HS 129 ... i knew it is bad but not that it is this bad!

[E4GLEyE]

So today, i fired up a career on Kuban as a duck pilot... and dayum, first 2 days went down with me spinning violently around on the tarmac, the 3th day I managed to take to the air, had to keep hear about 1.1 AtA just not to fall out of the sky, and while slowly creeping to the tank column (100 km away from takeoff location) a bunch of Yak-3s jumped us, taking swiftly down the air cover and than one by one the ducklings.... managed to get to the tanks, and dropped my two 50kg bombs (to no effect ... but the fault there was heavily on my end) than turned on the tanks with the 30mm, took out 1 LAV and 2 Gaz trucks, + 1 T34 and a KV1... than hit the top of an other LAV and blew up.... all in all, did real life pilots suffer the same slowpoke, horrible weight to thrust rate but pleasantly armored plane? I mean if not for me kicking the bucked the whay I did, it did endure rather a high amount of rounds while flying to the objective... Back to the Stuka for me

[Quinte]

To be fair, encountering yak-3s on your third day really is bad luck.

[-SF-Disarray]

Running into Yak-3's is extraordinarily bad luck. Especially considering they aren't even in the game! Unless this is some kind of secret easter-egg, the witch I'd be totally cool with having, that or the Yak-9's.

 

Getting the Duck to behave can be tricky but there is one thing that makes it way easier. Turn off the automatic RPM governor and learn how to manage the engines manually. I don't know what conditions the governor is configured to maintain, but it isn't level flight under cruising power.

[E4GLEyE]

Sorry for the typo, wanted to type Yak1 but not so sure about it at this point... typing on a phone did not help a great deal :d but reds... with red stars and pointy guns that shot hellfire and downed all my comrades! 

[SAS_Storebror]

This has been explained a couple of times, I´d recommend the forum search function.

Automatic governor is to maintain combat power setting.

For takeoff you need manual mode to get more power (and boost), for cruise you need manual mode to stay within nominal settings.

It´s all specified many times and can be found easily.

 

Mike

[-TBC-AeroAce]

16 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

This has been explained a couple of times, I´d recommend the forum search function.

Automatic governor is to maintain combat power setting.

For takeoff you need manual mode to get more power (and boost), for cruise you need manual mode to stay within nominal settings.

It´s all specified many times and can be found easily.

 

Mike

 

Very true but the search function does suck 

[E4GLEyE]

36 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

This has been explained a couple of times, I´d recommend the forum search function.

Automatic governor is to maintain combat power setting.

For takeoff you need manual mode to get more power (and boost), for cruise you need manual mode to stay within nominal settings.

It´s all specified many times and can be found easily.

 

Mike

Sry if the post is/was unnecessary, but the help welcome as well, gonna try the automated governor off the next time around, the spinning out thing felt like a Pe2 with 0%RPM but full power, i hope maintaining cruise will be easier as well with manual settings. and I guess, for ground attacking, I should recover more before the next swoop.... but the greed is real ?

[ShamrockOneFive]

It's not a powerhouse performer, that's for sure

 

I recommend Requiem's tutorial for flying the 129 for best results. I'm still trying to figure out how best to use it.

 

 

[WheelwrightPL]

To be fair you must be a great pilot if you can bag KV-1 in a lowly Duck.

[Mac_Messer]

52 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

This has been explained a couple of times, I´d recommend the forum search function.

Automatic governor is to maintain combat power setting.

For takeoff you need manual mode to get more power (and boost), for cruise you need manual mode to stay within nominal settings.

It´s all specified many times and can be found easily.

Thanks for the info. Funny how in official tech specification it`s stated you can`t fly it above 4000m, yet the very specific Kommandogerat settings are kinda stated and..... are not. Should be edited so that takeoff procedure aswell as cruising REQUIRE manual pp management.

[LP1888]

I once took out a spitfire with the duck on coconuts server a while back....... then again it was landing lol I find the duck fun to fly if you ever get in trouble from fighters on campaign I try to put turn them and fly low as low as possible ?? good luck ? 

[-SF-Disarray]

My first kills in a Duck were a pair of Yaks. I'm not sure how I managed that though. Maybe they were just sight seeing? They passed me and settled nicely into the gun sight. I figured it'd be rude not to oblige them with some ammo.

[LP1888]

2 birds with one duck lol

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, AeroAce said:

Very true but the search function does suck 

 

The info is right there, inside the game.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

34 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

The info is right there, inside the game.

 

I know that I was just generally saying the fourm seach feature is not very good.

 

[KatieLuna]

The duck can be a very potent attack aircraft if the engine is managed well, and when it has a good escort or free reign. I just wish it got Panzerblitze, so it could become the german IL-2!

It feels like a very stable guns platform, I do not recommend central bomb racks, as the MG17 pod is very good when attacking light vehicles, and the 30mm cannons are effective against tanks. Taking extra wing bombs however is quite useful, as they help to stop trains in their tracks. A single 250 is simply a waste of space, as guns can do a far better job. If you  are confident you are attacking an intact train, you could consider using the 4x 50kg bomb racks, in order to carpet the train.

Always take 20mms. They are better at ground attacking.

Additionally, it is a charming aircraft to fly. The window to the world  gives you a phenomenal view of the ground, and the gunsight is versatile in its uses.

I recommend the usage of a mirror, as without it you must open the canopy to see directly behind you, which is annoying when attacking.

As mentioned, YOU MUST USE MANUAL ENGINE CONTROLS. Wehraboos beware, your throttle won't be all you need this time!

Edited July 30, 2018 by TheTacticalCat

[CrazyDuck]

3 hours ago, E4GLEyE said:

than turned on the tanks with the 30mm, took out 1 LAV and 2 Gaz trucks, + 1 T34 and a KV1... than hit the top of an other LAV and blew up.... 

 

I salute you. While not impossible, it's certainly extremely difficult to kill a KV-1 with the MK-103. Especially when you're "wasting" your ammo on other targets.

 

[Yogiflight]

3 hours ago, Mac_Messer said:

3 hours ago, SAS_Storebror said:

This has been explained a couple of times, I´d recommend the forum search function.

Automatic governor is to maintain combat power setting.

For takeoff you need manual mode to get more power (and boost), for cruise you need manual mode to stay within nominal settings.

It´s all specified many times and can be found easily.

Thanks for the info. Funny how in official tech specification it`s stated you can`t fly it above 4000m, yet the very specific Kommandogerat settings are kinda stated and..... are not. Should be edited so that takeoff procedure aswell as cruising REQUIRE manual pp management

It is not correct, that you need manual mode for takeoff, in fact I didn't use it a single time for takeoff, only for cruising. I always takeoff with auto mode, and second I never used boost for takeoff. I didn't even know the duck has boost.

[Venturi]

I find it to be one of if not the best attack aircraft in the game. It's ability to make quick turns at low airspeeds and almost hover over the battlefield is unmatched.

 

If the centerline high velocity 30mm cannon actually performed as it should against tanks, it would be great.

It does suck against anything other than tanks, however. The bomb load is pathetic.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Venturi

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

2 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

It is not correct, that you need manual mode for takeoff, in fact I didn't use it a single time for takeoff, only for cruising. I always takeoff with auto mode, and second I never used boost for takeoff. I didn't even know the duck has boost.

It makes it take off quite quickly, I once overtook a Bf 110 with bombs on the runway as he was taking off as well. I bet he was surprised to see a Duck passing by his side and leaving him in the dust xD

 

1 hour ago, Venturi said:

If the centerline high velocity 30mm cannon actually performed as it should against tanks, it would be great.

The current tank DM gives it hard time against the KVs, which need around from 20 to 30 hits to be destroyed, the T-34s on the other hand can be dealt with 8 hits which isn't bad imho. The light tanks are easily destroyed with 3 or 4 hits.

[SAS_Storebror]

10 hours ago, E4GLEyE said:

Sry if the post is/was unnecessary, but the help welcome as well?

Didn't want to sound rude, it's just that some things come around again and again and again and again and...

Maybe it's easier just to link to something I've posted concerning the same matter almost half a year ago:

https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,58022.0.html

 

Mike

[Feathered_IV]

Plz explain, what is mean you Duck?

[Pict]

11 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

Plz explain, what is mean you Duck?

 

Pull your dead down below the armor plate when Yak-3's appear? 

Edited July 31, 2018 by Pict

[Godspeed]

Duck has hidden potential.

Trust me its very hidden.

[F/JG300_Gruber]

2 hours ago, Godspeed said:

Duck has hidden potential.

Trust me its very hidden.

 

 Yeah as a lawn mower, or leaf blower.

Had it existed in middle ages, it could also have been used as an effective fancy anvil.

Other than that it's a pretty effective dust collector. 

 

As a plane, its potential is as nicely hidden as the Atlantide.

Edited July 31, 2018 by F/JG300_Gruber

[F/JG300_Gruber]

11 hours ago, Venturi said:

I find it to be one of if not the best attack aircraft in the game. It's ability to make quick turns at low airspeeds and almost hover over the battlefield is unmatched.

 

While it can hold it's ground as long as you have altitude reserve to deplete, it is okayish, but unmatched certainly not.

The Stuka can make tighter turns at any speeds, and is miles ahead when it comes to sustained low speed turn rate and radius.

 

@E4GLEyE I agree with you that the Duck is a downgrade from the Stuka. The few advantages it has aren't compensating for how bad it performs.

It is original in it's design and quite fun to fly with it's special engine managements but that's almost it.

Edited July 31, 2018 by F/JG300_Gruber

[WheelwrightPL]

11 hours ago, Venturi said:

I find it to be one of if not the best attack aircraft in the game. It's ability to make quick turns at low airspeeds and almost hover over the battlefield is unmatched.

 

I don't know how you got that impression: the Duck turns like a Titanic, here is the official data from IL2 aircraft specifications:

 

Hs 129 B-2: Maximum performance turn at sea level: 30.0 s, at 255 km/h IAS.

 

On the other hand Stuka turns like a fighter:

Ju 87 D-3: Maximum performance turn at sea level: 22.2 s, at 230 km/h IAS.

 

Even a heavy tactical bomber out-manouvers the Duck by a vast margin:

A-20B: Maximum performance turn at sea level: 24.5 s, at 270 km/h IAS.

 

[migmadmarine]

Anyone had a chance to try the Mk.103 against a player in the KV-1S yet, and have the player report damage back? Then again, don't know how completely the damage model for tank crew is implimented yet.

[JtD]

1 hour ago, WheelwrightPL said:

Hs 129 B-2: Maximum performance turn at sea level: 30.0 s, at 255 km/h IAS.

 

I'd recommend to do some in game testing. You'd end up with 24-25s at combat power.

 

Doesn't change the fact the Ju87 is better (it's grossly over-modeled in this regard - apparently it's aerodynamically the third cleanest airframe in game), but closes the gap considerably.

[WheelwrightPL]

14 hours ago, JtD said:

 

I'd recommend to do some in game testing. You'd end up with 24-25s at combat power.

 

Doesn't change the fact the Ju87 is better (it's grossly over-modeled in this regard - apparently it's aerodynamically the third cleanest airframe in game), but closes the gap considerably.

 

This gets muddled even more because to be combat-effective you must fly with heavy underwing pods in a Stuka which limits its turning ability.

However, il2 aircraft data doesn't even account for this because it only shows results for clean airframe configurations.

 

So, paradoxically, in the end the Duck may end-up turning better than Stuka because its 30mm cannon is mounted center-line so in theory it should impact its turning ability less than Stuka's draggy underwing pods.

 

Edited August 1, 2018 by WheelwrightPL
improved phrasing

[F/JG300_Gruber]

53 minutes ago, JtD said:

it's grossly over-modeled in this regard - apparently it's aerodynamically the third cleanest airframe in game

 

Not sure what you mean by cleanest airframe. Drag just skyrocket past 300km/h

Wing design is made for lower speed than typical fighter. So it doesn't surprises me that it behaves nicely around 250kph, where all others are more comfortable sitting at 350kph.

 

Without bombs and half fuel, the D3 wing loading (145kg/m²) is lower than any other fighters except for the i16 and Spitfire MkV (130-135kg/m²)

The yak 1B already stands at 168kg/m²...

This was even more pronounced on the B2, 800kg lighter than the D3, wing loading dropping to the 120kg/m² region.

 

Have a look at Heinz Migeod interview on YT (He flew on the B2 mostly). He said that they never feared the spitfire in the air. It was too fast and easy to dodge. Only the Hurricane was a problem because it could, with difficulty, keep up with the Stuka in a tight sustained turn.

 

 

Edited July 31, 2018 by F/JG300_Gruber

[SAS_Storebror]

8 minutes ago, F/JG300_Gruber said:

they never feared the spitfire in the air. It was too fast and easy to dodge. Only the Hurricane was a problem because it could, with difficulty, keep up with the Stuka in a tight sustained turn.

Why would any of these want to follow a Stuka in a tight sustained turn?

It this was a relevant criteria, we would still fly biplanes.

 

Mike

[F/JG300_Gruber]

It was relevant back then since IIRC British fighters were still fighting mostly turn and burn style 

It still is online (and offline too), since both Human and AI flying Soviet plane tend to go into turnfight without second thoughts. 

 

Any half smart pilot engaging you with proper B&Z (even with a Rata) and you are in trouble, no matter if you are flying the Duck or the Stuka. But duck will always fall first 

[SAS_Storebror]

Alright, agreed 

 

Mike

[Sgt_Joch]

Hs129 is one of my favorite plane in game: stable, easy to fly, good field of view, easy to loiter and spot ground targets. It is a good all around ground attack plane and a lot of fun once you learn its quirks.

 

its faults are the same ones it had in RL: vulnerable to enemy fighters, limited bomb load and 30 mm cannon is relatively weak against Soviet tanks. Good against trucks or light tanks, but you need a lucky hit in the rear to take out a T-34.

Edited July 31, 2018 by Sgt_Joch

[JtD]

1 hour ago, F/JG300_Gruber said:

Not sure what you mean by cleanest airframe. Drag just skyrocket past 300km/h

Wing design is made for lower speed than typical fighter. So it doesn't surprises me that it behaves nicely around 250kph, where all others are more comfortable sitting at 350kph.

 

You put it into a wind tunnel at a reasonably high angle of attack, and it produces less drag for lift than say a Bf109 or a Yak-1. That's got nothing to do with wing design, it's just not right. The same things that make it aerodynamically poor at high speed are still there when it's flying slowly.

 

What the wing does is provide a decent amount of lift so that the plane can turn tightly, not so that the plane can turn efficiently.

 

1 hour ago, WheelwrightPL said:

Yes, this gets muddled considerably because to be combat-effective you must fly with heavy underwing pods in a Stuka which impact its turning ability considerably.

 

And this is to consider on top of it. Might be worth redoing the turn tests with the gunpods under both planes.

[SAS_Storebror]

31 minutes ago, Sgt_Joch said:

Hs129 is one of my favorite plane in game: stable, easy to fly, good field of view, easy to loiter and spot ground targets.

It's a nice flightseeing plane, but to me that's it almost.

I don't feel comfortable in it whenever I know I'm gonna meet something that can shoot back at me, be it ground targets or other airplanes.

Especially against Trucks with AA guns I sometimes think to myself "if I had an IL-2, I could have swallowed 100 times as many bullets and still go home on both legs" while I'm going down for another belly landing with smokepile in the weed on my brave duck.

That's the only part that doesn't feel right to me, but I cannot back this up with real life data: I thought of the Henschel being a tougher plane that could take quite a punch without suffering critical damage, however ingame I'm going down with shot up engines after first, latest second AA hit.

 

Mike

Edited July 31, 2018 by SAS_Storebror

[F/JG300_Gruber]

45 minutes ago, JtD said:

 

You put it into a wind tunnel at a reasonably high angle of attack, and it produces less drag for lift than say a Bf109 or a Yak-1. That's got nothing to do with wing design, it's just not right. The same things that make it aerodynamically poor at high speed are still there when it's flying slowly.

 

What the wing does is provide a decent amount of lift so that the plane can turn tightly, not so that the plane can turn efficiently.

 

 

That makes sense. 

 

Out of curiosity, how do you guys manage to draw out polar curves out of the game, and how do you keep free of unwanted interferences from engine or pilot not-so-perfect handling ?

I'm genuinly interested in the testing method you are using to discuss FM, it's something that is quite obscure to me. 

 

 

24 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

It's a nice flightseeing plane, but to me that's it almost.

I don't feel comfortable in it whenever I know I'm gonna meet something that can shoot back at me, be it ground targets or other airplanes.

Especially against Trucks with AA guns I sometimes think to myself "if I had an IL-2, I could have swallowed 100 times as many bullets and still go home on both legs" while I'm going down for another belly landing with smokepile in the weed on my brave duck.

That's the only part that doesn't feel right to me, but I cannot back this up with real life data: I thought of the Henschel being a tougher plane that could take quite a punch without suffering critical damage, however ingame I'm going down with shot up engines after first, latest second AA hit.

 

Mike

 

Pretty much the same feeling. 

 

The plane itself is quite sturdy though, especially if shot from the back. It soaks up 20mm AP drillers better than the average german plane. But wing spar is still a weak spot and going head front, you have those to big radials super-exposed to AA. And since this crate can not fly on a single engine with the 30mm gun pod and a couple holes in the wings... you are all set for a squirel hug faster than in any other plane.

 

Unless you don't take the pod, and are then left with the worst attacker of the entire sim.

 

 

Edited July 31, 2018 by F/JG300_Gruber

[Yogiflight]

And still the 30mm guns shoot together with the machineguns. It is really time this gets changed, so the machineguns shoot together with the MG151(/20) and the 30mm shooting alone.

 

[ShamrockOneFive]

1 hour ago, Yogiflight said:

And still the 30mm guns shoot together with the machineguns. It is really time this gets changed, so the machineguns shoot together with the MG151(/20) and the 30mm shooting alone.

 

 

That I would very much like to see.