So ... what's the verdict on the FW 190 now???

February 25, 2015

I've probably been online with the 190 for about 3 hours since the update and so far it's been very disappointing. To me at least, the aircraft appears worse than ever. From what I can tell, the high speed handling is about the same but at the lower end of the speed range she's very twitchy indeed with an even greater propensity for spinning than before.

Anyone else notice this or is it just 'moi'?

Edited February 25, 2015 by Wulf

February 25, 2015

There wont change anything. She was Crap and is crap and will always be crap.

Use her to attack groundtargets but forget her to fly her as a fighter. Just not worth it.

I personalyl cant have fun in this plane flying it as a fighter. And i really tried hard.

Edited February 25, 2015 by VSG1_Winger

February 25, 2015

Dont know if they changed anything, been a week since a last played, but one thing I noticed for sure, guns cant do jack anymore, ramming is not a far option as an attacking choice now.

February 25, 2015

Doesn´t feel like anything has changed with the 190.

February 25, 2015

On the contrary Istruba: Now the extra guns on the Fw 190 actually makes a difference.

I still think the Fw 190 has been dealt short. I seems to underperform in engine power especially at medium altitude and while it's great that the controls stiffen up at higher speeds, it's no good when they don't on the other fighters. In terms of handling, I don't have a problem with it, nor have I had: If you choose to fly a plane with +220kg/m² wingloading, you don't push its flight envelope.

However: All things considered, the LW pilots and especially the Fw 190 fliers are better off now, than they were pre-patch IMHO. The extra firepower is now an actual advantage, engine damage and blown off wings happen much more rarely now and we VVS pilots can't pluck you out of the sky with single hits from high deflection anymore.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Finkeren

February 25, 2015

So ... what's the verdict on the FW 190 now???

Guilty! For being the most overestimeted and misinterpreted aircraft by flight simmers since....ever.

February 25, 2015

Ja, es ist wirklich eine Schande.

Eine Menge Leute gefragt, für die Balance ... und Balance, die wir erhalten haben.

Someday there will hopefully be a WWII flightsim dev that doesnt belong to one of the sides that actually participated in the conflict. Hopoe dies last and hopefully i am not too old to simpilot by then:)

So ... what's the verdict on the FW 190 now???

Guilty! For being the most overestimeted and misinterpreted aircraft by flight simmers since....ever.

I would be happy if my planes would overperform as well. Always nice to see the other side undermodeled eh? I can understand you.

Congrats!

February 25, 2015

So ... what's the verdict on the FW 190 now???

Guilty! For being the most overestimeted and misinterpreted aircraft by flight simmers since....ever.

Guilty, for the biggest nonsense post from all flight simmers since.....ever

February 25, 2015

Well, I'll give it a few more days - I might just be flying like crap at the moment, but I actually think the 190 has been changed. Handling, sink-rate and vulnerability all seem worse to me now. And of course, roll-rate is still a disaster.

February 25, 2015

There wont change anything. She was Crap and is crap and will always be crap.

Use her to attack groundtargets but forget her to fly her as a fighter. Just not worth it.

I personalyl cant have fun in this plane flying it as a fighter. And i really tried hard.

Same here, ok Im not an ace. But, besides the fact I never loved this plane (design, features, whatever) I just call it "the stall machine". Period.

February 25, 2015

On the contrary Istruba: Now the extra guns on the Fw 190 actually makes a difference.

I still think the Fw 190 has been dealt short. I seems to underperform in engine power especially at medium altitude and while it's great that the controls stiffen up at higher speeds, it's no good when they don't on the other fighters. In terms of handling, I don't have a problem with it, nor have I had: If you choose to fly a plane with +220kg/m² wingloading, you don't push its flight envelope.

However: All things considered, the LW pilots and especially the Fw 190 fliers are better off now, than they were pre-patch IMHO. The extra firepower is now an actual advantage, engine damage and blown off wings happen much more rarely now and we VVS pilots can't pluck you out of the sky with single hits from high deflection anymore.

I don't think the additional weapons make much of a difference at all, other than to further degrade performance - which is already poor. In RL, the MGFFs were always a bit problematic in the 190 in any event (which is why they were replaced in the A-6) due to the flatter trajectory of the inboard Mauser cannons. Basically you had three different weapons (MG 17s, MGFFs and Mauser 151s) all with different trajectories; so, beyond the harmonized range the projectile spread was less than ideal.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Wulf

February 25, 2015

So ... what's the verdict on the FW 190 now???

Guilty! For being the most overestimeted and misinterpreted aircraft by flight simmers since....ever.

I'm sure you're being mostly sarcastic here, but if you believe the Fw190 has been accurately modeled in this, or any other sim; then IMHO, you're just flat out wrong.

I would be happy if my planes would overperform as well. Always nice to see the other side undermodeled eh? I can understand you.

Congrats!

Yes, you're 100% right on this!

February 25, 2015

I'm sure you're being mostly sarcastic here, but if you believe the Fw190 has been accurately modeled in this, or any other sim; then IMHO, you're just flat out wrong.

How so? Your conclusions and sources would be interesting to hear.

February 25, 2015

Guilty! For being the most overestimeted and misinterpreted aircraft by flight simmers since....ever.

+1 ;0

February 25, 2015

The Uber plane is not so Uber?

February 25, 2015

So finally an accurate FM?

February 25, 2015

The FW 190 seems to be accurate. It's not supposed to be a turn fighter and it's not. It's supposed to have roll rate that is achieved in the game. It performs up to expectations. If there is a problem then it's in unexpected performance of VVS fighters mainly the Yak 1.

Also there is probably a huge difference in what we virtual pilots consider fighter plane quality and what real pilots considered quality back then during WW2. Majority of people who complain about FW 190 performance are probably searching for a dogfighter for slow and tight turn duels. And the FW 190 is not great in that field.

In my eyes the FW 190 is great for ambushes. If one jumps someone unaware of his presence the FW is priceless. All the firepower is great. (And people will admire that more in BOS now when we have more sturdy airplanes)

If one can't surprise or outnumber the opponents then why to attack in the first place?

Ok still the relative performance problem is here and shall be clarified by devs. They have shown their ability to admit mistakes so I believe the Yak 1 is not gonna last forever in this state. Also the F4 and roll rates of early Lavotchkins.

February 25, 2015

I still don't give the 190 the blame for it's performance but rather any of it's oppoments, although fighting Lagg-s and Las actually feels fair (despite their benifitial roll rate boost).

Still looking ahead for:

- fix of non linear throttle at 1.2 - 1.42 ata range

- uncontroillable taxi behaviour with unlocked tailwheel (due to false inertia, directional stability, angular momentum)

- fixed radio beacon indicator in MP

(- reframed cockpit for better hoizontal and vertical visibility to the the front)

- slightly refurbished stall module launched with 1.007 (I guess), which introduces rapid and unexpectable flick roll and flat spin tendencies at speeds below 450km/h

Of course all other planes need some love and performance hammers as well to make the 190 play it's part in BoS accurately.

February 25, 2015

Majority of people who complain about FW 190 performance are probably searching for a dogfighter for slow and tight turn duels. And the FW 190 is not great in that field.

I guess what people are misunderstanding is that most of us who are complaining about the 190 performance know that and dont turnfight, so dont start saying things you dont know. The Yak seems to be overperforming but thats not what we discussing in this topic.

Edited February 25, 2015 by istruba

February 25, 2015

I guess what people are misunderstanding is that most of us who are complaining about the 190 performance know that and dont turnfight, so dont start saying things you dont know. The Yak seems to be overperforming but thats not what we discussing in this topic.

But a fighter plane is always matched against its opponents. If there were no Yaks there woudn't be threads like this one. Or the discussion wouldn't be so heated up. Or if the Yak would perform within the expected performance envelope the FW could act as energy fighter and dominate with speed and energy. It can't do this well now and the main reason for that is its relative lack of energy compared to the Yak.

Still i believe that performance is not of great concern. We simply use these crafts in a way not prevailent in reality 70 years ago.

February 25, 2015

The FW 190 seems to be accurate. It's not supposed to be a turn fighter and it's not. It's supposed to have roll rate that is achieved in the game. It performs up to expectations. If there is a problem then it's in unexpected performance of VVS fighters mainly the Yak 1.

Also there is probably a huge difference in what we virtual pilots consider fighter plane quality and what real pilots considered quality back then during WW2. Majority of people who complain about FW 190 performance are probably searching for a dogfighter for slow and tight turn duels. And the FW 190 is not great in that field.

In my eyes the FW 190 is great for ambushes. If one jumps someone unaware of his presence the FW is priceless. All the firepower is great. (And people will admire that more in BOS now when we have more sturdy airplanes)

If one can't surprise or outnumber the opponents then why to attack in the first place?

Ok still the relative performance problem is here and shall be clarified by devs. They have shown their ability to admit mistakes so I believe the Yak 1 is not gonna last forever in this state. Also the F4 and roll rates of early Lavotchkins.

Where did you get that from? how about reading what actually people said it's wrong first.

The biggest problem for the 190 remains it's high speed handling, compared to all other fighters in the game. There's no maneuver, the 190 can do at high speeds, in bos, that can't be matched or bested by all Russian fighters in the game. They roll better, turn better , do everything better at high speed. None of this Russian fighters and certainly not the Bf109 should be able to match the FW-190 at high speed. until the later war US planes showed up the 190 was king at high speed. There were specific instructions given to the engeneers, when upgrading the LA5, because of it's poor high speed handling compared to the German planes and specially the new 190. So where did you get your low speed turn fight bs from?

Edited February 25, 2015 by Jaws2002

February 25, 2015

For people who still remember the early IL-2. It feels like the 190 FM is similar to the 109G-6 (Early) FM of the original IL-2. For so long Oleg insisted that it's performance was accurate. The plane had a slower climb rate than the I-16! It was the most un-flyable plane in the entire series until it was fixed (2 years after release).

The culprit was the use of the famed Soviet war-time trials of a captured 109G6. As it turned out, that particular G6 was not up to snuff - hence the underwhelming test performance.

Full disclosure: I think the 190 FM is very close. I think the issue is more with slightly OP Russian fighters in terms of dive speed - and E retention. In matters of pure 'dogfighting' ability, I believe they are very accurate.

February 25, 2015

Where did you get that from? how about reading what actually people said it's wrong first.

The biggest problem for the 190 remains it's high speed handling, compared to all other fighters in the game. There's no maneuver, the 190 can do at high speeds, in bos, that can't be matched or bested by all Russian fighters in the game. They roll better, turn better , do everything better at high speed. None of this Russian fighters and certainly not the Bf109 should be able to match the FW-190 at high speed. until the later war US planes showed up the 190 was king at high speed. There were specific instructions given to the engeneers, when upgrading the LA5, because of it's poor high speed handling compared to the German planes and specially the new 190. So where did you get your low speed turn fight bs from?

Ok so maybe not turn fighting. But there is still this relative performance problem. I consider the FW 190 OK as it is. What seems to be wrong is the speed of the Yak 1 and roll rates of the Lavotchkins. So my conclusion is that there is no need to touch the FW.

February 25, 2015

If someone think that Fw 190 can't dogfight i suggest read these :

Johnie Johnson - one of British Ace flying on Spitfires about his dogfight with Fw 190 A-2/A-3 in 1942 ( over Dieppe)

And some notes from Russian La5 pilots against Fw 190 in Eastern Front:

The FW-190 first appeared on the Soviet-German front at the end of 1942. This is the first high-speed German fighter with an air-cooled engine. In comparison with the Me-109 and its modernized versions, the Me-109F and the Me-109G, the FW-190 is of a higher quality. The speed of the FW-190 is slightly higher than that of the Messerschmitt; it also has more powerful armament and is more maneuverable in horizontal flight. The FW-190 has a large supply of ammunition, with 15 seconds of cannon fire, and 50 seconds of constant machine-gun fire. For this reason the gunners are not economical with their ammunition, and often open up the so-called "frightening fire". The pilots have good visibility laterally, forward, upward and rearward. A fairly good horizontal maneuver permits the FW-190 to turn at low speed without falling into a tail spin. An armored ring on the front part of the engine provides the pilot with reliable protection; for this reason, the FW-190's quite often make frontal attacks. In this way they differ from the Me-109s. One shortcoming of the FW-190 is its weight. The lightest model of this plane weighs 3,500 kgs. (7,700 lbs), while the average weight is from 3,800 (8,360 lbs) to 3,900 kgs. (8,580 lbs). Since the FW-190 is so heavy and does not have a high-altitude engine, pilots do not like to fight in vertical maneuvers. Another weak point in the FW-190 is the poor visibility downward, both forward and rearward. The FW-190 is seriously handicapped in still another way; there is no armor around the gas tanks, which are situated under the pilot's seat and behind it. From below, the pilot is not protected in any way; from behind, the only protection is the ordinary seat-back with 15-mm of armor. Even bullets from our large caliber machine guns penetrate this armor, to say nothing of cannon. The main problem confronting our fliers is that of forcing the Germans to fight from positions advantageous to us. The FW-190's eagerly make frontal attacks. Their methods of conducting fire in such cases is quite stereotyped. To begin with the Germans open fire with long-range ammunition from the horizontal cannons at a distance of 1,000 meters (3,200 feet). At 500 or 400 meters (1,000 or 1,300 feet) the FW-190 opens fire from all guns. Since the planes approach each other at an extremely great speed during frontal attacks one should never, under any circumstances, turn from the given course. Fire should be opened at a distance of 700 or 800 meters, (2,300 or 2,600 feet). Practice has shown that in frontal attacks both planes are so damaged that, in the majority of cases, they are compelled to drop out of the battle. Therefore, frontal attacks with FW-190's may be made only when the battle happens to be over our territory. Frontal engagements over enemy territory, or even more so in the enemy rear, should be avoided. If a frontal attack of an FW-190 should fail the pilot usually attempts to change the attacks into a turning engagement. Being very stable and having a large range of speeds, the FW-190 will inevitably offer turning battle at a minimum speed. Our Lavochkin-5 may freely take up the challenge, if the pilot uses the elevator tabs correctly. By using your foot to hold the plane from falling into a tail spin you can turn the La-5 at an exceedingly low speed, thus keeping the FW from getting on your tail. When fighting the La-5, the FW risks a vertical maneuver only at high speed. For example, let us assume that the first frontal attack of an FW failed. The plane then goes on ahead and prepares for a second frontal attack. If it fails a second time, the pilot turns sharply to the side and goes into a steep dive. On coming out of the dive, he picks up speed in horizontal flight and engages the opposing plane in a vertical maneuver. Vertical-maneuver fighting with the FW-190 is usually of short duration since our planes have a better rate of climb than the German planes, and because the Germans are unable to withstand tense battles of any length. The winner in present air battles must have an advantage in altitude. This is especially true with regard to the FW-190. "Once a comrade of mine and I engaged two FW-190's at a height of 3,500 meters (10,850 ft). After three energetic attacks we succeeded in chasing the two FW-190's down to 1,500 meters (4,650 ft). All the while we kept our advantage in height. As usual the German tried, out of an inverted turn, to get away and below, but I got one in my sight and shot it down. After that we immediately went up to 3,700 meters (11,470 ft) and met another group of FW-190's as they were attacking one of our Pe-2 bombers. We made use of our advantage in height and by vertical attacks succeeded in chasing the Germans away and also shot one down." When following a diving FW you should never dive below the other enemy planes. When two planes dive the one following the leader should come out of the dive in such a way as to be at an advantage over the leading plane in height and speed. In this way the tail of the leading plane will be protected; at the same time, the second plane will also be able to open up direct fire against the enemy. In fighting the FW-190 our La-5 should force the Germans to fight by using the vertical maneuver. This may be achieved by constantly making vertical attacks. The first climb of the FW is usually good, the second worse, and the third altogether poor. This may be explained by the fact that the FW's great weight does not permit it to gather speed quickly in the vertical maneuver. After two or three persistent attacks by our fighters the FWs completely lose their advantage in height and in speed, and inevitably find themselves below. And because of this, they are sure to drop out of the battle into a straight dive (sometimes up to 90 degrees) with the idea of gaining height on the side, and then of coming in again from the side of the sun with an advantage in speed and height. At times it happens that the FW, after diving, does not gain altitude, but attempts to drop out of the battle altogether in low flight. However, the FW-190 is never able to come out of a dive below 300 or 250 meters (930 ft or 795 ft). Coming out of a dive, made from 1,500 meters (4,650 ft) and at an angle of 40 to 45 degrees, the FW-190 falls an extra 200 meters (620 ft). A shortcoming of the FW-190 is its poor climbing ability. When climbing in order to get an altitude advantage over the enemy, there is a moment when the FW-190 "hangs" in the air. It is then convenient to fire. Therefore, when following a FW-190 in a dive, you should bring your plane out of the dive slightly before the FW comes out of it, in order to catch up with him on the vertical plane. In other words, when the FW comes out of the dive you should bring your plane out in such a way as to have an advantage over the enemy in height. If this can be achieved, the FW-190 becomes a fine target when it "hangs". Direct fire should be opened up at a short distance, 50 to 100 meters (150 to 300 ft). It should also be remembered that the weakest spots of the FW-190 are below and behind--the gasoline tanks and the pilot's legs, which are not protected. Throughout the whole engagement with a FW-190, it is necessary to maintain the highest speed possible. The Lavochkin-5 will then have, when necessary, a good vertical maneuver, and consequently, the possibility of getting away from an enemy attack or on the contrary, of attacking. It should further be kept in mind that the La-5 and the FW-190 in outward appearance resemble each other very much; therefore, careful observation is of great importance. We may emphasize once more: never let an enemy plane gain an altitude advantage over you and you will win the fight.

February 25, 2015

Actually there's a need to touch the fw190 to remove the "roll inertia" added in the patch when they "fixed" the 190. they added that and it perfectly negated the increase in maximum roll rate. So, in actual cpmbat, at speed, the lagg, La5 and yak all out roll the fw190, because the 190 needs a very long time to achieve it's maximum roll rate.

This is how the real one was, and it's a far cry from the poor high speed handling machine we have in game:

upload

image upload no limit

Try this two in game and see if you come to a conclusion that matches this.

And some more stuf from Russian sources:

" Soviet pilots reported that the Lavochkin ( La-5 ) could stay with – but not overtake – an Fw 190 in horizontal flight at low altitude and their performance was similar, when manoeuvring in the same plane. When chasing or evading an Fw 190 in a climb, the La-5 (which was half a ton lighter) enjoyed some advantage. However, its manoeuvrability at speeds in excess of 250mph left a lot to be desired in comparison with the Fw 190. Most pilots felt that the ailerons and elevators were particularly heavy when turning tightly at higher speeds and when exiting a dive. This in turn meant that only physically strong pilots could hope to get the best out of the early La-5s when engaging enemy fighters."

With service testing and combat experience having revealed numerous defects with the La-5, Lavochkin set about rectifying these problems with the follow-on La-5F of early 1943. Incorporating aerodynamic improvements, reduced weight (achieved by losing two of the five fuel tanks), reshaped and larger flight controls and a more powerful (and reliable) M-82F engine, the new fighter started to reach frontline units in March 1943. Engine reliability had been of great concern with the original La-5, as the M-82 had a tendency to suffer from spark plug failure and exhaust pipe burnthrough. The fighter’s boost system had also proven difficult to operate, as had the cowling side flaps – the engine routinely overheated as a result. Although the improved La-5F allowed Soviet pilots to achieve parity with German fighters during the spring of 1943, Lavochkin was fully aware that more still needed to be done. For example, engine reliability was still not what it should have been, with the La-5 suffering a failure rate three times greater than its contemporaries in the VVS-KA at that time. Pilots were also finding the aircraft difficult to recover from inverted spins due to the heaviness of the controls. Indeed, frontline aviators continued to abandon La-5s in an inverted spin until they were shown how to recover the aircraft by Lavochkin test pilots. As previously mentioned, the fighter’s handling improved with the advent of the La-5F thanks to the fitment of larger flying surfaces.

" The LaGG-3 tested by the agency in March and April 1942 at a flying weight of 6,8341b (3,1OOkg) ......In addition to high noise level, high control column forces and short range, it was claimed that manoeuvrability was poor and that radio communication range was insufficient..

(La5 with M-82)......The tests also revealed quite a number of problems. Controllability proved to be even more difficult than that of the LaGG-3 M-1 05P. Transition from a banked turn in one direction to a banked turn in the other caused stick forces requiring great physical efforts by the pilot. "

And some British findings after testing the aircraft:

Fw 190 A-3

Flying Characteristics

The aircraft is pleasant to fly, all controls being extremely light and positive. The aircraft is difficult to taxi due to the excessive weight on the self-centring tailwheel when on the ground. For take-off, 15° of flap is required, and it is necessary to keep the control column back to avoid swinging during the initial stage of the take-off run. The run is approximately the same as that of the Spitfire IX.

Once airborne, the pilot immediately feels at home in the aircraft. The retraction of the flaps and undercarriage is barely noticeable although the aircraft will sink if the retraction of the flaps is made before a reasonably high airspeed has been obtained.

The stalling speed of the aircraft is high, being approximately 110 m.p.h. (177 k.m./h.) with the undercarriage and flaps retracted, and 105 m.p.h. [169 k.m./h.| with the undercarriage and flaps fully down. All controls are effective up to the stall. One excellent feature of this aircraft is that it is seldom necessary to retrim under all conditions of flight.

Dive

The Fw 190 has a high rate of dive, the initial acceleration being excellent. The maximum speed so far obtained in a dive is 580 m.p.h. |934 k.m./h.l True at 16,000 ft [4,880 m|, and at this speed the controls, although slightly heavier, are still remarkably light. One very g<x>d feature is that no alteration of trim form level flight is required either during the entry or during the pull-out. Due to the fuel injection system it is possible to enter the dive by pushing the control column forward without the engine cutting.

CONCLUSIONS

The flying characteristics are exceptional and a pilot new to the type feels at home within the first few minutes of flight. The controls are light and well-harmonised and all manoeuvres can be carried out without difficulty at all speeds. The fact that the Fw 190 does not require re-trimming under all conditions of flight is a particularly good point. The initial acceleration is very good and is particularly noticeable in the initial stages of a climb or dive.

Perhaps one of the most outstanding qualities of this aircraft is the remarkable aileron control. It is possible to change from a turn in one direction to a turn in the opposite direction with incredible speed, and when viewed from another aircraft the change appears just as if a flick half-roll has been made."

February 25, 2015

Still cannot figure out why they have gone back a step from IL2 with the glass and frame around the cockpit being so thick even tho it has been PROVEN that the real thing looked nothing like that due to refraction.

February 25, 2015

"[...] at the time the aerial combat in the west really began to catch fire, the "Oberkommando der Luftwaffe" decided to withdraw most of their superior Fw190 fighters from the east, because they considered the obsolete Bf109 enough to rival the Russian planes, which were still inferior at this time. Most of the Fw190 deployed in the east at this time were used in a ground attack duty, due to their superior armor plating, and better capability to carry heavier bombs. At the time the Russian planes closed the gap to the German one's in terms of performance, the numerical advantage of the Russian airforce was already so big, that the Oberkommando had the opinion, that it "doesn't matter in this conditions, if the pilots fly a 109 or a 190 [that's the reason the 190 weren't send back to the east at this time]"

- translated from German into English by me, source "Luftkrieg über Europa 1939-1945 - Die Angst im Nacken" by Manuel Wolf, ISBN 978-3-613-03084-8 -->source Original German documents from OB West

And yet again and again and again you have to listen to Russian (or other people from Ex-USSR) that the "190 is a crappy plane, it's overestimated bla bla.." nonsense like this. I think the reason is pretty clear even in those 3 sentences.

1. probably 90% of the fighters the Russian encountered have been 109s..by implication around ~90% of the Russian shot down planes, have been shot down by 109s. The 190 was used in such small numbers at a fighter in the east, that it was very unlikely for Russians to encounter it in this duty - another example are the Griffon Spitfires. (Almost) nobody in Nazi Germany considerd them as "dangerous" or stuff like that, they didn't get any reputation..it was always the Mustang-D, or the Spit9 the Germans feared the most..same reason, Griffon Spitfires were only in such small numbers in duty, that the Germans barely encountered them in fight.

2. the few 190s the Russians encountered were mostly deployed in ground attack duty, so probably most of the time low and slow, after throwing their bombs, + the additional drag from the bomb mounting didn't make it better for sure - so no wonder, that the Russians didn't consider them as dangerous or "good fighters", because they have mostly been the victims.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Celestiale

February 25, 2015

And yet again and again and again you have to listen to Russian (or other people from Ex-USSR) that the "190 is a crappy plane, it's overestimated bla bla.." nonsense like this.

Er........where am I having to listen to all these people, Celestiale?

February 25, 2015

Er........where am I having to listen to all these people, Celestiale?

For example in this thread. And in many others.

February 25, 2015

touchy

February 25, 2015

My only qualm at this point is the relative ineffectiveness of four 20 mm guns on target. I admit I also pushed my convergence out thirty meters as I am doing a lot more mud moving in the Fw recently. I know they beefed up the DM so its possible I just need to get used to it.

On the other hand, I used more rounds to take down a Yak last night than I typically used in the original to tackle a Fortress.

While it is my opinion the Russian FM's are overdone, I can live with both the Fw's FM's as well as the view for now. No hard data to support either claim. Just the historical record and pilot references. I'm hoping both/all will get a review before we hit 1944 in the west (vs Mustangs,Spits, heavies, et al) and the Dev's can devote resources to it. I honestly don't see them doing much with any of it in the short term. Again, just my opinion.

Edited February 25, 2015 by HerrMurf

February 25, 2015

Is there a difference between online and offline (lag, packet loss)? Never had troubles with the firepower of the Fw. One short burst and target was dead, but I didn't fly online, yet.

February 25, 2015

Good lord how many of these bloody FW190 threads are we gonna have?

So much debate for an aircraft that didn't see action at Stalingrad anyway. Yet the Luftwhiner is a resilient creature.

Edited February 25, 2015 by 71st_AH_Chuck

February 25, 2015

42.

February 25, 2015

Chuck, its a passionate crowd. Better than a passive one which would let both the topic and genre die.

February 25, 2015

For example in this thread. And in many others.

Er...do you mean Brano? Because he's from Slovakia? Am I meant to draw a conclusion about the FW190 from that? I'm afraid I'm merely an ignorant Brit here Celestiale but I note you are Bavarian. Do I draw a conclusion from that too?

I do believe people are allowed to disagree on these forums, right?

February 25, 2015

I like how they got the engine to sound: Whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine

Pitch perfect!

February 25, 2015

People complaining about whiners are whiners themself you know?

Seriously though it's extra paid content. I wish people would actually use that detail of analying bugs on various planes ingame. Only because the 190 reccieves the most attention doesn't meant it's the most bugged plane ingame and everything else fine.

If it was me you'd see several threads about every plane appearing every day.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

February 25, 2015

Good lord how many of these bloody FW190 threads are we gonna have?

Till it get's fixed

February 25, 2015

So ... what's the verdict on the FW 190 now???

Recommended Posts

Wulf

SR-F_Winger

Willy__

9./JG27golani79

Finkeren

Brano

SR-F_Winger

II./JG77_Manu*

Wulf

J4SCrisZeri

Wulf

WWChunk

Mewt

GOAT-ACEOFACES

=AVG=Zombie

GOAT-ACEOFACES

CaK_Rumcajs

6./ZG26_5tuka

Willy__

CaK_Rumcajs

Jaws2002

StG77_Kondor

CaK_Rumcajs

303_Kwiatek

Jaws2002

Flack88

II./JG77_Manu*

DD_Arthur

II./JG77_Manu*

GOAT-ACEOFACES

II/JG17_HerrMurf

JtD

Chuck_Owl

JtD

II/JG17_HerrMurf

DD_Arthur

SYN_Mike77

6./ZG26_5tuka

II./JG77_Manu*

BraveSirRobin

Browse All

Activity