Whats your opinion on the new FW FM?

[Willy__]

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 

 

 

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.

 

 

As Murf commentated, the 190 should be better on knife/scissors fight, since it had an oustanding roll rate. Not so much ingame where all planes roll way too fast. Actually, you could do scissors fighting with a few patchs ago, but after the "polar" FM revision, if you try to scissors with the in game 190 you will only end up dead.

[JG13_opcode]

By "knife fight" I meant "stall fight" which the 109 typically excels at.  I wouldn't try to beat a 190 in the flat scissors; I usually try to get them in the vertical.

[Art]

No fix .. ok guys.. this game is lost ..

[LukeFF]

No fix .. ok guys.. this game is lost ..

 

Oh, the drama...

[Art]

Oh, the drama...

Stick to the topic stop trolling

[Turban]

Saying that "the game is lost" , is trolling. 

[LukeFF]

Saying that "the game is lost" , is trolling.

Exactly

[RAY-EU]

They told to improve the FW 190 A3 ?

 

I think now the Performance of the Fw 190 A3 is Worse .

[Willy__]

 

 

I think now the Performance of the Fw 190 A3 is Worse .

 

The rate of climb is certanly better compared to what it was. But everything else is either equal or worse, IMHO. 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

The only thing that really went backwards is the accelerated stall characteristics went from sudden to instantaneous. There is virtually no buffet or pre-stall behavior anymore. It was much better before. If they could keep the climb performance and revert to the previous stall characteristics I think we'd have a generally acceptable representation of the AC. Of course we'd still need to find something to argue about

[Guest deleted@50488]

I believe the absence of no pre-stall buffet is plausible for the Fw-190.

 

Even the 109s are described, at least by Klaus Plaza, as having no pre-stall buffet.

[DD_Arthur]

The only thing that really went backwards is the accelerated stall characteristics went from sudden to instantaneous. There is virtually no buffet or pre-stall behavior anymore. It was much better before. If they could keep the climb performance and revert to the previous stall characteristics I think we'd have a generally acceptable representation of the AC. Of course we'd still need to find something to argue about

 

This.

[Original_Uwe]

Wait a minute they kicked the 190 in the jimmy again???!!!

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

No, there have been no changes since the last major overhaul.

[Original_Uwe]

Ah ok I had heard that it changed again in latest update

[Holtzauge]

Naw, kicking someone who is already down would be unsporting.......

[Lymark]

 So, after all these updates and stuff, is the 190 worth to buy and fly? I'm deciding whether buying it via steam sale or not....

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

You probably won't reccieve a clear answer on that question, but in my (objective) opinion it's worth giving it a try and draw your own picture of it. It's not more off historically than any of the other aircraft and still is a capable fighter/-bomber.

Edited July 4, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[JG13_opcode]

 So, after all these updates and stuff, is the 190 worth to buy and fly? I'm deciding whether buying it via steam sale or not....

 

It's only going to get better with time.  Might as well pick it up cheap.

 

I guarantee if you fly with discipline you'll find success in the Fw 190 online.  If you furball at low altitude you will not.

 

If you're just out for some decent WWII action, this game is worth it.  If you're looking for ground attack, I'd say this game is excellent.

 

If you're one of those guys who wants his favourite plane to be the best, buy something else.

Edited July 4, 2016 by 13GIAP_opcode

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

It's only going to get better with time. Might as well pick it up cheap.

 

I guarantee if you fly with discipline you'll find success in the Fw 190 online. If you furball at low altitude you will not.

 

If you're just out for some decent WWII action, this game is worth it. If you're looking for ground attack, I'd say this game is excellent.

 

If you're one of those guys who wants his favourite plane to be the best, buy something else.

Agree. Fly it within its envelope and you will have fun. Try to knife fight inside a phonebooth and you will be extremely frustrated. I suspect it will be looked at it again but probably later than sooner. She is a beast when handled well (and with a gentler touch). I have it and it is my exclusive ride when lone wolfing it and it is a blast. You can read my and all the others opinions before making an informed purchase. She has flaws and it is a challenge to get max performance out of the airframe but when you get the guns to bear it is very gratifying.

[CUJO_1970]

If you are patient enough to fly the way an actual human would fly an actual energy fighter then yes, the FW-190 will take good care of you. If you get out of line though, she will kill you. And without needing much help from the enemy.

 

My only death online so far this month was from a low-level stall trying to get a gun solution because I got careless and lazy and let my guard down.

 

Give her altitude and a good head of steam and she will be good to you.

[1Sascha]

Only bought the 190 recently, so I can't comment on the old FM.

 

However: The 190 in BoS feels a lot like other renditions of the plane in older sims. Meaning: Pull any sort of Gs and she'll want to do an accelerated stall on you. I do fly with very little stick input when needed and I think I know how to avoid accelerated stalls, but with this plane, the threshold seems way too low.

 

 

 

Dogfighting with the A3 is almost impossible now, you stall stall stall and then you stall.

 

^ This!

 

She also seems to lack the excellent high speed instantaneous turn-rate she supposedly had (due to excellent elevator authority). In other sims you can use this to briefly gain deflection on an enemy plane. Pull hard very briefly to pull your nose in front of the enemy plane, fire, then immediately relax the stick to avoid turning your instantaneous turn into a sustained one where the 190 will bleed off E like a stuck pig. 

 

I can only quote anecdotal evidence here, but:

 

I just re-read the British evaluation of the 190 A-3 that is included in Alfred Price's excellent "FW 190 in Combat" (https://www.amazon.com/Focke-Wulf-FW-190-Combat/dp/075245207X) and I couldn't find any mention of that pretty vicious tendency to drop the left wing under any sort of load. The report repeatedly calls the 190 "pleasant to fly" and compares it very favorably to all the planes they tested it against (Spit V/IX, P-38F, P-51A, etc). They call it "more maneuverable" than all the planes they tested it against (except in turning circles of course). And this was an evaluation during war-time, looking for ways to beat the 190. I'm pretty sure the Brits would've discovered this tendency to snap and mentioned it in the (rather extensive) report. Plus the test was conducted with a 190 whose engine was running rough due to them using the wrong spark-plugs (which had fouled up).

 

Re. Climb rate (and I haven't measured it in game):

 

 

 

The rate of climb up to 18,000 ft (5,488m) under maximum continuous climbing conditions at 1.35 atmospheres boost, 2,450 rpm, 165 mph is between 3,000 and 3,250 ft/min (15.24 to 16.51 m/sec). The initial rate of climb when pulling up from level flight at fast cruising speed is high and the angle steep, and from a dive is phenomenal

And again: This was a test conducted by the Brits and with a "rough running" engine (their words).

 

Plus there's this anecdote from Julius Meimberg's "Feindberührung"

 

http://neunundzwanzigsechs.de/main.php?page=11

 

in which he describes his disagreement with squad-mate Egon Mayer (102 kills) about which plane was best in a dogfight, the 109 G-1 or the FW 190 (page 219 in the German edition of the book). So they went up for a mock-dogfight and tried to "shoot each other down" until they were both exhausted - but had to declare it more or less a draw when they returned. And that was a G-1 that was stripped of armor plates and other heavy equipment and thus a lot lighter than the G-2 in BoS.

 

*shrug*

 

These discussions are probably as old as the simulation-genre and will probably continue on for as long as there are simulations. In the end, it's up to the developers to check the planes' performances against historical records, so I'm not "demanding" or "judging" anything here. Just reporting my first impressions of the FW 190, BoS-style..

 

 

 

S.

Edited July 5, 2016 by 1Sascha

[Dakpilot]

The vicious stall is also mentioned in some British tests, and often in German Pilot accounts, there are many examples of using it as a last ditch 'unfollowable' escape tactic, when in trouble

 

As you say these discussions have been going on for years   which is great when they remain civil

 

You mention the very effective elevator, and this is where I feel the issue is in BoS, because it is so effective you are easily (on a gaming Joystick) able to pull too much G, to the point where even with finesse it can be hard to avoid accelerated stall, and is 

 

too sensitive, some judicious sensitivity adjustment will help to a degree, but what is really needed is independent aircraft settings, with only overall settings available the other aircraft may seem too sluggish.

 

With a full size joystick I believe control issues would be much less of an issue and riding the 'stall' would become easy..of course this does not help us with a 7 inch desktop joystick   and the light and harmonious controls can become a detriment rather than a blessing

 

With the much less effective control surfaces on Russian aircraft you are able to easily use quick max deflection inputs without ever being able to pull heavy enough G to induce stalls, which ingame turns into an advantage

 

Of course these are only my personal opinions (re control inputs)

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

I doubt the elevator is modeled too effective because you actually need plenty of it during landing (hence why some "sensetivity" advices are contra productive for newcomers). The thing is that both the 109 and 190 (the later to a less extent) will change their nose angle quickly after pulling even just a bit whereas russian aircraft like the Yak or Lagg behave more calm and steady. As result your AoA will increase way faster and exceed the critical limits.

 

You can actually pull and push the 109 while flying in a straight line threw the air inducing a yerky swing motion. That's probably why some people get the feeling of "wobbliness" when flying said aircraft.

 

Possible reasons? Well there are plenty, wrong placed CoG, wrong mass distribution, wrong aircraft inertia ect. Prove? Not possible without sufisticated development tools whic we dont posess.

 

Also I tested the 190's critical AoA some time ago and although inaccuracies were not excludeable ended up with about 1.5° less than what the devs have stated (15.5°).

Edited July 5, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[Dakpilot]

I don't believe the elevator is too effective either, just that ingame you are able to able to move it much more quickly than would seem comfortable in IRL

 

As for wrongly placed G oF G etc. that is something which would be nice to check

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[SvAF/F16_Goblin]

I agree with Dak on this one, much of the problems I believe can be related to the fact that we can pull the control surfaces without resistance.

This mean it will be to fast input and to much input. In real life with speed full deflection would most likely not be possible due to drag and wind forces.

Especially since the controls are not hydraulically or electrically operated but manually by wires.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

...in which case the force modeling would be faulty. Anyway, as the discussion includes small inputs, stick forces are neglible.

[CUJO_1970]

Yes, pilot accounts mention the stall, but they also mention it was quick to recover - so much so that it could actually be used as a defensive maneuver.

 

Post-stall characteristics in this sim are nothing like what is recalled in real life.

[SvAF/F16_Goblin]

Well, I find it much easier to control with this set up even though pulling to fast or to much the snap stall is a fact.

[1Sascha]

So, after all these updates and stuff, is the 190 worth to buy and fly? I'm deciding whether buying it via steam sale or not....

 

 

Just buy it... four 20mm cannon.... :D Oh wait.. you'll have to "unlock" the 20mm FF-cannon first.. never-mind..

 

OTOH, the campaign was nice enough to throw two "intercept attack planes"-missions my way, both featuring large flights of IL-2s (5 or 6 each, IIRC). Shot down ten of them in two of those missions and I can finally fly the 190 in its intended configuration. IIRC, the deletion of the outer cannon should've been the "unlock", as the FFs were standard issue on the plane in its "fighter"-configuration.

 

Oh well...

 

Just make sure to download the skin-pack. For some reason, they didn't include my favorite 190-skin in the game itself, which is the black eagle-head, as flown by Horst Hannig of JG2 for example.

 

 

 

 

S.

Edited July 6, 2016 by 1Sascha

[LukeFF]

IIRC, the deletion of the outer cannon should've been the "unlock", as the FFs were standard issue on the plane in its "fighter"-configuration

The outer cannons were optional equipment on the A-3.

IIRC, the deletion of the outer cannon should've been the "unlock", as the FFs were standard issue on the plane in its "fighter"-configuration

The outer cannons were optional equipment on the A-3.

[1Sascha]

The outer cannons were optional equipment on the A-3.

 

The outer cannons were optional equipment on the A-3.

Source?

 

All the info I can find in "FW 190 in Combat" and Squadron Signal's "190 in Action" speaks of 151/20 plus FF/M as standard wing-armament. "FW 190 in Action" even states that this had been the standard already on the A-2.

 

I know there were 190s flying without the added cannon. Like later ground attack versions or early Jabos (to reduce weight, I suppose) and that fighters were configured in this way as well to improve speed/handling, but in my understanding the standard "out of the box"-configuration was 4 cannon and the *option* was to delete the outer ones. So I'd be curious to see some sort of evidence to prove that wrong.

[JtD]

It's a Rüstsatz, it's optional standard, not standard standard.

[CUJO_1970]

Some JG/26 pilot in Donald Caldwell's book Top Guns of the Luftwaffe mention being surprised that a particular FW he was assigned had no outer cannons installed. One of the more experienced pilots told him "you don't need them".

 

Not sure if the outboard cannons were removed by pilot request or if some new (early) 190s came from the factory without them installed.

[1Sascha]

Some JG/26 pilot in Donald Caldwell's book Top Guns of the Luftwaffe mention being surprised that a particular FW he was assigned had no outer cannons installed. One of the more experienced pilots told him "you don't need them".

 

Not sure if the outboard cannons were removed by pilot request or if some new (early) 190s came from the factory without them installed.

I just checked this excellent LW-reference-page:

 

www.deutscheluftwaffe.de

 

which has a ton of original documents and manuals on it in pdf-form.

 

Found the instruction manual for the A-2's weapons-systems:

 

http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/f/FockeWulf/Fw%20190/Fw%20190%20A-2%20bedien.%20Waffen.pdf

 

and it does indeed call the FF/Ms a "Rüstsatz"

 

Dang.. can't copy and paste from the pdf for some reason, but it's on page 10, where the manual lists all the guns and equipment installed (under "1. Allgemeines"). Last point in that section translates as:

 

"If Rüstsatz FF/M is installed, the following equipment will be installed (along with it):

 

MG-FF/M

etc."

 

Hmmmmmmm....

 

 

Sadly, they don't have a manual for the A-3 on that page ...

 

However: There were some Rüstsätze that would've been routinely installed at the factory - not just in the field. So I'm not sure how much the manual calling it a Rüstsatz actually means. I don't believe that the FFs were in the same "league" as the R6-Rüstsatz on the 109s (20mm gunpods). Especially since those things had a much bigger impact on handling and performance.

 

 

*shrug*

 

 

S.

Edited July 7, 2016 by 1Sascha

[JtD]

The A-2 to A-5 have the same armament. In the A-1 the MG FF were hard-wired, A-6 and later had the outboard MG151 also hard-wired.

 

You won't find out what 'standard' was from Fw190 manuals. Like I said, it was optional standard. You could buy the Fw190 with or without the gun installed. If it was installed, you could still remove it in the field when not wanted, and if it wasn't installed, you could still buy the Rüstsatz separately and install it in the field when wanted.

You would need to check Luftwaffe records about at what time in which place the guns were installed how frequently. But since the Fw190 was neither present around Moscow nor at Stalingrad, it's an entirely theoretical debate. The designers made their decision, and it really is just a gaming decision. Not a historical simulation decision.

[ZZ15_dasSofa]

Comparing this sim to other sims in order to answer the question whether this one models planes with over 1000hp, 3tons weight and top speeds more than triple that of small motorplanes right, is about as unscientific as it gets....

 

And yes, I have flown 4 seater Cessnas and smaller stuff, too.

 

If you didnt get a feeling from your real flying you should check your "buttsensor".

You can`t compare 1:1 as a pilot thats should be clear. But you can do at a speed of 230km/h with a ME 109 E-7 a hard and fast push on the stick to lef or right side with nose down plus yaw and look how the Plane are behaive, it should be cleare what i am talking about - if not your out.

We talk also about a combat"simulation" so we compare it with others like il21946, CloD, DCS and not with MSFS what should also be clear. And in exactly this compairsion, this Game is on the same level as IL2 1946 which is over 12 years old and that is my mind.

[CUJO_1970]

Seeing some strange comparisons at 12,000-18,000 ft altitudes while flying FW-190 against Russian birds online.

 

Has anyone tested them for speed and climb at these altitudes? The Yak and La-5s that I've been fighting seem in dogfights to have good speed and climb up there and I've been surprised at what they can do. Although it seems they are slower, you have to manage your energy like an expert.

 

In reviewing tracks I'm seeing some "stair-step" climbing and really high AoA full-power steep climbs at relatively low speeds. They really don't seem to lose much power at these altitudes but I have not tested them personally.

[JG13_opcode]

On mobile currently so can't check but IIRC that's pretty close to their full-throttle height so their performance is just about at maximum there.

 

However there's the reported but unconfirmed issue regarding flaps and lift coefficients.

[Crump]

It is very cut and dry as to which FW-190's could have the outboard cannon removed.  The authorized configurations are listed in each variants ladeplan.  Deviations from that published ladeplan are the responsibility and privy of the manufacturer only.  

 

That is how airplanes work and Germany, like all the other signatories, complied with the international conventions in place.  BTW, Aviation convention is simply good common sense when it comes to aircraft as almost all the rules have been written in blood.  It is much more than just a piece of paper.  It is a way to gain valuable experience in aviation without loss of life.

 

Only thru Focke Wulf GmbH authority could the outboard weapons be removed.

 

The ladeplan gives that authority in some of the ladeplans for the MG-FF equipped FW-190A's up until the FW-190A5.  The FW-190A5 could only have the MG-FF's removed if it mounted the GM-1 system.