Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: GScholz on September 01, 2004, 08:58:36 AM

Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: GScholz on September 01, 2004, 08:58:36 AM
Was fighting an La7 today in my 109F-4, and I noticed to my terror that the La7 now outturns the 109F-4. In AH1 I never had any difficulties outturning La7s in the F-4, so what changed? La7 turns better, or 109F-4 worse?
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: ra on September 01, 2004, 09:20:59 AM
Maybe the elgay was low on fuel.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: JB73 on September 01, 2004, 10:12:58 AM
depending on speed i have found f4 worse.

havent flown lala since first week of release so i dont know about it.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Urchin on September 01, 2004, 10:38:09 AM
I noticed the same thing, I think the La7 turns better.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: GScholz on September 01, 2004, 11:10:45 AM
If the La7 turns like a Spit now there is no excuse left for leaving it unperked. Every other plane is a La7 now.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: VO101_Isegrim on September 01, 2004, 01:17:07 PM
I think it should be correct. The La-7 was an excellent turner, with very high power to weight ratio. It also had leading edge slats, like the 109, plus it`s wingloading is lower.

I don`t expect either 109s or Spitfires being able to turn with a Lavochkin (historically, not game wise).

It depends a lot on altitude, though. Soviet tests found that as the Lavochkins power fell off, the 109G could match it`s (La-5FN)turn rate at 7000m.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: JB73 on September 01, 2004, 01:40:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim
It depends a lot on altitude, though. Soviet tests found that as the Lavochkins power fell off, the 109G could match it`s (La-5FN)turn rate at 7000m.
that is a very different situation.


a 5 VS a 109G probably a 6 in the tests.

GS is talking about the 109F with is one of the best turners in the game, and was IRL.


very different monster,
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Flyboy on September 01, 2004, 02:19:27 PM
La7s turn batter now, i have noticed that too

on a side note, JB73 whats with your avatar?!?
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: leitwolf on September 01, 2004, 02:35:00 PM
same here, had a La-7 enganging a turn fight with me flying a F-4 and instead of the expected easy kill it ended in a nightmare of a fight .. i survived.. barely. After ~5minutes and a friendly showing up, the Lala engaged it's warp drive and escaped into hyperspace.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: JB73 on September 01, 2004, 02:45:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Flyboy
on a side note, JB73 whats with your avatar?!?
what's with all the blinking stuff?

heheh thats the point!
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Kweassa on September 01, 2004, 05:02:53 PM
The La-7 always turned better than the Bf109F-4 even in AH1. Except, in AH1 it was very marginal, and incredibly harder to just plain outturn a F-4 in a La-7.

 So it would usually come down to circumstances and energy situation, and depending on it it wasn't too hard for a F-4 to outturn a La-7.

 However, the readjusted flight modelling of AH2 shows some very different characteristics of various planes at low speeds.

 For instance, one of the most noticeable increases in maneuverability is associated with the US planes with flap use.

 The stabilization due to flaps is so noticeably higher and effective than AH1, that I rarely have the galls to engage a P-51 in a Bf109G-10 toe to toe anymore. Most US planes can start using flaps at least 60~200mph IAS higher than other planes - and by the time the Bf109G-10 drops down very low speeds to use its own flaps the P-51 has already decisively outturned it.

 In turn, the different characteristics have effected the 109s in a harsher way. Pulling high AoA near the verge of stall is very risky now and the plane is very much destabilized in the roll axis. Planes like the Typhoon, also seem to turn a bit worse than it used to in AH1.

 Another surprising fact I've found out, was that outturning a N1K2-J in a SpitV wasn't so easy anymore. Ofcourse, my adversary was an experienced pilot, but experience or no, outturning N1K2s in SpitVs were never that hard.

 The N1K2 doesn't seem to have changed much, but the SpitV isn't what it used to be in AH1. It pulls tight turns, but you can't dare to push hard rudder and go near verge of stall at the same time - the resulting stall would leave you in a flat-spin.

 ....

 So, I think its the result of various little changes to various different planes that draws out very different conclusions than compared to AH1.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Widewing on September 01, 2004, 06:35:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Urchin
I noticed the same thing, I think the La7 turns better.


I agree, it turns better in AH2. I got into a low-speed scissor, then turn fight with one while flying a P-38 and it took more than 5 seconds to kill it! ;)

I'm  wondering if this is due to the La-7 almost always being low on gas, with twice the burn rate at full power in AH2.

My regards,

Widewing
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Angus on September 01, 2004, 07:15:00 PM
WOT???? Lala a turnmonster now?
And I've been outturning it in  a P51 :confused:

But seriously, I always thought the 109F was an excellent turner, and I remember testing it in AH I vs a Spit IX, it was a matter of loadout which plane turned better.
But now, of course, one can see the La-7 deploy it's slots, so maybe there are some turn-masters around?
Heck, with all those Lala's around I'm grabbing my 109 and going for a hunt ;)
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: flyingaround on September 01, 2004, 07:23:48 PM
Odd....I seem to be able to out turn an LA7 in a 109G10.  I'm sure many things need to be factored in, like pilot ability, relative E states, joystick setup, etc, etc...

If we talkin' about stall fighting 109F vs. LA7, the F OWNES the lala.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Kweassa on September 01, 2004, 07:51:20 PM
Quote
If we talkin' about stall fighting 109F vs. LA7, the F OWNES the lala.

 
 There's no reason for the Frederick  to own the Lavochkin. Everything is in favor to the La7.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Meyer on September 01, 2004, 09:59:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Kweassa
There's no reason for the Frederick  to own the Lavochkin. Everything is in favor to the La7.


Not really,  the F-4 have a lower wing load.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: GScholz on September 02, 2004, 12:07:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Meyer
Not really,  the F-4 have a lower wing load.


Not in AH2 obviously.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Dead Man Flying on September 02, 2004, 12:50:44 AM
The La-7 in no way comes close to outturning the Spit V in AH2.

I'm sure happy when they try though.

-- Todd/Leviathn
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Zazen13 on September 02, 2004, 02:50:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
The La-7 in no way comes close to outturning the Spit V in AH2.

I'm sure happy when they try though.

-- Todd/Leviathn


On a similiar note, a P51D with good flap work can outturn any LGay7. Just ask Jozepi. ;) In fact, the P51D can outturn just about anything but the 'pure' angles fighters in AHII.

Zazen
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: GRUNHERZ on September 02, 2004, 03:06:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
The La-7 in no way comes close to outturning the Spit V in AH2.

I'm sure happy when they try though.

-- Todd/Leviathn


Yea but they sure can run away, far, far, away....
Title: Re: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: straffo on September 02, 2004, 03:24:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
Was fighting an La7 today in my 109F-4, and I noticed to my terror that the La7 now outturns the 109F-4. In AH1 I never had any difficulties outturning La7s in the F-4, so what changed? La7 turns better, or 109F-4 worse?


As you are a squadie and I know you can handle the truth : YOU JUST SUCK


cheers :p
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: GScholz on September 02, 2004, 06:22:42 AM
I know ... :(






;)
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Glasses on September 02, 2004, 02:35:43 PM
Why would you want to out turn a P-51 in a G10 when you could instead just out climb the sucker. While his turning using flaps to get  a gun solution on you you just ht the good Ol MW50 and spiral your arse above him, then just  use a lil rudder in a slip and plink his shiny but to pieces :D

....And then again ol Messerchmitts have been mean to me lately so I'm sticking  to the Focke Wulfs  for now , Kurt Tank never fails old four eyes :D
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Glasses on September 02, 2004, 02:35:45 PM
Why would you want to out turn a P-51 in a G10 when you could instead just out climb the sucker. While he's turning using flaps to get  a gun solution on you you just hit the good Ol MW50 and spiral your arse above him, then just  use a lil rudder in a slip and plink his shiny butt to pieces :D

....And then again ol Messerchmitts have been mean to me lately so I'm sticking  to the Focke Wulfs  for now , Kurt Tank never fails old four eyes :D
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Sable on September 02, 2004, 03:29:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Glasses
Why would you want to out turn a P-51 in a G10 when you could instead just out climb the sucker. While he's turning using flaps to get  a gun solution on you you just hit the good Ol MW50 and spiral your arse above him, then just  use a lil rudder in a slip and plink his shiny butt to pieces :D



Well a decent P-51 pilots sees the 109 go up and realizes he can't catch him in the climb ... unloads for some energy and then makes a 4-5g beak turn into the 109 when he comes down with a little bit of roll out of plane.  And you end up with a stalemate until another plane comes along - this happens to me every time a good stick in a G10 catches my P-51 low E 1v1.  If the P-51 tries to climb up after the G10 it gets roped and shot, and if the 109 tries to out turn the P-51 it usually gets shot.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Virage on September 02, 2004, 05:20:40 PM
What is the wing loading for the La7 ?
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: bozon on September 03, 2004, 02:14:27 AM
Quote
I'm wondering if this is due to the La-7 almost always being low on gas, with twice the burn rate at full power in AH2.

La7 is always low on gas with its beer-can sized tank. It's the P38 that is heavier on fuel now if he still wants to make 30 min sorties.

I haven't tried the La7 since the beta days, but back then it could handle extremly low speeds and count on the engine to pull it through the turn. I hoped that with the new torque model, flying 100 mph in a flat turn with full throttle would be extremely hard. it isn't.

it's turning circle (not rate) is now about as small as a spit 9's.

Bozon
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Tilt on September 03, 2004, 01:07:51 PM
La7 best sustained turn performance @ full weight throttle set to full mil no WEP (2400rpm @1000mm mercury)

At 1000m

IAS between 320and 340 KM/h

Turn radius approx 315m

Bank angle approx 71 deg


turn time per 360 Deg approx 21 secs


At 5000m

IAS between 280and 290 KM/h

Turn radius approx 485m

Bank angle approx 64 deg


turn time per 360 Deg approx 30  secs

My understanding was that the F4 had good vert figures for its day (but the La7 was not of the 109F4's day)

So the best comparison would probably the combat turn (chandelle?) figure.

This is heavily ruddered a half turn climbing under zoom conditions combining both vert and horizontal manouverabiulity in one test. A sort of std VVS indicator to its combat (manouverability) effectiveness.

For the La7

start condition > end condition

alt 1000 > 2170m
speed 560 > 270 Km/h
time 24 secs

alt 5000 > 5940m
speed 460 > 240 Km/h
time 23 secs
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Tilt on September 03, 2004, 01:16:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Virage
What is the wing loading for the La7 ?


Compared to a Spit IX (http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/mkixvla.html)

Note how the advantage swings between fully loaded and near empty weights


Compared to 109G2 (http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/109vla.html)

This is pretty old and not updated for some time.......the 109 power figure could be in error.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Karnak on September 03, 2004, 01:22:32 PM
Tilt,

That is comparing it to a Spitfire F.Mk IX with a Merlin 61 (like we have in AH) and at full load which includes 1,000lbs of bombs.  The max HP listed is only true for a Merlin 61 Spitfire MK IX, not for the Spitfire Mk IX in general.  The max HP for the Spitfire Mk IX was over 1,700.  I don't know how much it was at +25lbs boost.

Would you fight an La-7 with a fully bombed Spitfire Mk IX in AH?
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Tilt on September 03, 2004, 01:30:22 PM
No Karnak I am not trying to imply anything I am just providing the data I have.

Seems to me that range for range and load for load the Spit IX has the edge in the wing loading department .
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: thrila on September 03, 2004, 01:49:06 PM
The listed weight of spit IX jumped out at me a bit.:eek:   It is incorrect by a large margin.   If that wieght is used for all the other calculations then all the figures on that page are very wrong.

The weight of a fully loaded spit without bombs is about the same as the la7.  It is around 7400lbs for the spit IX.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Karnak on September 03, 2004, 02:12:57 PM
Tilt,
When you say stuff like this:
Quote
Originally posted by Tilt
Note how the advantage swings between fully loaded and near empty weights.

I can take it no other way than you are trying to mislead people about where the La-7 stands.  I know you like the La-7, but that was a disingenious argument.  You're clear implication was that in a normal air-to-air combat meeting of the two the La-7 would have lower wingloading than the Spitfire Mk IX would and that for the Spitfire Mk IX to have lower wing loading it would need to be low on fuel.
Title: combat flaps on anything US?
Post by: joeblogs on September 03, 2004, 09:12:59 PM
Can anyone give me an actual historical example of P51s using their flaps in combat? How about the F6-f?

-blogs

Quote
Originally posted by Zazen13
On a similiar note, a P51D with good flap work can outturn any LGay7. Just ask Jozepi. ;) In fact, the P51D can outturn just about anything but the 'pure' angles fighters in AHII.

Zazen
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Meyer on September 03, 2004, 09:48:33 PM
3400kg for a G-2?

should be 3050/3100kg

And 1800hp??? :confused:
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: GScholz on September 03, 2004, 09:55:59 PM
It's a ricer G-2. 300kg of decals, vinyls and alloy wheels + Turbo mod with wet shot Nitro as well for at least 1800hp at the crank. Gorgeous interior of course; all leather with magnesium panels and brushed aluminum trim, and a pair of dice hanging from the Revi. Wunderbaum is optional.
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Meyer on September 03, 2004, 10:00:41 PM
LOL :D
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: straffo on September 04, 2004, 02:53:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
It's a ricer G-2. 300kg of decals, vinyls and alloy wheels + Turbo mod with wet shot Nitro as well for at least 1800hp at the crank. Gorgeous interior of course; all leather with magnesium panels and brushed aluminum trim, and a pair of dice hanging from the Revi. Wunderbaum is optional.


Didn't you forgot the 250kg of the meatball in the cockpit ?
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: DoctorYO on September 07, 2004, 09:35:17 AM
all 109's turn worse now..  infact the g10 vs stang matchup equal pilots my money is on the stang..  the 109's just dont turn like they used to in AH1 and will catch you by surprise..

(I use rudder in all turns in the 109 now to try to make up for its lack of turning ability.  hence slower speed and better turn radii.. seems to work better putting the slip ball not max but just on the end of the gauge..)

Now as stated in my other posts the new dweebfire is the LA7 it turns it accelerates and we all know its "ludicris" speed (dark helmut)

with a managed throttle it outturns anything but turn and burners..  silly aint it..  with little or no torque either.. weeeeeeeeeeee...............  all those horses under the hood with no torque.. I think its a error..


Phear the La7.....




DoctorYo
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: leitwolf on September 07, 2004, 12:23:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
It's a ricer G-2. 300kg of decals, vinyls and alloy wheels + Turbo mod with wet shot Nitro as well for at least 1800hp at the crank. Gorgeous interior of course; all leather with magnesium panels and brushed aluminum trim, and a pair of dice hanging from the Revi. Wunderbaum is optional.

LOL!
The pair of dice sold me.. must.. have.. that.. plane.. :D
Title: Re: combat flaps on anything US?
Post by: joeblogs on September 07, 2004, 12:54:07 PM
That's what I thought...

Quote
Originally posted by joeblogs
Can anyone give me an actual historical example of P51s using their flaps in combat? How about the F6-f?

-blogs
Title: Re: combat flaps on anything US?
Post by: bozon on September 07, 2004, 01:06:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by joeblogs
Can anyone give me an actual historical example of P51s using their flaps in combat? How about the F6-f?

I remember a P51(B?) pilot story about a turn fight vs 109G. It was on a mission to norway and he got caught in a circle fight with the 109 on the deck. After lowering one notch of flaps he slowly out turned the 109 and shot it down.
The flight back was on instruments through bad weather.

I spent 20 min looking for the webpage but couldn't find it. Does it ring any bells with anyone?

The pilot said they considered flap use in combat before, but were discoraged by their commanders who wanted them to keep fast and not risk the nasty stall of the P51.

Bozon
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Charon on September 07, 2004, 01:41:14 PM
Quote
Can anyone give me an actual historical example of P51s using their flaps in combat? How about the F6-f?


I remember a couple of references in Eric Hammel's "Aces against Germany" where it was described. Generally the practice was to drop one notch of flaps to get good initial turn rate but to be careful not to keep them out for too long and kill too much airspeed, as i recall.

Charon
Title: re: p51 flap use
Post by: Hack9 on September 07, 2004, 08:01:43 PM
Regarding use of flaps in combat in P51 Mustangs.

This is taken from a USAAF document circa June 1944; commentary on combat tactics in P51 by 1Lt. C. A. Vitali, 360th FS/356th FG:


"I find that the tightest turn ma be obtained in a pinch by putting the prop in very fine pitch with manual control if necessary, lowering about 10 degrees of flaps, and trimming the ship in the turn."

(used without permission)

Taken from: Aircraft of the Aces #31, VIII Fighter Command at War, 'Long Reach', compiled by Michael O'Leary, Osprey Publishing, 2000.

-Hack9
Title: 109F-4 vs. La7
Post by: Sable on September 07, 2004, 08:42:43 PM
Here are a few examples of books where P-51 pilots talking about using flaps in a turnfight:

Bob Goebel "Mustang Ace" pg 199
Bud Anderson "To Fly and Fight" pg 8
Eric Hammel "Aces Against Germany" pg 154, pg 189, pg 211, pg 240 (all quotes from different pilots)

They were called combat flaps for a reason.
Title: Re: re: p51 flap use
Post by: joeblogs on September 08, 2004, 11:46:35 AM
We've got some pretty good proof for the P51, how about for the USN heavy iron?

-Blogs

Quote
Originally posted by Hack9
Regarding use of flaps in combat in P51 Mustangs.

This is taken from a USAAF document circa June 1944; commentary on combat tactics in P51 by 1Lt. C. A. Vitali, 360th FS/356th FG:


"I find that the tightest turn ma be obtained in a pinch by putting the prop in very fine pitch with manual control if necessary, lowering about 10 degrees of flaps, and trimming the ship in the turn."

(used without permission)

Taken from: Aircraft of the Aces #31, VIII Fighter Command at War, 'Long Reach', compiled by Michael O'Leary, Osprey Publishing, 2000.

-Hack9