Does the FW190 FM need reevaluation?

[Irgendjemand]

If you followed the numerous FM threads about this iconic plane (and maybe tried to fly it recently) you might also think the planes FM needs a little more love. This poll is to show the devs an actual number of people that would apprechaite an overhaul instead of just having one thread after the other locked because it derails after some time.

AFAIK all the relevant information that justufies an overhaul has been sent to the devs.

 

Some of the relevant information has been put together by 303_Kwiatek in THIS thread (thanks 303_Kwiatek) and also highly valuable data on the matter has been supplemented by forummember Crump (also thanks to your continuing effort).

 

So let us know what you think.

 

Thank you!

 

PS: Thanks to all committed forummembers that spend so much time discussing the matter trying to find out what might have gone wrong during the last FM change the FW had.

Edited September 11, 2016 by Irgendjemand

[RAY-EU]

May be this reevaluation of the FW190 A3 will be reflected to the FW190 A5 of BOK .

 

But in the allied list I do not see a clear oponent superior fighter for FW190 A5 from WW2 History archives

The only is the Spitfire MkV but it should be clear inferior.

 

So They should take later the La5 FN ...

Edited September 11, 2016 by RAY-EU

[Irgendjemand]

May be this reevaluation of the FW190 A3 will be reflected to the FW190 A5 of BOK .

 

But in the allied list I do not see a clear oponent superior fighter for FW190 A5 from WW2 History archives

The only is the Spitfire MkV but it should be clear inferior.

 

So They should take later the La5 FN ...

In the question and answer Jason stated the LA5F (not FN) MIGHT come as later addition collectorplanes together with BF 109 G6.

But stick to topic plz.

Edited September 11, 2016 by Irgendjemand

[beepee]

I voted no.

 

It is my favourite Luftwaffle ride at the moment.

 

I don't treat her badly and I seem to manage just fine when killing bot pilots. She is also great for Jabo missions.

 

Move on already. The devs have much more important things to be focused on right now.

[1./JG42flesch]

The important Thing of a Flight Simulation is a correct Flight Model of the Planes.

The FM from the FW 190 is wrong, they can correct this, but did the want?

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

 

 

I don't treat her badly and I seem to manage just fine when killing bot pilots.

 

:lol:

 

ok man, but sorry, no further input needed

[beepee]

 

 

ok man, but sorry, no further input needed

 

Never say your sorry for being an A-hole. Own it, or don't bother in the first place.

[Turban]

:lol:

 

ok man, but sorry, no further input needed

 

Is experience really mandatory when it comes to expressing an opinion? If it was, the forums would be pretty quiet.. 

[Ace_Pilto]

I'm not sure we really need a poll to derive an answer for something that's already happening. 

 

Patience lads, keep reading the patch notes, they're working on it.

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

 

 

Never say your sorry for being an A-hole. Own it, or don't bother in the first place.

Ok, sorry for saying that in the first place. What I wanted to say is that I do not need any further explanation of why you think the 190 is ok, since you seem to only fly it in SP mostly. I do not think that SP is as challenging as MP and that it is MP, where every bit of performance of your aircraft counts and where deficiencies are magnified extremely compared to SP. I wasn´t trying to say that your opinion is not as welcome as everyone else´s. Sorry, if it came across that way.

[Luft1942]

So what was the FW like before the last patch? From what I understand they fixed the climb rate but made it too easy to stall in the process?

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

 

 

Patience lads, keep reading the patch notes, they're working on it.

 

Did I miss something? Where do they say that they are working on it??

[Ace_Pilto]

Did I miss something? Where do they say that they are working on it??

 

Read the patch notes.

[Matt]

No need to read it, because there's nothing. What you perhaps mean, is fix no. 9 which has been made a long time ago (and which led to the current FM).

Edited September 11, 2016 by Matt

[DD_Arthur]

So what was the FW like before the last patch? From what I understand they fixed the climb rate but made it too easy to stall in the process?

 

Essentially, yes.  This is the problem.  I don't do much MP at the moment as my internet is too poor to fly during euro prime time but the SP experience with the FW is now pretty meagre too.

 

You can't bounce the a.i. ; they know you are coming but you can hardly exploit the FW's strengths either without ending upside down.

 

Most annoying.

[Turban]

Essentially, yes.  This is the problem.  I don't do much MP at the moment as my internet is too poor to fly during euro prime time but the SP experience with the FW is now pretty meagre too.

 

You can't bounce the a.i. ; they know you are coming but you can hardly exploit the FW's strengths either without ending upside down.

 

Most annoying.

 

That's your experience.  It isn't proof that the plane is wrong.

[Crump]

 

 

That's your experience.  It isn't proof that the plane is wrong.

 

No the documentation and science is proof the plane is wrong. 

[Turban]

No the documentation and science is proof the plane is wrong. 

 

You don't have the plane. You don't have the game. You based your idea of what the plane is on... what exactly? Your imagination ? Forum gossip ? 

 

And of course you expect us to believe you know all about the science ?

 

[beepee]

since you seem to only fly it in SP mostly.

 

Nah man, I fly online only.

 

Usually in The Menacing Ferrets server. Guess I just have not come across too may meatbags in there flying VVS.

Edited September 11, 2016 by MF-beepee

[Crump]

 

 

You don't have the plane. You don't have the game. You based your idea of what the plane is on... what exactly? Your imagination ? Forum gossip ?    And of course you expect us to believe you know all about the science ?

 

I don't know what your experience is Turban but I am willing to stack mine against it.

 

The conclusions are based on Focke Wulf GmbH documentation, RLM Documentation, Luftwaffe Documentation, USAAF Documentation, RAF Documentation, RAE Documentation, and NACA Documentation all backed up with modern aircraft performance analysis.

 

That is a lot more than some one dimensional thought process.

[SYN_Mike77]

The worst mistake this team ever made (and yes, I'm including unlocks!) was including the 190.  It doesn't really belong in the planeset and all it has done is bring a ton of grief to the community.  

[Crump]

 

 

It doesn't really belong in the planeset and all it has done is bring a ton of grief to the community.  

 

I think it was included because of its popularity.  The market dictated its inclusion in order to increase profits.  That same popularity drives the number of discussions on it as purchasers try to reconcile what they read in history to the representation of that history in the game.

[Turban]

I don't know what your experience is Turban but I am willing to stack mine against it.

 

The conclusions are based on Focke Wulf GmbH documentation, RLM Documentation, Luftwaffe Documentation, USAAF Documentation, RAF Documentation, RAE Documentation, and NACA Documentation all backed up with modern aircraft performance analysis.

 

That is a lot more than some one dimensional thought process.

 

All those books. Do they contain an analysis of the IL2 Battle of Stalingrad FW 190 ? 

 

 Reading books tell you how the plane is in the game ? That's some 5th dimension stuff ...

 

It's strange how you seem to think you are superior to the devs and the people they work with. Oh yeah, making a list of "sources" is going to impress me.

 

Anyway. I know you're having a crusade on the internet for years trying to come up as some kind of expert reg. the FW, so .. yeah..have fun...

Edited September 11, 2016 by Turban

[JV69badatflyski]

waiting for a normal würger and then i'll buy the game ,when quitting il2-46, I promised myself not to buy another sim if the 190 was so badly simulated, if you compare Bos 190 to il2-46, the last one was at least flyable, even if it lost it's energy a lot, had a very poor acceleration,  it still could outdive almost anything and you could scissors without grounding it...and could do the flip and the recovery the way it's mentionned in almost all test-flights records.

[Turban]

 purchasers try to reconcile what they read in history to the representation of that history in the game.

 

And it works great ! The FW 190 is every bit as I imagined it ! 

[GridiroN]

I'm suprised Fern hasn't jumped on this thread yet.

In any case, the FW190 will not be changed. The devs have said pretty consistently for a year now that they use German, official sources for German planes and Russian, official sources for Russian planes. Unless you can find an authentic German source that states the FW190 is wrong, it's staying as it is. Pilot opinions don't count. Enemy opinions don't count. 

 

As far as the A5 is concerned, according to Wikipedia, the only real difference the A5 had was that it carried heavier weapons so if anything it's only going to be worse. The only aerodynamic difference was shifting the centre of gravity 15cm forward, to carry heavier rockets and bombs. 

[JV69badatflyski]

In any case, the FW190 will not be changed. The devs have said pretty consistently for a year now that they use German, official sources for German planes and Russian, official sources for Russian planes. Unless you can find an authentic German source that states the FW190 is wrong, it's staying as it is. Pilot opinions don't count. Enemy opinions don't count. 

 

As far as the A5 is concerned, according to Wikipedia, the only real difference the A5 had was that it carried heavier weapons so if anything it's only going to be worse. The only aerodynamic difference was shifting the centre of gravity 15cm forward, to carry heavier rockets and bombs. 

that's bad for them as they will loose (actual and future) customers,  as for the A5, there are modifs (internals) on the D2 engine that were made, boost modifs (1.58 and 1.65ata) and the CoG change had nothing to do with externals

 

[Dr_Molem]

As far as the A5 is concerned, according to Wikipedia, the only real difference the A5 had was that it carried heavier weapons so if anything it's only going to be worse. The only aerodynamic difference was shifting the centre of gravity 15cm forward, to carry heavier rockets and bombs. 

 

What about radiator flaps that became standard with the A-5, covering the cooling gills -> less drag -> plane reaching ~570 kph at SL, while A-3 does around 540, at full power.

[Crump]

 

 

The devs have said pretty consistently for a year now that they use German, official sources for German planes and Russian, official sources for Russian planes. Unless you can find an authentic German source that states the FW190 is wrong, it's staying as it is.

 

That has actually been presented.

 

 

 

As far as the A5 is concerned, according to Wikipedia, the only real difference the A5 had was that it carried heavier weapons so if anything it's only going to be worse. The only aerodynamic difference was shifting the centre of gravity 15cm forward, to carry heavier rockets and bombs. 

 

 

That is not correct either...

I hope wikipedia is not going to be there source, LOL.

 

 

It's strange how you seem to think you are superior to the devs and the people they work with.

 

Wow, you have some interesting perspectives that are simply not true but do make for a colorful psyche.

 

I think you ought to read more what others write to you and stop with the one dimensional propaganda. 

[XQ_Lothar29]

 Absolutely - based on all the new information posted by numerous forummembers

[GridiroN]

That has actually been presented.

Unless the source came from an german organization directly involved in testing the plane, having been given to them by FockeWulf themselves, I doubt the devs will care.  

 

That is not correct either...

Then provide a counter point so we can all learn instead of shutting people down...

 

 

What about radiator flaps that became standard with the A-5, covering the cooling gills -> less drag -> plane reaching ~570 kph at SL, while A-3 does around 540, at full power.

No idea. "As far as wikipedia is concerned". In any case, being too slow is not the 190's issue.

 

that's bad for them as they will loose (actual and future) customers,  as for the A5, there are modifs (internals) on the D2 engine that were made, boost modifs (1.58 and 1.65ata) and the CoG change had nothing to do with externals

That's not what Wikipedia's source claims. In any case, then provide why it *was* changed so we can all learn instead of winking at me.

Edited September 11, 2016 by GridiroN

[LukeFF]

I don't know what your experience is Turban but I am willing to stack mine against it.

 

The conclusions are based on Focke Wulf GmbH documentation, RLM Documentation, Luftwaffe Documentation, USAAF Documentation, RAF Documentation, RAE Documentation, and NACA Documentation all backed up with modern aircraft performance analysis.

 

That is a lot more than some one dimensional thought process.

 

And yet, you still don't own the game. That's quite telling. 

[Crump]

 

 

Unless the source came from an german organization directly involved in testing the plane, having been given to them by FockeWulf themselves, I doubt the devs will care.  

\

 

It came from Focke Wulf.....and the RLM...and the Luftwaffe....and the RAF....and the RAE....and the USAAF....and the NACA...and even TsAGI....forgot about them and the VVS.  All these sources agree and all of them agree with modern aircraft performance analysis.  In other words, they form a system that crosschecks the data points so that or F=ma relationships develop IAW newtonian physics so that our performance points all agree.  Specific performance develops at the specific places it should on the L/D curves, power available, power required, and corresponds to the values listed in the POH and by the designer.

 

That is about as correct you are going to get in a mathematical model of an aircraft and make no mistake, the game is nothing but a mathematical model of these airplanes.

 

Very detailed reports backed by multiple sources where presented to Han.   I think emotions or language barrier got the best of them.

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376053

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376176

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376178

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376182

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376321

 

There is quite a bit more....

 

Do you want more German data if Focke Wulf's own aerodynamic characteristic sheet used by the engineering team is not good enough or the operational charts used by FW-190 pilots in the Luftwaffe.  I can post the VVS, RAE, and USAAF?

 

What do you need to convince you?

[ZachariasX]

[unreasonable]

As I understand it, 90% of the agony is down to the angle of attack at which the plane stalls, with the "expert" consensus in the forum being that it is too low.

 

I just wish the developers could make a post showing the current stall AoA in-game, according to their tests, and the reference number they are using.

 

This would at least nail down where we all stand with respect to the main point.

 

Or have they already done this and it is lost in the commotion?

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

Unless the source came from an german organization directly involved in testing the plane, having been given to them by FockeWulf themselves, I doubt the devs will care.

 

That´s a good point, but I´m going to try to give you a historical wrap up of what´s happened

 

1) FW behaves all good

 

!! 2) Ppl in community find out Climb is wrong b/c plane has been calibrated at wrong power setting

 

-> 3) Devs change climb AND "fineness ratio" ---> PATCH 2.003

 

-> 4) FW becomes the brick we have today

 

Why the change in fineness ratio and how did the values change? Dev´s won´t tell, but it´s probably a secondary adjustment in order to achieve current climb

-> See the problem? Makes it hard to present primary information (except for the stall angle of attack argument that Crump has presented, but which is ignored by devs) that supports or is against the current set up.

 

 

 

 

I doubt the devs will care

 

Yes, but some people here care about the 190.

THIS here is what can do, what irgendjemand is doing, creating this poll to raise attention

Edited September 11, 2016 by II/JG17_SchwarzeDreizehn

[Crump]

 

 

Or have they already done this and it is lost in the commotion?

 

yeah it been lost in the commotion because every time a discussion comes up..."Internet experts" have to jump in and contribute most what amounts to white noise and rabbit holes.

[Irgendjemand]

Read the patch notes.

Saldy i think what you mean is jkust the summary of what already happened. I read everything and nowhere i saw anything saying they would be doing anything in regards to FW FM.

 

EDIT: And all others please keep it civil. I really dont want this thread get locked like all the others.

Edited September 11, 2016 by Irgendjemand

[GridiroN]

\

 

It came from Focke Wulf.....and the RLM...and the Luftwaffe....and the RAF....and the RAE....and the USAAF....and the NACA...and even TsAGI....forgot about them and the VVS.  All these sources agree and all of them agree with modern aircraft performance analysis.  In other words, they form a system that crosschecks the data points so that or F=ma relationships develop IAW newtonian physics so that our performance points all agree.  Specific performance develops at the specific places it should on the L/D curves, power available, power required, and corresponds to the values listed in the POH and by the designer.

 

That is about as correct you are going to get in a mathematical model of an aircraft and make no mistake, the game is nothing but a mathematical model of these airplanes.

 

Very detailed reports backed by multiple sources where presented to Han.   I think emotions or language barrier got the best of them.

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376053

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376176

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376178

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376182

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/?p=376321

 

There is quite a bit more....

 

Do you want more German data if Focke Wulf's own aerodynamic characteristic sheet used by the engineering team is not good enough or the operational charts used by FW-190 pilots in the Luftwaffe.  I can post the VVS, RAE, and USAAF?

 

What do you need to convince you?

Hey, If the FW190 is wrong, I'd LOVE it corrected. It's not me you need to convince. People have provided sources indicating the YaK is also wrong. I want that corrected. People have provided sources indicating the LaGG is wrong. I want that corrected. I want everything historically accurate. I'm simply suggesting that the devs have laid out their criteria for when a plane will be fixed. 90% of people make posts that don't meet this criteria.

Edited September 11, 2016 by GridiroN

[unreasonable]

yeah it been lost in the commotion because every time a discussion comes up..."Internet experts" have to jump in and contribute most what amounts to white noise and rabbit holes.

 

So if you know that it - namely the developers posting their in-game and target numbers as I stated in my post - has already been done already but lost in the commotion, perhaps you would be so kind as to provide a link?