Jump to content

Bf109s able to "stand" on their elevators in hard turns?


Recommended Posts

Hi chaps,

 

I was wondering if anyone else has noticed this phenomenon with the later models of 109 (G2 and later) where they are able to sustain 5G or above for a super long time in tight turn fights, my squadron and I have been turned inside of whilst in Spitfires at the very edge of black out (with the new FM).

 

We'll be doing the proper engine management and flap releasing for the maintaining of lower speed and higher speed, 5G+ turns and there will be a 109 that comes screaming in from altitude that manages to turn inside of us, and maintain the inside turn. This happens regardless of the speed we collectively travel at.

 

It is always a 109 achieving these types of turn, 190s are not able to do this.

 

I was always under the impression that the 109's main advantage was speed and the spit had superior turn capability?

 

Anybody else witnessed elevator standing from 109s?

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, -=No.66=-Griff1999 said:

@QB.Creep I'm inclined to agree with your theory, I do however think that it shouldn't be the case that 109s can drop at great speed from altitude and immediately get inside of a 5G turn with a elliptical winged Spit.

 

Haven't tried flying a BF109 then, I see. You and the No.66 boys are welcome to try one out. 

Edited by Bilbo_Baggins
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

This is another one of those pointless complaint threads that doesn't even have a testable claim.

 

There are so many variables involved in turning performance that you really need to be more specific about what you think is wrong.

 

I understand why you think that, I've seen some pretty bad takes on this forum, the only reason why I made this post is that I've seen it happen to multiple squadron-mates, some of which are way way better than myself.

 

Imo, it's down to inaccurate or recently deprecated modelling of the FM for the later 109s.

Some of the chaps think it's to do with inaccurate stabiliser problems within the 109 FM.

 

Again though, this post is to see if anyone has encountered situations where the 109 is fully standing on their elevator within turn fights, which should not be possible with the new physiology.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, -=No.66=-Griff1999 said:

Do you also see this happening often?

Sorry Griff, not a comment on your thread so much as having a giggle with Brems.  For what it’s worth; I have noticed neither a change in the ‘109’s FM nor any great ability to turn inside a well flown Spitfire and if I’m clumsy or careless I can blackout in both.

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

Sorry Griff, not a comment on your thread so much as having a giggle with Brems.  For what it’s worth; I have noticed neither a change in the ‘109’s FM nor any great ability to turn inside a well flown Spitfire and if I’m clumsy or careless I can blackout in both.

 

Cheers for your input, I do actually appreciate it!

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you take into account the high elevator authority of RAF fighters? 

You're more likely to pull more G with them and not realising it until the pilot is exhausted and fall into a black out/G lock.

A Spitfire can be completely traped by a 109 on his six because of G limits (its pilot can't exploit the full turning capability), while it has way better turn rate. Same story with Tempest vs Dora. The only escape is trying to make overshoot with eratic defensive maneuvers (so everything except a continous turn) or being able to quicly drop the speed and then turn hard at low speed without taking much G.

Edited by JG300_Faucon
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JG300_Faucon said:

Did you take into account the high elevator authority of RAF fighters? 

You're more likely to pull more G with them and not realising it until the pilot is exhausted and fall into a black out/G lock.

A Spitfire can be completely traped by a 109 on his six because of G limits (its pilot can't exploit the full turning capability), while it has way better turn rate. Same story with Tempest vs Dora. The only escape is trying to make overshoot with eratic defensive maneuvers (so everything except a continous turn) or being able to quicly drop the speed and then turn hard at low speed without taking much G.

 

We have aye, it seems to us that they can match if not better it mate,

 

We have also tried many many different maneuvers with the Spit to shake these kinds of tails, absolutely none of them work, the 109 seems to be able to chop and change with us no matter what in MP. 

 

Edit: I have personally seen and experienced hard elevator standing 109s cut inside turns at notably low speeds, I've also seen 109s pull 6-7g turns without any trouble, I even did it on Sunday just past in one of No.66's private sessions.

Edited by -=No.66=-Griff1999
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, -=No.66=-Griff1999 said:

Hi chaps,

 

I was wondering if anyone else has noticed this phenomenon with the later models of 109 (G2 and later) where they are able to sustain 5G or above for a super long time in tight turn fights, my squadron and I have been turned inside of whilst in Spitfires at the very edge of black out (with the new FM).

 

We'll be doing the proper engine management and flap releasing for the maintaining of lower speed and higher speed, 5G+ turns and there will be a 109 that comes screaming in from altitude that manages to turn inside of us, and maintain the inside turn. This happens regardless of the speed we collectively travel at.

 

It is always a 109 achieving these types of turn, 190s are not able to do this.

 

I was always under the impression that the 109's main advantage was speed and the spit had superior turn capability?

 

Anybody else witnessed elevator standing from 109s?

 

 

@-=No.66=-Griff1999 I honestly can't say I've noticed any significant changes in terms of flight model to the Bf 109's.

 

In order to better understand what's going on it'd be helpful to know which specific models it is you are flying and precisely which Bf 109 you were fighting, turning performance is not a black and white thing, so things like how much fuel, what modifications and which particular variant can matter.

 

For example, if he was at minimum fuel and you were at max; that may make a little difference plus whether or not you are using 150 octane fuel etc. I agree, he/she may well have (probably was) using a fair bit of the flaps plus stabiliser trim to bleed off speed in the dive, perhaps also cutting the power.

 

The recently added Bf 109 G-6 late is able to pull a slightly sharper turn and climb slightly better than the existing G-14 (which is not a bad performer per se in a dogfight), it also has plenty of power reserves with MW50 and seems to compete fairly well with a Spitfire IX - this makes the margins a bit smaller but you should still be able to turn inside of them if you seem them coming.

 

Question for you - did you do a warm up maneuver before entering into combat? I know this sounds silly but without doing this your pilot will black out early if you suddenly apply many G's at once - this is a result of the pilot physiology changes that came fairly recently. Check the update log/dev. diary on that if you haven't.

 

In the Spitfire, you can very easily apply more G's than the Bf 109 - and because of the seating angle you are also very slightly more prone to blacking out... so if you can - try not to depend on hard maneuvering all the time throughout combat. If your intent is to get stuck into the middle of a dogfight and stay on the edge of the blackout, you will eventually be shotdown - I can guarantee it. As the adage goes; you can't keep turning forever... even in the Spitfire - and that's because the pilot is the limiting factor here not the aircraft and your pilot will fatigue if you keep pulling or sustaining high G's - this will eventually start to affect how tightly you manoeuvre.

 

In one recent battle (surprisingly) I had no problem shooting down a Spitfire IX I encountered online in a dogfight with the Bf 109 G-6 late, because I had a very slight altitude advantage (energy I could waste when I really needed it); I followed in a slight climbing turn behind and knew the pilot would predictably start with a strong defensive manoeuvre to try turn the tables. So.. I just sit back and follow through at a slight distance and wait patiently... deliberately using a little less rigour, letting him bleed energy as well as knowing he is going to fatigue if he maintains these high G's. After about 40 seconds of him doing this very hard banking / maneuvering, I only then press the attack hard - and of course, he can't react as much due to fatigue.

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

 

@-=No.66=-Griff1999 I honestly can't say I've noticed any significant changes in terms of flight model to the Bf 109's.

 

In order to better understand what's going on it'd be helpful to know which specific models it is you are flying and precisely which Bf 109 you were fighting, turning performance is not a black and white thing, so things like how much fuel, what modifications and which particular variant can matter.

 

For example, if he was at minimum fuel and you were at max; that may make a little difference plus whether or not you are using 150 octane fuel etc. I agree, he/she may well have (probably was) using a fair bit of the flaps plus stabiliser trim to bleed off speed in the dive, perhaps also cutting the power.

 

The recently added Bf 109 G-6 late is able to pull a slightly sharper turn and climb slightly better than the existing G-14 (which is not a bad performer per se in a dogfight), it also has plenty of power reserves with MW50 and seems to compete fairly well with a Spitfire IX - this makes the margins a bit smaller but you should still be able to turn inside of them if you seem them coming.

 

Question for you - did you do a warm up maneuver before entering into combat? I know this sounds silly but without doing this your pilot will black out early if you suddenly apply many G's at once - this is a result of the pilot physiology changes that came fairly recently. Check the update log/dev. diary on that if you haven't.

 

In the Spitfire, you can very easily apply more G's than the Bf 109 - and because of the seating angle you are also very slightly more prone to blacking out... so if you can - try not to depend on hard maneuvering all the time throughout combat. If your intent is to get stuck into the middle of a dogfight and stay on the edge of the blackout, you will eventually be shotdown - I can guarantee it. As the adage goes; you can't keep turning forever... even in the Spitfire - and that's because the pilot is the limiting factor here not the aircraft and your pilot will fatigue if you keep pulling or sustaining high G's - this will eventually start to affect how tightly you manoeuvre.

 

In one recent battle (surprisingly) I had no problem shooting down a Spitfire IX I encountered online in a dogfight with the Bf 109 G-6 late, because I had a very slight altitude advantage (energy I could waste when I really needed it); I followed in a slight climbing turn behind and knew the pilot would predictably start with a strong defensive manoeuvre to try turn the tables. So.. I just sit back and follow through at a slight distance and wait patiently... deliberately using a little less rigour, letting him bleed energy as well as knowing he is going to fatigue if he maintains these high G's. After about 40 seconds of him doing this very hard banking / maneuvering, I only then press the attack hard - and of course, he can't react as much due to fatigue.

 

Which kite are we flying? ----> Both the MkV and MkIXe

 

Do we warm up? -----> Our engagements happen under a variety of conditions honestly, 7/10 times we have pulled several high G maneuvers before entering a turn fight with the 109s in question.

 

We have pilots that are very skilled (in our collective opinion) each and every one of us has taken the time to learn the new PM, we try and keep ourselves out of the furball as much as is possible and engage the stragglers or individual craft as much as possible.

 

The IX is a weird plane in this sim, it seems to be easily out performed by the V in performance without the Merlin 70 or the 150 Octane fuel mods and allows for GLOC far faster, I'm not quite sure what to make of it.

 

Thank you for your addition to this discussion, we try and use as much information as is given.

 

Edited by -=No.66=-Griff1999
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

This is another one of those pointless complaint threads that doesn't even have a testable claim

 

The KEY WORD in this sentence is...... ANOTHER: When somebody needs to say AGAIN same thing as other times in a recent past- present means things are not working properly well as they should.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 109's whole tail-plane moves when trimming, so possibly this trimming doesn't trigger the blackout effects until the elevator is pulled (bugged).  I can't get online to test this right now.  If the trim is being exploited like this at high speeds, then one could technically gain better turn rate then what the system is registering with the joystick input;  Test two 109s, each following the other through turns with one trimmed to max elevator and the other one not to see if the G loads are applying equally...

Edited by Drum
Link to post
Share on other sites

G forces are the result of a change in velocity over time. Nothing else. It doesn't matter whether you are in an aircraft turning as the result of the elevators moving, or the stabiliser being trimmed. Or for that matter, if you aren't in an aircraft at all, but riding a roller-coaster instead. Follow the same path, at the same speed, and you will experience the same G forces. This is elementary physics, and if anyone wants to claim that the sim is doing something different, they need to provide verifiable evidence to back it up.

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

G forces are the result of a change in velocity over time. Nothing else. It doesn't matter whether you are in an aircraft turning as the result of the elevators moving, or the stabiliser being trimmed. Or for that matter, if you aren't in an aircraft at all, but riding a roller-coaster instead. Follow the same path, at the same speed, and you will experience the same G forces. This is elementary physics, and if anyone wants to claim that the sim is doing something different, they need to provide verifiable evidence to back it up.

 

Gravity is not a force in itself (the day he called it Force was not the best in Newton's curriculum). G is an acceleration ( 9.8 meters/ second squared). I agree with the universal physics for everybody but.... we're talking of a place with no real air, etc,etc. So when all parameters are only a series of 0 and 1 I start to doubt in real and inmovable truths. So I come from the other side and doing the devil's layer: I need a verifiable evidence from the side what is pretending to defend everything is in place and in order and 4.5 releases and an uncontable hot fixes list is not a very soothing point, otherwise why G physics is in its second released version? 

Do you really know how many spins you have to do in the real flap in cockpit wheel of a 109 to deploy them? 22 complete spins!!!!! in a such small and claustrophobic cockpit for a 6 feet high Klaus von Otto. Do you know in 44-45 109 pilots  just never deployed flaps for landing. I can't imagine a 109 pilot entering in a 5G tight turn just pulling the stick fully back with only one hand while with the other operating the flap wheel, also the trimmer wheel  and, don't forget it: the throttle, but I can imagine a FW190-A's or D9 a P-51,P-38 and P-47 using their electric/ hydraulics flap system. 

So we can discuss accuracy in implementations for years and sure we wouldn't finish thinking the same. If you are so sure you're right then you will have zero problems in demonstrating us why 109 pilot G suffering capabilities are inside parameters. Please be as accurate as you're demanding for others.   

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Tatata_Time said:

I need a verifiable evidence from the side what is pretending to defend everything is in place and in order and 4.5 releases and an uncontable hot fixes list is not a very soothing point, otherwise why G physics is in its second released version?

 

If you argue that the game is modeling something incorrectly, it's up to you to provide evidence. That's how we got to the revised pilot physiology.

 

So far, this thread is nothing but unfalsifiable anecdotes. It's no better than claiming that you've seen alien spaceships in the sky above Kuban.

 

38 minutes ago, Tatata_Time said:

Do you really know how many spins you have to do in the real flap in cockpit wheel of a 109 to deploy them? 22 complete spins!!!!! in a such small and claustrophobic cockpit for a 6 feet high Klaus von Otto. Do you know in 44-45 109 pilots  just never deployed flaps for landing. I can't imagine a 109 pilot entering in a 5G tight turn just pulling the stick fully back with only one hand while with the other operating the flap wheel, also the trimmer wheel  and, don't forget it: the throttle, but I can imagine a FW190-A's or D9 a P-51,P-38 and P-47 using their electric/ hydraulics flap system. 

 

None of this has anything to do with the effects of acceleration on the pilot.

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

Do some people honestly think that g forces are specifically modelled for each aircraft insetad of an universal funtion depending of your specific flight path??

 

G-force in it's self is indeed a universal function, the way that G force effects pilots in individual kites is not, e.g seat placement

1 hour ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

 

If you argue that the game is modeling something incorrectly, it's up to you to provide evidence. That's how we got to the revised pilot physiology.

 

So far, this thread is nothing but unfalsifiable anecdotes. It's no better than claiming that you've seen alien spaceships in the sky above Kuban.

 

 

None of this has anything to do with the effects of acceleration on the pilot.

 

You seem to miss the purpose of this thread, it is to find out if other people have also seen what we have seen happen, not provide a full set of technical read outs from the game.

 

You've surely seen some of the issues with the current 190 FM, is it really unfeasible to suggest that the 109 might be suffering a similar issue?

 

The chaps and I will be doing some testing later tonight so we'll try and get a good bit of evidence to further back up what we're saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, -=No.66=-Griff1999 said:

e.g seat placement

AnP was rather clear what seat placement (you mean recline?) does. It is just the trigonometric factor determined by the seat angle. There is very little diference between the 109 and the Spit.

 

I think you guys should read the dev diary where AnP goes into detail about how he made the current system. The Spit has a very light and effective elevator, hence the onset of g accelleration is usually different when you fly the 109 and the Spit.

 

Unless you prove with a track that you fly identical accellerations in both aircraft and still get different g effects, it is very, very obvious that you fly the aircraft differently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

G onset is very important when it comes to blackout and as you point out, the sensitive elevator on the Spitfire will produce a trend where you black out earlier than in other aircraft with less sensitive elevators.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, JG300_Faucon said:

Did you take into account the high elevator authority of RAF fighters? 

You're more likely to pull more G with them and not realising it until the pilot is exhausted and fall into a black out/G lock.

A Spitfire can be completely traped by a 109 on his six because of G limits (its pilot can't exploit the full turning capability), while it has way better turn rate. Same story with Tempest vs Dora. The only escape is trying to make overshoot with eratic defensive maneuvers (so everything except a continous turn) or being able to quicly drop the speed and then turn hard at low speed without taking much G.

This

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I personally noticed too that you are often brought to the brink of a total blackout when turning with 109's while they themselves continue to pull tight maneuvers at high speed. 

 

In my Spit IX career, I always end up exhausted when fighting 109s. To avoid this, I need to avoid turning in a tight fashion, which means I often end up being out turned by G14s and K4s that dont get tired. 

 

At first I thought that maybe it had something to do with the way fatigue affects AI. But it is noticeable when fighting 109s especially. I had the same issue yesterday in a Yak 1 when fighting a 109E. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I experienced it but only from other side. Ive never had problem staying behind spit until really slow speeds and then, i just dropped 20-30% flaps, smashed stick towards me while firing, did BS unrealistic aoa without stall and killed the spit. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 109 can fly at very high AoA, making it a great solution for snapshots. It is often that a persuing 109 not really turns inside the oponent, but for a brief time pulls a lot of alpha, enough for a snapshot. The Spit on the other hand tends to follow the nose more, making you pull higher g's to get the same alpha for a snapshot. It might explain why people in the Spit might feel being on the receiving end. A well flown 109 is a VERY competent dogfighter.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

Well I personally noticed too that you are often brought to the brink of a total blackout when turning with 109's while they themselves continue to pull tight maneuvers at high speed. 

 

In my Spit IX career, I always end up exhausted when fighting 109s. To avoid this, I need to avoid turning in a tight fashion, which means I often end up being out turned by G14s and K4s that dont get tired. 

 

At first I thought that maybe it had something to do with the way fatigue affects AI. But it is noticeable when fighting 109s especially. I had the same issue yesterday in a Yak 1 when fighting a 109E. 

 

 

 

I'm glad to have some other takes on this "issue".

 

2 hours ago, =DMD=Honza said:

I experienced it but only from other side. Ive never had problem staying behind spit until really slow speeds and then, i just dropped 20-30% flaps, smashed stick towards me while firing, did BS unrealistic aoa without stall and killed the spit. 

 

Do you consider it to be a somewhat negligible "issue" or something that you could do in pretty much all the 109s?

 

1 hour ago, ZachariasX said:

The 109 can fly at very high AoA, making it a great solution for snapshots. It is often that a pursuing 109 not really turns inside the opponent, but for a brief time pulls a lot of alpha, enough for a snapshot. The Spit on the other hand tends to follow the nose more, making you pull higher g's to get the same alpha for a snapshot. It might explain why people in the Spit might feel being on the receiving end. A well flown 109 is a VERY competent dogfighter.

 

I don't doubt that for a minute, I myself started off in this sim with the 109s as a learning platform, I've just never seen this happen without a stall of some description or a death spiral up until just after the more recent FM updates.

 

7 hours ago, Diggun said:

If you're dropping flaps in a Spit in turns, you're doing it wrong. Those puppies are for whipping out for landing only.

 

We don't tend to do it often, it's more like a last ditch attempt to get further inside the 109 trailing.

 

10 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

Unless you prove with a track that you fly identical accelerations in both aircraft and still get different g effects, it is very, very obvious that you fly the aircraft differently.

 

I understand why you say that but as I mentioned above, it's not just me that see's this happening a lot, it's my entire squadron that has seen it and had it happen to them. It is very unlikely that ALL of us are flying the kite incorrectly.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, -=No.66=-Griff1999 said:

 

Do you consider it to be a somewhat negligible "issue" or something that you could do in pretty much all the 109s? 

Iam flying only g-k, basically all Gs. And i can do it in all of them. Ofc sometimes i miss but thats expected if spit is jinking but problem is absurd AoAs that 109s can pull without loss of control. Keep in mind, even in wt, you stall it doing this, in DCS which have multiple times superior FM, you cant even think about doing something absurd like in il2 with 109 as you'll end in death spiral which is hard to recover, not in il2 where you lose what... 100 meters of alt if you manage to stall it? 109 cant stay behind spit at low speeds but certainly can pull BS maneuvers to cripple spit and prevent it from turning sharp. At high speeds, youre limited by Gs (again, by feel, i can pull more and longer in 109, seat position have nearly none influence on pilots performance in terms of Gs and stamina, not to mention, spit have upper foot rests on rudder pedals where you gain nearly the same seat position as in 109 so if there is some position advantage, they are basically the same) 

Edited by =DMD=Honza
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, =DMD=Honza said:

Iam flying only g-k, basically all Gs. And i can do it in all of them. Ofc sometimes i miss but thats expected if spit is jinking but problem is absurd AoAs that 109s can pull without loss of control. Keep in mind, even in wt, you stall it doing this, in DCS which have multiple times superior FM, you cant even think about doing something absurd like in il2 with 109 as you'll end in death spiral which is hard to recover, not in il2 where you lose what... 100 meters of alt if you manage to stall it? 109 cant stay behind spit at low speeds but certainly can pull BS maneuvers to cripple spit and prevent it from turning sharp. At high speeds, youre limited by Gs (again, by feel, i can pull more and longer in 109, seat position have nearly none influence on pilots performance in terms of Gs and stamina, not to mention, spit have upper foot rests on rudder pedals where you gain nearly the same seat position as in 109 so if there is some position advantage, they are basically the same) 

 

Thank you for your objective opinion about weirdness of 109 FM. I really appreciate your objectivity in this matter, but you know.... always someone try to question the sacred 109 a legion of fandome boys enter the game and try to troll the dissident opinions, because fan boys don't want to loose those advantages (even agaisnt physics) where they based their winner tactics. 

 

The fact we normally don't fly a plane should not affects the fact we normally fight aigainst it, so our obligation as regular opponents is discovering our natural opponents weak points and exploid them in combat. So that's the main reason guys come here and ask when they discover weird situations related with uppps... at this point in the fight it should make any error due I correctly exploided that opponets's weak point and uppps I haven't won any advantage... just the opposite, now I'm in Energy dissadvantage.

 

As some planes FM should be rechecked as the Tempest, some 109's G models FM should be recheked too.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =DMD=Honza said:

Iam flying only g-k, basically all Gs. And i can do it in all of them. Ofc sometimes i miss but thats expected if spit is jinking but problem is absurd AoAs that 109s can pull without loss of control. Keep in mind, even in wt, you stall it doing this, in DCS which have multiple times superior FM, you cant even think about doing something absurd like in il2 with 109 as you'll end in death spiral which is hard to recover, not in il2 where you lose what... 100 meters of alt if you manage to stall it? 109 cant stay behind spit at low speeds but certainly can pull BS maneuvers to cripple spit and prevent it from turning sharp. At high speeds, youre limited by Gs (again, by feel, i can pull more and longer in 109, seat position have nearly none influence on pilots performance in terms of Gs and stamina, not to mention, spit have upper foot rests on rudder pedals where you gain nearly the same seat position as in 109 so if there is some position advantage, they are basically the same) 

 

Cheers for putting your experiences here mate I really appreciate it!

 

3 minutes ago, Tatata_Time said:

 

Thank you for your objective opinion about weirdness of 109 FM. I really appreciate your objectivity in this matter, but you know.... always someone try to question the sacred 109 a legion of fandome boys enter the game and try to troll the dissident opinions, because fan boys don't want to loose those advantages (even agaisnt physics) where they based their winner tactics. 

 

The fact we normally don't fly a plane should not affects the fact we normally fight aigainst it, so our obligation as regular opponents is discovering our natural opponents weak points and exploid them in combat. So that's the main reason guys come here and ask when they discover weird situations related with uppps... at this point in the fight it should make any error due I correctly exploided that opponets's weak point and uppps I haven't won any advantage... just the opposite, now I'm in Energy dissadvantage.

 

As some planes FM should be rechecked as the Tempest, some 109's G models FM should be recheked too.

 

 

I fully agree with this sentiment, I've seen Tempests do some weird stuff as well, I appreciate your take on this :)

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

What is needed is real world pilot input from people like:

 

Keith Skilling

Volker Bau

Charlie Brown

Anna Walker

There may be a number of real life warbird pilots who may be willing to help?

 

I remember reading how years ago, someone asked  Cptn Eric Brown to try 1946.  Sure the new pilots haven't flown in combat, but with their experience, perhaps it could clear some things up if they tried the game.

 

The 109's climb like jets.  

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Confused_2018 said:

 The 109's climb like jets.  

The climb rate is ok i would say as they were climbing monsters even irl but the ingame ability to sustain massive AoAs which even jets without fbw cant properly sustain... And this applies to all god damn plane, just drop flaps and do whatever you want as chances to stall the damn things is next to none. They should start with modelling proper gyro effect from engines. So you wont be able to dogfight at slow speeds with 109 as engine will eventually overcome your inputs. Especially in k4 but here, its like flying korea-vietnam era jets with hydroalics assists and stabilisation systems. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The G-force thing is probably it. The attacker can be a lot more relaxed than the defender by going into lag pursuit etc and thus if you don't break off quickly it can be a slow, losing battle. Similarly, I've taken the Mustang into dogfights with 109Gs before and beaten them because their pilots are exhausted by the time we get to low speed, and my US pilot with his comfy G-suit is still ready for more

 

22 minutes ago, =DMD=Honza said:

The climb rate is ok i would say as they were climbing monsters even irl but the ingame ability to sustain massive AoAs which even jets without fbw cant properly sustain... And this applies to all god damn plane, just drop flaps and do whatever you want as chances to stall the damn things is next to none. They should start with modelling proper gyro effect from engines. So you wont be able to dogfight at slow speeds with 109 as engine will eventually overcome your inputs. Especially in k4 but here, its like flying korea-vietnam era jets with hydroalics assists and stabilisation systems. 

 

A few of the twin engined fighters are similar, as is the Tempest as noted above, you can fly at extremely low speeds quite stably with the nose pointed at the sky as long as you have power on.

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...