190 vs yak1

[Holtzauge]

For those of you who think the current Fw-190A3 FM is an improvement to the one we had before, why don't you try the DCS Fw-190D9 for comparison? The D9 has an even higher wing loading than the A3 but still does much better in momentaneous turns than our A3 which seems pretty strange.

 

To avoid breaking forum rules and yet explain why I think the D9 and A3 are comparable in this respect, here is a link to the background in the appropriate FM section for those who are interested:

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/page-7?do=findComment&comment=351502

Edited April 20, 2016 by Holtzauge

[Venturi]

I'm not saying it's perfect by any means. Sure it should be made right, if off.

 

But it's still one of the best birds. I get a kick out of people whining about it. I went 6-1 yesterday against Yaks in the duel server dogfight zone.

[Turban]

For those of you who think the current Fw-190A3 FM is an improvement to the one we had before, why don't you try the DCS Fw-190D9 for comparison? The D9 has an even higher wing loading than the A3 but still does much better in momentaneous turns than our A3 which seems pretty strange.

 

To avoid breaking forum rules and yet explain why I think the D9 and A3 are comparable in this respect, here is a link to the background in the appropriate FM section for those who are interested:

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21732-whats-your-opinion-new-fw-fm/page-7?do=findComment&comment=351502

 

 

Still blows my mind that when it come to the FW190 A3,  someone would take as reference a FW190 D9 from a different game.

 

Both planes were different. The games are different. It's stretching theories beyond the breaking point.

[Gump]

I'm not saying it's perfect by any means. Sure it should be made right, if off.

 

But it's still one of the best birds. I get a kick out of people whining about it. I went 6-1 yesterday against Yaks in the duel server dogfight zone.

got any videos?

[Lusekofte]

I know the spitfires had to evolve in a fast rate after encountering FW 190 , but still that is not my point. I cannot understand why people render it useless. 

Being able to escape/ dodge a attack means you can reenter the fight. I see absolutely no reason for frustration other than own mistakes. 

I have confident in Hairys competance in how it should perform . But looking in that perspective I do not think this sim is capable for full realism . 

We have no distraction in regard of engine management or navigation, the map is too small for getting lost. We only need to hold a hand on the joystick and the other in throttle. There is no low quality fuel, no nothing. If you have a way out your free to re engage 

[Holtzauge]

Still blows my mind that when it come to the FW190 A3,  someone would take as reference a FW190 D9 from a different game.

 

Both planes were different. The games are different. It's stretching theories beyond the breaking point.

I'm sure it does. You know I listen to most people in this forum but I have been monitoring your posts for a while now and you are one of the most biased people I have ever come across so when it comes to the Fw-190 your input counts for nada. BTW, don't be surprised if this is the last reply you will see from me since monitoring what you write is simply a waste of time......

[Irgendjemand]

I'm not saying it's perfect by any means. Sure it should be made right, if off.

 

But it's still one of the best birds. I get a kick out of people whining about it. I went 6-1 yesterday against Yaks in the duel server dogfight zone.

You must have been very lucky and only encountred day one noobs:)

Co E in a maneuverfight it doesnt even take a mediocre YAK pilot to down a good FW pilot.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Irgendjemand

[Turban]

I'm sure it does. You know I listen to most people in this forum but I have been monitoring your posts for a while now and you are one of the most biased people I have ever come across so when it comes to the Fw-190 your input counts for nada. BTW, don't be surprised if this is the last reply you will see from me since monitoring what you write is simply a waste of time......

 

lol, that's fine by me, after seeing your argument that a Me 109 K4 has a similar wing load that a A3 and so they should have comparable "momentaneous turning" characteristic, I lost faith too 

 

Co E in a maneuverfight it doesnt even take a very good FW  pilot to down a good YAK pilot.

 

Fixed it for you 

[Lusekofte]

You must have been very lucky and only encountred day one noobs:)

Co E in a maneuverfight it doesnt even take a mediocre YAK pilot to down a good FW pilot.

 

This statement is just wrong, of course you are toast if you fight a yak like a yak in a 190. I am sure you are way more experienced fighting in a FW than me , so I am not going to advice you on anything in it. But is not this getting a bit too polarized 

[Venturi]

got any videos?

 

I doubt it would hold your interest unless you are like me, who enjoys "strategic" flying, because it was mostly me outclimbing, outzooming, extending and coming back. Not dogfighting, because the Yak is better at turn and burn.

[Mac_Messer]

i think it would be cool if the german side parked their 109's and all piled into the 190's! head on over to the VVS side and test your skills. show the VVS how those great 190's can fight. c'mon, dont be shy, ditch the 109's, you dont need their help. mount up that worthy FW steed, steel up you confidence, grit your teeth and aim for those red stars...

I personally find it hilarious how people mainly flying VVS, of whom many don`t have the BoS FW190 DLC at all, always claim that it is not only superior to the Yak but also to the 109. Naturally, when it comes down to providing proof of FW190 success, the same people vanish as if like no discussion was in place. So all in theory for them and it stays like that.

[Gump]

You must have been very lucky and only encountred day one noobs:)

Co E in a maneuverfight it doesnt even take a mediocre YAK pilot to down a good FW pilot.

..

without hesitation or exaggeration i would agree with this. it is no joke. i might even extend that to say an La5 would be a little more difficult, but still easy enough. i might add that previous revisions would still give the victory to the yak, but the La5 was in grave danger previously.

.

[Mac_Messer]

I'm not saying it's perfect by any means. Sure it should be made right, if off.

 

But it's still one of the best birds. I get a kick out of people whining about it. I went 6-1 yesterday against Yaks in the duel server dogfight zone.

You probably one of the 5 whole pilots doing so well in the FW190. Congrats for that.

[Mac_Messer]

The FW is off course competitive against the La5. What you say is just no true and purely sensationalist. As far as I can tell this month you killed 1 FW and got killed 3 times by them.

 

So clearly they are competitive. Sorry to bring the stats but you made it sound like you're a FW killer when obviously you aren't.

 

 

As to why the german side fly mostly the 109 ? Well, the 109 is easier to fly and has better performance esp. at low alt. .

 

Is that proof there is something wrong with the FW if most people fly the 109 ? No. 

 

Not only it is basically historically representative, but the 109 with high roll rate might be "stealing" even more pilots from the FW.

 

The BoS 109, be it F4 or G2, after the patch is superior to the FW190 as a whole. You can strip the 190 down to 2 cannons and 1/3 fuel it`ll still be inferior. Even with gunpods the 109 is still the better choice all around.

 

You can always say that FW190 is faster but that hardly tells the whole story of a fighter aircraft performance.

[Venturi]

I personally find it hilarious how people mainly flying VVS, of whom many don`t have the BoS FW190 DLC at all, always claim that it is not only superior to the Yak but also to the 109. 

 

 

Yes, there are many issues causing the truth of this statement, that the 109 in game is superior to the FW -

 

The major reason why is that the 109 in game is modeled without the subtle, very important, disadvantages it had. These don't translate onto graphs well, but are super important for how it can be flown.

 

Two of the major ones are ineffective ailerons at high speed, and ineffective elevator at high speed - with the inability to change trim in a fast dive to get out (unlike the uber-effective trim the 109 has right now).

 

These are superiorities that the FW190 does not have over the 109 right now in game, but should have............... if the 109 does not have these limitations, then sure, its a super plane compared to the 190. 

Oh yeah, the 190 should also have better initial roll rate than it does... should be the best of all planes in the sim right now.

[Gump]

I doubt it would hold your interest unless you are like me, who enjoys "strategic" flying, because it was mostly me outclimbing, outzooming, extending and coming back. Not dogfighting, because the Yak is better at turn and burn.

i have used the new one in the same manner, but i noticed a few things...

.

1) you need to be VERY careful about changing course/direction, even when split-s to dive in. i found this requires quite a bit of altitude advantage to enable a large turn arc and aim adjustment. and if the target makes an evasive maneuver out of the 190's flight path, it gets very dangerous to try and adjust accordingly. following through the attack dive too far below the target can get very dangerous as the victim may just dive and catch you in the climb and shoot you.

.

2) it's almost imperative that the attack is a surprise, so the target doesn't evade. again, that means a LOT of height advantage and time for the target to lose interest and/or tracking. it also requires a keen eye glued to the target, or the target being confined to avoid running off.

.

3) you need to maintain good height above all enemies. being the highest in the sky takes a lot of maintenance and can easily be used against you (with current version) by an enemy who perceives this is your #1 priority. you might be able to win the height war, but the enemy pilot may very well accomplish another goal besides you. in other words, the 190 pilot gets to look down and watch the enemy plane destroy his bombers.

 

do you think that's how they fought in the battle of britain IRL?

[SKG51_robtek]

Still not even 1 video of a yak vs 190 dogfight to analyse.

Words are useless as they are only voicing opinions, especially from people which dont even own the 190!

I'd like to see a encounter 1 vs 1, co alt. and no guns until the planes have passed each other for the first time.

There are so many 'experts' from both sides of the fence that a event like this doesn't seem impossible to happen.

[Turban]

There are many videos of the FW online from people who actually fly it and mastered it instead of complaining on the forums in hope to have it made easier to succeed with.

And those videos actually show how great and deadly the FW is. But some people dismiss that. They don't want to have to fly one way, even if it's historically accurate. They want their plane to do it all. And do it all without being demanding to fly at all on top of that.

[WokeUpDead]

Still not even 1 video of a yak vs 190 dogfight to analyse.

Words are useless as they are only voicing opinions, especially from people which dont even own the 190!

I'd like to see a encounter 1 vs 1, co alt. and no guns until the planes have passed each other for the first time.

There are so many 'experts' from both sides of the fence that a event like this doesn't seem impossible to happen.

 

What's the point? Of course the 190 will likely lose in this very specifically contrived scenario that plays to the Yak's strengths.  The great thing about the German planes is that more often than not they don't HAVE to accept the terms of a fight if they don't like it.  Their climb rate allows them to come to a fight with an advantage, their speed allows them to avoid the fight if they don't like how it looks, and the 190's toughness and firepower gives it better than 50/50 odds in that first head-on pass if wants it.  They weren't designed to win in a "fair" (co-alt, co-e, no fire on merge) fight, they were designed to get an "unfair" advantage before the fight.

 

There may or may not be legitimate gripes about the new stall characteristics of the 190, but losing duels to a Yak doesn't prove anything.

Edited April 21, 2016 by WokeUpDead

[Wulf]

What's the point? Of course the 190 will likely lose in this very specifically contrived scenario that plays to the Yak's strengths.  The great thing about the German planes is that more often than not they don't HAVE to accept the terms of a fight if they don't like it.  Their climb rate allows them to come to a fight with an advantage, their speed allows them to avoid the fight if they don't like how it looks, and the 190s toughness and firepower gives it better than 50/50 odds in that first head-on pass if wants it.  They weren't designed to win in a "fair" (co-alt, co-e, no fire on merge) fight, they were designed to get an "unfair" advantage before the fight.

 

There may or may not be legitimate gripes about the new stall characteristics of the 190, but losing duels to a Yak doesn't prove anything.

 

 

The point is that an aircraft known to have completely out performed a Spit V should be able to effectively combat a Yak 1, on something like even terms - unless of course you're suggesting a Yak 1 was actually superior to a Spit V.  Are you suggesting that?  A (Merlin 61 powered) Spit IX was said to have exhibited almost identical performance to the A-3 so are your actually suggesting a Yak 1 was as good or better that a Spit IX?  

 

The simple reality is that on anything like even terms, (co-alt/co-energy merge) and assuming something like equal pilot skill, the 190 will have little or no chance against a Yak.  In those circumstances even running away would be a 50/50 prospect at best. 

 

So to all of you who say the 190 is a fantastic aircraft I say prove it.  Show us how you kill a Yak on even terms.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Wulf

[WokeUpDead]

The point is that an aircraft known to have completely out performed a Spit V should be able to effectively combat a Yak 1, on something like even terms - unless of course you're suggesting a Yak 1 was actually superior to a Spit V.  Are you suggesting that?  A (Merlin 61 powered) Spit IX was said to have exhibited almost identical performance to the A-3 so are your actually suggesting a Yak 1 was as good or better that a Spit IX?  

 

The simple reality is that on anything like even terms, (co-alt/co-energy merge) and assuming something like equal pilot skill, the 190 will have little or no chance against a Yak.  In those circumstances even running away would be a 50/50 prospect at best. 

 

So to all of you who say the 190 is a fantastic aircraft I say prove it.  Show us how you kill a Yak on even terms.

You don't, that's the point I was making. The 190's strength is being able to enter the fight on UN-even, favourable terms.  That's how they were able to out-perform the Spit Vs; they were faster at all altitudes and they climbed better at all altitudes, so they likely started all fights at and advantage.

 

Another thing to be aware of when discussing Spit Vs vs 190s over France: Spits didn't go there singly and duel single 190s, they mixed it up in numbers.  Some planes do much better as part of a team than as single duelists.  Zero vs Wildcat is a good example in real life as well as in the old IL-2 1946: 1v1 the American plane had almost no chance, 2v2 was already a decent fight, 3v3 or more the Wildcats would win more often than not.  Tough, compact planes that can roll quickly to switch targets like the Wildcat or 190 do a lot better in big melees against more fragile planes with big, easy to hit wings like Spits or Zeros.

[Mac_Messer]

There are many videos of the FW online from people who actually fly it and mastered it instead of complaining on the forums in hope to have it made easier to succeed with.

And those videos actually show how great and deadly the FW is. But some people dismiss that. They don't want to have to fly one way, even if it's historically accurate. They want their plane to do it all. And do it all without being demanding to fly at all on top of that.

Before the patch, I know because the FW190 was somewhat decent back then (didn`t really have o problem with it). But now...

 

Not mentioning you missed the point entirely. It is not about easier but unhistorical. People say FW190 falls from the sky because it buffets violently at the slightest movement of elevators, resulting in wing dip. With such stall characteristics the Anton`s historical light steering becomes irrelevant since even light movements cause the plane to stall.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Mac_Messer

[Wulf]

You don't, that's the point I was making. The 190's strength is being able to enter the fight on UN-even, favourable terms.  That's how they were able to out-perform the Spit Vs; they were faster at all altitudes and they climbed better at all altitudes, so they likely started all fights at and advantage.

 

Another thing to be aware of when discussing Spit Vs vs 190s over France: Spits didn't go there singly and duel single 190s, they mixed it up in numbers.  Some planes do much better as part of a team than as single duelists.  Zero vs Wildcat is a good example in real life as well as in the old IL-2 1946: 1v1 the American plane had almost no chance, 2v2 was already a decent fight, 3v3 or more the Wildcats would win more often than not.  Tough, compact planes that can roll quickly to switch targets like the Wildcat or 190 do a lot better in big melees against more fragile planes with big, easy to hit wings like Spits or Zeros.

 

 

Any fighter aircraft can win a fight, even a fight against an aircraft with a much higher level of performance, if it attacks from a highly advantageous position.  What that's got to do with the effectiveness or otherwise of the 190 v the Yak 1 I don't know?

 

And on the subject of Zeros and Wildcats; when was the last time you heard anyone say the Wildcat was an exceptional fighter or anything like it?  The reality is that the Wildcat was never viewed as exceptional.  The deficiencies of the aircraft (and there were many) could be overcome, to some extent at least, if Wildcat pilots cooperated in a particular way.  But the Wildcat was by no means a great a fighter - not at any stage of the War.  You could make it work in certain circumstances but it was essentially obsolete by 1942.  And for the record, if you want to make a comparison between a carrier fighter and a 190 you'd be better advised to start with a Hellcat or an F4U.  

Edited April 21, 2016 by Wulf

[BlitzPig_EL]

Wulf, just for the sake of clarification, are you making the argument that an FW 190 A series can out turn in the horizontal a Spitfire Mk. V or a Yak 1?

 

I will be the first one to say that the FW, the real one, was superior to the Mk. V and the Yak, but I'm trying to understand the way you think it was superior.

[Wulf]

Wulf, just for the sake of clarification, are you making the argument that an FW 190 A series can out turn in the horizontal a Spitfire Mk. V or a Yak 1?

 

I will be the first one to say that the FW, the real one, was superior to the Mk. V and the Yak, but I'm trying to understand the way you think it was superior.

 

No, I have never suggested anything of the sort  The 190 couldn't stay with a Spit or a Yak in a sustained turn - not historically.  The cardinal rule when flying a 190 is 'never follow a better turning fighter (almost anything but in this case a Spit or Yak) into a turn'.  

 

What's more, I'm not aware of anyone on this forum who 's suggesting such a thing.

[Dakpilot]

The point is that an aircraft known to have completely out performed a Spit V should be able to effectively combat a Yak 1, on something like even terms - unless of course you're suggesting a Yak 1 was actually superior to a Spit V.  Are you suggesting that?  A (Merlin 61 powered) Spit IX was said to have exhibited almost identical performance to the A-3 so are your actually suggesting a Yak 1 was as good or better that a Spit IX?  

 

The simple reality is that on anything like even terms, (co-alt/co-energy merge) and assuming something like equal pilot skill, the 190 will have little or no chance against a Yak.  In those circumstances even running away would be a 50/50 prospect at best. 

 

So to all of you who say the 190 is a fantastic aircraft I say prove it.  Show us how you kill a Yak on even terms.

 

Everyone always talks about the FW190's superior roll, handling etc that made gave it is glory days and fame when the RAF had such a hard time with the Spit mkV

 

But to counter it all they did was stick a Merlin intended for the Wellington bomber in it with no other improvements and parity was restored to a point, and suddenly the threat was not so great

 

there were no other changes from Mkv to Mk IX at that time, all it's 'uberness' was countered by a bit more power..completely outperformed MkV now fine against FW190

 

dogfighting on equal terms would require the Fw190 to shed about a ton of weight and the Yak to grow some more horsepower

 

All these calls for 'duels' will prove nothing but pilot skill or experience 

 

don't get me wrong, I am not saying the FW190 is right,  just that many of the arguments pertaining to its in game handling/performance issues are wrong

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[StG2_Manfred]

Still not even 1 video of a yak vs 190 dogfight to analyse.

Words are useless as they are only voicing opinions, especially from people which dont even own the 190!

I'd like to see a encounter 1 vs 1, co alt. and no guns until the planes have passed each other for the first time.

There are so many 'experts' from both sides of the fence that a event like this doesn't seem impossible to happen.

I invited Venturi for the coming weekend, so we will see. And you are describing exactly how a duell fight have to start

[Venturi]

If we can agree on conditions, it will not be a dogfight, but it will be flown correctly.

[Wulf]

This statement is just wrong, of course you are toast if you fight a yak like a yak in a 190. I am sure you are way more experienced fighting in a FW than me , so I am not going to advice you on anything in it. But is not this getting a bit too polarized 

 

 

Just for interest's sake, how do you know the statement is "just wrong"?

 

On the one hand you're telling us you can't fight a duel because your 'rig' isn't up to the task and yet on the other, you somehow know how a hard fought action between a Yak and a 190 would play-out online. 

 

Isn't that a bit weird??  I mean, if your 'gear  isn't up to the job' (sorry, childish sexual innuendo) , how would you know?

[StG2_Manfred]

If we can agree on conditions, it will not be a dogfight, but it will be flown correctly.

 

Whatever you mean with flying correctly, it's up to you how you fly. My goal is to shoot down the opponent

 

But to start the fight with co-alt, no guns at the first head-on pass is ok?

Edited April 21, 2016 by StG2_Manfred

[Jester]

Everyone always talks about the FW190's superior roll, handling etc that made gave it is glory days and fame when the RAF had such a hard time with the Spit mkV

 

But to counter it all they did was stick a Merlin intended for the Wellington bomber in it with no other improvements and parity was restored to a point, and suddenly the threat was not so great

 

there were no other changes from Mkv to Mk IX at that time, all it's 'uberness' was countered by a bit more power..completely outperformed MkV now fine against FW190

 

dogfighting on equal terms would require the Fw190 to shed about a ton of weight and the Yak to grow some more horsepower

 

All these calls for 'duels' will prove nothing but pilot skill or experience 

 

don't get me wrong, I am not saying the FW190 is right,  just that many of the arguments pertaining to its in game handling/performance issues are wrong

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Actually, that's not quite true.

 

Yes, the MkIX used the same fuselage as the MKV, but the tail was radically redesigned including a rudder with significantly increased chord to counteract the extra torque of the new engine. Not 100% sure, but I thought the MKIX wing spars were modified as well.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Jester

[Irgendjemand]

If we can agree on conditions, it will not be a dogfight, but it will be flown correctly.

So you will keep going straight, try to separate and go for a headon. Thats not gonna proove anything but the FW being faster and having more firepower. And we all already know that.

You say the FWs maneuveringability is sufficient and now you rudder back trying to avoind the inevitable before it even happened because you KNOW the only possible outcome and do not want to take the disgrace:)

We see through you:P

Edited April 21, 2016 by Irgendjemand

[Dakpilot]

Actually, that's not quite true.

 

Yes, the MkIX used the same fuselage as the MKV, but the tail was radically redesigned including a rudder with significantly increased chord to counteract the extra torque of the new engine. Not 100% sure, but I thought the MKIX wing spars were modified as well.

 

You are quite right, however I understood the initial ones introduced to combat the Focke Wulf arrival did not have these , later production versions had the newer wings and MkVIII style tail

 

**edit** I believe the first 100 MkIX's were just re-engined MkVc airframes, there were so many constant developments to the MkIX that it is hard to define a 'typical' one, with changes to wings, undercarriage, tail. elevators, cowling, carb intakes, ETC.  the last ones were even fitted with teardrop canopy

 

however I am probably dragging off topic a bit with Spitfire ramblings

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited April 21, 2016 by Dakpilot

[JtD]

So you will keep going straight, try to separate and go for a headon. Thats not gonna proove anything but the FW being faster and having more firepower. And we all already know that.

You say the FWs maneuveringability is sufficient and now you rudder back trying to avoind the inevitable before it even happened because you KNOW the only possible outcome and do not want to take the disgrace:)

I don't think he's ever said he was going to take it and turn inside a Yak-1 in a prolonged turn fight. Also, a 1vs1 in a game is not representative for WW2 air combat and has no significance when trying to make a point about realistic or unrealistic performance.

 

That said, just flying level for separation is quite a bit less than the Fw could do in real life, both on the paper and according to pilot accounts.

Edited April 21, 2016 by JtD

[Dakpilot]

What exactly is this "behind the bike shed's" duel about?

 

General Yak Vs 190 or the much disliked recent FM change?

 

without similar comparison of contest from same people with older FM what would it prove, regardless of result?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Venturi]

So you will keep going straight, try to separate and go for a headon. Thats not gonna proove anything but the FW being faster and having more firepower. And we all already know that.

You say the FWs maneuveringability is sufficient and now you rudder back trying to avoind the inevitable before it even happened because you KNOW the only possible outcome and do not want to take the disgrace:)

We see through you:P

 

You are on ignore.

What exactly is this "behind the bike shed's" duel about?

 

General Yak Vs 190 or the much disliked recent FM change?

 

without similar comparison of contest from same people with older FM what would it prove, regardless of result?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Nothing, except that the whiners need to see how a FW should be flown... and it's not the way that they "dogfight".

Whatever you mean with flying correctly, it's up to you how you fly. My goal is to shoot down the opponent

 

But to start the fight with co-alt, no guns at the first head-on pass is ok?

 

Oh sure, co-alt, 1000m start, 30% fuel for both

Standard "duel" tactics mean the merge is safe, then guns hot

We will see how it goes but I know how it will go... boring

[Irgendjemand]

Dito. And have fun running away. LOL

[Venturi]

One further thing... I want to use the duel server (neutral ground)

 

It's perfectly set up for this. 

[Venturi]

I don't think he's ever said he was going to take it and turn inside a Yak-1 in a prolonged turn fight. Also, a 1vs1 in a game is not representative for WW2 air combat and has no significance when trying to make a point about realistic or unrealistic performance.

 

Correct. And it's a totally ahistorical way to fight. But that said, I aim to prove that the FW can at least not get shot down in single combat by a Yak-1, and will always threaten a reversal...

 

If you guys want to see a dogfight, I can take a Bf109F-4 against the Yak-1... I bet I don't hear any takers, though.

[Lusekofte]

Just for interest's sake, how do you know the statement is "just wrong"?

 

On the one hand you're telling us you can't fight a duel because your 'rig' isn't up to the task and yet on the other, you somehow know how a hard fought action between a Yak and a 190 would play-out online. 

 

Isn't that a bit weird??  I mean, if your 'gear  isn't up to the job' (sorry, childish sexual innuendo) , how would you know?

 

Did you read the context? If you engage yaks and loose you obviously make a big mistake. The sentence simply do not come out of a fighter pilot by hart, one of the reasons I fly mostly ground pounding and bombing missions is the lack of aggression and confidence. Confidence mostly because I cannot follow enemy with my TrackIr in dense  dogfights, due to my hardware. With the attitude shown in that sentence , you simply should not fly fighters. And it just say you are doing it wrong. 

There was a reason for LW aces manage to shoot down 200 + enemies: confidence, tactics , skills and never engage if the odds are against you. If you´re not bounced from high altitude by a Yak there is simply no reason to loose the fight

Edited April 21, 2016 by 216th_LuseKofte