Let's talk about our favorite warplanes

[GP*]

I know the feeling. I'm sure that flying to Berlin and back wasn't much of a problem - you only need to make one 180° turn.

Is it that bad? I've heard the Mustang in DCS is pretty touchy...but to what extent?

 

I've obviously never flown the Mustang in real life, but a high wing loading combined with a laminar flow wing would suggest modest turn performance -- how well is it reflected in DCS?

 

Not looking to start any huge debates here, just asking.

[gavagai]

Is it that bad? I've heard the Mustang in DCS is pretty touchy...but to what extent?

 

I've obviously never flown the Mustang in real life, but a high wing loading combined with a laminar flow wing would suggest modest turn performance -- how well is it reflected in DCS?

 

Not looking to start any huge debates here, just asking.

 

It's reflected well enough that the forum is full of posts from people who can't turn it much without stalling.  It requires a light touch, and a ffb joystick is a big help.

 

 

 

The P-51 gave no warning whatsoever of an accelerated stall. At the stall, the aircraft departed with complete loss of control, achieving 270-degree of roll before recovery. Departure was accompanied by violent

aileron snatch strong enough to rip the control stick from the hand. In short, the P-51 suffered from a Part I deficiency.

Edited August 16, 2013 by gavagai

[AndyJWest]

I'm flying the DCS P-51 with a twisty stick, rather than rudder pedals, which doesn't help, and I've not really flown it enough to get the best out of it - but it is definitely on the touchy side in turns, and you do need to keep the ball centred any time you are close to a stall. As for its handling with the fuselage tank full, it is definitely tricky - but so it should be. I can't see any particular reason to suggest that the FM is 'wrong' and there are good reasons to suggest that it is pretty accurate: see for instance this thread http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=111388 on real P-51 pilots trying it out. If BoS FMs are as good as this (which seems entirely possible), we'll be in for a treat. 

[Nanoton]

1. Bf 109

 

2. Fw 190 A

 

3. P47

 

4. LaGG 3

 

5. A6M Zero

 

And one bonus: F6F Hellcat

Edited August 17, 2013 by Nanoton

[GP*]

It's reflected well enough that the forum is full of posts from people who can't turn it much without stalling.  It requires a light touch, and a ffb joystick is a big help.

 

Now if only a 109 existed for DCS while I wait for BOS...I'd love to have to work at those takeoffs and landings

[=69.GIAP=TUSHKA]

Il-2

Pe-2

P38

P47

A20

 

Kusk

 

Obviously I am a mud-mover.  

[Avimimusold]

1. Mig 3 - it is a gentleman's airplane - faster than anything in 1941, but with a weak armament and some design flaws. Your opponent will know that you are going to defeat him long before he goes down.

 

2. Fw-189 - Glass house, strong defensive armament, very large wingspan - a fascinating aircraft to fly and fight in - with an unusual roll for the player.

 

3. Il-4 - Carries a much heavier and more versatile bomb load compared to the Pe-2, makes an excellent complement to the stable as a very common and capable Soviet medium bomber.

 

4. Do-17 or Do-217 - The high wing loading gives it a very interesting feeling for the pilot. Good at diving to safety. They also carried relatively strong defensive armaments.

 

5. U-2 - Low wing loading, bi-plane flight, and a decent mixture of machine guns (including fixed forward firing) and bombs.

 

 

I'm also fond of the low wing loading of the Fairy Fulmer and the Tomahawk IIB (which reminds me of a Mig-3) and the Ki-43.

 

Favorite theatre:  Probably Eastern Front North 1941... interesting mixture of aircraft. Finnish aircraft and naval operations. A chance to fly the Mig-3 before it is outclassed... After that North Africa.

 

What I'd probably say if I were being honest - the strategic night bombing campaign (not that we'll ever see it - given that American and Russian developers typically lack the knowledge to see how historically important and enjoyable the gameplay could be)

[TheBlackPenguin]

What I'd probably say if I were being honest - the strategic night bombing campaign (not that we'll ever see it - given that American and Russian developers typically lack the knowledge to see how historically important and enjoyable the gameplay could be)

 

I just had to highlight this one, it can be coupled with the US daylight efforts starting early in the war as they built up, so you'd see B-17F's mixed in with light and medium bombers. Then you have the night operations with Stirling's, Wellingtons etc, and then see the electronic developments with H2S, Gee, Oboe, Window and of course this would mean we'd have the Luftwaffe night fighter units in-game.

[Rjel]

What I'd probably say if I were being honest - the strategic night bombing campaign (not that we'll ever see it - given that American and Russian developers typically lack the knowledge to see how historically important and enjoyable the gameplay could be)

Well hell then, have the British and German developers who are so knowledgeable about how historically important and enjoyable the gameplay could be do it.

[TheBlackPenguin]

Well hell then, have the British and German developers who are so knowledgeable about how historically important and enjoyable the gameplay could be do it.

 

I know you're answering an ill-conceived sentence, however they "ended up in an argument"...Which reminds me of Target for Tonight, a sim that didn't quite make it (sorry, no discussions)...I'll make a new thread .

[PeterZvan]

Lets see - WW II only right? (else there would be Camels, Dr.Is.... in it)

1: Spitfire -  huge histrical importance, looks brilliant, supposably flies that way as well - only real full time counterpart to the 109, both got loads of variants and kept being preety much on top. Favourite version would be the Mk.IX 

2: 109 - brilliant design from the word go - loads of inovations, loads of sucess, non stop evolutions to keep it on the top - favourite version would be the F4 as it looks right and had the performance at the time frame

3: Zero - love the philosophy behind it - performance is all - no compromising the performance. This made it the monster it was at the start - kind of sad (or very much lucky) that the developement didnt continue with more powerfull engines... If it would continue on the developement curve like the Spit and 109, than it would deffinitly be one of the most dangerous planes out there. Not to mention that I have a soft spot for the Zeros due to Saburo Sakai (what a great book his accounts are)

4: FW 190 - brilliant design, great performance, massive firepower - really upped the game when it really started to get involved in the fights (instant need for a Mk.IX Spit). Also looks the best out of all the WW II planes (A versions) - just a mean plane - favourite version - I guess complete A series

5: I guess La5 / La7 series - proper fighter with great performance. Looks great, again a great idea with the engine transplant - making an average plane into a great plane. Great gun placement... La5FN is the variant of my choice.

 

Of course many others just missed out.

Closest one was the Mosquito - love that plane - what an idea that was.

Plenty of American planes missed out, but I always disliked the fact that they made them with too many compromises - they could perform so much better if made less roomy, with less ccomfort... Just like giving a sports car electric seats, aircon, sunroof.... just needles weight that makes it softer and less potent. But maybe the most notable for me would be the Mustang.

 

Favourite theater - I guess France 1940. Much overlooked I reckon and a very effective battle - the Luftwaffe really was crucial to make it so effective - especially the dive bombers and the close front support - the management and logistics there were just genious - Wolfram Richthoffen really knew his stuff. And on the fighter v fighter side it was far from clear cut - some great scraps there and many early war planes were involved there (D.520, Ms.406, P36, Hurricanes...) - would love to see an addon for that period at one point - especially as at one or another point we would be taking off and fighting over the same areas as in RoF.

[Meteor2]

I just had to highlight this one, it can be coupled with the US daylight efforts starting early in the war as they built up, so you'd see B-17F's mixed in with light and medium bombers. Then you have the night operations with Stirling's, Wellingtons etc, and then see the electronic developments with H2S, Gee, Oboe, Window and of course this would mean we'd have the Luftwaffe night fighter units in-game.

 

You are so right. Fascinating options and no sim until now has build on that...

[JG4_Greif]

So the 109 has won

[6./ZG26_Emil]

1. FW-190 early models

2. 109

3. Do 17

4. Ju 88

5. Hurricane

 

I like the early theaters and am quite happy with revising the Eastern Front again. I like the BOB and would be interested in a Med theater providing it wasn't just North Africa, I've worked in North Africa for many years and the maps we got in IL2 were horrible and a completely wrong depiction of the region so if they did it, it would have to be very good.

[BlitzPig_EL]

So the 109 has won

 

 

Actually, it lost...

 

[Bf-110]

I'm a great fan of twin engined fighters/attackers,but here goes my list.

 

Bf-110 (obviously)

 

Ki-45

 

Ju-88

 

Hs-129

 

Ki-61

 

North África,because desert is awesome and Pacific because of the aeronaval combat.But I'd like to know if there were enough engagements on the Atlantic or North Sea.

 

BTW,how frequent were dogfights incolving P-47s?

[PauloHirth]

bf109G-6 AS

FW190A-5

Yak7-B

Yak-9K

La-5/5FN

LAGG-3

P-39

P-40

P-51B

P-38

Hurricane

Spitfire MK-II , V.... 

[Camille88]

1. BF 109 

2. Spitfire

3. FW-190 A 3 - 5 

4. Yak 1B 3

5. A6M5 Zero

 

Batlle of Britain 

[VeryOldMan]

FW-190  A (all  types series and colors)

 

P-38

 

Tempest

 

 

Nothign special on the soviet front,  probably the LA-5

[=Elite=BlitzPuppet]

I love me some 109s...(G-10s, G2s, F2s)They almost always my choice flying in IL2 when they are an option and I want to be a fighter.

 

JU-88 and JU-87s are not too far behind.

[4thFG_Cap_D_Gentile]

Planes:

1: P-36/Hawk 75 with and without retracts.

2: P-40B-through P40-M1.

3:SBD 2/3.

4: F4F3/3a/4.

5: F4U-1 Corsair.

 

Battles/Fronts:

1: China 1937-1945.

2: Philippines 1941-1942.

3:Early carrier raids.

4:Coral Sea.

5: Midway.

 

GL !

[Freycinet]

Guys, how about spending a few words on WHY you find your personal selection of planes the best? Makes for more interesting reading...

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Guys, how about spending a few words on WHY you find your personal selection of planes the best? Makes for more interesting reading...

 

Are you hoping to uncover a closet nazi by doing this

Edited August 28, 2013 by JG5_Emil

[Falco_Peregrinus]

1 -  Macchi C.202 - Simply outstanding and beautiful lines

 

2 - Bristol Beaufighter (all versions) - firepower and ruggedness

 

3 - Cant Z.1007bis bomber - very beautiful bomber

 

4 - Swordfish - slow and old... but full of battle honours

 

5 - Yak 3 - efficient, powerful, light

 

 

Teathre: it ought to be MALTA and North Africa

 

for a change!

Edited August 29, 2013 by Ioshic

[Finkeren]

Guys, how about spending a few words on WHY you find your personal selection of planes the best? Makes for more interesting reading...

My selection is the best because of my superior intellect and exquisite taste.

 

There, wasn't that interesting?

 

All right, let's try: I chose the La-5FN as my overall favourite based on a number of factors:

 

1. Its overall looks, which are just great. The rugged, compact airframe of the LaGG-3 combined seamlessly with the elegant lines of the ASh-82. The heavy-framed but elegant canopy. Etc. Plus it looks great in both early 1943 black/green and late war grey/blue-grey camouflage. Overall it looks better than the cleaner design of the La-7.

 

2. Its capabilities af a fighter: Great mix of high performance, good handling characteristics, powerful and concentrated armament, good all-round FOV, high speed at low altitudes.

 

3. Its combat record, which is impressive for a fighter of the VVS, combined with its troublesome birth. It was truly a design that had to prove itself.

 

4. The fact that it's a VVS fighter and saw extensive service in large numbers. Flying for the VVS Means alwayws being sort of an underdog, which really appeals to me.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Finkeren

[Manta]

1. Macchi 202/205 Folgore/Veltro

2. Mc 200 Saetta

3. SM 79 Sparviero

4. Fw 190 all versions

5. P40 Kittyhawk & Tomahawk

 

Theatre: Mediterranean & North Africa

[Freycinet]

Thx Finkeren, very interesting reading, some good points there.

[Caudron431]

Yaks, i love you!

 

I appreciate all series, but my favorites are the 9 series: 9/9D/9T/9M. Frankly i find these aircraft to be as interesting as the 109 (which is also one of my all time favourite, especially the Emil and early G6, G10 being the ultimate for me). It is really different and has a very nice feeling of lightness, a very good rate of roll, and it has a good rate of turn too.

 

The early 9 is the most beautiful to me, i like its big undernose air intake, and its wing shape is really original, very elegant.

 

And the 9T and M, with their pit position moved backwards make them look like powerful vintage sportscar, and the heavy canon gives it an awsome firepower against bombers. Like to see pilots rolling above a bomber, showing the underwing blue and the red stars, and a moment after looking at the shells impacting.

 

Of course i also like the fact that Yaks were used by the Polish and the French small airforces with success.

 

(Frankly the soviet 303 interception division's lightning symbol on the fuselage sides, with the blue white red color on the spinner make the Normandie Niemen aircraft really awesome. Almost as cool as the spirals on the 109 spinners.)

 

Look sec 5 and sec 10 in this video:

 

 

It is what i like!

Edited August 30, 2013 by RegRag1977

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

I would love to see the P-39 Airacobra.  I know the Russians had them partway through the Battle of Stalingrad, so they could have seen service there.  I understand the Russians removed the wing guns, which helped a lot with performance, and that the 'Kobra's' issues outside of Russian service weren't as much of an issue because of the low-altitude environment of the Eastern Front.

 

I think the P-39 had over 1,000 kills on the Eastern Front, and there were eventually something like 5,000 of them in service, so it isn't a rare oddity to find in that theater.

 

The P-40 was one of the first aircraft supplied via Lend/Lease and worked pretty well, with pilots saying performance matched or exceeded the 109F.  Like the -39, it had good armor and served in both close air support and air superiority roles.

 

There were a couple thousand Hurricanes provided to Russia, but I'm not so excited about them: it is easy to find games that pit Hurricanes against 109s.

 

The TB-3 definitely operated at Stalingrad, and that would be an interesting plane to fly.  You could do missions from opposed cargo runs and paratrooper drops to heavy bombing missions.  I can't imagine modeling an aircraft with 5 turrets would be easy.  But seriously, an open cockpit heavy bomber flying missions in the dead of night during the winter in Russia?  Yeah - I want to do that (virtually).

 

The Russians have a few thousand A-20s, but I don't know if they served at Stalingrad.  THAT would be a neat airplane to fly.  If the Russians considered an airplane overpowered it should be a delight in a game.  Pilots apparently liked it because they could fly it like a fighter if they had too: no word on what the gunners thought of that mentality.  Tough airplane, easy to fly, what's not to love?

[Freycinet]

P-40 performance matching or exceeding that of the Bf-109F probably wouldn't stand up to closer inspection... :-) But is is a sexy plane!

[Bf-110]

Like I said,I'm a fan of twin engines fighters/attackers.

 

Bf-110 (love at first sight when played BF42: Road to Rome.Also,an elegante plane,with a pretty modern looking design for its time)

 

Ki-45 (another sleek twin engine fighter.I'd say it's the japanese Bf-110)

 

Ju-88 (like it since BF1942 Battle of Britain map)

 

Hs-129 (a very interesting plane,specially when armed with the BK 3,7)

 

Ki-61 (started to like this plane after playing Pacific Fighters.A very beautiful and agile aircraft)

 

There other planes I like as well,such as the P-38,Mosquito and Pe-2,the fearsome Pe-8 and the rejected P-36.

Forgot to mention the Piaggio P.108 and the Fw-200.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Bf-110

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

P-40 performance matching or exceeding that of the Bf-109F probably wouldn't stand up to closer inspection... :-) But is is a sexy plane!

 

Yeah, I scratched my head over that claim, but I suppose if you are pulling guns and ammo cans out and operating it at low altitude?  Maybe?

 

My uncle was a P-39 driver and it is hard to imagine him saying something positive about that airframe.  Different roles, I guess.

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

I'm flying the DCS P-51 with a twisty stick, rather than rudder pedals, which doesn't help, and I've not really flown it enough to get the best out of it - but it is definitely on the touchy side in turns, and you do need to keep the ball centred any time you are close to a stall. As for its handling with the fuselage tank full, it is definitely tricky - but so it should be. I can't see any particular reason to suggest that the FM is 'wrong' and there are good reasons to suggest that it is pretty accurate: see for instance this thread http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=111388 on real P-51 pilots trying it out. If BoS FMs are as good as this (which seems entirely possible), we'll be in for a treat. 

 

 

I wondered about this post for a bit.  I had watched a video about a guy getting checked out In "Crazy Horse" at Stallion 51 and he commented about the airframe giving two quick, subtle shakes and then departing violently if you stalled it.  Not long after, I ran into "Sizzlin'  Liz's" pilot and had a nice chat with him before he went up.  He said that it wasn't a problem at all - the plane gives plenty of warning at the limits and is incredibly easy to fly.  I asked about footwork on landing - the guy getting checked out in "Crazy Horse" said you really needed your feet to be alive on landing to keep things progressing in an orderly, predictable, non-expensive direction.  "Liz's" pilot said it didn't require any more than the usual degree of awareness.

 

I thought about his comments a lot, and realized with literally thousands of hours in the cockpit of Mustangs, it is probably second nature to him.  He made it sounds as easy to fly and as non-threatening as any airplane ever built.  

 

A few minutes later, he was doing some high speed passes down the runway for the crowd and totally blowing all the noise abatement rules ;-)

 

Locals sometimes get a little upset at the AT-6s (and they are not subtle) but I wonder if anyone can truly be upset at a P-51 flying overhead at speed.

[Finkeren]

There is one aircraft, that I didn't put on my list, simply because I have a hard time explaining, what's amazing about it, and that's the IL2.

 

I've been in love with it, since i first learned about its existence (which was comparatively late) and I was ecstatic when the old IL2 game came out with it as its center piece. Yet I still can't grasp exactly why I love it.

 

-It's not really pretty, that's for sure. It's a chimera blending a brutal, heavy, blocky monstrousity with some very slender, aerodynamic lines. It's not elegant enough to look sleek and fast, and it's not ugly enough to look downright brutal.

 

-It's sort of the quitessencial ground-pounder and mud-mover, but it really wasn't that effective neither as a light bomber, tank buster or CAS. Its armament was relatively light and for the most part extremely inaccurate. It's not that it couldn't do its job, it's just that so many aircraft actually did it better.

 

-For all its revolutionary armour design, it really wasn't that tough, and even though some aircraft made it home after having sustained massive amounts of damage, more still were shot down in droves (it was likely the most-shot-down aircraft in WW2) It wasn't fast enough to outrun its predators either. It was really the gnu of the air (notice how in nature documentaries, the gnus almost never escape the lion or the crocodile, but there are always so many gnus, that the lions can't posibily eat them all)

 

Still I absolutely adore the IL2. Just thinking about those brave men and women, who flew them on death defying missions, buzzing by at tree-top level, trying their best to provide some aïd to the grunts on the ground, gives me a chill down my spine. It's truly a remarkable aircraft, and one og my favourites, even if its qualities are somewhat elusive.

[Stray]

My list based on IL-2 1946 adventure, in love with it for few years now

 

1. Bf-109 "Friedrich"

2. Fw-190 A-5

3. Me-262

4. F4U-1C ( gotta love the cannons on this one )

5. Bf-110 G2

 

Favorite battle? All of them.

[peregrine7]

I like planes for their handling. So I can't make too much of a judgement, there's a limited amount of good flight sims out there. (so this list only applies to flight sims, not reality)

 

1) Spitfire - Great turning time, so fun in a fight, easier to fly at low speeds.

 

2) LA5FN (Fink outlines it all)
 

3) I hate the P51, and yet here it is. Why? Because landing it in DCS is such a joy, I just want to takeoff and land all day long.

 

4) BF109 (DB601 engine, I just love that sound. The low rumble... the roar as it cranks up)

[senseispcc]

Spitfire any type but the MKIIa is my favorite with all is little imperfections added.

LA-5fn

Tempest MKV

Any non jet pre 1945 aircraft.

[Freycinet]

Finkeren, great read! I must say that I don't completely agree with you, though. AFAIK German soldiers were quite afraid of the Sturmovik. They were attacked very often and many times there weren't any Luftwaffe Experten around to fend off the attacks. Also, from what I've read it was not easy at all to shoot down the Il-2, at least not for average fighter pilots.

[Finkeren]

Freycinet: Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the IL2 was completely ineffective at its job, I'm saying it wasn't the best at it by a long shot.

 

German infantrymen propably feared the IL2, because they were the most vulnerable to its rapid fire MGs and cannon which were the IL-2's most accurate weapons (and maybe because infantry always fear relentless attacks from the air)

 

The IL-2 wasn't really a hard target to bring down, especially for fighters. Even after the addition of a rear gunner, that gunner still had a limited field of fire, often no marksman training and the changes made to acommodate him/her left rear armour protection severely compromised.

 

The numbers speak for themselves. The IL-2 were shot down in huge numbers, mostly by fighters and small caliber AAA. During 1943, where the VVS had large numerical superiority in almost every battle, the average life expectancy for an IL-2(the aircraft, not the crew) was less than 25 missions, and much less during hard fought battles like Operation Zitadelle.

[Kaenzdhi]

IL-2

LA-5

YAK-3

YAK-1

A6M

 

Eastern Front