FW 190 worth it?

[ITAF_Cymao]

 

 

So what you are saying is that people who fly only offline are not really flying? What are they doing?

Truly none really flies in the game...
But there are two different experiences, and I dont say that an experience is more important than an another and I know which I prefer. It is as if there were two different games.
But I'm saying that what may be less important in an experience becomes fundamental in the other and vice versa.

 

S!

[BletchleyGeek]

someone delete this thread.

this is horrible.

or maybe make it a sticky and a mandatory read for the newcomers.

Just to let them know what kind of a cesspool they will have to deal with.

FFS

It is hard to miss @Yakdriver

 

I have been around the Internet long enough that I am not traumatised by reading these debates. You can find similar patterns of behaviour in pretty much every game heavy on the simulation side. What is peculiar to this community is that there is a very tribal vibe to the polarisation in the threads, almost like what used to be the norm in games as EVE online before the Something Awful guys took over. Probably due to the squadrons meta game, and taking beef from the MP servers to the forums.

 

I have probably like 20 hours on the simulated FW 190 and it is very hard to fly... if you try to handle it like the 109. I tend to think of it as a faster, more agile 110. The stalls are lethal, I kind of have developed a spidey sense to avoid getting the plane in that state. But there are many planes on this sim that need to be handled with care, like the I 16 or the P 40.

 

Reading the FULL write up by Eric Brown on the plane was very helpful to get into the right mindset.

 

No idea if the changes in the flight model will have a dramatic effect on how it flies. Models are always works in progress, since it only makes sense to talk about them as useful or not, they are all "false". In that regard, I think that the current FW 190 model is useful to portray this plane in its historical roles. But it may not be useful when operating on the boundaries of that.

 

Just 2 cents from a unaffiliated relative newcomer.

[Lusekofte]

But can we say that you dont know very well the Focke in Bos?

 

Yes I test it only when things I did not know is brought up in discussion like this. I never knew about the sudden stall it so easily get after FM change, so I tested it.

And every time a member say it is rubbish I  go qmb and try it out, I set enemies at best and fly a mission, then I fly online one mission to see if it is different.

I do not know the FW well, I only object every time people say it is rubbish. It can't be used. I simply cannot see that is possible.

I fly PE 2 , LAGG and IL 2 occasionally th JU 52, have absolutely no interest in anything else, until HS 129 , Devastator , Kate , Dauntless ; A 20  Val come

HE 111 felt like a gas balloon to me, 110 witch I love in COD , well it really do not bring anything. JU 88 I never gave a shot, because the LW side outnumber Red all the time. The one thing this simulator do better than the rest is the simulation of LAGG , IL 2 and PE 2, you really feel you are flying a heavy peace of metal through a soup of atmosphere. I forgot the JU 87 G1 we got, I like that one too, because it is sexy

Edited January 7, 2017 by 216th_LuseKofte

[ShamrockOneFive]

It is hard to miss @Yakdriver

 

I have been around the Internet long enough that I am not traumatised by reading these debates. You can find similar patterns of behaviour in pretty much every game heavy on the simulation side. What is peculiar to this community is that there is a very tribal vibe to the polarisation in the threads, almost like what used to be the norm in games as EVE online before the Something Awful guys took over. Probably due to the squadrons meta game, and taking beef from the MP servers to the forums.

 

I have probably like 20 hours on the simulated FW 190 and it is very hard to fly... if you try to handle it like the 109. I tend to think of it as a faster, more agile 110. The stalls are lethal, I kind of have developed a spidey sense to avoid getting the plane in that state. But there are many planes on this sim that need to be handled with care, like the I 16 or the P 40.

 

Reading the FULL write up by Eric Brown on the plane was very helpful to get into the right mindset.

 

No idea if the changes in the flight model will have a dramatic effect on how it flies. Models are always works in progress, since it only makes sense to talk about them as useful or not, they are all "false". In that regard, I think that the current FW 190 model is useful to portray this plane in its historical roles. But it may not be useful when operating on the boundaries of that.

 

Just 2 cents from a unaffiliated relative newcomer.

 

Very well said! If you haven't already welcomed you to the forum... Welcome! Flight simmers do tend to be a pretty passionate, sometimes dramatic, somethings a little bit TOO much kind of crowd but its probably also why we're willing to buy some expensive extra hardware (joysticks, HOTAS, Track IR) and then get excited and a little nuts over getting new planes, fixing old planes, and the like. Maybe a little obsessive is the right word! :D

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

If you can wade through the fringe elements of both sides there is some pretty useful and even respectful dialog in each of these threads. They usually last about three pages regarding Fw threads before the rending of garments begins.

[StG2_Manfred]

someone delete this thread.

this is horrible.

 

or maybe make it a sticky and a mandatory read for the newcomers.

Just to let them know what kind of a cesspool they will have to deal with.

 

FFS

 

Wow, just wow. Who you are you? Yes, make this thread sticky, and your post best answer I recommmend!

[Mmaruda]

I'll say this, I don't have much experience in flying any 190 in any modern sim (I mean this and the D9 in DCS), all I can say is that a good deal of people who fly this plane online do it wrong... Just as they fly the other planes wrong (or cannot even handle them on the ground properly). I see dogfigts being dragged out turnfights on low altitude and hardly anyone having the notion to separate. I will not comment on the acceleration and climb rate of the plane, but as far as the original question asked by the OP is concerned - YES, it's worth to buy the 190. Is it worth to fly online? Considering the OP mentioned it's easy to stall and twitchy, yeah it is, but it is that way, cause you are flying low and slow and insist on turning with Soviet fighters when you should be climbing and doing BNZ stuff. It's the same in DCS with the D9.

 

Yeah sure, you will read sources that will say the plane was actually able to turn and fight at low altitude, but at the end of the day, that is not the tactics you should be employing as a Luftwaffe pilot.

 

As far as offline goes, the AI is always turning at maximum AOA and able to keep the plane flying. They can turn on a dime and if they happen to be at a disadvantage in a turn, you will see them wobble all over the place, because they have inhuman abilities letting them hold it forever at the edge of stall - hardly a situation to judge any plane's performance, because you will never be able to match the AI's skills at this.

 

Personally, I still think that BOS has the best level of immersion and is the top dog when it comes simulating the experience of flight alone. Every simulation is always an approximation and especially with planes that are not flying today, it's going to be a hard job to get everything right, even more so, when you consider the fact that not every historical source is a reliable scientific analysis of flight physics (pro tip: none of them are, they are reports based on opinions).

 

At the end of the day, I find the most enjoyment online in flying bombers - at least I get to fly a proper mission instead of getting all salty because a 1920's standard Ishak filled my superior German fighter full of holes, cause I got greedy and forgot what a fighter pilot's job is: shooting down bombers and drawing enemy fighters away from our own bombers, so that they can do their job.

 

The sooner everyone gets rid of the airquake mentality, the sooner they will learn to enjoy and appreciate the game, despite any issues it might have.

Edited January 7, 2017 by Mmaruda

[MiloMorai]

Many years ago on another board a guy did a study of accidents when JG26 was transitioning to the Fw190A. One can not say the pilots of JG26 were inexperienced as they had been battling the RAF for quite some time. Conclusion reached was they had about the same accident rate with the Fw190A slightly higher.

[Mmaruda]

Many years ago on another board a guy did a study of accidents when JG26 was transitioning to the Fw190A. One can not say the pilots of JG26 were inexperienced as they had been battling the RAF for quite some time. Conclusion reached was they had about the same accident rate with the Fw190A slightly higher.

 

It's not always down to experience alone, there is also fatigue, stress and how much time you have to accustom yourself the the new plane and how favourable are the conditions.

[LuftManu]

I fougth with it the other day. I was lucky but I think that in very good hands, nowadays is usefull. Can´t wait till they fix it.

 

Heres is a video

 

 

Edited January 8, 2017 by LF_ManuV

[Yakdriver]

Wow, just wow. Who you are you? Yes, make this thread sticky, and your post best answer I recommmend!

Just some [censored] with a shitty attitude.:-)

[BletchleyGeek]

Very well said! If you haven't already welcomed you to the forum... Welcome! Flight simmers do tend to be a pretty passionate, sometimes dramatic, somethings a little bit TOO much kind of crowd but its probably also why we're willing to buy some expensive extra hardware (joysticks, HOTAS, Track IR) and then get excited and a little nuts over getting new planes, fixing old planes, and the like. Maybe a little obsessive is the right word! :D

 

Cheers, Shamrock

 

 

If you can wade through the fringe elements of both sides there is some pretty useful and even respectful dialog in each of these threads. They usually last about three pages regarding Fw threads before the rending of garments begins.

 

Yesterday I went through a thread you started like in April 2016 (?) about how to fly the FW properly, etc. That was actually very interesting and I think that having an extract of the useful parts of that thread for newcomers would be great.

 

As for myself, I am getting into flight simming more seriously due to a professional interest. As part of my training for this particular project I am working on I was recommended to study the book "Fighter Combat. Tactics and Maneuvering" by Robert L. Shaw. Also very helpful to navigate these discussion was to reflect on what he wrote on the Chapter "One versus One Maneuvering, Dissimilar Aircraft". I love the little quotes Shaw inserts inline in his text. Let me share a passage (on pages 141 and 142):

 

 

One of our achievements at this period was the "Rosarius Traveling Circus." This was a flight comprised of all air-worthy captured planes we could find. They traveled through the West from unit to unit in order to familiarize our pilots with enemy technique. The leaders could fly these enemy types themselves. In this way we found out that we had usually overrated their performance. The circus proved a great success.

 

Lt. General Adolph Galland, Luftwaffe

 

 

And this (the emphasis is mine)

 

 

Low Wing Loading versus High Thrust-to-Weight

 

Encounters between a low-wing-loaded fighter and an enemy fighter with greater T/W are quite common. In this case each fighter has performance

advantages and disadvantages relative to its opponent. The engagement strategy is for the pilot to exploit the opponent's most serious weaknesses

while taking full advantage of his own fighter's greatest strengths.

 

The low-wing-loaded fighter's greatest performance advantages are assumed to be good instantaneous turn performance, slow minimum speed,

and a tight sustained turn radius. In some cases this aircraft also might have a significant sustained-turn-rate advantage. Its weaknesses

include inferior climb and acceleration performance under low-G conditions, and slower "top-end" speed. 

 

These characteristics are ideally suited to the use of angles tactics as described in the last chapter. One of the problems of the

pilot of a low wing-loaded fighter is how to get close to an opponent who has greater speed capability. This may be accomplished with geometry by

use of pure and lead pursuit. High and low yo-yos and barrel-roll attacks also may be useful. Since the high-T/W opponent has better climb

capability and vertical potential, the pilot of the low-wing-loaded fighter should attempt to constrain the fight to the horizontal plane as much

as possible. Nose-tonose turns make best use of a turn-radius advantage, and lead turns can be devastating because of instantaneous-turn

superiority. A flat scissors should be lethal to the high-T/W fighter since it suffers from both a turn-performance and a minimum-speed disadvantage.

The low-wingloaded aircraft might also have some advantage in a rolling scissors because of better slow-speed controllability, but usually not so

great an advantage as in the flat scissors. In cases where the high-T/W enemy has a sustained-turn-rate advantage, the rolling scissors generally

should be avoided.

 

On the other hand, the pilot of a high-T/W fighter should concentrate on energy tactics when he is engaging a low-wing-loaded opponent. Lag pursuit

and vertical/oblique maneuvers are necessary ingredients. Nose-totail geometry is usually preferable because of the assumed disparity in turn radii. 

 

The defensive spiral might be handy if the pilot of the high-T/W fighter finds himself at a serious disadvantage, a high-wing-loaded aircraft often can

generate much greater induced drag than a low-wing-loaded adversary, which may lead to a rapid vertical overshoot and subsequent position

advantage for the high-T/W fighter. If this advantage cannot be capitalized on quickly, however, the low-wing-loaded bogey may use its superior

low-speed turn performance to shallow out its spiral and regain the upper hand as the maneuver continues.

 

Here I kind of expect to be corrected, but my interpretation is that the VVS planes tend to fit better into the "low wing loading" performance profile (the 109, the MiG-3 perhaps?, the Zero), than the "high thrust-to-weight" profile (the FW-190 and the P-51 being the two WW2 I think represent better this class of aircraft). As I said on my previous message, the FW looks to me to perform in this sim very much like this ideal notion of High Thrust-To-Weight used by Shaw on his book. I think also that some discussions sometimes become fixated on a rigid interpretation of these "categories", when whether a plane fits or not in it may vary between iterations (the 109 E and G series are two very different planes IMHO) of the same design, weather conditions, altitude, etc. 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Yeah, I had fun with that thread. Most of it is still pertinent but I think that was the previous FM build. I plan to post an updated version after I get a little seat time in the new build. I also have additional resources now that I am squadded up. Some of my teammates are much better dogfighters than I am. I will include their perspectives when the time comes.

 

I'm not a true BNZ'r but I fly as efficiently as possible regardless of airframe. I constantly weight the cost/benefit of hard maneuvers. I'm never afraid to disengage or extend to fight another day and almost never lose a pure footrace in the Fw - even against 1b's. Guys who do are probably staying in the maneuver fight too long and are not recognizing when the E state has deteriorated or reversed. If you get behind the curve with a Yak at slow speed you are in for a very long day in the Fw.

[Wulf]

Cheers, Shamrock

 

 

 

Yesterday I went through a thread you started like in April 2016 (?) about how to fly the FW properly, etc. That was actually very interesting and I think that having an extract of the useful parts of that thread for newcomers would be great.

 

As for myself, I am getting into flight simming more seriously due to a professional interest. As part of my training for this particular project I am working on I was recommended to study the book "Fighter Combat. Tactics and Maneuvering" by Robert L. Shaw. Also very helpful to navigate these discussion was to reflect on what he wrote on the Chapter "One versus One Maneuvering, Dissimilar Aircraft". I love the little quotes Shaw inserts inline in his text. Let me share a passage (on pages 141 and 142):

 

 

And this (the emphasis is mine)

 

 

Here I kind of expect to be corrected, but my interpretation is that the VVS planes tend to fit better into the "low wing loading" performance profile (the 109, the MiG-3 perhaps?, the Zero), than the "high thrust-to-weight" profile (the FW-190 and the P-51 being the two WW2 I think represent better this class of aircraft). As I said on my previous message, the FW looks to me to perform in this sim very much like this ideal notion of High Thrust-To-Weight used by Shaw on his book. I think also that some discussions sometimes become fixated on a rigid interpretation of these "categories", when whether a plane fits or not in it may vary between iterations (the 109 E and G series are two very different planes IMHO) of the same design, weather conditions, altitude, etc. 

 

 

If I have interpreted you correctly, yes, I think your last comment is absolutely correct.  A lot of people seem to regard fighters as being exclusively of one type.  Hence people talk about 'turn fighters' and 'energy fighters' and such as though any given fighter must to be flown one way only, no matter what your opponent is flying or in what circumstances.

 

When I used to fly on COD I was amazed at the number of Spit pilots who would orbit their airfields flying just a few hundred meters above the turf waiting to execute a tight turn if attacked, presumably because at some point someone had told them that the Spit was a 'turn fighter'.   Just crazy shit. 

 

The 190 is a bit the same.  We are told it must be flown this way or that but in reality any title that can be ascribed to a particular fighter type is little more than a truism.  The circumstances of each combat determine the tactics.  That said, expecting to win a sustained turn fight with a Spit or a Yak will likely end badly for you.

[Bumfluff]

Any idea what the fm changes will be and when?

[Willy__]

Any idea what the fm changes will be and when?

 

They will fix the A3 when they do/release kuban's A5. IIRC its scheduled to be around mid 2017

 

Essentially they got the wrong Clmax from a porked windtunnel test. From pratical terms, with the "old FM" you could pull higher AoA before the stall occurs on the 190.

Edited January 8, 2017 by JAGER_Staiger

[ShamrockOneFive]

Any idea what the fm changes will be and when?

 

This Dev Update contains all of the details: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/?p=412855

 

The most relevant part is probably here:

 

 

At the moment, we continue to analyze the data we have in hand. Our estimate of the Fw-190 maximum lift coefficient is now 1.3-1.4. Increasing the maximum lift coefficient will also increase the maximum angle of attack. Pitch range of the flight stick till stall will be widened, making the aircraft easier to handle.

 

The Fw-190 had an unusual wing warp as proven by documents which were found thanks to the community’s help, however, these documents have slight discrepancies. Changing this warp will result in different stall behavior, it's likely to become 'softer', but only after flying the corrected plane in the game can this be tested.

 

The main performance characteristics - speed and climb rate - should remain the same.

 

The changes will come when the FW190A-5 is added to the series. That is estimated to be sometime in March.

[BletchleyGeek]

Thanks fot the answers Herr Murff and Wulf.

 

Yes that's what I meant, and also yes, every plane nonetheless does more efficiently certains maneuvers than others, and vice versa.

 

Thanks for sharing that story from CLOD btw

[JG13_opcode]

 

 

Pretty much since they introduced this bs fm made from  "sekrit document".

 

Hi Jaws, it's not a secret document.  I have a copy of it and so do others.

 

Native Russian speakers misinterpreted or overlooked a small but important detail of a German test conducted in a French wind tunnel, all while under a deadline.  Stuff happens, we showed them the problem and now they're fixing it.

 

Why so sour?

[SCG_motoadve]

Didnt go thru all the pages of this thread , I just wanna say I bought the 190, will start to fly it and if I dont like it , then will wait for the fix in a few months.

Developers promised a fix, so Im not worried about it.

[Fern]

Just move your pitch curve sensitivity close to 100% and it wont be as twitchy. I havent stalled it in awhile, granted I dont try to turn fight with it though. I fly it straight and die...

[=ARTOA=Bombenleger]

I think the FW190 is absolutely worth it. 
In no fighter in the entire game i feel so safe and relaxed.
Even though the FW doesnt turn as good as it probably should, its still the superior fighter compared to the 109 imo.
The bad turning performance is only a real disadvantage in some wrong executed offensive maneuvers, which arent suited to the 190 even if its turing performance was corrected.
The 190 still retains for me the strongest defense of any plane in the game: speed, dive acceleration and cockpit visibility.

also I would like to point out that when people quote some sources from WW2 that say the FW has superior agility, that turning is only one form of agility, rolling being the other and far more important in defensive maneuvers.



 

[JG13_opcode]

Well, right now the F-4 is faster and with the headrest removed has almost as good rearward visibility and certainly better forward and lateral due to no giant bars.

[=ARTOA=Bombenleger]

Well the fw has much better rearward visibility then the 109 even when the headrest is removed. 
Also it has much better visibility in the area of 3-9 o clock above which is the danger zone. the visibility directly ahead is a bit worse than in the 109, but thats only a disadvantage in the offensive. 
As to the speed both planes have areas where they are faster than the other.
I really dont want to start an argument about what is better the 109 or the 190 because it really boils down to taste and flying style and is a highly emotional topic.
I was just stating my opinion of the fw, to contribute my opinion wether the fw is worth it or not.

[Willy__]

The 190 still retains for me the strongest defense of any plane in the game: speed, dive acceleration max Vne and cockpit visibility.

 

 

There, I corrected for you.

Edited January 10, 2017 by JAGER_Staiger

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

You are right, of course, but I hate that as much as "feelings." Just post facts or opinions for counterpoints. "There, I fixed it for you" is just so smarmy and does exactly the opposite of swaying another's opinion or encouraging discussion/debate.

[JG13_opcode]

Well the fw has much better rearward visibility then the 109 even when the headrest is removed. Also it has much better visibility in the area of 3-9 o clock above which is the danger zone. the visibility directly ahead is a bit worse than in the 109, but thats only a disadvantage in the offensive.

Yep, true for the side and rear view, but IMHO not by much. However for novice pilots I think the bad forward visibility in the 190 and unintuitive fighting style makes it a bad choice.

 

 

As to the speed both planes have areas where they are faster than the other.

Again, true but what I meant is that the F-4 is faster than all soviet aircraft at all altitudes. Or at least it was, the last time I checked. Until the F-4 gets fixed it will be a more survivable aircraft than the 190 since it also accelerates faster, again IMHO.

 

I was just stating my opinion of the fw, to contribute my opinion wether the fw is worth it or not.

Me too. I still think it's worth it. You just have to be really really patient to succeed in it. I had a guy chase me up to 9000m+ today. I couldn't get enough separation to regain the offensive before the map ended. Was a 20-minute chase, lol. In the F-4 he'd have been dead meat.

Edited January 10, 2017 by JG13_opcode

[=ARTOA=Bombenleger]

There, I corrected for you.

So you think there are planes with better dive acceleration? please elaborate.

But you are right the Vne is another aspect about the 190 thats really great and can save ones butt.

 

 

One thing that alone is worth the money for the fw is the cosy sound she makes at 700km/h+ 

[tailwheel]

I think the FW190 is absolutely worth it. 

In no fighter in the entire game i feel so safe and relaxed.

Even though the FW doesnt turn as good as it probably should, its still the superior fighter compared to the 109 imo.

The bad turning performance is only a real disadvantage in some wrong executed offensive maneuvers, which arent suited to the 190 even if its turing performance was corrected.

The 190 still retains for me the strongest defense of any plane in the game: speed, dive acceleration and cockpit visibility.

 

also I would like to point out that when people quote some sources from WW2 that say the FW has superior agility, that turning is only one form of agility, rolling being the other and far more important in defensive maneuvers.

 

 

 

 

I would be interested to be your wingman for some training. Because for me, the 190 is the plane I feel the most insecure in. I know I turn that bird harder than is probably recommended. But even in something simple as doing a reconnoiter circle to orient myself, this thing just gets wobbly as heck. I also have problems when I get this thing into a stall. It will be dipping off to the left. I'll be gentle and barely work the controls and let her stable out, and as soon as I put in any control effort, plop she rolls to the right. I find the Mig 3 much easier to fly and recover from stalls with. I used to be able to dogfight with the AI in campaign mode. Then I went online to get some real experience. They did the FM change and it was all it was worth not to corkscrew into the ground. So I gave up using it for fighter combat. How do you use it for escort missions. If you are constantly disengaging and re-entering the battle, doesn't this give the enemy free reign to harass what you are defending? Esp if he is doing a lot of sharp maneuvering already to evade bomber guns. I know the plane was used for escorting. But I'm having trouble envisioning the tactic to keep enemies off the bombers.

Q: if the main defense in a 190 is the roll, and you can't use the plane to turn. How do you escape an enemy? You're basically going down a helix, and all the fellow behind has to do is time his shots to you moving in and out his LOF. And if he is patient, he just needs to fly straight and level behind you.

[=ARTOA=Bombenleger]

To answer your last question first:
The roll is not the main defense of the 190, on the contrary is the last resort in case you are too low/slow to escape.
Your main defense in the 190 are your eyes and cautiousnes.
If you need to escape forget about diving, people think the fw dives great so it has to do it a lot, but great diving means having to do it less whie still getting the same result.
First its important never to let an enemy close to you that is above you, because that means your only defense is a steep dive (almost suicide) or scissors (almost suicide).
An enemy that is 2km above you but 6km away has to use his height advantage to catch up to you, at which point he is so fast that he either cant follow your evasive maneuver (afterwards he has nearly equal E so you can run away) or cant follow you when you enter your shallow (max 5°) dive.

I would like to emphasize how I understand the dive accelertion of the 190 and I dont claim to be absolutely right on this but it works for me.

A 190 at slow speeds close to a russian fighter wont outdive the russian fighter. Why? 
Not because the russian fighter accelerates better in a dive or equally but because at 300km/h and a distance of 400m a difference in dive acceleration wont give you the needed separation of additional 400m before the russian has shot you.
Dive acceleration starts becoming a factor at a point where engine acceleration stops being a big factor!
So when the russian is approaching you at 600km/h all his additional speed has to come out of converting altitude. and thats where the 190 is better.
Hence the shallow dive, your fw will be at at least 500km/h in level flight in a combat scenario when you enter the 5° dive, you will get an additional 200km/h in no time while using very little relative altitude to you pursuer.
in the beginning he will still be coming closer but the longer he continues the more of the advantage he had, he loses.

After 2 minutes he should have realised that he cant catch you, at that point he might dive below you trying to prophang you when you do a steep climb up.
Or he will start climbing above you to attack you when you have climbed up to nearly his alt and are therefore slow.

The trick is not to play into his hands obviously. So dont do steep climbs and always get an extra minute or two of separation before restarting to build up altitude or turning towards the battle again.

Of coourse this takes a ot of time and a 109 could have done a fancy spiral climb and shot the guy down in the same time, but it could have been jumped by another unseen opponent or receive an unlucky hit in the spiral climb.

So the fw is not more effective than the 109 if you look at the time it takes to reverse a situation, what the fw does is it cuts down the risk by a good amount but also limits the potential reward.
So that doesnt seem like such a great deal does it? Well the deals gets better the more 190s fly together because (attention just my own opinion) 4 190s benefit each other more than 4 109s.

wow I didnt intend to write that much but i hope its somewhat understandable. 
 

Edited January 10, 2017 by =ARTOA=Bombenleger

[curiousGamblerr]

...

wow I didnt intend to write that much but i hope its somewhat understandable. 

 

 

Nah man this was great IMO!

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Just move your pitch curve sensitivity close to 100% and it wont be as twitchy.

Dangerous advise especially if you're just starting to fly it. The added non linearity will eventually bite back on landing or incase you eventually need more than 50% controll deflection with highly inaccurate output.

 

Instead I advise to start off with linear setting (0% sensetivity) and get to fly it a little. If its really uncontrollable add a few % sensetivity and test again. In general you want your curve to be as linear as possible to give you the same accurancy threwout the whole joystick movement range.

Edited January 10, 2017 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[curiousGamblerr]

I'm kinda with 5tuka... I didn't realize you could adjust the sensitivity until I was very used to this sim, and so I fly with 0% on everything. I still manage to use the 190, I'm just absurdly careful with the stick compared to other planes.

 

Edit: And I just don't turn, period. I zoom by, get a shot or not, extend and repeat. I'm not chess player but I like to think of this game as a bit of 3D chess, and in that context the 190 is a knight or bishop- incredibly powerful in some contexts, totally screwed in others. (extend, extend, extend!)

Edited January 10, 2017 by 19.GIAP//curiousGamblerr

[II./JG77_Manu*]

So you think there are planes with better dive acceleration? please elaborate.

But you are right the Vne is another aspect about the 190 thats really great and can save ones butt.

 

 

One thing that alone is worth the money for the fw is the cosy sound she makes at 700km/h+ 

 

Pretty much any modern Russian plane has at least the same dive acceleration then the 190 ingame...let's see, hopefully this get's fixed with the update in March. 

[Dr_Molem]

109 is as fast if not faster, it dives better, and rolls as well at high speed.

I don't see how the 190 would be the superior fighter in its current state.

[76IAP-Black]

To make Long Story short ..

 

Yes it`s worth to buy, to fly and fight in it

 

Its a masterpiece of 3D work!!!

 

[Willy__]

You are right, of course, but I hate that as much as "feelings." Just post facts or opinions for counterpoints. "There, I fixed it for you" is just so smarmy and does exactly the opposite of swaying another's opinion or encouraging discussion/debate.

 

 

So you think there are planes with better dive acceleration? please elaborate.

But you are right the Vne is another aspect about the 190 thats really great and can save ones butt.

 

 

One thing that alone is worth the money for the fw is the cosy sound she makes at 700km/h+ 

 

Sorry if I sounded like an asshat, but its the truth. Its pretty much well documented that the 190 IRL would dive better than the 109, but take the two planes ingame, make them start with the same alt and speed, guess who wins the race ? The 109!

 

But Bombenlerger make very good points on the next post on how to use the 190! +1 to him!

 

 

 

 

109 is as fast if not faster, it dives better, and rolls as well at high speed. I don't see how the 190 would be the superior fighter in its current state.

 

 

Sorry, but at high speeds the 190 does rolls better than the 109, it also has better elevator authority. Off course this is well over speeds of 500-600 kph.

Edited January 10, 2017 by JAGER_Staiger

[Tomsk]

Q: if the main defense in a 190 is the roll, and you can't use the plane to turn. How do you escape an enemy? You're basically going down a helix, and all the fellow behind has to do is time his shots to you moving in and out his LOF. And if he is patient, he just needs to fly straight and level behind you.

 

So I agree with the post above that the main defence in a 190 is the speed, dive, vne and visibility. Those will save your butt more times than the roll rate.

 

However, I thought I'd say something about the use of roll rate in the defence. So personally I think superior roll rate is the most important attribute in a close in dogfight, even more important than superior turn rate (although that's nice too). That's because of the concept of "planes of manoeuvre". So thinking about a plane it has 3 axes of rotation: pitch, yaw and roll. In an aircraft these axes are not all equivalent: airplanes can pitch up well, pitch down less well, roll well and yaw very poorly. This means to get your nose on a target for a shot you typically have to roll to get your pitch axis to be in line with the opponent, and then pull positive G to get your nose in position. You can add a little yaw for correction, but not a lot. You also can't pitch down very well because you red-out so quickly. 

 

So one way to use of roll rate in the defence is to get outside your opponent's plane of manoeuvre. Your opponent rolls his pitch axis to be in line with where you are, and pulls G to bring the nose round onto you for a shot. So you roll so that your positive pitch axis is perpendicular to his and you pull gently. This means from your opponent's point of view you just moved perpendicular to his pitch axis. This puts you outside his current plane of manoeuvre, if he just keeps pulling his nose won't be onto you and he won't have a shot. The nice thing is you don't have to turn very much to move a long way outside his ability to get to you. So he'll counter by rolling again to put you back onto his pitch axis ... at which point you roll again to put your axis perpendicular to his and pull out of his plane of manoeuvre again. This usually ends up turning into a rolling scissors.

 

Now if you are good at this, and you hold the roll rate advantage, your opponent more or less has no opportunity to shoot you. I've had opponents on my tail who despite firing wildly never had a serious hope of hitting me, I was always outside their plane of manoeuvre. Okay so that keeps you out of trouble, how do you transition to the offensive? Well firstly as the defender you hold the initiative, you go first which means you're opponent is lagging behind your manoeuvres. Secondly if you hold the roll rate advantage you start to get well ahead in this game of "roll out the way". So much so that whilst you are spiralling around in a barrel roll your opponent is more or less going straight, rolling around desperately trying to keep up. You're moving in a spiral path, your opponent is moving in a straight path, and a spiral is longer than a straight line. So even though you're travelling at the same speed, he's making more forward progress than you. He's going to find it very hard not to overshoot. Doubly so if he's being aggressive and constantly working for lead pursuit (which is what you need to take a shot), and most people will pull heavy lead pursuit in this scenario. When he overshoots you can slide onto his tail and gun him down. I've done this many times in planes that roll better against opponents that turn better.

 

The current extremely stall happy FM of the FW makes this rather hard to perform currently, not impossible, but definitely very hard. But it works very well in other simulators, so hopefully when the 190 FM is fixed we'll start to see some good scissor fighting again

Edited January 10, 2017 by Tomsk

[JG13_opcode]

Hmmm, isn't sustained climb performance the deciding factor in the rolling scissors? You don't really roll aggressively in that maneuver, whereas the flat scissors is heavily dependent on aileron reversals.

[Fern]

So I agree with the post above that the main defence in a 190 is the speed, dive, vne and visibility. Those will save your butt more times than the roll rate.

 

However, I thought I'd say something about the use of roll rate in the defence. So personally I think superior roll rate is the most important attribute in a close in dogfight, even more important than superior turn rate (although that's nice too). That's because of the concept of "planes of manoeuvre". So thinking about a plane it has 3 axes of rotation: pitch, yaw and roll. In an aircraft these axes are not all equivalent: airplanes can pitch up well, pitch down less well, roll well and yaw very poorly. This means to get your nose on a target for a shot you typically have to roll to get your pitch axis to be in line with the opponent, and then pull positive G to get your nose in position. You can add a little yaw for correction, but not a lot. You also can't pitch down very well because you red-out so quickly. 

 

So one way to use of roll rate in the defence is to get outside your opponent's plane of manoeuvre. Your opponent rolls his pitch axis to be in line with where you are, and pulls G to bring the nose round onto you for a shot. So you roll so that your positive pitch axis is perpendicular to his and you pull gently. This means from your opponent's point of view you just moved perpendicular to his pitch axis. This puts you outside his current plane of manoeuvre, if he just keeps pulling his nose won't be onto you and he won't have a shot. The nice thing is you don't have to turn very much to move a long way outside his ability to get to you. So he'll counter by rolling again to put you back onto his pitch axis ... at which point you roll again to put your axis perpendicular to his and pull out of his plane of manoeuvre again. This usually ends up turning into a rolling scissors.

 

Now if you are good at this, and you hold the roll rate advantage, your opponent more or less has no opportunity to shoot you. I've had opponents on my tail who despite firing wildly never had a serious hope of hitting me, I was always outside their plane of manoeuvre. Okay so that keeps you out of trouble, how do you transition to the offensive? Well firstly as the defender you hold the initiative, you go first which means you're opponent is lagging behind your manoeuvres. Secondly if you hold the roll rate advantage you start to get well ahead in this game of "roll out the way". So much so that whilst you are spiralling around in a barrel roll your opponent is more or less going straight, rolling around desperately trying to keep up. You're moving in a spiral path, your opponent is moving in a straight path, and a spiral is longer than a straight line. So even though you're travelling at the same speed, he's making more forward progress than you. He's going to find it very hard not to overshoot. Doubly so if he's being aggressive and constantly working for lead pursuit (which is what you need to take a shot), and most people will pull heavy lead pursuit in this scenario. When he overshoots you can slide onto his tail and gun him down. I've done this many times in planes that roll better against opponents that turn better.

 

The current extremely stall happy FM of the FW makes this rather hard to perform currently, not impossible, but definitely very hard. But it works very well in other simulators, so hopefully when the 190 FM is fixed we'll start to see some good scissor fighting again

 

Wont you lose a [edited] ton speed with those maneuvers, rendering you a sitting duck for the five yaks that chased you down and didnt over shoot you? Seems like anytime you pitch up with the 190 you're losing lots of speed and E. Not to mention with its horrible acceleration and climb rate. [edited]

 

Dangerous advise especially if you're just starting to fly it. The added non linearity will eventually bite back on landing or incase you eventually need more than 50% controll deflection with highly inaccurate output.

 

Instead I advise to start off with linear setting (0% sensetivity) and get to fly it a little. If its really uncontrollable add a few % sensetivity and test again. In general you want your curve to be as linear as possible to give you the same accurancy threwout the whole joystick movement range.

 

You're probably right, I'm a horrible dogfighter. So I wouldnt listen to me either. Not being sarcastic. I have a [edited] Logitech 3D stick, not a 300 dollar stick. The 100% pitch sensitivity seems to stabilize the nose of 109s and the 190 for me.

 

 

 

The added non linearity will eventually bite back on landing or incase you eventually need more than 50% controll deflection with highly inaccurate output.

 

It's really rare that I get to land the 190, so that's a mute point for me. 

 

7. Comments containing profanity, personal insults, accusations of cheating, excessive rudeness, vulgarity, drug propaganda, political and religious discussion and propaganda, all manifestations of Nazism and racist statements, calls to overthrow governments by force, inciting ethnic hatred, humiliation of persons of a particular gender, sexual orientation or religion are not allowed and will result in a ban.

 

Verbal warning

Edited January 10, 2017 by SYN_Haashashin
Lenguage.