Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Wilbus on October 22, 2002, 04:21:14 PM
-
Basicly, all bombers vs 109 E, THEY ALL FARGIN OUTROLL IT!!!!!
Why on EARTH didn't LW use the Ju88 as an escort instead of the 109 during Battle of Britain??? Bit worse climb sure but that's about it, can friggin turn with the 109 aswell, just like the A20 etc.
But then again, we ALL know the Ju88, B17, A20 etc outrolled the 109 E. :rolleyes:
*venting mode off*
-
Extracted from this (http://www.bf109.com/flying.html) page:
a. Owing to the cramped Bf 109 cockpit, a pilot can only apply about 40 lb sideway force on the stick, as against 60 lb or more possible if he had more room.
b. The designer has also penalized himself by the unusually small stick-top travel of four inches, giving a poor mechanical advantage between pilot and aileron.
c. The time to 45-degree bank of four seconds at 400 mph, which is quite escessive for a fighter, classes the airplane immediately as very unmanoeuvrable in roll at high speeds.
In short, this is what HTC seems to be attempting to simulate. My feeling is that HTC penalizes the 109 starting at to low a speed. BUT... I also have not tested it against the data on this page.
-
its porked
-
c. The time to 45-degree bank of four seconds at 400 mph, which is quite escessive for a fighter, classes the airplane immediately as very unmanoeuvrable in roll at high speeds.
I have the 109 E (part of it) Manual together with RAF test report, it was a bad rolling plane in high speeds. The Spitfire mk 1 and 109 E had the same rate of roll at 400mph (as stated by the report). Thing is, 109 E can't roll at all in any speed.
It should roll bad but not as bad as it does in low speeds, and spitfire mk 1 definatly shouldn't outroll it. Ju88, B17, A20, B26 etc DEFINATLY SHOULD NOT OUTROLL A FIGHTER!
-
why bother asking
-
I brought this up a while back, don't remember if HTC ever commented on it.
Actually, the 109E isn't porked if you look at that chart. That chart says time to a 45 degree bank. Looks to me at 200 mph, the 109E takes about 1 second to roll 45 degrees. If I remember correctly, it took about 8 to 9 seconds to roll 360 in AH. 45x8=360.
On the other hand, the Spitfire I, according to that chart, should have a whopping 15 second 360 roll time, but it does a 360 roll in 6 seconds. The 109F4 also rolls a LOT faster than the 109E4, I believe it was turning in a 360 roll of somewhere around 5-6 seconds also. The later Spits, if I remember correctly, took 4-5 seconds to do a 360 roll. All of this is in AH, no idea how long they took in real life.
-
Its called SNAP ROLL!!!!
lol "duh Marge its called JET LAG!!!!!!! can't u say JET LAG!!!! JET LAG!!!!!!!"
-Homer Simpson
-
Its called SNAP ROLL!!!!
UH?
-
Must resist the urge to flame the H2H tard.......:D
-
Doing my best but hard...
-
all i am saying is use ur rudder in your rolls......don't let alerions do all the work................
and i really don't know what ur talking about i can keep the 109e-4 with any american british russain plane when it comes to rolling the only plane i can't keep with is 190's and ur not sposed to keep with them in rolls.........
the 109e-4 rolls fine if u can get to perdicting ur enemy by the type of tricks they like to pull u can easily out smart them (ex. 190 rolls on its back and dives away.......... let him go, do a split s goin up and gain alt on him if he tries to come back at u from underneith he'll stall out then u just come around on his high side while he is recovering and next thing u know is he's dead)
no need for insults
-
Yes no need for insults.
But please do try saying that after you've experienced the CT in maybe BoB setups.
If you have no trouble following someone in the E-4 with rolls, then you're playing with all the wrong guys. Two or three rolls with enough speed and any plane can shake the E-4 with ease. CT:Lybia and BoB shows us that.
-
nod stay in head 2 head or else know what you are talking about.
You are constantly wrong in most everything you post. Even in your Sig. You dont what this threads about.
Anyone in this thread could kill you in a 109e in our sleep.
The roll rate of ther spit 1 is wrong.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
nod stay in head 2 head or else know what you are talking about.
You are constantly wrong in most everything you post. Even in your Sig. You dont what this threads about.
Anyone in this thread could kill you in a 109e in our sleep.
Finally SOMETHING I agree with you on. :D:D:D
-
Think we all know how to roll planes in here Nod, think we all know we can use rudders aswell. Doesn't matter though, any plane in AH will still outroll the 109 E, quite obviously, acording to the chart, the spitfire Mk 1 rolls too fast (which would lead me to think the hurricane 1 rolls too fast as I've never heard it rolled better then the spit 1). Looking at the chart the Spit should have a 2 second roll to 45 degrees in 200mph, right now it does it bellow 1 second so it is more then twice as fast as it should be.
-
hmmm.......
well i guess u are right.....i am use to fighting temps 262's and spit14's that are spraying constatly..... i guess i don't play with experianced enough players too.........and i think insults are not needed Wotan/Innominate ok?......... if u are refering to the quote that about bombers goin down in one pass.... well that is from a book i bought a used book store callled "Flying forts" and its by Martin Candian................its a quote not a fact and a quote is something some one said not a stated fact so therefor it can't be wrong it was someone's opinion............also wotan i am not wrong in most of my posts the only main points i argue is B-17's duribility and Kamakazi's
my (serious) apolgies for posting,
-NOD2000
-
Originally posted by NOD2000
"NO bomber ever whent down in one pass NEVER did it do that no matter what plane attacked...unless it killed both pilot and the copilot" so y does that happen in AH...........
You have never read a book about Galland then. Seem to recall from his diary that he took out 2 B-26's with R4m's in one salvo :)
-
Galland is not necessarily a reliable source, but i've read of probably dozens of instances of bettys going down on one pass - wellingtons reportedly went down quite easy, as did liberators i doubt many nightfighters needed got the oportunity to make a second pass and they put down hundreds of bombers
-
Originally posted by whgates3
Galland is not necessarily a reliable source, but i've read of probably dozens of instances of bettys going down on one pass - wellingtons reportedly went down quite easy, as did liberators i doubt many nightfighters needed got the oportunity to make a second pass and they put down hundreds of bombers
Yep. Don't let those WW2 aces fool you they really don't know anything. Lies....all lies.
__________________
-Nacho
(http://www.itsmysite.com/nachosigs/images/aero_innovatf3.jpg)
-
I think we need some chlorine in the H2H gene pool.