Eastern Front 1943 -- which plane set is better

[GScholz]

Range will hopefully not be as much of a problem for both sides as in the MA if the fuel burn is set to 1, and we'll be fighting in Russia, not the Pacific.

[Sombra]

When you say La-5, you are referring to the La-5FN, But there was a La-5 proper, and a La-5F too, besides the La-5FN. La-5F should be a relatively low effort addition, and would improve scenario possibilities. This scenario, for example. Wouldn't it?

[DmonSlyr]

And that is where you will find the 109s and 190s (and where you found them historically on the Eastern Front). The LW should always have the altitude advantage unless caught off guard. If the LW commanders in the scenario have any sense at all the VVS won't find any 109 or 190 below 12K, and hopefully (since I'll be flying LW) the LW will roam a lot higher than that. Only diving down to B&Z the VVS and always maintaining the perch above the fight. The 109 is also a better climber at any alt above 5K so it can maintain the perch more easily than the 190, but still it should not be much of a problem. If the LW flies right and use proper tactics the VVS will suffer "historical losses". If flown like MA furballers the VVS will win the day.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

You also have to consider that the pilots had much better squad training in real life than in H2H. I think the fights played out a little more slowely in real life. The Germans should be higher than the Russians. However, I doubt very much that once the fight goes on, the 109s or 190s will stay high. I personally think in AH, the La5s are going to beat the 109s, but that actually will depend on the pilots. The 190s are fine until they lose the alt cap. If the La5 gains the 190A5s 6 or the 109s 6, it's over.  They have to keep the alt cap in order to win. In groups, 109s and 190s will have a hard time winning against the Russian planes if they end up lower.

[GScholz]

Not ending up lower is the key to LW success on the Eastern Front. Just like it is key for the Allies in the west...

[Vulcan]

The A5 would not out turn any plane in the set. It may out turn a bad Yak 9t pilot or P39 pilot. Those planes are incredibly nose heavy and embalanaced and take more skills than the other planes to be successful in. The only way the 190A5 has an advantage over the La5 is if it starts 5k above it. The La5 beats it in every other important  aspect besides diving.

Not true. A 190A5 you can use the rollrate change direction very very quickly such that executing a decent scissors will put you behind the la5 very very quickly or at least cause him to break off. And depending on the loadout the A5 can turn quite quickly. A 50% gas load in the 190A5 probably gives it about the same legs as 100% in the la5fn - and A5 sticks will usually take the light gun package and drain aft first. It makes a huge difference as it is a small aircraft.

[Brooke]

I love FW 190A-5's in scenarios.



I love La-5's in scenarios.



I love 109G's in scenarios.



I haven't flown a Yak or P-39 in Scenarios, but I bet that I would like them just fine.

I even liked flying Bf 110's in scenarios involving late-war US stuff.  I expected the 110 to be totally hopeless in that environment, and it wasn't, which surprised the heck out of me.



The scenario environment can still surprise me even after 23 years of flying in scenarios.

[GScholz]

Real men fly the one-ten!

[Brooke]

Real men fly the one-ten!

You know, it was really quite surprisingly fun.  I honestly thought it would be completely useless cannon fodder against US planes.  I was completely wrong.  Its firepower is so amazing against bombers, and because it can get up to pretty high speeds in a dive, and because it is a pretty good turner, it isn't horrible in a many-on-many fight.

[FLOOB]

You can get by with a block plane and a long jack plane but the best plane set should have a spoke shave in it.

[Brooke]

Standard.

[DmonSlyr]

Not true. A 190A5 you can use the rollrate change direction very very quickly such that executing a decent scissors will put you behind the la5 very very quickly or at least cause him to break off. And depending on the loadout the A5 can turn quite quickly. A 50% gas load in the 190A5 probably gives it about the same legs as 100% in the la5fn - and A5 sticks will usually take the light gun package and drain aft first. It makes a huge difference as it is a small aircraft.

Completely disagree.

The roll rate of the 190 can help the plane change direction  more quickly, but the plane cannot create a steeper lift vector as quickly. The La5 is much more versatile in combat.  I'm willing to bet the LA5 excelerates quicker. Which is very important in furballing.  If the LA5 gains the 190A5s 6, the fight is over. It's not so much the other way around. The La5 can pull tighter maneuvers with a counterpunch defense maneuver and roll inside the 190 all day. The 190 has to stick to BnZ tactics. If it gets equal E and a La5 pulls a reversal, the 190 will not be able to turn with it or use the vert as well in the barrel rolls.

The only way a 190 wins with equal pilots is with BnZ only tactics. You cannot use any other style against the La5 in the A5. It simply will not work, it will be death to the whole squad if you get COE with a buncha quick La5s.

It's simply the planes physics. The 190A5 is no where close to as versatile as a LA5 in a furball. That's just the bottom line.

[DmonSlyr]

You have to think, the 109G6 is almost similar in turning/ rolling capabilities as the La5. I think even the La5 would be able to get inside the G6. This will come down to pilot experience mostly in scenarios. If that is the case. The A5 doesn't come close to either as far as turning and reversals are concerned in close combat.

[Brooke]

Scenario fighting is significantly different than 1:1 Main Arena fights.  Scenario fights are typically many-on-many, start at much higher altitudes, involve only historical matchups of planes (not whole plane set), and do not have the benefit of knowing the exact environment you are going into (thanks to no or much-less radar information and less certainty on what the situation is).  This gives significant changes to fights.

One example is how good 190's are in scenarios as a result not of great turn rate but good speed, sturdiness, very crisp and precise roll and pitch response at speed, ability quickly to go from one shot, to re-targeting, to another shot, with lots of lethal ammo.  Before flying them in scenarios, I thought they'd get dominated by Spitfires.  They don't.

One plane that, to me, suffers a lot in high-alt scenarios is my beloved P-38.  It's low compressibility limit and severity of compressibility effect make it very challenging to fly in scenarios, although if you can handle that, it can still be a decent plane in that setting because of its various other traits.

I remember watching some ultimate fighting back when it was a new thing.  One of the fighters (Tank Abbot) was talking about fighting styles and disparaging the guys who get into grappling.  He said something to the effect of, "Yeah, you can use that in these one-on-one cage fights, but if you try that in a real bar fight, while you are rolling around on the ground, some other guy is going to come up and smash a bottle over your head."  That's how it is for scenarios.

[pipz]

When I attack bombers in a 190a5 I may cringe a bit but I know I will probably come through with the maybe some engine damage.

When I attack bombers in a LA5 I write my virtual will, cringe and close my eyes!  La5 seems to get a lot of pilot wounds when I fly them anyway.

[Delirium]

As Brooke said, scenario battles are more a test of SA than ACM. The real successful ones that in addition to SA have great aim.