Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: storch on September 25, 2004, 10:39:11 AM
-
It seems that the 109 G-10 is tip stalling like the 190 erroneously does. has anyone else noticed this?
-
What's a 'tip stall'?
If you by any chance mean the serious destabilization of the roll axis during harsh maneuvering, then I definately agree.
As it is, getting the plane to slow down to near 100mph without an upward movement (that gains alt) during a turn maneuver, is incredibly hard in all of the 109s. In other words, getting the plane to turn harsh enough to drain speed down to the stall speed, is very hard, because already at 180mph or so, even with first or second notch of flaps applied, the plane is seriously destabilized.
The C.202 and C.205 suffers almost exactly the same amount of difficulty during turns.
All other planes - including the Lavochkins or Spitfires... Zeros and Hurris even... (though much less than the 109s or Macchis), suffer more difficulties in a harsh turn compared to AH1.
As it is the only planes I haven't seen suffer this problem to such a noticeable extent, is the P-47s, P-51s, F4Us and P-38s. The P-38s I can understand. The P-47s, P-51s, and F4Us; taking the flap use into consideration, still, seems way too stable.
These planes don't 'marginally outturn' 109s and 190s - they 'decisively, and easily' outturn them.
-
These planes don't 'marginally outturn' 109s and 190s - they 'decisively, and easily' outturn them.
I was thinking the exact same thing myself.
Except the wording from the actual tactical trials is:
"Little to choose between the two with the Mustang having a slight advantage" and "Turning is NOT recommended except for immediate defense".
AND
The FW-190A5 being flown by a USAAF pilot with FIVE hours in the 190!
I am sure he was expert by then at figuring out the edge of the 190's envelope. With all the warning the bird gave...
:(
Looking forward to Pyro's redoing the FM.
Crumpp
-
A tip stall is just what it sounds to be. In a high angle of attack and banking the wing tip may stall first causing the aircraft to enter into a violent spin. It is happening in the 109 G-6 and G-10. The thing is that it is occurring in mild climbing turns. These are flight characteristics which were not present in ANY LW aircraft. Plainly the LW aircraft are very poorly modeled in this game. If you want the allied aircraft to have all of the advantages then simply disarm the LW completely. Why pretend any longer? :D
-
I wouldn't go so far as doing the 'overmodelled' claim - as HT is really sensitive about those issues.
However, from your description, I immediately recognize it, and agree to an extent.
I'm a devout fan of the 109s - I use all the Gustav models and the Friederich(Emil's really too slow for MA purposes..) almost exclusively in AH. The first, immediate things I've noticed in the differences between AH1 and AH2 was that the 109s were having problems in turning, and the P-51s and P-47s were basically 'out-of-reach' for me in whatever 109 I choose to fly them against.
I believe I'm the first one who brought it up in the boards(which ofcourse, by no means implies that I'm the only one who realizes it), and here is a thread in the help section where in deep frustration I've spilled what I felt:
Favorite Moves in a 109? (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=130115)
I'm pretty sure this is what you're getting at too, storch.
.....
In the thread, is some comments by bozon;
clouds, I am aware of the instabilities the 109 suffers at low speeds (spit 9 developed some too). IMO it's most other planes that suffer too little of this. Some planes don't seem to have any torque at all and don't fear a spin. If it was up to me I'd give all the planes the mossie's new flat spin.
This part I wholely agree. Frankly, most of the planes, more or less, have received some kind of 'character quirks' that makes maneverig harder than it was than AH1 - and I like that part.
In AH1, having a 'better turning ability' usually meant simply the harder you pull, the quicker you outturned the opponent. It also meant that some planes were more 'resilient' to stall conditions and side factors such as torque.
However, in AH2, I've experienced a lot of things.
* The Zekes and Hurris would violently stall out if you just yanked the stick like you'd have done in AH1.
* When engaged in a turn fight which none started out behind the other, in an equal conditions/one circle merge, the SpitV can't just simply outturn the N1K2 by pulling the stick.
* The Spit9 has grown issues in regards to stability if you pull hard while applying sudden rudder.
* Even the "Lgays" suffer violent snap rolls if you apply sudden, harsh stick input - particularly when the fuel tank is full.
Almost all planes have distinct reactions to harsh conditions, particularly with hars turns - except the P-51s and P-47s, and F4Us.
There's basically almost no way to follow a P-47 in a rolling scissors - a 109 or 190 in AH2 just can't follow that angle. If I should win that battle, it is most likely because I broke off from that engagement, and used the climb and accel advantage to 'bugger out' and then gain an alt advantage again and again.
Seems like those three planes in particular, have the stabilization effect of the flaps set too high - or the flap effectiveness of other planes is much too low.
I personally don't mind the difficulty of managing the 109 at such speeds, but I do mind the fact that I can't beat a La-7 in a 109G-10 which I've used for years, engaged in a low speed maneuvering fight.
The really frustrating thing is, I can beat the same guy in the same La-7 with flying colors in a P-51D, or even a P-47D, which I have almost no flight time in. Damn!
I mean, is it really supposed to be this hard to outmaneuver a P-47D with a Bf109G-6? A 5.6 ton with 2000hp, against a plane that weighs only 50%, but has 75% of the engine power?
-
Yea something is off with the US planes, especially the 47...
-
Well I can't help about HTC's "sensitivity" issues. my suggestion to the "sensitive" prima donnas would be to buck up. It has to be hurting them in the pocket book. I have very little tolerance for the "we know better" crowd which HTC seems to be. There is a problem. That they choose not to address it is one thing. It's a totally diiffferent thing to to tell me, a customer that pays his account up three months in advance most times to consider HTC's feelings. The modelling is off and they need to fix it to the satisfaction of the axis players. I don't mean to the exclusive favor of the axis players but to the conditions which existed in the field as closely as possible. The modelling is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off. You have a very well read playing field here the amount of sloppiness that is currently the state of these models is unacceptable.
-
I tested 190A5, 109G10, P47D40 and P47D25, all of them on wep, 50% fuel, flaps up and sea level. I noted G and speed for stable substained turns with no "tip stalls" for several 360 degree turns.
190A5 and 109G10 got 2.6G at 175mph.
P47D40 and P47D25 got 2.1G at 150 mph.
-
hmm...i havent been having any trouble turning in a g-2, actually ive been surviving turn fights with spits quite a bit (they always seem to switch direction just as i start stalling)
ive noticed that the g2 has better accel and handling and on the deck top speed than the g-6 and the g-10...
-
Originally posted by GODO
I tested 190A5, 109G10, P47D40 and P47D25, all of them on wep, 50% fuel, flaps up and sea level. I noted G and speed for stable substained turns with no "tip stalls" for several 360 degree turns.
190A5 and 109G10 got 2.6G at 175mph.
P47D40 and P47D25 got 2.1G at 150 mph.
Amazing!!!!!!! it happens to me every fight
-
Ah yes, the old Axis == German & German == undermodeled whine.
It'd been awhile since I'd seen it. Brings back memories.
EDIT:
OK, clarification. I agree that there is stuff that doesn't seem right, particularly in the changes to many of the American aircraft's performance with flaps deployed.
What I don't agree with is the whole "Axis is being intentionally screwed" rhetoric that is taking off in this thread.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Ah yes, the old Axis == German & German == undermodeled whine.
It'd been awhile since I'd seen it. Brings back memories.
EDIT:
OK, clarification. I agree that there is stuff that doesn't seem right, particularly in the changes to many of the American aircraft's performance with flaps deployed.
What I don't agree with is the whole "Axis is being intentionally screwed" rhetoric that is taking off in this thread.
I'll beg your pardon but lose a 1/2 wing in any axis airplane and the fight is over and the axis player is dead. Lose 1/2 wing in an allied plane and it can now out run you easily. It just happened to me again in the CT. I shot 1/2 of a wing off of Smokin SS in a P38 and he just out ran my 109 G10. What would you conclude when all the cards are stacked against the axis player? I've only been playing for 17 months so these "old" whines are a revelation to me. And if a new generation of player comes to the same conclusion what would that indicate? It's sloppy and it's dishonest not address the issue and then have HTC come on here and just simply delete the message and at times ban the messenger.
-
anyone here fly 109G-10 in Il-2/Il-2FB? does it stall like that in Il-2/Il-2FB?
-
testing it doesnt really do anything i fly LW 95% of the time and yes most 109 190 and the 110 start to wanna stall at anything under 180mph and the 110G2 is messed up im turning with a p51 full flaps and just put in a little rudder and BOOOM flat stall spin HTC needs to fix the LW A/C cuz they are messed up.
-
Originally posted by storch
I'll beg your pardon but lose a 1/2 wing in any axis airplane and the fight is over and the axis player is dead. Lose 1/2 wing in an allied plane and it can now out run you easily. It just happened to me again in the CT. I shot 1/2 of a wing off of Smokin SS in a P38 and he just out ran my 109 G10. What would you conclude when all the cards are stacked against the axis player? I've only been playing for 17 months so these "old" whines are a revelation to me. And if a new generation of player comes to the same conclusion what would that indicate? It's sloppy and it's dishonest not address the issue and then have HTC come on here and just simply delete the message and at times ban the messenger.
Yeah, sure. Whatever.
That is defineately an Allied vs Axis thing, hmmm? All Allied aircraft do one thing and all Axis aircraft the other?
-
In AH world, 190s can still land even if 1/2 wing missing by using correct trimming... but your speed is around 300km/h when approaching the runway. You have 50/50 chance of ditching on the runway or the dirt:D
-
Originally posted by 1K3
anyone here fly 109G-10 in Il-2/Il-2FB? does it stall like that in Il-2/Il-2FB?
In IL-2 all the flight models seem about equal to me.
-
Hey it's a LW thread I should at least make a cameo :D
-
That is defineately an Allied vs Axis thing, hmmm? All Allied aircraft do one thing and all Axis aircraft the other?
Well, that's the point of one person on this thread. However, not for me.
It could be simply a mistake, overlook, low correction priorities, or in the worst case, "nothing wrong". I'm willing to accept all of the possibilities or potential explanations.
However, if this turns out to be 'nothing wrong', then its something that disturbs our traditional looks and views on the aircombat between the P-47/P-51 vs 109s/190s.
IIRC, the traditional views was that at medium high speeds the 51 and the 47 easily matched 109s and 190s in maneuvering. At low speeds the 51s and 47s would have an edge in stability, but the 109s and 190s would have the edge in overall maneuverability.
In the end the outcome of an all-out stall fight would be a 109 would more or less easily outturn/outmaneuver a P-47, and would have to work hard to do the same to a P-51. A 190 would be deadlock with a P-47, and be disadvantaged against a P-51.
At least to the extent of my skills and experience of AH2, a 109 is at deadlocks with a P-47 and outmaneuvered hardily by the P-51.
The 190 is no match at all for both the P-47 and P-51, and any engagement that falls under 250mph and the P-47 or the P-51 would decisively outturn it within two circles.
It could be pilot factor - since I'm not a top shape pilot. But then again, not all the P-47 and P-51 pilots I meet are the topdogs of MA.
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1096204482_p47-fw190-4.jpg)
These are just the conclusions from that Tactical Trial. The P47 was a P47D-4 which is a P47D11 without the performance robbing ordinance hardpoints.
The FW-190 is an FW-190A5 which was repaired from a crashlanded plane.
Crumpp
-
Gotta say I haven't noticed it, if anything the 109/190 seem better in Ah2, with the exception of the Dora. It seems markedly less manueverable, but I never was a real big fan of the Dora anyway.
-
The FW-190A5:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1096205004_page1.jpg)
The engine fouled plugs when dropped to an idle and simply quit at altitude. The service ceiling of the Aircraft was never reached.
Interesting note is the aileron vibration and reversal in the turns. This is not a flight characteristic of the FW-190A series. The only other place this is mentioned is a Rechlin test flight between the FW-190A2 vs. Bf-109F4.
The FW-190A5 was a ground attack version, which they attempted to ballast to simulate a fighter version.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1096205249_page3.jpg)
The Rechlin comment:
http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/aleirons.jpg
All of the FW-190A pilots I have interviewed have made the same interesting comments:
1. The FW-190A5 was the worst performing FW-190A. It gained weight but did not gain any power until after a short time period in which the Spitfire did have a measure level speed superiority. Adjustments were made to the Kommandogerat and the fuel injection system on the BMW-801D2 which restored it's level speed advantage.
2. The FW-190A8 was the most nimble version of the FW-190A.
CG adjustments, Horsepower increase, control surface changes and a more efficient propeller are the reason.
3. They used angle tactics against allied fighter (including VVS) every fighter except the Spitfire.
Crumpp
-
Oh,
The tactical trials for the FW-190A5 vs P51 is a P51B not the P51D which had a worse turn radius.
Additionally the FW-190D outturned the FW-190A.
I will dig up the documentation.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by storch
It seems that the 109 G-10 is tip stalling like the 190 erroneously does. has anyone else noticed this?
Yes, very much so. The 109's supposed to have a gentle stall, but I notice a lot of roll instability while turning.
-
Great info Crumpp! Did you send this stuff to HTC?
-
I was in a turn fight at low altitude with a P51 and a P47 and the only reason they didn't kill me is because they probably didn't know their rides very well and were probably fairly new. As it was I had a hard time evadind and knocking them down. I'll agree with Kweassa that if the problem isn't in the LW AC then it's with the Allied. I believe Crumpp has forwarded every bit of that info to HTC some months ago and pyro responded on these boards that he would "look into it". Maybe it will be looked into in two weeks ;)
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Additionally the FW-190D outturned the FW-190A.
Similar weight to 190A8 plus 300 extra hp. I expect at least similar turning characteristics, actual D9 is far worse turner than A8.
-
Similar weight to 190A8 plus 300 extra hp. I expect at least similar turning characteristics,
Yep, and that extra horsepower works a long way to improving turning performance.
Crumpp
edited for clarity....
-
I think Godo meant that the AH2 D-9, "actually maneuvers worse than the A-8". If that be the case than I agree with him.
-
Yep, I meant current AH D9.
-
I'd agree with that to, from what experience I have trying to fight in both planes. The D-9 seemed a little more manueverable in AH1, and the A-8 seemed a little less than it is now.
-
No sim I have ever seen conisderd thar 190A8 to be "nimble," In fact it's always been modeled as a heavy pig with the standard idea that it weas a bomber destroyer and not a fighter..
-
Well, EAW and WWIIF 190A8 were a delight to fly.
Warbirds and AH 190A8s are a rocks, D9 is a enormous rock.
-
Crump,
where is the other report from that web page? there were two of them, the other one was much more favourable to the P47.
The one you posted is the earlier one from 1943. I think this one was a P47 without water injection or paddle blade. Also, if my memory serves me right, the one you posted was done by the brits.
I can't reach the webpage:
http://www.lanpartyworld.com/ww2/
Bozon
-
It's kind of confusing actually Bozon.
Apparently the test was flown in Italy in December of 1943 according to this report:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1096245523_p47-fw190.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1096245561_p47-fw190-2.jpg)
I believe it is a detailed report of this test flight:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1096245609_p47-fw190-3.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1096204482_p47-fw190-4.jpg)
Consider though:
In 1944 the Jagdwaffe was flying FW-190A8 with the VDM 9-12157H3. A wide chord wooden prop or VDM hub 9-16176 with the blades 9-30341.10 and or 9-12153B. These are the really wide chord blades seen on the Dora.
Only the first batch of FW-190A8's were delivered with VDM 9-16176A which is the narrow metal prop seen on the FW-190A5.
So both A/C got a more a more efficient propeller.
Anybody good with Prop efficiency calculations? I have access to all three props for close examination. I can take measurements if someone knows what to measure and how to do the calculations. I will photograph and document the measurements.
BTW Your link does not work.
Crumpp
-
My $0.02.....
IMHO The 109G10 in AHII will NOT manuver as well as the 109G10 in AHI. None of the 109's do.
In AHI if I timed everything just so, I could preform a cut the throttle some, hard roll, allot of rudder, pull stick back, and almost reverse the direction of the 109 nearly within the length of the plane.
NO WAY in AHII. Now it stalls, or flops around, or worse just goes into a shallow dive.
Not talkin sudden pull just smooth control input with a rapid steady increase until the manuver is preformed.
IMHO The Hartmann Manuver (Erik Hatmann) is a NO GO in AHII in any 109.
Try it if you like, just push the stick forward and left and apply left rudder. It's been reported the actual manuver could also nearly reverse your direction.
Not talkin an Axis Allied bias here just something I've noticed.
Possible error in program input? or unadjusted/maladjusted flight variable?
The 109's are not as manuverable as before. Flaps on the 109's? I very rarely use em during combat! To me doing so gives away the 109's main weapon SPEED!
The E, F, and G2 don't seem quite as unstable as the G6 and G10.
Recall a report that claimed the 109's (all models) had very strong down rudder response. Was put in by Willie at the insistance of one of the German ace's.