Spitfire Mk V is the MOST maneuverable plane?

[battlefield_2016]

Hi folks,

 

For an experiment sake, I tried to determine the most maneuverable plane for a dogfight  . Interestingly, according to the IL-2 BOK/BOM sim, Spitfire MK V (AI, Veteran level) is the plane that can't be hardly beat by anything, especially at low altitude scrimmage. So what can theoretically beat the Spitfire in one-on-one? Here's what I figured:

 

1) Yak-1 can be somewhat an equal opponent, but again, it turned out to be hard to keep up with the Spitfire climbing and turning on you

2) I-16 short turning radius helps until the Spitfire gains speed

3) MIG-3 can run away from the Spitfire with a further sharp flat turn for a head to head attack, and MIG-3 turning radius is better than LA-5F

4) LA-5F became the biggest disappointment in this comparison. It's hard to do anything vs the Spitfire, LA-5F climbing rate is somewhat helpful, but turning radius is awful. (Folks, cheer me up about the LA-5F in case I don't know how to properly fly it - I love the plane).

5) Me-109F is not helping either, although it is possible to run away in 109G to turn around for a head to head attack

 

I had a similar experience with the excellent maneuverability of a Macchi MC 202 vs the mentioned Soviet planes, so I would like to raise a few questions here for the pilot community and developers:

- Could the maneuverability characteristics (physical model) of the Spitfire MK V and the Macchi MC 202 be inaccurate in the simulator due to contradicting/insufficient historical data? It feels like if you fly a Spitfire you can beat a@@ to pretty much any plane (...that's how the Battle for Britain was won and Me-109E/F are just pathetically inferior !)

- LA-5F is known to be a great fighter plane, but did it really have such a poor horizontal maneuverability?

 

Any practical and topic related input is welcome. Thanks!

Edited December 20, 2017 by battlefield_2016

[Finkeren]

A couple points:

 

- The Spit Mk. V is absolutely no. 1 when it comes to pulling angles, and I think that is pretty much correct. Yak-1 comes close in sustained turn though.

 

- The La-5 has pretty good horizontal maneuverability, but you need to keep your speed up. It is not great at energy retention, so endless turn fighting is not its forte.

 

- The MiG-3 is awesome - deal with it!

[battlefield_2016]

Thanks Finkeren, I have been really pleased with the MiG-3 as well. My favorite plane, on par with the LA-5F.

[Jade_Monkey]

I16 is good but has a nasty stall.

 

I'd say Spitfire has the best turn, great for turn fights.

[battlefield_2016]

Did any of you guys try this challenge when you fight (human vs AI) the best possible plane in the sim with an inferior plane? In approximately 10 one on one dogfights, I had 8:2 ratio of wins to Spitfire vs LA-5F. Any suggestions on the tactics for LA-5F?

[Max_Damage]

You can fly in a straight line, hopefully gaining some speed over the spit. Then, you go vertical and do smooth wave-like yoyo maneuvers which accumulates a bit more energy into your plane. The goal here is to finally do a vertical chandelle, reverse and do a hammerhead on the spit. The idea here is that in theory your plane can get more energy especially if you are faster. which you then translate into a vertical chandelle with greater altitude gained compared to your opponent.

 

This probably wont work with the la5 because said energy accumulation advantage is not big enough to overcome the advantage that a plane on your 6 has. But it should work with f4/g2. When it works, that usually means that your plane is just technically superior. Like in case with me109 and say yak1.

Edited December 20, 2017 by Max_Damage

[Finkeren]

I would suggest learning to fight the Spit in the Fw 190 first. With the La-5F it’s basically the same thing, but it is just slightly worse than the 190 across the board.

[battlefield_2016]

I wonder how the situation will change with the La-5FN. There is also P-39 Aircobra that Pokryshkin preferred to other soviet airplanes, I can't wait to test it out. 

Edited December 20, 2017 by battlefield_2016

[Max_Damage]

LA5fn will be just superior to it. It means that it will be able to gain ~40 kmh on top of it and safely go vertical. The distance will be safe at all times. 

Edited December 20, 2017 by Max_Damage

[battlefield_2016]

I guess my main point is the accuracy of flight model recreation in this simulator. I tend to think either the Spitfire's capability to pull angles is slightly exaggerated, or the  La-5F flight model is slightly off in terms of horizontal maneuverability. According to numerous memoirs of the soviet pilots, they considered Yaks and La-5 the most capable and combat agile airplanes, whereas Yaks were more maneuverable than Messerschmitts and La-5 were superior in the same fashion to Fw-190. Again, it all boils down to what plane gets on your 6 after you spend 15-20 min doing all sorts of vertical maneuvers and trying to avoid stalling in turns. I mean, when I purchased the La-5 collector's plane, I was unpleasantly surprised how clumsy it is in the horizontal maneuvering. 

 

I'm not trying to offend here the Spitfire fans. It's all about historical accuracy.

Edited December 20, 2017 by battlefield_2016

[Finkeren]

La-5FN will be superior in every concievable way to the La-5 (except range) and in the right hands could well be the strongest fighter below 2000m, but it will not become easier to do well in, and I still think we’ll see far more Yaks than La-5FNs online.

 

The P-39 is a total dark horse for me, I can see it go in any direction. That’s part of what makes it do exciting for me.

[battlefield_2016]

I anticipate P-39 with a great horizontal maneuverability on par with the Spitfire but stricter flight model than the Spitfire in terms of critical maneuvers (well known unrecoverable flat spin). Although Pokryshkin in his memoirs said he never had unrecoverable flat spins. 

Edited December 20, 2017 by battlefield_2016

[Max_Damage]

I guess my main point is the accuracy of flight model recreation in this simulator. I tend to think either the Spitfire's capability to pull angles is slightly exaggerated, or the  La-5F flight model is slightly off in terms of horizontal maneuverability. According to numerous memoirs of the soviet pilots, they considered Yaks and La-5 the most capable and combat agile airplanes, whereas Yaks were more maneuverable than Messerschmitts and La-5 were superior in the same fashion to Fw-190. Again, it all boils down to what plane gets on your 6 after you spend 15-20 min doing all sorts of vertical maneuvers and trying to avoid stalling in turns. I mean, when I purchased the La-5 collector's plane, I was unpleasantly surprised how clumsy it is in the horizontal maneuvering. 

I just want to point one thing the plane that we have is not a la5f. It is a la5. And it behaves appropriately when compared to its real life stats. Dont worry about that. When compared to a G2 it can do SOME turning. Not against f4 ofc.

 

P39 is going to be slow to accelerate. The pilots said that it required some time to get going. its going to be bad at low alt compared to a yak1b im pretty sure. But it will have a lot of ammo.

Edited December 20, 2017 by Max_Damage

[CIA_Yankee_]

- The MiG-3 is awesome - deal with it!

 

I have to ask: are you being facetious here?

 

If you're not, I would appreciate any advice on how to get the best out of the Mig-3, and to know in what ways it is superior to the Yak-1 (for example).

 

I know it's the best high altitude VVS fighter (aside from the Yak-1b, perhaps?)... but that alone is a bit of a trap: sure, its at its best at high altitude, but that's also the altitude where the LW fighters dominate. Even if the performance margin for the Mig3 is narrower at high altitude, you're still hanging out in their playground. Conversely, for example, with the Yak-1 you actually do have some advantages over the LW fighters under certain circumstances (on the deck, when they're busy attacking bombers, and the likes).

[Finkeren]

The MiG is in no way superior to the Yak-1b below 4000m.

 

It's still awesome though.

[battlefield_2016]

71st_AH_Yankee_,

 

MiG-3 is just fast and solid, that's how it feels to me. Try to fight Spitfire Mk V using Yak-1 and then MiG-3. Yak is light, it's great but not as fast even at low altitude. MiG-3 goes up to 580 km/h at sea level, to the pilot's advantage. 

 

How to use squeeze maximum out of the MiG? WOT and pull high G's at maximum possible speed, it's still stable in the horizontal. 

Edited December 20, 2017 by battlefield_2016

[battlefield_2016]

You know folks, out of sheer curiosity, if you are interested, can someone here also try to dogfight the Spitfire Mk V (AI, Veteran)? If you haven't done so, try it and share your experience here, I would be delighted

 

I suggest comparing Yak-1b and MiG-3, and if you are very enthusiastic, try La-5 as well (Note, there's a modification that allows using unlimited WOT - doesn't help anyway lol)

Edited December 20, 2017 by battlefield_2016

[Finkeren]

The Spit is probably the only fighter where I find veteran/ace AI harder to beat than the average human opponent.

[Lemon]

Did any of you guys try this challenge when you fight (human vs AI) the best possible plane in the sim with an inferior plane? In approximately 10 one on one dogfights, I had 8:2 ratio of wins to Spitfire vs LA-5F. Any suggestions on the tactics for LA-5F?

hi, i play  PWCG 3.x , on Kuban map rarely  AI 109 s wingman can do anything against the spitfire, i think the biggest difference is they don't loose speed much when they are maneuvering, they rarely caught with energy disadvantage,

so you can t do mistakes if want to catch them

[Lensman]

Much as I love the Spitfire (they often fly over my house) its measly popgun and 3 rounds of nail sized ammunition do it a disservice.

[CIA_Yankee_]

Much as I love the Spitfire (they often fly over my house) its measly popgun and 3 rounds of nail sized ammunition do it a disservice.

 

I dunno, I get some good value out of its firepower. The cannons are absolutely deadly, and there's 2 of them, while the machineguns have plenty of ammunition to use them as a way to hurt enemies in situations where you're not too sure of the firing solution.

 

That being said, the machineguns are definitely a "death by a thousand cuts" weapon: only with exceptional skill or luck are you going to get a dramatic kill with them. What you're much more likely to do is inflict damage to the engine that will eventually disable it, but you're not going to blow off wings and elevators with them. In fact, even in CloD that's how it goes, and those Mk Is have 8 machineguns.

[Barnacles]

You know folks, out of sheer curiosity, if you are interested, can someone here also try to dogfight the Spitfire Mk V (AI, Veteran)? If you haven't done so, try it and share your experience here, I would be delighted

 

I suggest comparing Yak-1b and MiG-3, and if you are very enthusiastic, try La-5 as well (Note, there's a modification that allows using unlimited WOT - doesn't help anyway lol)

 

I took you up on your suggestion and flew an LA5 against a vet Spit in QMB, starting head on at 3000m, initially after the merge I decended using a sprial to get the thing off my 6, then found it easy to keep at arms length by keeping at high speed  when merging then using the LA5's speed to extend level. I found it incredibly hard to seal the deal though, as even with high yoyos I found it difficult to get on its 6. This went on for a while and I was thinking it is indeed impossible to beat, then I realised like a noob I had left the supercharger on stage 2. After changing the supercharger, at low alt, it was possible to use the LA5's rate of climb, acceleration and speed gain in a shallow dive to quicky get an energy and positional advantage.

[Max_Damage]

You know folks, out of sheer curiosity, if you are interested, can someone here also try to dogfight the Spitfire Mk V (AI, Veteran)? If you haven't done so, try it and share your experience here, I would be delighted

 

I suggest comparing Yak-1b and MiG-3, and if you are very enthusiastic, try La-5 as well (Note, there's a modification that allows using unlimited WOT - doesn't help anyway lol)

LF spitfire? merlin 45 or 46

Edited December 20, 2017 by Max_Damage

[battlefield_2016]

I took you up on your suggestion and flew an LA5 against a vet Spit in QMB, starting head on at 3000m, initially after the merge I decended using a sprial to get the thing off my 6, then found it easy to keep at arms length by keeping at high speed  when merging then using the LA5's speed to extend level. I found it incredibly hard to seal the deal though, as even with high yoyos I found it difficult to get on its 6. This went on for a while and I was thinking it is indeed impossible to beat, then I realised like a noob I had left the supercharger on stage 2. After changing the supercharger, at low alt, it was possible to use the LA5's rate of climb, acceleration and speed gain in a shallow dive to quicky get an energy and positional advantage.

Thanks a lot for sharing. I usually start the dogfight at 1000 m and if the initial head to head attack is not successful, then the whole mess begins. In my settings I believe I have an automatic supercharger setting and the most I can do is to gain some distance away from the Spitfire then sharply turn around onto the opponent, and then everything boils down to testing luck in occasional head to head attacks and this stuff can go indefinitely, otherwise AI wins, imho.

[Max_Damage]

Well it is impossible against a spit LF with 45 engine. Against 46 it is barely possible in theory.

 

You need to accumulate speed up to ~600 kmh using yoyos and then do a chandelle, hope for the best.

 

 

Against 45 you need some better plane. maybe ill try with a g2/f4.

[battlefield_2016]

I dunno, I get some good value out of its firepower. The cannons are absolutely deadly, and there's 2 of them, while the machineguns have plenty of ammunition to use them as a way to hurt enemies in situations where you're not too sure of the firing solution.

 

That being said, the machineguns are definitely a "death by a thousand cuts" weapon: only with exceptional skill or luck are you going to get a dramatic kill with them. What you're much more likely to do is inflict damage to the engine that will eventually disable it, but you're not going to blow off wings and elevators with them. In fact, even in CloD that's how it goes, and those Mk Is have 8 machineguns.

I find the Spitfire's machine guns are extremely efficient at short distance, just like ShKAS on I-16. 

Well it is impossible against a spit LF with 45 engine. Against 46 it is barely possible in theory.

 

You need to accumulate speed up to ~600 kmh using yoyos and then do a chandelle, hope for the best.

 

 

Against 45 you need some better plane. maybe ill try with a g2/f4.

Thanks!!! 

[RAY-EU]

The firts Fw190 saw combat over the Channel front in September 1941 had no inkiling of the new fighter's development . The early 190s were superior to the Spitfire mk V being faster and more agile , gave German pilots the edge over Spitfire Mk V in 1941 and 1942 . '

' Aircraft of WW2 Amber Books UK 2014 '

[Barnacles]

Thanks a lot for sharing. I usually start the dogfight at 1000 m and if the initial head to head attack is not successful, then the whole mess begins. In my settings I believe I have an automatic supercharger setting and the most I can do is to gain some distance away from the Spitfire then sharply turn around onto the opponent, and then everything boils down to testing luck in occasional head to head attacks and this stuff can go indefinitely, otherwise AI wins, imho.

 

Worth noting for the LA5 especially, the auto engine management is REALLY conservative with the temperatures. On the LA5 this is a particular problem as high outlet cowl openings are very draggy on that plane. You can get a significant amount of speed my going to manual vice auto. I noticed when I was at 1000m even with my erronious use of stage 2 supercharger I was gaining in a level chase with 0% outlet cowls. The auto feature would have them close to wide open at this stage.

[battlefield_2016]

Anybody else to try this "ice bucket challenge" to fight the Spitfire Mk V using La-5F (select continuous WOT in the modifications), or MiG-3? Or any German plane with comparable to the Spitfire Mk V top speed?

Only consistent win tactics counts )))

Worth noting for the LA5 especially, the auto engine management is REALLY conservative with the temperatures. On the LA5 this is a particular problem as high outlet cowl openings are very draggy on that plane. You can get a significant amount of speed my going to manual vice auto. I noticed when I was at 1000m even with my erronious use of stage 2 supercharger I was gaining in a level chase with 0% outlet cowls. The auto feature would have them close to wide open at this stage.

Thanks for the suggestions, I will be testing it tonight. I really appreciate your contribution to the topic guys.

[Barnacles]

Anybody else to try this "ice bucket challenge" to fight the Spitfire Mk V using La-5F (select continuous WOT in the modifications), or MiG-3? Or any German plane with comparable to the Spitfire Mk V top speed?

Only consistent win tactics counts )))

Thanks for the suggestions, I will be testing it tonight. I really appreciate your contribution to the topic guys.

 

Another point is the AI is really crap in scissors, especially in the spit. The La5's roll rate makes it strong there.

[Mac_Messer]

 

I had a similar experience with the excellent maneuverability of a Macchi MC 202 vs the mentioned Soviet planes, so I would like to raise a few questions here for the pilot community and developers:

- Could the maneuverability characteristics (physical model) of the Spitfire MK V and the Macchi MC 202 be inaccurate in the simulator due to contradicting/insufficient historical data? It feels like if you fly a Spitfire you can beat a@@ to pretty much any plane (...that's how the Battle for Britain was won and Me-109E/F are just pathetically inferior !)

- LA-5F is known to be a great fighter plane, but did it really have such a poor horizontal maneuverability?

 

Any practical and topic related input is welcome. Thanks!

 

Comparing a BoB scenario to a 1941-42 is prety much irrelevant. In BoB the Spit and Emil were very close while from that on, the development of both planes went by different routes.

 

As the La5-FN showed, the La5-F compared to it suffered mainly from being underpowered, while its general airframe assets were mostly the same. 1943`s Lavochkin is a great all arounder while the Spit excels in heavy G maneuvering.

 

If you asked is that realistic now in IL2, the answer were to be somewhat ambivalent. Yes, the aircraft can pull the turns, the pilots not neccessarily.

[Herne]

You know folks, out of sheer curiosity, if you are interested, can someone here also try to dogfight the Spitfire Mk V (AI, Veteran)? If you haven't done so, try it and share your experience here, I would be delighted

 

I suggest comparing Yak-1b and MiG-3, and if you are very enthusiastic, try La-5 as well (Note, there's a modification that allows using unlimited WOT - doesn't help anyway lol)

 

quick mission 2 flights v 2 flights (8v8) i was in a fw190 A3 other flight on my team was 109 F4's against 4 spits and 4 yaks everyone on vet difficulty. We won the day. but the same was true when i took a spit against the FW's and 109's.

 

good thing about the furballs is that they are not all gunning for you, and you get an opportunity to pick them off while they are after your team mates

 

As for flight model accuracy, I think the Dev's take great pride in this series. It may not be perfect (I have never flown a real Spit V so who am I to judge) but I don't think you'll find a more accurate spit VB flight model anywhere else. There is a ton of performance data out there in the public domain, Dev's work hard on these virtual birds to make them perform as close as they can to the data they have.

Edited December 21, 2017 by =11=herne

[unreasonable]

I guess my main point is the accuracy of flight model recreation in this simulator. I tend to think either the Spitfire's capability to pull angles is slightly exaggerated, or the  La-5F flight model is slightly off in terms of horizontal maneuverability. According to numerous memoirs of the soviet pilots, they considered Yaks and La-5 the most capable and combat agile airplanes, whereas Yaks were more maneuverable than Messerschmitts and La-5 were superior in the same fashion to Fw-190. Again, it all boils down to what plane gets on your 6 after you spend 15-20 min doing all sorts of vertical maneuvers and trying to avoid stalling in turns. I mean, when I purchased the La-5 collector's plane, I was unpleasantly surprised how clumsy it is in the horizontal maneuvering. 

 

I'm not trying to offend here the Spitfire fans. It's all about historical accuracy.

 

Do not forget that very few VVS pilots ever saw, let alone flew, a Spitfire V. Very few ended up in Russia. There were a lot more Spitfire IXs sent later on, but these were flown by the PVO (air defense) service, a separate military branch.

 

Also that for a Soviet pilot to say that a capitalist aircraft - German or British - was superior overall would not be optimal for his career. 

 

If you want to do comparisons better just to stick to the data. You might be interested in JtD's thread in which he has done a number of systematic tests.     https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25336-another-look-turn-times/

[RAY-EU]

& by this way we have tested and know by far , that We have the conclusions for the performance and capavilities that now a day the : Lavokin 5 of this video is allready the La 5 FN .

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Also consider that the La-5 we have in game is the early version, similar to that of the 1942 LaGG in terms of airframe. The F engine modification makes the boost unlimited, but it's still an early La-5 with an F engine, it lacks the improvements a 1943 production La-5F would have.

[Tomsk]

After changing the supercharger, at low alt, it was possible to use the LA5's rate of climb, acceleration and speed gain in a shallow dive to quicky get an energy and positional advantage.

Very interesting, I’ve tried high speed energy tactics against the Spit Mk V in the FW 190, which is much like the LA-5 but a little better in most respects. I didn’t have a lot of luck. As I understand it the 190 should gain energy over the Spit in a shallow high-speed climb, but I could make no substantial gains. Maybe I’m doing it wrong, I’d love to hear how you did it in the LA-5 in detail.

 

I also wonder if the Spit is over modelled (or I suppose the 190 under modelled). In real life the Spit V was considered inferior to the 190 in every aspect except slow speed turning. Indeed this is why the Spit IX was so desperately introduced, the Spit V was being dominated by the 190. However I’ve found the Spit seems to climb better than the 190 (historically it did not), and although it is slower the difference is not huge.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Tomsk

[Wulf]

LA5fn will be just superior to it. It means that it will be able to gain ~40 kmh on top of it and safely go vertical. The distance will be safe at all times. 

 

 

Don't forget the roll-rate.  The La-5FN had much improved roll when compared to La-5.  Can't wait to see what that looks like. 

 

 

As for flight model accuracy, I think the Dev's take great pride in this series. It may not be perfect (I have never flown a real Spit V so who am I to judge) but I don't think you'll find a more accurate spit VB flight model anywhere else. There is a ton of performance data out there in the public domain, Dev's work hard on these virtual birds to make them perform as close as they can to the data they have.

 

 

No no no .... we don't have to guess.  The Air Fighting Development Unit at Duxford conducted a comparative trial between an A-3 and a Mk VB in July '42.  The results are available online.  

[Barnacles]

Very interesting, I’ve tried high speed energy tactics against the Spit Mk V in the FW 190, which is much like the LA-5 but a little better in most respects. I didn’t have a lot of luck. As I understand it the 190 should gain energy over the Spit in a shallow high-speed climb, but I could make no substantial gains. Maybe I’m doing it wrong, I’d love to hear how you did it in the LA-5 in detail.

 

I also wonder if the Spit is over modelled (or I suppose the 190 under modelled). In real life the Spit V was considered inferior to the 190 in every aspect except slow speed turning. Indeed this is why the Spit IX was so desperately introduced, the Spit V was being dominated by the 190. However I’ve found the Spit seems to climb better than the 190 (historically it did not), and although it is slower the difference is not huge.

Against the spit I followed the merge with a gentle immelmann back towards the Spit. More often this would result in another head on, so I would generally dive under the Spit, not turn, but gain seperation then use the climb rate to steepen the climb to get above the spit. By this time you've only turned 180 compared to the AI's 360, so because of the power of the la 5 and 190 you should be able to gain an advantage from there. The slight problem is that the Spit can climb around the same rate, but the AI is generally poor at choosing what speed to do its climbs at. A faster climb will benifit an LA5 or 190.

 

On your second point, I don't think it's overmodelled performance wise. The spit in BoS is a late mk V with 16lbs boost, which was introduced as a countermeasure to the appearance of the 190. If you look at the power to weight ratio of the merlin 45 model at full power v the 190 you'll see that they are quite close, so for climb rate at least for me I'd expect the spit to be better.

Edited December 21, 2017 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[Barnacles]

 

 

 

No no no .... we don't have to guess. The Air Fighting Development Unit at Duxford conducted a comparative trial between an A-3 and a Mk VB in July '42. The results are available online.

The 190 was better in every way apart from turning circle. I read somewhere that the test was conducted at 9lbs boost 2850 rpm for the spit though.

[Finkeren]

The 190 was better in every way apart from turning circle. I read somewhere that the test was conducted at 9lbs boost 2850 rpm for the spit though.

Sounds about right for what we have in the sim.