Spitfire vs Mustang vs Bf-109 vs Fw-190

[WING47]

     I have done some recent research on each of these four aircraft and the way some perform in AH has, at least to me, come under question. This is due to the numbers and facts, as well as pilot opinions. First off is the wing loadings of each aircraft:

Spitfire(early versions):27Lbs per sq-ft
P-51D:39Lbs per sq-ft
Bf-109:40Lbs per sq-ft
Fw-190:48Lbs per sq-ft

     Other factors include center of gravity, which is another critical factor in maneuverability. The further forward the better the stability,but lower the maneuverability,and vice verse.

Spitfire:at least when the fuel tanks are full,it is tail heavy,especially in earlier versions
P-51:due to the placement of the fuel tank,and radio,as well as indicating flight characteristics,show it is tail heavy
Bf 109:is a forgiving fighter and as far as i know no heavy equipment was behind the pilot,it is also light and had a big meaty engine hung ont the front.This suggests in level flight it may have been nose heavy.
Fw190D:According to the information i have found,the 190 was a little unstable and had a fuel tank in the rear,suggesting it may have been tail heavy.

    If the pilot accounts i have heard are true, in a dogfight from best to worst are:

#1:spitfire
#2:P-51
#3:190
#4:109

     Of course the 190 vs 109 is controversial, as the 109 was probably better at low speeds,especially early versions.

Now for my list,at high speeds or speeds above 300mph I would vote:

#1;P-51 and 190 as they were easier on the pilot.
#2:spitfire only because the controls seemed slightly slower at these speeds.
#3:Bf 109 as its controls were very difficult at high speeds.

     At low speeds the spitfire comes up on top followed by the P-51,109, and last is the 190.Of course earlier 109s were lighter and probably could beat a Mustang at low speeds.
     The bottom line is that the modeling on each aircraft is questionable,except perhaps the pony as AHes creator flew it,and this is also confirmed by a earlier post.HTC may also want to look into other aircraft as well as their modeling is also questionable,but i haven't done enough research to confirm this.So at least for now spitfire pilots rejoice.



       -WING47

[Ardy123]

Wing47,
here is an account of a pilot who has flown both the p51 and the 109 and he stats the 109 turns much tighter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFl8X4y9-94

[Ack-Ack]

     I have done some recent research on each of these four aircraft and the way some perform in AH has, at least to me, come under question. This is due to the numbers and facts, as well as pilot opinions. First off is the wing loadings of each aircraft:

Spitfire(early versions):27Lbs per sq-ft
P-51D:39Lbs per sq-ft
Bf-109:40Lbs per sq-ft
Fw-190:48Lbs per sq-ft

     Other factors include center of gravity, which is another critical factor in maneuverability. The further forward the better the stability,but lower the maneuverability,and vice verse.

Spitfire:at least when the fuel tanks are full,it is tail heavy,especially in earlier versions
P-51:due to the placement of the fuel tank,and radio,as well as indicating flight characteristics,show it is tail heavy
Bf 109:is a forgiving fighter and as far as i know no heavy equipment was behind the pilot,it is also light and had a big meaty engine hung ont the front.This suggests in level flight it may have been nose heavy.
Fw190D:According to the information i have found,the 190 was a little unstable and had a fuel tank in the rear,suggesting it may have been tail heavy.

    If the pilot accounts i have heard are true, in a dogfight from best to worst are:

#1:spitfire
#2:P-51
#3:190
#4:109

     Of course the 190 vs 109 is controversial, as the 109 was probably better at low speeds,especially early versions.

Now for my list,at high speeds or speeds above 300mph I would vote:

#1;P-51 and 190 as they were easier on the pilot.
#2:spitfire only because the controls seemed slightly slower at these speeds.
#3:Bf 109 as its controls were very difficult at high speeds.

     At low speeds the spitfire comes up on top followed by the P-51,109, and last is the 190.Of course earlier 109s were lighter and probably could beat a Mustang at low speeds.
     The bottom line is that the modeling on each aircraft is questionable,except perhaps the pony as AHes creator flew it,and this is also confirmed by a earlier post.HTC may also want to look into other aircraft as well as their modeling is also questionable,but i haven't done enough research to confirm this.So at least for now spitfire pilots rejoice.



       -WING47

No offense but what you've done doesn't prove diddly squat, think you need to do far more and better research.

ack-ack

[FLOTSOM]

Wing47,
here is an account of a pilot who has flown both the p51 and the 109 and he stats the 109 turns much tighter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFl8X4y9-94

nice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The Fugitive]

  blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,



       -WING47

All you did was list a few opinions and then called HTC flight models into question. Opinions can be very jaded. Lets use Ack-Ack as an example.

Ack gets the chance of a life time and is offered flight time in a P38j, as well as a P51D. He is given instruction and time to get use to the planes. After running them through their paces he files a report. Cutting through all the technical garbage we can boil it down to Ack-Ack says the P38j is the better aircraft  

I'm not saying he's right or wrong, but everyone knows he is a 38 jock through and through. Don't you think that might skew his "opinion" a bit?

If you want to call the flight models into question you had better have a LOT of data to back you up from reputable sources. HTC uses books and books of data to get the flgiht models as close as possible while still keeping the game playable.

oh and as a side tip, don't use Wikipedia as a source.

[Ack-Ack]

All you did was list a few opinions and then called HTC flight models into question. Opinions can be very jaded. Lets use Ack-Ack as an example.

Ack gets the chance of a life time and is offered flight time in a P38j, as well as a P51D. He is given instruction and time to get use to the planes. After running them through their paces he files a report. Cutting through all the technical garbage we can boil it down to Ack-Ack says the P38j is the better aircraft  

I'm not saying he's right or wrong, but everyone knows he is a 38 jock through and through. Don't you think that might skew his "opinion" a bit?

The P-38J isn't the better plane?  Holy crap, the P-38J FM is PORKED! HiTech fix it!

ack-ack

[Pigslilspaz]

Then explain to me why I enjoy turn fighting and winning frequently in my 109? Oh wait, it's cause all those fun tricks that you don't even mention. It all boils down to pilot skill, not the aircraft. You can have an extremely balanced, strong, and lightweight sword, but if your were new with it, you'd be killed with a master using only a wooden pole.

[vafiii]

From the articles I've read and opinions of pilots who have actually flown the plane, the P-51 is overrated. Yes, it's fast. But it doesn't maneuver for squat. It certainly can't dogfight. The strategy of P-51 pilots is always gain altitude, dive on your opponent and run like hell.

[MiloMorai]

From the articles I've read and opinions of pilots who have actually flown the plane, the P-51 is overrated. Yes, it's fast. But it doesn't maneuver for squat. It certainly can't dogfight. The strategy of P-51 pilots is always gain altitude, dive on your opponent and run like hell.

Only gamers fly in circles.

[leitwolf]

[..]
Now for my list,at high speeds or speeds above 300mph I would vote:
#1;P-51 and 190 as they were easier on the pilot.
#2:spitfire only because the controls seemed slightly slower at these speeds.
#3:Bf 109 as its controls were very difficult at high speeds.

Your list is pretty much what is happening in AH, isn't it?

I'm an aerodynamics noob, but just wingloading (and the CoG you mentioned) is not a reliable indicator for aircraft performance.
You are missing things like wing shapes, engine power (varies with alt) -> thrust, lift(loading)/weight (varies with fuel,ammo), drag (varies with speed), how effective control surfaces remain at certain speeds (aileron+elevator authority, throw in flaps) and maybe arcane things like laminar flow (arguably the P-51's selling point) or exhaust thrust (certainly a selling point of the 51).
While I'm just namedropping here .. there are quite a few variables out there.

[alpini13]

aaaahhh what about the RE 2005  ???  better than the spit and 109 and equal to or better than the spit and p51 in every catagory under 20000ft....... yeah we need it in AH

[IrishOne]

the P51 only has that rear weight when it is 75% fuel or greater.   WW2 pilots always tried to burn the AUX tank before engaging in combat, as it was known to seriously throw off the CG.

[Motherland]

aaaahhh what about the RE 2005  ???  better than the spit and 109 and equal to or better than the spit and p51 in every catagory under 20000ft....... yeah we need it in AH

The Re 2005 was a bit better than the C.205 and worse than the G.55... in 1943.
Don't know why everybody seems to think that the -5 series fighters were über planes. They were good in 1943, but they'd be pretty... maybe below average at best in the late war arenas.

[Ack-Ack]

The Re 2005 was a bit better than the C.205 and worse than the G.55... in 1943.
Don't know why everybody seems to think that the -5 series fighters were über planes. They were good in 1943, but they'd be pretty... maybe below average at best in the late war arenas.

2005 is a larger number than 205, it has to be better.

ack-ack

[Guppy35]

From the articles I've read and opinions of pilots who have actually flown the plane, the P-51 is overrated. Yes, it's fast. But it doesn't maneuver for squat. It certainly can't dogfight. The strategy of P-51 pilots is always gain altitude, dive on your opponent and run like hell.

Can you point us to these articles and opinions?  Are you talking about real 51s or in game 51 flying?

The goal of any real life wartime pilot is to have height and speed on his opponent.  That doesn't mean it always happened.  Also didn't mean that 51 pilots didn't dogfight when they had to.