PDA

View Full Version : What happened to Bf109 in 1.11?



XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 09:36 AM
Hello Oleg! FB is truly a great game!!

However, I was wondering that what on earth happened to Bf109 in the 1.11 patch (comparing to 1.1b)? I find it has been seriously downgraded in performance.

My guess is that it has something to do with the increased radiator drag in auto setting. It's ok that now I must learn to use manual radiators, but general feeling still is that 109 has become even more a duck to russian fighters. The axis situation was gloomy enough in 1.1b, but now it's next to hopeless! Maybe radiator drag is a bit too high for the 109, or speed little too low?

Not to mention the easy overrev when using manual prop pitch. To me this extra boost was the only chance to outclimb russian fighters and use b&z. But now the manual prop pitch is too dangerous to use, and the auto pitch doesn't give enough power. So for example I find myself unarmed against the better perfoming Lagg and Rata in my F2 and Emil.

Things seemed much more balanced in 1.1b (the russians still had advantage, but we too had a chance), is there no going back to that direction? How can there be such a huge difference between beta and final?

Best regards
T_Rom

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 09:36 AM
Hello Oleg! FB is truly a great game!!

However, I was wondering that what on earth happened to Bf109 in the 1.11 patch (comparing to 1.1b)? I find it has been seriously downgraded in performance.

My guess is that it has something to do with the increased radiator drag in auto setting. It's ok that now I must learn to use manual radiators, but general feeling still is that 109 has become even more a duck to russian fighters. The axis situation was gloomy enough in 1.1b, but now it's next to hopeless! Maybe radiator drag is a bit too high for the 109, or speed little too low?

Not to mention the easy overrev when using manual prop pitch. To me this extra boost was the only chance to outclimb russian fighters and use b&z. But now the manual prop pitch is too dangerous to use, and the auto pitch doesn't give enough power. So for example I find myself unarmed against the better perfoming Lagg and Rata in my F2 and Emil.

Things seemed much more balanced in 1.1b (the russians still had advantage, but we too had a chance), is there no going back to that direction? How can there be such a huge difference between beta and final?

Best regards
T_Rom

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 09:46 AM
well, i must comment breifly that, though it says explicitly in the readme that the "closed/auto" flaps drag ratings were fixed, it is still way off... i threw my K-4 into a 90 degree dive at the dirt, and low and behold... the flaps were as wide open as they could be. If the whole principal behind them is wind resistance, how in gods name can they be open in a dive? ... hmm, intriguing.

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 11:01 AM
I don't have factual data to comment on your findings.. However, I found that the AIs cannot use properly the hardware they get (the 109s).

If they could make good use of their Energy, then the effects of whatever little discrepancy there may be between the simulated 109 and the real one would be greatly lessened. Currently even the later the 109s have problem fighting I16s..

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 11:52 AM
T_Rom wrote:
- Hello Oleg! FB is truly a great game!!
-
- However, I was wondering that what on earth happened
- to Bf109 in the 1.11 patch (comparing to 1.1b)? I
- find it has been seriously downgraded in
- performance.
-
- My guess is that it has something to do with the
- increased radiator drag in auto setting. It's ok
- that now I must learn to use manual radiators, but
- general feeling still is that 109 has become even
- more a duck to russian fighters. The axis situation
- was gloomy enough in 1.1b, but now it's next to
- hopeless! Maybe radiator drag is a bit too high for
- the 109, or speed little too low?
-
- Not to mention the easy overrev when using manual
- prop pitch. To me this extra boost was the only
- chance to outclimb russian fighters and use b&z. But
- now the manual prop pitch is too dangerous to use,
- and the auto pitch doesn't give enough power. So for
- example I find myself unarmed against the better
- perfoming Lagg and Rata in my F2 and Emil.
-
- Things seemed much more balanced in 1.1b (the
- russians still had advantage, but we too had a
- chance), is there no going back to that direction?
- How can there be such a huge difference between beta
- and final?
-


If you have any problems with Bf109's radiator settings, jump right into a La7, close the radiator and enjoy the extra time, about 4 Min with radiator closed vs 3 1/2 with radiator open, before the engine starts overheating. In addition you will also like the increased performance e.g. 610 km/h with radiator closed vs 540 with radiator open (at 1000m altitude), a difference of 70 km/h !!!

Russian physics made by Maddox.


enjoy, schofei





Message Edited on 09/09/0310:53AM by schofei

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 12:17 PM
WUAF_Mj_Hero wrote:
i threw my K-4 into a 90 degree dive at the
- dirt, and low and behold... the flaps were as wide
- open as they could be. If the whole principal behind
- them is wind resistance, how in gods name can they
- be open in a dive? ... hmm, intriguing.


You understood it wrong. The princible behind them is cooling the engine, not wind resistance. They are opening as wide as the engine needs air, even in a dive. They are closing when the engine cools down.

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 12:24 PM
Don't know what your talking about.

The red side was filling up fast last night, so I took out the 109G2 (1943 server).

Wow - what a joy to fly. Was BnZ'ing, TnB'ing - musta ripped up a few p39's and tore up a Hurricane on a nice dive.

Only time I was even shot at was when I cut back throttle on the deck to finish off a smoking p40.

Again, it was a joy to fly the 109 - maybe it's from my IL2 days when it would overheat and engine would die in 30 seconds (so it seemed - lol).

Maybe you need to examine your technique's?


(also - I love to kick in manual prop and pull just a few more rpms - watch that baby climb!!!)

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 01:37 PM
one P-39 just putclimbed my 109G-2, i was behind him, he started to turn tight to right, so, i lag pursuited him, just for gaining speed, while P-39 still turnd tight.
i had some 420 kmh when he get at my six, i let him to go ther, his nose pointed bout 10 degrees still away from me, i started to tighten my turn and started to climb too, i thought he could not follow me after he just made 2 tight cicrles pullin hard, but what, he just started to follonw me in tight spiral climb! thats something i call ODD.

and i had 25% of gas left and my plane havent gained any hits from anyone. i wonder how that was possible for that. this happened in online. still u recon say that G-2 is joy to fly, i dont think so.

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 02:00 PM
IMHO, the G-2 and G-6 are okay, with practice - it's the G-10 and G-14 which are odd, in terms of climb performance.

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 04:24 PM
Time to QUIT WHINING and start posting test results, even tracks.

Then if you fly less than well perhaps someone who doesn't can correct your numbers.
It's hard to counter "I got caught, it's not right!" except in similar vague terms.

I think that top speed and climb may do it here.


Neal

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 05:04 PM
Hi all
I tend to fly the 109 F2/4 online as it was the only aircraft that held the remote chance of turning with the La5/7. Now the patch seems to have taken that away so i,ve given up and gone to flying the La5 as this is the only way to even the fight now.
Yes i have a big interest in WWII and knew that the russian aircraft from 1942/43 onwards were superior in every way, and no with out actually being able to fly either theres no way of knowing which is better e.t.c for myself. But (theres always a but) every book that i have read regarding the two sides never put the 109 and La5 as far apart as the patch seems to have done.
Diablo...

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 05:34 PM
^did Oleg know that in 6000m are -30?C /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Steinhoff write in his Book "Street of Messina" that he must "CLOSE" the radiator in 6000m because of undercooling the engine at high speed !

also there is a "schnellflugstellung" shown in this picture which is ca. our radiator 2
http://mitglied.lycos.de/kubanskiloewe/109kuehlklappen.jpg

The overheating Problem make using MW50 without overheating unimpossible; G14 f.e. cant reach 600kmh in 6000m without overheating.
With 103% you need radiator 4 for no overheating but this is slow your plane down/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
So for flying 109´s in 1.11 its better to close radiators and fly with 100% or lower !

On the other Hand you can climb with a JUGD10 in 6min to 6000m with pitch 95,110%+water,330-340TAS and continious trim up. In 5000m it overheat a bit but no matter because in 6000m it is cool again with the same settings/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


http://mitglied.lycos.de/kubanskiloewe/110missing.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 12:40 AM
109s are mostly fine Imo, atleast for early war 109s.. now G2 is actually bit overmodelled yes about turn perfomance and climb (but only by little), G6 is much worse than G2 than it should.. climbs of late 109s seem bit low too, like Yak1B climbing with 109 G-10.. Though these are very minor issues and are unlikely to ever get fixxed.. I would just hope we would proper amount of ammunition for MG151 in F2, F4, G2, and G6s.. Could surely need that extra 80 rounds /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

____________________________________



Official Sig:



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/shots/Vipez4.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 11:49 AM
"i was behind him, he started to turn tight to right, so, i lag pursuited him, just for gaining speed, while P-39 still turnd tight.

i had some 420 kmh when he get at my six, i let him to go ther, his nose pointed bout 10 degrees still away from me, i started to tighten my turn and started to climb too,

i thought he could not follow me after he just made 2 tight cicrles pullin hard, but what, he just started to follonw me in tight spiral climb! thats something i call ODD."


1. The initial speed of the P-39 could have been a lot higher than you think.

2. "i started to tighten my turn and started to climb too" - this part, is a fatal mistake. You should have ceased turning and started going vertical immediately.

If you thought that going immediately vertical was not an option because the distance the P-39 was behind you was too close, then you managed the merge wrong, and lost more E than you thought, during the process where you described it as "lag pursuit."









-----------
Due to pressure from the moderators, the sig returns to..

"It's the machine, not the man." - Materialist, and proud of it!

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 12:12 PM
diablotye wrote:
- Hi all
- I tend to fly the 109 F2/4 online as it was the only
- aircraft that held the remote chance of turning with
- the La5/7. Now the patch seems to have taken that
- away so i,ve given up and gone to flying the La5 as
- this is the only way to even the fight now.
- Yes i have a big interest in WWII and knew that the
- russian aircraft from 1942/43 onwards were superior
- in every way, and no with out actually being able to
- fly either theres no way of knowing which is better
- e.t.c for myself. But (theres always a but) every
- book that i have read regarding the two sides never
- put the 109 and La5 as far apart as the patch seems
- to have done.

It would be unwise to judge the 109s apparent lack of ability because of it's turn rate. Even though the 109 may seem like a good turner in some situations, it's best to use it in the vertical. People complaining about the 109s FM based on it's turning performance shouldn't be suprised that the aircraft loses out to others in a short space of time. It's not what the 109 is all about.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 02:13 PM
Functio wrote:
- It would be unwise to judge the 109s apparent lack
- of ability because of it's turn rate. Even though
- the 109 may seem like a good turner in some
- situations, it's best to use it in the vertical.
- People complaining about the 109s FM based on it's
- turning performance shouldn't be suprised that the
- aircraft loses out to others in a short space of
- time. It's not what the 109 is all about.

Perhaps, but at the same time, that doesnt' mean it sucked in turns.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 02:41 PM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- Don't know what your talking about.
-
- The red side was filling up fast last night, so I
- took out the 109G2 (1943 server).
-
- Wow - what a joy to fly. Was BnZ'ing, TnB'ing -
- musta ripped up a few p39's and tore up a Hurricane
- on a nice dive.
-

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhh

Dont tell him the G2 is good or next it will be striped down to junk too......

I have to say the accuracy and power of the mk108s has again been undermodled, these birds overheat real fast now & the pause when you pull the triger is very anoying you only have split seconds to shoot down an enemy and if one of thoes seconds is absorbed by a Gun that wont shoot when you pull the triger its realy bad

Also the accuracy of the 108 is realy pathetic, I might as well throw dirt @ the enemy..... Im sorry to whine about this but I took the downgrade from 1.0 with grace, cuz I knew it was overmodled compared to other ac,

I re-learned the 109 in 1.1b & was realy starting to like it...... it was dam near perfect
Now I must speak up to defend this bird..... you have changed it too much for the worse.....Please Fix the

Overheating issues(too fast)
MW50(ac does not accelerate fast enough)
MK108 (very inaccurate & underpowered again)
Prop pitch is still WRONG http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Just go back to the 1.1b 109 it was more on par with what would seem like reality at least it had a chance



<center> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1063229517.jpg </center>



Message Edited on 09/11/0308:57AM by cozmo_d

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 02:51 PM
The g2 should be left well alone now considering how overmodeled some VVS planes are which i doubt will ever get downmodeled to the way they should be, bet you in the next patch the g2 will have been altered for worse but doubt VVS planes will.

Now the trend seems to be model luftwaffe planes on the verge of being ok but just under at best apart from some odd roll rates etc, VVS planes get modeled just over spec in just about every aspect...

Just dont expect to see anything change its gone on for too long ever since il2 patches

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 02:54 PM
Kweassa, in start of right turn i was behind (100m) behind that P-39 with that P39, with same speed. he started the tight right turn, so was not able to follow him in that, decided to go for E fighting, so thats why made lag pursuit, or cant even call it lagg pursuit, cos didnt pull stick almost at all, only kept plane in turn position to lure that P39 to think that im pulling right turn too.
so, i gained speed while P39 still turned and should not be able to get as much speed as i. understand to this point?

when he almost managed to get in 6 pos, i started to tighten my right turn with climb, in every sence the P39 should not be able to answer in this maneuver, he should only able to see that im turning right and climbing, going in the his high right side while he´s not able to follow with lack of speed. well, he didnt bleed E in that turn so he catched me.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 03:15 PM
You think thats bad look at these new fights /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Ok im flying g6as @ 3000m wep on Rad open 103% throttle
going near 470 TAS straight & level....

Now comes the fun part

LA7 12 o clock low..... much lower than me not sure how low but @ very Least 1000m below me, but more like 2000m below me...

So I see him trying to climb & close the gap for a belly shot... So I Close the radiator, Go to full throttle and pull up nice & smooth and preform a Large Elman manuver.....
(no way in hell should he be able to get on my six right?)

Now the la7 he just keeps right on climbing & climbs right up onto me right at the end of the elman manuver & has enough speed to close the distance & shoot me Down with ease......

LMAO This is wrong on so many levels I cant even begine to explain it...

Never.... Ever.... Ever..... in the past has any of thoes VVS ac been able to follow, In a Large Highspeed Elman manuver Especialy when they are 1000/2000m below me when I start the manuver!!!!

Please Fix the 109..........


<center> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1063229517.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 06:31 PM
http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=003776


You guys should think about the first post!

<hr>
<table border="0" width="100%"><tr><td width="50%"><font size=2><font size="-1"> and did those feet in ancient times
trod america's pastures of green?
and did that <font color="#FF0000">anthropocentric</font> god <font color="#FF0000">wane</font>
with their thoughts and beliefs all unseen?
I don't think so,
he's up there with the others lying low,
<font color="#FF0000">vying</font> with those who you've traded
your life to bless your soul,
and have they told you how to think,</font></font></td><td width="50%"><font size=2><font size="-1">
cleansed your mind of <font color="#FF0000">sepsis</font> and autonomy?
or have you escaped scrutiny,
and <font color="#FF0000">regaled</font> yourself with <font color="#FF0000">depravity</font>?
now we all see, "religion is just synthetic
<font color="#FF0000">frippery</font>, unnecessary in our expanding
global culture efficiency"
and don't you fear this impasse
we have built to our future?
ever so near,
and oh so <font color="#FF0000">austere</font> </font></font></td></tr></table>

http://thebrpage.tierranet.com/pix/Greg/graffin2_sm.jpg

"God Song" by Bad Religion

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 07:24 PM
The thread poster/posterette never posted the Fb109 version, so we may assume Fb109 Email.

-- The axis situation was gloomy enough in 1.1b, but now it's next to hopeless!

Although I am Happy with the Patch 1.1beta Fb109, I find it Refreshing to see the luftwhining pass from Fw190 to Fb109 whiners. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

NOOB (a definition): One who fails to post the altitude of their Luftwaffe dogfights against La~7, and usually exhibiting very high post counts, but there are exceptions, from time to time. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 08:17 PM
for all again:

G2 is slightly undermodelled in speed and climb.
compared with original g1 and g2 test.

who ver says g6 is ok, has absolutely NO knowledge of the 109 series.

wastel


PS: currently still working on my bf109 analysis for FB

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 09:50 PM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:
- NOOB (a definition): One who fails to post
- the altitude of their Luftwaffe dogfights against
- La~7, and usually exhibiting very high post counts,
- but there are exceptions, from time to time. -


Im assuming your gabing @ me since I mentioned the la7

If you pay atension you will see I did mention my altitude


<center> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1063229517.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 10:34 PM
OK! I tested more, and yes you are right: G2 seems ok, although I couldn't catch La-5 with it (this may be right, I am not sure)... But it is the early models that I am whining about! You should be able to B&Z I-16 with F2 and Emil, but I find this much more difficult in 1.11 than in 1.1beta. So I am just wondering how can there be so big difference between beta and final patch?!

If 109 is indeed modelled correctly now, I must really wonder the performance of I-16. Did it really climb better than Emil??

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 11:15 PM
Now you can check the data for yourself.

Il2compare seems to have accurate data for the FMs in FB1.11.

Very quickly you will see many things wrong, not only with 109, but across the board. Very strange things like 109F4 being much faster than 109F2, 109G2 severely outperforming G6, G10, G14, and even K4 in non-wep climb. Certain planes having incredible climb rates, that don't correspond with historical data, and others ahving very poor climb rates. Many turn times are off by 3 or 4 seconds.

http://www.hellenic-sqn.gr/common/ilc2_v2.zip

It just shows how moot it is to debate FMs, when there really isn't any one place to start.

I am now accepting donations to buy the smilies a new home.
http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb06894.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb57471.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb11726.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb75733.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80477.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb64472.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb59442.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80347.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb73057.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb48642.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb24962.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72600.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72327.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb10373.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb70750.gif

Message Edited on 09/11/0304:16PM by StG77_Fennec

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 11:28 PM
We need an official comment on this.

It's claimed that the sfs file was cracked. If so, that means that we could do the same and correct the problems ourselves, then pass the files out to those we want to fly with and do it that way. Doesn't look like we'll get anything done correctly from the developer...

Thoughts?

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 11:36 PM
This is highly suspicious.... if those files are cracked and flight data can be "tweaked" can they then be used online verus other players....? anyone who has been involved in VOW shouldn't have to do too much putting two and two together to see where this takes us....?

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 12:11 AM
yup still much to be done to get the FMs of 109s correct.. not to mention VVS planes..

____________________________________



Official Sig:



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/shots/Vipez4.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 12:19 AM
JG77BlackWulf_2 wrote:
- This is highly suspicious.... if those files are
- cracked and flight data can be "tweaked" can they
- then be used online verus other players....? anyone
- who has been involved in VOW shouldn't have to do
- too much putting two and two together to see where
- this takes us....?

No. The version checking will validate and verify the versions of the important files. If they don't match the server, it will kick you out. So it's not a problem. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 12:24 AM
Wait, we can modify the flight performance?!?

Heck, i'm not flying online anymore, tell me how!

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 01:58 AM
Just crak the SFS file, then figure out what to do with the info.

Simple huh? And it's been that way since IL2 1.0. lol

Seriously, it's just a theory. Someone has a program that has, "puporedly" (and that is the key here) cracked the .sfs files and used the data they contain to make a program that will compare any plane to any plane.

Theoretically, since they can obviously be cracked and understood by someone, they could be changed too.

The trick is though, you'd not be able to fly on HL with just anybody anymore. Well, not that you'd want to anyway. If you didn't know what version they had, it would be CFS cheat city.

Fortunately there is version checking built in that "handshakes" with the server to make sure that all clients match the server, and therefore, each other. Ensuring everyone is on the same version, using the same FMs.

Incidentally, this is nothing new. The OpenPlane engine that FS:SDOE was made with did the same thing, though less sophisticatedly, and without encryption, and a new engine known as TargetWare is doing this as well. 3 Games are currently being made with it - Target Flanders (WWI), Target Rabaul (WWII), and Target Korea (obvious. lol). This engine was intended to be open and user modable, yet also ensure integrity for online play.

It can be done. I wish Oleg would follow suit.

At least we'd get off his back and *only* kvetch at each other. lol

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 03:11 AM
StG77_Fennec wrote:
- Now you can check the data for yourself.
-
- Il2compare seems to have accurate data for the FMs
- in FB1.11.
-
- Very quickly you will see many things wrong, not
- only with 109, but across the board. Very strange
- things like 109F4 being much faster than 109F2,
- 109G2 severely outperforming G6, G10, G14, and even
- K4 in non-wep climb. Certain planes having
- incredible climb rates, that don't correspond with
- historical data, and others ahving very poor climb
- rates. Many turn times are off by 3 or 4 seconds.
-


It's worse than that. The comparison tool is not correct for many 109 sea level speeds if you use auto engine management (F2, F4, G2, and G6). The 109's overheat and the rads open early. F2 won't even do 500 km/hr at sea level without using CEM. It rapidly slows to about 465 when the rad opens.

I believe the *difference* between the F2 and F4 is real and correct. There were problems with the F2 engine that were corrected in the F4 (however, the wrong boost level is shown in the F2). I got that info from Butch2K I believe.

LaGG-3's and La-5's don't overheat like they should and they run faster than production tests showed.

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 06:31 AM
Cozmo d,

Why do you fly at 103% power and radiators open? I find much better performance at a lower power setting, rad on auto or 2 and prop about 70% you then have some power left in hand to accelerate, just a thought that this may be why you are getting caught?

JG4_Tiger

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 10:07 AM
Im still not convinced about the version checking process. To my cynical and devious mind anyone that can crack the sfs files and produce the Il2 compare programme also has the ability to neutralise the "compare" feature......which MAY explain some rather interesting VOW results and arguments/accusations.
PLEASE NOTE:
I am simply postulating a POSSIBLE scenario,not stating facts!