Whats your opinion on the new FW FM?

[Dakpilot]

Lagg series naming is not as simple as one would assume, it is not possible to say a 66 series had 66 modifications from a series 1..

 

the naming was more from factory batches , some factories producing different series at the same time frame and some same series names has different specs, depending in which factory it was produced, while factories were being re-located things were very confused, right up to La-5 production changeover

 

It would be simpler to just consider the in game model to be a late 42 production model, which was quite different to the early ones which gave the initial poor reputation

 

Wikipedia is not a very good source on Lagg 3 history

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[CUJO_1970]

Yes, an overloaded Walmart pushcart that can pull off every maneuver I wrote with the essence of simplicity, like an overpowered biplane.

 

And respectfully, no LaGG was better or even as good than contemporary Yak during the war and this gulf widened as time went on. Yak became one of the best fighters of the war - LaGG was essentially phased out.

 

Nobody said LaGG was a piece of Junk, but it's own pilots and air force had a lot of problems with it and they are very well-documented. Sorry about that. Not intended to offend anyone.

[LukeFF]

LaGG was essentially phased out

 

...in the second half of 1944. If it was that bad of a plane, it would have been phased out long before that. 

Edited June 21, 2016 by LukeFF

[MiloMorai]

LaGG became the La.

[novicebutdeadly]

...in the second half of 1944. If it was that bad of a plane, it would have been phased out long before that. 

From the small amount of reading that I have done in regards to the LAGG:

 

After the LA was ordered into production all but 1 or 2 factories switched to LA production, the LAGG was popular as a ground attack aircraft due to it's ability to absorb damage and return to base (more than the Yak could) and it's use of non-strategic materials.

 

Once there was no longer a shortage of these materials the production lines were closed.

Edited June 21, 2016 by novicebutdeadly

[tailwheel]

some interesting interviews. Seems the 190 wasn't totally helpless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74nsR6zjXPY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOHmjpQsb9I

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Yes, an overloaded Walmart pushcart that can pull off every maneuver I wrote with the essence of simplicity, like an overpowered biplane.

 

And respectfully, no LaGG was better or even as good than contemporary Yak during the war and this gulf widened as time went on. Yak became one of the best fighters of the war - LaGG was essentially phased out.

 

Nobody said LaGG was a piece of Junk, but it's own pilots and air force had a lot of problems with it and they are very well-documented. Sorry about that. Not intended to offend anyone.

 

I can do those manoeuvres in a Pe-2, I don't see the problem.

 

The LaGG-3's main problem - as pilots will attest - is that it was not a beginner-friendly aircraft. You needed a good pilot to get the best out of it since energy management was prime, whereas in the lighter Yak-1 with the same engine you could regain lost speed and altitude easier. The deal here is that an experienced pilot would not make the mistakes that needed forgiving, while the Yak-1 could forgive beginners for sloppy handling. Grigor'yev and Gal'chenko for example scored 17 and 12 victories flying LaGG-3s of 1941 production. The last LaGG-3 series was toe-to-toe with contemporary fighters, and was only phased out when the La-7 entered production, and this was an aerodynamic revision of a re-engined LaGG-3.

 

...but anyhow, the Focke-Wulf 190.

[JtD]

The LaGG was a not beginner friendly aircraft because it was tricky to fly. Not because it was heavy. That just made it a poor performer. The leading edge slats were introduced to mitigate the extremely poor control characteristics (by mid war Soviet standards, when they didn't have a lot of extremely well trained pilots).

 

Still, when comparing the Fw190 and the LaGG-3 in game, there's either no free lunch in physics or BoS has it right.

[Crump]

 

 

tricky to fly.

 

Tricky huh? 

[CUJO_1970]

Again, let me say - I'm not saying LaGG was a bad design - it was a good airframe that eventually became La-5, 7.

 

You guys are missing the point completely.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

The heavy weight definetly made it handle as tricky as it did. The wing loading became higher than what the design was initially planed to have and as result manouvrebility and stick forces became worse.

 

Thee design itself surely was functional and well, but conditions and materials meant it'd never reach the performence it aimed for.

Edited June 21, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[Willy__]

Guys this is a thread about the 190 and not about the lagg

[Holtzauge]

Funny thing is when you fly the BoS Fw-190 against AI, the LaGG (Not Yak or La-5) is the toughest to beat: Try setting up a head on engagement from 10 km separation 1 km altitude with a Fw-190 with LaGG AI set to veteran: Then avoid getting hit in the merge, do an Immelmann and turn back over the LaGG and start zig-zagging or circle around at 1.2 ata at 300-320 Km/h. Usually I have built up a good deal of speed before the merge so I end up substantially higher than the LaGG. This is when the funny part starts: What does the LaGG do? Well first it goes vertical, hangs on the prop and God help you if you are above within shooting range. Anyway, let’s assume we are not dumb enough to be there and survive. Now what the LaGG does is start following you in a low speed nose high attitude and when the speed gets low enough, out come the flaps! So now you are being chased by a LaGG with the flaps out!

 

If you now start circling gently or zig-zagging with a low bank angle around the AI the LaGG will continue to chase you (still with flaps out!) and actually gain! As an experiment I tried gently circling at a low bank angle (1.2 ata 300-320 Km/h) around the LaGG AI and the LaGG kept the nose pointing in my direction, turning inside me, still with flaps out and after a number of turns succeeded in climbing up to my altitude, still inside my turn with the flaps out and shot me down.

 

And before the FM police busts me for not flying the Fw-190 in the correct way: This was an EXPERIMENT and the object was to show how one aircraft with FLAPS OUT can catch another flying in CLEAN condition at a speed close to that for best climb. Now if you believe this is correct from a FM perspective then there is not much I can do to help you but for me it’s a clear indication that the FM is off and as Marcellus put it: “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark”…..

[MiloMorai]

Funny thing is when you fly the BoS Fw-190 against AI, the LaGG (Not Yak or La-5) is the toughest to beat: Try setting up a head on engagement from 10 km separation 1 km altitude with a Fw-190 with LaGG AI set to veteran: Then avoid getting hit in the merge, do an Immelmann and turn back over the LaGG and start zig-zagging or circle around at 1.2 ata at 300-320 Km/h. Usually I have built up a good deal of speed before the merge so I end up substantially higher than the LaGG. This is when the funny part starts: What does the LaGG do? Well first it goes vertical, hangs on the prop and God help you if you are above within shooting range. Anyway, let’s assume we are not dumb enough to be there and survive. Now what the LaGG does is start following you in a low speed nose high attitude and when the speed gets low enough, out come the flaps! So now you are being chased by a LaGG with the flaps out!

 

If you now start circling gently or zig-zagging with a low bank angle around the AI the LaGG will continue to chase you (still with flaps out!) and actually gain! As an experiment I tried gently circling at a low bank angle (1.2 ata 300-320 Km/h) around the LaGG AI and the LaGG kept the nose pointing in my direction, turning inside me, still with flaps out and after a number of turns succeeded in climbing up to my altitude, still inside my turn with the flaps out and shot me down.

 

And before the FM police busts me for not flying the Fw-190 in the correct way: This was an EXPERIMENT and the object was to show how one aircraft with FLAPS OUT can catch another flying in CLEAN condition at a speed close to that for best climb. Now if you believe this is correct from a FM perspective then there is not much I can do to help you but for me it’s a clear indication that the FM is off and as Marcellus put it: “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark”…..

 

Are you trying to score personal points on the internet?

[Bert_Foster]

And before the FM police busts me for not flying the Fw-190 in the correct way: This was an EXPERIMENT and the object was to show how one aircraft with FLAPS OUT can catch another flying in CLEAN condition at a speed close to that for best climb. Now if you believe this is correct from a FM perspective then there is not much I can do to help you but for me it’s a clear indication that the FM is off and as Marcellus put it: “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark”…..

 

I agree with your argument that Flaps should decrease climb performance. For the record just did a test with Lagg3 50% fuel, Water and Oil Rads Full open. Climb at 250Kmh IAS max Boost/RPM at 250Kmh. Timed the climb portion from 1000 to 2000m. Established climb power config speed at at 500m started the clock passing 1000m.

 

Clean took 1:07 (Avg ROC 14.8msec)

3 secs worth of Flap extension (looked about 15 degrees) Climb time took 1:17 (Avg ROC 12.9msec)

6 secs worth of flap extension (looked about 30 degrees) Climb time took 1:53 (Avg ROC 8.8msec)

 

To me Climb perf deteriorates with increasing flap extension.

Edited June 21, 2016 by Bert_Foster

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

A technical side note, there is a bug that happens occasionally when the 3D model shown to the player does not reflect the reality of aircraft around them.

 

Case in point, once in a Yak-1 I met a Fw-190 flying with gear down and flaps out. It ran away from me with ease, and when I turned home it came back fast as a rocket and shot me down. Afterwards the pilot of that 190 told me he not once had his gear out after take-off.

 

I've seen this happen with flaps and bombs as well.

[Art]

Where is fix for 190?!!!!

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

While I agree the Fw needs a tweak, there is not one promised ATM. I would not expect it to be a priority in the short term but probably a little later. She is serviceable as is if you are willing to learn her quirks. Plenty of info out there to be successful if you put in the time. I do hope for another review of the FM's at some point.

Edited June 24, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[KoN_]

When i see a Flat spinning aircraft in front of me that`s in a dogfight `, i know for sure its a 190 . I hope with the new patch this FM gets the love it should have . I hardly see any 190 now ,

Edited June 28, 2016 by II./JG77_Con

[Shatter12]

Because I'm a noob, don't have the game yet and the FW 190s are one of my favourite aircraft of WW2, what are they underperforming in? I've managed to work out that they are underperforming in Rate of Climb (not sure how much though), and have a too high of a stall speed, impacting manoeuvrability. Is there anything else it's underperforming in, or anything that I've got wrong here? Thanks in advance.

[JtD]

It's mostly stall speed and handling. Climb and speed are roughly right, even though not generously modelled. The problem here is that at high altitude some Soviet aircraft overperform in the 50-100 km/h range, taking away the advantage a Fw190 did historically have.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Acceleration has been brought up to standards, and in terms of performance it's where it should be.

 

As it is now it has some unforgiving stall characteristics which come without warning, but the exact cause of this is yet to be surely determined.

 

For a player, it means it's not an aircraft you want to take up on a 1 x 1 co-alt fire-after-merge duel (similar to the La-5 in that respect) but that doesn't say much about combat performance. If you fly it in open world combat situations it works very well, and you'll still be toasting people in a single burst.

 

On the server with most coordinated flying (DED) you find lots of strike groups with Ju-88/Bf-110 attackers covered by two Bf-109s and two Fw-190. Those are a hornet's nest to get close to, and are ran with extremely good results by the Russian-speaking squadrons. I got a Fw-190 flying alone there which tried to disengage in a straight line 200m away from me. In other words, if you fly it properly (in pairs or more) and don't do stupid stuff like levelling out at guns range, it is a beast. If you try to play I-16 with it, it will become a landscape feature

[Shatter12]

It's mostly stall speed and handling. Climb and speed are roughly right, even though not generously modelled. The problem here is that at high altitude some Soviet aircraft overperform in the 50-100 km/h range, taking away the advantage a Fw190 did historically have.

Ah, so did the FW 190 A-3 get fixed in around April in terms of RoC? I must have been reading the earlier parts of threads. What high altitudes are we talking about? AFAIK most combat in the eastern front was between 0m-4km, sometimes 5kms if your were lucky. Not sure though. I believe the RoC is underperforming by ~2-4m/s, although I'm not entirely sure that this is correct. Is it historical that the FW 190 is slower then the Russian aircraft? I get above 4km (where they had to change their supercharger gear, I think?) they gradually performed worse and worse, but I'm not entirely sure that the FW 190 suffered that much with the BMW 801.

[Irgendjemand]

So funny to read all this ... . Just fly it. And then stash it. Because its better and you will have much more fun NOT flying it.

Just my prediction.

Edited June 28, 2016 by Irgendjemand

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

The 190s climb ratewas fixed for altitudes below switch altutude (~2500m). Performence abive has not been mentioned as far as I remember.

 

Also it's noteworthy that these changes came threw appling different wing data from a wind tunnel test. That increased climbrate but also decreased acceleration and made it less stable when manouvreing (stalls out earlier into violent spins).

[JtD]

Ah, so did the FW 190 A-3 get fixed in around April in terms of RoC? I must have been reading the earlier parts of threads. What high altitudes are we talking about? AFAIK most combat in the eastern front was between 0m-4km, sometimes 5kms if your were lucky. Not sure though. I believe the RoC is underperforming by ~2-4m/s, although I'm not entirely sure that this is correct. Is it historical that the FW 190 is slower then the Russian aircraft? I get above 4km (where they had to change their supercharger gear, I think?) they gradually performed worse and worse, but I'm not entirely sure that the FW 190 suffered that much with the BMW 801.

Could have been around April with the climb rate change, I'm too lazy to confirm by checking, but sound about right. High altitude would be above full throttle altitude of the Soviet aircraft, 4km+. Both in game and historically the Fw190 and the Soviet aircraft achieved about the same speed below ~4km altitude, details depending on the exact altitudes and individual machines performance (comparing Kampfleistung with full throttle performance). Above 4km M-105PF powered aircraft like the Yak and the LaGG are already past the best altitude for even the 2nd supercharger gear (full throttle altitude) and are losing power, whereas the BMW801 can maintain full power up to about 5.5-6km. Which is why the Fw190 should be very much superior up high, while in game it is marginally superior at best. The reason for that is as I said, the Soviet aircraft are not losing the speed they should be losing when going above full throttle altitude.

[Shatter12]

Could have been around April with the climb rate change, I'm too lazy to confirm by checking, but sound about right. High altitude would be above full throttle altitude of the Soviet aircraft, 4km+. Both in game and historically the Fw190 and the Soviet aircraft achieved about the same speed below ~4km altitude, details depending on the exact altitudes and individual machines performance (comparing Kampfleistung with full throttle performance). Above 4km M-105PF powered aircraft like the Yak and the LaGG are already past the best altitude for even the 2nd supercharger gear (full throttle altitude) and are losing power, whereas the BMW801 can maintain full power up to about 5.5-6km. Which is why the Fw190 should be very much superior up high, while in game it is marginally superior at best. The reason for that is as I said, the Soviet aircraft are not losing the speed they should be losing when going above full throttle altitude.

So it's either a case of the BMW 801 underperforming, the FW 190 A-3 underperforming or the M-105PF over performing. I'm guessing at 5-6km was where the BMW 801 produced the most HP on the supercharger gear.

[CUJO_1970]

3500 meters and above is where a FW 190 should live online.

[KoN_]

Been caught out many times in my shallow dive away from pursuing enemy below 2000m La-5 will catch you , even a LaGG ,

Online best to engage and disengage out of sight out of mind , you cant run when down low not unless you have great distance .

i`ve tried it many many times ,  best fly with some one and work in pairs as said above .

 

 

All us 190 fans are waiting for an upgrade .

Edited June 29, 2016 by II./JG77_Con

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Been caught out many times in my shallow dive away from pursuing enemy below 2000m La-5 will catch you , even a LaGG ,

Online best to engage and disengage out of sight out of mind , you cant run when down low not unless you have great distance .

i`ve tried it many many times

Completely don't agree. Even when the enemy has a slight E advantage you can get him to burn it off and then extend. If you are getting caught it is because the enemy has a significant E advantage but that would be true of any aircraft in that situation.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I usually catch Fw-190s when the pilot thinks he's good to go despite the energy states in question and enters that shallow dive on a straight line. All the way to 400m away you're a sitting duck in that situation.

[JG13_opcode]

I usually catch Fw-190s when the pilot thinks he's good to go despite the energy states in question and enters that shallow dive on a straight line. All the way to 400m away you're a sitting duck in that situation.

 

Pretty much this.

 

It was fast historically, but not so fast that it can disengage from any fight with impunity.  Slowly pulling away from the Yak with nose-mounted ShVAK at your dead 6?  Well... good luck 

 

Best to secure a positional advantage first, such as disengaging after a head-on.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Pretty much this.

 

It was fast historically, but not so fast that it can disengage from any fight with impunity.  Slowly pulling away from the Yak with nose-mounted ShVAK at your dead 6?  Well... good luck 

 

Best to secure a positional advantage first, such as disengaging after a head-on.

Always blow through a head on and seek a better position after extending. I'd do this even in an Friedrich. I'll never understand pilots who actually seek out a 50/50 encounter?! Even if you are the better pilot in the better plane, a simple lucky shot takes the K.

[JG13_opcode]

Always blow through a head on and seek a better position after extending. I'd do this even in an Friedrich. I'll never understand pilots who actually seek out a 50/50 encounter?! Even if you are the better pilot in the better plane, a simple lucky shot takes the K.

 

Yep, back in the il2fb days when I was pretty exclusively a 109 guy I would always blow through a forward-quarter merge, usually go nose-to-tail after to give myself time to think lol.

[Willy__]

It was fast historically, but not so fast that it can disengage from any fight with impunity.  Slowly pulling away from the Yak with nose-mounted ShVAK at your dead 6?  Well... good luck 

 

Honestly, I dont fear the Yaks. I fear more those Lagg's with the bs 23mm that can shoot and hit in a very accurate and reliable way from almost 1km away, taking only a single shell to kill/set a fire/blow up or dewing any plane.

Edited June 30, 2016 by Herr_Istruba

[JG13_opcode]

Honestly, I dont fear the Yaks. I fear more those Lagg's with the bs 23mm that can shoot and hit in a very accurate and reliable way from almost 1km away, taking only a single shell to kill/set a fire/blow up or dewing any plane.

 

I don't fly the LaGG so I can't really comment.  But that's an interesting point of view because to be honest when flying the Yak, every time I see a Fw 190 I feel relaxed and confident if he's co-E, whereas if I spot a 109 I know I'm in for a rough fight ahead even if I've got a little bit of E on him.  The Yak and the 190 are definitely dissimilar, whereas in a lot of areas I'd say the Messer and the Yak are within 10% a lot of the time, so if you make a mistake in the Yak you're toast.

 

The 190s just don't do as well in the knife fights as the 109, and that definitely jives with my experience flying Axis in il2FB, at least for the Anton.

 

The 23mm sounds like the Mk-108 to be honest.  Some of these guys have been flying for years and lob those shells around like snipers.  There was that awesome video by Gutted where he does the "one shell" kill right at the end, timed to music 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Whether the Fw was better at knife fighting IRL I don't know and will let others argue - but if you try that in game the opposition will eat your lunch and take your milk money too. Use the Fw as an interceptor, hit hard and fast, extend, repeat. At least as far as the in game Fw is concerned.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Honestly, I dont fear the Yaks. I fear more those Lagg's with the bs 23mm that can shoot and hit in a very accurate and reliable way from almost 1km away, taking only a single shell to kill/set a fire/blow up or dewing any plane.

As long as he cant point at you its not a problem, powerful armament is only powerful when it can be used. 

And speaking of VYa-23 it was a weapon designed for ground attack and developed with an idea to be fitted into both Il-2 and LaGG-3, it was an upscaled Berezin machine gun and it shared its characteristics in many ways (with good performance, but poor reliability and short lifetime due to excessive recoil leading to jams and breaking of the parts, but since none of this is present in Il-2 series, you wont feel it). Overall it is a 200 gm projectile flying at 900+ m/s, so not sure what are you expecting in terms of ballistics. 

[Brano]

Its probably the same expectation like the guy who crossed my way this morning,driving in Volvo SUV from side road without giving a shait Im on the main road (brake to the floor and my face on windshield).Him thinking that driving Volvo makes him immortal   

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

But that's an interesting point of view because to be honest when flying the Yak, every time I see a Fw 190 I feel relaxed and confident if he's co-E, whereas if I spot a 109 I know I'm in for a rough fight ahead even if I've got a little bit of E on him.  The Yak and the 190 are definitely dissimilar, whereas in a lot of areas I'd say the Messer and the Yak are within 10% a lot of the time, so if you make a mistake in the Yak you're toast.

 

This has been my experience since always as well. In both SP and MP on the old Il-2 I would rejoice if a contact turned out to be an Fw-190 instead of a Bf-109. With the former winning is a matter of making sure the guns aren't pointed at you and slowly getting some altitude on it, while with the Bf-109 if the fight deteriorates there's always the chance that after a merge the bastard will slam the throttle to the wall and go 600m above you in a matter of seconds. Then all your efforts have been wasted and that long boring process of draining the enemy's energy starts again.