Jump to content
MechSauce

Are you a 190 guy or 109?

109vs190  

119 members have voted

  1. 1. 109vs190

    • 109
      53
    • 190
      66


Recommended Posts

Which one is your choice, without hesitation?

 

 

For me its the 109, because i love being in the shit of things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I am far more successful in the 190 - all versions - than I am in the 109. The 109 may be a scalpel  but I'm kind of a club guy. Start high, hit hard, run and reset. Not much for operating in small spaces or proving my SA and maneuvering is superior to anyone. My wingman prefers the 109 so I get tons of time in with the scalpel as well. Still prefer clubs.

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Early on ( earlier on ) in the sim the Bf-109. I like the '190 more now. I've become very used to the Fw-190's handling to the point where recently, when I picked up again on the 'Fortress on the Volga' campaign ( Bf-109 G2 ) the roll rate was so "bad" I thought I've sustained damage or that the ailerons were reduced to the size of a typical smart phone, or maybe I was carrying a 250kg bomb under each wing or was equipped with those stupid MG151 gondolas ( on missions not so outfitted )

 

I still hold the 109 in high regard though: it's probably the best "does everything pretty good overall" plane in the game, and I'll tell you this: After flying the Spitfire MkV in the 'Achtung Spitfire' campaign, the Bf-109 seemed like a trainer by comparison in regards to it's relative docility in ground handling, take-off and landing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely the 190, because of the high roll rate, the overall better visibility, the firepower, and the streamlined 109 is so f***ing ugly, the 190 an absolute beauty.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven’t flown for a while, but 190.

Can’t argue with those guns.

It’s all about the high speed instinctive snapshot.

 

Only 109 I like is the E.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 190 is a perfect and versatile tool. Firepower, speed and visibility are great. Especially the A8 has a lot of great options. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Haven’t flown for a while, but 190.

Can’t argue with those guns.

It’s all about the high speed instinctive snapshot.

 

Only 109 I like is the E.

 

 

when I saw your name here, I knew I would read the "I only like the E"! 😆

 

 

BTW, some days I'm a master at 109 and a potato with 190, and vice versa.

 

Some days Im a potato with both.

Sadly there's no single day I can perform well with both.

 

but, If I have to chose one... Would be the 190 A3.

14 minutes ago, =FSB=HandyNasty said:

When flying alone, the 190 by a small margin. When flying in pair or more, the 190 hands down.

I guess you meant the 109 when flying alone?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In overall, I do better in a Focke Wulf 190.

I (everyone) like 109's speed and climb rate but at high speed I prefer 190's handling.

 

In a nutshell:

  • 190: Better visibility, great roll rate, dive speed, dive handling, firepower, punching bag;
  • 109: Better climb rate (outstanding one), faster.

190 A3 in action

Spoiler

 

 

190 A8 in action

Spoiler

 

 

Edited by SCG_ErwinP
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

I guess you meant the 109 when flying alone?

No. When alone, I still prefer the 190, as it better suits my flying style. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back when it was added to the original Il-2... people complained so much about the Fw-190 being terrible that I reacted and taught myself how to fly it well.

 

That original bias aside - I'm rather fond of a high roll rate as it allows precisely picking the angle and the time of a maneuver, as well as close in changes to the tempo of a fight, and scissors can be used as an effective defensive maneuver. As for the Bf-109... I actually prefer flying the E for some reason, then the F, then the K...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither of them.  I do enjoy shooting 190s down more however.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is like asking: are you a 'Breast Man' or a 'Butt Man'? :)

 

I keep that one private  if you don't mind. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Uufflakke said:

 

It is like asking: are you a 'Breast Man' or a 'Butt Man'? :)

 

I keep that one private  if you don't mind. :P

You could start a poll. Might be quite interesting:crazy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% 109. The amazing climb rate and maneuverability is addicting!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

190. Can´t beat that daka. I like that things are really dead once I hit them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the D9 count as a 190 or some some sort of hybrid? It is my favourite from the Axis side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D9 is absolutely a 190. Same fuse, tail and wings with only minor differences and a small extension. Engine is obviously different but she is still a boom and zoom monster when used correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Generally the 109. It has much more docile handling, especially spin behaviour, and IMO has better overall performance. Although that's also its biggest disadvantage; pretty much every allied aircraft is way better than the 109 at something specific, while close in performance at all other characteristics. The 190 can at the very least out-roll every other fighter.

 

The 190 Dora is the exception here - I just love it! She won't spin out on you without a warning, while boasting excellent performance and handling.

Edited by AEthelraedUnraed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more of a allied pilot although I'm not always a useful one in MP. But when I have to choose the axis side, I always take whatever FW190

is available, because I love the brute sound of its radial engine, even when I get shot down at the end. Always a pleasure to fly these beasts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2020 at 6:29 AM, Yogiflight said:

..., and the streamlined 109 is so f***ing ugly, the 190 an absolute beauty.

You are, in fact, wrong on that one, it is (of course) exactly the other way around. Only a blind person would say such a thing (no offense).

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DerNeueMensch said:

You are, in fact, wrong on that one, it is (of course) exactly the other way around. Only a blind person would say such a thing (no offense).

Have you been to the optometrist lately? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The D9 and Late war Mustangs have been my favorite looking airframes since I was a wee lad. One sings "fast" and the other screams "deadly!"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

The D9 and Late war Mustangs have been my favorite looking airframes since I was a wee lad. One sings "fast" and the other screams "deadly!"

Anton series looks even more beautiful than Dora, small but hard punch... A8 looks gorgeous!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't become an Anton devotee until I saw the Janes WWII Fighters promo on a sim magazine cover. It was an extreme closeup from about 1 o'clock and she looked wicked. Tried to find it just now in a web search but nada. I'll try to see if I still have the hardcopy lying around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2020 at 6:08 AM, SCG_ErwinP said:

In overall, I do better in a Focke Wulf 190.

I (everyone) like 109's speed and climb rate but at high speed I prefer 190's handling.

 

In a nutshell:

  • 190: Better visibility, great roll rate, dive speed, dive handling, firepower, punching bag;
  • 109: Better climb rate (outstanding one), faster.

190 A3 in action

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

190 A8 in action

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

You forgot a few things, 109 has better maneuverability overall, still very good dive rate against contemporary enemy aircraft, fluid coupling supercharger (meaning its performance doesn't suffer until 6k unlike the 190), the roll rate is very similar if you know how to snaproll, and superb handling and stall characteristics, and overall a very flexible aircraft in areas of performance. All which make the 109 a decent to good Boom and Zoomer, and a very good dog fighter. 

 

After a few hundred hours in the 109, you'll find that the 109 weak points can be overcome through a variety of methods, which is probably why experienced pilots didn't really have a problem with the 109s lack luster performance at the end of the war and could still go toe to toe with even the best allied aircraft. The 190s fighting ability is derived mostly from its speed, dive, and firepower. Unfortunately later in the war its speed and dive were overcome by contemporary allied aircraft and being not as flexible as the 109, didn't do as well. (Which in part is why 190s usually did the Bomber attacks) Whilst the 109s ability is diversified across many areas of performance, it always had a card up its sleeve if the pilot knew what he was doing. 

 

 

(Sorry, couldn't stand by while people weren't being nice to my baby)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, SCG_Sinerox said:

You forgot a few things, 109 has better maneuverability overall, still very good dive rate against contemporary enemy aircraft, fluid coupling supercharger (meaning its performance doesn't suffer until 6k unlike the 190), the roll rate is very similar if you know how to snaproll, and superb handling and stall characteristics, and overall a very flexible aircraft in areas of performance. All which make the 109 a decent to good Boom and Zoomer, and a very good dog fighter. 

 

After a few hundred hours in the 109, you'll find that the 109 weak points can be overcome through a variety of methods, which is probably why experienced pilots didn't really have a problem with the 109s lack luster performance at the end of the war and could still go toe to toe with even the best allied aircraft. The 190s fighting ability is derived mostly from its speed, dive, and firepower. Unfortunately later in the war its speed and dive were overcome by contemporary allied aircraft and being not as flexible as the 109, didn't do as well. (Which in part is why 190s usually did the Bomber attacks) Whilst the 109s ability is diversified across many areas of performance, it always had a card up its sleeve if the pilot knew what he was doing. 

 

 

(Sorry, couldn't stand by while people weren't being nice to my baby)

You might be right as yours and Riksen's results shows by itselves!

But 190 has exceptional features and is lot more robust than 109 and I still prefer 190 😍

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, SCG_Sinerox said:

After a few hundred hours in the 109, you'll find that the 109 weak points can be overcome through a variety of methods, which is probably why experienced pilots didn't really have a problem with the 109s lack luster performance at the end of the war and could still go toe to toe with even the best allied aircraft. The 190s fighting ability is derived mostly from its speed, dive, and firepower. Unfortunately later in the war its speed and dive were overcome by contemporary allied aircraft and being not as flexible as the 109, didn't do as well. (Which in part is why 190s usually did the Bomber attacks) Whilst the 109s ability is diversified across many areas of performance, it always had a card up its sleeve if the pilot knew what he was doing. 

 

The most important weaknesses of the 109 (awful handling on the ground), short range and bad armament don't really come to play in a game.

There's a reason why most pilots preferred the 190 - Germans and Allied - and why the 190A-2 was considered better than the 109F-4 in 1942.

 

The reason why the 190 attacked the bombers was because it could, while the 109 lacked the fire-power. Who believes the 190 didn't have the oompf to fight with allied fighters is quite mislead.

The 109 was still produced in large quantities because ole Willy had very good ties with the Nazi party leadership. That's the only reason why 1944 and 1945 saw large-scale 109 production. Well that and because ole Willy lobbied against newer and better fighters to be produced and tested. Such as the DB603/ Jumo 213-powered Fw 190, which could have been available in 1943. But ole Willy tried to wring more ca$h out of his 1935 race-plane, instead of providing a better airframe.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

There's a reason why most pilots preferred the 190 - Germans and Allied - and why the 190A-2 was considered better than the 109F-4 in 1942.

 

Let’s do a reality check on this one.

 

German comparison flights between A2 and F4, and they don’t quite match the Bremsprop version ;) 

 

Basically they say the BMW powerplant is so unreliable (on average, engines barely making past 25 operational hours at the time) that the plane is unsuited for operation over the sea, desert or enemy territory, and in particular the airframe’s advantages are primarly the higher strength, but the disadvantage is that it will always yield lower performance, in particular in climb and speed. Low engine lifespan also limits its deployment as a large number of replacement engines needs to be supplied. It is also mentioned that the BMW powerplant has very little development potential and performance is unlikely to improve much in the future.

 

The fitting of the DB 603 was considered, but they point out (as opposed to some secret cabal and mine work by Willy) that it’s a completely new engine and as such, teething and development troubles are expected, and it will be very likely not available for at least a year as a practical solution.

 

Hence for a good time, the only truly operations capable will be the F4 and the new 109G, and that the originally suggested 50-50% production of 190s and 109s was considered unwarranted (hence the historical production ratio was rather closer to 1/3s 190 - 2/3s 109, which also more or less corresponds the man hours required; it took about 2/3a the work to produce a 109 compared to a 190).

 

The 190 was, however far better suited for fighter bomber work than the 109 and this is where it came within it’s own in the Luftwaffe.

 

http://kurfurst.org/Tactical_trials/109F4_Rechlin_vergleich_190A2/109F_Rvergleichsflg_190A2_de.html

 

Zum bereits festgelegten Produktionsverhältnis der FW 190 zur Bf 109
    werden folgende Überlegungen amgestellt:

    Der Motor ist derzeit so unzuverlässig, dass das Flugzeug nach Ansicht
    von Oberst  G a l l a n d  nur bedingt einsatzfähig ist und ein Einsatz
    über See nach England derzeit nicht in Frage kommt.
Nach Aussage von Motor-
    Fachleuten wird nach Durchführung von vielen Änderungen ( heute schon 20 )
    der Motor BMW 801 C und auch D frühestens in einem halben Jahr so betriebs-
    sicher werden, dass er jede Belastung aushält, also frontreif ist, wie z.B.
    der DB 601 E.

    Für die fernere Zukunft ist nicht anzunehmen, dass ein fronteinsatzfähiges
    luftgekühltes Triebwerk im 2000 PS-Bereich herauskommen wird. Vermitlich
    wird es die Entwicklung der Feinflugzeuge mit sich bringen, dass wir auf 
    starke flüssigkeitsgekühlte Triebwerke, trotz der grossen Vorteile, luftge-
    kühlter, zurückgreifen müssen.

    Es ist beabsichtigt, den DB 603 als nächtsten flüssigkeitsgekühlten nach dem
    BMW 801 D in die FW 190 einzubauen. Dazu ist zu sagen, dass der DB 603 ein
    völlig neuer Motor ist, der ebenfalls seine Kinderkrankheiten haben wird.
    Es ist nicht damit zu rechnen, dass dieser Motor vor einem Jahr an der Front
    erscheint, dann aber wird der 801 D gerade eben richtig frontreif geworden
    sein. 
Der Motor 801 C erreicht heute nur 25 Betriebsstunden im Durchschnitt!!

    Die technischen Schwierig werden also bei der FW 190 auf längere 
    Zeit dauernd bestehen, während underdessen die einzige, wirklich frontreife
    Jagdmaschine, die Bf 109 F 4 oder G ( nur weiterentwickelter Motor ! )
    bleiben wird.
Der Einbau des BMW 801 C und D ist nur als Zwischenlösung zu
    betrachten, was ja durch die nächsten Einbauabsichten bewiesen wird.

    Ebenso unnsicher wie der Einsatz über dem Kanal erscheint, bleibt er über
    anderen Seegebieten oder über Russland. Die Zusammensetzung der Flugzeug-
    führer ist heute keine solche mehr, dass Verluste aufgrund technischer 
    Mängel hingenommen werden könnten.

    Ein Einsatz der FW in den Tropen wird auf grössere Motorschwierigkeiten
    stossen und die Möglichkeit hierzu wird noch sehr lange nicht gegeben sein.

    Solange der BMW 801 nur so wenig Betriebsstunden aushält, also bei waitem
    nicht einmal 50 Stunden erreicht, müssen sehr viele Motoren nachgeschoben
    werden. Dies wird auf Schwierigkeiten stossen, sobald mehrere Verbände
    auf FW 190 umgerüstet sein werden.

    Das beabsichtige Produktionsverhältnis von ungefähr 50% FW 190 und
    50% Bf 109 bedautet auf baldige Umrüstung anderer Verbände hin. Sobald dies
    geschehen ist, bleibt aber nicht mehr die Möglichtkeit, diese Verbände nur
    über eigenem Gebiet einzusetzen und es müssen eben entweder bis dahin diese
    technischen Mängel am Motor abgestellt sein, oder aber, es müssen soviel
    Motoren nachgeschoben werden, dass dauernder frühzeitiger Motorenwechsel
    ermöglicht bleibt, was kaum zu erwarten ist.

    Die Entwicklung zeigt auch deutlich, dass die Bf 109 immer schneller und 
    steigfähiger bleiben wird, als die FW 190
. Auf die beste Steigfähigkeit
    kann aber nicht verzichtet werden. Wenn sie im Augenblick bei der Eigenart
    des Einsatzes am Kanal bei der FW 190 auch ausreicht, bzw. keine so ausrei-
    chende Rolle spielt, so darf darüber ihre Unterlegenheit mit BMW 801 C
    gegenüber der Bf 109 F 4 mit 50% der Steigzeit der F 4 auf 10000m auf keinen
    Fall übersehen werden. Mit dem BMW 801 D wird die Unterlegenheit schätzungs-
    weise noch immer 25 bis 30% der Steigleistung der Bf 109 F 4 betragen.

    Aus den angestellten Überlegungen heraus erscheint das Verhältnis von
    50% für die FW 190 zu hoch gegriffen sein, auch bei Berücksichtung der
    grösseren Beschussempfindlichkeit der Bf 109.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

you 190 guys are just mad because you don't fit in the 109 cockpit!  😂 (JUST KIDDING!)

Edited by MeoW.Scharfi
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

German comparison flights between A2 and F4, and they don’t quite match the Bremsprop version ;) 

 

That's because you're cherrypicking pretty much the only semi-negative testing report on the 190 there is - written in 1941 and before widespread EIS of the A-2 and A-3.

It's a project status report, not an in-service test. The report attests the 190 superior handling and structural integrity.

The only definate drawback is a lower climb-rate* and the engine-reliability at the time of testing (late '41).

 

*A comparison test between Egon Mayer and Juliums Meimberg (the latter flying a 109F) showed that the 190's lower climb-rate is set-off by it's vastly superior take-off performance:

While the 109 pilot has his hands full, trying not to crash, the 190 pilot just opens the throttle, takes off and begins a climb - gaining vital seconds on the 109. Up to medium altitudes, that factually evens out their climb-capabilities during a scramble.

 

JG 26 was pushing for it's introduction into service. They regarded the 190 as better than the 109 in all regards except turning, where Gollob even claims that it cannot be conclusively attested which aircraft turns better. Heinrich Beauvais claims that's just down to Gollob's ego and the 109 was a better turner in the test subject to the report.

 

Then again, hadn't it been for JG 26's Otto Behrens and Karl Borris, the RLM would have axed the 190 altogether.

More ca$h for Willy...

 

25 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Hence for a good time, the only truly operations capable will be the F4 and the new 109G, and that the originally suggested 50-50% production of 190s and 109s was considered unwarranted (hence the historical production ratio was rather closer to 1/3s 190 - 2/3s 109, which also more or less corresponds the man hours required; it took about 2/3a the work to produce a 109 compared to a 190).

 

The 109F-4 was so vastly great that RAF losses markedly increased with the arrival of 190s in both, JG 26 in mid-late 1941 and in early 1942, when JG 2 began transition.

Also the RAF did think the 190 was superior in performance to both the 109F and the Spit V. Seems like they must have missed Mr. Gollobs report...

 

26 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Basically they say the BMW powerplant is so unreliable (on average, engines barely making past 25 operational hours at the time) that the plane is unsuited for operation over the sea, desert or enemy territory, and in particular the airframe’s advantages are primarly the higher strength, but the disadvantage is that it will always yield lower performance, in particular in climb and speed. Low engine lifespan also limits its deployment as a large number of replacement engines needs to be supplied. It is also mentioned that the BMW powerplant has very little development potential and performance is unlikely to improve much in the future.

 

1) The 190 flew fighter-bomber operations over Britain pretty much within Mr. Gollobs 6 months "no overwater flights" moratorium.

2) It was down to a couple of officers and enlisted men by JG 26 that helped Focke-Wulf and BMW shake out the issues with the 801 powerplant in the 190 airframe. Had it not been for those people, who had clearly seen the aircraft's potential early on (after flying the death-star 109F for months), the project would have died due to RLM's lack of interest.

3) The BMW 801 would reliably deliver 2000+ hp by the end of the war (less than 4 years away at the time of writing of the report). It would do it with and without a turbocharger.

The 801 did successfully power a large fleet of fighters, night-fighters, bombers and recce-birds.

4) BMW and Fw were working on improved high-altitude performance out of the 801 in 1941 (!), but the RLM wasn't interested.

5) The 190A-2 and A-3 were as fast or faster than the 109F-4. They'd do it with more range and more firepower. And they'd bring their pilot back across the channel with serious engine-damage.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

The 190 was, however far better suited for fighter bomber work than the 109 and this is where it came within it’s own in the Luftwaffe.

 

That "Abschrift", ist that a report from "Hptm. G o l l o b". Is that Gordon Gollob?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

 

That "Abschrift", ist that a report from "Hptm. G o l l o b". Is that Gordon Gollob?

 

Yes, thats him, although other big names  incl. Garland have contributed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

109er addicted here..

 

See at this landing...and fall in love with it.

 

 

Edited by ITAF_Rani

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...