Jump to content
Wulf

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

Recommended Posts

 

[Edited]

 

 

Well before they fix the 190 flight model they still "have to fix every russian plane's overperforming flight model", just like you said before.

 

It seems that some people on the jerry side will never be satisfied unless their planes club baby seals every time.

Edited by Bearcat
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"[...] 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.

The production of the FW 190 was to low to satisfy all the needs of both the fighter and ground attack arms. FW 190 were also needed in the west because of their firepower to fight the four engined bombers. Still they needed to be supported at high altitude by 109 units because of the bad performance up high of the 190. The FW 190 fighters in the east were always few, the max number being in the spring 43 up to Kursk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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)

 

jjohnsononfw190.jpg

 

 

 

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.

 

 

:)

I can not understand why the devs ignore such evidence. I mean if it was one out of many that describe otherwise.

But AFAIK they all speak the same language about the FW 190. The FW in BOS is the biggest joke in flightsim history and doenst speak for the competence of its creators. Hard words and i am almost sorry i have to talk like that since this could be the flightsim of all flightsims.

More importantly did they fix the stiff elevator problem at high speed? The real FW didn't have this problem.

no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The production of the FW 190 was to low to satisfy all the needs of both the fighter and ground attack arms. FW 190 were also needed in the west because of their firepower to fight the four engined bombers. Still they needed to be supported at high altitude by 109 units because of the bad performance up high of the 190. The FW 190 fighters in the east were always few, the max number being in the spring 43 up to Kursk.

 

It's especially true since the FW190's firepower was used predominantly against the Heavies (B-17, B-24, Lancaster). The 109s were used as fighter interceptors and were also very potent against any russian bombers as the VVS preferred the use of medium bombers and ground attack aircraft. The 109s were not that effective against the Flying Fortresses (unless they were equipped with gunpods, which reduced their effectiveness against other fighters). 

Edited by 71st_AH_Chuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that some people on the jerry side will never be satisfied unless their planes club baby seals every time.

LOL, its funny cuzs it true ;)
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

[Edited]

 

 

Well before they fix the 190 flight model they still "have to fix every russian plane's overperforming flight model", just like you said before.

 

It seems that some people on the jerry side will never be satisfied unless their planes club baby seals every time.

wed be satisfied if the plane would perform how its described in numerous sources. And not like a FYLING BRICK. God dammit. Wether the 190 is under or other planes are overperforming can be argued about. But she simply is not the superior aircraft she should be.

I said it over and over again. There WERE theaters in wich the allied side had the superior performing planes. Model one of those and no german will complain about being outperformed by an allied plane that actually WAS superior during WWII.

 

EDIT: I wont assume this is necessarily BIAS. Maybe its really just an error. Still, i for my part wont stop complaining until this mistake is fixed.

Edited by Bearcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

[Edited]

 

 

Well before they fix the 190 flight model they still "have to fix every russian plane's overperforming flight model", just like you said before.

 

It seems that some people on the jerry side will never be satisfied unless their planes club baby seals every time.

Chuck, you can do better than that.

 

As I see it the 190 is less an issue performance wise (many handling and basic physical issues though). The thing is that the Yak is definetly overperforming. You said you are an aeronautic engineer, so I think you agree it sustains too high AoAs without loosing lift or speed (looks like a suspicious wing polar has been used for it to me).

 

The Lagg-3 and La-5 have anecdoteably proven too high roll rate. If it had superior or compareable roll rates I'm sure the russian tests and ocmbat manuals had said so instead of it having bad manouvrebility and heavy controlls putting high strains on their pilots.

 

If you want histoical accurancy in this theatre you have to pay the price of a slight balance shift towards the germans. I'm fine with it, I will still fly my Lagg-3 and challenge unexpirienced 109 pilots not using it to it's limits. I for one don't fear accurancy, I admire it. And I have never been a Fw 190 fan but participate in nearly every thread because I recgnize it's erros ingame and want to see it fixed like any other aircraft.

 

So pls don't do the mistake to put every player enjoying german aicraft designs in one bin and beat them up for being superiourity orientated or - in modern terms - being "seal clubbers".

Edited by Bearcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can not understand why the devs ignore such evidence. I mean if it was one out of many that describe otherwise. But AFAIK they all speak the same language about the FW 190.

Well, the Russian source basically says the Fw190 was a brick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the Russian source basically says the Fw190 was a brick.

And the British Spitpilot?

 

And Quote: "We may emphasize once more: never let an enemy plane gain an altitude advantage over you and you will win the fight. "

Well, thats basic aircombat one o one. But even that doesnt help with the BOS FW brick dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck, you can do better than that.

 

As I see it the 190 is less an issue performance wise (many handling and basic physical issues though). The thing is that the Yak is definetly overperforming. You said you are an aeronautic engineer, so I think you agree it sustains too high AoAs without loosing lift or speed (looks like a suspicious wing polar has been used for it to me).

 

The Lagg-3 and La-5 have anecdoteably proven too high roll rate. If it had superior or compareable roll rates I'm sure the russian tests and ocmbat manuals had said so instead of it having bad manouvrebility and heavy controlls putting high strains on their pilots.

 

If you want histoical accurancy in this theatre you have to pay the price of a slight balance shift towards the germans. I'm fine with it, I will still fly my Lagg-3 and challenge unexpirienced 109 pilots not using it to it's limits. I for one don't fear accurancy, I admire it. And I have never been a Fw 190 fan but participate in nearly every thread because I recgnize it's erros ingame and want to see it fixed like any other aircraft.

 

So pls don't do the mistake to put every player enjoying german aicraft designs in one bin and beat them up for being superiourity orientated or - in modern terms - being "seal clubbers".

 

About overperforming:

 

One thing a lot of people tend to forget about flight model charts is the conditions in which the tests were performed. Doing a test at -40 in the winter is not the same as doing a test in +20 during summer. The Stalingrad winter was one of the coldest there ever was and having read many accounts from german pilots (including Bubi Hartmann's), there were many issues with Bf.109s and FW190s having engine issues because they couldn't operate their engines at their temperatures. The Russians quickly became experts at operating at these low temperatures since they used techniques that the Germans just had never thought about (like pouring fuel into the aircraft's oil sump to thaw the oil (which the german ground crews were very skeptical about at first) and to ignite fuel under the engine.)

 

Common conception from westerners (british, germans, americans) about russian aircraft is that they were bricks and were overall terrible planes. If the british or americans did tests on russian planes, I very much doubt that they did it at the conditions the russians operated them at during the Battle of Stalingrad. Try to find a cold -40 winter in Germany or Britain... 

 

In my guides I tried to find information about russian aircraft performance. It was a real nightmare. For each plane I had 3 to 6 different sources telling me different numbers. And most of these tests were performed at ISA settings, not RUSSIANWINTERITSFREAKINGCOLD condition. And ironically, german planes test results also vary from source to source. British, American, German tests... they never agree on anything because they are never done on the same machine, with the same pilot, in the same conditions. 

 

Performance tests made by manufacturers themselves are also slightly biased. Not because they are unprofessional, but because the flight test results could determine whether or not they got a contract to the detriment of one of their competitors. So the performance data you get on a certain configuration might be for the same model, but these tests were not done with the same configuration as the aircraft would have during actual combat operations. There are (and will be) documentaries on my youtube channel about Supermarine and Messerschmitt and it's pretty interesting how they explain the way some of their performance tests were done. Willy Messerschmitt's test pilots have an eye-opening perspective on the rivalry between the engineers of Junkers, Focke-Wulf and Messerschmitt.

 

But yeah, I have to agree on certain things you said about the flight models. But, to use the motto of my favourite FM guru Buzzsaw from Team Fusion: "Flight Models are not perfect and never will be."

Edited by 71st_AH_Chuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the British Spitpilot?

I've turn fought and won against Spitfires in the Fw190 in Il-2:1946. I could write combat reports about that, but it doesn't make the Fw190 the superior turn fighter.

Edited by JtD
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Insanity+that+is+crazy+the+first+time+so

 

 

 

It seems that some people on the jerry side will never be satisfied unless their planes club baby seals every time.

No question about it, but not everyone who wants the plane fixed wants a clown wagon.

Actually, I think the 190 is popular because it's more challenging to fly.

That's how I started flying mostly fw190, back when forgotten battle was released. got quickly bored with The la5fn, then the Yak and then the g6AS. The 190 was interesting for me until after Pacific fighters. Then after some patch, it was easier and the severs, where before two three of us were flying 190, started filling up with new comers to the plane.

From that point on, was more interested in p47, p38 and the f6f.

You model a plane a dog, and if it wasn't known to be a dog, people will find it imteresting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck,

 

Temperature has almost no influence to the relative performance of a few planes!!!

 

All that is asked for, is that the planes perform as they did in relation to another, the absolute numbers are not that important (within reason).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the British Spitpilot?

 

And Quote: "We may emphasize once more: never let an enemy plane gain an altitude advantage over you and you will win the fight. "

Well, thats basic aircombat one o one. But even that doesnt help with the BOS FW brick dude.

And that is why they instrumented and testing planes.. because one mans garbage is another mans treasure.. But a number is a number.. and no amount of bias will change the value of a number

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.....

But yeah, I have to agree on certain things you said about the flight models. But, to use the motto of my favourite FM guru Buzzsaw from Team Fusion: "Flight Models are not perfect and never will be."

True that, you have to know your data well or better use a solid average of what you consider to be more "serious" sources. I also worked on that for some time and I've seen a wide variety of captured plane's tests and german ones as well.

 

Still, assuming the cold weather benefit is roughtly equal for any plane ingame, I have to agree with robtek on talking about relative performance.  There are first tests of BoS planes under ISA/ICAO conditions already and I hope the ME will enable us to test all plane extensively under those conditions for collecting more sufisticated test results of planes ingame.

 

Personally I judge planes more by their feel than performance, which might seem unlogical but it's what attracts my passions of flight. That's why I'm getting frustrated by bugs like the non linear throttle or taxi behaviour more easily than maybe others.

 

In my opinon either of both deserves equal attention for fixes in future and the recent trim tab change gave me hope devs might listen to my wishes.

Edited by Stab/JG26_5tuka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck,

 

Temperature has almost no influence to the relative performance of a few planes!!!

 

All that is asked for, is that the planes perform as they did in relation to another, the absolute numbers are not that important (within reason).

 

http://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/1531/does-temperature-affect-takeoff-performance

 

Temperature has a significant influence on aircraft performance. In terms of RELATIVE flight performance, maybe not. But in terms of engine performance, yes.

 

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/pilot_handbook/media/PHAK%20-%20Chapter%2010.pdf

 

If you check, for instance, Figure 10-27. Cruise power setting on page 10-23.

 

You can see a difference of about 7 mph between +20 deg C and -20 deg C at 6000 ft. Now try to extrapolate that for -40 deg C. It varies from engine configuration to engine configuration. By what? I am not 100 % sure. We'd need to ask on the russian forums as I am sure they have an easier access to this kind of data than me.

 

Lots of german planes did have engine troubles during winter operations because they would start their engine with frozen oil into it, which would wear it down prematurely and diminish its performance gradually. It was a maintenance nightmare for the ground crews.

 

About 10 mph difference of speed might not seem like a lot, but it's the little margin that makes a plane outperform the other. Supermarine engineers had countless sleepless nights about finding ways  to gain a little 5 mph, which made a lot of difference for the pilots. That's why, for instance, small design improvements over time like the retracting rear wheel, the use of flush rivets in certain areas... all these things allowed to gain 3, 4 or 5 extra mph. 

Edited by 71st_AH_Chuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3min i played it yesterday i found the 190 stalling for no apparent reason.

Also the 109 stabilizer was going crazy without touching anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm from those who say the Fw 190A-3 has the most accurate FM, among fighters.

 

Let's see quickly, what were the advantages of this bird against the fighters we have ingame (including 109s) ? --> roll rate, high speed controls, durability, speed and dive acceleration,...

 

Ingame, La-5 & LaGG-3 roll much better, Yak-1 can roll with the 190 because of his weird inertia with """maximum 2% error""", and all fighters are much more maneuverable at high speed.

 

I'm just passing through...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The production of the FW 190 was to low to satisfy all the needs of both the fighter and ground attack arms. FW 190 were also needed in the west because of their firepower to fight the four engined bombers. Still they needed to be supported at high altitude by 109 units because of the bad performance up high of the 190. The FW 190 fighters in the east were always few, the max number being in the spring 43 up to Kursk.

 

 

No, you're wrong.  The only serious bombing to take place over Germany during the BoS period was the bombing being conducted by the RAF - at night , following the initial daylight efforts in '39-'40 which resulted in catastrophic air crew losses.  Some 109s and 190s were conscripted into the night war but essentially it remained the RAF v the dedicated twin-engined Luftwaffe night fighters and Flak units.  The US was gearing-up in '42-'43 but it was still essentially in a training phase with only limited bombing.  And of course, both 109s and 190s were employed in response to daylight incursions.  

Edited by Wulf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More importantly did they fix the stiff elevator problem at high speed? The real FW didn't have this problem.

 

 

No, not true.  The elevators on the 190 did stiffen up at high speed.  The problem is the devs have failed (for reasons that only they understand ;) ) to incorporate this same 'reality' into the other fighters in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, its funny cuzs it true ;)

 

 

OMG really?  

 

In the end this just boils down to common sense.  Do we really imagine that the Luftwaffe is going to deploy a day fighter (a day fighter that was designed and developed AFTER the Bf 109)  that was simply incapable of surviving sustained encounters with an enemy fighter force?  Because that is the aircraft we have in BoS.  What the Germans regarded as their most advanced and competent fighter of the period can't hack it with crummy first generation Yaks and La-5s (not to mention Laggs) - not even when stripped of it's two outer wing cannons.  

 

So where is the evidence that this was in fact the case??  After all, people who are facing certain death usually aren't  that slow in coming forward when they think they've been sold a pup.  Russian pilots certainly made their views about the LaGG-3 known loud and clear.  So where are all the reports from the legion of dispirited 190 pilots documenting the abject failure of the 190 as a front line  day fighter???   Well, where the f@@k are they then; cos I haven't seen any??  The only plausible explanation I can come up with is that they must all have been killed before they could make it back to base.  There they were desperate to inform the powers that be that the 190 was actually a f@@king clown fighter that couldn't hold a candle to the old 109 let alone fight its way out of a wet tissue paper bag but, unfortunately, because they were actually flying a 190 at the time, they just didn't make it back.  

 

Yeah, I know - it's bullshit.

 

And as for all you guys who think the 190 is 'about right' relative to the Soviet machines - maybe you should consider a demonstration of your superior understanding of the aircraft's handling qualities.  What about a 190 fighter school for the less capable among us??  I'd be more than happy to be shown how it's done.  You could start off by shooting me down a couple of times, you in your 190 and me in mine.

 

How about it Ace, you want to school me on the 190???  I'm always willing to learn bro.

 

If not, maybe Han or Zak could give us a demo. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG really?

I think you responded to the wrong person, in that I didn's say any of the things your were trying to imply I said..

 

My response, that you quoted, was in regards to the

 

"It seems that some people on the jerry side will never be satisfied unless their planes club baby seals every time"

 

Comment that I found funny and true

 

Hope that helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The worst thing in BOS Fw 190 is controlability at higher speed. Above 600 kph IAS Fw 190 became very stiff expecially on elevator controls.  It should't happend before about 700-750 kph according to German report. 

 

Other hand all other fighters in BOS got much better controls effectivness at high speeds comparing to Fw 190.  La5 and Lagg3 was known from  heavy stick forces at speed above 250 mph ( 400 kph IAS) which is not happend in BOS.

 

Also Fw 190 in BOS need to much trim changes when IRL was known from not needed trim in wide speed range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG really?  

 

In the end this just boils down to common sense.  Do we really imagine that the Luftwaffe is going to deploy a day fighter (a day fighter that was designed and developed AFTER the Bf 109)  that was simply incapable of surviving sustained encounters with an enemy fighter force?  Because that is the aircraft we have in BoS.  What the Germans regarded as their most advanced and competent fighter of the period can't hack it with crummy first generation Yaks and La-5s (not to mention Laggs) - not even when stripped of it's two outer wing cannons.  

 

 

 

 Wulf m8, don't you think you might be confusing what happened in reality with what happens in a computer game? 

 

I think your idea of a fighter school is a really good one.  Especially as Joint Ops has just closed down. Luckily we now have the tools to try and match reality.   We'll be needing a full-switch server - you know, none of that coloured icons and external view stuff.  We'll also need at least another ten guys to fly the rest of our outfits 'planes.  Oh yeah, I expect we'll need a few guys for opposition too!

 

When we're in the air we'll use height, the sun, clouds, etc. to try and stalk our prey without being seen.  If we meet a formation with a tactical advantage over us or who look bigger than us then - if we have the chance - yes, we'll runaway!  :biggrin:

 

If, however, we manage to manoeuvre our way into a nice little spot above them - a place in the sun perhaps? - then we'll be able to dive down on 'em - unexpected like - and blow their brains out.  Then we'll bugger off back to our place in the sun with our wingmen and see if we can do it again :salute:

 

Wait a minute!  I think I've just invented something - I think I'll call it.........a coop :)   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Wulf m8, don't you think you might be confusing what happened in reality with what happens in a computer game? 

 

I think your idea of a fighter school is a really good one.  Especially as Joint Ops has just closed down. Luckily we now have the tools to try and match reality.   We'll be needing a full-switch server - you know, none of that coloured icons and external view stuff.  We'll also need at least another ten guys to fly the rest of our outfits 'planes.  Oh yeah, I expect we'll need a few guys for opposition too!

 

When we're in the air we'll use height, the sun, clouds, etc. to try and stalk our prey without being seen.  If we meet a formation with a tactical advantage over us or who look bigger than us then - if we have the chance - yes, we'll runaway!  :biggrin:

 

If, however, we manage to manoeuvre our way into a nice little spot above them - a place in the sun perhaps? - then we'll be able to dive down on 'em - unexpected like - and blow their brains out.  Then we'll bugger off back to our place in the sun with our wingmen and see if we can do it again :salute:

 

Wait a minute!  I think I've just invented something - I think I'll call it.........a coop :)   

 

 

No, I don't believe I am (confusing reality with a computer game).

 

If you expected to survive for any time at all in a WW 2 fighter you'd better pick your fights very carefully - I accept that.  But of course, that applies to everyone, not just 190 pilots and not just the Luftwaffe.  But that said, sometimes we won't have that luxury of choosing.  Sometimes we get caught on the hop - maybe attacking enemy ground formations, or maybe we've been ordered to defend a high value asset or what have you.  In those situations the capabilities of your aircraft become very important.  At present, even with an altitude advantage attacking opportunities in a 190 are limited to just a couple of dives before you'll find yourself co alt with your enemy.  If you're alone or in a force approximately the same size as that of the enemy you're now in very serious trouble.  You can't out maneuver your enemy with rolls or turns and you probably won't even be able to run - you certainly can't climb to safety or accelerate away.  The 190 is a little faster that the enemy but it may take you 2-3 minutes to achieve effective separation.  Typically you'd be dead long before that happens.  The 190 simply has no tactical advantages in BoS.  And that's really weird because we know the 190 was a better aircraft than the 109 at low medium altitudes.  It was faster, it rolled better, was generally considered the more nimble of the two by a considerable margin and absolutely wiped the floor with the 109, when flown at speed.  Those attributes are simply absent from the game.

Edited by Wulf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet..

 

I see some Fw190 pilots do very well online..

 

And as far as I can tell, they are all flying the same Fw190..

 

So, why the difference?

 

Ah, yes pilot skills!

 

Long story short..

 

Just because you can not do it..

 

Does not mean it can not be done

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet..

 

I see some Fw190 pilots do very well online..

 

And as far as I can tell, they are all flying the same Fw190..

 

So, why the difference?

 

Ah, yes pilot skills!

 

Long story short..

 

Just because you can not do it..

 

Does not mean it can not be done

 

 

True.  And for the record, I've never claimed to be any good.  I get shot down all the time.

 

Maybe if you listed your top ten 190 pilots we could try and organize some training for the rest of us 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people don't like the current FM, let them debate it in peace. If you think the FM is alright or just needs to be used as is, or that how the machine is used in reality versus a game etc etc etc, just stay out.

That said, FW fans, keep this discussion limited to relevant threads, like this one, and don't turn every other thread into a FW discussion, then everyone should be happy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people have a heavy hand when flying the 190 that is why so many stalls.  She is fast and got a deadly punch, my 262 so far in game  :ph34r: . You really can pull a lot of Gs if you have high speed and you can turn inside enemy fighters. If something goes wrong, just full throttle and dive away home.

 

Maybe too sensitive but she can be very effective when you know what you are doing, I mean you should not fly her like a 109 or you will probably fail.

 

Remember the old IL2 joystick settings 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 ???

 

I used to limit maximum elevator input to 80 so I could fly all the time full back stick and no stalls at all. Here I just ease back the pressure and it is ok. But you really don´t need too much stick back at all to make things happens.

 

Just a lot o f practice :)

Edited by =[Coffin]=Gielow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you're wrong. The only serious bombing to take place over Germany during the BoS period was the bombing being conducted by the RAF - at night , following the initial daylight efforts in '39-'40 which resulted in catastrophic air crew losses. Some 109s and 190s were conscripted into the night war but essentially it remained the RAF v the dedicated twin-engined Luftwaffe night fighters and Flak units. The US was gearing-up in '42-'43 but it was still essentially in a training phase with only limited bombing. And of course, both 109s and 190s were employed in response to daylight incursions.

I was talking about later on, in the spring 1943 schlacht units started using the 190, and from then on the production couldn't keep on to satisfy the needs of fighter and schlacht units. After Kursk JG51 had to revert to the 109 (except the Stabstaffel) and JG54 was the only 190 fighter unit left in the east. And during the summer of 43 the US day raids were growing stronger and indeed 190s were needed against the viermots.

 

By the time BOS took place, only JG51 was using the 190 in the east, on the central/northern fronts. JG54 started converting on it at the end of 1942/ beginning 1943.

Edited by SYN_Ricky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see some Fw190 pilots do very well online..

That's not particularily important in this discussion. I don't think most guys want the 190 to be corrected due to being too bad to perform good with it (or let's say reasonably sucessfull) but because they feel/know sth is plenly wrong with it's representation.

As for me I barely stall it in a fight and don't try to turnfight my enemies for long, only short initial turns. I usually can escape my enemies ay time and don't try to outclimb Yaks anymore since I know for sure they will eventually catch up with me despite their inferiour energy state.

 

Am I doing good that way? Sort of. Is it good enought for me to acchieve some reasonable performance with the 190? No, because I know it's wrong.

 

The 190 should not be forced to escape the fight but to carry it. Currently, especially vs Yaks, this is cleary not (or barely) possible because of Yaks questionable aerodynamics and climb performance (despite it being inferiour at low altitudes speed wise ironicly).

 

Than again I face similar issues fighting Yaks with the G-2, which should have considerably better rate of climb than the Fw 190. So my final assumption is that the Yak is modeled incorrectly ingame and I for myself refuse to fly it until it's fixed.

 

What I tried to say judging historically accuracy of FMs by pointing out players performing "good" is no way to prove things right. You can give the 190 a biplane FM and eventually I'll perform good with it, which doesnt mean it's corrcet that way.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not particularily important in this discussion. I don't think most guys want the 190 to be corrected due to being too bad to perform good with it (or let's say reasonably sucessfull) but because they feel/know sth is plenly wrong with it's representation.

As for me I barely stall it in a fight and don't try to turnfight my enemies for long, only short initial turns. I usually can escape my enemies ay time and don't try to outclimb Yaks anymore since I know for sure they will eventually catch up with me despite their inferiour energy state.

 

Am I doing good that way? Sort of. Is it good enought for me to acchieve some reasonable performance with the 190? No, because I know it's wrong.

 

The 190 should not be forced to escape the fight but to carry it. Currently, especially vs Yaks, this is cleary not (or barely) possible because of Yaks questionable aerodynamics and climb performance (despite it being inferiour at low altitudes speed wise ironicly).

 

Than again I face similar issues fighting Yaks with the G-2, which should have considerably better rate of climb than the Fw 190. So my final assumption is that the Yak is modeled incorrectly ingame and I for myself refuse to fly it until it's fixed.

 

What I tried to say judging historically accuracy of FMs by pointing out players performing "good" is no way to prove things right. You can give the 190 a biplane FM and eventually I'll perform good with it, which doesnt mean it's corrcet that way.

[Edited]

 

This kind of post brings nothing to the discussion whatsoever. PM sent.

Edited by Bearcat
Injecting politics
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not particularily important in this discussion. I don't think most guys want the 190 to be corrected due to being too bad to perform good with it (or let's say reasonably sucessfull) but because they feel/know sth is plenly wrong with it's representation.

As for me I barely stall it in a fight and don't try to turnfight my enemies for long, only short initial turns. I usually can escape my enemies ay time and don't try to outclimb Yaks anymore since I know for sure they will eventually catch up with me despite their inferiour energy state.

 

Am I doing good that way? Sort of. Is it good enought for me to acchieve some reasonable performance with the 190? No, because I know it's wrong.

 

The 190 should not be forced to escape the fight but to carry it. Currently, especially vs Yaks, this is cleary not (or barely) possible because of Yaks questionable aerodynamics and climb performance (despite it being inferiour at low altitudes speed wise ironicly).

 

Than again I face similar issues fighting Yaks with the G-2, which should have considerably better rate of climb than the Fw 190. So my final assumption is that the Yak is modeled incorrectly ingame and I for myself refuse to fly it until it's fixed.

 

What I tried to say judging historically accuracy of FMs by pointing out players performing "good" is no way to prove things right. You can give the 190 a biplane FM and eventually I'll perform good with it, which doesnt mean it's corrcet that way.

 

 

well all I know its a pain in the butt to fly now!!! or for the matter to Taxi...

 

+1

 

...it's a shame  :angry:

[Edited]

 

You'd better stop your personal and poltical allusions!

Edited by Bearcat
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My verdict, after flying it at the EU Expert server last night is that, both the Bf109 and the Fw190 are SUPERB! as they are right now!

 

Not a single spin, even less a flick-roll, and a couple of successful dogfights, including tight turns, with an La5 and a Yak-1 :-)

 

What more can we ask ?

Historical accurate performance for all planes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd better stop your personal and poltical allusions!

 

Hes a [Edited], give him some time to practise and become more professional :)

Edited by Bearcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.  :biggrin:

 

Luftwhiners gonna whine...

 

This is the most ridiculous thread, "I can't do this in the 190." [reply] "Yes, I can do this, I just did it!" rinse and repeat...

Or better yet are the posts with puff-piece snippets.

Edited by SYN_Bandy
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...