Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Hristo on May 22, 2000, 03:07:00 PM
-
With most 190 pilots waiting for A-5, the unevitable question arises.
Why was earlier version (supposedly) better than later one (A-5 better than A-8) ?
Sure, it is lighter, so it benefits from this and has better acceleration, climb, lower wingloading and is slightly faster.
But, why did Germans made the A-8 such a pig, compared to A-5 ? Is it because they needed better buff killer ? Or maybe they realized that most important factors for air combat were other than low wingloading and aerobatics ?
IMO, the most important plane characteristic for WW2 air combat are speed, guns, dive and cockpit visibility. The most successful WW2 planes prove that. So, when A-8 was introduced, it had much better guns than A-5, it was heavier so dive was faster, and speed suffered only marginally. IMO, it was actually a better plane, if flown correctly.
On the other hand, Spitfire was just an outdated design. Sure more powerful engines were introduced, but the plane could only count on mistakes of enemy pilots or surprise to be effective (any Dora could simply dive away from Spit XIV). WW2 air combat was rarely a 1 on 1 duel, where Spitfire could beat any plane. It was all hit and run, and some plane designers just knew better than Mitchell some 10 years earlier (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Comments, please ?
-
Sorry Hristo...disagree in A5 with you 100%
Originally posted by Hristo:
With most 190 pilots waiting for A-5, the unevitable question arises.
Why was earlier version (supposedly) better than later one (A-5 better than A-8) ?
Sure, it is lighter, so it benefits from this and has better acceleration, climb, lower wingloading and is slightly faster.
Damno, Hristo...you need more answer that this? a plane that is faster (5-10 mph), accelerates better,turns closer and faster and has WAY better climbrate than other...and you still ask why is better?
But, why did Germans made the A-8 such a pig, compared to A-5 ? Is it because they needed better buff killer ? Or maybe they realized that most important factors for air combat were other than low wingloading and aerobatics ?
IMO, the most important plane characteristic for WW2 air combat are speed, guns, dive and cockpit visibility. The most successful WW2 planes prove that. So, when A-8 was introduced, it had much better guns than A-5, it was heavier so dive was faster, and speed suffered only marginally. IMO, it was actually a better plane, if flown correctly.
So you resign that advantage on speed, handling, climbrate and acceleration for a better dive performance and 2 porked Mausers with 140 rpg?...sorry but I disagree. If you want 4 20mm cannons you'll still have those MG FF (pure crap ok, but they still are 20mm isnt it? )
Hristo, Fw190A5 with 2*13mm and 2*20mm has exactly the same weapons as a Dora-9...and Dora turned better than A8, too.
The fact that in Aces High Fw190A8 is the pig it is,is because it is the heavy sturm version, with armor and adds that made it clumsy. In real life, pilots flew "lighted" Fw190A8, quitting armor and even outer cannons, to win the performance lost by the weight added.
I did a test the other day. I took off in a 50% fuel Fw190 with only 2 20mm. That weight is more than that of the 100% fuel loaded fw190A5. The plane handled like a REAL dream. I felt like a god in it.
Then why dont I fly Fw190A8 light? you'll ask
1-Because I want to fly sorties that last more than 10 minutes
2-Because If I fly Fw190A8, I fly Fw190A8. WIth all its advantages and drawbacks. The day we have A5 I'll do in it, with all its advantages and drawbacks, too.
I am pretty sure that I'll still fly some sorties on A8, as I love its firepower. But Fw190A5 is better fighter than A8.
On the other hand, Spitfire was just an outdated design. Sure more powerful engines were introduced, but the plane could only count on mistakes of enemy pilots or surprise to be effective (any Dora could simply dive away from Spit XIV). WW2 air combat was rarely a 1 on 1 duel, where Spitfire could beat any plane. It was all hit and run, and some plane designers just knew better than Mitchell some 10 years earlier (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Hey! I am bringing a chair ,a cold beer and some popcorn!!! lets see the thread explode in flames!!!!!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Ram, out
Fw190D9? Ta152H1? The truth is out there
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://members.tripod.com/JG2/)
(http://nottosc.tripod.com/ram190.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-22-2000).]
-
hi hristos,
you want a comment?
SO GIVE ME A D13!!!!
one question:
A5 had 2x mgff's+2xmg151+2xmg131, right??
------------------
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/habicht.jpg)
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://www.busprod.com/weazel2/)
[This message has been edited by HABICHT (edited 05-22-2000).]
-
Originally posted by HABICHT:
one question:
A5 had 2x mgff's+2xmg151+2xmg131, right??
Yes ,HAsqueak, but MG FF was a low muzzle vel. cannon, more or less like the Japanese Type99 of the A6M2. And you know that here in AH muzzle velocity means that Hispanos are Turbolasers while Mausers are scratching guns...so go and imagine a Mg FF...
MG FF was usually deleted from Fw190A5 series by the own pilots, they thought that they werent worth the weight (and I agree 100%).
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-22-2000).]
-
If you dive you are no longer a threat (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But if you climb.......
Turn though can help when energy fighting as you don't have to pull G's for as long as you would in a worse turner.
Turn isn't important providing your energy is greater than that of you enemy. That ain't always the case.
Admitably turn isn't the most important factor in a fighter but in many pilot accounts of 2 squads of planes meeting the fight turned into a furball where turn was a factor.
I suppose fighter design is a trade off if you put big enough wings on a FW to make it turn with a spit you could knock 30 mph off it's top speed.
As it happened the spit 14 could retain it's turning ability while still having a higher top speed and climb than the 190-D9.
And if turn isn't important then why didn't all late war spits have clipped wings?
What it boils down to is to hit and run (the most survivable tactic) you don't need turn (or climb) you need speed (and to a lesser extent guns and dive). So If you make a perfect BnZ fighter you make it like a FW. However by doing this you put youself at a major disadvantage when you have inferior energyas the only thing you can do is put your nosedown and run (how you gonna shoot those bombers down now). In our arena it's easier to maintain an energy advantage because you can cruise at 30k and be very selective about your targets. I don't think this was nessacarily the case in WW2
[This message has been edited by jmccaul (edited 05-22-2000).]
-
And if turn isn't important then why didn't all late war spits have clipped wings?
Umm... I always thought that clipped wings, increased the roll rate, but decreased the turn ability, since your decreasing wing area and increasing the wingloading.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Hristo:
I would add to your list (speed, guns, dive, visibility) range, altitude performance, controllability through all speed ranges, rate of climb, and turning performance in that order.
Why did Fw 190A performance degrade slightly as time went on? Simple - weight increases without power increases.
If you look at all WW2 fighters you will notice one thing: as time went on, new versions were always heavier. There was always more and more equipment being added, fuel tanks being added, weapons being added, armor being added, etc.
Many of the planes were given more engine power as time went on to compensate. P-51 and Spitfire got more powerful Merlins, F4U and P-47D added water injection, LaGG-3 got M-82, etc.
However the 190 soldiered on with the BMW 801D-2 despite the efforts of Kurt Tank to add more power. Fw 190 designs for more powerful engines were ready as early as 1941. But the planned turbosupercharged variants (Fw 190C) were a failure due to metallurgy problems, and Tank was unable to get significant DB 603 or Jumo 213 allocations until Q4 1944. It's not that Tank was not aware of the need for more power, he was just let down by the fools controlling aircraft production.
This issue was even more severe on the Fw 190 because the plane was overweight from the start. It was originally designed for a smaller engine, the BMW 139. BMW offered the 801 instead, and the airframe was adapted to the larger engine. However the wing loading was too high and the wings had to be enlarged as well on the second prototype with the 801.
As far as the Spitfires, don't forget that later Spitfire Mk. IX variants were just as fast as Fw 190A at most altitudes, and faster above 20,000 feet. Spitfire Mk. XIV was faster than Fw 190A at any altitude, and faster than the Fw 190D-9 at most altitudes.
BTW Habicht, only about 12 Fw 190D-12 were built, and the D-13 was a prototype only.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 05-22-2000).]
-
Clipped wings basically enhanches low alt performance.
The MG FF was a Swedish design based on the German Becker cannon of world war 1, being the first standard cannon adopted by the Luftwaffe it was reliable but hampered by its slow rate of fire and ammunition feed from -45 -60 or -100 drum magazines. It was generally used in its MG FF/M form in a moteur-cannon installation between the cylinder banks of the aircraft's engine, firing through the propeller shaft.
-
<<<IMO, the most important plane characteristic for WW2 air combat are speed, guns, dive and cockpit visibility. >>>
Ah, I can't wait for the P-47.
(sorry for hijacking this thread)
ra
-
Also, the Type 99 Model 2 Mk 4 was a superb weapon, placing it in the same class as the MG FF isn't quite right...
The Type 99 M2 M4 had a muzzle velocity of 2.4k ft/sec.
The main german 20mm cannon, the MG 151/20 had a muzzle velocity of 1,910 ft/sec.
Even the earlier Type 99, the model 2, was superior to the MG 151, which a muzzle velocity of 1,970.
-
Nath take a gander at this:
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/gustin_military/fgun.html (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/gustin_military/fgun.html)
Doesn't agree with the MV figures you are quoting.
-
Some answers:
A-5 had MG 17s.
Remember that WW2 fights were iconless. It was very hard to spot low E 190 running on the deck.
I’d rather have almost twice as firepower in A-8 than that of A-5. Sure, I am not able to outturn anything anymore, but who cares. Turning is not needed when attacking. And I prefer to have dive instead of turning as defense.
What matters speedwise is dive speed and deck speed. Speed at 20k or so is not important IMO. All chases end up on the deck sooner or later. Thus, Dora is faster than Spit XIV.
As for multi plane dogfights, I disagree again. BnZ and E fight can be performed there, it doesn’t have to boil down to WW1 furball every time. All 190s should do there is to keep the speed. IMO, in multi vs multi fight you need great cockpit visibility, guns for quick kill and speed for staying alive. Start turning and looping and someone is bound to nail you when you are most vulnerable. Also, good wingman and squad tactic negate any of these advantages.
Not to mention, I’d much rather be in 190 co-alt at 10k with 10 Spit IXs than in Spit with 10 190s. I guess you know why (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
And I agree, Funked, 190 would be much better plane if Tank could get the engines he wanted from start. But even now, I am still impressed by the plane.
Now, more questions:
Some say Dora outturned A-series, some disagree. What is the thruth ?
-
Speed at altitude is important for an interceptor. Speed on the deck is great for survival though.
Also I haven't seen any data that suggest the D-9 was any faster than the Mk. XIV at sea level.
About the turning abilities of D-9 vs. A-8: They have the same wing, and the D-9 is a tiny bit lighter, with more power. Seems like the Dora might be able to turn better. Also there are some pilots who said that was the case.
-
With superior dive performance (brick) and 10 minutes of power boost with MW 50, Dora would win any deck chase with Spit XIV. Some 20 mph at 20k is far less important than 20 mph in dive or 5 mph on the deck, IMO.
Wasn't it able to catch diving P 51s too ?
Funked, what is the exact weight difference between A-5 and A-8 we are talking about ?
Next, is Dora closer to A-5 or to A-8, performance wise ?
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
I don't know about the diving. It's not THAT much a brick. For instance P-51D is heavier and has less drag.
Weights...
A-5 8700 lb (no outboard cannon)
A-8 9625 lb (clean fighter, MG 151/20 outboard)
D-9 9400 lb
A-5 and A-8 performance were not drastically different. A-8 had boost override for a few more hp and it was actually faster on the deck. But the climb rate was lower due to extra weight.
D-9 has a little more power than the A series at low level, and more power above 20k. Also some D-9 had MW 50 boost with over 2200 hp at sea level. So D-9 performance (climb and speed) is superior to A series above 20,000 feet (approximately) and is much superior at low altitudes if MW 50 is used.
-
Tempest would outdive and outrun Dora below 15k methinks. Who needs a fancy Spitfire when you have four Hispano Mk V? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
About the turning abilities of D-9 vs. A-8: They have the same wing, and the D-9 is a tiny bit lighter, with more power. Seems like the Dora might be able to turn better. Also there are some pilots who said that was the case.
Yet in WB, Dora was regarded about the worst turning plane (even worser than A-8) of all and from my experience is not far from truth.
It will be interesting to see how it goes this time. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
D-9 has a little more power than the A series at low level, and more power above 20k. Also some D-9 had MW 50 boost with over 2200 hp at sea level. So D-9 performance (climb and speed) is superior to A series above 20,000 feet (approximately) and is much superior at low altitudes if MW 50 is used.
I have had impression that almost all D-9's had MW 50? Before A-8 only prototypes had MW 50, few A-8's might have had MW 50 (photos indicate presence of MW 50 with that yellow/red triangle) but D-9 had it almost as a rule. I think all Ta 152's were delivered with MW 50.
Dora will be a mean mothershrecker but it will not be uberplane. Firepower is not phenomenal and turning ability is below average. It's speed is very good but so is Typhoons and how many of them you see in the arena? Pretty much none.
I don't expect to see Dora being flown outside of historical JG's much. But those who only fly Luftwaffe planes like me will be more than happy to get Dora.
I just hope they don't pull that play balancing toejame to us. Now there will be means to limit plane use in arena (score modifiers and such) other ways than little "extra" weight.
------------------
jochen Jagdflieger JG 2 'Richthofen' Aces High
jochen Geschwaderkommodore (on leave) Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) Warbirds
Thanks for the Fw 190A-5 HTC!
Ladysmith wants you forthwith to come to her relief
Burn your briefs you leave for France tonight
Carefully cut the straps of the booby-traps and set the captives free
But don't shoot 'til you see her big blue eyes
-
About the MW 50 on D-9 - from Wolfgang Wagner "Kurt Tank: Focke-Wulf's Designer and Test Pilot" Pg. 162.
The D-9 was only retrofitted with a water-methanol system. The MW 50 injection system could be utilized up to an altitude of about 5000 meters and boosted the Jumo 213A's performance to 2100 hp. The system was not to be used on takeoff, however, at least initially. Aquisition of suitable water-methanol systems was hampered by the constant bombing raids, so that a simplified system known as "Oldenburg" was initially fitted. The first production Fw 190D-9 carried the Werknummer of 210001. Machine #2 (210002) was retrofitted with its methanol injection system in Langenhagen, while the third aircraft (210043) had it installed in Cottbus.
The same book quotes 580 km/h at sea level and 686 km/h at 6600 m for a non-MW 50 D-9. A guy who posted on this BBS as "weretiger" found some RAE tests that showed 435 mph at 25,000 feet (no MW 50) and 440 mph at 16,000 feet (MW 50).
I just hope they don't pull that play balancing toejame to us. Now there will be means to limit plane use in arena (score modifiers and such) other ways than little "extra" weight.
I think that's the idea, Jochen. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
However I have seen no evidence that the WB Dora was play-balanced...
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
Clipped wings basically enhanches low alt performance.
The MG FF was a Swedish design based on the German Becker cannon of world war 1
swiss right, oerlikon?
------------------
BORK,BORK,BORK!!!"
Crabofix <What happend?...:A stranger morgie turndee burndee ,flip flip flip flip flip flip>
Flygflottlj.19(Lento R5)"swedish Gladiators"
-
However I have seen no evidence that the WB Dora was play-balanced...
Gosh, I think you're right funked... Apology to HTC, maybe I'm just tired, that's all (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
jochen Jagdflieger JG 2 'Richthofen' Aces High
jochen Geschwaderkommodore (on leave) Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) Warbirds
Thanks for the Fw 190A-5 HTC!
Ladysmith wants you forthwith to come to her relief
Burn your briefs you leave for France tonight
Carefully cut the straps of the booby-traps and set the captives free
But don't shoot 'til you see her big blue eyes
-
Isn't it strange that when the luftwaffe fans talk about real life their planes are so much better than everybody else's, but when it comes to including them in the game they weren't that good really and the Spit XIV will be too uber?
The Spit XIV had a max speed at sea level of 363mph, 584kmh.
[This message has been edited by Nashwan (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
Funked, on the Type 99 cannon. I have been assisting some friends doing research on the Type 99, and I have to say that its difficult to quantify.
The following is from memory but its pretty close.
The Type 99 went thru 5 different variations during the war, from the MkI like that mounted on the Early Zero's (essentially a MG/FF), to a very late war extremely limited production MkV.
I believe that the version mounted in our N1K2 in AH is probably the MkIV (but maybe a MkIII), which was a very capable 20mm cannon, which was somewhere between the MG151/20 and Hispano in capability.
Gustins page, only lists the stats for the Mk1 and MkII.
Nashwan, that is 3 mph faster than the non-MW50 Dora, and only a few mph slower than the P-51. Plus the Spit XIV can easily outclimb, outturn, outaccelerate, maintains E better, and has better armament than either of those two other fighters. Now who's forgetting things? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Yet another pirated thread...
-
I'm not forgetting anything. I fully accept the Spitfire XIV is the best fighter to see combat in WW2 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) It's the Luftwaffles who seem to be forgetting that when they talk about real life, but then they recover their memory when anyone asks if it can be introduced into AH.
to quote Hristos (who shot me in my chute on my first day in AH (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
On the other hand, Spitfire was just an outdated design. Sure more powerful engines were introduced, but the plane could only count on mistakes of enemy pilots or surprise to be effective (any Dora could simply dive away from Spit XIV). WW2 air combat was rarely a 1 on 1 duel, where Spitfire could beat any plane. It was all hit and run, and some plane designers just knew better than Mitchell some 10 years earlier
Why is he so frightened of the Spit then?
-
Sorry, my bad.
Sisu
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
Sorry for pirating the thread guys.
I'll be more careful in the future.
Sisu
-
It's not pirating the thread, it's a direct reponse to what Hristo said in his first post. He even asked for comments.
Karnak, thanks for translating into English what I was trying to say.
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
its that the Lufflewaffles talk the talk, but won't walk the walk.
And that from a guy who doesn't even fly AH ? Now walk the walk and come to AH.
Here's pic for you:
(http://www.stormbirds.com/warbirds/art/images/famous_fighter.jpg)
-
Sorry again.
Sisu
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
Sorry, really, I am.
Sisu
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
By the way, any debater can tell you that attacking the messenger instead of the message is a pretty good sign that the attacker has lost the debate. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
B]
Do not flatter yourself, boys.
It was you Spit types who hijacked this thread all called us Luftwaffles/Luftwobbles whatever. In your words we don't walk the walk, but talk the talk. Is this constructive posting ?
Constructive statement follows:
Dora is better than Spit XIV. Spit XIV can't even be compared to 262.
-
My point about the clipped wings was that it would give a fairs speed boost (i'm not sure of the exact speed increase but for example by changing to a multi-ejector exhaust and removing carburettor ice gaurd you could add 15 mph to the speed).
As such why did the RAF not only use clipped wing spits late in the war if speed was so much more important than turn (i.e. they did sacrifice some speed for turn ability by not having clipped wings)
One more point is should fighters be designed for experts or green pilots because the most immediate tactics to new pilots are to turn. (Yes even FW's i'm sure we've all herad the account of the Ta 152 winning a knife fight with the tempest - if that was a spit 14 the Ta pilot would be dead)
Obviously certain pilots have certain tactics and therefore some planes are better for them but if your talking about good design you've got to take the dweebs into account to.
Thats why i like the spit as in almost any situation it still holds alot of advatages and you can switch from energy fighting to knife fighting as the situation demands. This affords you a margin of error while dogfighting.
When first flying the FW how many times do you die because you made a mistake and put yourself in a situation you shouldn't put the FW in. With the spit your more likley to get away with it. (and in real life you only get to make one mistake (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) )
To sum up why i like the spit :
Because in almost any mark with planes from the same era (allied and axis) you usually have 2 out of speed,climb and turn over your opponent.
And it's so much prettier than all those horrible radial types (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
LOL, believe me, some Spit types put themselves in situations not even F 16 can handle (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Sorry, shouldn't have posted this.
Sisu
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
For the record...
I am not a "Luftwaffe" advocate any more than I am USA, Italian, Japanese or British. I do fly everything. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
My comment is that topics tend to start specific, then someone pops in and takes a tangent. Often this happens when someone has an agenda. As you see, the original thought of the thread was a comparison between different 190 types. Next thing you know we are talking about how the LW guys "talk the talk but won't walk the walk".
Frankly, I hope you guys get your MkXIV. I'll fly it, along with every other plane in the set. I hope Hristo gets his 262 as well (which I will also fly). But tell me something, how does this help the guy trying to compare 190 variants? Just because the word "Spitfire" appears in text doesn't mean we need to open that can of worms again. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
-
The A5 is armed with 2 151s and 2 (Swiss designed) Mgffs.
The cowl machine guns are 7.92 mm.
Two faced FW fans....
The Brit fighter fan club does exactly the same thing. Hyping there planes or whineing about them on any given day. The US iron croud and any given pilot will do the same thing from day to day. This is probably historical.
If we wanted a plane with the lightness of the A5 but the real firepower of the A8 then the A6 would have been chosen. The A5 was the absolute schourge of the 1943 eastern front and channel front. It is the epitomome of the radial engine FW in regards its effectivenss vs its contemporaries. That is why it is in the game.
Turn rate may not be very important for boucing helpless victims. But I find it very usefull for getting that fireing solution to blast some one off my buddies 6. So I fly the FW light in most cases. Of course I would never bother to carry the MGFFs on an A5. And the D9 will only be available light I would imagine.
-
Do not forget 190 instanteneous turnrate. At 350 IAS 190A-8 can turn inside Spit on the deck.
-
Hehehehe...I knew it...I knew it...this exploded in flames!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
oh ,damn...my beer is over! I'll go to the fridge and take another one!!!
(and I'll make some more popcorn)
-
Well I don't think you can rightly call me a Luftwaffe supporter in the least, but I am one of the people who thinks the Spit Mk XIV will be extremely unbalancing.
Personally I think I am pretty much non-nationalistic in this game. Thru most of the beta I flew, and was an ardent supporter of the N1K2 (check my past posts on it), thru most of the pay to play tours, I fly the Pony mostly. I have very vocally advocated the La7, Yak-9U, Ki-84, P-63, and the P-47N. So I guess that makes me a "Russo/Japanese American Psycophant".
But I won't tell you that in RL, I am about 75% descended from Prussians and Bavarians (Hein, Wagner, and Beckner family names), lest you also call me a Luftwobble.... ooops (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
You guys can call each other names and yell back and forth about "My ancestors had better planes than your ancestors" all yah want. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) My concern is in the game.
So why would I advocate a Fw190D9, and not a Spit XIV? Because the Dora has strengths and weakness's, that can be exploited. In my opinon the Spit XIV doesn't.
Yep you just got me to admitt it. For a pure air to air role, I don't think it got any better than a late mark Spitfire.
Jmmcaul said it best: When first flying the FW how many times do you die because you made a mistake and put yourself in a situation you shouldn't put the FW in. With the spit your more likley to get away with it. <snip> Because in almost any mark with planes from the same era (allied and axis) you usually have 2 out of speed,climb and turn over your opponent.
In the Spit XIV you got all 3. And if you believe some reports the damn thing even turns as well as the Mk IX. <Points back to all the AGW posts about how WB's Spit XIV is the "one of the worst modeled", while it is one of the most dominate aircraft in the arena>
So why would anyone fly anything but the XIV? Not to sound arrogant, but the majority of pilots are nothing but sheep, who will follow the pack, and fly nothing but the plane that racks up the most kills.
And you know what.... *Baaaa* *Baaaa* *Baaaa* I would be one of those sheep myself, because I am not going to let myself get killed repeatedly by Johnny Newbie in an aircraft that can do it all performance wise.
If you want proof, just look at the arena today at the number of Spits. Now you want to add 40 mph to it too?
Sorry, but I dont' want to see what would effectively become a one plane sim, to all but those diehard few.
So Nashwan and Karnak, no offense intended, but you can scream, yell, and gnash your teeth all you want about "Luftwobbles" and "1942 Tech", buy most of us just aren't gonna buy it.
Those of us that have years and years of experience in online flightsims know exactly what an aircraft like the XIV will do.
It will ruin it for just about everyone but the Spit fanatics.
Ok rant over....<dons flame retardent suit>
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Originally posted by Hristo:
Do not forget 190 instanteneous turnrate. At 350 IAS 190A-8 can turn inside Spit on the deck.
Yup Hristo...but with A5 is easier to get those 350 Mph (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif),as it accelerates better...and the snapturn will be the same.
You asked why should be A5 better than A8?. I answer: because EVERYTHING but firepower...and 2x20mm arent that bad,too isnt it? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
In the "pirate" matter (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). For Karnak and for anyone else. I am really doubtful that Hristo is scared by Spit XIV. I, for me, am not scared by it...if well modelled.
What do I mean by "well modelled"?. Easy, model the Griffon's torque and low speed Spit handling will suck as it did in RL, requiring constant triming and rudder input...something that SpitIX doesnt need at all.
Model the Spitfire's bad handling at high speed and it will suck ,as it did in RL.
So you get a plane that at low speed feels a lot the torque of its engine, and one that over 350 mph is like a piece of rock. Roll problems and hard controls.
I dont fear that kind of plane. Bring it as it was and I'll kill em as I kill SpitsIX today.
Fw190D9 on the other hand retains its wonderful handling at all speeds, rollrate, and turns better than a A8...it accelerates very well too. If we add MW50 to it (and we should do it), then we have a plane to be scared of. It may be not the better climber nor the faster...but it still is like a powered-up light Fw190A8...and if you dont fear such a plane then you arent very wise (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I fear SpitXIV in good and expert hands...but those hands arent a lot...I never fear a plane I fear the one that rides it. Bring the Spit XIV. Bring the D9. But bring them with all they caracteristics. And we'll see then if the spit is so problematic (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Ram, out
Fw190D9? Ta152H1? The truth is out there
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://members.tripod.com/JG2/)
(http://nottosc.tripod.com/ram190.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
This was an Fw190 thread. I have removed my posts, at least as far as I could. Sorry guys.
As far as the Fw190 goes, I always prefered the A-4 or A-5. But that is probably due to my style; I need a lighter aircraft. Focke-Wulfs are not my expertise, so I shall leave this thread to those whose specialty is the Fw.
By the way, Vermillion, my ancestors were Finnish, not English.
Sisu
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
Karnak-
By no means do you need to remove a post! My comments were never intended towards that end...
Lest this board becomes a place of "post-then-flame" it just seems advisable to try to stay on topic with threads. My opinion, that's all, and it means nothing more than that. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Nothing wrong with lobbying for the Spit XIV, or any other bird. Still, it doesn't have to be inserted in every a/c thread. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Perhaps what we need is another thread to get this stuff out...
-
As you can probably tell i like my spits and would go as far as to say it's the best point defence/interceptance air carft in WW2 as such you could say it makes perhaps the ultimate arena plane (particularly the 14).
As such i think Verm has a point the spit 14 probably would be the most used plane in the arena perhaps to the point when it would be desirable not to have it.
The RAF though did not only use spitfires as it really only did one job so rather than exclude the spit 14 i'd like to see hitechcreations change the arena dynamics planes would only be available in historical proportions and also only available for their historical missions.
With the new mission builder i think it would be an excellent idea to assign planes to players based on what mission they wanted to perform. Also it would be good if the more people participating in the mission the more likley you were to get the premier plane for that duty.
-
Originally posted by Hristo: (First post of thread)
On the other hand, Spitfire was just an outdated design. Sure more powerful engines were introduced, but the plane could only count on mistakes of enemy pilots or surprise to be effective (any Dora could simply dive away from Spit XIV). WW2 air combat was rarely a 1 on 1 duel, where Spitfire could beat any plane. It was all hit and run, and some plane designers just knew better than Mitchell some 10 years earlier (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Comments, please ?
How was my mentioning the Spit XIV hijacking the thread? If Hristos starts a thread and I reply to one of the topics he raises in his first post, surely that is staying on-topic. if it isn't I am genuinely sorry, and I apologise. But I really though I was responding to something he had raised.
As to bringing in the Spit XIV, it was my first ever post on this board. I have since learned just how good the planes was, and I am no longer asking for it. I would like some newer British planes, like the Spit IX HF and LF, which could be dadded with very little effort, and the Tempest, which I thnik is needed.
I haven't really asked for the Spit XIV, I am just trying to point out a certain hypocrisy in Luftwaffe threads, where they constantly tell us that their planes were the best, yet wouldn't unbalance the arena, while the Spitfire is a poor plane but can't be allowed in because it is too good. If somebody makes obviously contradictory comments like that, I find it hard to restrain myself. In future I will try harder.
-
Karnak, my whole point was that, it doesn't matter what nationality or ancestry you are to me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I like aircraft some aircraft from every nationality that particpated in WWII for their sheer beauty engineering wise. Yep, I'm a geek.
What bothers me is what happens in the arena. And any of the guys that have played thru the "AW Fw190 Spindweebs period", the "WB's P-38L like a UFO period", or even the "WB's pre-800 lb Dora period" will tell you how miserable a one plane sim is.
Sorry if it sounded like a personal attack, I apologize.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Vermillion, I wasn't feeling like I was attacked by you, I was just providing some more info about myself.
I remember flying in WBs, using the MkXIV Spit when everyone and his dog seemed to be flying Cannon Hawgs (This is not a reference to AH, please don't start this topic here). I died lots to them.
Sisu
-
Funked sayeth:
"If you look at all WW2 fighters you will notice one thing: as time went on, new versions were always heavier."
Technically that might be true... but the P-51H was a lightweight version of the P-51D (powered by the Merlin V-1650-9 which I don't have specs on). You could also consider the F8F-1 to be the successor to the F6F and it was a lighter airframe mated to essentially the same engine to my understanding.
Verm also thinketh that the Spit XIV doesn't belong in AH because it has no weaknesses... yes it does... short legs and nasty torque effects.... I also suspect that it has high stick forces at the higher end the speed range, and that planes with maneuvering flaps could turn with it long enough to get the kill at the higher speeds.
Hristo, stop being a flight sim bigot. Griping at someone because they "don't play AH" is a personal attack in lieu of having good rebutting evidence to what they say.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
[This message has been edited by SnakeEyes (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
Ram said :"What do I mean by "well modelled"?. Easy, model the Griffon's torque and low speed Spit handling will suck as it did in RL, requiring constant triming and rudder input...something that SpitIX doesnt need at all.
Model the Spitfire's bad handling at high speed and it will suck ,as it did in RL.
So you get a plane that at low speed feels a lot the torque of its engine, and one that over 350 mph is like a piece of rock. Roll problems and hard controls."
Heheheheh just call it G10 version 2 and be gone with it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) If it's realy like that alot of newbies will be very surprised when they fly one (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
NOT AFRAID... NOT AFRAID AT ALL (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Bee
-
...assuming all of that is true, which is assuming a lot.
What is the consensus on the 190A vs 190D? Anything I have read says better climb, dive, speed and turn for the 190D. Short of firepower, the D-9 is flat out better than the 190A.
-
Snake Eyes, I did not mention his playing or not playing AH until that same person stated that us Luftwaffe pilots talk the talk but do not walk the walk ! Talk about hypocrisy !
And you expect me not to answer that ? But now, stop infecting this thread.
Back to original topic:
In first post I mentioned all the reasons why I believe Dora is better than Spit XIV. And why would 262 be even better, only exception being guns which need closer range.
Read first post (dive, deck speed, cockpit visibility). You know what is the best plane in AH right now, IMO ? P 51. For the same reasons. Followed by 190A-8. F4U lacks good 6 view, but is generally better than 190 in other respects. Typhoon would ehter that category too, but dive manuverability and evil flight characteristics degrade the plane too much, IMO.
Bring the Spit XIV. I said that before. 109 can deal with it. 190 needs D version to do it. But in arena rarely do engagements last long that Spitfire advantages come to play.
What can lone Spitfire at 15k do against 5 Doras ? Pretty much nothing. What can lone Dora do at same alt with 5 Spitfire XIVs ? It can survive (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
For example, I have flown G-10 most times in the arena. Although I had just the advantages over P 51 the Spit XIV had over Dora, I was very frustrated fighting it. Only when P 51 pilot fought in his plane the wrong way I had chance to down it. The same will happen to Spit XIV drivers when they fight the Dora.
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
If anybody wants to talk about Fw 190 variants, let me know...
We already had a good Spit XIV thred a few weeks ago, you can scroll down to read that.
-
Didn't see any LW slam (other than the truncated version in the post)... but Karnak apparently edited out his posts (which is why I didn't see anything on that order).
In any event, I made that remark because I've see that as your response a few times now. It just agitates the natives on both sides and ain't real productive.
Getting back to the topic at hand, what do real LW pilots say about the whole issue? Did they largely prefer the earlier 190s over the A8? I do know that they vastly preferred the Dora over the A series. Probably one of the biggest factors is performance speed at alt, which is where the A8 really suffered.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
Snake Eyes, 1 time called few times is demagogic (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Some of greatest authorities in field of fighter combat agree that 190 was superior to its counterparts, particularly Spitfire. While it could still be outturned by one in a knifefight ! Seems that low speed stallfights from WW1 are not the way of WW2 combat.
When Goering asked Galland what does he need and he asked for a squadron of Spitfires, he actually admitted he did it only to annoy Goering. In his own words, Galland considered German planes better. At that time it was 109E vs Spitfire I.
I believe I remember Robert Shaw mentioning Fw 190D-9 as his choice of best WW2 fighter.
If elliptical wing was such a superior design, why didn't Kurt Tank put one of 1930 Heinkel elliptical wings on his plane ? There was obvioulsy a reason.
After few months of playing in multiplayer arena, I think I can recognize some of the most important plane characteristics for air combat. Hint - it ain't turn rate.
It is the ability to make quick kill and get away.
A-8 can kill quicker with its almost double firepower of A-5 (MG FF being left out). But if you look at 4 MG 151/20 as an overkill for anti fighter work and 2 MG 151/20 as just about enough, I am ready to give A-5 the advantage. This might be just the case if one would look at A-8 as a dedicated bomber killer.
Properly flown Dora would be unbeatable for any Spitfire XIV. If Dora has alt, the best Spitifre can count on is a mistake of Dora pilot. And even then, Dora would probably get away.
Take 5 experienced pilots in Doras against 5 experienced pilots in Spitfire XIVs. Let's say they meet at 10k. If Spits have E advantage, Doras simply would not engage. They would dive away and live to fight another day. If Doras have E advantage, Spits would have to fight. They can not dive away. A clear advantage, and a big one. That simple.
-
This is funny, You asked which one was preferred. Well I can actually answer that question somewhat. Let me explain:
My Great grandpa (whom we all called opa) was a mechanic during WWII from 1941 to 1944 (winter) then again he served at the end of the war. While he never ever discussed his years in the war when he died 3 years ago we recieved both his diaries and his photographs. He was an amatuer photographer and we have almost 300 photos of his taken between 1943 and 1945, some of the mechanics and units, some of planes. Many of planes actually (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Recently some members of my family have been doing a family millenium project and transferring his diary into English and recording it. This NOT easy as he was from Manheim, and his dialect is bizarre to translate correctly if german is your second language.
One of the things that has caught my attention was that he recorded opinions of planes when they came into service along the front. As he served on the eastern front all except the last year of the war he DID record the opinions on the 190 variants.
Along the eastern front the Stuka was gradually being replaced by the 190 as a ground attack plane. Opa's diary indicates that pilots were on the whole very unsatisfied with the early 190's for bombing and attacking ground targets. He records many disagreements with pilots about bomb racks, accuracy and effectivness of early 190's. Later when they flew the A8 the pilots were VERY happy with the plane. They liked the added ground fire protection, the extra guns and improved ordinance. They also highly approved of it's speed. Opa, by the way liked the A8 more too, it ended up coming back to him with less holes in it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) He hated Stuka's right from his first diary. He was injured in november of 1944 when the cold weather weakened a support allowing a Stuka to collapse on his leg. This did not appear to improve his opinion of them !
BTW I will be trying to scan some of his pictures over the next few months. Some I believe may have been rare photo's. Many unfortunatly are hard to make out, apparently opa was very amatuer when he started taking pictures. However included are many many photos of various 190's stuka's and other planes I cannot readily identify. Many are of Russian planes as well.
------------------
If your in range, so is the enemy.
(http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/sorrow/sorrow.gif)
[This message has been edited by Sorrow[S=A] (edited 05-24-2000).]
-
Hiya sorrow!!
Hey you have a real treasure in your hands!! that kind of diary and documentation is the kind of something I really pray I can some day see with my own eyes, to read hand-written first-hand reports on WWII fighters...and even more if they are on Fw190!!!!
note that your Granddad wrote on Pilot's opinion on Fw190 regarding ground attack. And I must agree,fw190A8 is better Ground attack plane than A5 would be, because its better weaponry and armor...
you refer to faulty and problematick bomb racks. Remember that Fw190 was designed as a fighter not fighter bomber, and I understand that the first adaptations could have some problems.
Also please note that Fw190s engaged on ground attack were mostly F and G series...maybe some A too...but A was mainly a fighter plane not jabo.
As I believe, first pilots converted from Stuka to Fw190 had a bad opinion of their planes, regardless of its problems with bomb racks. They were used to slow,killer punch and 6-defended (reargunner) Stukas, and they converted to a lightling jabo with 2x20mm guns (not 37mm certainly)...and they had no rear gunner, lack that they ,it seems,found hard to get used to.
I have readed several accounts on that matter and I think that at first nearly all Schlatch pilots on eastern front were real unhappy with the change...until they realized the strongs of the fw190...and the fact that after releasing the bombload they could fight the russian planes instead of turning away to give the rear gunner an arc of fire.
On mechanical matters I dont know...but I used to think that ground personnel was becoming mad with the BMW801 engine because its mechanical computer, seems it was devilish to maintain...did your granddad put anything into his diary about that? What did he thought on that matter? please write it here...FEED ME!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
One last note...we are here discussing Fw190A5 as better or worse fighter than Fw190A8. In Jabo roles I'd always pick A8 over A5, all day (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). So, in fact, we agree (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Thanks for the input sorrow. I hope you keep on putting some of your Opa's diary stuff here in the board. I am mighty interested in the matter.
------------------
Ram, out
Fw190D9? Ta152H1? The truth is out there
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://members.tripod.com/JG2/)
(http://nottosc.tripod.com/ram190.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-24-2000).]
-
First off when you build a plane's armor up and increase it's firepower so it can attack massive bomber formations, you are not making a better fighter, you have built a specialized aircraft 190A8, A5 and A6's were last pure fighter FW's and they match up against all comers, every plane has strengths and faults, that's why they come with pilots (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) and btw this "luftwobble" "sissyfire" toejam needs to stop you boys have a problem, go to the con step into the alley and settle it, 'cuz a bunch of supposedly grown men arguing like my 8 year old over the superior performance of a museum piece is annoying to say the least.
Sorrow, what was your Opa's name? my family is from Mannheim, it would be interesting to see if they knew each other (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (my Opa was in the wehrmacht)
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
Word
-
Hristo... I think your analysis is a bit simplistic. For example, the 190A5 might be a better aircraft in terms of air to air combat with another fighter aircraft than the A8, based on its better powerloading and higher top speed. Whereas the A8 would have been a more capable bomber killer than the A5. Whereas the D9 was a better high altitude fighter than either the A5 or A8(and the D9 also reminds us that more firepower isn't necessarily the answer, as it typically had less firepower than the A8).
In terms of the comment we were discussing (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) ... You said it to me once as well... so that makes two times, and I swear I've seen that comment one other time. So 3 = a few. And even though I = demogogue, that is not true in the context of this particular discussion. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Whats the difference between 190's choosing not to engage by diving and spits choosing not to engage by climbing away (apart from ending up at a higher energy state)
Also you must remember it's not just experts who fly the plane.
And if you dive every time you see fighters who are above you your soon going to run out of height and therefore e and one thing you don't want in a FW is to be low on e.
P.S. If you never make mistakes you can't lose.
-
Thanks RAM, translating this has meant a great deal to my family, many felt they never really knew him while he was alive, this is a sort of glimpse into him we never knew existed.
While techinical information is abundant through his journal, for obvious reasons it has not been translated yet. Technical and mechanical words are often almost impossible to decipher from longhand unless you have an idea of what he is writing about. For now the main work has been on parts of the diary dealing with people and events around him. It also concentrates upon 1944&45, these are in the best condition (they were not dragged around in the field, and opa's writing became better after the winter of '43.). The part I read about the 190's is from these portions, mostly a notation of a conversation between pilots upon the arrival and refitting of several new ones. Mixed with some earlier portions where he mentioned problems with the bomb racks, inaccuracy complaints and difficulties pilots were having. He noted these down as a way to jog his memory as he thought of ideas to correct them or adjustments that could be made.
Two things that are interesting to look at from what I have here. One is a side comment I will post from what I have:
-Diary of Helmut Kern-
last recorded date: april 3 1945
13 pages from that mark.
-
Werner and I have been working all day on preparing the new FW that arrived tuesday. We expect them to be ready by sunday but they want them now. Work is so slow with these new ones as the [Injector? Pressured?] bottle has to be removed and [system? cable?] turned off before they can be used. The Engines on these ones do not sound correct either I think I will have to replace some of the plugs and wires before we let them run full. At least the mes. have new bottles for shmindt and the officers.
-
I am totally guessing here. So don't take me as a bible (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But it sounds like the 190's they recieved had either GM-1 or MW50 installed that they removed and saved for 109's. Unfortunatly he rarely bothered to note versions or types (A,G or F etc etc)
The other is one my dad was faxed yesterday. It appears that in 1943 he met Hartmann. I won't even TRY to quote this one entirely. I don't even have it in front of me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
What he said was that Hartmann flew his plane back to their field camp to be repaired after being fired upon in a combat mission. Opa described him as a quiet sombre mood who spoke in monotones. That night they broke out some liquer to drink with him and he told them many many stories and appeared to cheer up greatly. It seems that he lost one of his pilots that morning in the engagement his plane was shot up in. After the others went to sleep Hartmann stayed up drinking much longer. In the morning they found he had crawled under is plane to sleep, after apparently spending many hours repainting the name of his plane over and over again on the side of the plane. When he awoke he left without saying much to anyone and Opa never had a chance to meet him again. Opa thought him a very odd man who became very intense and frightening when telling stories!
Pzvg- My Opa's name was Helmut Kern.
After the war he returned to Manheim for a few years, then moved to northern germany to work for a brick plant.
Unfortunatly I cannot tell you what unit he was in! I don't really know! He never bothered to say in what we have, and one gets the impression He and his friend werner did not really belong to any one unit- they worked where they were needed under 2 or three different commanders.
------------------
If your in range, so is the enemy.
(http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/sorrow/sorrow.gif)
[This message has been edited by Sorrow[S=A] (edited 05-24-2000).]
-
Wow!!! Incredible stuff sorrow!!!.
That quote from your Opa's diary regarding the Fw190s has caught my attention (heh, how not! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)). quitting factory-equipped MW50 or GM1 systems from Fw190s!! That is a proof that Fw190s WERE fitted with them from factory!...and in a date as late as April 45!.
Also, the story regarding Hartmann is really interesting. He was the Ace of Aces, the biggest Ace in history...and to share a night with him listening his stories...wow.
It's nice, too,that thanks to that diary and your opa's notes you'll know him a bit better than you did. Dont feel sorry about losing all that when he was alive. If he didnt talk too much about it, then is not your faultnor your family's. Now you have his thoughts and experiences and somehow you'll get to understand and know him better. You dont know how much rich you are!
Keep on putting more stuff here, please, Sorrow. Really wonderful information and reading!!!
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-24-2000).]