PDA

View Full Version : Advice with 109s and 190s



diomedes33
05-08-2004, 10:50 AM
I've been getting really frustrated with these series of planes since AEP came out. Something changed that I can't compensate for, and I need some advice. I could hold my own before this addon, now I'm just cannon fodder.

Online, I cruise around 4000m looking for targets, when I see one I try to position myself behind it then dive on them. All they have to do is turn and I have to climb back up and try again. All they do is keep turning, and I keep loosing energy, till I'm even with them. This happens in about 4-5 passes.

If I'm in a 109 I can usually get out of it, but in a 190 90% of the time I get shot down.

Offline, I tried flying some quick skirmishes with ace level p51, 47, 63 and spitfires. The spits were the only ones that gave me trouble. I figured the AI was lacking where a human pilot would not make mistakes. However, I noticed that when I shot, my bullets hit the target on all occasions except for high deflection shots.

A few times I was lucky enough to jump an unsuspecting target. They were flying straight and level. I opened up on them and most of the time nothing hits, no puffs of smoke. I blew my surprise advantage and now we are back to the situation above.

I have my convergence set to 200m, I probably start shooting between 250 and 150 hard to tell with icons off.

What's the best way to line up a target run with a 1000m or greater alt advantage?
Anybody else shooting blanks?

I'm really frustrated, so any help you guys can give me would be appreciated. Thanks

http://www.public.asu.edu/~guthriec/ubi_sig.jpg

diomedes33
05-08-2004, 10:50 AM
I've been getting really frustrated with these series of planes since AEP came out. Something changed that I can't compensate for, and I need some advice. I could hold my own before this addon, now I'm just cannon fodder.

Online, I cruise around 4000m looking for targets, when I see one I try to position myself behind it then dive on them. All they have to do is turn and I have to climb back up and try again. All they do is keep turning, and I keep loosing energy, till I'm even with them. This happens in about 4-5 passes.

If I'm in a 109 I can usually get out of it, but in a 190 90% of the time I get shot down.

Offline, I tried flying some quick skirmishes with ace level p51, 47, 63 and spitfires. The spits were the only ones that gave me trouble. I figured the AI was lacking where a human pilot would not make mistakes. However, I noticed that when I shot, my bullets hit the target on all occasions except for high deflection shots.

A few times I was lucky enough to jump an unsuspecting target. They were flying straight and level. I opened up on them and most of the time nothing hits, no puffs of smoke. I blew my surprise advantage and now we are back to the situation above.

I have my convergence set to 200m, I probably start shooting between 250 and 150 hard to tell with icons off.

What's the best way to line up a target run with a 1000m or greater alt advantage?
Anybody else shooting blanks?

I'm really frustrated, so any help you guys can give me would be appreciated. Thanks

http://www.public.asu.edu/~guthriec/ubi_sig.jpg

Hunde_3.JG51
05-08-2004, 11:10 AM
As for shooting blanks, if you mean you are hitting and not doing much damage it is because almost all of the guns/cannons in FB are bugged right now. It will be fixed in the upcoming patch and it is the reason I stopped playing for over a month. If you are missing then you simply need to practice more high speed gunnery, it takes a long time to get it down pretty well.

As for losing your energy advantage I have to ask what server settings you fly on? I fly the 190 almost exclusively and I only fly on full-switch type servers. With externals, padlock, or icons on it makes it very easy to track your plane after your intitial pass so they can just turn very sharply when you get close. This is very unrealistic as they would never be able to track you that way in reality. Still, if he is turning he is giving up energy so keep zooming away from him and gaining altitude to increase your advantage. On full-switch server it really shouldn't take more than 1, 2 or maybe 3 passes. Also, if you feel like you are losing your advantage, simply disengage and find friendlies.

As for diving in on opponent I prefer a fast, fairly sharp dive to a point slightly above and directly behind my opponent, from there I use a shallow dive to attack point. I dive sharply at the beginning so I can get down and out of sight. If you use a shallow dive and remain high above him you will likely be spotted.

As for convergence I am one of the few that uses 500m in all 190's and 109's except for the 109E (I use 200m). This keeps your bullets/rounds much more level in the gunsight, they don't drop as quickly. The 190 has enough cannons that you don't need for them to hit all in the same spot. In the 109 it only effects vertical trajectory. I find deflection shooting easier at 500m because as I said the bullets/rounds are fired at a more level trajectory. In planes like the 109E, P-40, P-51, etc I set convergence at 200m because the concentrated firepower is needed more. I usually start shotting at 250m or under.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Sat May 08 2004 at 10:24 AM.]

diomedes33
05-08-2004, 11:26 AM
Thanks for the reply.

I fly almost exclusivly on full switch servers now.

I'll try diving steep first then shallowing it out as I approach the target. Right now I try to "guess" where it will be and head to that point.

I'm pretty sure its not my gunnery. I know I'm not a crack shot, but I've set up some situations in the FMB similiar to my online experiences. Where the target is caught by surprise and the target gets damaged. And like you said after two or three passes, its going down.

I'll try cranking up my convergence too. Anything that could make a deflection shot flatter would be a good thing.

thanks again.

http://www.public.asu.edu/~guthriec/ubi_sig.jpg

Hunde_3.JG51
05-08-2004, 11:44 AM
No problem.

Just wanted to clarify that diving sharply and then going into shallow dive is only used on unsuspecting opponents. Any time you are engaged with someone using slashing attacks you must "guess" where they will be, exactly as you said. Trying to get directly behind your opponent could cause you to take some very bad angles and lose precious energy. Also, another reason for using shallower dive at the end is that you will arrive at a slightly slower speed but at a better position, and this can help keep the 109's elevator from stiffening up as much if you need to make last minute corrections.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

jurinko
05-08-2004, 02:13 PM
hello Diomedes,

welcome to the club... be sure it is almost impossible to stay in a prolonged BnZ fight with Fw 190A series, even starting with big advantage... each boom and zoom cycle bleeds your energy out and some types of enemy planes seem to gain 200m of altitude after each hard evasive turn an nose point upwards. I fly Fw 190 succesfully, but usually in pure hit-and-run tactics. It works well, the only flaw is the sonar sound warning the prey to make hard turn when I am closing from 300m. I am flying it allways over 3000m alt, usually between 4 - 6km. Fw zooms better there and most of Russian aircraft loses power. Be carefull with US planes up high.. allways start from above.

Bf 109 series are better than Fw 190 in terms of staying in fight, but they have limited firepower /except MK108/ and the gunpods slow them down too much. Poor high speed handling is the biggest disadvantage, plus vulnerability and low fuel load. They are good up to 1942 (with standard 20mm armament).

My advice:
- start from altitude advantage at least 1-1,5km
- attack an unaware enemy flying straight if possible - with good flown Spit or La it is hard to keep E advantage if the enemy is good
- fight in altitude which is good for your plane - studying the IL2 compare program helps a lot
- train your gunnery as much as possible - the first pass must kill or at least cripple the enemy
- attack with max possible speed, the excess speed is you only chance to disengage safely after the attack. I shoot usually in 600-700kph.

Here you can find several online tracks showing that tactics, just click on the active links:

http://www.scitech.sk/svz/viewtopic.php?t=387

---------------------
Letka.13/Liptow @ HL

F19_Ob
05-08-2004, 03:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by diomedes33:

Online, I cruise around 4000m looking for targets, when I see one I try to position myself behind it then dive on them. All they have to do is turn and I have to climb back up and try again.


I have my convergence set to 200m, I probably start shooting between 250 and 150 hard to tell with icons off.

What's the best way to line up a target run with a 1000m or greater alt advantage?
Anybody else shooting blanks?

I'm really frustrated, so any help you guys can give me would be appreciated. Thanks

http://www.public.asu.edu/~guthriec/ubi_sig.jpg
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



4000 m is a good altitude for many fighters. The aces normally try to have atleast 3000 and preferably higher to begin with and then descend while searching and spotting.


A good trick if u spot an unsuspecting enemy below, is to dive down quite far below his tail where he cant see u and use the extra speed gained to zoom up , but remember to level out so u dont overshoot. If U have a wingman he will stay 4-500m behind and below your tail to avoid detection and be prepared for a secondary atack if u for som reason fail to finish the enemy off.

In a 109 I normally climb up and level out about when Im 100-200m from his tail sometimes less. With the 109 I prefer to end up at same speed as the foe on the end of my climb to his tail to ensure as many hits with that single cannon as possible.

With the fw190 wich have many cannons I prefer high speed and start firing from longer distance.

In my opinion 200 m convergence is to little for the fw190. 300 or more is better. But then everyone will have their style and needs.

On the later 109s convergence doesnt matter much since the guns are concentrated in the nose. but I have it set to 300 anyway.


If the enemy spots me in the bouncerun I climb away in the fw190 and go for longdistance deflectionshots in the 109.
In the 109 I often convert my speed in to turning power , preferably a descending turn wich makes it as sharp as possible = I keep the speed at best turn speed = I can keep on pulling hard. Usually it lasts for one single hard turn and nowadays thats enough to draw deflection and hit.

So for me it is mixed tactics with the 109 and BnZ with the fw190.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Now and then I post onlinetracks With explanations and tactics. I noticed I had still one available on the web.... feel free to take a peek.
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=380104843


http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

diomedes33
05-08-2004, 09:48 PM
All of these suggestions were helpful. I changed my gun convergence to 500. It made it a big difference. I had my convergence set so low because I also fly Mustangs. There's probably been miles of pages posted about how finicky those .50 cals are.

When I was flying the dora a lot back in version 1.2. I was able to fly it similar to the 109. A lot of high and low yo-yos with slashing attacks. But recently when I tried to fly it with the same tactics; the wings start buffeting and I usually go into a spin.

I tried increasing the radius of my turns. I thought I was pushing the plane too hard, but to avoid the buffeting I end up loosing so much airspeed that I have to force a hammerhead or start spinning. Either way, I usually get a tail full of lead.

So from what you guys are saying, I should just dive down, shoot then zoom back up with maybe a gental climbing turn ? And try to stay away from anything more?

http://www.public.asu.edu/~guthriec/ubi_sig.jpg

Hunde_3.JG51
05-08-2004, 10:46 PM
Glad you like the 500m convergence.

The 190D in AEP does not handle as well as it used to, it stalls easier now as you have noticed and cannot turn as well though combat flaps still help.

Concerning the FW-190:

In short, yes it is best to shoot then climb/extend away. Don't follow him into turns unless they are very gentle. P-47 pilots often adhered to the rule that any turn greater than 90 degrees was unacceptable, and this holds true for the 190 as well IMO. I find a straight zoom climb followed by a Hammerhead preferable to a gentle combat/climbing turn unless there are others about who you do not hold a significant energy advantage over. In this case a longer extension/climb followed by a combat turn is probably your best bet.

For the reasons I mentioned above it is easy to see why the 190 is an excellent plane to use when you have a wingman or wingmen, but it is not the best 1 vs. 1 plane unless you have a decent altitude/energy advantage. The utilizatation of the hammerhead can be useful in low combatant encounters as well. If all else fails the 190 has excellent escapability with its great high speed handling, roll-rate, and speed at sea-level. If jumped by an opponent with a severe advantage a split-s into a dive works well as he will bleed his energy turning around (or require a much larger area/radius to perform his split-s), and if he is stuck to your 6 o'clock a split-s, into a jinking high speed dive, followed by another split-s (or variations of it) can be helpful in eliminating his advantage and supplying you with the needed space to simply out-run your opponent. Never simply fly straight in these maneuvers, keep moving but do it gently so you do not bleed speed while performing them but rather you build it. Don't be predictable. If someone is behind you, the last thing you want to do is climb (presenting an easy target), and most planes will out-turn you, so your best bet is to dive/split-s and build speed quickly where you can use your high speed handling, roll-rate, and level speed to your advantage.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Sat May 08 2004 at 09:57 PM.]

Willthisnamedo
05-09-2004, 02:35 AM
Interesting posts: Hunde, one of yours implies that convergence settings effect bullet drop.

I don't understand this: my understanding is that convergence refers to the horizontal plane alignment of wing mounted guns (ie the 'triangle' formed by the line of the wings between the guns, and the 2 lines of fire out to the 'convergence point'.) When this is adjusted, we are changing the extent to which the guns are pointing fractionally inward from the actual direction the aircraft's nose is pointing. This is thus, in principle, irrelevant for any nose mounted cannon/guns.

Bullet drop is a different concept, which is concerned with the effect of gravity. I would have thought that the guns/cannon would all be boresighted to some standard setting at manufacture, with the ability for armourers to tweak if necessary. (it is far less predictable, of course, as it will depend on what attitude the aircraft is in at time of firing)

So, my questions are: is any of the above wrong, or are you saying that FB simplifies the model and 'convergence' settings also affect 'bullet drop' settings (ie would shift the point of impact of nose mounted weapons 'up/down' with respect to point of aim?)

Not trying to be funny or provocative here, but as a former soldier/tank gunnery man, I know how difficult it is to allow for all these factors, and I got to thinking about this as a result of your post, and now I'm curious as to the reality and the game version... Basically, I would love to know if tweaking convergence affects my vertical point of aim, because I'd assumed not in the past.

diomedes33
05-09-2004, 11:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Willthisnamedo:
Interesting posts: Hunde, one of yours implies that convergence settings effect bullet drop.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll take a stab at it since Hunde hasn't posted yet.

I believe its more perception that its a flatter arc then it really is. Like you said Willthisnamedo the convergence sets the horizantal arc so that the bullets will meet x m in front of the nose. However since the muzzel velocity is constant, the barrels vertical arc must be adjust too. This will ensure that the bullets will meet at x m in the center of your crosshairs.

Using some trig and physics.

if theta is the angle of incidence
And Mv is muzzle velocity (MG151/20 - 750 m/s)

x distance traveled (500m convergence)
500 = (Mv)x * t

y distance traveled

(assuming the crosshair is at the same elevation as the gun, not in real life, but makes things simpler)

0 = (Mv)y * t - 9.8t^2

After solving these

(Mv)x = 749.97 m/s
(Mv)y = 6.53 m/s

tan(theta) = y/x = 0.5 degrees

This doesn't take into account the horzantal arc, it might make it 0.6 degrees since it has to travel a little bit more distance. Since the outer guns on a fw190 can't be much more than 2 m from the crosshair, it really doesn't make a difference.

The human eye can't comprehend this slight degree without a refernce of some sort, especially in a virtual computer screen. So the trajectery appears flatter.

http://www.public.asu.edu/~guthriec/ubi_sig.jpg

[This message was edited by diomedes33 on Sun May 09 2004 at 10:51 AM.]

Hunde_3.JG51
05-09-2004, 11:44 AM
Willthisnamedo, I mean bullet drop in terms of your view through the gunsight. However my wording was not proper, what I mean is that the rounds/bullets are shot out at a more downward trajectory as you decrease convergence. This is true for all planes in FB, even nose mounted cannons. Take a 109 and set convergence to 200m and line up a level flying friendly and fire at say 200m, then set it to 1000m and repeat. You will notice that at 200m convergence your tracers may actually go under the aircraft, while at 1000m convergence they may actually fly over the aircraft when firing from 200m. The difference in vertical trajectory (the angle the round actually leaves the aircraft) is quite noticeable.

I didn't mean there was an actual difference in the rate the rounds drop from gravity, only a difference in angle that rounds leave the aircraft on the vertical plane. This is why it can help in deflection shooting and to keep rounds more level in the gunsight.

Hope this was clearer, as the wording in my initial post was improper.

Someone once used the analogy of a football pass. If three guys standing next to eachother but spaced apart wanted to throw a football and have them meet at 10 yards they would throw a line drive, flat trajectory pass. If they wanted the footballs to meet at 60 yards they would throw a much more arcing trajectory pass so they would meet at the same place.

Take care.

Diomedes, guess we posted at the same time http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Sun May 09 2004 at 11:01 AM.]

Willthisnamedo
05-09-2004, 12:50 PM
Fascinating: thanks for the replies.

My interpretation, therefore, is that (whether it models real life or not), FB alters both horizontal and vertical alignment when it sets 'convergence'...

The next question of course, purely for interest, is whether this was the same for actual aircraft, or whether it's a simplification.

It is of course a complex calculation: if the aircraft is banking while firing, then the 2 bullet 'streams'' trajectories in the vertical plane (as a result of gravity) are no longer meeting centrally relative to the aircraft - they're now dropping to the 'downward' side of the nose. If the aircraft is also pointing up or down in its longitudinal axis, the trajectories will be greater or less (respectively) as well.

I would expect that the real situation was at the pilot's discretion, depending on his preference: for a given convergence, he could have the point of aim adjusted up or down as he wished (as is the case when 'zeroing' an individual or tank gun).

For interest, the skill with a 'terrestrial' machine gun is in setting everything so that the trajectory not only arrives at the intended point of impact, but is also arrnged so that, at the assumed 'battle range', the trajectory is within the height of the intended target. This means that even if the firer has misjudged the range, the target will still be hit by the bullets, as opposed to them arcing harmlessly overhead...(ie, for a standing man, the trajectory between the gun and him will not exceed 6 feet from the ground.) Easy to state, difficult to achieve.

All reminds me of Lanoe Hawker: WW1 British pilot who scored several kills in the days before interruptor gear, with a lewis gun strapped to the wing of his aircraft: now that's skill...

diomedes33
05-09-2004, 02:00 PM
You'll have to ask Oleg or someone with knowledge of the internal workings of IL2.

If Il2 can handle fluid flow equations over wings and control surfaces. Using these to model stall characteristics, lift, drag, etc ... of different aircraft (These I'm pretty sure are simplified)

A single mass with an initial velocity, only effected by gravity and air resistance should be very simple in comparison.

However, they may have simplified these to save processor resources.

http://www.public.asu.edu/~guthriec/ubi_sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
05-09-2004, 03:14 PM
It is natural to lose some of your alt/energy advantage with each B&Z pass. That's why you want to do some telling damage on the first pass.

However, this sim has been loaded with so much "revisionist history" modeling that make B&Z much less effective than it really was.

1) The visuals: having a "perch" altitude advantage from which to acquire targets in safety has been made artifically harder in this game. Planes in the weeds have the advantage of being able to spot you against the blue sky, while their "dots" intermittently disappear or fail to appear at all against terrain, even when you are doing good area pattern searches. If you "zoom in" for more scrutiny, you are LESS likely to see a dot than more likely. The FB/AEP visual system is simply "bass-ackwards".

2) The 109 concrete elevator, tacked onto this plane family based on anecdotal evidence and not applied to the many other types of planes that would also suffer its effects, makes the 109 much less effective for B&Z. In addition to almost any contemporary being able to easily pull up and into a dive attack (with the 109 unable to get elevator authority for several key seconds), the 109 also wastes much more of its energy advantage just recovering from the dive. The negative effect on maneuverability in the diving vertical is exponential, meaning the 109 is only effective in the B&Z against an opponent that hasn't seen him. If the target EVER sees the attack in development, he seizes the advantage QUICK, whether the 109 pilot makes any tactical mistakes or not.

diomedes33
05-09-2004, 06:38 PM
So the glass is half emtpy ...

I didn't ask what are the short commings of the sim. I asked what are the best ways to attack and survive in a fw190 and bf109 IN THE SIM. I have no desire to attack any one with a real plane.

Hunde, Jurinko and ob_swe all have presented good tactics as they exist in this sim. Which may or may not coincide with real tactics.

Stiglr your post was nothing but your on bias views on a game, and how you perceive the world in 1945. In the slim chance that you flew a 109 or 190 in combat, you can still grind an axe all you want. This sim is just a computer model of physics with a bit of fun and history sprinkled on top.

No simulation will ever be perfect, that's why its called a simulation. It SIMULATES the real world. If you want a real 109, stop preaching, buy one and scare the **** out of some poor guy in a cessna.

http://www.public.asu.edu/~guthriec/ubi_sig.jpg