FW 190

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Apart from FM diversity this pretty much also reflects the real situation of pilots transferring from the 109 to the 190. Some were convinced by it's feautures while others, especially very expirienced 109 pilots, preferred the former.

 

It's probably very difficult to get used to flying the 190 once you "mastered" the 109 as a dogfighter because it's not suited for copy-paste tactics. Whereas the common Bf-109 pilot (ingame) could be best described as a rugby player running around the field looking for trouble and beat stuff up the 190 pilot is more of a chess player until he has the opportunity to strike.

 

It's understandable that it may pose a schock at first but once you spend some time with it and get used to it's strenghs and weaknesses I'm sure you'll discover it has more potential.

[Porkins]

Porkins don´t listen to all this nonsense. When you get it right its one of the most satisfying planes in the sim.

As some ppl are saying you can enter a turn fight, just make sure you are fast enough and fight in the vertical, if your victim turns to avoid you dont turn after him in the horizontal, do a loop or a high yoyo and try to guess what his exit vector is going to be, catch him coming out of the turn with a high deflection shot, the fw has good firepower to take him down. It takes practice of course.

If you are not succesfull you will start to loose energy with every pass, so there will be a moment you will have to dive to gain speed and flight away to friendly territory, climb and go back to the fight, this way you can achieve more than one victory in one sortie.

A part from the roll rate it feels great to me.

And something very important, turn your pitch sensitivity (is that the right word?) curve all the way up to avoid those nasty stalls

Very well explained, thanks!

[Wulf]

It's funny that virtually every Fw-190 ever modelled in any game/sim (except for the Fw-190D, always) is, according to these types, a flying coffin. Makes one wonder, is it really possible that every single quality FS developer got the aircraft wrong and Winger is somehow right?

 

 

Actually, if you'd flown the things you wouldn't find it funny at all.  Not even a bit.  I can still recall the sense of utter disappointment I felt when I first flew the 190, way back when, in the 'original' IL-2 Sturmovik.  To say the thing  was an utter travesty doesn't even begin to describe it.  It was at best a sick joke.  Over time (years) that situation slowly improved but from day one the devs swore up hill and down dale that the FM was absolutely correct.  It wasn't.   By the time I stopped flying the sim years late the 190 had morphed into a useful aircraft of sorts but it was still wasn't great - not by a long shot and at no stage did the devs just man-up and say we got it wrong.

 

 When I discovered the latest version of the title was to incorporate a new version of the 190 A series, I was over the moon.  Finally, I thought, we might just get a representation of the aircraft that did the thing justice.  Well, once again expectations and reality went their separate ways.  I don't know if you were on board at the time of the 190s release (I don't think you were) but the overwhelming emotion was one of total disbelief.  The aircraft's cockpit layout had actually been deliberately distorted to make it conform with some miscalculated geometry.  Now, did the devs release the aircraft with a proviso that these glaring unresolved issues would be corrected?  No, no they did not. and I'd have to say that for many of us that was when our faith in the good intentions of the devs  took a serious hit.  Same with the issue over 'the bar' in front of the pilot's face.  Supposedly the devs knew all there was to know about the 190 (or so we were assured) but strangely they didn't know that.  Again, our faith and willingness to simply accept what we were being told took a serious knock.   Now, I'm not suggesting for one second that the aircraft is all bad, it isn't; for the most part it's beautifully modeled and the FM is on the right track - but it still needs work and that should just be acknowledged.  That would take a lot of heat out of the situation.  All the obfuscation in the world  isn't going to change the reality that certain issues - like roll-rate, acceleration, speed at altitude etc need to be addressed.  

Edited February 11, 2016 by Wulf

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I agree jcomm & I'm no real shakes as a pilot or an expert on the 190, even though it is my go-to aricraft.

 

I have great difficulty with the spins and the way the 190 seems to snap into them with little warning.

 

It seems a very different bird recently but that could well be me.

 

One more thing I found odd was the lack of rudder input on take off to counter torque, which I'm pretty sure used to be present but now is much reduced and I'm stabbing both left and right on the rudder as she rolls along the runway.

 

Before as I remember it was a hefty rudder input which was reduced as speed and rudder effectiveness increased

 

Try changing the your pitch sensitivity to 50% for the 190, you'll find that reduces the the high speed stalls.

[SR-F_Winger]

Nope, it's the same thing as always with you, "I was shot down by a Russian plane, therefore the Russian plane is over-modeled." Over and over and over again you repeat this. 

Do me a favor, put me on your ignorelist and spare the world your nonsense accusations about me.

I perform very well in this game when i fly it. No matter the plane. I know what i am talking about. And i flew red to try it out. Had to laugh about the poor germans trying hard against the ubermodeled woodies:P

Edited February 11, 2016 by StG2_Winger

[ShamrockOneFive]

Apart from FM diversity this pretty much also reflects the real situation of pilots transferring from the 109 to the 190. Some were convinced by it's feautures while others, especially very expirienced 109 pilots, preferred the former.

 

It's probably very difficult to get used to flying the 190 once you "mastered" the 109 as a dogfighter because it's not suited for copy-paste tactics. Whereas the common Bf-109 pilot (ingame) could be best described as a rugby player running around the field looking for trouble and beat stuff up the 190 pilot is more of a chess player until he has the opportunity to strike.

 

It's understandable that it may pose a schock at first but once you spend some time with it and get used to it's strenghs and weaknesses I'm sure you'll discover it has more potential.

 

Well said! I spent years flying the FW190 series in IL-2 Forgotten Battles and IL-2 1946 through all of the comments and discussions about the aircraft in those sims. Really I don't find flying the A-3 in this sim significantly different from the A-4 in IL-2. Different but ultimately the style of fighting is pretty much what I expect it to be. In some ways its a fair bit easier for me to fly this FW190 to its strengths than before.

 

It may have a few issues here and there but its really a great fighter to fly and fight in. And it makes a decent Jabo too!

[Cloyd]

I don't fly online, so I have no opinion about how it performs there. Offline, if you can't blow the crap outta anything near you, then you're doing something wrong.

 

Cloyd

[FTC_Etherlight]

Do me a favor, put me on your ignorelist and spare the world your nonsense accusations about me.

I perform very well in this game when i fly it. No matter the plane. I know what i am talking about. And i flew red to try it out. Had to laugh about the poor germans trying hard against the ubermodeled woodies:P

 

No, he should absolutely not do that. In fact nobody should, because people need to put your constant whining into perspective, otherwise new people who did not have to sift through your constant claims that "Russian planes so ub0r" might actually think that you're right, which might even result in there being more people like you. And we must, and I want this to be very clear, absolutely avoid that. Why? Because it poisons every sensible discussion there might come up about the topic. Are the Yak-1 flaps fishy? Yes, absolutely. Will that stop my 109 from outperforming it in speed, highspeed initial turns, vertical maneuvering at speed and in climbrate? No! I even got 5 kills in one sortie today in the FW-190 on WoL, and I'm not even good at this game, yet. I just kept my speed up and saw all those Russians disappear in the mirror after I attacked. 30 minutes ago I've flown on the duel server with a few squadmates, because WoL is down right now. I was flying the FW 190 in a mostly pure furball/dogfight environment. The result? 8:1. So no, the FW is not bad. Not at all in fact. Will a Lagg-3 or a P-40 take extremely high amounts of punishment before going down? In some cases, yes, I was wondering how a Lagg-3 survived 4 successful passes from my FW with gunpods. Could they do anything about it? Nah, just took a bit more work. So yeah, there are definitely issues, but 80% of the time I see balance ratings of 2:1 for the Germans, sometimes even 3:1. Why? Because the German planes are so bad and all those players willfully play the victims for the Russians? Come on, dude. Do you want the Russian planes to perform even worse, so that 109s have free reign over the sky? Have fun playing on servers with 50 Germans against 5 Russians flying the IL-2, because they wanna pop some tanks. Go on, check the WoL-Statspage. Sort by K/hr, sort by K/D, sort by overall score, any value that indicates success and not just playtime and look at the nation mostly flown on the first page. Jesus.

 

That constant onesided bickering and whining does nothing but poison the forums and I'm just sick of it. Quit being a fanboy, you're fooling noone anymore at this point. Engage in the discussions seriously and acknowledge the actual situation on the MP servers with the current meta that evolved, because of the very noticable performance gap between the nations' fighters. Most people agree that the FW flightmodel needs work, be it the rollrate, that weird performance gap between certain altitudes that Ze_Hairy put forward or the suspicious tendency to go into violent snaps and stalls at high speeds even with sensible input. I agree! But you screaming "Russian bias" into every thread is actually counterproductive to any form of argument people put forward, because it derails the discussion and takes away from the credibility of the issue. It reminds me of that South Park episode where the towns people argue if the racist flag of the town should be changed and both sides put forth reasonable arguments, until the Ku Klux Klan decides they wanna support one side. They don't want their support and its actually counterproductive to their efforts, who would have guessed.

 

I'm usually a very quite member of the forum community and don't read the forums that much anymore, partly because of stuff like this. I would very much appreciate if people would tune down the trolling a little and stop using the forum to vent, because if this is not venting (and I'm paying you the compliment of assuming that it is), there are issues far more severe you should take a look at.

 

On the topic at hand: I mentioned it in my little escapade before, but the performance gaps (somewhere between 1,500 and 2,700 meters) as well as the probably a bit too low rollrate in combination with the FW reacting very violently to harsh control inputs, force you to a very very conservative playstyle if you do not have a huge energy advantage. That does not mean you purely need to boom and zoom, but the very explosive vertical turnfighting that a 109 is capable of will also be very risky and quite difficult to pull of in many situations. What the FW does quite well, however, is converting speed to altitude, at least in my experience. Therefore I'm a fan of hammerhead maneuvers if you want to take the risk. If you wanna be on the safe side: Stay fast, don't get sucked into too many energybleeding maneuvers, get distance, reset the approach and you're peachy. I have always been a big opponent of gunpods or excessive armament in most flight sims, because of the loss of performance they usually bring with them, but I actually use the additional cannons on the FW, just because they usually mean that a successful approach is the last approach you have to make. Considering that you will mostly deal with very high angle deflection shots in a FW against an enemy who is aware of your presence, your accuracy will necessarily suffer at the beginning, at least in my experience. Therefore I want those passes that actually work to be as devastating and effective as possible. In about 70% of cases the enemy is toast or so badly damaged that you just have to wait for the kill message to arrive a few minutes later. At the very least you put him into a state where he's barely able to defend himself anymore and finishing him off should be pretty easy if you decide to do so. I agree that using a high amount of sensitivity on the pitch axis helps with the snaprolling and stalling at the beginning but I have come to believe that it's not necessarily a good thing to do, because IF you want to go into more drastic maneuvers for defensive flying (you will need to if you fly JaBo missions at some point) the later percentage area of the axis will become very compressed and therefore unpredictable, at least that's what I felt. So I would urge you to try and use a max of around 20% sensitivity if you can deal with it, because I have actually found that me going back to that value helped me a lot after a bit of practice.

Most of this stuff is a matter of personal preference, Ze_hairy for example has some wicked flat/rolling scissors-skills to make people on his 6 overshoot (mostly because he is a madman who tends to fly FW-190 only in every game it's available^^), but that's obviously risky and difficult, especially in this game.

 

So TL:DR for starters, like other people pointed out:

- Stay fast

- Stay vertical if you're not very good at controlling the pitch in scissoring-maneuvers

- Try to intercept turning enemies with high-deflection shots

- Don't be ashamed to bugger off if they bleed your energy and gain the upper hand, even a bloody P-40 will rip you a new one in a sustained turnfight if they know what they're doing ^^

 

Sorry for the wall of text by the way.

[GP*]

Actually, if you'd flown the things you wouldn't find it funny at all.  Not even a bit.  I can still recall the sense of utter disappointment I felt when I first flew the 190, way back when, in the 'original' IL-2 Sturmovik.  To say the thing  was an utter travesty doesn't even begin to describe it.  It was at best a sick joke.  Over time (years) that situation slowly improved but from day one the devs swore up hill and down dale that the FM was absolutely correct.  It wasn't.   By the time I stopped flying the sim years late the 190 had morphed into a useful aircraft of sorts but it was still wasn't great - not by a long shot and at no stage did the devs just man-up and say we got it wrong.

 

 When I discovered the latest version of the title was to incorporate a new version of the 190 A series, I was over the moon.  Finally, I thought, we might just get a representation of the aircraft that did the thing justice.  Well, once again expectations and reality went their separate ways.  I don't know if you were on board at the time of the 190s release (I don't think you were) but the overwhelming emotion was one of total disbelief.  The aircraft's cockpit layout had actually been deliberately distorted to make it conform with some miscalculated geometry.  Now, did the devs release the aircraft with a proviso that these glaring unresolved issues would be corrected?  No, no they did not. and I'd have to say that for many of us that was when our faith in the good intentions of the devs  took a serious hit.  Same with the issue over 'the bar' in front of the pilot's face.  Supposedly the devs knew all there was to know about the 190 (or so we were assured) but strangely they didn't know that.  Again, our faith and willingness to simply accept what we were being told took a serious knock.   Now, I'm not suggesting for one second that the aircraft is all bad, it isn't; for the most part it's beautifully modeled and the FM is on the right track - but it still needs work and that should just be acknowledged.  That would take a lot of heat out of the situation.  All the obfuscation in the world  isn't going to change the reality that certain issues - like roll-rate, acceleration, speed at altitude etc need to be addressed.  

 

 

The initial cockpit of the 190 in this game was ridiculous. I don't think I'll ever get over it. How that got through quality control...who knows.

 

And yes, the 190A in the original IL2 -- pretty much up until the last few years of the sim -- was awful. Acceleration on takeoff was laughable at best.

[SYN_Mike77]

Nope, it's the same thing as always with you, "I was shot down by a Russian plane, therefore the Russian plane is over-modeled." Over and over and over again you repeat this. 

Oh be fair Luke!  He does the same ing over at RoF when his Dr1 is shot down by French or British planes.  It's not just the Russians.

[LukeFF]

Oh be fair Luke!  He does the same ing over at RoF when his Dr1 is shot down by French or British planes.  It's not just the Russians.

 

True 

[Gump]

so. I decided to hop in this plane offline and learn to fly it since it seemed to just confuse me online....

.

I hadn't read any discussions about the plane previously. I will say that it took a while to figure out how to work it. those snap rolls are like "whaaaa..?" if you fly with the "F2" view, and pull the elevator, you can watch the thing just wallow. it seems to just keep going with momentum even though its nose is pointed otherwise. in other words, it doesn't change direction (turn) very well and, if you pull too hard it will enter this high AoA position and snap or wobble.

.

I found, as a few have described here, that it is best to use with boom/zoom (vertical) tactics. you cant fly the plane well without learning to use the stabilizer/pitch trim adjustment. it will not go fast with too much positive trim, and it will not turn well with too much negative trim.

.

shooting. the plane has some strong guns, but it is very easy to lose a target under the front or behind that extra-wide canopy frame. I don't know how to judge a deflection shot coming from underneath since it has such a large blind spot there. nice thing is, the ammo belts are large - much larger than the la5, so you can spray and pray more.

.

I guess my biggest 'impression' with this plane is that it does not fit the description I hear on all the documentaries about how it gave the spitfires a fit when it appeared. in other words, it had to be able to turn well IRL. in this game, the 109 turns much better. IRL the 109s would always be the BnZ planes. the game seems to reverse the roles. IMHO. offline quick missions, I can beat an i6 with a 109. the 190 gets whipped almost every time.

[LLv24_Zami]

I guess my biggest 'impression' with this plane is that it does not fit the description I hear on all the documentaries about how it gave the spitfires a fit when it appeared. in other words, it had to be able to turn well IRL. in this game, the 109 turns much better. IRL the 109s would always be the BnZ planes. the game seems to reverse the roles. IMHO. offline quick missions, I can beat an i6 with a 109. the 190 gets whipped almost every time.

Now you did a big mistake. With this sentence let`s wait how quickly certain individuals come here to explain to you that the performance of Fw-190 against the Spitfire is just a false legend, Fw-190 is not that "uber"(using this word is important!), it was a just barely decent Jabo at best, imply that you are a Luftwhiner etc etc... 

[LukeFF]

"utter travesty"

 

"sick joke"

 

"ridiculous"

 

"awful"

 

Ah, first-world problems...

[Wulf]

so. I decided to hop in this plane offline and learn to fly it since it seemed to just confuse me online....

.

I hadn't read any discussions about the plane previously. I will say that it took a while to figure out how to work it. those snap rolls are like "whaaaa..?" if you fly with the "F2" view, and pull the elevator, you can watch the thing just wallow. it seems to just keep going with momentum even though its nose is pointed otherwise. in other words, it doesn't change direction (turn) very well and, if you pull too hard it will enter this high AoA position and snap or wobble.

.

I found, as a few have described here, that it is best to use with boom/zoom (vertical) tactics. you cant fly the plane well without learning to use the stabilizer/pitch trim adjustment. it will not go fast with too much positive trim, and it will not turn well with too much negative trim.

.

shooting. the plane has some strong guns, but it is very easy to lose a target under the front or behind that extra-wide canopy frame. I don't know how to judge a deflection shot coming from underneath since it has such a large blind spot there. nice thing is, the ammo belts are large - much larger than the la5, so you can spray and pray more.

.

I guess my biggest 'impression' with this plane is that it does not fit the description I hear on all the documentaries about how it gave the spitfires a fit when it appeared. in other words, it had to be able to turn well IRL. in this game, the 109 turns much better. IRL the 109s would always be the BnZ planes. the game seems to reverse the roles. IMHO. offline quick missions, I can beat an i6 with a 109. the 190 gets whipped almost every time.

 

 

As usual, Eric Brown comes to the rescue when questions about the 190 arise.  This is what he had to say about the the fighting style of the 190 when used against better turning aircraft like the Spitfire

 

“The AFDU trials confirmed what the RAF already knew - that the Fw 190 was a truly outstanding combat aircraft. They also produced vitally important information which went some way towards restoring the situation in so far as the RAF was concerned and in eradicating something of the awe in which the Focke-Wulf had come to be held by Allied pilots. It was concluded that the Fw 190 pilot trying to “mix it” with a Spitfire in the classic fashion of steep turning was doomed, for at any speed -even below the German fighter's stalling speed- it would be out-turned by its British opponent . Of course the Luftwaffe was aware of this fact and a somewhat odd style of dogfighting evolved in which the Fw 190 pilots endeavoured to keep on the vertical plane by zooms and dives, while their Spitfire-mounted antagonists tried everything in the book to draw them on to the horizontal. If the German pilot lost his head and failed to resist the temptation to try a horizontal pursuit curve on a Spitfire, as likely as not, before he could recover the speed lost in a steep turn he would find another Spitfire turning inside him! On the other hand, the German pilot who kept zooming up and down was usually the recipient of only difficult deflection shots of more than 30 deg. The Fw 190 had tremendous initial acceleration in a dive but it was extremely vulnerable during a pull-out, recovery having to be quite progressive with care not to kill the speed by 'sinking' ”

Edited February 12, 2016 by Wulf

[Dakpilot]

The Fw 190 being vulnerable in pull-out of a dive is also noted by numerous Soviet official combat trials and pilot anecdotes

 

This does go a little way to explain peoples surprise at lack of energy retention when fighting in a 190, because is not pulling out of a dive just a steep turn in the vertical plane?

 

add in the 'flight sim' issue of sensitive control inputs and you have one reason the FW 190 does not live up to expectations when flown a certain way

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Feathered_IV]

It's worth recalling that the Spitfires were frequently operating with a severe tactical disadvantage, at the limit of their range and tied in escort to Blenheim bombers. 

[LLv24_Zami]

It's worth recalling that the Spitfires were frequently operating with a severe tactical disadvantage, at the limit of their range and tied in escort to Blenheim bombers. 

Well of course it is.

Germans always got what they got basicly by deceiving, dishonesty or just by pure luck. But when Allies did succeed, it was because of superior planes and pilots. That`s how the story normally goes and I`m not just referring to the this particular case 

[Aap]

It's worth recalling that the Spitfires were frequently operating with a severe tactical disadvantage, at the limit of their range and tied in escort to Blenheim bombers. 

 

                

(I hope it was intended as a joke.)

[kendo]

Wonderful post [TWB]Etherlight. Just had to say that. 

 

And thanks to Wulf for the very instructive quote from Eric Brown. A very useful perspective. Maybe it should be posted all by itself as a 'sticky' at the top of the forum home page?

 

I think most of us 'neutrals' want to see all aircraft modelled as accurately as possible. And I believe the devs are committed to that too, as the continuous tweaking and improvements have shown.

 

But despite the rights or wrongs of the situation unfortunately Winger has become 'The boy who cried "Wolf" ' just a few times too often. Eventually you end up just tuning it out......

Edited February 12, 2016 by kendo

[Dr_Molenbeek]

I guess my biggest 'impression' with this plane is that it does not fit the description I hear on all the documentaries about how it gave the spitfires a fit when it appeared. in other words, it had to be able to turn well IRL. in this game, the 109 turns much better.

 

IRL, 109 was a better turner, until speeds where G force becomes a real factor... as Heinz Lange said:

 

"I believe the Fw 190 was more manoeuvrable than the Messerschmitt — although the latter could make a tighter horizontal turn, if you master the Fw 190 you could pull a lot of G and do just about as well. In terms of control and feel, the 109 was heavier on the stick."

 

And we come back again to our weird representation of stick forces in flight sims. 

 

Let's not talk about the massively OP roll rate of Bf 109s in BoS, the underperforming climb rate of 190, and you quickly understand why people tend to see the 109s as being "the superiors fighters".

[LLv24_Zami]

Wonderful post [TWB]Etherlight. Just had to say that. 

 

And thanks to Wulf for the very instructive quote from Eric Brown. A very useful perspective. Maybe it should be posted all by itself as a 'sticky' at the top of the forum home page?

 

I think most of us 'neutrals' want to see all aircraft modelled as accurately as possible. And I believe the devs are committed to that too, as the continuous tweaking and improvements have shown.

 

But despite the rights or wrongs of the situation unfortunately Winger has become 'The boy who cried "Wolf" ' just a few times too often. Eventually you end up just tuning it out......

All extremes are just as annoying IMO. Extreme pro (Luftwaffe or any other country/airforce/plane) dude AND the guy always extremely opposing him.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Zami

[Wulf]

It's worth recalling that the Spitfires were frequently operating with a severe tactical disadvantage, at the limit of their range and tied in escort to Blenheim bombers. 

 

 

You're right in the sense that after the BoB, combats between Fighter Command and the Jagdflieger were more likely to be over the Continent than the South of England - so a reversal of the tactical constraints that prevailed during the previous year.  However, the main weight of the German assault had now been switched Eastwards, with the developing attack on the Soviet Union.  The Luftwaffe was still raiding England during this period but the main role of the Jagdflieger on the Channel Front had changed to that of a holding operation while the Soviets were being subdued.  Given the resource requirements involved in that operation, only JG 26 and JG 2 could be spared for the task of keeping a lid on the RAF, which at this point in the War was expanding rapidly and attempting to re-assert itself over the Continent.  Keeping the RAF in check was always going to be a tall order with just two JGs at their disposal, so the Germans had to pick their battles carefully.  If they felt compelled to engage the RAF (typically because a bomber force of some kind was incorporated in a sweep)  they did, and if possible at a time and place that suited them best, but often they just left the RAF's  fighter sweeps unmolested or at least, just mounted harassing operations against them.  When you consider that these RAF fighter sweeps could incorporate over 20 fighter squadrons at a time, all stacked-up at various altitudes, it's not hard to understand why.  

Edited February 12, 2016 by Wulf

[Ace_Pilto]

 

IRL, 109 was a better turner, until speeds where G force becomes a real factor... as Heinz Lange said:

 

"I believe the Fw 190 was more manoeuvrable than the Messerschmitt — although the latter could make a tighter horizontal turn, if you master the Fw 190 you could pull a lot of G and do just about as well. In terms of control and feel, the 109 was heavier on the stick."

 

And we come back again to our weird representation of stick forces in flight sims.  

 

The 190 still has a lot of capability at speeds where you're hoping your will is in order in the 109. You could probably get a better idea of that with a realistically lengthened stick and FFB setup.

 

IMO, 190 is the best aircraft in BoS.

[Jade_Monkey]

But despite the rights or wrongs of the situation unfortunately Winger has become 'The boy who cried "Wolf" ' just a few times too often. Eventually you end up just tuning it out......

The boy who cried "Wulf"

[303_Kwiatek]

Atcually in BOS Fw 190 got lighter stick forces then 109 which is good.  I think that in BOS Fw 190 got similar problem like 109 with too much dynamic stability around pitch ( spring effect - wobbling) .   Also still A-3 is lack in climb rate about 1-2 m/s comparing to RL German data.     I think roll rate could be acceptable but problem is that other BOS planes got too good roll rate expecially at higher speed -   i mean here Lagg-3 and LA-5.  If their roll rate would be reduced to more beliveable rate Fw 190 would got its real and historical adventages.

 

So reasuming i think develepors should check and think such issues:

 

- pitch behaviour  and yaw effect ( spring effect )  -  for 109 and Fw 190

- climb rate

- roll rates other planes in BOS ( La-5 and Lagg3, 109?)

- too good performance other planes at high alts   (  109 F-4,  Yak-1 and Lagg-3)

 

I see that A-3 in BOS got only 2 isuess -  wobbling behaviour around pitch axis and still too weak climb rate.  Rest problems exist in other planes performacne (  too good performacne at high alts and too good roll rates )

 

If these thing would be adjusted and fixed i think we would got more accurate and relative performance for 190 against all other planes.

Edited February 12, 2016 by 303_Kwiatek

[II./JG77_Manu*]

It's funny that virtually every Fw-190 ever modelled in any game/sim (except for the Fw-190D, always) is, according to these types, a flying coffin

You can't compare the 190 in 1946 with the one in BoS right now.

In 1946 (12.2 with HSFX) the 190A4/A5 is an absolute superb plane..in my opinion clearly the best fighter in the year 1943 from all nations. It seems right in every department, like climb rate, roll rate etc...where as in BoS it just isn't.

People in this topic - and in any other topic, that just opens to get the FM right - can throw around their nonsense (i am not talking about you, just to be clear) that "you only have to fly the 190 properly" "learn how to use it" "bla blub" and further nonsense.

 

There is a scientific truth:

According to all the proper sources, including German and English, the Fw 190A3 had a climb rate of 16m/s, it reached 5000m in just under 6 minutes. Not the case in game, so it's undermodeled.

 

No matter how many Russian fanboys, 190 anti-biased, Anti-German, or game-balance gurus in here will tell you, that "it's still a good plane", "can crush every Soviet plane when used right", "just learn to fly it properly" and more of this utter nonsense, that doesn't bring anything useful to the discussion if the 190 is right (which is already off topic from what OP asked), doesn't change the fact that it's undermodeled. 

 

If it would behave like in 1946(+HSFX), believe me, i would celebrate if it would even come close. (Btw i don't care what so ever, if i can "best" the Soviet planes, or if i have the "superior plane", i rather fly a properly modeled 190A against an La7 or Yak3, then a wrongly modeled one against a Lagg)

 

Sorry for off topic. Regarding how to fly it, there are already a few very good posts in here (hidden in between personal stuff and OT), so i don't have to add anything to that.

Edited February 12, 2016 by II./JG77_Manu*

[ShamrockOneFive]

If we want to critically analyze the conversation. There are really two different discussions that stem from the same base comment.

 

1) The FW190A-3 in IL-2: BoS is a good fighter that when flown properly can be extremely successful.

2) The FW190A-3 in IL-2: BoS has some flight modelling issues (climb rate, roll rate?) affecting its historical accuracy.

 

Arguing that the two are the same (as some are probably doing) is false equivalency. It's certainly two responses to the same problem but it doesn't solve the problem. One can still be very successful and have fun in an under performing aircraft. The FW190 is one of those types that is just so good that even a little hamstrung it still ends up being excellent.

 

There's a very good discussion in the FM section (ignoring some of the negative comments) about the climb and roll rates of this plane. Worth having a peek at for a more technical discussion.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

No problem Manu, I completely see your point and I agree - factually speaking actually, it's nigh impossible to get every single aircraft parameter right and even when this happens it takes some time to do, in which I'm sure the Fw-190 will eventually have its smaller quirks adjusted. What grinds my gears are the Wingers of the universe who are quick to claim that BoS is somehow a Soviet-biased deathtrap and the Fw-190 is not worth flying and can be caught up by every single Soviet fighter on a straight line. This kind of fantasy is utterly annoying, but here we are OT as you said

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Correct aircraft performence is actually way easier to acchieve than aerodynamical qualities of an airplane. It's comparetively easy to implement and check with real data, however there's no real hard data on for example stall characteristics, high speed behaviour ect. Those details are way harder to capture and will probably never be modeled realistcly in all categories.

[SR-F_Winger]

can be caught up by every single Soviet fighter on a straight line

I never said that.

Edited February 12, 2016 by StG2_Winger

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Best advice for FW190: Dont fly it if you dont want to get frustrated.

You are outrun, outrolled, outdived and outclimbed by russian fighters.

Only thing it can do well is fighterbombing.

Or does outrun mean something else?

[SR-F_Winger]

Or does outrun mean something else?

Where please do i say "can be caught up by every single Soviet fighter on a straight line"?

 

Read again [Edited].

Edited February 12, 2016 by Bearcat

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Alrighty, off I go to catch 190s - maybe I'll close in with one while it's on final. I digress...

[Mac_Messer]

It's funny that virtually every Fw-190 ever modelled in any game/sim (except for the Fw-190D, always) is, according to these types, a flying coffin. Makes one wonder, is it really possible that every single quality FS developer got the aircraft wrong and Winger is somehow right?

It is a safe bet. If you treat the FW190 like a flying coffing you try to stay alarmed at all times and try not to get into risky engagements. Works with the IAR80 aswell.

It's probably very difficult to get used to flying the 190 once you "mastered" the 109 as a dogfighter because it's not suited for copy-paste tactics. Whereas the common Bf-109 pilot (ingame) could be best described as a rugby player running around the field looking for trouble and beat stuff up the 190 pilot is more of a chess player until he has the opportunity to strike.

It is simple. The 109 in `40 through `42 is a great fighter on its own.

So TL:DR for starters, like other people pointed out:

- Stay fast

- Stay vertical if you're not very good at controlling the pitch in scissoring-maneuvers

- Try to intercept turning enemies with high-deflection shots

- Don't be ashamed to bugger off if they bleed your energy and gain the upper hand, even a bloody P-40 will rip you a new one in a sustained turnfight if they know what they're doing ^^

 

Not sure if you know it, the list is what an advanced virtual pilot is. It is not easy to do well in a FW190 because it requires skill in nearly every part of flying.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Mac_Messer

[Gump]

interesting. wolf's 'eric brown' quote and ze_hairy's 'Heinz Lange' quotes seem to describe the general behavior of this plane (excepting the debated roll/climb). thx for the education, guys. I don't know if these are the final authority, but this game seems to emulate those descriptions. not sure how such a plane would come to be revered as the "butcher bird" as such, though.

.

I do recall the spit9 being said to be developed because of the 190, and was superior to the 190 (my readings). the spit 9 was fast and could climb high.

.

so, its like flying a missile with gyroscopic procession. the wings are more like guidance fins and you have to point-and-shoot the plane. pull too hard and that gyro will teach you a lesson.

[URUAker]

You can't compare the 190 in 1946 with the one in BoS right now.

In 1946 (12.2 with HSFX) the 190A4/A5 is an absolute superb plane..in my opinion clearly the best fighter in the year 1943 from all nations. It seems right in every department, like climb rate, roll rate etc...where as in BoS it just isn't.

People in this topic - and in any other topic, that just opens to get the FM right - can throw around their nonsense (i am not talking about you, just to be clear) that "you only have to fly the 190 properly" "learn how to use it" "bla blub" and further nonsense.

 

There is a scientific truth:

According to all the proper sources, including German and English, the Fw 190A3 had a climb rate of 16m/s, it reached 5000m in just under 6 minutes. Not the case in game, so it's undermodeled.

 

No matter how many Russian fanboys, 190 anti-biased, Anti-German, or game-balance gurus in here will tell you, that "it's still a good plane", "can crush every Soviet plane when used right", "just learn to fly it properly" and more of this utter nonsense, that doesn't bring anything useful to the discussion if the 190 is right (which is already off topic from what OP asked), doesn't change the fact that it's undermodeled. 

 

If it would behave like in 1946(+HSFX), believe me, i would celebrate if it would even come close. (Btw i don't care what so ever, if i can "best" the Soviet planes, or if i have the "superior plane", i rather fly a properly modeled 190A against an La7 or Yak3, then a wrongly modeled one against a Lagg)

 

Sorry for off topic. Regarding how to fly it, there are already a few very good posts in here (hidden in between personal stuff and OT), so i don't have to add anything to that.

This topic is about tips to be more succesfull with the 190 NOT ABOUT FM. That is what Porkins asked for and that is what I and some other ppl gave, the rest including you are offtopic.

 

Saying the 190 in BOS is a great plane and can be very succesfull against all soviet types is no nonsense is just the truth and encourages Porkins to not give up trying.

 

The A3 in 1946 was quite different from the A4/A5.

 

I´m no fanboy of anything just an enthusiast, I love the FW is my favourite german plane in any wwii sim. I agree issues with the 190 tha needs to be fixed but its not the end of the world and don´t pork the plane. I´m sure those will be fixed in time.

[JG300_Olrik]

Best advice for FW190 : never fly alone ! Have good coms with a fair wingman and use wise pair tactics. Enemies will run or die !

Don't turn, don't break speed, fly high and fast. Try to keep a step ahead of your enemy and forsee his manoeuvers.

In case of lower energy and /or inferior num : don't fight but run... as you would have done in real.

Edited February 12, 2016 by F/JG300_Touch

[Porkins]

Great discussion. Inspired by some of the advice and feedback, I fired up the 190 last night and flew a few missions in the campaign. My experience matched what seems to be the consensus. When I got into turn fights or lost speed, the plane did not excel (no pun intended). Instead when an enemy went into a turn I climbed and did a loop to get back behind him. In this maneuver I found the 190's performance to be quite good. At full throttle it proved to be an excellent climber. The excellent vision allowed by the 190's canopy proved to be very valuable in this maneuver, as it was easy to track the plane as I climbed up and around. I did find that its performance seemed to track with the excerpt quoted by Wulf above. Very average in the horizontal, but great performance in the vertical. 

 

If I were to speculate about the dev's design of the 190, I'm guessing they modeled the plane for this excact type of role, which is supported by historical documentation. They probably also were motivated to have the 190 not feel like you were just flying a reskinned 109, which is also understandable. I still prefer flying the 109, but it's early days for me and the 190. At worst the 190 will be a great change of pace for when I get tired of flying the 109. 

[Dr_Molenbeek]

This topic is about tips to be more succesfull with the 190 NOT ABOUT FM.

 

Unfortunately, tips and FM are often linked.

 

For example, in the case of our BoS Fw 190A-3, if i say "don't use vertical maneuvers above 1000m in winter unless you have a good energy advantage !", you will say me "why in winter ?", and i'll answer you with 2 charts:

 

 

 

 

This link cannot be denied...