Jump to content
1_Robert_

G6 vs La5fn

Recommended Posts

I just pre-ordered both of them, so I'll try it from both sides.

 

I usually fly Russian aircraft, and I like to drag the opposition down onto the tree tops and then go to work on them, preferably in mountainous terrain. It gives them other things to think about besides shooting at me while I'm busy lining them up. So I'm thinking the La-5FN is going to be right up my alley. We'll see.

 

But the G6 will get its flight time, too. I like the 109s now and then, when I don't feel like scaring the squirrels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, not true.   The La-5 we have in-game already rolls as fast as a 190.  So the FN that's coming down the pike will have to have an 'improved roll-rate', so actually superior to the Focke-Wulf.   Yup.

 

This is the comparison I'm particularly interested in, the La-5 FN vs the FW 190 A-5. If I've understood correctly, the La-5FN is faster than the 190 below 4Km. Out climbs it at most altitudes, and at all climb speeds (high-speed climbing is a thing). Out turns it at all speeds, and has comparable roll rate. If so then the word I'd use to describe it is that the La-5 FN "dominates" the FW 190 A-5 (out runs, out climbs, out turns, out rolls).

 

Side note: we really need an equivalent of IL-2 Compare for IL2 BoX ... that tool is so useful!

Edited by Tomsk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Side note: we really need an equivalent of IL-2 Compare for IL2 BoX ... that tool is so useful!

If anyone provides the data about speeds and climb rates we can easily import them into the old Il-2 compare and use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I always find these Discussions a little odd. They are both fighter Aircraft and therefore nimble and made to perform. Hell, an aggressively flown I-16 is a dangerous target for a 190 and those two are lightyears apart. And my Stuka has more Airkill Notches than all my other Aircraft.

 

This mindset of the superior aircraft granting automatic wins is a Syndrome most Luftwaffles suffer from already, and I find it really odd. Even in a matchup between those two, the Pilot who knows how to play his aircraft's strengths better than the other does his, will still prevail, no matter how good the Aircraft.

 

We for example are working on gittin gud with the P-40s with some success and are learning to play it's very few strengths in our favour, and it works against brilliantly against enemy Pilots who missjudge its capabilites.

 

1 on 1s are irrelevant most of the time and the FN simply lacks in the same points the current La-5 does. It will fall apart in dives, suck at deflection shooting and be short of breath above 2000m. And in Combat 2000m are a matter of Seconds if the German Pilot isn't utterly greedy.

There is a skill cap however. If both pilots know both machines to the highest degree they can anticipate each others moves and when one plane is faster, more maneuverable and turns better then the other pilot can only hope for a mistake of the pilot of the superior machine.

 

There is no simple answer with "git gud". It is never 100% sure someone with better plane will win, but that doesn't mean that your skill and knowledge can help you when facing technological superiority.

 

But I do agree that most put too much emphasis on the plane itself, but in my opinion, in a flawed way. They like the aesthetics of the plane and want to feel good flying and winning. They already have the better plane 109G2,F4, 190, but they want those planes to be like the legends they read about.

Edited by =LD=Solty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the comparison I'm particularly interested in, the La-5 FN vs the FW 190 A-5. If I've understood correctly, the La-5FN is faster than the 190 below 4Km.

This is almost certainly not true. The extra boost (forsazh) completely loses its effectiveness above 2000m, and then you are left with the performance of the La-5 (with boost).

 

Around 2K I think the Fw 190 will have performance parity and from there it will only gain advantage, as you go higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the 190A5 on the deck still very marginally faster than the FN?

Possibly faster than an early series FN, but later in its production run the FN did something like 583 km/h at sea level, which is faster than the A5 with outlets closed at emergency power.

 

In any case, the FN will be faster than the A5 on combat power.

Edited by Finkeren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

190A-5 is as fast as the FN on Deck at Emergency, but the FN will be on Forsazh as well there. The Two will match well.

Edited by 6./ZG26_Klaus-Mann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Around 2K I think the Fw 190 will have performance parity

I am not sure about that, as the FW190 loses power between 2 and 3k because of less manifold pressure. But above 3k you are certainly right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure about that, as the FW190 loses power between 2 and 3k because of less manifold pressure. But above 3k you are certainly right.

Yeah, but the FN loses well over 150hp between 0 and 2K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is almost certainly not true. The extra boost (forsazh) completely loses its effectiveness above 2000m, and then you are left with the performance of the La-5 (with boost).

 

Around 2K I think the Fw 190 will have performance parity and from there it will only gain advantage, as you go higher.

 

Yes although the Fw 190 is not great at 2K due to the super charger gear switching at 2.6K. The IL-2 Compare data (which is not the same as IL2 BoX I agree, but it's something) suggests the 190 should start to pull ahead after 3.5K. If that proves to be true in IL2 BoK as well (or there abouts) then that's pretty high in terms of the typical combat altitudes found in the sim. 

 

 

In any case, the FN will be faster than the A5 on combat power.

 

Yeah on emergency it's close, and on combat as you say it's likely the FN will be faster. Overall 190's should expect to get caught trying to run on the deck. Which is gonna be tough for us 190 fans as that's always been one of the big advantages it has over the competition :)

 

 

If anyone provides the data about speeds and climb rates we can easily import them into the old Il-2 compare and use it.

 

That is the tricky part isn't it, getting the data :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and that somehow means the developers could never have uncovered new info? 

 

ah, yes - this old nugget again.

 

"Sekret Dokuments" :)

 

It's literally a cure-all for anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you tried old il2's La5FN? Do you think they ' gonna use German test data?

 

No, but it might be some of the most relevant data on the FN.

 

As far as old il2's La5FN - I wouldn't bring that up as anything comparable to what we've seen here - the La-5 in the sim is done very well, with the exception of it's too-good roll rate.

 

The Lavochkins that Oleg trotted out were a product of their time I guess. Best to leave them dead and buried. This sim does it much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but it might be some of the most relevant data on the FN.

Using test data from captured prize aircraft is never the best option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using test data from captured prize aircraft is never the best option.

 

No kidding? - can you show where I said it was?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a matchup I’m very much looking forward to, especially after trying the new flight model a few nights ago (hadn’t flown in over a year).

Welcome back. We had some interesting discussions back in the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah, yes - this old nugget again.

 

"Sekret Dokuments" :)

 

It's literally a cure-all for anything.

 

No, it's called "the developers have more ready access to the archives in Moscow and have their reasons for not making their test data public."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's called "the developers have more ready access to the archives in Moscow and have their reasons for not making their test data public."

 

 

I struggle to see any clear distinction between Cujo's initial comment and your reply. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's called "the developers have more ready access to the archives in Moscow and have their reasons for not making their test data public."

 

What could such reasons be? Im just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly classified, maybe they are allowed to look into the docs but not copy them and they just take notes. Maybe it's just too much effort to put it all online, let alone they might not find it necessary.

 

In the the end, does it really matter?

Edited by Windmills

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classified German documents say that FW 190 Anton 5 was going 605 km/h on sea level. I have them right here, but I cannot show you, it's classified.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not classified, I bet it just is a source they want to keep from competing companies. And I can understand that. Why should anyone benefit from things you have spent time and money on getting

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the issue of the La-5FN... I was watching Jason's little airfield demo and the roll rate on the La-5FN Series 2 as he showed off is pretty much the same as the La-5 Series 8. Which has me wondering if the Series 8 has improvements over earlier and slower rolling Lavochkins or what. I don't know but at this point the video seems to suggest an aircraft that handles a little better by the numbers than the La-5 Series 8 but isn't the over the top La-5FN from IL-2: Forgotten Battles (loved/hated that plane :)).

 

I'm seriously doubting that the La-5FN is going to be anything like the way it was originally represented in IL-2: Forgotten Battles. We've come a long way from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classified German documents say that FW 190 Anton 5 was going 605 km/h on sea level. I have them right here, but I cannot show you, it's classified.

I have a Sikrit Dokkumint that sais the 109G-6 could reach 630 on Sea Level when you get the Meredith Effect just right. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real reason that they don't divulge the data or its source is because this pleasant, crackling campfire of discussion that we're having right now would turn into an El Niño-whipped conflagration of staggering, mythical proportions about thirty seconds after they released the data. The railing, angst, second guessing, counter-arguing, wailing, and gnashing of teeth would be unbearable and would eventually chase all non-OCD personnel away from this forum forever.

 

Don't believe me? Go over to Brand-X's forum and start a thread about the flight model of your favorite aircraft module and see what happens.

 

:P:lol::wacko:

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really happy the Russians will soon have the best plane in the game, because I won't feel guilty flying a German plane anymore.  <g>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always the same, everyone but the LW is over-modelled using the best data available.

 

Exactly why the LW always outnumbers the, currently only VVS, online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much better LW aircraft may or may not be, in certain circumstances, is totally irrelevant.  The issue is, are they accurate?  That's all that matters.  If LW a/c are over-performing, as you seem to suggest, they should be corrected.  That should go without saying IMO.   So which ones do you think the devs got wrong?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fw190A5 performance at 1.42 ata:

 

fw190-a5manual-pg11.jpg

 

Without the outboard MGFF's weight dropped to 3,855 kg and the top speed at 1.42 ata increased by ~5 km/h from SL and up:  565 km/h @ SL & 665 km/h at 6.3 km.

 

At 1.65 ata top speed increased to 580+ km/h at SL, and 680+ km/h at 6.3 km.

 

Idle stall speed with flaps & gear up was ~160 km/h (99.4 mph)

Edited by Panthera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's called "the developers have more ready access to the archives in Moscow and have their reasons for not making their test data public."

 

 

I struggle to see any clear distinction between Cujo's initial comment and your reply. 

 

 

Classified German documents say that FW 190 Anton 5 was going 605 km/h on sea level. I have them right here, but I cannot show you, it's classified.

 

 

LMAO this made my day. 

 

Just to show how some people has double standards....  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much better LW aircraft may or may not be, in certain circumstances, is totally irrelevant.  The issue is, are they accurate?  That's all that matters.  If LW a/c are over-performing, as you seem to suggest, they should be corrected.  That should go without saying IMO.   So which ones do you think the devs got wrong?

 

Have to agree Wulf and want to reiterate that its important in these debates about aircraft performance that we are not or should not be in the business of comparing the aircraft versus other aircraft (that's a separate debate) but looking for accuracy.

 

If the La-5FN is the best at whatever... if there's data that says it then I'm good with that. If someone has contrary info that's great too. I'm interested in the accuracy of the modeling, the details and nuances of that, and by and large the team does a great job. They haven't been perfect but then point me to anyone who truly got it right every time in a flight sim.

 

And I should tack on... I realize that the thread is literally called Bf109G-6 vs La-5FN but it ended up being a FM discussion anyways. :cool:

Edited by ShamrockOneFive
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real reason that they don't divulge the data or its source is because this pleasant, crackling campfire of discussion that we're having right now would turn into an El Niño-whipped conflagration of staggering, mythical proportions about thirty seconds after they released the data. The railing, angst, second guessing, counter-arguing, wailing, and gnashing of teeth would be unbearable and would eventually chase all non-OCD personnel away from this forum forever.

 

Don't believe me? Go over to Brand-X's forum and start a thread about the flight model of your favorite aircraft module and see what happens.

 

:P:lol::wacko:

This ^^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I've got some sekrit documents saying the Mosquito should be flyable in BoBo but I can't share them either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...... but I cannot show you, it's classified.

post-102894-0-02380900-1514881011_thumb.jpg

Edited by Semor76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The German tests on captured La-5FN are interesting but does it show the information on what date the aircraft was captured, the date of the tests and more specifically what actual series/model it was

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somes said the La5FN will out-turn the G6. I'm really not so sure about that. It's also depend of what kind of turns we are talking about.

Of course at high speed 109 won't out-turn almost anything with his stick as heavy as a freight train. But at slow speed, in sustaining turn with full power? For the moment all 109 variants out-turn the La5 s8. So with the 5FN and G6, it could be equivalent... ?

 

Btw in the video, I dont see a real improvement in turn compare to the La5 s8 (just my opinion, and it's only a video).

Edited by F/JG300_Faucon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hans Werner Lerche's book mentiones the first airworthy La 5 FN was captured in September 1944.

 

I have also read info supporting that date, but not anything that could be stated as a fact, because also have read it was from 43, and other sources not giving specific date but mentioning Kursk and that the testing was in 44

 

The date is important but not quite so much as series production number/model type, although there were many small changes there are a lot of differences between FN models, 

 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somes said the La5FN will out-turn the G6. I'm really not so sure about that. It's also depend of what kind of turns we are talking about.

Of course at high speed 109 won't out-turn almost anything with his stick as heavy as a freight train. But at slow speed, in sustaining turn with full power? For the moment all 109 variants out-turn the La5 s8. So with the 5FN and G6, it could be equivalent... ?

 

Btw in the video, I dont see a real improvement in turn compare to the La5 s8 (just my opinion, and it's only a video).

 

Yeah I agree with this, with a slightly heavier 109 and a more powerful La5 intuitively (based the current differences) I would say that the best the FN can hope for is parity in this regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...