Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Noir on August 11, 2011, 06:20:17 AM
-
When the 110 gets remodeled would it be possible to have a model suited for BOB, not a rare overpowered subversion? :pray
-
You mean the 110c is overpowered?
-
You mean the 110c is overpowered?
the 110C4-b is correctly modeled, but it has nothing to do in BOB!
-
the 110C4-b is correctly modeled, but it has nothing to do in BOB!
you're not serious are you?
-
you're not serious are you?
I'm dead serious, you find normal that the 110 outruns the spitfire MK1?
-
I suppose it depends upon the situation and circumstances...
http://gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php (http://gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php)
-
Oooo only the "british" mossie (same class two-engined heavy fighter) can outrun the entire '44 luftwaffe?
Seriously. Im lazy to do your research. Plz get some data about which 110 was serving during the BoB, then post its top speed at various altitudes, then it may be changed.
Edit: according to Gonzo's charts, the spit1 is faster with wep, climbs better up to 13K, accelerates much better, turns tighter and quicker... what else you want?? LOL!
-
I'm dead serious, you find normal that the 110 outruns the spitfire MK1?
you're seriously wrong. the 110-c models started out being escort fighters in the battle of britain, heavy losses from hurricanes and spits, which could out turn the 110, forced the germans to put them to different uses. the c4b model was the first fighter/bomber model, they used the db601-n engine 1050-1100hp each.
-
the c4b model was the first fighter/bomber model, they used the db601-n engine 1050-1100hp each.
isn't the BOB 110C4 supposed to have the DB-601A-1 engine?
The charts only tells one side of the story, a 110C4-B will bnz a spitfire mk1 quite easily.
-
isn't the BOB 110C4 supposed to have the DB-601A-1 engine?
The charts only tells one side of the story, a 110C4-B will bnz a spitfire mk1 quite easily.
Like I said, depending on circumstances or situation...
It is possible to catch a P-51D in a 109E if you catch the pony with his pants down...
-
isn't the BOB 110C4 supposed to have the DB-601A-1 engine?
The charts only tells one side of the story, a 110C4-B will bnz a spitfire mk1 quite easily.
So... youre requesting for this: even tho the spit1 eats the 110c for breakfast, its still too über and you wanna degrade it, so it would have no chance even with an alt advantage.
Very nice. You have problems killing 110Cs in spits or what?
Btw. in the beginning of the BoB, there werent many spits. Have you heard about the Hurricane mk1 or the Gloster Gladiator? Also the DB-601N engine was ready in '40 Summer.
-
So... youre requesting for this: even tho the spit1 eats the 110c for breakfast, its still too über and you wanna degrade it, so it would have no chance even with an alt advantage.
Very nice. You have problems killing 110Cs in spits or what?
Btw. in the beginning of the BoB, there werent many spits. Have you heard about the Hurricane mk1 or the Gloster Gladiator? Also the DB-601N engine was ready in '40 Summer.
I'm not into trying to degrade anything. I flew the '08 BOB in a 110C4-b and we slaughtered pretty much anything that came our way, to the point that people didn't want to fly the BOB anymore. I just thought it would be nice to have the right plane for the event. Don't read too much in my posts because I'm a member of an allied squad, I like every plane equally.
-
Noir that's a rather misguided attempt to fix problems with the BOB scenario. There are far bigger problems.
I think you read a claim on these forums and parroted it back. I don't think, however, the claim is all that noteworthy to begin with.
There WAS a variant of the 110C-4/B that had DB601N engines. These produced 1200 horsepower. The variant before this produced 1175 horsepower. Total (2 engines) of 50 extra horsepower. Not all that much. However, the 110C-4B had extra drag due to the bomb rack (the "/B" denotes it's capable of carrying bombs).
The small increase in horsepower was only to make up for the lost speed in drag. The 110C-4 and the 110C-4/B were almost the same top speeds. If you removed the draggy bomb rack it would only add about 15km/h.
However, there are a few things to note.
A number of sources say the top speed of the 110C-4 was about 348 or 349 at 22k. Ours makes about 345 at 19k.
This (citing 2 sources) shows 110c-4 top speed separate from 110c-4/b:
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/aircraft/fighters/messerschmitt-bf-110a-c.asp#p7TPMc1_7
Here we have airpages.ru, not always the best but in this case cites 3 different sources at the bottom:
http://www.airpages.ru/eng/lw/bf110c.shtml
Note it says the engine type and speed of 560km/h, not too far off from what we have in-game.
Here we see AH's performance tops off a bit under 350 at 19K or so:
http://www.gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php?p1=110c4b
This is backed up by the current HTC charts available on the homepage:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/scores/genchart.php?p1=59&p2=-1&pw=2>ype=0
I find this VERY strange since in older versions of AH charts supplied by HTC we found the FTH at about 23k or so. The Musketeers archived one of these on their website here:
http://www.musketeers.org/kumori/images/110c4speed.gif
Note that the speed didn't change, just the altitude it best reached that.
On ww2aircraft.net and LEMB there were some comments about 2 types of superchargers on the 110C. The "early" models topped out 4km (4000 meters altitude), and the later were 4.5km. It looks like we have been given the early FTH, but we have late-BOB full-powered spits and hurricanes with +12 boost and 100 octane fuel. Note that the 1100 hp version of the Bf110C was from 1939, as well. This was the same DB601A engine as found in the Me109, basically speaking.
In short: I think somebody read something on paper and freaked out, assuming that's what we had. I think the performance difference is minimal, even IF we had it. In fact, it looks like HTC hamstrung the 110C-4 at one point by lowering the FTH by some 4,000 feet. I don't recall when that happened!
Please consider this plane was a very very early introduction to the game. HTC made several compromises back then to enhance the planeset and include more functionality. We had a K-4 they named a G-10 just to give you more guns options. We had a hybrid typhoon. We had gunpods and bombs on the Bf109F-4. We had bombs on the Bf109E-4. We had a frankenstein Spit9. The P-47D-40 was really first named P-47D-30. Not all aircraft were 100% correct in their naming or their loadouts.
It's most likely they modeled a normal Bf110C-4 and added the /B on the name just because it has the central bomb rack, allowing this plane to perform over a much wider scenario time frame. A Bf110C-4 on the eastern front or in the desert would be nearly useless without its bomb load. HTC could get away with making combined capabilities back then. Today they have a much stricter adherence to specific types.
In short: Quit freaking out about the 110C-4. It looks right compared to all the references I see online. The DB601N issue is a snipe hunt in regards to BOB performance. The real problems are the Hurr1 overmodeling and the bombers being too fast for RAF fighters to chase.
-
damn, i have to give krusty a :aok
gonna be an ugly day... :joystick:
-
The real problems are the Hurr1 overmodeling and the bombers being too fast for RAF fighters to chase.
I completely agree with the bomber speeds, pretty much ruins BoB events. which is a shame because fuel restrictions for the 88s would solve it easily. adding the He111 and Do17 would help too :)
I wasnt aware there were issues with the Hurri I modelling, care to elaborate on that?
-
Roll rate nearly 2x faster than historically tested (if I recall right), some E-retention issues, especially carried over to the Hurr2C make it an ubermonster compared to historic performances.
In short: Needs to be reworked from the ground up. It dominates where it shouldn't.
-
Very nice. You have problems killing 110Cs in spits or what?
I've done the BoB scenario both in Spits and in Bf110s and they almost exactly right. Granted, the Spit1 will easily out turn the 110, so we instead kept them fast and always made sure we had at last 6-7k beneath us. Nose down, the 110 walks away from the Spits without much difficulty. If you factor in the ability to pull neg G, it is even easier.
I feel a Bf110 with engines that have less horsepower will NOT prevent the Bf110 BnZ, but it would make it much harder (like it was in reality). If you put either Bf110 (our current model, or a slower one) in a close escort position, it will show the weaknesses it had historically. In the scenario, we blatantly ignored any such instructions and the results validated us.
-
If you put either Bf110 (our current model, or a slower one) in a close escort position, it will show the weaknesses it had historically. In the scenario, we blatantly ignored any such instructions and the results validated us.
was that because the 88s were so fast that they didnt really need an escort?
-
was that because the 88s were so fast that they didnt really need an escort?
Very possible! In FSO last week we had Dunkirk as a setup. Basically a BOB planeset. Our hurr1's came in some 10,000 ft above the bomber stream and still with our intercept and dive could only make about 3 passes before the bombers were pulling in front of us. I made 2.5 before return gunner fire (made much more effective because of the slower closure rates) killed my engine on the first hit.
Forcing bombers to historic speeds would be a step in the right direction. At least for scenarios and events and such.
-
was that because the 88s were so fast that they didn't really need an escort?
That is another discussion entirely. I was talking about the Spit1 vs the BVf110. We didn't close escort anything, we left that for the Emils.
That said; when I flew a Spit1 in the BoB scenario, we had 2 maybe 3 passes on the bombers. Afterwards, they flew so far from us it would take 20+ minutes to re-engage them, and sometimes more if we wanted to prevent a tail chase which helped the 88s defensive fire. The Hurricanes generally had 2 passes (at best) before the bombers flew hopelessly out of range.
However, the Bf110 and bomber speeds are two completely separate arguments. Arguments that both need discussion, I will admit.
-
was that because the 88s were so fast that they didnt really need an escort?
That too, but the close escort lacks in flexibility. Ive never liked that role. Loose escort/free hunt before the bombers usually works better.
Btw, Deliriums right, the 110 can escape from the spit, just not in level flight. Anyway, the spits a pretty much better fighter aircraft IMO. Asking it to be more über compared to its rivals... well... we cant see it every day.
-
Roll rate nearly 2x faster than historically tested (if I recall right), some E-retention issues, especially carried over to the Hurr2C make it an ubermonster compared to historic performances.
In short: Needs to be reworked from the ground up. It dominates where it shouldn't.
Can you prove these "e-retention" issues for example?
Our Hurricane does 262mph on the deck. The RAF data I have seen suggests ~280mph on the deck for a new aircraft. The speed deteriorated fast in service especially on the earlier aircraft with partly fabric covered wings but that doesn't really concern AH. On the other hand, the Mk.I in AH does over 320mph at it's best alt where the same RAF data I mentioned shows ~317mph.
So the issue isn't as simple as you depict it.
And then there's a weird kink on a speed curve which hints to a 2-speed supercharger:
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/scores/genchart.php?p1=62&p2=-1&pw=2>ype=0)
...Mk.I had a single speed SC.
-
Ive got to say that in the BoBs ive done, although the 110s can dive away, if they stay to fight then the only problem in the spit or hurri is getting enough lead into them, as you'd expect.
-
Can you prove these "e-retention" issues for example?
e-retention is practically impossible to test in AH, and theres no RW data to compare it to. the only way to know if theres something wrong is to look at the flight model, and then the implementation of that model in coad. theres 2 aircraft in AH which I doubt in terms of their modelling of e-retention, but its based on my subjective experience of fighting against them. that doesnt invalidate my doubts - I'm good at evaluating other aircrafts' e-states - but its not quantitative evidence thats needed for proof.
-
So the issue isn't as simple as you depict it.
I wasn't trying to say it was a simple issue. That wasn't my intent.
And then there's a weird kink on a speed curve which hints to a 2-speed supercharger:
...Mk.I had a single speed SC.
Also a good point. I recall that being mentioned before but forgot it when posting my previous reply. Like I said, though, it needs a total re-do from scratch.
-
e-retention is practically impossible to test in AH, and theres no RW data to compare it to.
Exactly my point. That's why it's best not to throw words like that around.
-
if they stay to fight then the only problem in the spit or hurri is getting enough lead into them, as you'd expect.
I had no problems at all with that, set the convergence very close and you'll buzz saw the wingtips off. Again, only the stupid Bf110 pilots will stay and turn fight.
-
There are some things that don't match up to historic values. The fact that they are hard to describe, harder to test for, doesn't negate the fact they don't match up. Like having A6Ms that can follow hellcats in dives, or can zoom up 5000 ft or what have you. Or very draggy I-16s being able to dive on and stay on faster craft in chases where they ought to fall behind quickly. (these are just examples)
The hurricanes have amazing dive and zoom climb performance, coupled with no risk of stalling, very generous roll rate, and top that off with quad hizzos on the IIC, and you get a total package more than any comments or performance capabilities I've read about for the real craft.
going back to your mention of the speeds... Maybe we don't have the 100 octane? I thought we got it for the Hurr1 same time as the Spit1, but going by the following from wwiiaircraftperformance.org:
(http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/hurricane/hurricane-I-level.jpg)
compared to:
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/scores/genchart.php?p1=62&p2=55&pw=2>ype=0)
Interesting to compare. Maybe HTC was going for 87 octane? Doesn't explain the dogleg 2nd gear on the charger, but might explain some of the rest? Also the fade-off on the IIC power curve above FTH also looks abnormal. Also interesting to note that despite different supercharger the IIC had same low-alt speeds on the deck as 100 octane Mk.IA.
-
The Spitfire is over fragile, all marks. The Hurri rolls about 1.5 times faster than it should.
Basically, the Bf110C-4b and Hurricane Mk I don't seem at all handicapped like the Spitfire Mk Ia and Bf109E-4 do compared to later models in their lines.
I think that had these aircraft performed like they do in AH, 1944 would have seen Griffon powered Hurricane Mk XIVs fighting Bf110K-4s.
Remember, the Bf110s got slaughtered before the close escort order was given. That was given due to excessive bomber loses. Only later did Bf109s get tasked with escorting the Bf110s. I am skeptical that the Bf110 and Hurricane responded to control inputs as effectively as they do here in comparison to the Spitfire Mk Ia and Bf109E-4 and I am skeptical that the Spitfire was so massively more fragile than other fighters of its day.
The bomber speed is a whole other issue.
-
The Spitfire is over fragile, all marks. The Hurri rolls about 1.5 times faster than it should.
Basically, the Bf110C-4b and Hurricane Mk I don't seem at all handicapped like the Spitfire Mk Ia and Bf109E-4 do compared to later models in their lines.
I think that had these aircraft performed like they do in AH, 1944 would have seen Griffon powered Hurricane Mk XIVs fighting Bf110K-4s.
Remember, the Bf110s got slaughtered before the close escort order was given. That was given due to excessive bomber loses. Only later did Bf109s get tasked with escorting the Bf110s. I am skeptical that the Bf110 and Hurricane responded to control inputs as effectively as they do here in comparison to the Spitfire Mk Ia and Bf109E-4 and I am skeptical that the Spitfire was so massively more fragile than other fighters of its day.
The bomber speed is a whole other issue.
I thought one of the reasons the 110's suffered such high loses was BECAUSE they were tied to close escort duties and lost the initiative in combat with the RAF interceptors? I'll admit that it's been a while since I read up on the BoB so I'll take your word to the contrary if I'm mistaken.
-
I thought one of the reasons the 110's suffered such high loses was BECAUSE they were tied to close escort duties and lost the initiative in combat with the RAF interceptors? I'll admit that it's been a while since I read up on the BoB so I'll take your word to the contrary if I'm mistaken.
That order certainly didn't help it, but the signs of problems were there in the Battle of France and came to the fore in the Battle of Britain, even prior to the close escort order. It wasn't like it was doing fine until that order was given.
-
That order certainly didn't help it, but the signs of problems were there in the Battle of France and came to the fore in the Battle of Britain, even prior to the close escort order. It wasn't like it was doing fine until that order was given.
you're talking about the issues 3 seat a and b models that used the jumo engines. they didn't suffer as heavy losses in france and poland as the c models did against the spits and hurricanes. mostly due to the obsolete aircraft they were pitted against. it wasn't until the bob that the luftwaffe realized the aircraft were doomed as escort fighters. i believe it was the loss of some 200+ in one month that brought that realization to the forefront.
still, for a supposedly poor performing aircraft with a bad combat record the germans sure made a large number of them and used them in many different roles.
-
The Bf110 was very successful as a night fighter.
-
It was successful, but not a good performer. It didn't take much to be a good night fighter. Bombers didn't fly as fast as they do in AH. I've heard that it was quite unstable with the giant antennae on the nose, and a bit of a handful.
As for its track record during BOB, I don't think you can comment about it being slaughtered because everything the Germans learned up to that point was totally ignored and orders handed down from the top micromanaging every facet of the mission profile. They were hamstrung. It would be like telling a P-51D squadron to only fly below 250mph and to aggressively out-turn anything they see. The end results may suggest the airframe itself was bad but it was more doctrine.
I don't think it was all that GREAT per se, but given that the Western powers were in a race to see who could fight the fastest and highest, the 110C-4 was definitely in the top ranks of speed and altitude performance. If they BnZed the RAF to death the results may very well have been different.
Same thing applies to the Fw190 -- fast and high but turns not so good. IT ended up wiping Spitfires from the skies for about a year or so until the RAF could counter it with the Spit9. If the Fw190 were forced to only fly low close escort inside the bomber stream it wouldn't have done any better than the 110C.
-
Krusty,
Bf110s were not told to do that until the bomber losses were not dropping and were unsustainable. People keep acting like the close escort order was for the entire BoB, but it wasn't and the Bf110 did poorly before that as well.
-
It was successful, but not a good performer. It didn't take much to be a good night fighter. Bombers didn't fly as fast as they do in AH. I've heard that it was quite unstable with the giant antennae on the nose, and a bit of a handful.
As for its track record during BOB, I don't think you can comment about it being slaughtered because everything the Germans learned up to that point was totally ignored and orders handed down from the top micromanaging every facet of the mission profile. They were hamstrung. It would be like telling a P-51D squadron to only fly below 250mph and to aggressively out-turn anything they see. The end results may suggest the airframe itself was bad but it was more doctrine.
I don't think it was all that GREAT per se, but given that the Western powers were in a race to see who could fight the fastest and highest, the 110C-4 was definitely in the top ranks of speed and altitude performance. If they BnZed the RAF to death the results may very well have been different.
Same thing applies to the Fw190 -- fast and high but turns not so good. IT ended up wiping Spitfires from the skies for about a year or so until the RAF could counter it with the Spit9. If the Fw190 were forced to only fly low close escort inside the bomber stream it wouldn't have done any better than the 110C.
Krusty your leather Lederhosen is showing again.
-
Speaking of Rolling (Karnak)
Is it just me, or does the 262 roll REALLY slowly?
-
Speaking of Rolling (Karnak)
Is it just me, or does the 262 roll REALLY slowly?
Honestly, I am not at all the one to ask about the Me262 either historically or in game. I really prefer pistons to turbines.
-
Krusty,
Bf110s were not told to do that until the bomber losses were not dropping and were unsustainable. People keep acting like the close escort order was for the entire BoB, but it wasn't and the Bf110 did poorly before that as well.
I don't know about the 110C but specific to the 109E it WAS most of the BOB. The reason they had only 5 minutes over the target to fight was because they had to circle and form up and stay with the bomber formations as the bombers zig-zagged over France making their way in to the target. They had to rendevouz and if the timing was off they burned more gas waiting.
The Bf109 pilots could have and would have caused a lot more hurt to the RAF if they had just gone in in hunter killer mode and killed the RAF. The squadron leaders were practically begging for the freedom/permission to do so, but were not allowed.
I can only imagine 110C specific orders being just as strict.
P.S. Guppy I'm not saying it's a great plane, just that if you look at it from pure speed and alt, it's not without merit. Doctrine overruled capability. It has qualities the RAF wanted in their own aircraft, but were unable to produce in time. (i.e. whirlwind)
-
Krusty,
Bf110s were not told to do that until the bomber losses were not dropping and were unsustainable. People keep acting like the close escort order was for the entire BoB, but it wasn't and the Bf110 did poorly before that as well.
actually karnak, by the time the 110c made it to full production the luftwaffe command mistakenly determined it was ideally suited to the role in spite of the shortcomings. you are right that the close escort order was not for the entire bob, can't remember what squadron it was but in one month it lost ~220 out of ~230 110s while they tried to fly close escort. soon after that the 110s were pulled from escort duty and the 109s became bomber escorts.