Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

185 Excellent

About LeLv76_Erkki

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

683 profile views
  1. Yeah it seems to be true, also I think ram air effects the optimal altitude so typically the higher the power setting and speed the higher the switch altitude, in Yaks for example. But that behaviour of La-5 might not be 100 % on ram air.
  2. In his graph M66 is faster at 6k, because its done at 3000 rpm +18 lbs. Once I have the time I want to test M66 vs M70 at all altitudes and power settings
  3. I have found that when using +12lbs RPM 2900 (30 minute power setting) or the continuous power setting Merlin 70 starts to enjoy advantage much lower, at 4000 m or so already. At 6000 m M70 is full 10 mph faster (indicated speed) at continuous and 7 mph faster using 30 min power setting.
  4. Button. It can use full throttle for 10 min with the boost.
  5. My whole point was that you do NOT get historic outcomes by behaving historically. Unless you think gunners should seriously damage an attacking fighter almost every time. What that induces is very unhistorical behaviour of avoiding bombers because they are more dangerous than fighters.
  6. All gunners are about equally worthless when they are set to the lowest difficulty. In multiplay, in great part thanks to the superhuman gunners, Pe-2 is pretty much a better fighter than I-16 or heck in many ways better than P-40 even. You can attack Pe-2 head-on, tear off its wing and the gunner often still hits from the spiralling plane you as you pass by at 1000 km/h of relative speed. Multiple human Pe-2s just arent worth engaging longer than one pass from ahead and even that is risky. I do not think it is very realistic or historical to expect a relatively small and lightly armed medium bomber to score anywhere near 1:1 against fighters, them attacking from dead six(like RAF fighters in BoB) or not. Or 1:2, or 1:3. You dont expect that from He 111, Ju 88 or G4M(that has rear gunner with a cannon) or say B-25, B-26 or any other medium bomber either, do you. Many of those much heavier armed than Pe-2. Even massive formations of 8th AF heavies cruising in combat box at 8000 m failed to achieve loss parity against(much fewer in numbers, rookie piloted and often already engaged by escorts) 109s and 190s. I know this looks like some people moaning on the same subject again and again but to us it feels like many either choose to ignore this for reason or another, or even seem play a different game. Or actually expect gunners to be that lethal. I do think that flying bombers should be in many ways rewarding (instead of being just targets for fighters), but op gunners arent the way. That said I do not think the current state is by design of the devs or WAD. edit: I should also mention that I'm already okay if the gunners dont get fixed. I still like Il-2 a lot. I have learned to simply avoid the Pe-2 is most situations so hopefully no more gunner induced gray hair to me.
  7. However getting hit and damaged/shot down by the Peshka gunner is not a "fluke" but rather common. On the other hand its relatively safe to attack an ace AI Ju 88 from dead astern despite of the three very rapid firing guns of the two gunners and them also having good fields of view. Or A-20, or Il-2 even(despite Il-2 gunner also having very good field of fire). Its so bad that I nowadays rarely even bother attacking Peshkas unless an opportunity to do that head-on or directly from the side presents itself. I did not have time to fly last taw but in the one before that I shot down about 12 Peshkas, they were about half of my kills, and did not suffer engine damage only twice - once when I was in Bf 110... Anecdotal? Yes absolutely, but I'm not only one who has similar experiences. OTOH I do not find A-20's gunner to be as lethal as Peshkas and He 111 H-16(top)'s, but I'm sure that is only because the A-20 top gunner's field of fire is very limited and it has to reload after a short burst. I do not believe the AI is any different from plane or faction to another. In addition to perfect the gunners' perfect awareness and it not caring about maneuvering and G forces, another thing that effects this phenomenon must be the gun recoil effects being lackingly modelled. The guns, especially ones held and partially supported by the gunner(ie. not in powered turret) in real life are not perfectly rigid in and their shake, which would depend on the gun and the way its mounted, would add a lot to dispersion to a burst. I have seen all those three shoot down fighters, but its a rare occurrence and in my experience typically needs the enemy fighter to be extra poor shooter and extra greedy to stay in the six for quite some time. Many Soviet fighters have no cockpit armor ahead so even Ju 87 gunner can get lucky.
  8. Someone will know the exact dates or months, but Yak-1 s. 69 and LaGG-3 s. 29 are both Spring 1942 aircraft. La-5 September 1942, Yak-7B May-April 1942. Yak-1B late 1942, entered frontline units I believe May-ish 1943. P-47D-28 is mid 1944 but its practically identical(or worse thanks to its propeller) compared to earlier bubbletops including D-25 introduced in May 1944(earlier ones just didnt have direction finding antenna or gyro sight).
  9. TBH honest the difference between 8 mm and 12,7 mm is also that one produces (at least somewhat, way or another) believable gunner performance results, the other does not. Its not helped by the fact that Pe-2 is the only Soviet bomber in game = every Soviet bomber has borderline superhuman gunners. When B-25 will get introduced that will be literal flying fortress if gunner AI isnt tuned.
  10. They're omnipotent - the Pe-2 bottom gunner - who aims through a periscope - will be aware of you attacking head-on and can and often will shoot you as you pass by the millisecond you enter his field of fire. Gunners also dont care about G forces or maneuvering. German gunners arent as lethal because almost without exception their guns are mere 8 mm MGs, and because Pe-2 is so fast meaning attacking fighter spends more time in fire and has to attack from behind more often. Try attacking He 111 H-16 from within the top gunners field of fire, though...
  11. No, its not slow. Versus 109 and 190 its main trouble is that it can maintain that top speed for only relatively short time, and that right now in multiplay it faces 109 K-4 that is head and shoulders above all other fighters. Against historically most common adversaries to the type - 109 G-6, G-14 and 190 A-8 - it performs very well.
  12. Just a note: ability pull high AoA, having very low stall speed, having small turn radius and turning quickly are all different things. Flaps can give some aircraft impressive maneuverability and handling at very low speeds, but exploiting those in actual combat is very difficult(and not the least because typical dogfight starts at 450 km/h and ends in 20 seconds). I need to catch up to this thread...
  13. He 111 is very underpowered and Ju 88 not much easier in full load. Make sure you use 100 % RPM! Do not use full flaps, they will slow you down too much. 10-20 % down or even or none at all is enough. Elevator trim fully back too will help you a bit. For He 111 H-6 the maximum fuel load is so massive that you are unlikely to ever need more than 50-60%.
  14. I cant recall what engine and fuel rating it is modeled after. It does hold speed very well through many kind of maneuvers compared to both 109 and 190 and it can choose to run away too, except from the K-4(depending on altitude).
  • Create New...