190A5 vs 190A8

[Krusty]

Even back in AH1 it was pretty superior, at all alts. I recall a number of HTH rooms with themed setups, one was 190a5s vs spit5s. They are faster and better. Even when you have a spit5 closing on your tail (and remember, back then 1.2k killshots were the NORM!) you could disengage by running away. If he was too close to run straight, you could do 3-4 revolutions of a flat scissors and get him out of sync, and as soon as he was out of sync just keep going. By the time he turned back you had too much of a lead for him to hope of catching you.

I found quite a bit of glee learning how to use historical tactics against the pesky spitties in my 190. Back then I was rather unskilled and was very impressed with how well the 190 did. The firepower, diving, roll, and overall performance makes it devastating to the spit5s.

The only thing the spit5 has is near-stall flat-turn radius, and that doesn't even enter into most fights.


Compare a pony to a hurricane. Hurricane turns much tighter, and can kill a pony, but the pony has better all round performance in almost every area. Same deal with the 190.

[Saurdaukar]

I found quite a bit of glee learning how to use historical tactics against the pesky spitties in my 190. Back then I was rather unskilled and was very impressed with how well the 190 did.

+1

Personally, I love the A5.  Wish it was a tad faster (cough) but with some of its best engine performance (RoC) at typical (4-6K) MA altitudes, it can surprise.

Nothing quite so satisfying as turning the tables on one who engaged with the intention of using your poor flat turn performance against you.

Roll + RoC + Acceleration = In control of fight.

Sustained Turn = Makes up for mistakes.

[Angus]

I kill pony's in Hurry's and 190's with SpitV's if needed. It also counts for the driver of the slower kite to know what to do
The 190 will respond worse to violent maneuvers than the Spit V, and the counter to scissor as an evasive, look more than turn. In such a way I learned to close on the 190  
Anyway, in order to kill an enemy, you have to be in range. That means you are there too

[Die Hard]

You'll need the 190 driver to make a mistake. Skill can make up for a performance deficit, but you're clearly at a disadvantage. 1 vs 1 the 190 is a difficult bird to fly against a turner, but many vs many it dominates the Spit5.

[thorsim]

the hi-tech 190s poor handling alone precludes it from being dominant in the games.
 
poor handling character only noted in that one USN 190-F5 test with all it's problems.

the fact that some of us can cope with the plane does not justify it's representation in the game/s.


 

[Kweassa]

the hi-tech 190s poor handling alone precludes it from being dominant in the games.
 
poor handling character only noted in that one USN 190-F5 test with all it's problems.

the fact that some of us can cope with the plane does not justify it's representation in the game/s.

...and thus, the Gates of Hell open.

I need me a bowl of popcorn.

[Spikes]

the hi-tech 190s poor handling alone precludes it from being dominant in the games.
 
poor handling character only noted in that one USN 190-F5 test with all it's problems.

the fact that some of us can cope with the plane does not justify it's representation in the game/s.


 

Here we go again.

[BnZs]

Poor handling? Rolls like a dream, steady gun platform. Elevator effective to very high speeds.

Only bad point of handling is poor rate and radius of turn and a tendency to drop a wing when stalled-IOW, the same ones the 190s actually had!

[thorsim]

ok lets see, where does the 190 rate in ah as maneuverable/manageable/ease of flight in AH ...

now explain the differences in that and just about every test report and pilot opinion other than the USN report i mentioned ...

hell even the history channel (as bias a source as there is) says the a8 should out maneuver the p51 ...



you all need to come to terms with this stuff, the 190 is described by the Luftwaffe, RAF, VVS as exceptionally easy to fly with impeccable handling, both the germans and the soviets thought its effective turn was better than the 109s a plane the british admit turned as well and some now say better than the spitfire, yet in the games ...

WTF is with these boards everybody is saying how the 190 is off and i say it is off and i get jumped on ...

you guys need to grow up and take a statement for what it is, and the in game handling of the 190s is nothing like it was reported to be by by everyone who tested them, with the exception of the USN in that one test of the underpowered, unbalanced, weight added, 190F

which seems to have bee the basis for the handling qualities of the 190s in the games ...

not sure how that is not obvious to everyone ...

Poor handling? Rolls like a dream, steady gun platform. Elevator effective to very high speeds.

Only bad point of handling is poor rate and radius of turn and a tendency to drop a wing when stalled-IOW, the same ones the 190s actually had!

[cattb]

This is shaping up to be very INteresting.

[Krusty]

He has a point, and you all shouldn't rag on him. On the other hand maybe the same info is presented the same way and folks tire of it (like B-29 requests).

I think that perhaps the balances at work in turns could be retuned so that it turns more easily (and probably a bit tighter, as well) but overall I don't think modeling the A5 off of other more reputed testing would change it all that much.

I'm for it, I'm just saying it's not a horrible plane already, and any such changes would only make it better.


Oh, and given the option I'd fight one vs a P-51 any day. I think they probably are more manuverable, even with the Pony's flaps bonus. I've out-turned my fair share of uber-flappen-armed ponies and jugs in 190A5s. It eats them for lunch.

[BnZs]

You quoted something off of "Dogfights" on the History Channel as a source? Fine. In another episode this same show claimed the 109 was less maneuverable to the P-51. Willing to accept the hierarchy of 190>P-51>109 in turning ability as reality, or would you rather switch to using *rational* evidence to argue your position?  


The Good:

The 190 IS stable.

The 190 DOES have excellent control authority at all speeds.

The 190 DOES out-roll virtually every plane in the game.

The Bad:

The 190 has a poor rate and radius of turn, due to high wing-loading.

The 190 has a tendency to drop a wing when you stall it.

What part of this do you think conflicts with history? "Excellent handling" does NOT mean out-turns a Zero.

ok lets see, where does the 190 rate in ah as maneuverable/manageable/ease of flight in AH ...

now explain the differences in that and just about every test report and pilot opinion other than the USN report i mentioned ...

hell even the history channel (as bias a source as there is) says the a8 should out maneuver the p51 ...

(Image removed from quote.)

you all need to come to terms with this stuff, the 190 is described by the Luftwaffe, RAF, VVS as exceptionally easy to fly with impeccable handling, both the germans and the soviets thought its effective turn was better than the 109s a plane the british admit turned as well and some now say better than the spitfire, yet in the games ...

WTF is with these boards everybody is saying how the 190 is off and i say it is off and i get jumped on ...

you guys need to grow up and take a statement for what it is, and the in game handling of the 190s is nothing like it was reported to be by by everyone who tested them, with the exception of the USN in that one test of the underpowered, unbalanced, weight added, 190F

which seems to have bee the basis for the handling qualities of the 190s in the games ...

not sure how that is not obvious to everyone ...

[jdbecks]

if your flat turning in a 190 you are flying the 190 wrong, its all about the vertical..I always high yo yo than flat turn. Having good manoverbility does not mean good turn rate.

[thorsim]

the "accelerated stall" was noted by low 190 time pilots and or testers, it was not a flaw, it was a "less pronounced" stall warning. you can feel free to find a higher time 190 pilot who had the time in type to acclimate himself to the 190s pre stall warnings that holds the same opinion of a "no warning" stall.

it is in no way fair to the type to take a tester or low time FW190 pilot who is surprised by the RELATIVE stall compared to the spit or the 109 and then use that to model what by all accounts was an excellent handling airframe even stellar and model it so much as to make it twitchy and difficult in the turn.  there is no way that would happen to a more popular plane type ...

likewise please find one report other than the infamous USN one that has the 190 behaving anything like as difficult as the A8 in the games ...
(note this discussion).
i never understand how easy it is for so many to believe that some plane types got so much worse as they evolved while others don't or even get better while going through pretty much the same changes.

point of fact that in the games the p51 has to be made to depart in a snap roll while  in TRW it was soo difficult to do a snap roll with out departing it was prohibited in the POH, and the instant departure was often used by it's pilots as a last ditch desperation evasive.  

it is a somewhat subjective thing and it must be decided how well behaved an airframe should be modeled, but i would point out that there were no full fleet retrofits on the 190 for a handling issue like in the p51, and it never earned a nickname like the "ensign eliminator" like the F4u.  

so excuse me for being somewhat suspect about the data choice used for the handling character when these airframes are benign in comparison to the handling of the 190s which was often described with words like
"impeccable" relating to its handling character.

[BnZs]

it is a somewhat subjective thing and it must be decided how well behaved an airframe should be modeled, but i would point out that there were no full fleet retrofits on the 190 for a handling issue like in the p51, and it never earned a nickname like the "ensign eliminator" like the F4u.  

so excuse me for being somewhat suspect about the data choice used for the handling character when these airframes are benign in comparison to the handling of the 190s which was often described with words like
"impeccable" relating to its handling character.

And the 190 in Aces High has impeccable handling traits. It is an easy to control plane. (It is easy to take off and land too-this is *the* most vital handling issue to most real pilots). The only thing it does not do well handling-wise is out-turn better turning aircraft.

It's easy to snaproll the P-51 in Aces High. Most people do not snaproll the P-51 in Aces High because it *is* rather difficult to do a snaproll at 450mph IAS. 

F4Us? 190s were not designed as carrier aircraft. But of course the 190 also does not have the tendency to ground-loop that the F4U had in real life...and in Aces High.

There are lots of us here who have had no trouble making the 190s hold their own as dogfighters against the typical P-51 pilots. You seem to be the odd man out.