Best plane set and why I hate the MkIX

[gatt]

Well,
I was thinking about the most interesting plane set. After some reasoning I came to the conclusion that the 1941-42 is probably the best one.
As far as ETO and MTO are concerned you could have 109E, 109F, 109G (early variants), Stukas (still active in MTO and Russia), 190A (early variants), Fiat CR42, Macchi C.200 and C.202 and a lot of nice light/medium LW-RAF-Italian-Russian buffs (never modeled as they should be). Gladiators, Seafire, Spit MkII, MkV and early MkIX, Hurricane MkI/II, P40 and all the early russian fighters and fighter/bombers.
Same thing for the PTO, with Wildcats, A6M2/3, Ki43 and very good dive/torpedo bombers.

But the main problem is the MkIX (I really hate it   ). If you include the year 1942 (even) the (early) MkIX is a real factor of discontinuity.
You could say, hell, it was simply the best fighter in 1942!
The real problem is the tweaked FW190A-3/4 and 109G-2 FM's we usually get.

In tons of books/bios (from allied and axis points of view) I have seldom found that the MkIX was an  ultimate-decisive asset/problem during 1942, not as big as the one I find in our arenas, where thousands of pilots fly uber-Spits. Very rarely I red about LW pilots feeling inferior during 1942 dogfights, even when they faced those "8 bombers, 160 fighters" raids. Not those flying 190A's, not at all.
From what you read you can understand that the A-3/A-4 was really superior to the MkV and very similar to the 1942 MkIX up to 20K.
Perhaps we should have more MkIX variants and not the "blended/best" ones. Of course we should have right FM for 109A and 109G-2.

No flames here, really. The MkIX was a mighty a/c, one of the best allround fighters of the war. But IMHO the way it is (comparatively) modeled now is really a big problem.

At least Hristo will understand me ....  

P.S.: in WB rps, for example, you get first the MkIX (probably a blended Merlin61/66, HF/LF) and only some "days" after the underpowered G6 ... in other words you have to fight the MkIX with the F4 for some time. Hard to believe.    

[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 12-06-1999).]

[Hristo]

Nice idea, Gatt, but I don't think it will be seen soon - no US planes in ETO at the time.

As for Spit IX - are you referring to the variant we have here, or clipped wing low alt dogfighter ?

By some HTH experience, here are my thoughts on duel matchups:

109E has no chance in any fighting concept even against average Spit pilot. It would require very careful flying and group coordination. Emil can bet everything on its turn radius, but Spit has higher turn rate. Challenging indeed for Emil pilot, boring for Spit pilot. However, Spit V would tear Emil apart even quicker.

109F stands a chance, but generally, 109F pilot has to be better than Spit IX pilot to capitalize tiny climb advantage. Everything else favors the Spit.

109G. Hmm, hard to say, there were voices which said that early Gustav was better climber than F-4, and faster too. If so, it should be an easier task, but still with advantage to Spit.

190 early A series ? Now that's a plane. Not overweight armored buff killer like A-8. Dive speed, dive maneuverability, zoom climb, roll rate and guns should make Spit life miserable. And the precious deck speed - I can just picture 190A-5 trailing 5 Spitfires, whose pilots express their anger on open channel  

But let's not go to other planes if the existent ones are not fully modeled. The planeset which we have now will be mostly OK if some planes get their FM brought to realistic boundaries. I would also go for Dora, as that would be the best matchup for P 51D, resulting in many great duels (like one found in Shaw's book). Early A variants might give Pony pilots a harder time, but generally not a greater danger, unless a pilot is very skilled. Pony would still dictate the fight.

Now, what was I trying to say anyway ?  

[gatt]

 

no US planes in ETO at the time

I'm sorry, I know it. Marketing is marketing. But USAAF had not outstanding fighters at that stage of the war. The 1941-42 IMHO still *is* the best phase of the air war.


 

As for Spit IX - are you referring to the variant we have here, or clipped wing low alt dogfighter?

Thats why we should have different variants of MkIX. I think now we have a blended version, both in AH and WB. What I mean is that we need a 1942, Merlin61, mostly MkV converted, variant of the MkIX. This kite, faced with the *right* A-3, could give rise to the most interesting A2A fight.

 

109G. Hmm, hard to say, there were voices which said that early Gustav was better climber than F-4, and faster too. If so, it should be an easier task, but still with advantage to Spit

AFAIK, the G-2 with M-1 injection was exceptional at high altitude, *very* fast. With a stellar rate of climb. Probably a tough foe for the MkIX above 20-25K. 190A at medium-low alt and 109G2 at high alt, that is. Like in RL.

 

190A-5 trailing 5 Spitfires, whose pilots express their anger on open channel

hehe      

 

[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 12-06-1999).]

[-ik-]

Both the 109G-2 and 109G-6 were faster and better climbers than the 109F-4. Both had a superior thrust/weight ratio (at comparative loaded weights) and a superior thrust/drag ratio. I wouldn't use Warbirds as a good comparison of the 109 varients, they suffer from the confusion clarified above.  

[fd ski]

Yes, what he said. And all 109's and 190 got the 1000ft/m climb bonus just because they are LW...

Early spit 9 ? What you do have is early spit 9 - pray to the all mighty that spit 9 HF or LF doesn't ever come up. Even 190 won't get away.


------------------


Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
   www.raf303.org  

[gatt]

No,
simply they dont get anything cuz they *are* Luftwaffe.
Please let us try to have a more historical 190A-4/5 FM, do you?
 

[Westy]

 Don't forget. The Spit did not have the range in 1942 or 1943 to escort the buffs to thier targets.
 So don't just brush it aside as being mythically a great airplane. It WAS a great airplane. It just had no legs.

 But just imagine if it had?

-Westy

[jedi]

Yep, the 41-42 war is arguably the most interesting, especially if you have air war enthusiasts who are interested in interesting stuff.  Give us the P-40 and I think even the US "students of the airwar" would be happy to flail around in either the Pac or Euro zones.

But of course that's not ALL we have playing, is it?  

At any rate, rather than a full RPS (which we won't have the planes for for a while anyway), why not model about 3 "periods" of the air war.  43-44, which is about what we have right now, 41-42, which have no planes for yet, and Battle of France/Britain?

I mean, aside from having the Mustang and the rest of the gee-whiz fighters, is there any more BORING period than 1945?  43-44, 41-42, and BoB were the periods when the air war was won and lost.  Be pretty neat to fly those epochs I reckon.

--jedi

[SnakeEyes]

You guys really kill me.  Yes, by all means, let's make AH the "all 1942, all the time" channel because it'll make the Luftwobblies happy.

Now, what are we looking for here, Luftwobblies?  Good matchups (by your standards), or historical matchups?  I see references to historical matchups during the 1941/42 period, but then when we get to the P-51s you guys start hankering for the 700-produced FW190D (which didn't see wide use until late December 1944).

PS - The 190A5 is a 1943 aircraft... so you'd likely observe 5 Spitfires trailing the A5, only to see a P-47C dive in and catch you.  Tsk tsk.    

------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=

[This message has been edited by SnakeEyes (edited 12-06-1999).]

[-ik-]

in warbirds i can count the number of p47c pilots at around 4, because compared to the Spit IX it's a big piece of dog poo, no one flys it.  

[SnakeEyes]

I guess that just makes me even more macho for flying it in the WB 1945 planeset, eh?  

------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=

[fats]

'43 ETO is the most interesting period of WWII, as far as LW vs. Allied is concerned.


//fats

[janneh]

Now this is getting interesting...

First of all I really agree with gatt on this one. Fights without any real uberplane are pure fun! in WB just when 109F-4 arrives, oh boy, what a fights  
109E sux (well, WB flight model anyway), but I remember something about 109E was one of the best fighter of its time !?! Can't recall from where...

ik Now You tell me the main differences of F-4 and G-2/G-6 models ?
Just G has more powerfull engine and MG's ? With same armor and main frame ? If so, G should be much better than F.
I've always dreamed something like F-4 FM(WB) and G-6 guns, now that would be a real spit killer! You are saying WB's FM is bad on 109's ? Is F overmodelled(TM) or G "undermodelled"?

Oh, btw Hristo what was/is your id in WB ?
Hehe, I just had to ask  

[Hristo]

Never flown in WB arena, only on Ladder as Nassko  

[-ik-]

yes, from all the evidence I have seen the brand W 109's are wrong. The 109G-6 had more power/weight and more thrust/drag compared to the 109F-4, but in warbirds it climbs slower!

at loaded weights:
109F-4 power/weight is 4.74lb/hp
109G-6 power/weight is 4.7lb/hp

while a small difference, keep in mind that due to its superior thrust/drag the 109G-6 would definately climb better compared to the 109F than its brand W counterpart.