Author Topic: BF 109 vs FW 190  (Read 1129 times)

Offline Kolibri

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
BF 109 vs FW 190
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2007, 05:27:11 AM »
I like both, the 109's and the 190's.

My favorites are the 109-K4 and the 190-D9. That just because of speed. With this planes I don'T have to let the runstang run. I catch them from their six.

My K/D rate is normaly in a 190-D9 better than in a 109-K4 and I know the reason.

I never take a turnfight with the 190 and I never are at lo deck fight with this plane. And that is simply the reason that I won't get picked so often from a high speed tiffy or runstang.

In a K4 i like turnfights. Many people underestimate the K4 in turnfight. If I really come in trouble during a turnfight the K4 allows me to leave the fight by its good acceleration. So i get some distance, outclimb the foe and come back to the fight with a good starting position.

But however, the K4 is not as half as good for bnz like the D9.

And that is what the D9 do best, bnz.

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
BF 109 vs FW 190
« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2007, 05:27:46 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
"Unfortunatelly the AH190 miss a realistic highspeed upzoom(e-bleed), even the underpowered 109F and 109G6 outzoom the 2050hp 190A8 at sea level. The inertia out of 1200-1600kg more weight and at least 500hp more power should do the job by easy."


Maybe it's because the 109F and G2/G6 we have in AH is too fast at low alt and climbs too fast.  For example, the AH 109G-2 is just as fast as the 190A-5 at full power + WEP at all altitudes.  In real life 190A totally owned 109Gs at low to medium altitudes.  

I read somewhere that the mid-war era 109G-2/G-6's power were limited only to 1.3 ata/2600 rpm throughout the mid war, the 1.42 ata was cleared in late war.  

I also think that our 109F-4, a 1941-era plane, is like the old spit 5 with +16 boost (a 1942-era plane).  The 109F-4 with 1.42 ata boost appeared in mid war.  In my opinion 109F-4 should be boosted down like what HTC did to the old +16 boost spit 5 to make 109F a 1941 plane.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2007, 05:29:58 AM by 1K3 »

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
BF 109 vs FW 190
« Reply #17 on: May 16, 2007, 06:11:42 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Charge
It was interesting to fly FW in WW2OL. It handles pretty much like Knegel said. In slow speed it feels heavy in turns but once you get it to proper speed you can make moderately tight turns and the plane will not slow down and it feels very agile, but if you make a too tight turn and let the speed decay the handling gets worse the slower you go. As somebody said of FW: " it likes to go fast and stay there".


but here... it flip-flops even at 300mph:lol

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
BF 109 vs FW 190
« Reply #18 on: May 16, 2007, 12:52:36 PM »
I think we should steal some of those anti-gravity flaps the P-47s are installed with, and stick them on the 190s... so we can do the flapfest thingy in 190s too.


 On the other hand, I'd probably settle for raising the permitted limit for the first notch of 190 flaps to a little over 200 IAS...