Hi dtango,
Krusty say that the G10 and G14 climb better than the K4 in AH, therefor the K4 cant run on 1.98 ata, but anyway, i still cant reproduce a 4800ft/min climb, all constant climbs i low level made have 4400-4500ft/min as result.
The climb of the 109K for sure is better than the test show, while the speed is rather ok(i did overview your correction, thanks for the hint), but it looks like the climb of the 109G10 and G14 is to good as well.
btw, no tests on Kurfis page seems to be DB605DC + MW50 related!!
At least i would expect a better climb with 200PS more power from sea level to 4900m, not up to 6000m. It seems to me that it realy is the early DB605D + MW50, which had lower rated altitude than the DB605DB and was more similar to the DB605AM.
The climbrate with a DB605DC + MW50 should decrease MUCH above 4900m altitude, same goes for the speed, but its almost exact the same climb curve like the DB605DB show, but with a less good performence above 5500m.
Also the Vmax in hight, on the DB605D + MW50 sheet isnt higher than that of the DB605DB, only the Vmax at sea level, but as we know from the La7 and other planes, a Vmax different of 10mph from plane to plane, even with the same poweroutput is nothing special(The La7 test i saw vary from 595-616km/h).
I have no doubt that the 109K4 with 2000PS was at least as fast as the La7 at sea level and the climb must have been better than the DB605DB climb up to 4900m.
Imho the currently to good climb of the 109´s is made to overcome the wrong e-bleed formula while turning, used in AH. The 109´s with their correct climb would be hopeless, same like the P38´s without the flaps would be hopeless. At least i have no idea why the 109K in low level bleed so much more energy than the La7.
Imho they should adjust the La7, F4U, Temp, 109F, Spit16 and Hurri(and other rather light wingloaded planes) E-bleed behaviour and they should adjust the 109 climbs(maybe other that are wrong??) to the right values.
The static performences, like Vmax, climb etc are not much worth if the E-Bleed dont work like it should.
The default FM´s of "European Airwar" are a good example to display this:
The 109E4 has a Vmax of 550km/h @ sea level and 1000m/min climb, the Spit1a has a Vmax of 470km/h and 800m/min climb.
This static values clearly show a much to good 109E4, but in game the Spit was a absolut even plane, cause like all other rather light wingloaded planes, it simply didnt bleed energy while turning, also not while highspeed turns.
Imho somewhat similar its in AH(not that extreme). Of course the E-bleed at varius speeds and changing speed is not easy to determine in exact numbers, nevertheless the physical law determine the relations.
And i got the impression that the E-Bleed relation often dont fit in AH.
Heavy wingloaded planes(tendency to have a high dragload) like the P38´s and FW190A8, once fast, should keep energy much better than very light wingloaded planes, specialy if this planes have less power as well.
The 109G6 should keep much more energy than the 109F4, but its the other way around.
The SpitIXc should keep more energy that the SpitVb, but its the other way around, etc.
I only know the A6M2 and A6M5 where this relation fit. The more light A6M2 with its bigger wings bleed more energy while speed decreasing turns than the A6M5. The A6M2 also dont have a that good upzoom, but the relation between this two planes work oposide to how it work otherwise in AH.
Heavy planes with relative smal wings and fuselage simply miss the needed surface to slow down as fast as a more light plane with relative big wings. Although they need a higher AoA to archive the same turn radius than the more light wingloaded(liftloaded) plane, the surface into flight direction still isnt more big than that of the other plane. At highspeed the higher relative inertia and the smaler relatibe zero drag will help to keep the speed up and and if the other plane turn more tight, it should bleed even more energy.
Thats how it work between the Zeros and thats how it should work in all planes. Only if this relation´s fit, its possible to adjust the static performences(climb, Vmax) to a realistic value, without to get a unbalanced gameplay.
How i would like to be able to make a real B&Z in my P47 or FW190A8 or P38, currently this planes only can make hit and run, even vs outdated planes like the 109F4, HurriII or SpitV.
btw, Benny, weight isnt ALWAYS a disadvantage!!! Weight is a storage of energy, when a P38J meet a SpitV with 550km/h in 1000m alt, the P38J keep twice as much energy + twice as much power than the SpitVb and should be able to outzoom it by easy!!!
Wight hinder the deceleration in the same way like it stop the acceleration.
Why the FW190 and P38 have a so slow acceleration but a so extreme deceleration is a miracle for me.
If HT get this right, we can talk about the static performences(i bet then the P38 dont need more than 2x 1600HP).
Greetings
Knegel
