69th_chuter Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Maybe. Looks more like evasive maneuvers to me, though, with some cross controlling and negative G. There's no definitive pitch down break so if it was a stall the aircraft would have to be pitch unstable (pitching nose up at break).
[TWB]80hd Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Looks like he was on the 51s tail, lost his juice, and departed controlled flight at least to an extent... I mean, I guess he could have had another 51 on his tail or something, but it sure looks like he recovers just in time for a 51 to light him up head-on....
SCG_Space_Ghost Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Looks like he was on the 51s tail, lost his juice, and departed controlled flight at least to an extent... I mean, I guess he could have had another 51 on his tail or something, but it sure looks like he recovers just in time for a 51 to light him up head-on.... This.
150GCT_Veltro Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Nice find, thank you. So BoS is right? It seems to be. This is exactly what happens to me with the FW.
SCG_Space_Ghost Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Nice find, thank you. So BoS is right? It seems to be. This is exactly what happens to me with the FW. I don't think anyone reputable has made the claim that it was stalling wrong. No need for another FM thread.
Y-29.Silky Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Maybe. Looks more like evasive maneuvers to me, though, with some cross controlling and negative G. There is no way that's an evasive maneuver lol. It looks like he just tried to get the lead on the 51 and simply stalled. Great footage nonetheless, those P-47's looked like tanks.
[TWB]80hd Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Post-recent FW FM changes, the 190 seems much more like the precision instrument that historical accounts would have us believe that it was... you've got some excellent tools at your disposal, and if you perform with precise and deliberate violence of action you will love what she will do for you... but if you are ham-fisted with the controls, inaccurate with your guns, or fail to seize and fully exploit a cornering-speed or near cornering-speed opportunity, things quickly get a lot more interesting hahahahaha
Wulf Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) Post-recent FW FM changes, the 190 seems much more like the precision instrument that historical accounts would have us believe that it was... you've got some excellent tools at your disposal, and if you perform with precise and deliberate violence of action you will love what she will do for you... but if you are ham-fisted with the controls, inaccurate with your guns, or fail to seize and fully exploit a cornering-speed or near cornering-speed opportunity, things quickly get a lot more interesting hahahahaha Well, I'm guessing I fall into the second of the two pilot categories. Personally, I think the 190 is 'improved' somewhat but still far from being right. Relative to the three Soviet single-seaters: the 190 is too slow. The Yak for example, may not be able to overtake the 190 in an extended tail chase but it can certain stay with it; the 190 has dreadful acceleration - probably the worst in the game; the 190 has no roll advantage. Any one of the 3 Soviet types can follow a 190 in a rolling break; the 190 isn't as maneuverable (nimble) as it should be; the 190 loses energy faster than any other aircraft in the game; and the 2 cannon 190 has no performance advantages over the 4 cannon 190 - even though we are expected to believe that the absurdly high speeds attained by the Yak are at least partly attributable to the absence of 20 kgs of radio equipment. Now, having said that, I'm not suggesting the 190 can't be made to work in the game - it can. But tactically you are extremely limited. If you enter a combat zone from altitude and never allow yourself to be drawn into an extended fight you should be able to keep it together, at least until enemy aircraft arrive on the scene with an altitude advantage. As soon as they do your done. You can't run, you can't turn and you can't climb your way out of trouble. Would the Germans have adopted the 190 we currently have in the game? I seriously doubt it. Even at low medium altitudes where the 190 was historically at it's best, it a much 'lesser' aircraft than the in game 109. Thanks devs, Edited April 9, 2015 by Wulf
Original_Uwe Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 Celestial has an interesting thread going on relative speeds, and it seems to indicate that the 190 is the closest to reality, with all the Soviet fighters being between 30 and 40 kph to fast at higher altitudes, and generally to fast overall. I for one have started to really, really like the 190. At 400 kph nothing can turn away from her! 2
SCG_Space_Ghost Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 (edited) -snip- the 190 is too slow. The Yak for example, may not be able to overtake the 190 in an extended tail chase but it can certain stay with it; No. You're failing to cite the altitude at which it is too slow. Aside from that, it is not too slow - its relative performance is now accurate compared to all of the data I have ever seen. Just about every other aircraft in the sim is being overmodeled. the 190 has dreadful acceleration - probably the worst in the game; No. It's acceleration in a dive is accurate. Do you have any data claiming that it should be accelerating any faster than it is..? the 190 has no roll advantage. Any one of the 3 Soviet types can follow a 190 in a rolling break; I can agree with that. On a different note, the 109's are considerably overperforming in roll performance at all speeds as well. the 190 isn't as maneuverable (nimble) as it should be; No. It is perfectly nimble and that is modeled just fine... But as you already stated, it isn't able to use its primary advantage: roll speed and aileron authority at speed. the 190 loses energy faster than any other aircraft in the game; and I don't disagree but that's a pretty relative claim. Do you have any data or math to back the claim? I know I don't. Maybe it retains energy fine but others are overperforming..? That seems more accurate... But again... I don't have any data or math to back that claim. the 2 cannon 190 has no performance advantages over the 4 cannon 190 - even though we are expected to believe that the absurdly high speeds attained by the Yak are at least partly attributable to the absence of 20 kgs of radio equipment. I don't entirely agree... There is no major performance penalty for the standard 4 cannon loadout but there is definitely some loss in performance... But I don't entirely disagree either... Other aircraft are being overmodeled. -snip- Fact of the matter..? Wrong subforum. Don't get yourself banned. Edited April 10, 2015 by 4./JG26_Adler 2
Wulf Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 (edited) Fact of the matter..? Wrong subforum. Don't get yourself banned. Yeah sure. What you said about wrong sub-forum, sure. However I would just point out that I did in fact qualify all of my comments about the 190 with the words ... "relative to the three Soviet single-seaters". So, although I'm happy to accept that the 190 is okay and everything else is over-egged that doesn't help me very much does it cos the devs refuse to acknowledge that embarrassing little fact. And when discussing the Yak v 190 speed I was referring to the deck. Down on the deck the Yak can stay with a 190 for 5 minutes or more. Edited April 10, 2015 by Wulf
Venturi Posted April 10, 2015 Author Posted April 10, 2015 (edited) There is far too much similarity in aircraft performance - specifically top and diving speeds - for my taste. That being said. To get action on this, you must be a beta tester. That means, you must be scientific. You must control the conditions you test at, you must test a variety of aircraft under exactly the same testing conditions, you must run multiple tests to get a real average number for each test category, and you must keep good records. Then, and only then, do you present to the devs here. That is how you will get them to listen. Edited April 10, 2015 by Venturi 1
Wulf Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 (edited) The devs may be many things but I doubt they're simpleminded. They are as capable as anyone else of spotting the obvious. The Soviet machines are too fast. You know it, I know it and so of course do they. But they also have to sell the game if they want to eat and the biggest market is almost certainly Russia and the former member states of the old Eastern bloc. Edited April 10, 2015 by Wulf
Dakpilot Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 more 'they do it on purpose to sell more in Russia' BS....how many times do people have to roll out this drivel that it is Soviet biased on purpose.....? sorry but it really is tiring , are there some bugs still left? yes.. but to imply this bias, you are stating that the Dev's are LYING every time that is said, when they have stated their intent to do things in a purely historical way...multiple times Cheers Dakpilot 1
Dr_Molenbeek Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 (edited) I do not trust there's any Russian bias in flight models, since 109s are also overperforming, especially the F-4... Edited April 10, 2015 by Ze_Hairy
Bearcat Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 The devs may be many things but I doubt they're simpleminded. They are as capable as anyone else of spotting the obvious. The Soviet machines are too fast. You know it, I know it and so of course do they. But they also have to sell the game if they want to eat and the biggest market is almost certainly Russia and the former member states of the old Eastern bloc. This line of reasoning has no place on this forum. 2
Jaws2002 Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 Looks like he was on the 51s tail, lost his juice, and departed controlled flight at least to an extent... I mean, I guess he could have had another 51 on his tail or something, but it sure looks like he recovers just in time for a 51 to light him up head-on.... Something like that, but you have to notice how quick he recovered. ...and it doesn't look like it worked out too well for that 51 that did the head on attack. I see all kind of pieces flying off it. It look like the 51 got light up.
69th_chuter Posted April 12, 2015 Posted April 12, 2015 There is no way that's an evasive maneuver lol. It looks like he just tried to get the lead on the 51 and simply stalled. Great footage nonetheless, those P-47's looked like tanks. Well, I said maybe. If it was a modern light-plane absolutely, BUT the 190 was known for a nasty, no warning, direction changing accelerated stall that could drop right into a spin if the pilot was slow to respond, So, I still say maybe.
Recommended Posts