Author Topic: P47 vs 190  (Read 21644 times)

Offline Ardy123

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3417
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #45 on: February 27, 2011, 03:45:22 PM »
I'm thinking dropping flaps happens a LOT more in here than happened in WW2

agreed, and It was brought up before...

If your life was on the line would you try and turn fight?

Yeah, that's right, you just got your rear handed to you by a fuggly puppet!
==Army of Muppets==
(Bunnies)

Offline pervert

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #46 on: February 27, 2011, 05:31:34 PM »
agreed, and It was brought up before...

If your life was on the line would you try and turn fight?



I think I'd poo myself then put the poo on my top lip like a moustache.  :salute

Offline Ardy123

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3417
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #47 on: February 27, 2011, 07:23:16 PM »
I think I'd poo myself then put the poo on my top lip like a moustache.  :salute
oh thats sexy... nothing like a 'perverted' Dirty Sanchez. :rofl :rofl

Yeah, that's right, you just got your rear handed to you by a fuggly puppet!
==Army of Muppets==
(Bunnies)

Offline bj229r

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6732
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #48 on: February 27, 2011, 08:17:05 PM »
agreed, and It was brought up before...

If your life was on the line would you try and turn fight?


That's not the best way to make use of the plane
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers

http://www.flamewarriors.net/forum/

Offline Chalenge

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15179
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #49 on: February 28, 2011, 01:34:47 AM »
A D-11 should have the paddle blade prop and water injection. A lot of P-47D-11's between Jan 44 and April 44.  Nobody in the 8th AF was thinking Fw 190A6-A7 was 'easy' and tended to avoid turning fights if at all possible below 15,000.

I see a lot of references about dropping flaps (not from you) and 'easily out turning (pick one)..When you drop flaps you will get things for sure - 1.) a slight to significant reduction in turning radius, and 2.) a huge loss in energy leaving fewer options to win if your short term turn advantage doesn't work out for you.

When you look at that video do you see a Razorback or do you see a later model? Does anyone think they know for sure the entire story behind the video? I can tell you after considerable time in online flying that what you see in a limited aspect video doesnt tell the entire story ever. Yet some people look at the video and are lead to envision a turn fight while it could simply be a Jug firing at a distant airplane and a 190 pilot 'picking' an involved Jug. Just as likely are a hundred other scenarios yet a turn fight seems to make more sense to people for some reason. Must be all those MA hours they have racked up doing the same thing over and over...

 :bhead
If you like the Sick Puppy Custom Sound Pack the please consider contributing for future updates by sending a months dues to Hitech Creations for account "Chalenge." Every little bit helps.

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #50 on: February 28, 2011, 12:11:07 PM »
When you look at that video do you see a Razorback or do you see a later model?

Razorback, and given the paint scheme (OD with white stripes on the tail), probably an early model at that.  C or early D model.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Bubbajj

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 346
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #51 on: February 28, 2011, 04:24:43 PM »
Don't bother Steele. The know it all types will chime in with a condescending diatribe imperiously informing you that it's all about wing loading and to shut the hell up cause you don't know what your talking about. That is, unless your talking about a Brewster, then it's not so much about wing loading.  :headscratch:   

Offline drgondog

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 326
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #52 on: February 28, 2011, 07:09:31 PM »
Razorback, and given the paint scheme (OD with white stripes on the tail), probably an early model at that.  C or early D model.

Stoney, except for 56th FG, IIRC all the 8th AF Jugs carried the 18 inch white bands through March, 1944 which would mean that most of the groups were upgraded to the D-11RE and RA.
Nicholas Boileau "Honor is like an island, rugged and without shores; once we have left it, we can never return"

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #53 on: February 28, 2011, 10:11:28 PM »
Stoney, except for 56th FG, IIRC all the 8th AF Jugs carried the 18 inch white bands through March, 1944 which would mean that most of the groups were upgraded to the D-11RE and RA.

Roger that...  I generally consider the D-11 to be the back end of the "early" D models since the step up to the D-15 standard is what got them legs for going deep.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #54 on: February 28, 2011, 10:30:37 PM »
Don't bother Steele. The know it all types will chime in with a condescending diatribe imperiously informing you that it's all about wing loading and to shut the hell up cause you don't know what your talking about. That is, unless your talking about a Brewster, then it's not so much about wing loading.  :headscratch:   

Its never about wing loading.  Its about power available versus power required.  That requires some pretty extensive math, which most are not interested in either (1) learning about or (2) taking the time to perform.  This is the main reason that a 190 is much more competitive with a Jug at low altitude than at high altitudes.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2852
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #55 on: March 02, 2011, 03:45:32 PM »
Stoney , do you think Fw190a8 have a correct flight model right now ?

If not ,please write the adjustments you think is neccesary to the FM.


So far I have read in Baumers presented documents its overweight now, do you agree with that ?






My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #56 on: March 03, 2011, 01:22:53 AM »
Stoney , do you think Fw190a8 have a correct flight model right now ?

If not ,please write the adjustments you think is neccesary to the FM.


So far I have read in Baumers presented documents its overweight now, do you agree with that ?








I believe that the FW-190 as modeled in-game matches the modeling of all the other aircraft.  Is there 100% fidelity--I have no idea--that's beyond my level of expertise.  If there are any discrepancies, I believe they are consistent with the discrepancies that exist for all of the aircraft in-game, i.e. the playing field is level and the relative performance is accurate.  I believe HTC has modeled as accurately as they can, based on the historical resources available to them.  Every performance aspect of the aircraft in-game is based on accepted aerodynamic and physics equations and represent the best estimates of performance of all the aircraft they have included in the game. 

Now, whether or not the 190A8 is heavier than it should be is a different question, and one I'm not qualified to answer.  Baumer has access to some really good resources, has stick time in some of the aircraft of the era, and is extremely rational when he makes an argument on these boards.  If he thinks its too heavy, there's a chance it may be.  But, I also believe that if HTC receives credible information that contradicts their current modeling, they will make a change in order to keep Aces High the game that has the best fidelity to real-life that a game can.

With respect to the FW-190 in general, it was a very good design.  With a quick roll rate, good instantaneous turn performance, and firepower, it was a very capable aircraft, and one that was very much suited to WWII air combat.  The only thing it lacked later on was the high-altitude performance that the allies stumbled into earlier in the war.  If imitation is the highest form of flattery, then Kurt Tank should have been proud, as Grumman felt the design so efficient for the task, that they designed their "next generation" F8F to conform to the same performance characteristics.  Had Seversky not had the idea of designing the Jug for excellent high-altitude performance, it would have been late into 1943 or early 1944 before the Allies would have even had a fighter that could be manufactured in quantity, and could compete with the FW-190.

If it doesn't perform as well in the furball, knife-fights we have in Aces High, that's no reflection on its abilities in real-life.  Just like the FW-190, the Jug doesn't compete well in this environment either, and its real-life, wartime combat record is excellent and well documented.  So take heart you 190 lovers!  Its a good plane.  Just because it can't maintain a tight sustained turning radius doesn't mean it wasn't competitive.  And there's nothing, in my opinion, in the historical record of its flight performance that contradicts its relative performance in-game.  As long as the context of the historical anecdotes is considered, I think its relative performance is spot on (except perhaps, the questionable weight issue of the A8).  And, if there is an issue with its weight, I'm sure HTC will make a change sometime in the future if they get access to reliable data.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2852
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #57 on: March 03, 2011, 03:53:13 AM »
In-game A8 to me feels like its fighting with a 500kg bomb under its belly.

Since I don't know much about flight science at all , but do fly IRL since 20 year, even though I give the A8 some time each month, every time I wonder, why is the A5 better in every single aspect ( i normally fly with 2*20mm) , yet its 1,5 year earlier design.Admittedly you get some few more minutes of   flighttime with aux fuel.

I havent noticed its more durable to compensate (  got insta-pk'ed killed from a 110g2 rear gun (!)), nor have I felt any big difference killing buff with 4*20 in a5 vs the A8. Do we have minengeschoss modelled ?

To me , the A8 just dont compensate with anything else but nice skins. Ive heard they are faster than the A5 down low, but that cant be more than a few mph since every single move away from flying straight give you ultimate E-retention penalty in this bird.

After dogfighting a BIG twin engine A20 bomber, you fly home talking to yourself, with whats left of youf plane   shot both from rear gunners at 3,5g and then out-turned , and after a while Im out of E with almost 2k HP, that darn plane keep on turning like an crazy ivan.
My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline Ardy123

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3417
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #58 on: March 03, 2011, 04:20:43 AM »
Its not so much the lack of turn, but in my experience its a whole host of things that make 190a8 challenging..
1) Little warning on wingtip stalls
2) does not have the power-to-weight ratio that its 109 cousin has and thus can not as easily rely on vert maneuvers when slow, iw the nose doesn't pull up as fast...
3) its not nearly as fast as many of the MA planes that have similar turn characteristics... (the 190D9, p51, most p47s, ta-152, yaks... all are much faster).
4) it doesn't dump its 'e' as fast as a 109s...
5) in steep vert rolling scissors with tighter turning planes, I almost always overshoot after several turns.... grrrr :furious
Yeah, that's right, you just got your rear handed to you by a fuggly puppet!
==Army of Muppets==
(Bunnies)

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: P47 vs 190
« Reply #59 on: March 03, 2011, 08:57:24 AM »
2) does not have the power-to-weight ratio that its 109 cousin has and thus can not as easily rely on vert maneuvers when slow, iw the nose doesn't pull up as fast...

Empty weight is significantly too high, that would help a tad if corrected.

4) it doesn't dump its 'e' as fast as a 109s...

LOL! Really? Dude... it's got a massive radial speed brake up front. Chop throttle and you lose E like mad. It's the overshoot king.