The Mighty IL2, or ... it's Pilot :-)

[Guest deleted@50488]

Yesterday I spent 99,0 % of my simming time in IL2... It's growing towards becoming my only sim :-)

 

In one of my preferred servers I always was presented, when logging in, with a huge asymmetry between Axis << Allies, and so was forced to pick Axis and fly the 109 E-7 and the F-4, and latter the G-2.

 

A human controlled IL2 captured my attention the moment I got being shot down, session after session. The pilot always managed to maneuver the aircraft in such a way, mostly in vertical maneuvers, that even after being hit, sooner or latter he was behind me, and ripping my wings, like no Yak, or La5 or even Rata could :-)

 

My first though is that indeed the IL2 is a great fighter after all, or the pilot is a great pilot, or even better - both of these :-)

 

But I wonder if the IL2 was really this maneuverable ?

 

Please, don't get this as:

 

1) Bashing;

2) Axis-itis... ( I pick whatever side, depending only on # of players balance at the Servers... )

Edited October 31, 2016 by jcomm

[Finkeren]

Well...

 

There were plans to redesign the IL-2 as a stop-gap heavy interceptor, though it never entered large scale production.

 

On paper at least, the IL-2 shouldn't be too bad really. It's got a fairly low wing loading (about the same as the Yak-1 IIRC) its power/weight ratio with no heavy ordinance is no worse than the P-40Es (though that isn't saying much) its climb rate isn't terrible for a plane that size and it's got big and fairly responsive control surfaces.

 

There are mainly 3 factors that disqualifies it fro ever becoming an effective fighter though:

 

1. Its sheer size and weight. Though you could point to the P-47 as an example that it could work.

 

2. Its overall draggy design which gives it an abysmsl top speed despite having acceptable acceleration.

 

3. The fact that the pilot can't see a damned thing from that cockpit.

 

Overall I think the IL-2 is modeled nicely in this sim, and I can't see any reason, why it should be less maneuverable than what it is now.

 

However, the BoK version of the IL-2 with the redesigned two-man cockpit is likely gonna be a complete dog with regards to handling compared to the other two we have. The introduction of the new cockpit brought some rather nasty stability issues to the design, which were never really fully adressed, though the late 1943 indroductuon of swept back wings helped somewhat.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Thx for the precious info Finkeren!

 

You made me feel that I should really read more about these ww2 aircraft !

[6./ZG26_Emil]

The 41 IL2 is pretty damn good

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

[Max_Damage]

You ve been shot by Kirill? Dont worry we all have been.

 

And for that matter a stuka will outturn yak1 and this is realistic.

Edited October 31, 2016 by Max_Damage

[Guest deleted@50488]

You ve been shot by Kirill? Dont worry we all have been.

 

And for that matter a stuka will outturn yak1 and this is realistic.

 

No :-) Actually it was Aerowolf - this guy really knows how to take the best out of the IL-2 ( don't know if it was the Mod-41 ? )

[Max_Damage]

My best flight on WOL included 3 tanks, 2 cars and a me109 :D

[Wulf]

I really don't know how to react to this stuff.  Do these guys truly believe this nonsense or is this some sort of giant piss-take.  I just don't know.........  

[Guest deleted@50488]

Wulf,

 

do you refer to believing what I was posting in the OP, or the true capability of an IL-2 to perform those maneuvers ?

[SuperCossack]

There is no way a russian airplane can possibly beat a german airplane, russian airplanes are russian................

[KoN_]

[Edited]

 

Knock off the insinuations of "Russian bias" ..

Edited October 31, 2016 by Bearcat

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Here you go Corrigan: http://www.rkka.es/Otros_articulos/28_IL-2_ases/28_IL-2_ases.htm

 

Funny how Bf-110s getting kills is considered normal yet when the Il-2 shoots something it's cheating.

 

For those failing to grasp the concept, just remember that if an AA gun sitting hundreds or even thousands of metres away from its target can score kills, then a flying platform with guns that is anywhere between 10m and 200m can easily hit something too, so long as its target is in front of it. Performance charts are nice, but bullets are faster than piston engined aircraft.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Excellent sources for reading guys!  Thank you!!!!

 

During the OL session it was obvious to me that the player in the IL-2 knew what he was doing and how to take advantage of the positive aspects of his aircraft and, at the same time the negative aspects of my tactics, or the lack of it :-)

Edited October 31, 2016 by jcomm

[Finkeren]

Excellent sources for reading guys!  Thank you!!!!

 

During the OL session it was obvious to me that the player in the IL-2 knew what he was doing and how to take advantage of the positive aspects of his aircraft and, at the same time the negative aspects of my tactics, or the lack of it :-)

 

Getting kills in the IL-2 is not hard at all, if your opponent is kind enough to make mistakes. I've shot down quite a few 109s who considered me easy pickings and slowed down to park on my six, leaving them vulnerable to the IL-2's pleasant low speed handling. The IL-2 is easy to handle, can be thrown around safely at low speeds and is a wonderful gun platform. As long as your opponent offers you the chance of a shooting solution, it's very easy to take advantage of it.

 

If the 109 pilot does not make mistakes, however, you'll quickly discover, why the IL-2 is not a fighter. It is too damn slow and climbs way too sluggishly to be a threat to anything. 

[Irgendjemand]

I want to throw 4 things into the room that could be base for arguments on why the IL2 performs as well as it does.

 

1. Prophang

2. Sniping

3. Planedurability
4. Weapondamage

[Finkeren]

I want to throw 4 things into the room that could be base for arguments on why the IL2 performs as well as it does.

 

1. Prophang

2. Sniping

3. Planedurability

4. Weapondamage

 

Throw in "5. Pleasant and safe handling at most speeds" and I'll say that's about correct.

[Aap]

 

 

Many here do read their history books. Just in case you yourself missed this particular one, it's a great read and gives good insight in to what the il2 was capable of. Red star against the Swastika https://www.amazon.c...n/dp/1848328036

 

 

Even when reading the introduction of that book from the link that you provided, it says "it was slow to maneuver and an easy target for fighters". That is what I have read elsewhere also. I have read that it could be hard to shoot it down, because it could absorb lots of damage, but these forums here are the actually first time ever that I have read that IL-2 was a good dogfighter, with Max_Damage trumping everybody else by saying that IL-2 was actually better dogfighter than F4U.

[Finkeren]

 

 

Even when reading the introduction of that book from the link that you provided, it says "it was slow to maneuver and an easy target for fighters". That is what I have read elsewhere also. I have read that it could be hard to shoot it down, because it could absorb lots of damage, but these forums here are the actually first time ever that I have read that IL-2 was a good dogfighter, with Max_Damage trumping everybody else by saying that IL-2 was actually better dogfighter than F4U.

 

Not a single person here claims, that the IL-2 was/is a good dogfighter. It is much too slow and has a mediocre climb rate. However, if your opponent makes a mistake and offers you a shooting solution, then the IL-2s qualities makes it easy to exploit that.

[Aap]

 

 

some say... https://en.wikipedia...r-to-air_combat

 

I think that is one of the most puzzling part of entire Wikipedia that I have ever run into. I remember reading that several years ago and actually believing in it at first.

But now, several years later, I have not seen any other sources (interestingly this Wikipedia part does not have any sources mentioned either) of Ju87 formations being "often attacked" by IL-2's or Hs-126 units suffering from "ravages" of IL-2's in air-to-air combat. It is also weird that the paragraph starts with a "owing to a shortage of fighters", where earlier in the same article they say that there were only 249 IL-2's at the beginning of Operation Barbarossa and Stalin was upset and gave his "final warning" because of the low production volumes of IL-2's at first, while Soviet Union had thousands of I-16's, produced over 3000 Mig-3's during 1940-41, followed by LaGG-3 and Yak-1's in the thousands plus the lend-lease aircraft. 

I guess all kind of desperate situations or lucky opportunities can happen in war, but I have not seen any sources about IL-2's being used as a fighter purposedly.

[Aap]

Not a single person here claims, that the IL-2 was/is a good dogfighter. It is much too slow and has a mediocre climb rate. However, if your opponent makes a mistake and offers you a shooting solution, then the IL-2s qualities makes it easy to exploit that.

 

I can absolutely agree to that. However, when reading the discussion, Con asked if someone has read a book about "the dog fighting skills of this air frame" and he got a reply referring to this book. When reading the introduction of this book, it did not appear to be the kind of book that Con asked about.

[Aap]

Funny how Bf-110s getting kills is considered normal yet when the Il-2 shoots something it's cheating.

 

As most probably know, Bf-110 was originally designed as a heavy fighter. Not that it has anything to do with cheating, but just pointing it out, if someone wants to compare Bf-110's and IL-2's air-to-air capabilities.

Edited October 31, 2016 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Finkeren]

 

As most probably know, Bf-110 was originally designed as a heavy fighter.

And as I said: The original purpose of a design is not always indicative of how it will perform in that role or how it will perform in other roles.

 

The Pe-2 was also originally designed as a fighter. Does that mean we should expect it to perform well as one?

Edited October 31, 2016 by Finkeren

[Aap]

Reading some other posts in this topic I'm thinking...damn we really need a dislike button and some kind of a system which automatically deletes the most disliked posts. Addressing these idiotic posts gets tiring after a while...

 

Not trying to be offensive, but could you point out, which post in this thread is the most idiotic? Maybe the one, where someone makes absurd assumptions about another person's flying skills and ability to shoot down ground attackers in a fighter, even though the other person only talked about a certain plane's flight characteristics?

[Irgendjemand]

+1000 to this. 

 

Reading some other posts in this topic I'm thinking...damn we really need a dislike button and some kind of a system which automatically deletes the most disliked posts. Addressing these idiotic posts gets tiring after a while...

whats this post if not trolling? Everyone here can feel spoken to by your post. And calling comments idiotic isnt quite nice.

[Aap]

And as I said: The original purpose of a design is not always indicative of how it will perform in that role or how it will perform in other roles.

The Pe-2 was also originally designed as a fighter. Does that mean we should expect it to perform well as one?

 

I am not sure what you are trying to argue about here exactly.

Do you mean that because Pe-2 was originally designed as an escort fighter, that means that IL-2, which was not designed as a fighter, should be as capable in air-to-air as Bf-110, which was designed as a fighter? I can't really see a connection here.

[Finkeren]

I am not sure what you are trying to argue about here exactly.

Do you mean that because Pe-2 was originally designed as an escort fighter, that means that IL-2, which was not designed as a fighter, should be as capable in air-to-air as Bf-110, which was designed as a fighter? I can't really see a connection here.

My contention was, that the Bf 110 doesn't perform well as a fighter, simply because it was designed as one. My previous example with the Hawker Typhoon is more analogous to the IL-2.

 

EDIT: I'm not saying, that the Bf 110 doesn't perform well enough in the role as heavy fighter. Just to avoid confusion.

Edited October 31, 2016 by Finkeren

[KoN_]

Many here do read their history books. Just in case you yourself missed this particular one, it's a great read and gives good insight in to what the il2 was capable of.

 

Red star against the Swastika

https://www.amazon.com/Red-Star-Against-Swastika-Eastern/dp/1848328036

I shall look for this on my kindle thank you . 

[Irgendjemand]

Again nobody is saying it was a good dogfighter. The thread is more about can luftwaffe-heads accept that if they make lots of mistakes the IL-2 is capable of shooting them down.

The OP surely knows.

 

[[TWB]80hd]

Good pilots don't often lose dogfight to IL-2s... The ones that throw fits when they do lose are generally the ones who haven't made synaptic connections with certain fundamentals...

 

I've had people tell me I'm a cheater because an IL-2 1941 handily out-turns their 190 A-3 when we're both doing 600kmh... and another questioned how I could possibly outclimb their F-4... answer being as simple as "energy" but I think maybe there are quite a few out there that don't truly grasp what that means...

 

If you engage someone that knows what they are doing (in either IL-2, but definitely the 1941) and you don't do so very carefully, you're going to have a bad time, and that has zero to do with "Russian developers" and everything to do with cornering speed, e-retention, and two sterling examples of the fact that a 23mm that is good against RHA steel is absolutely catastrophic to the materials used to construct light fighters. If you don't let an IL-2 point its nose at you, you've won the fight. It's that simple.

[Aap]

My contention was, that the Bf 110 doesn't perform well as a fighter, simply because it was designed as one. My previous example with the Hawker Typhoon is more analogous to the IL-2.

 

Okay. So if you want my opinions, then yes, in general, yes I would expect a plane that was designed as a fighter to manage better as a fighter than a plane that was not designed as a fighter.

And more specifically, I expect Bf-110 to be better in air-to-air than IL-2, even if Bf-110 did not live up to the pre-war visions of it's air-to-air capability.

Edited October 31, 2016 by II./JG77_Kemp

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Bf110 had two engines (which leads to way better power/thrust ratio as well), Il2 has one. And yet Bf110 can dream to do those VTOL prophang manouvers, the IL2 does handily.

[Finkeren]

Okay. So if you want my opinions, then yes, in general, yes I would expect a plane that was designed as a fighter to manage better as a fighter than a plane that was not designed as a fighter.

And more specifically, I expect Bf-110 to be better in air-to-air than IL-2, even if Bf-110 did not live up to the pre-war visions of it's air-to-air capability.

As a general rule this ofc holds up, and the Bf 110 is a far better fighter than the IL-2 will ever be - both IRL and in the sim.

 

What you can't say (as Con did) is that a plane can't perform well in a role it wasn't designed for, simply because it was designed for something else.

[[TWB]80hd]

Bf110 had two engines (which leads to way better power/thrust ratio as well), Il2 has one. And yet Bf110 can dream to do those VTOL prophang manouvers, the IL2 does handily.

 

Get your 110 on a scale with an IL-2 1942 w/gunner, and you are correct, and the game correctly displays this as well.

 

Get your same 110 on a scale with an IL-2 1941 with no gunner (which you unfortunately cannot removed from the 110) and all of a sudden a single AM38F is indeed going to win power to weight over 2 x DB 601Bs.

 

If we could send our 110 gunners on holiday and have them take their MG 15 and its ammo with them, I think things would be different.

[Irgendjemand]

Hmmm. Id love to see how a turnfight IL2 against 110 ends.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Get your 110 on a scale with an IL-2 1942 w/gunner, and you are correct, and the game correctly displays this as well.

 

Get your same 110 on a scale with an IL-2 1941 with no gunner (which you unfortunately cannot removed from the 110) and all of a sudden a single AM38F is indeed going to win power to weight over 2 x DB 601Bs.

 

If we could send our 110 gunners on holiday and have them take their MG 15 and its ammo with them, I think things would be different.

 

Do you have the weight of the 1941 Il2? Gunner alone (+gun) doesn't add that much weight

[312_Tygr]

Bf110 had two engines (which leads to way better power/thrust ratio as well), Il2 has one. And yet Bf110 can dream to do those VTOL prophang manouvers, the IL2 does handily.

 

What? I guess PA34's two Lycomings are more powerful than F-16's puny single P&W  ....  Now if only I could find an F-16 to stage a dogfight with  

 

Seriously, you should look at power ratings, weights, etc. before generalizing...

[II./JG77_Manu*]

What? I guess PA34's two Lycomings are more powerful than F-16's puny single P&W  ....  Now if only I could find an F-16 to stage a dogfight with

 

Seriously, you should look at power ratings, weights, etc. before generalizing...

 

I learned in math, that 1150*2 is more then 1700

[[TWB]80hd]

Do you have the weight of the 1941 Il2? Gunner alone (+gun) doesn't add that much weight

 

I don't have the definitive on what we have modeled in-game, but it's an entire second cockpit, the weapon, the ammunition, and the gunner.  Look at the difference when you take the 151/20 pods on a 109... sure some of that is drag, but the impact the weight has is substantial.

 

It would be interesting to see the exact weight of any given airframe with selected ordnance/fuel/etc before take-off.

[Finkeren]

Hmmm. Id love to see how a turnfight IL2 against 110 ends.

Luckily, we can find out quite easily

 

Prediction: In a pure chase-your-own-tail turnfight at low level, the IL-2 will win - a simple question of lower wing loading.

 

In any other kind of fight, the Bf 110 will win.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

 

 

So looking at the facts, if you hang a IL-2 on it's prop it should prop hang longer than BF-110. But, this isn't the case in-game

 

 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNy1XrRUGGQ