Jump to content

Aircraft Specs Comparison table

Recommended Posts

Hello all, 


From the Excel masochist master who made the Battletech Record Sheet & Repair sheet the EvE Online PI flowchart and the Daemon X Machina decision matrix i now present the Il-2 Excel spreadsheet:



Sample image of compact view


What is it? it's a compilation of all the stats i felt were worth comparing on various aircraft in-game. This sheet includes all aircraft from BoM, BoS, BoK and BoBp.


In the document there are two sheets:


Compact view -- my preferred view, it keeps all but one row at the same height and also keeps the column width down allowing a large number of aicraft/stats to be viewed at once


Sortable -- this is the same data but transposed so that standard sort filters work. I dont like this view as much since it gets bloated, but not having sorting would be unbearable. 


Both sheets have conditional formatting (the colors given to some of the stats) The closer to green the color is the better that aircraft does relative to the other aircraft. The aircraft which is best in a category will have a dark green coloring, the worst will have a dark red coloring, and an aircraft which has a stat that is exactly the 50th percentile will be yellow.  In the "Compact" sheet fighters are compared to only fighters, and likewise the attackers/bombers are compared to other attackers/bombers. Unfortunately for the sortable sheet this formatting is applied to everything. 




* All air speeds are IAS unless otherwise indicated

* All data is from the thread Aircraft Flight and Technical Specifications and Operational Details unless otherwise stated

* Thank you to 77.CountZero for his modifications to Il-2 compare which i pulled aircraft maximum speed data from

* Spitfire data was generally taken from the engine option with the best stats

* The "Fuel load", "custom load mass", "custom wingload" and "Custom load max PWR" are fields i put in to play around with how much changes in the loadout impact various stats.

* While engine power is given in hp, i have given the power-to-weight-ratios in kilowatts per metric ton. Using horsepower per metric ton felt wrong, and switching the mass to imperial tons also felt wrong considering all other units are in SI here. 

* Missing aircraft includes: SPAD 13.C1, Sopwith Camel, Fokker Dr.I, Pfalz D.IIIa, and the Po-2





Google docs view link


Google docs download link




* Of the aircraft in this table currently the P-39 actually has the lightest wingload with standard loadout. (118 kg/m^2 vs the I-16's 129 kg/m^2) removal of the 4x .30 cals and taking half fuel further reduces this to 106 kg/m^2, and bumps the PWR up to a respectable 367 kw/ton in emergency mode, tied with the spitfire IX, and beaten out by the La-5, La-5FN and I-16 (437 kw/ton). The Ju52 actually holds the record for lightest wingload under standard loadout -- with a staggering 90 kg/m^2. Well that P-39 wing area was a typo so then so much for my fun. This means with my previously suggested custom loadout it ends up having a wingload of 159 kg/m^2 placing it roughly on par with the Bf 109 E7's standard wingload (note that that same 109 with 50% fuel would have an advantage)


* The Me262 has ruined the conditional formatting for DNE speed, and PWR. this is why i cant have nice things


EDIT 2: fixed the DNE to Vne and fixed P-39 stats typo


EDIT 3: I wanted to mess with some fuel loads and such, so i added fuel weight/mass for each aircraft as well as flight endurance times and the corresponding fuel consumption (l/min). Also fixed a typo in the Ju 52's PWR calculation which forgot it had a third engine...


P-38, tempist, P-51, etc info post:


Me-262, etc info post:


2021-1-26: Added Hurricane II, Bf 109-G late w/WM-50, and C-47. Congratulations to the new record-holder for lightest wingload, the C-47! at a low 71kg/m^2, at a "30 minute" fuel load this drops to a mere 52 kg/m^2

Edited by Kataphrakt
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 15
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone knows where i can find the thread which had specs on the P-38, P-51, Me-262 et. at. could you link it? i dug it up at some point for the P-38 and P-51, but cant find it now.


Edit: found it and updated original sheet

Edited by Kataphrakt
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Btw the P-39 wing area listed in the game stats has a typo, it should be 19.8 m^2 rather than 29.8 m^2

That would explain it having the lightest wing loading in the table. That little tidbit threw me a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bert_Foster said:

Nice Job.


Row 11 Compact:

Column K in expanded:


DNE speed .... More correct Abbreviation in Aviation use is Vne


I keep miss-hearing it as DNE, thanks for the correction


15 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Btw the P-39 wing area listed in the game stats has a typo, it should be 19.8 m^2 rather than 29.8 m^2


I'd had my suspicions about this considering the P-39 handles about the same as the P-40 which was suggested by the original stats (with this typo) to have a much higher wingload than the P-39. 


A few sources also backup the 19.8 m^2 wing area:





1 hour ago, senseispcc said:

Here is one video about the second world war and the Me 262;


My remark about the 262 was mostly about how it's high Vne eclipses all other fighter's Vne, and how its engine power is given in terms of thrust (as most modern jet aircraft do) instead of horsepower. I have an equation somewhere for theoretical propeller efficiency that i could use to calculate the thrust for all the prop aircraft, but i'd need prop diameters and such, plus i've heard the game  does actually take into account prop efficiency. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

I have updated the sheet with some more fields. While i had the 30 minute fuel load before, i added data comparing the 30-minute-loadout mass, wingload, and PWR.  


21 hours ago, Alfaunostebas11 said:

Good job, Kataphrakt.

But I can't save the Excel file ...

Try again, the link to download the file in the OP should download the file as an excel sheet.



Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Thanks for the data @Kataphrakt - question, for SL turn rate (sec), what is this meaning, degrees per second? If that's the case, the aircraft that have the lower number of coloured green which is opposite to what I would expect. So does it mean how many seconds to do a 360 degree turn?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

First, nice spreadsheet.


However, some of the entries look off to me. I'm pretty sure the K-4 entry is for the DB engine, not the DC. The DC has lower combat power listed, but much higher emergency power.


Not sure whether to post this here, but the La-5 entries seem suspicious in that both have faster nominal than boosted sea level speeds (And I suspect the 6k speed for the basic La-5 should be 599 kph, not 499.). Now, this is carried over from the devs themselves, so the mistake (if it is one) is not your fault. However, a manual I found here on the forum instructs pilots to engage boost to reach top speed at low altitudes, so I don't think there's any paradoxical drag being induced by the extra power. I also suspect the climb rates given are for nominal power and not boost, by comparing power and weight to, say, the G-14, but that is out of the scope of your table.



Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
  • 1 month later...
On 11/28/2020 at 10:17 AM, Enigma89 said:

Any chance to add dive speed and climb rates?

Climbrate is already included for sea level, 3k, and 6k. Dive speed is dependent on the dive angle, with the max dive speed being the Vne speed which is already on the chart. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Added Hurricane II, Bf 109-G late w/WM-50, and C-47. Congratulations to the new record-holder for lightest wingload, the C-47! at a low 71kg/m^2, at a "30 minute" fuel load this drops to a mere 52 kg/m^2

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Charlo-VR said:

Such great work, very much appreciated! You probably already intend to add the Yak-9 and Yak-9T 🙂


Didnt realize those had specs to them. I'll add them later. 

  • Thanks 1
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...