Bf-110e performance

[Snowball77]

Hi all, I want to ask a question regarding the 110 performance in game. Today I gave up the Stalingrad campaign with the stuka after I found that the ai stukas didn't like to attack objectives and instead they much prefer to fly around in circles eventually turning back to base with their full payload, so I started another one with the bf-110 because it is one of my favorites. This time the ai does attack ground objectives just fine but I am so far disappointed with the plane performance. It feels really slooow, it's so damn slow at doing everything, it takes ages to climb to 2000 meters, and once there it has trouble going beyond 450 km/h in level flight. I mean I know the 110 wasn't a fine dogfighter but at least in speed and climbing shouldn't be that behind single engine fighters, shouldn't it? In fact I found that it has trouble keeping up even with I-16s in terms of climbing and acceleration. Is this alright or maybe is this plane a little underperforming? I'm no expert mind you I'm just asking, the only comparison I have is CLOD, where the Bf-110c definitely climbs and accelerates better than this one, the one we have in great battles on the contrary seem to be completely hopeless in anything that isn't dropping bombs and taking out slow bombers/transports.

[CzechTexan]

Have you seen this video of bf110E Dogfight?

It might give you inspiration 😉

 

 

Edited March 24 by CzechTexan

[BlitzPig_EL]

If you are carrying a bomb load it will be slow due to increased drag and weight.

It is pretty well known that the Bf110 was meat on the table for single seat fighters.

[Snowball77]

I wasn't carrying a bomb load and couldn't keep up with I-16s, but I was carrying 100% fuel if I'm not mistaken

[BlitzPig_EL]

OK, did you have the 110 well in trim?  This can make a big difference in your level speed. The AI always have perfect trim and operate at the most effective settings for their aircraft.

[Yogiflight]

@Snowball77 the Bf 110 E2 is the ground attack version of the E series. It has additional weight, compared to the earlier versions, even when you are flying without the additional armor. With the E2 being a pure ground attack version in mind, the developers argumented it might not have been equipped with the engine the Bf 109 F2 has, but with the engine the Bf 109 E7 is equipped with, as the F2s engine wasn't available yet, when the Bf 110 E2 was starting duty and as it was a pure ground attack version, it might not have been fitted with the stronger engines even after they were available. As noone was able to show evidence that the E2s were retrofitted with the stronger engines, we have to live with it.

This is my point, why I would like to have the E1 added to the game, as it would be available from the beginning, even at the time of Odessa in 1941, through to Stalingrad, and with the stronger engines it would make quite a difference to the E2, which shouldn't be flying any fighter missions at all in career mode and the AI should act more like the AI, flying the twoseater IL-2.

To the comparison with the I-16, it isn't that bad in climbing and acceleration. Especially in climbing it can even surprise you flying a 109. And the Bf 110 is a large and heavy aircraft, compared to this small piece, so climbing and accelerating surely isn't on the plus side of it.

Additionally 100% fuel is quite a lot in the 110.

Edited March 24 by Yogiflight

[Snowball77]

I don't remember honestly I use the keyboard for trim and rudder, my configuration is not ideal.  Today I was able to shoot down two Mig-3s in a free hunt mission, I was hovering around 4000 meters and had an altitude advantage of more than 1000 meters over migs and pe-2. Kind of boom and zoom, but you must have an altitude advantage with this thing, if you're caught at low altitude in some low speed fight you're done. Btw I was asking myself why don't we have the F version of this plane? The F version would make much more sense than the E, the F was available since 1941 if I'm not mistaken and it's just like the E but with better engines. The E model is simply underpowered imo. 

Edited March 24 by Snowball77

[Zooropa_Fly]

It's really not a fighter, unless you're super talented and/or there's a few of you. That goes for the G2 as well.

It's my favourite ride, but in MP I'm looking to get in and away from the target without getting into a scrap.

And if I do, there's little more exciting than limping a smoking 110 back to base, on the occasion you can.

[Yogiflight]

22 hours ago, Snowball77 said:

the F was available since 1941 if I'm not mistaken

According to Wikipedia production started in December 1941 and as the F2 was the Destroyer version, it surely was first delivered to the units based in Germany for the Reichs Defense. So I doubt it saw action in the battle of Moscow.

[ShamrockOneFive]

On 3/24/2025 at 7:55 PM, Snowball77 said:

I don't remember honestly I use the keyboard for trim and rudder, my configuration is not ideal.  Today I was able to shoot down two Mig-3s in a free hunt mission, I was hovering around 4000 meters and had an altitude advantage of more than 1000 meters over migs and pe-2. Kind of boom and zoom, but you must have an altitude advantage with this thing, if you're caught at low altitude in some low speed fight you're done

That's coincidentally what Bf110 pilots flying earlier models thought when they fought the RAF. And also why the 110 was withdrawn as a fighter during that battle.

[FeuerFliegen]

It's a shame that we don't get the DB601P (same as DB601N but for the 110) for the Bf110 E-2 as an option; same goes for the Bf109 E-7 not having the DB601N engine.  Luckily we'll get the DB601N with the new Bf109 E-4 though.

 

I can't recall how many times I've heard people absolutely hate the fact that we are given the excuse "well that specific plane didn't fly in that specific battle in that we released it for" and so we don't get that option.   I REALLY hope they don't pull that kind of stuff with Korea and future Pacific releases. 

 

One of the worst is the fact that we don't get the MK108 option in the Bf110 G-2; "because that wasn't used in Kuban"

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

6 hours ago, FeuerFliegen said:

I can't recall how many times I've heard people absolutely hate the fact that we are given the excuse "well that specific plane didn't fly in that specific battle in that we released it for" and so we don't get that option.   I REALLY hope they don't pull that kind of stuff with Korea and future Pacific releases. 

Unfortunately they've already pulled that kind of stuff in Korea. They've used that excuse for why we don't get the Mig-15 ground attack mods, and for only giving us the most basic Yak-9 armament of two 13mm + one 20mm, instead of the three 20mm, or two 20mm + one 23mm/37mm options. Whether we get the IL 10 rockets or not was also left ambiguous. They are historical under a broader definition of being real mods that existed in our dimensions history, but not the narrower definition of there's evidence they were used in this battle specifically so we get the plain jane plane.

[Snowball77]

But I also heard that the 110 had the most kills in the battle of Britain, I don't know if it's true but if it is I wonder how they managed to get those kills. In il-2 a 110 is a free kill for I-16s even. Now I love the I-16 but I don't think they were better than early spitfires and hurricanes 

[Aapje]

From what I've read, the BF 110's would do well in when doing 'high escort', flying much higher and far in front of the bombers. They would fly high and fast, and would boom and zoom. With disciplined pilots, they would be pretty safe, since none of the RAF fighters could then keep up. At best they could survive by out-turning the 110's. And a major benefit of boom and zoom is that one can often surprise the enemy.

 

And a big advantage they had over the 109 was time in the combat area. The 109's would have to leave again very quickly due to a lack of fuel. Can't get any kills if you are out of the fight due to lack of fuel stamina. However, you also can't get shot down if you are out of the fight, so the 110's also seem to have paid for their endurance with a relatively high loss rate.

 

This was true in particular when the 110's were ordered to stay close to the bombers for close escort missions, and this meant that they had to fly slow and lacked the altitude advantage, and also lacked the element of surprise.

 

This is just my speculation, but knowing how people are, I suspect that the bombers (and thus bomber command) wanted the close escort, because then they could see the fighters protecting them. The fighter sweeps happened out of sight of the bombers, and people tend to believe that things that they can't see themselves, don't exist/happen.

[PatrickAWlson]

On 3/25/2025 at 3:46 AM, Zooropa_Fly said:

It's really not a fighter, unless you're super talented and/or there's a few of you. That goes for the G2 as well.

It's my favourite ride, but in MP I'm looking to get in and away from the target without getting into a scrap.

And if I do, there's little more exciting than limping a smoking 110 back to base, on the occasion you can.

 

I love it as an interceptor.  Makes short work out of IL2s and medium bombers.  Against AI I can have some success with it, but in MP it would not go well.

[102nd-YU-devill]

On 3/27/2025 at 7:55 AM, Aapje said:

From what I've read, the BF 110's would do well in when doing 'high escort', flying much higher and far in front of the bombers. They would fly high and fast, and would boom and zoom. With disciplined pilots, they would be pretty safe, since none of the RAF fighters could then keep up. At best they could survive by out-turning the 110's. And a major benefit of boom and zoom is that one can often surprise the enemy.

 

And a big advantage they had over the 109 was time in the combat area. The 109's would have to leave again very quickly due to a lack of fuel. Can't get any kills if you are out of the fight due to lack of fuel stamina. However, you also can't get shot down if you are out of the fight, so the 110's also seem to have paid for their endurance with a relatively high loss rate.

 

This was true in particular when the 110's were ordered to stay close to the bombers for close escort missions, and this meant that they had to fly slow and lacked the altitude advantage, and also lacked the element of surprise.

 

This is just my speculation, but knowing how people are, I suspect that the bombers (and thus bomber command) wanted the close escort, because then they could see the fighters protecting them. The fighter sweeps happened out of sight of the bombers, and people tend to believe that things that they can't see themselves, don't exist/happen.

Edit:

Any fighter can boom and zoom an inexperienced opponent. While this certainly could have happened it is a far cry from a rule.

 

I have never read a positive account about any version of me110, except accounts of night fighters which were quite effective against single bombers.

In this game the me110 is unstallable. Yes it is heavy and slow but it does not stall, it turns on a dime, has an unrealistic elevator authority and stability in pitch (can point its nose at a high pitch angle and still be a perfectly stable firing platform) and takes a hell of a lot of damage.

I16 while not a fastest fighter was still faster than a bf110c, and much lighter and manevourable with about 30% less wingloading. An I 16 should not have any issues shooting down a bf110 if it can catch him and enter any kind of fight at co-E. I have never read any account where the puny rear gunner from a bf110 or any other similar airplane managed to defend from a competently flown single engine fighter.

If you dont believe any of that then the fact these airplanes were never again used as day fighters after BoB should tell you something.

[LukeFF]

Guys, if you have complaints about the 110's flight modeling, the correct place to report an issue is in the FM section of the forum, along with supporting materials, i.e., a track file (not a YouTube video).

 

Thanks 🙂

[102nd-YU-devill]

1 minute ago, LukeFF said:

Guys, if you have complaints about the 110's flight modeling, the correct place to report an issue is in the FM section of the forum, along with supporting materials, i.e., a track file (not a YouTube video).

 

Thanks 🙂

 

Hi Luke,

 

How do you want me to record flight telemetry to demonstrate what I said?

 

 

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, 102nd-YU-devill said:

Hi Luke,

 

How do you want me to record flight telemetry to demonstrate what I said?

 

Record the plane doing a manuever that you think isn't realistic and upload it here in the FM forum. The team then has tools to analyze what might or might not be right.

[blitze]

Playing a 110 Moscow career - it is what it is but I still enjoy flying it.

A better Zerstroyer version with the upgraded engines would be fun for Stalingrad.  As for the rear gunner - I order in close firing.  Let the AI get up close and then burst it.  Or so I hope my AI gunner does. 😁

Limping home is quite a challenge too but it takes forever.