Some things I'd like to reply to ...

[JtD]

... but the topic got shut down because some dumb comments. Since the parts I'm replying to were just exchanges of opinion of relative merits of aircraft, preferences of features and or tactics, both in historically and in a computer game, and as far as I can see are within forum guidelines, I hope the moderators don't mind me taking these threads from the other topic and continue them here.

 

If you set up a normal Bf109 vs. a normal Fw190, where the advantages you describe are true, and take two gamers of the same skill level, the 109 might win 10 out of 10. If you took two pilots of the same skill level, this is just not true.

How so?

For several reasons:

Real life pilots did value their life, and if in a 1vs1 situation, they'd fight for survival more than for killing. In that sense, there's nothing the Bf109 pilot can do to force the Fw190 pilot to stay in the fight that does not favour him, as the Fw190 can always dive and run away.

The handling of the Fw190 in some ways was easier than that of the Bf109, allowing in particular rookie pilots to fly the Fw190 closer to the limit than the Bf109. That can actually make a difference.

The fighting in the Fw190 was physically less stressful than in the Bf109, due to lower control forces. If the Fw190 pilot just keeps the fight in a physically demanding style, at some point the Bf109 will be exhausted to a degree where it becomes a significant factor.

With the use of the environment such as clouds, climb and turn performance become less important. You'd more often gain sufficient separation, which could be used for head on attacks, which would favour the Fw190.

Same is true for visibility from the cockpit, which from the Fw190 is better - it can be deciding.

 

All in all even a small 1vs1 fight in real life is way more complex than a computer game can depict. You just don't get 100% success rates.

 

It begs a question - is the fw190 doomed to stay inferior to the 109 in sim gaming? It is undeniable that in the online play we have now, the scenarios tend to favor the 109 good sides and ignore 190 good sides. So while the 190 might have been better IRL here where we join a server and fly from our chairs, it is pretty much inferior in every way?

I would say some aspects will remain impossible to model with reasonable effort. But my personal experience is that the Fw190 is not inferior to the Bf109 as a fighter aircraft, not even on dogfight servers. Because I don't fight close quarter 1vs1 battles. One of my mantra's is "if you enter a fair fight, you've already made your first mistake". In that sense, the Fw190 is way more capable of converting an advantage into a kill, due to better handling and larger fire power, and also more capable of converting a disadvantage into survival, due to better dive, handling, ruggedness and top speed. The easiest and also most effective kill is shooting down the guy who's on the six of one of your team mates. You'll not only get an easy kill, which won't fly evasive because it's detracted, but you'll also save your buddies behind. Like Manu and his squad in SeoW, I've had no problems racking up insane K/D ratios even when I was fairly new to Il-2 on line. And I only ever played as an opportunist lone wolf, never coordinated in a team.

Long story short, the Fw190 might not be the best fighter there is, but it certainly is the best killer, and that's what combat is about.

 

Removing extra guns to get more performance was commong amongst pilots in ww2. Id take maneuevrability over a couple of extra guns any day.

I hope you're also aware that while individual pilots did that, all air forces in WW2 increased fire power and accepted the resulting performance losses. Because the air war had shown it to be worth it. The average fire power between 1939 and 1945 went up from somewhere around the equivalent of 2x.50cal to somewhere around the equivalent of 4x20mm, easily 5 times the fire power. I understand your preference, but in bigger air battles, it was more important to dispatch opponents quickly than to stay on their six for extended periods.

One of the classic set-ups I've seen on Il-2 servers were the Bf109F-2 vs. HurricaneIIc battles. In this set-up, the Bf109 basically holds all the cards except for fire power, and 1vs1, 9 out of 10 went to the Bf109. Pretty quickly, too. But already at 2vs2, this turned into a much more even fight, and in 4vs4, Bf109's would limit themselves to hit and run, with predictably poor results owing to the poor armament. Or they'd just get shot down.

[PatrickAWlson]

Since you brought up the FW190 ...

 

I have a question per the Fw190: what are the tips for controlling it in this game.  I am finding this plane to be incredibly unforgiving.  Whenever I fly the thing I always manage to lose control and crash.  Usually it is an unintentional snap roll to inverted and down I go.  No question I am doing something wrong, thus the request for advice.

 

The last time this happened I was banked about 45 degrees at 90% power, trying to do a spiral climb.

 

P.S.  Please no FW190 FM griping.  I want to know how to fly the plane as it is modeled in the sim, not engage in an argument over whether it is modeled correctly. 

 

P.P.S.  I spend the vast majority of my time writing and testing PWCG and almost none actually playing, so my lack of skill is entirely on me.  I do, however, like to pop into the cockpit and take control.  So ... just looking for a tip or two to keep this thing in the air.

[Lusekofte]

JtD you hit the nail, in terms of the FW 190 was a better plane than the 109 you would get different answers from the tacticians and logistical part of Luftwaffe and the pilots. Even among the pilots the opinions where divided. You see they got different jobs. 

Like in all other aspects of life you simply cannot have it all, If you want a stable gun platform able to fly slow enough to hit ground targets or serve as a Night fighter . You do not want a Nimble Spitfire. Everything come at a price. P-47 vs P-51 . Same myth Everybody is convinced the P-51 was best. Not correct, but it was best at its job

[ShamrockOneFive]

Since you brought up the FW190 ...

 

I have a question per the Fw190: what are the tips for controlling it in this game.  I am finding this plane to be incredibly unforgiving.  Whenever I fly the thing I always manage to lose control and crash.  Usually it is an unintentional snap roll to inverted and down I go.  No question I am doing something wrong, thus the request for advice.

 

The last time this happened I was banked about 45 degrees at 90% power, trying to do a spiral climb.

 

P.S.  Please no FW190 FM griping.  I want to know how to fly the plane as it is modeled in the sim, not engage in an argument over whether it is modeled correctly. 

 

P.P.S.  I spend the vast majority of my time writing and testing PWCG and almost none actually playing, so my lack of skill is entirely on me.  I do, however, like to pop into the cockpit and take control.  So ... just looking for a tip or two to keep this thing in the air.

 

Like the FW190 in IL-2 1946... you have to have a gentle hand on the stick. The FW190 was known to have good handling until you take it to the edge and then it tended to flop all over the place. Generally speaking it seems to behave that way in my past two sim experiences as well (No FM griping here... I got super tired of the debates). So basically you have about 90% of the flight range to play with and you need to know when you're getting close to that 10% level because that is where things get messy and the plane behaves poorly.

 

I have to change my thinking in the 190. In the 109 and Yak-1 you can kind of hamfist it and get away with some stuff. Here you have to focus on flying smoothly and knowing the limits really well. If you do that then it stays fast and responsive... if you let it get too far then it will flip on its back violently or stall in a weird way.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Pat,

 

The key is to watch for the pre-stall buffeting. It is actually modeled quite well on the Fw. If you get into it (power on stall), she will wallow and start to roll before she snaps over, you must release the back pressure and step on the opposite pedal fairly quickly. I tell all Fw beginners to keep their speed above 300 at all times and do not follow a Russian crate through more than about 180 degrees until you master her. I'd set a hard-deck for yourself of about 1000m to give you time to recover if it does snap all the way over. Below that, just let 'em go, set up, and either attack or flee depending on the situation. (Same on the 180's).

 

PM me and we can have an extended conversation.

[KoN_]

Since you brought up the FW190 ...

 

I have a question per the Fw190: what are the tips for controlling it in this game.  I am finding this plane to be incredibly unforgiving.  Whenever I fly the thing I always manage to lose control and crash.  Usually it is an unintentional snap roll to inverted and down I go.  No question I am doing something wrong, thus the request for advice.

 

The last time this happened I was banked about 45 degrees at 90% power, trying to do a spiral climb.

 

P.S.  Please no FW190 FM griping.  I want to know how to fly the plane as it is modeled in the sim, not engage in an argument over whether it is modeled correctly. 

 

P.P.S.  I spend the vast majority of my time writing and testing PWCG and almost none actually playing, so my lack of skill is entirely on me.  I do, however, like to pop into the cockpit and take control.  So ... just looking for a tip or two to keep this thing in the air.

Set up your curves ,

70%

8%

40%

give and take on the last edge zone .

do not turn aggressive , do not dive aggressive , do not turn two or more turns and then extend away from chase  , fly steady JaBo style Keep speed up above 300+.

Roll away from targets opposite direction and use roll rate to keep speed up in turn .

I fly 190 a lot but not happy with it .

A Flat spin comes very unexpected even in simple manoeuvre " like push too quick on stick to go into a dive  ,   will go into flat spin .

Can not feel when pushed to its limits . so fly steady with smooth inputs .

A Test pilot in WWII took a captured 190 in 1942 ,  up and said it was better than the Spit at that time . Hence the rushed upgrades for the spitfire . 109 ran away 190 stayed and fight .

Like the FW190 in IL-2 1946... you have to have a gentle hand on the stick. The FW190 was known to have good handling until you take it to the edge and then it tended to flop all over the place. Generally speaking it seems to behave that way in my past two sim experiences as well (No FM griping here... I got super tired of the debates). So basically you have about 90% of the flight range to play with and you need to know when you're getting close to that 10% level because that is where things get messy and the plane behaves poorly.

 

I have to change my thinking in the 190. In the 109 and Yak-1 you can kind of hamfist it and get away with some stuff. Here you have to focus on flying smoothly and knowing the limits really well. If you do that then it stays fast and responsive... if you let it get too far then it will flip on its back violently or stall in a weird way.

i find its Nothing like the 190 in il-2 . Not with my set up .

Edited December 30, 2015 by II./JG77_Con

[Dr_Molenbeek]

Since you brought up the FW190 ...

 

I have a question per the Fw190: what are the tips for controlling it in this game.  I am finding this plane to be incredibly unforgiving.  Whenever I fly the thing I always manage to lose control and crash.  Usually it is an unintentional snap roll to inverted and down I go.  No question I am doing something wrong, thus the request for advice.

 

The last time this happened I was banked about 45 degrees at 90% power, trying to do a spiral climb.

 

Adds a bit of pitch axis curve if you don't possess a stick extension.

 

Puts the horizontal stabilizer to -75 when you're going to enter in combat.

 

And the more important: it's a matter of habit.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Sorry Con,

 

The only things I really agree with are, "Do not turn aggressive," and Roll away from targets in the opposite direction."

 

She dives and recovers very well and does not need curves. Just a steady hand. Spins and snap rolls are well telegraphed both audibly and visually. You just have to pay attention to the signs. This aircraft needs a significant amount of time to read but all the feedback is there. I can now turn aggressive with any AC but there are still plenty of times where discretion is the better part of valor and extending is the best choice. It just took a while to recognize when those performance envelope signals were occurring.

 

*Edit:

 

Reading some other comments, here and elsewhere, I may have to amend. If you have a standard stick you may want some minor curves. I have a 10cm extension on the Warthog. I tend to fly with the stab at neutral unless I am trimming for a steady climb with an enemy in tow and want maximum efficiency or I have a heavy load as a Jabo.

Edited December 30, 2015 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[Wulf]

Since you brought up the FW190 ...

 

I have a question per the Fw190: what are the tips for controlling it in this game.  I am finding this plane to be incredibly unforgiving.  Whenever I fly the thing I always manage to lose control and crash.  Usually it is an unintentional snap roll to inverted and down I go.  No question I am doing something wrong, thus the request for advice.

 

The last time this happened I was banked about 45 degrees at 90% power, trying to do a spiral climb.

 

P.S.  Please no FW190 FM griping.  I want to know how to fly the plane as it is modeled in the sim, not engage in an argument over whether it is modeled correctly. 

 

P.P.S.  I spend the vast majority of my time writing and testing PWCG and almost none actually playing, so my lack of skill is entirely on me.  I do, however, like to pop into the cockpit and take control.  So ... just looking for a tip or two to keep this thing in the air.

 

 

Eeek ...sorry people.  That reply incorporated far too much 'tone'.  

Edited December 31, 2015 by Wulf

[KoN_]

Sorry Con,

 

The only things I really agree with are, "Do not turn aggressive," and Roll away from targets in the opposite direction."

 

She dives and recovers very well and does not need curves. Just a steady hand. Spins and snap rolls are well telegraphed both audibly and visually. You just have to pay attention to the signs. This aircraft needs a significant amount of time to read but all the feedback is there. I can now turn aggressive with any AC but there are still plenty of times where discretion is the better part of valor and extending is the best choice. It just took a while to recognize when those performance envelope signals were occurring.

 

*Edit:

 

Reading some other comments, here and elsewhere, I may have to amend. If you have a standard stick you may want some minor curves. I have a 10cm extension on the Warthog. I tend to fly with the stab at neutral unless I am trimming for a steady climb with an enemy in tow and want maximum efficiency or I have a heavy load as a Jabo.

Not a problem mate , i have warthogs on desk with no extension , so my inputs will be different . i cant even fly the 109 .

[andyw248]

Since this has already morphed into an FW190 thread...

 

In a real aircraft you just can't throw around your stick/yoke as hard as you can in a sim. In addition to that, it also becomes quite apparent when you enter a regime of flight where bad things are looming - in particular stick forces become even lower, sound (of airflow) diminishes, and your ship becomes sluggish. Some aircraft may buffet, but many won't. When all of these things happen you will correct your control input, and evade catastrophe; you will do this because the combination of these indicators tell you something bad's going to happen.

 

In the sim you don't have all of these indicators but you do have some. Foremost the sound - when the sound of airflow diminishes you are in danger, so relax on the controls, and keep them coordinated; while you would normally look over the nose and not at the panel, in this situation a quick glance at your turn-and-bank indicator might help you establish an attitude that is inductive to survival.

 

And then there's airspeed. Always be sure to have enough airspeed for what you are trying to attempt. A turn reversal roll at 300 kph just won't cut it - you will be close to a high speed stall in all fighters, and since it is just that tiny bit more sensitive than other fighters you'll be below high speed stall if you try this with the FW. Bottomline: You'll always need to keep track of your airspeed and see what you can do with what you have. In other words - 400 is better than 300

[andyw248]

@JtD - Great way of bringing up this topic! If I understand you correctly you are saying that the technical advantages of certain aircraft will go only so far, and that increased firepower goes a long way if proper tactics are employed.

 

This would also be supported by the USAAF/USN mounting 6/8 .5 guns to their rides, and being fairly successful with that.

 

However, from the memoirs of some VVS pilots I get the impression that they favored flying light aircraft with center-mounted guns because they would try to get close to the target and then every bullet would hit.

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

Wow, I learned something. I always thought of the 190 as a shotgun and the 109 as a pistol. Seems it takes more to fight/fly in the 190 than the 109. I'm guessing since I fly on the light ..err Red side and have zero time in a Blue plane.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I'm flying the G2 now and it is vastly different than the 190. She is a rocket in the vertical and a scalpel within the envelope. Actually easier to bring the guns to bear but I do miss the bludgeon that is the Fw. It was just was time to try a new ride. The vision out of the Fw is beyond compare. Even with icons you can lose a target in a maneuvering fight with the 109. Gonna miss the high speed pullout/rollout too but it is fun turning inside a Yak now.

[GP*]

I'm flying the G2 now and it is vastly different than the 190. She is a rocket in the vertical and a scalpel within the envelope. Actually easier to bring the guns to bear but I do miss the bludgeon that is the Fw. It was just was time to try a new ride. The vision out of the Fw is beyond compare. Even with icons you can lose a target in a maneuvering fight with the 109. Gonna miss the high speed pullout/rollout too but it is fun turning inside a Yak now.

Interesting. I find looking "around" the framing of the G-2 (with TrackIR of course) easy, and rarely lose sight of anyone. With the 190 on the other hand, that massive canopy bow can make it tricky to keep sight in certain situations.

[JtD]

However, from the memoirs of some VVS pilots I get the impression that they favored flying light aircraft with center-mounted guns because they would try to get close to the target and then every bullet would hit.

Well, in 1939, even the VVS fighter armament consisted mostly of something around 4 ShKAS guns (in the I-153 and I-16, their newest fighters). It's something that to me qualifies as the equivalent of 2x.50cal.

In 1945 it was considerably heavier, with 2xUBS+1ShVAK or 2ShVAK on most of their fighters, but it is true that the 4x20 equivalent was not reached. It still is easily double of what it was in 1939, and they also had some really hard hitting 37mm guns in use.

 

I doubt this not-so-much-increased fire power was solely due to pilot input, I think it has a lot to do with the Soviet aircraft design evolution in WW2, including even political and ideological reasons. The premier fighter, politically chosen and technically justifiable, was the Yak. It was just too small and underpowered to allow for something like 4x20mm guns, even post war versions did not go there. The La was technically capable of carrying these guns, and post war did. I assume they didn't do this during the war because of the higher cost of the aircraft. Aircraft were not built to last.

 

But if you were just trying to say that the pilots in the VVS favoured light aircraft with less guns - that's true for most pilots in most air forces. That's also why pilots don't get to decide everything in fighter development.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Nice thread and lots of interesting info here

 

As a side note, if I remember correctly the ShVAK took a lot of space and was too heavy to fit more than two of in most fighters. However, once the B-20 came to be the La-7, Yak-9U and Yak-3 were all fitted with 3 on the nose in 1945. On the La-7 the third gun was between the old two, while the Yaks retained the spinner cannon and added the rest on the sides of the nose if I remember correctly.

[JtD]

Yes, compared to a machine gun it was large and heavy - compared to other WW2 20mm cannons, the ShVAK was pretty normal sized, but the B-20 was extremely compact and light.

 

Which is why they could replace the already small UB guns with the B-20, even on the Yak's. I've read the installation wasn't considered 100% satisfactory, though, and it looks as if the Korean war Yak's didn't make extensive use of the B-20 cannon. All in all, it appears the air frame limit was pretty much reached by the end of the war.

 

The La, on the other hand, was up-gunned to 4x23mm post war, used and built extensively with that layout. Technically it was possible to up-gun it to even German late war standards.

[Ace_Pilto]

Since you brought up the FW190 ...

 

I have a question per the Fw190: what are the tips for controlling it in this game.  I am finding this plane to be incredibly unforgiving.  

 

It's an aircraft that was "dynamically unstable" before it was cool and my favourite to fly in BoS.

 

Keep it over 450 Kph at minimum to start off with, at 450-600 Kph is where it really out performs anything they can throw at you in terms of responsiveness but you'll lose that performance very quickly if you're careless. You won't be able to get any decent AoA out of it below 400-450 without very soft hands and without knowing it well so leave out the fancy stuff until you're used to it's quirks.

 

Try not to spin inverted and especially avoid negative-G accelerated stalls unless you plan on taking up farming. 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Interesting. I find looking "around" the framing of the G-2 (with TrackIR of course) easy, and rarely lose sight of anyone. With the 190 on the other hand, that massive canopy bow can make it tricky to keep sight in certain situations.

I'm sure it is a pilot issue. Working on that now

[PatrickAWlson]

An interesting quote that goes to the heart of better in a sim vs better in real life.  The fact is that we just don't usually fly in a sim the way that real pilots flew and certainly never under the conditions in which real pilots flew.  This is from Kurt Tank:

 

The Messerschmitt 109 [sic] and the British Spitfire, the two fastest fighters in world at the time we began work on the Fw 190, could both be summed up as a very large engine on the front of the smallest possible airframe; in each case armament had been added almost as an afterthought. These designs, both of which admittedly proved successful, could be likened to racehorses: given the right amount of pampering and easy course, they could outrun anything. But the moment the going became tough they were liable to falter. During World War I, I served in the cavalry and in the infantry. I had seen the harsh conditions under which military equipment had to work in wartime. I felt sure that a quite different breed of fighter would also have a place in any future conflict: one that could operate from ill-prepared front-line airfields; one that could be flown and maintained by men who had received only short training; and one that could absorb a reasonable amount of battle damage and still get back. This was the background thinking behind the Focke-Wulf 190; it was not to be a racehorse but a Dienstpferd, a cavalry horse

[6./ZG26_Emil]

... but the topic got shut down because some dumb comments. Since the parts I'm replying to were just exchanges of opinion of relative merits of aircraft, preferences of features and or tactics, both in historically and in a computer game, and as far as I can see are within forum guidelines, I hope the moderators don't mind me taking these threads from the other topic and continue them here.

 

For several reasons:

Real life pilots did value their life, and if in a 1vs1 situation, they'd fight for survival more than for killing. In that sense, there's nothing the Bf109 pilot can do to force the Fw190 pilot to stay in the fight that does not favour him, as the Fw190 can always dive and run away.

The handling of the Fw190 in some ways was easier than that of the Bf109, allowing in particular rookie pilots to fly the Fw190 closer to the limit than the Bf109. That can actually make a difference.

The fighting in the Fw190 was physically less stressful than in the Bf109, due to lower control forces. If the Fw190 pilot just keeps the fight in a physically demanding style, at some point the Bf109 will be exhausted to a degree where it becomes a significant factor.

With the use of the environment such as clouds, climb and turn performance become less important. You'd more often gain sufficient separation, which could be used for head on attacks, which would favour the Fw190.

Same is true for visibility from the cockpit, which from the Fw190 is better - it can be deciding.

 

All in all even a small 1vs1 fight in real life is way more complex than a computer game can depict. You just don't get 100% success rates.

 

I would say some aspects will remain impossible to model with reasonable effort. But my personal experience is that the Fw190 is not inferior to the Bf109 as a fighter aircraft, not even on dogfight servers. Because I don't fight close quarter 1vs1 battles. One of my mantra's is "if you enter a fair fight, you've already made your first mistake". In that sense, the Fw190 is way more capable of converting an advantage into a kill, due to better handling and larger fire power, and also more capable of converting a disadvantage into survival, due to better dive, handling, ruggedness and top speed. The easiest and also most effective kill is shooting down the guy who's on the six of one of your team mates. You'll not only get an easy kill, which won't fly evasive because it's detracted, but you'll also save your buddies behind. Like Manu and his squad in SeoW, I've had no problems racking up insane K/D ratios even when I was fairly new to Il-2 on line. And I only ever played as an opportunist lone wolf, never coordinated in a team.

Long story short, the Fw190 might not be the best fighter there is, but it certainly is the best killer, and that's what combat is about.

 

I hope you're also aware that while individual pilots did that, all air forces in WW2 increased fire power and accepted the resulting performance losses. Because the air war had shown it to be worth it. The average fire power between 1939 and 1945 went up from somewhere around the equivalent of 2x.50cal to somewhere around the equivalent of 4x20mm, easily 5 times the fire power. I understand your preference, but in bigger air battles, it was more important to dispatch opponents quickly than to stay on their six for extended periods.

One of the classic set-ups I've seen on Il-2 servers were the Bf109F-2 vs. HurricaneIIc battles. In this set-up, the Bf109 basically holds all the cards except for fire power, and 1vs1, 9 out of 10 went to the Bf109. Pretty quickly, too. But already at 2vs2, this turned into a much more even fight, and in 4vs4, Bf109's would limit themselves to hit and run, with predictably poor results owing to the poor armament. Or they'd just get shot down.

 

I agree but the fact is we can game the game and I don't mean exploit. The 109 is the superior climber and therefore will always win a fight against a 190. Reality doesn't work the same way, LW pilots during the war didn't have the option to just take off and climb to 7k and not worry about what happens below them they were assigned tasks to escort or hunt and told the altitudes at which they would fly at. On the eastern front that altitude got progressively lower as things turned bad in the ground war.

 

I flew 109s in IL2 since 2001/2 andn the rule was simple 'climb, climb, climb and never ever turn in an attack'. Fast B&Z attacks performed at maximum speed by a coordinated and well trained group is virtually impossible to defeat. 

 

 

One thing that BOS has done is make the ground war a major deal where the LW is forced to chose between air superiority or lose the ground battle....I think this is probably a very real quandary suffered by the LW during WW2 on the Eastern Front.

Edited December 31, 2015 by 6./ZG26_Emil

[Dr_Molenbeek]

The 109 is the superior climber and therefore will always win a fight against a 190.

 

The fact is... A group of Fw 190s that is attacked from above by a group of Bf 109s (never happened ofc but imagine), has every reasons to survive without suffering loss. The opposite, however, is not true.

 

I'm wrong ?

[6./ZG26_Emil]

The fact is... A group of Fw 190s that is attacked from above by a group of Bf 109s (never happened ofc but imagine), has every reasons to survive without suffering loss. The opposite, however, is not true.

 

I'm wrong ?

 

What is this rubbish you wish to blather on about now?

[Dr_Molenbeek]

What is this rubbish you wish to blather on about now?

 

I asked you a simple question, if you think that you're not able to reply (and that does not surprise me from you), then don't reply. But keep your attempts to make a scandal in your pocket.

 

lol...

[GP*]

I'm sure it is a pilot issue. Working on that now

As are my shortcomings in the 190