Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: wells on November 28, 1999, 03:12:00 PM
-
I made a chart for v0.39 planes
http://www.iaw.com/~general6/ahchart.htm (http://www.iaw.com/~general6/ahchart.htm)
-
can you give me some more information to your chart? Which type of weapons did you choose for each plane? How much fuel? Did you use wep?
thx
niklas
-
I took 100% fuel, no WEP was used. Weapons were the default load.
-
Thanks Wells
Been meaning to do that, but been too busy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires ;) "
-
wow, both the 190A-8 and Mc 205 seem to pale in comparison to the real things...
-
With 109G10 same thing than 190/c205.. allies conspiracy?
-
The 109's not too bad, but the 190 is really sad. I think the George is outta place too, should be a 400 mph fighter at 20k. It's starting to look like some kind of conspiracy! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
God forbid the American and Brit ac aren't the best... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) again the conspiracy strikes!
Werewo
-
I was looking up some data on the C.205V last night and evidently, the italian version of the DB605 was a copy of an midwar version, and produced around 1475 hp. Which is of course alot less than the DB605 in the G10 is putting out. (At least according to this one source).
I do agree with Wells though that the N1K2 is downright pitiful. But more about that later today, with some solid numbers to back it up.
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires ;) "
-
the G-10 has MW50 and/or GM-1 to boost it's power. I dunno if the Italians had the same systems for their engine?
-
Vermillion,
The license built engine of the "Veltro" was the DB605A-1, the same of the Bf109G-2, with 1475hp at take-off. Not sure about GM-1 injection, some A-1 had it some had not.
Whats difficult to judge is the effect of the C.205 fuselage and wing. The C.202 "Folgore", for example (with the same fuselage and wings of the C.205), had almost the same DB601A of the 109E but was way faster (about 370mph at 20K) and climbed to 20K in less than 6 minutes, much better than the Emil.
Can we do the same thing with the 205/G2 comparison? I'd like to ... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Lets wait for the FM tune.
-
Ok Gatt don't get me wrong (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I was just suprised when I found that 1475 hp rating, figuring it was much higher like the DB605 thats in the later model 109's. Actually it makes more sense given the period of the war.
Was just sharing some information I had, not trying to infer anything from it.
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires ;) "
-
You all forgot that there is everyone's favourite plane, and it is OK.
Stalls are docile and at lowest speed, it is the fastest, it climbs with the best of them, with 25% fuel it goes long way and does TnB quite nice. It's guns shred B 17 in one pass, its pilots are so confident they go HO against 190, they even fire from d12.
Guessed already ? No ? Hint: it has blue nose.
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 11-29-1999).]
-
I have always read that the Mc 205 was a 400mph+ machine, oh well (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
-
-ik-,
the C.205 actually WAS "just" a 400mph kite, at 23,000ft. Without WEP. And should climb to 20K in less than 6 minutes. We are really waiting for the FM fine tuning.
Vermillion,
sorry for my rough english, I didnt want to sound harsch, not at all.
All "Series 5" italian fighters, i.e. the C.205 "Veltro" (Greyhound) the Fiat G.55 "Centauro" and the Reggiane 2005 "Sagittario" (Archer), were engined by the license built DB605A1 (sometimes limited in rpm).
Some prototypes of the G.55 (called G.56) were powered by the mighty DB603A (1,750hp) and armed with 3x20mm. Even the Luftwaffe was impressed by the performance. Take a look at this G55, armed with 2x12,7mm and 3x20mm:
(http://web.tiscalinet.it/gatt/G55.jpg)
[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 11-29-1999).]
-
Gatt, do you have any published sea level speeds for the MC205?
-
Wells,
we have a 325mph at sea level.
-
Hristo has it right.
Anyone noticed lately how "uber" the P-51 is here? (It really has no bad characteristics here)
Also notice how we have a F4U-1 instead of the F4U-4, and the Fw190A8 instead of the Fw190D9, both of which would have fit the planeset better? And incidentally been as fast or faster than the Pony?
I smell a "HT loves the Mustang" conspiracy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Just kidding
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires ;) "
-
For all I know, Dale's probably getting his yaya's before relinquishing the P-51D back to the realm of reality - hehe
Hey, it's still just a beta!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
129 IAP VVS RKKA
-
Now that would be funny (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
If your in range, so is the enemy.
-
Vermillion:
Dunno, I would rather have the A-8 than D-9 based on WB.
//fats
-
After all the stories of WB Dora weight/overweight/CG etc, I was expecting a fresh start of 190 in AH.
We didn't get the Dora, but have to fight P-51D and its AH FM in a bomber killer.
-
Anyone consider that the P-51D might have actually been superior?
It is also be worth considering that the P-51D was late war and it got generous doses of "What was Successful Before" or "This is What is Needed to Compete Against its Advisaries". The P-51D is competing, with planes currently in the arena, that are earlier WW2 and less advanced.
I think one should back up opinions with data if one is to achieve some sort of foundation to ones claims. (WTG Verm (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) )
I might like the P-51 only because a friend of my Dad let me sit in it when I was around 10. I might like the 190 if I had been born on another continent and had the same repeated in that fine plane. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I choose my own Hero's! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Mino
-
Not THAT superior, Minotaur.
It has all the best qualities of most planes, except roll rate.
And we get to fight it with planes it outmatches in most important areas. And still it gets more advantages it should not have.
-
Hristo;
cc
Please supply HTC with data you are referencing.
For myself I would find it interesting as well. My only foundation is "How it Flies in a Game".
Good Luck! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Mino
-
It flies wonderfully in the game. Like a toy.
It has more down elevator than 109.
It climbs with 109 right now.
And I believe that P 51D wing was no slow speed design. This one does TnB amazingly good. Zooms from the runway if needed.
Fuel modifier helps it, but I won't argue that.
Its guns are devastating. I wish I could have those in 190 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
But most important, it is, among these advantages, put to fight planes it historically outmatched. Planes that would compete with it on the same footing are left out.
Instead of 109K-4 we have 109G-10, instead of 190D-9 we have 190A-8.
Don't get me wrong, 190 can hold its own here, but only because P 51D pilots are too sure of themselves. 109G-10 is not even seen in the arena nowadays.
Ever wondered why some die hard 190 pilots did not switch to this 190 we have ? They still fly Pony.
-
Hristo:
Why do you seem to feel that the K-4 is superior to G-10?
"Bf 109G-10
Deliveries of the G-10, which was planned as a supplement to the K-series and which represented a connecting link between it and the G-series, began in the autumn of 1944. The G-10, production of which ran from October 1944 until the end of the war, resulted from conversion of older series, like the G-6 and G-14. As a result it was referred to as a 'bastard aircraft' in the Bf 109 type sheet. It was not actually a further development of the G-series, rather it represented an attempt to bring older, repairable machines up to the standard of the K-4, which was being manufactured in parallel, through a conversion process. The object was to supplement production of the new K-4 with the repaired aircraft of almost equal value in the cheapest manner possible."
"Bf 109K-4
While the K-1 to K-3 series, which got no further than the project level, were to retain the DB 605A power plant, the K-4 was conceived around the DB 605D and accordingly differed little from the G-10. In contrast to the G-10, K-series aircraft were not conversions of older machines, and unlike G-10 the vast majority of the aircraft delivered were equiped with the DB 605D engine, although a few exceptions are known among the early series aircraft which retained the DB 605AS engine...
...Thus the deliveries of the K-4 obviously began some time before those of the G-10...
...Like the G-10, MW-50 power boost was standard equipment on the K-4, and as a result the complete engine designation was DB 605DM."
The book; Messerschmitt Bf 109 F, G and K series by Prien & Rodeike, goes on to list the differenes between G-10 and K-4 which are largely external differences such as antenna locations, access hatches and so on. Both aircraft had same engine, almost identical fuselage and identical wing. Where does the marked difference come? Only thing I can think of is if we have DM 605AS equiped G-10, admitedly then the G-10/AS would be not like K-4. If we do have DM 605DM equiped G-10, then I can't see much differences between the two which would be notable in AH.
//fats
-
You are right, fats, G-10 and K-4 are almost the same plane.
It is just that I used to shoot P-51D much more easily in WB HTH in my 109K-4, than in this G-10 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
But then again, why are we left without the beautiful Dora, that's the real question.
-
First of all, the 6 .50s in the pony are not better than 4x20mm in my experience. When I get pissed off at dyin in HO's driving the Pony, I switch to the N1k and splode people like hydrogen filled baloons. Now I am not a great gunner, so others get better use out of the Pony's guns than I can, but they certainly aren't "uber" .50's. Put 6 of 'em on target at convergence... and yeah toejam blows up good, but it should. I also don't see 51's shredding B17's in a single pass. I can't do it, and most others I see trying certainly can't. Sure, there are a few experten around who shoot 20% gunnery and can do it, but that's because they are abnormally good gunners. For your average Shmo like me, the .50's in the Pony seem to have their traditional strengths and weaknesses. They have a high rate of fire, lots of ammo, and good range but with a downside of lower lethality compared to cannons. Please, what takes me 3 passes to kill in the 51 just freakin' evaporates when I'm flying the C.205 or the N1k in a single burst.
Second, enough about the Pony doing TnB. That's plain crap, it can TnB compared to a 190 yes, but the A8 is a truck. What the Pony CAN do is E fight very well. A good pony driver can maintain E, use the verticle, and "out turn" better turning planes for a short time. Get it into a pure low E TnB situation however and it's dog meat to the N1k, Spit, La5, Macchi, or even the 109. Want to prove me wrong? Do some sustained turn rate tests and post your results, but this anecdotal stuff says nothing.
Gawd, I can just imagine the wailing and crying that's going to go on when a few experten start "out-turning" "better" planes in the F4U. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Lord help us if we ever get a P38!
Their may be some issues with the 109's power, or the Pony's climb rate, I don't know. The rest of this anecdotal stuff you guys are whining about is just not true in my experience. Sure there are a few experten who can do amazing things in the plane, but that's because they are really good, not because the plane is too good.
I know it's hard to admit, but when you get your bellybutton handed to you it's likely the PILOT, not the PLANE that's responsible. Don't confuse uber-pilots with uber-planes. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
Personally, I have no problem killing P 51D. But it got harder than it was 2 versions ago. Period.
-
Lephturn:
I don't think people are complaining about the sustained turn rate of the P-51. They stink in AH, and they should stink.
What they are complaining about is that the P-51 has very mild handling at low speeds, when historically the laminar flow wings of the Mustang had fairly unfriendly low speed handling characterisitics.
Also, maybe I am not as well read as you, but to my knowledge the Mustang was traditionally a BnZ fighter, NOT an E-figter. I don't remember too many accounts of Mustangs outlooping 109's (or any other plane for that matter).
There is a drastic difference between the two, with an E-Fight being the use of manuevers in the vertical to gain angles. At least thats according to Shaw.
Yes you can E-Fight a Mustang, but that wasn't historically one of its strengths. Remember the historically poor climbrate?
And thats probably another one of the complaints right now. Right now, you can fight a Mustang in the vertical with little to no fear, and its quite effective. I should know, cause thats what I am flying right now.
I do however agree with you that the guns on the Mustang seem about right and they are not compareable to the BFG's of the Fw190 & N1K2.
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires ;) "
-
--- Vermillion: ---
There is a drastic difference between the two, with an E-Fight being the use of manuevers in the vertical to gain angles. At least thats according to Shaw
--- end ---
Well it's been 4 years since I last read Shaw, but then I read the same maneuvers _every_ night for months. And those were the E fight part, cause of my obsession with Fw 190 in CK.
Anyway the good ol days a side, I recall Shaw saying that E-fiting is used to gain position and you often _lose_ angles in the process. And that infact it is good to lose angles to lure the A-fiter to follow you, cause every moment the sittuation looks better and better for him up untill the E-fiter strikes back. Heh well anyone care to check, I don't know where my Shaw is <gasp!>. Hmm now I really want to go back and re-read all the stuff, maybe I'll learn some flying.
//fats
-
And from fighting concepts, back to plane performance (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Try power-off stall. Right now P 51D stalls at lower speed than 109G-10. I did not measure it accurately, but it is roughly 15-20 mph difference. Take this in TnB/stallfight against 109, and see how easily you kill it.
Also, try zooming in P 51D till 0 speed. It will go there, than hammerhead almost by itself. Like a toy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
I joined the Beta Team I believe early ver 34. Basically my only knowledge about these planes is from other simulations, books, movies or conversation. A weak foundation, I absorbed this game maybe from a different perspective than most.
As I was new too this game (I still am), it was wildly different too anything I had played before. There were three things that really impressed and surprized me about this game at that time.
First, was how many 109's there were up. It seemed by far that this was the most favorite and popular plane. Granted, at that time there were only 3 fighter planes to the set.
Second, was how successful this 109 plane seemed to be. I thought to myself "Wow! What a Wonderful Plane". Sadly, I have never liked it very much. I could not get it to turn the way I liked.
Many times phrases broadcast on the global channel were of the like "If you don't fly the 109 you are just basically a target". At that time the 109 backed up that claim.
Third, was this player Mitsu. I was really astonished at the number of kills per sortie Mitsu could get. Mitsu turned out to be a very nice individual, not some sim demon I imagined at first. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I believed Mitsu flew the Spit, thusly so did I.
Since I started playing, I have gotten a little better. So I can not actually compare the changes in plane performance across the different ver's. I read this forum alot and I can tell they must have changed.
Before 51 pilots complained, now 109 pilots complain. So obviously HTC does react and makes changes. This gives me pride and I am happy to be involved in this Beta!
Maybe just another perspective to condsider (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) or to dump on (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif).
Mino
-
A more appropriate opponent for the P-51D would be the Fw 190D-9.
Hell a Fw 190A-4 was good for 350 on the deck and 415 at 20k.
It's a beta though!
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 12-03-1999).]
-
I don't agree with that narrow definition of E fighting Verm. It's a tough call, because all air combat is E fighting. What I mean in any case, is that the 51 has low drag and can retain it's energy very well. It doen't climb or loop the best of course, but if you start a fight with an E advantage and use the verticle, you can maintain that cushion against any plane in the arena if you are careful. You can stay fast and pull manuevers in the 51 without burning as much E as the others will. Was that the traditional strength of the 51? I don't know, but it agrees with what I've seen in WB and other sims. Was it historically used that way? Not really relevant... everybody essentially BnZ'ed every plane there was if they could, it would be the exception when somebody got in a true TnB situation. What is relevant is whether the strengths and weaknesses of the plane are modelled correctly. The seem to be in my not-so-learned opinion.
The low speed handling thing... I have no idea. A Pony at stall is soon to be a dead Pony, so it doesn't impact my fighting online. If you guys think there is an issue there.. then test and post what you find, but this anecdotal stuff gets us no-place.
Glad we agree on the .50's btw. I think the .50's feel right-on where they always seemed to be p-shooters in WB.
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
Stall speeds are not anecdotal. Go test it and watch the gauges.
And don't think you don't use it in combat in your P 51. You do, because the plane takes this docile behaviour to higher speeds too. Slow speed stall is just a way to point this out.
Also, I consider 109 the best E fighter, because of the best E income. It could quickly establish E parity against P 51 in early versions. Now it's a dog ;(
-
And here's some anecdotal data from the Arena:
Took a Pony, 50% fuel. Climbed at 165 IAS and 4250 fpm at 5k. At 20k it was 2750-3000fpm.
Found a low B -17, dove on it, took its wing in 1 pass(awarded a kill, if someone suspects (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)). I aimed for wing, started firing at d5, pulled up at d2, convergence 300 for all guns. After that got in ack range, lost engine and radiator, went for a ditch.
109 tried to vulched me, but augered.
How's that for a Hollywood movie Mustang ?
P.S.
I use different handle when flying UFO planes (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 12-03-1999).]
-
Hristo;
I agree that the are some (maybe major)problems with this ver's 51. I flew both the 109 and 190. The 109 won't turn, and the 190 seems to be always stalling. I am not good enough , in either plane, to rate ACM abilities. These two things I do not notice flying the 51. Guns for HO seem very nice, 3 kills in that fashion from a 190.
I ran your climb test. I set OttoClimb speed to 165 before take off, 50% fuel. I got the plane clean and as soon as speed went above 165 I hit OttoClimb.
My VAS pegged at 4 for about 4 seconds then dropped to 3.5 sustained. 3.5 was the max sustained VAS I could acheive. I do something wrong?
I ran an identical test on the 109, the VAS stay pegged at 4 until the plane crossed about 12k. VAS slowly droped to 3 around 23k. That about sound right?
Good Luck to you! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Mino
[This message has been edited by Minotaur (edited 12-03-1999).]
-
Minotaur, I stand corrected at VSI value of P 51D at 5k. I am getting 3750 fpm (still 0.39 version).
My appologies, I will pay more attention to the gauge next time (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
The FW-190A8 is not less appropriate than the D9. The number of late mark 190As that P-51s encountered in 1944 & 1945 is FAR higher than the number of D9s encountered.
The numbers for the 51 may actually be off (I'm the wrong guy for that math), but when it comes to the historical perspective, the 190A8 and 51D are classic opponents, as are the 51D and 109G6. These aircraft were all manufactured in the 1000s and saw plenty of combat throughout 1944 and further.
The 190D and F4U-4 are essentially 1945 planes, as that is when they both saw the majority of their action.
PS - Those of you who haven't heard much about the P-51 being able to E-fight should enroll in RIF (Reading Is Fundamental). I can send you some book recommendations (although you must be able to read English rather than German).
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
snake eyes, the 109G-6 was introduced at the beginning of 1943, the P-51D in the early spring of '44 I believe. I think the proper contemporary you are looking for would then be the 109G-14 (all included MW 50, and over 1000 with the AS conversion [larger supercharger] for increased high altitude performance).
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by -ik- (edited 12-06-1999).]
-
Actually, I meant to type just 109G. I have no idea why I added the 6. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
Hristo wrote:
"Personally, I have no problem killing P 51D."
Well, I have a big problem, as P-51's seems to be much faster than my bullets, I mean they can run really fast after loosing their surprise / alt advantage. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Of course, there are good P-51 drivers, which get focus on fighting instead of a running, but not as many as should be...
ps. <S> HiTech, although was little warping fight, You nicely sucked all my E with Your stang.