I cannot be a defender of BoS anymore...

[Mac_Messer]

Because that's what pilots in real life did - if they had an immediate threat, they disengaged. Which in fact is one thing that on a strategic scale changed on the Western Front in 1943, when the P-47 arrived. Luftwaffe pilots, used to be able to disengage at will (forgive my little exaggeration) from Spitfires and P-38's by entering a steep dive, now were pursued by an aircraft that could dive as well as their aircraft could. On average, they also didn't commit suicide while trying to fulfil their mission of shooting down bombers, even though plenty were around.

 

Well, yeah, maybe I should have made that addition, too.

Yes, I was not talking about Western Front. Western Front =/ Eastern Front. You capiche?

Edited February 10, 2015 by Mac_Messer

[JtD]

I don't think the Germans sent all the suicidal pilots to the Eastern front. Maybe Hartmann was the exception, but this is what he did:

Leveling off at 12,000 feet, the pair followed the Terek River until they were passing over Prokhladny. At this point Rossmann spotted a flight of Soviet aircraft strafing German traffic outside the city and radioed Hartmann to follow him as he dived to attack. After a 5,000-foot plunge, the green wingman finally caught sight of the enemy Rossmann had been tracking all along. Seeing the Russians sent Hartmann into a dither of excitement. Slamming his Messerschmitt to full power, he leapt ahead of Rossmann and impatiently lined up on the rearmost Russian, opening fire at 300 yards. He was dismayed to see his tracers whizzing over and to the left of his target. Unable to get the aircraft in his sights, he had to yank his own plane upward at the last moment to avoid a collision. Momentarily leveling off, he later recalled that he found himself "surrounded on all sides by dark green aircraft, all of them turning behind me for the kill ... ME!"

 

Frantically climbing into a layer of cloud, he lost his pursuers and was unspeakably relieved to hear Rossmann's calm voice over the radio: "Don't sweat it. I watched your tail. I've lost you now that you've climbed into the clouds. Come down through the layer so I can pick you up again."

 

When Hartmann dropped from the overcast, he saw a plane coming at him from straight ahead. Panicky, he dived to treetop level and hurtled westward, screaming into his microphone that he was being pursued. By then Rossmann's voice from the radio was so garbled that Hartmann could not make out his words, and the youngster countinued full-tilt to the east until he outdistanced his pursuer.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

I don't think the Germans sent all the suicidal pilots to the Eastern front. Maybe Hartmann was the exception, but this is what he did:

 

Now would be important to know when he did this. Before he scored his first kill (took him quite a while) as a twenty year old kid?  or after his 200th? makes a huge difference

[JtD]

It was his first sortie.

[No601_Swallow]

I don't think the Germans sent all the suicidal pilots to the Eastern front. Maybe Hartmann was the exception, but this is what he did:

 

That is just a brilliant story (since that is the pattern of most of my engagements!). Thanks for bringing it here. 

 

[The Harmann anecdote seems to show that my frequent sensation of being a bit rubbish might actually be the most historically accurate part of the whole sim!]

Edited February 10, 2015 by No601_Swallow

[Yakdriver]

It was his first sortie.

yea, recognized that one too.

when i red the book, i lolled. happy to see that this man started out as an ordinary noob, doing ordinary mistakes.

[Wulf]

People who argue about historical accuracy for the FW190 in a game set over Stalingrad need to look up the word historical.

 

The worst mistake (and I say that as someone waiting for my unlock button to work) the devs made with this game was including the FW190. Think of the endless grief that choice has given them! Oh and if it is not competitive in game then neither is the Yak.

 

 

Yes, more grief sure, because at this stage the FMs still require some fine tuning but also more customers.  I wouldn't have purchased the sim without the 190 and I suspect I'm not the only one. 

[Wulf]

We would not even be having conversations about(it was not there) FW-190A models

if we had the historically available YAK-9 at Stalingrad all the 190's at low

altitude would of been shot down.

 

And the high altitude performance of the 190 was not all that shiney either.

 

The best days of glory that the FW-190A lived was with JG 26 when it came out

against the poor but beautiful Spitfire MK V over the English channel.

 

That was its greatest moment in its history.

 

After that all the other nations caught up and in some cased surpassed

it performance wise.

 

Old obsolete YAK-1's and ole LaGG's for crying out loud against FW-190A's and Bf-109G'.

 

Why not a I-16 while you're at it.

 

The IL-2 is the best plane in the game and no one even said it and that surprises me.

 

Sigh

 

 

Firstly, you may not have noticed but the 190 is already being shot down on a pretty regular basis at low altitude.  So, maybe it was a cost cutting measure on the part of the devs., who knows, but the sim has effectively rendered the Yak 9 redundant.

 

Secondly, it is common knowledge that the 190 A series struggled at altitude.  That's accepted.  So???????

 

And on what basis do you dismiss the the Spitfire V as "poor but beautiful"?  Poor relative to what exactly?  As far as the RAF were concerned, the Spit V was more than adequate when matched against the 109 F.   It was only hopelessly outclassed when it encountered the 190 A.   Strangely, in Soviet Russia, that state of affairs (like many other things) has been turned on its head.  The 109 is the alpha fighter whereas the 190 (which had only been in service with the LW for about a year at this point)  has morphed into a basket case.  

 

And yes, 1942 probably was the high water mark for the 190 A series but then, that's the exact time period we're talking about, not 1944-45 for Christ's sake! 

[FuriousMeow]

Sorry for late response, but surely they'd still have performance figures and flight envelopes. It'd be nice to have multiple sources, is all.

 

Yes, they do - the historical figures. They do not operate their aircraft to the extremity of the flight envelope. They do not at all, not at all. I can't say that enough times. Pilots that fly these planes do not push them anywhere near their limits, they just fly them. This isn't 1946 or even 1953 - there are only a handful left of the real versions in total of all of them. They do not fly them to their limits ever, never.

 

And it figures it would boil down to the 190 not being an uber plane. It's time to dump this nonsensical "the 190 is uber and the best out there" crap, even the early versions. It is a great plane, within its flight envelope but it is not the best plane in all circumstances. Its getting absurd this lust over the Fw190 being the best of the best fighters, it wasn't. It was great, but it required an expert that knew it in and out to operate to its fullest potential.

Edited February 11, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

Agreed 100%

[Wulf]

 

 

I don't think the Germans sent all the suicidal pilots to the Eastern front. Maybe Hartmann was the exception, but this is what he did: Quote Leveling off at 12,000 feet, the pair followed the Terek River until they were passing over Prokhladny. At this point Rossmann spotted a flight of Soviet aircraft strafing German traffic outside the city and radioed Hartmann to follow him as he dived to attack. After a 5,000-foot plunge, the green wingman finally caught sight of the enemy Rossmann had been tracking all along. Seeing the Russians sent Hartmann into a dither of excitement. Slamming his Messerschmitt to full power, he leapt ahead of Rossmann and impatiently lined up on the rearmost Russian, opening fire at 300 yards. He was dismayed to see his tracers whizzing over and to the left of his target. Unable to get the aircraft in his sights, he had to yank his own plane upward at the last moment to avoid a collision. Momentarily leveling off, he later recalled that he found himself "surrounded on all sides by dark green aircraft, all of them turning behind me for the kill ... ME!" Frantically climbing into a layer of cloud, he lost his pursuers and was unspeakably relieved to hear Rossmann's calm voice over the radio: "Don't sweat it. I watched your tail. I've lost you now that you've climbed into the clouds. Come down through the layer so I can pick you up again." When Hartmann dropped from the overcast, he saw a plane coming at him from straight ahead. Panicky, he dived to treetop level and hurtled westward, screaming into his microphone that he was being pursued. By then Rossmann's voice from the radio was so garbled that Hartmann could not make out his words, and the youngster countinued full-tilt to the east until he outdistanced his pursuer.

 

 

 

 

OMG!!!  I can just hear myself becoming increasing more shrill as this madness goes on.

 

Mac Messer is of course absolutely correct on the subject of 'disengagement'.  Quoting an action sequence from some sort of  'Free hunt' operation, by a pair of 109s, has nothing to do with anything!

 

If you we ordered to provide cover for some operation then that's what you did.  Of course you would take evasive action if and when the circumstances necessitated it but that's not the same thing as having the option of just buggering-off home every time you felt 'threatened'.  You had a job to do and you were expected to do it and if you got killed in the process that was just too bad for you.  This was a War after all and people were dying all the time.    You certainly didn't have the option of 'not engaging', at the expense of the mission objective.  Good luck explaining that decision when you arrived back at base.  In the latter stages of the War they'd have had you shot - for cowardice!

[FuriousMeow]

As far as the RAF were concerned, the Spit V was more than adequate when matched against the 109 F.   It was only hopelessly outclassed when it encountered the 190 A.

 

No, no. No. It wasn't hopelessly outclassed. In squadron vs squadron engagement, the speed of the 190 and its roll rate allowed them to engage and disengage at will and their wingmen would take care of the pursuing aircraft. Only in this new age has it become that the SpitV was hopelessly outclassed. So stop with this nonsense. Just stop.

 

It was in squadron vs squadron engagement that of course a plane that is faster and can dictate engagement based on working with wingmen that it is superior, so start working with wingmen and then you'll see - holy crap its superior. It is NOT a single engagement aircraft, it requires working with a wingman!

Edited February 11, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[Wulf]

Yes, they do - the historical figures. They do not operate their aircraft to the extremity of the flight envelope. They do not at all, not at all. I can't say that enough times. Pilots that fly these planes do not push them anywhere near their limits, they just fly them. This isn't 1946 or even 1953 - there are only a handful left of the real versions in total of all of them. They do not fly them to their limits ever, never.

 

And it figures it would boil down to the 190 not being an uber plane. It's time to dump this nonsensical "the 190 is uber and the best out there" crap, even the early versions. It is a great plane, within its flight envelope but it is not the best plane in all circumstances. Its getting absurd this lust over the Fw190 being the best of the best fighters, it wasn't. It was great, but it required an expert that knew it in and out to operate to its fullest potential.

 

 

 

Sigh.....    

 

Yes of course, no one in their right mind (or in any event, who wished to remain employed) would risk a rare vintage aircraft by pushing it to it's limits.  That's just common sense.

 

But what's all this "uber plane" stuff?  Who the hell is suggesting that the 190 was or should be uber?  As has been stated again and again, all we ask for is accuracy.  We asked for it in relation to the modeling of the armoured windscreen, and didn't get it and we ask for it in terms of the relative flight models and again it seems we aren't going to get it.   So many of you guys who fly Soviet aircraft online seem to  have trouble comprehending that for some reason.  

 

And for the record, the 190 wasn't an 'experts plane' so please, you can put that ugly old chestnut back in the closet.  It was by all accounts reasonably easy to fly - unlike the 109.

[FuriousMeow]

Sigh.....    

 

Yes of course, no one in their right mind (or in any event, who wished to remain employed) would risk a rare vintage aircraft by pushing it to it's limits.  That's just common sense.

 

But what's all this "uber plane" stuff?  Who the hell is suggesting that the 190 was or should be uber?  As has been stated again and again, all we ask for is accuracy.  We asked for it in relation to the modeling of the armoured windscreen, and didn't get it and we ask for it in terms of the relative flight models and again it seems we aren't going to get it.   So many of you guys who fly Soviet aircraft online seem to  have trouble comprehending that for some reason.  

 

And for the record, the 190 wasn't an 'experts plane' so please, you can put that ugly old chestnut back in the closet.  It was by all accounts reasonably easy to fly - unlike the 109.

 

And its accurate. The 190 is an experts plane, just the same as the 109 is, just the same as all planes are. The 109 wasn't difficult to fly, it was difficult to land and take off. That's it. The throttle assembly was for neophytes, the mastery of the flight envelope was for experts. So put that "I should be able to master it and win everything one on one" chestnut in your closet, and lock it away for good because it wasn't what you claim it was.

 

So stop with this "the 190 was so much better than the SpitVb, and so should be able to conquer all" because, again, it was a squadron vs squadron assessment. It also doesn't parlay at all into the Eastern front in any way, shape or form.

 

You consistently state the 190 should be uber, you don't care for anything else other than the 190 being the best. Your "armored windscreen," the one where you had a 190D-13 that had thicker, by the factor of two, front windscreen than the A6 model? The notion that the 190 "was designed" for refraction when no model prior to the A-2 had armored windscreen? It was not designed for refraction, that was a later installment.  The 190 flight model is off how? Because it is very accurate. It is extremely accurate, the high speed elevator response is the only contention I have with it.

 

"You guys who fly Soviet aircraft" except I play both, and I want them to actually all be accurate. So when I see a 190 zoom away from me when I'm in a Yak when we were both at equal speeds, and I can do the same in the 190 against a Yak, I find it hard to believe your drivel. And that is exactly what it is, drivel.

 

It is getting tiring, the 190 is perfectly fine. You need a wingman. Every flight simulator doesn't have the 190 wrong, your interpretation of it is wrong. You are wrong.

Edited February 11, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[Wulf]

No, no. No. It wasn't hopelessly outclassed. In squadron vs squadron engagement, the speed of the 190 and its roll rate allowed them to engage and disengage at will and their wingmen would take care of the pursuing aircraft. Only in this new age has it become that the SpitV was hopelessly outclassed. So stop with this nonsense. Just stop.

 

It was in squadron vs squadron engagement that of course a plane that is faster and can dictate engagement based on working with wingmen that it is superior, so start working with wingmen and then you'll see - holy crap its superior. It is NOT a single engagement aircraft, it requires working with a wingman!

 

 

Yes, yes, YES !!!

 

With the exception of horizontal turns, the 190 A-3 did everything better than the Spit 5.

 

The early Merlin 61 powered Spit 9 had about the same performance as an A-3.   Better turn of course but woefully inferior roll rate.

 

Now, in Soviet Russia, everything changes for some reason.  It would seem that the Kilmov powered Laggs and Yaks really were better machines than the Merlin 61 powered Spit with its two-stage two speed supercharger.  

 

I don't think so. 

[FuriousMeow]

Yes, yes, YES !!!

 

With the exception of horizontal turns, the 190 A-3 did everything better than the Spit 5.

 

The early Merlin 61 powered Spit 9 had about the same performance as an A-3.   Better turn of course but woefully inferior roll rate.

 

Now, in Soviet Russia, everything changes for some reason.  It would seem that the Kilmov powered Laggs and Yaks really were better machines than the Merlin 61 powered Spit with its two-stage two speed supercharger.  

 

I don't think so. 

 

I do. The engine has little to do with roll rate, unless its a rotary which.. yep... these planes don't have.

 

No, no NO! Stop it.

 

Oh, and the SpitV had a better immediate climb rate than the 190. The 190 had a better extended climb rate, due to its better acceleration and higher speed over a longer distance. Things like that help when engaging/disengaging an enemy. It's not so cut n dry.

 

But again, SpitV vs 190A-4 in squadron engagements or LaGG-3/Yak-1 vs 190A-3 in 1vs1 which are two different engagements and of course both of those planes are easily defeated by the 190A-3. So, the point is, you don't know how to use the 190A-3 vs those planes and you also aren't using a wingman which is the entire premise of the SpitV vs 190A-4 engagement.

 

You, and when I say you I mean YOU, will get destroyed by a SpitV when YOU are in a 190A-4 because you don't know what you are doing and also because you think it should be better based on a squadron vs squadron engagement. It boils down to that, YOU don't know what YOU are doing and YOU have no wingmen.

Edited February 11, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[LizLemon]

I do. The engine has little to do with roll rate, unless its a rotary which.. yep... these planes don't have.

 

No, no NO! Stop it.

 

Except when that engine is also linked to what type of wing is fitted to the spit.

 

Should I type the same word 3 times before or after the above sentence?

[FuriousMeow]

Except when that engine is also linked to what type of wing is fitted to the spit.

 

Should I type the same word 3 times before or after the above sentence?

 

I would like you to tell me that the Spit's engine impacts its roll rate.

 

I mean, like, if a different engine was fitted that the roll rate would be faster. Not a rotary, but an inline.

Edited February 11, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[Wulf]

 

 

You, and when I say you I mean YOU, will get destroyed by a SpitV when YOU are in a 190A-4 because you don't know what you are doing and also because you think it should be better based on a squadron vs squadron engagement. It boils down to that, YOU don't know what YOU are doing and YOU have no wingmen.

 

 

OMG, and I thought I was becoming shrill!  Wow ..  take a breath and calm down kitty...

[LizLemon]

I would like you to tell me that the Spit's engine impacts its roll rate.

 

I mean, like, if a different engine was fitted that the roll rate would be faster. Not a rotary, but an inline.

The spit mk9 had several types of wings fitted to it, including the higher rolling clipped version.

 

The early spit mk9 with Merlin 61 did not have the reinforced wing with improved control surfaces.

 

In this case the mention of the engine is a means of clarifying which sub-type is being discussed.

 

Or do you want to claim that the clipped tips on the Merlin 63 spit mk9 had no impact on roll?

[FuriousMeow]

The spit mk9 had several types of wings fitted to it, including the higher rolling clipped version.

 

The early spit mk9 with Merlin 61 did not have the reinforced wing with improved control surfaces.

 

In this case the mention of the engine is a means of clarifying which sub-type is being discussed.

 

Or do you want to claim that the clipped tips on the Merlin 63 spit mk9 had no impact on roll?

 

And yet engine type matters not to roll rate, just wing type aka clipped wing tips or control surfaces (doped fabric or metal covered) duh! I even asked about engine type and you go on this diatribe. Nice, thanks for playing and go away.

Edited February 11, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[LizLemon]

And yet engine type matters not to roll rate, just wing type - aka clip wing tips which obviously duh! Nice, thanks for playing and go away.

So you didn't know, or misread, his post an now this is your response?

 

It's a step up from just out right ignoring posts that prove you wrong, but you try to hard to make snarl work.

[FuriousMeow]

So you didn't know, or misread, his post an now this is your response?

 

It's a step up from just out right ignoring posts that prove you wrong, but you try to hard to make snarl work.

 

Engine type didn't impact the roll rate, speed did most importantly due to the metal control surfaces replacing the fabric doped surfaces.

Edited February 11, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[FuriousMeow]

Oh, and to recap LizLemon, the roll rate was never in question. The 190's current in-game performance was never a problem. It still isn't. The 190 A-3 is perfectly capable in BoS. It is an awesome fighter, it just requires a wingman to be fully effective. The whole thing from the start has been hinged on a SpitV vs 190A4 squadron vs squadron engagement in which the 190s kicked ass because they could roll quicker, accelerate faster and climb higher over long range. Which the 190A-3 currently can do in BoS against the LaGG-3 and Yak-1, according to accurate statistics.

 

So basically, all you are doing is "Waahhh!" because the 190A-3 is perfectly capable and works perfectly well - it just works best in pairs, or even better in squadron level, engagements. It is not a 1vs1 fighter, it never was. It isn't in any single air combat sim, and they all aren't wrong.

 

Use them historically and, holy sh!t, they perform historically. So find a friend to wing with Wulf, you'll be amazed at how well the 190A-3 dominates all VVS aircraft above ~12K, and most below that except a well "flown" La-5 which is  -Oh no! - historically accurate.

Edited February 11, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[LizLemon]

Where am I going "waah"

 

That poster compared the 190 with an early Merlin 61 spit. You took that to mean that he was saying engine has an impact on roll rate.

 

I pointed out that he was mentioning the engine type because the spit mk9 had many different subtypes.

 

You are making much ado about nothing, bedsides falling back on a point I never disputed. Reread the thread of you are having trouble.

[Solmyr]

@FuriousMeow : - Sorry, aside the subject but : -

 

Does your signature is up to date ? 

Because, well i didn't know this Aces High II "sim", but is it really supposed to have a better FM than the whole Il-2 series ???

 

Because it seems to be sooooo crap here. 

Not sure it beats Red Baron, look at those projectiles ballistics ! 

[FlatSpinMan]

Enough of this. You guys want to irritate each other, go do it somewhere else. This is just perpetuating ill will.