109-F4 and 190-A3

[R33GZ]

Just wondering if anyone else had noticed that the 109-F4 and the 190-A3 seem to out perform their contemporaries? I should probably add that I only own Kuban and Stalingrad at this stage so there's probably a few variants I haven't flown yet. 

 

I remember reading a paperback by Adolf Galland years ago. In it, he said the 109-F4 was his favourite variant, as future 109s became fat and heavy... Or something to that effect. 

 

Unless I'm imagining it, I seem to be able to get a good 500kph fast cruise in both the F4 and A3... A good deal quicker than say the G4 or A5. Could this be that the F4 and A3 have the ideal power to weight ratio for their airframes? 

 

Not a criticism or anything... Just curious. 

[Gambit21]

The F4 was the pinnacle dog-fighter. They became increasingly over-engineered after that, especially after the G6 (but gained in other areas)

 

Low altitude knife fights though - F4 but give me the Emil only.

(just my preference, I love the E)

 

The 190’s followed a similar path - with the A5 IIRC being the best in a phone booth, but even the A3 better than an A8 in that regard. Someone can correct me if I flubbed that.

Edited July 23, 2022 by Gambit21

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, R33GZ said:

Just wondering if anyone else had noticed that the 109-F4 and the 190-A3 seem to out perform their contemporaries? I should probably add that I only own Kuban and Stalingrad at this stage so there's probably a few variants I haven't flown yet. 

 

I remember reading a paperback by Adolf Galland years ago. In it, he said the 109-F4 was his favourite variant, as future 109s became fat and heavy... Or something to that effect. 

 

Unless I'm imagining it, I seem to be able to get a good 500kph fast cruise in both the F4 and A3... A good deal quicker than say the G4 or A5. Could this be that the F4 and A3 have the ideal power to weight ratio for their airframes? 

 

Not a criticism or anything... Just curious. 

"Fw 190 D

The Fw 190 D (nicknamed Dora; or Long-Nose Dora ("Langnasen-Dora") was intended as the high-altitude performance version of the A-series"

 

In this flying game A3 is faster then D9 abow 7km and can reach higher altitudes then D9  so you know things are not right there with history books as axis had best high alt fighter in 1942 in A3, it just seams they didnt know it.

So its not mistery why A3 is so popular in this game, it still have old FM that got fixed on other A models years ago.

 

When you look at F4 you got good fighter but how 13mm HE work in this game your lacking fire power on it as time progress, speed is not problem but guns get to be.

 

[ACG_Bob122]

It is quite easy to fly the F4/A3 vs their contemporaries. People will lie and say the LA-5, P-39, Yak1 or 7 are equal, they are not. The Yak9 is pretty close to the F4, but it is a 43 bird. Really, the only planes that start matching the F4/A3 are the Spit9 and LA-5FN, but then the blue players start saying it is not fair even though it is.

[Avimimus]

The secret to the A3... is that it is shorter!

 

The FW-190 was lengthened with the A5 in order to provide better stability with centre of gravity shifts from adding bombs and other additional weapons - and that lengthening was kept in all later variants (except the Fw-190D and Ta-152 - both of which were even longer).

 

So the Fw-190A3 is the original design, and that maybe why its controls are so well harmonised.

 

P.S. The Fw-190A4 might actually be of interest, as it is short like the A3 but has weapon/drop-tank options like the A5... this means it might handle more like an A3 when without bombs but still have the weapon options that the A5 has (albeit more dangerous to fly when they are equipped).

[R33GZ]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

The Fw-190A3 is the original design, and that maybe why its controls are so well harmonised.

This is what I was thinking also... Maybe those variants are the best match of engine to airframe and overall mass of the aircraft. Power to weight ratio, with aerodynamics thrown in for good measure ?

[jollyjack]

9 hours ago, R33GZ said:

Just wondering if anyone else had noticed that the 109-F4 and the 190-A3 seem to out perform their contemporaries? I should probably add that I only own Kuban and Stalingrad at this stage so there's probably a few variants I haven't flown yet.

 

Funny is that as occasional dogfight player i came to the same conclusion after trying out various Axis planes ...

Gambit's A5 and 109 E choices; wonder why?

[dgiatr]

9 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

The F4 was the pinnacle dog-fighter. They became increasingly over-engineered after that, especially after the G6 (but gained in other areas)

 

Low altitude knife fights though - F4 but give me the Emil only.

(just my preference, I love the E)

 

The 190’s followed a similar path - with the A5 IIRC being the best in a phone booth, but even the A3 better than an A8 in that regard. Someone can correct me if I flubbed that.

Hello to all!

I usually fly with G2 when its possible.

Can anyone tell me why F4 is better than G2 since duration of engine boost of F4 is so limited compaired to G2? Where F4 is better than G2 and how much in order to overcome the short engine boost duration of F4? How can anybody face enemy planes in a dogfight or in a long chase with so little boost duration?

Sorry to ask i am a novice pilot...

Thank you

[BMA_FlyingShark]

26 minutes ago, dgiatr said:

Can anyone tell me why F4 is better than G2 since duration of engine boost of F4 is so limited compaired to G2?

Maybe it has to do with the fact that the G2's engine is limited and can't go into emergency power like the others.

They modeled it this way 'cause the real ones back in the day were forbidden to go past a certain ATA (I forgot the exact settings).

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Eisenfaustus]

44 minutes ago, dgiatr said:

Can anyone tell me why F4 is better than G2 since duration of engine boost of F4 is so limited compaired to G2?

Both planes can hold combat power for 30 minutes - the difference is that the F4 can excess combat power for short periods of time which the G2 can’t. So you have more power available in the F4.
The plane is also a little lighter which makes it the best manoeuvring 109 in the game. 

[Avimimus]

7 hours ago, R33GZ said:

This is what I was thinking also... Maybe those variants are the best match of engine to airframe and overall mass of the aircraft. Power to weight ratio, with aerodynamics thrown in for good measure ?

 

Ah, yes I think this is close to the truth... but I'd put the emphasis on aerodynamics.

 

1942 and earlier a lot of the aircraft have lower wing-loadings and are travelling at lower speeds, so they have a better ability to manoeuvre (throw in the fact that they often have less firepower and the dogfights are much more elegant).

 

1943 and later the existing types are all growing in weight to the extent that handling is degrading and combat speeds overall are increasing to the point that you begin to get things like compressibility effects, heavier controls, and greater gee loads...

 

Try the Spitfires too... the pattern is similar!

[dgiatr]

5 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Both planes can hold combat power for 30 minutes - the difference is that the F4 can excess combat power for short periods of time which the G2 can’t. So you have more power available in the F4.
The plane is also a little lighter which makes it the best manoeuvring 109 in the game. 

Thank you for the information!

 

Another thing...Do you think guys that G2 dives better at the edge than F4?

I have the impression that when F4 reaches its dive speed limit about 850 km/h or a little after that , it looses more easily its ailerons than G2 does.  Can you confirm that or its just my impression?

Thank you again.

[R33GZ]

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

1942 and earlier a lot of the aircraft have lower wing-loadings and are travelling at lower speeds

That's kind of the opposite of what I have noticed with the F4 and A3 though, they both seem to have exceptional cruise speeds... 2300 RPM in the F4 and your honking along at 500kph with plenty of go left in the engine if you need it ?

[Ram399]

Here's a good chart of mid-war 109s I've kept on hand for a while now, if my memory serves I pulled it off of one of Sheriff's youtube videos.
(Just keep in mind that the standard G6 is just a bit worse than the G4 at everything in exchange for bigger guns)

[JG13_opcode]

23 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

The F4 was the pinnacle dog-fighter. They became increasingly over-engineered after that, especially after the G6 (but gained in other areas)

 

Low altitude knife fights though - F4 but give me the Emil only.

(just my preference, I love the E)

 

The 190’s followed a similar path - with the A5 IIRC being the best in a phone booth, but even the A3 better than an A8 in that regard. Someone can correct me if I flubbed that.

The 109 became an interceptor in later variants and you can see that in the engineering: powerful engine, small airframe, high climb rate, powerful nose-mounted armament, low endurance.

 

A good set of design tradeoffs if you are facing an unstoppable stream of Allied high altitude bombers over or near to your own territory.

Edited July 24, 2022 by JG13_opcode

[percydanvers]

What you're noticing is that both types became increasingly designed around shooting down bombers and little else. There was even political pressure on the Luftwaffe to even stop bothering to fight enemy escort fighters and throw everything at the bombers and nothing else (which proved pretty impossible in practice but still managed to cost a lot of pilots their lives trying to do). The result of that is planes with massive guns and huge engines for flying at really high altitude, none of which really does you much good at a >1000m dogfight against yaks. 

 

All that said I still think the G-4 is superb. It starts to get too heavy for me with the G-6.