Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Solty

  1. +1 and not to mention Luftwaffe had on many ocassions numerical advantage on the eastern front by concentrating airplanes and keeping the initiative.
  2. Bf110 has proven to be a not the best concept in 1940 when they were themselves used as escort for He111 and Ju88 and soon were in need of a Bf109 escort due to climbing casualties. The plane proved to be still useful as a night fighter though. Me410 was an improvement of the very poorly recieved Me210 and was continuation of the idea that those planes can be great fighter-bombers. They are not bad when comes to speed and armament and can be used very effectively against heavy bombers, but once they are met with Allied dedicated fighter planes they are at a serious disadvantage, at least without any element of suprise or numerical advantage, which by the 1944 and 45 was becoming qute rare for Luftwaffe. Me410 and Bf110 were a good solution to the bomber problem, but only if those bombers didn't have escort fighters. They were definitely not a on a level of a P-38 or P-51 when it comes to dogfighting capabilities. "Speed is life and altitude is life insurence" Is a saying for a reason. Just because one can loose to a slower plane, that doesn't mean that speed is not an advantage in a fight and more importantly in survival. If you are faster than your oponent, and you can feel that you might loose the next combat engagement, you can always turn your tail and run away and deny that kill. Again you are trying to prove a statement with just anecdotal reference that doesn't change the whole reality of things. Just because someone was killed by a slower plane, doesn't mean that speed is not an advantage in combat scenarios.
  3. So what qualifies as detail and what as a must have? Your approach is very arbitrary. What if I say "not all 109s had MW50 so it can be skipped, its just a detail", how is that any different from what you said? Anyway, I think that all of it is very important, although I hope they do all they can to get those planes close as possible to RL.
  4. Sorry, but this makes no sense. Germans at that time are mustering all they can and Me410 was produced as any other plane at a diminished rate and Germans were using everything they got. 8th AAF under command of Gen. Doolittle had been standaridsing around P-51D for a while, and he also reworked many units that previously were flying on P-47s. There was one unit using P-38 and it remained doing so and of course Zemke's Wolfpack was using P-47's up untill the end of the war. But that was not because they were worse than Me410 in dogfighting, thats because Doolittle wanted fighters with overlaping range and maintnance, so that Fighter Groups could rotate when defending the heavies. Each fighter has a X-ammount of hours that have to be put into the maintnance. If you have 3 groups and they are scheduled to go tommorow, Two of them are P-51's and can go while third is P-38 and still needs time because spare parts didn't arrive, it can derail the whole operation and put your forces under more danger. Thats what Germans could never do, standarisation! Previous 8th AAF commanders also didn't appreciate that as much as Doolittle did and thats the whole thing. It is not because P-38L is worse than Me410 or 110 in a dogfight (and I cannot imagine it could be). Not to mention, Germans were still pouring money into such planes as Me410 instead of closing the factory long ago, these planes were mostly grounded because they needed twice the fuel and were shot down way before they were even able to get close to the enemy bombers and could never run away from the likes of P-51D or P-47D/M or P-38L.
  5. You very much underestimate the P-51D. Depending on available WEP power and fuel (67'hg, 72'hg, 75'hg, 81'hg? Could be selectable like Merlin types for Spit Vb?), the P-51D can be a real monster to deal with. Especially that you have to take into consideration that if both planes are in take off configuration the P-51D has lower wing loading and that only becomes more pronounced when you defuel it to just 30% (which is still about 45 minutes of low level, fairly high power flying). As busdriver said, the P-51D cannot pull very high deflection, but that doesn't mean it cannot pull deflection at all. It is still a very capable airplane and can definitely win a turning fight with Fw190D9 equiped with MW50 and 1.8 ata power while at 61'hg of power itself. It is a fairly big difference in turning performance and only very defueled 190 with lots of skill can keep the fight interesting. I claim that P-51D will be even an issue for Bf109K4 and G6 in turning battles. It will definitely be closer than you think and especially with higher power settings. 190D9 has its share of advantages over the Mustang, but those diminish with higher boost and low speeds. P-51D with 75'hg can outrun, outturn and outclimb a 190D9 at most altitudes. PS. If you think that pilots acoounts are so important and say the whole story (they don't), I can tell you that there are many pilot stories from Allied pilots who claim that outturning a 109 and 190 was easy. I can even give you a link to some of them. PS.2: Links and quotes: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/352-bryan-27sept44.jpg "At no time did I have any trouble either overtaking or out-turning the FW 190s or ME 109s." http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/4-chandler-6nov44.jpg "(...) I turned inside him easily." http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/339-daniell-26nov44.jpg "It wasn't difficult to get on his tail as I was turning with him." You can find more here: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/combat-reports.html
  6. To my understanding the operation's name comes from the idea that Luftwaffe was suppose to grind its bootheel into allied airforces and ground them into foundations. So, bodenplatte itself is not a place, therefore it cannot be 'of'.
  7. That doesnt't mean you shouldn't try. I always try to aim at vital parts, shooting randomly is not very effective At least in BOS you get kills easily even with bad shooting. Currently in DCS you have to aim for speciific part and keep sustained burst to actually do damage, especially against 109s with the .50cals. Shooting down a Yak or LaGG is easy compared to that game. If one has a problem with shooting down another fighter, then something is wrong but not realy with guns. I prefer HMG over cannons, they give you much better accuracy with similar outcome. You do not need to rip a wing off or blow a plane up to get a kill. Just set him afire shooting his tank or hit his tail section and destroy his elevator or hit the engine (if you can get that deflection) and my prefered way of shooting down 109s with a good burst into the radiator. Bf109 is more fragile by natrue with its single wing spar, so it is completely natural that one well placed 20 or 23mm shot can take that wing quicker than in a 190 or P-40 where there are 4 (or was it 5?) spars holding the wing.
  8. YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES! P-51D, P-38L, Tempest, P-47D, 109G14, 190A8, 190D9! AMAZING! Together with other planes from the previous parts like Hs129, Ju88 and A20G its going to be awesome.
  9. https://goo.gl/images/RoL8g6 P-51D Mustang. Eight times the range of most fighters anGd still comparable with them.Great combination of speed, agility and firepower.
  10. You want fairly tight turns? Trim it up. That is the best 109 FM I saw in sims. The plane is really easy to fly and an amazing gun platform. You understand why Germans did not want to dogfight in it. They preferred speed and speed makes you stiff. 109F4 though is an excellent dogfighter and very maneuverable up to 400kph. We all have the documents, they show what is in BOS. One thing I find odd is how easy to take of and land it is. The torque is barely there.
  11. Solty

    303 Squadron

    I have a bad feeling about this. :/
  12. No. It is not only him saying so. You can find some other Germans talk about it (I believe Stigler said it) and a British test and Mark Hannah, claim that the plane requires two hands on the stick at speeds around 500kph and above that you require substantial strenghts to even move the control column. Modern P-51's do not have the feuselage fuel tank and that creates a shift in COG of the plane which makes the control more sluggish but the WW2 plane was actually realy easy to pull and with more G's the stick forces reversed and it was easier to pull. Mark Hannah flying the 109: http://www.eaf51.org/newweb/Documenti/Storia/Flying_%20109_ENG.pdf P-51D Manual, page 67 of the file (66 of tthe document): http://wiki.hoggit.us/images/8/83/North-American-P-51-Mustang-Pilot-Training-Manual.pdf
  13. Yep, It was in that place between a kite and a baloon. It flies very nicely now. I don't like how planes in BOS like to helicopter a bit, but nothing is perfect. Still the 109 now feels like it actually has weight and it actually has proper stiffness on ailerons and elevators. You realy do want to avoid steep dives and use the horisontal stabilizer trim to get out of dives. Very nicely done. And have you guys seen the P-40E? :D It feels goooooooooooooooood. No more little rudder imputs that kill you.
  14. Amazing patch. I love improvements to the FM's you did. Amazing work, it was worth the wait. Especially Bf109 and P-40E, they feel much closer to what the reports said. Thanks
  15. I am waiting for new FMs. Thats the most important to me. Hope it comes here soon.
  16. There is a P-40N sheet that states it is the best turner in the US arsenal, but in any other way it is inferior. It also stated that the P-40 had big issues with instability. I'll try to find it later. It is on this site somewhere: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-40/P-40.html
  17. In reality: From US reports you can only gather that a plane turns either good or bad or average. They never made tests like Soviets did. We also know form the training video that the P-51 has mild stalling characteristics and that it "doesn't whip over like some other planes do" and that recovery from spin is completely normal by slight rudder input and nose down attitude. In sims: Turn time for P-51D? Depends on power rating and fuel state. With 67'power about 30% of fuel the plane can hold a sustained turn at about 20 sec. With full wing tanks about 23sec but with full fuel its going to be impossible to hold in DCS. 75'hg would cut down the turn time by 1 sec probably, at least from what I got from other sims WT/IL2/AH. Conclusion I don't think that P-51D can tell us much about P-40E though. Those planes are so different in design and engine that it is realy hard to compare. Even P-51 Mustang MK1A, using the same engine as P-40 does, was faster than the Warhawk and Spitfire that used a more powerfull Merlin.
  18. You also have to remember that everyone will have different feeling of the aformentioned "wobble". With my Hotas X I am wobbling like a crazy person even with additional curves. But when I watch my friend's gameplay he has far less of the wobble. It all depends on your stick. The same Hotas X has no such problem in WT or DCS.
  19. After Pacific I would love to see some Battle of the Bulge setting with P38L, P47D, P51D and B25 vs 109G14, Fw190A8, Me 410 and Hs129
  20. And that excuses it in what way? Not to mention, Delta and other Spec Ops are not political and are not sworn to spread ideology.
  21. I wish interviews like that one were done in a closed building with some spare time. Oh well, still very nice interview. Good job. I just wish there was more.
  22. Exactly that. People say that 262 could be in 43, which to me is just fantasy, just because the engines available were just not reliable enough. Even in 1944 they were not up to standard and could work for 12 hours on average. Me262 was pushed out early because Germany was on its last legs.
  23. To me it seems, and I will probably repeat a lot of the previous statements, that the biggest issue is with simulating fatigue and g forces and stick forces, operational space in the cockpit and controls placement. Their impact on the fight is not big enough. For example a 109 pilot has to turn his flap wheel that is quite awkwardly placed and requires focus while in game u just hold a button on the throttle. Secondly stall mechanics seem to be really simple and in some cases even ridiculously easy to manage. I also find spotting extremely annoying. Planes pop in and out of existance, sometimes they are easier to spot from 8km than from 500m. Lastly I feel like weather conditions don't seem to matter too much while they seem to be one of the biggest concerns IRL.
  24. WT is nothing like WOT. First of all you keep all your airplanes, so you can fly it all you want. I have jets and mostly fly P-51D because i like the plane and do not care about the jets. Not to mention that the most crowded tier is T3. Planes in WT do not fall into the category you proposed, until you as a player create it yourself. My grind stopped at P-51D.
  • Create New...