Some questions after first impressions.

[Alkyan]

I would like to add that German pilots usually make the same mistake when your are co E with them or have energy advantage : they dive like crazy then level at max speed. If you dive at a shallower angle you can easily stay with them. As you are slower you don't produce as much drag and are more energy efficient. And your path is also shorter.

I get a lot of kills this way and also sometime the classic : yack ufo outdived me ! from the victim.

 

I play half of time F4, half of the time yack

[Finkeren]

In any case, I see German pilots in Bf 109s dive away from danger waaaaaaay too often. You're in a 109, that means you climb. Especially in the F4 climbing is nearly always the answer, because you're so much better at it than anyone else. Sometimes if you get bounced it might be necessary for you to force yourr opponent into a few turns to burn his energy, but then you start climbing right away.

[MadisonV44]

Ok, from my humble opinion all planes seem quite good modeled...maybe some more fine tuning needed expecially in the transition from low speed and stall speed (u have very few fluttering and "noise" warnings).

 

 

+1 

 

The transition between low and stall speed is sometimes really uncomfortable: IMHO this happens when you are not managing your energy and speed well (not speaking about stall here, just speaking about keeping the right amount of speed and energy to have a healthy trajectory) the sentence is of course happening  BUT the way the first sign effect is modeled (the transition as you mention it) feels unrealistic, just like a "dead leaf" effect. In fact, the plane is slightly balancing and bouncing on all axis even if you not in the stalling phase.

 

My two cents is that combining all axis on this effect Yaw, Pitch and Roll seems not appropriate at this stage and the way it is modeled is disturbing a lot of new pilots, even confirmed ones. 

 

Except this case and the 2 or 3 specifics planes behavior people are always complaining about (Yak magic Flaps, 109 pods not dragging that much, FW 190 climb rate >1800) the overall flight impression is well rendered and the good news is that it is improving better and better with the time, skills and experience. I was complaining at the early beginning, and now except a few remaining point above, i'm quite satisfied.  

Edited September 26, 2015 by C6_MadisonV44

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

In any case, I see German pilots in Bf 109s dive away from danger waaaaaaay too often. You're in a 109, that means you climb. Especially in the F4 climbing is nearly always the answer, because you're so much better at it than anyone else. Sometimes if you get bounced it might be necessary for you to force yourr opponent into a few turns to burn his energy, but then you start climbing right away.

 

Finkeren, I disagree in part. Far too many 109 pilots *also* make the mistake attempting to climb right away - getting ventilated in the process, thinking that the climb rate advantage will be enough to avoid being shot. Going straight into a climb in a moderate to low energy situation makes you a sitting duck.

Its about knowing when to use your superior climb rate.

 

Unless you have a significant energy advantage, your first goal is to gain separation. This is usually best achieved using a moderate dive as the higher speed will also make the attackers job harder. Once you have obtained enough separation, then initiate the climb making sure to not drop your speed too rapidly below optimal climb rates.

At this point you are in a position to get yourself into an energy advantage over your adversary. Begin to then position for an attacking blow with the tables turned.

 

What Alkyan describes below is the undoing of many pilots.

 

I would like to add that German pilots usually make the same mistake when your are co E with them or have energy advantage : they dive like crazy then level at max speed. If you dive at a shallower angle you can easily stay with them. As you are slower you don't produce as much drag and are more energy efficient. And your path is also shorter.

I get a lot of kills this way and also sometime the classic : yack ufo outdived me ! from the victim.

 

I play half of time F4, half of the time yack

 

This next part below I agree with -

 

 

Sometimes if you get bounced it might be necessary for you to force yourr opponent into a few turns to burn his energy

 

Because in most cases, you will not be able to separate at all at such a starting disadvantage.

[Alkyan]

Well, you can't climb without a decent separation first. Yack is not that bad at climbing ! Shallow dive, 1 minute to get separation then climb : you have the E advantage again.

And if the yack has more energy, you make it sounds simple but I would say the 109 is in trouble

 

Flaps do jam, but at very high speed.

And Yack's flaps don't jam.

[FuriousMeow]

The 190 will outclimb a Yak. Outclimbing isn't just pulling back and going up, it's climbing at optimal rate which is a combination of angle of attack plus speed. It also doesn't mean that suddenly you'll be poised above your foe ready to pounce, it simply means that altitude is gained over the opposition and YOU have to figure out how to use it best. Doesn't matter how great the perceived German technology advantage is, it doesn't do everything for you.

 

Attain separation and then proceed to climb at optimal speed plus angle of attack.

 

The 109 simply outclasses the Yak, and easily all other VVS planes, unless a mistake is made by the person controlling the 109.

 

Someone said that at some point, due to the clearly poor performance of the German aircraft, that no one will be flying that side. It will be impossible to play as everyone will be on the VVS side. And yet, the LW side is virtually ALWAYS outnumbering the VVS side. That person is in this thread.

 

Here's a simple video showing the 190 extending away and gaining altitude advantage above an Ace AI Yak, and they are better at climb than the majority of human players. They also pop flaps in vertical.

 

It's amazing that the Yak-1 is viewed as some completely inept aircraft that should easily and handily be dealt with. It was respected and engaged with caution on the Eastern front. Go in guns blazing, burn our your energy, get into turn fights, end up on the deck, you should be shot down by the Yak-1. If you even started out with a co-alt situation at altitude and end up on the deck, you earned being shot down. There is no reason for either the 190 or 109 to go from co-alt at 3KM, where they are better than the VVS planes, to on the deck against any VVS plane.

 

The Russian fighters are NOT good in dives, that just shows the lack of trying them out. Go offline, go in QMB, go to 3KM and dive at full throttle. The 109 and 190 will hold together, all VVS planes will start to fall apart before they reach the deck.

Edited September 27, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

 

 

The 109 simply outclasses the Yak, and easily all other VVS planes

 

When flown to its strengths. The same can be said for the Yak. There is a fair difference between the G2 and the F4 as well - especially maneuverability.

 

109 strengths, speed and climb/dive. Yak1 has the advantage in maneuverability and energy retention.

 

 

 

Ace AI Yak, and they are better at climb than the majority of human players

 

This IMO is a mistake many people on the forums seem to make. AI is not a comparison to a real online player. Real players push the envelope much further than the AI ever will - and when you find yourself online vs one of the better Yak1 pilots (ie those on the first few pages of WOL stats page), your understanding of what an AI pilots limits/capabilities are is going to get you killed real fast.

 

 

 

There is no reason for either the 190 or 109 to go from co-alt at 3KM, where they are better than the VVS planes, to on the deck against any VVS plane.

 

That's fine if you only want to deny the enemy airspace at 3K which it will do temporarily. Unfortunately some of the objectives mean that the fight will be down on the deck. Destruction of moving tanks and vehicles means dropping bombs at altitude is futile.

[Dr_Molenbeek]

The 190 will outclimb a Yak. Outclimbing isn't just pulling back and going up, it's climbing at optimal rate which is a combination of angle of attack plus speed.

 

I could not restrain myself from making a grimace while reading this.

 

About optimal climbing speed:

 

From sea level to 1200m --> Yak-1 can climb with the 3850kg Fw 190A-3 at climb power (1.32 ata/2400 RPM), as it should.

 

From 1200m to ~2600m --> Yak-1 can climb better than the 3850kg Fw 190A-3 at climb power, because the 190 starts to underperform.

 

At +2600m --> Yak-1 can climb better than the 3850kg Fw 190A-3 at FULL POWER.

 

But sure, that will not change the fact that everything is fine in your biased head.

[=TIA=TBear]

I guess that if we could see the EM charts Devs used to model planes and We could use them as reference to employ our planes any discussion would be over

[No601_Swallow]

Perhaps the fact that people can have a legitimate argument about this, with the Luftwaffe fans doing what Luftwaffe fans have done throughout the history of sim-dom, perhaps this shows that the game is functioning as it should.

[=TIA=TBear]

I 

 

At the times of IL-2 4.xx there were a usefull  .exe file called "IL-2 Compare" that looked like this :

 

 I think somthing similar with BoS data could be very usefull today too

Edited September 27, 2015 by =TIA=TBear

[LLv24_Zami]

Perhaps the fact that people can have a legitimate argument about this, with the Luftwaffe fans doing what Luftwaffe fans have done throughout the history of sim-dom, perhaps this shows that the game is functioning as it should.

 

And vice versa, the anti Luftwaffe guys are doing what they have always done. But I wouldn`t still say that FM`s are 100% right  . As TBear said, it would be best if we could see the EM charts Devs used.

 

By the way, it is quite easy to determine which planes person is flying just by reading comments here.

[Wulf]

TBear, just trust me on this okay; it's not going to happen.  

 

Swallow, have you ever wondered why it is that the VVS guys never seem to complain about the FMs?  

[=TIA=TBear]

Come on guys...I didnt want to open a controversy...I just wanted to understand to improve.  

[mb339pan]

MC202 is good, have good performance end climb rate but weak armament (no151/20 guns) BeZ tactics is difficult because of this, given that you do not make substantial damage, MC202 is to be used in number to have good results, does not have the FW power and speed

 

p.s. Yak1 end La5 is not a "poor plane", not underestimate them! end lagg3 have powerfull weapons

Edited September 27, 2015 by 150GCT_Pan

[BraveSirRobin]

Swallow, have you ever wondered why it is that the VVS guys never seem to complain about the FMs?  

 

Probably because they usually get their asses kicked in a historically realistic manner.  

[Wulf]

The 190 will outclimb a Yak. Outclimbing isn't just pulling back and going up, it's climbing at optimal rate which is a combination of angle of attack plus speed. It also doesn't mean that suddenly you'll be poised above your foe ready to pounce, it simply means that altitude is gained over the opposition and YOU have to figure out how to use it best. Doesn't matter how great the perceived German technology advantage is, it doesn't do everything for you.

 

Attain separation and then proceed to climb at optimal speed plus angle of attack.

 

The 109 simply outclasses the Yak, and easily all other VVS planes, unless a mistake is made by the person controlling the 109.

 

Someone said that at some point, due to the clearly poor performance of the German aircraft, that no one will be flying that side. It will be impossible to play as everyone will be on the VVS side. And yet, the LW side is virtually ALWAYS outnumbering the VVS side. That person is in this thread.

 

Here's a simple video showing the 190 extending away and gaining altitude advantage above an Ace AI Yak, and they are better at climb than the majority of human players. They also pop flaps in vertical.

 

It's amazing that the Yak-1 is viewed as some completely inept aircraft that should easily and handily be dealt with. It was respected and engaged with caution on the Eastern front. Go in guns blazing, burn our your energy, get into turn fights, end up on the deck, you should be shot down by the Yak-1. If you even started out with a co-alt situation at altitude and end up on the deck, you earned being shot down. There is no reason for either the 190 or 109 to go from co-alt at 3KM, where they are better than the VVS planes, to on the deck against any VVS plane.

 

The Russian fighters are NOT good in dives, that just shows the lack of trying them out. Go offline, go in QMB, go to 3KM and dive at full throttle. The 109 and 190 will hold together, all VVS planes will start to fall apart before they reach the deck.

 

 

 

..........  and Furious, I saw your comment to Han, in another thread, implying the 190 wasn't really up to it as a fighter, and was consequently used primarily as a fighter-bomber.  

 

That simply isn't true.  The 190 was used as a fighter-bomber because it was the best option available to the LW for that role.  The 109 couldn't carry enough bombs and, due to its liquid-cooled engine, was too susceptible to ground-fire.  The Stuka carried lots of bombs but required continuous fighter cover to have any chance at all.  The 190 had the versatility to fill numerous combat roles.   The 109, not so much.

[Dr_Molenbeek]

Walter Nowotny and Otto Kittel... two Fw 190A JG 54's pilots (FIGHTER squadron, hello FuriousMeow) that have made real piggeries on the eastern front, to mention only these two names.

 

Still there are ignorant people who think the 109 was a better fighter, to "defend" the actual state of our BoS Fw 190, while Galland himself has said: I had been telling Hitler for over a year, since my first flight in an Me-262, that only Focke Wulf Fw-190 fighter production should continue in conventional aircraft, to discontinue the Me-109, which was outdated, and to focus on building a massive jet-fighter force.

 

Guess why.

[Stig]

The Fw 190A did make quite an impression in the ETO in 1942, not so much in the ETO in 1944. I wonder why?

 

Maybe we are forgetting the training and experience of the pilots relative to the periods in which they were employed, in these FM discussions. 

[LukeFF]

And farther and farther we go into off-topic land...

[Matt]

Still there are ignorant people who think the 109 was a better fighter, to "defend" the actual state of our BoS Fw 190, while Galland himself has said: I had been telling Hitler for over a year, since my first flight in an Me-262, that only Focke Wulf Fw-190 fighter production should continue in conventional aircraft, to discontinue the Me-109, which was outdated, and to focus on building a massive jet-fighter force.

 

 

You left out the "specifically the "Dora" model and later variants" part of that quote.

[Dr_Molenbeek]

You left out the "specifically the "Dora" model and later variants" part of that quote.

 

..?

 

I had been telling Hitler for over a year, since my first flight in an Me-262, that only Focke Wulf Fw-190 fighter production should continue in conventional aircraft, to discontinue the Me-109, which was outdated, and to focus on building a massive jet-fighter force. I was in East Prussia for a preview of the jet, which was fantastic, a totally new development. This was 1943, and I was there with Professor Willy Messerschmitt and other engineers responsible for the development. The fighter was almost ready for mass production at that time, and Hitler wanted to see a demonstration. When the 262 was brought out for his viewing at Insterburg, and I was standing there next to him, Hitler was very impressed. He asked the professor, ‘Is this aircraft able to carry bombs?’ Well, Messerschmitt said, ‘Yes, my Führer, it can carry for sure a 250-kilogram bomb, perhaps two of them.’ In typical Hitler fashion, he said ‘Well, nobody thought of this! This is the Blitz (lightning) bomber I have been requesting for years. No one thought of this. I order that this 262 be used exclusively as a Blitz bomber, and you, Messerschmitt, have to make all the necessary preparations to make this feasible.’ This was really the beginning of the misuse of the 262, as five bomber wings were supposed to be equipped with the jet. These bomber pilots had no fighter experience, such as combat flying or shooting, which is why so many were shot down. They could only escape by outrunning the fighters in pursuit. This was the greatest mistake surrounding the 262, and I believe the 262 could have been made operational as a fighter at least a year and a half earlier and built in large enough numbers so that it could have changed the air war. It would most certainly not have changed the final outcome of the war, for we had already lost completely, but it would have probably delayed the end, since the Normandy invasion on June 6, 1944, would probably not have taken place, at least not successfully if the 262 had been operational. I certainly think that just 300 jets flown daily by the best fighter pilots would have had a major impact on the course of the air war. This would have, of course, prolonged the war, so perhaps Hitler’s misuse of this aircraft was not such a bad thing after all. But about Nowotny….

 

http://www.historynet.com/interview-with-world-war-ii-luftwaffe-general-and-ace-pilot-adolf-galland.htm

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

To get it back on track I'll share my observations regarding aircraft performances:

 

The German fighters are not suoeriour in all aspect, infact they have some great weaknesses against VVS ones.

 

The Lagg-3 is a great aircraft for defensive tactics and serves well as a multirole gun platform. It's also tough and if you fly it well will eat a few 20mm and continie the fight. Furthermore it has a very low roll sensetivity and good roll rate making it keep up with a Fw190 in almost any situation (this actually stays in contrast with vvs pilot repprts of the La-5 requiring "great ammounts of strengh from the pilot not everyone posseses").

 

Same counts for the la-5, which is a bit heavier and thus an even worse turning aircraft than the lagg-3 but also has offensive capebilities to match the 190 and bf109 g-2.

 

The yak is the best and at the same tine most suspiciously performing vvs aircraft ingame. Good turn capebilities and very well (in my eyea too well) energy rentention are making it the king of close and enrgy dogfighting.

 

Its only achilis verse is the slightly lower Vne compared to german fighters and it's lower than the fw190, but on par with 109s roll rate.

 

As somebody who flys both sides equally I admint I have great concerns for both the bf109 f4 and the Yak1 regarding overperformance, which previous tests showed up.

 

As for the la-5 and lagg-3 the roll rate definetly is too high to reflect historical pilot reports, but other than that they seem fine and challenging to fly.

 

The yak on the other hand, after flying it here and than without greaz practise in it, feels cery easy, fishy and unrewarding. German fighter 1k above you? No problem, you can climb steadily even while manouvering.

 

Fw 190 with greater energy pulls you into a climb turn? No problem, extent flaps amd enjoy a perfectly stable aircraft at speeds below 100 km/h while climbing after the foe and shootong him to bits while hes stalling.

 

And no, not everyone exeeds in using the yak this way, but that doesnt change tje sad fact that it potentially can be.

[Matt]

..?

Yeah well, in "The German Aces Speak" book, the line ""specifically the "Dora" model and later variants" is definately in that quote. Not sure if they added it specifically for that book or not, but i couldn't imagine why they would do that.#

 

But whatever.

[Bearcat]

TBear, just trust me on this okay; it's not going to happen.  

 

Swallow, have you ever wondered why it is that the VVS guys never seem to complain about the FMs?  

 

 

What I wonder is that why is it that for the last 15 years that I know of in every single sim I have flown.. every single one, the loudest complaints about FMs and performance, 80% to 95% of the charts and graphs and notes and all that stuff... posted about aircraft.. all seem to center around German aircraft and usually in most casses the FW-190.. ?

 

That's what I would like to know.. that's what I wonder... Could German engineering have been so comp[lext that no sim developer could get it right..? Or is there another dynamic at work..

 

I will say this though.. If this thread turns into yet another whine and cheese fest about the Fw-190.. it will be locked... So take heed.

[[GOAT]Spoutpout]

What I wonder is that why is it that for the last 15 years that I know of in every single sim I have flown.. every single one, the loudest complaints about FMs and performance, 80% to 95% of the charts and graphs and notes and all that stuff... posted about aircraft.. all seem to center around German aircraft and usually in most casses the FW-190.. ?

 

That's what I would like to know.. that's what I wonder... Could German engineering have been so comp[lext that no sim developer could get it right..? Or is there another dynamic at work..

 

I will say this though.. If this thread turns into yet another whine and cheese fest about the Fw-190.. it will be locked... So take heed.

 

So why is there also complaints about roll rates of LaGG-3/La-5 and flaps, suspicious Yak-1 energy retention and flaps behaviour, and eventually on the Bf-109F-4 ?

Definitely not only about the Fw-190.

[Bearcat]

They pale in comparison..

[SR-F_Winger]

What I wonder is that why is it that for the last 15 years that I know of in every single sim I have flown.. every single one, the loudest complaints about FMs and performance, 80% to 95% of the charts and graphs and notes and all that stuff... posted about aircraft.. all seem to center around German aircraft and usually in most casses the FW-190.. ?

 

That's what I would like to know.. that's what I wonder... Could German engineering have been so comp[lext that no sim developer could get it right..? Or is there another dynamic at work..

 

I will say this though.. If this thread turns into yet another whine and cheese fest about the Fw-190.. it will be locked... So take heed.

Well,  could it maybe simply be because the devs of the sims in wich the complaints arose have always been russian? Nah. Definately not:P Cmon. You REALLY consider it far fetched to come to such a conclusion?

Oh and FYI: Almost every single simmer in know shares more or less this opinion with me.

 

Simple question on the matter: If its prooven that due to refraction "the bar" is not visible in the real thing, WHY do they refuse to simply eliminate it and not only reduce it? And that only under huge pressure of the community. Or why do the russian guns have no dispersion? Or has this been fixed meanwhile? Sorry i dont fly these crates. If its been fixed then ignore the last argument.

Why do we see the ground reflected in the windshield - through the fuselage in the FW?! This are things that (IMHO) cannot be explained with good reason!

Edited September 28, 2015 by JG4_Winger

[SR-F_Winger]

Sorry, edited too long and had to do another reply.

And like this the list goes on and on. Non linear throttle in the G2 for example. I dont get it.

Oh and for the smarties: With "every single simmer i know" i mean the simmers i am flying with, and am talking to and have a relation bigger than replying to their forumposts to.

Edited September 28, 2015 by JG4_Winger

[LukeFF]

Well,  could it maybe simply be because the devs of the sims in wich the complaints arose have always been russian? Nah. Definately not:P Cmon. You REALLY consider it far fetched to come to such a conclusion?

 

Yes, it is far-fetched, and you really need to stop posting crap like this if you want to be taken seriously.

[Bearcat]

Well,  could it maybe simply be because the devs of the sims in wich the complaints arose have always been russian? Nah. Definately not:P Cmon. You REALLY consider it far fetched to come to such a conclusion?

Oh and FYI: Almost every single simmer in know shares more or less this opinion with me.

 

Simple question on the matter: If its prooven that due to refraction "the bar" is not visible in the real thing, WHY do they refuse to simply eliminate it and not only reduce it? And that only under huge pressure of the community. Or why do the russian guns have no dispersion? Or has this been fixed meanwhile? Sorry i dont fly these crates. If its been fixed then ignore the last argument.

Why do we see the ground reflected in the windshield - through the fuselage in the FW?! This are things that (IMHO) cannot be explained with good reason!

And on that note.