PDA

View Full Version : PFs Speed and climb kings!



DIRTY-MAC
01-17-2006, 09:34 AM
Who is the speed king in FB from 0m-3000m?
I asked this in another thread but it got locked,
Robban75 posted these, thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Alt -- K-4 - P51 - La7 - D-9 - D-9'45

0m --- 590 - 608 - 612 - 614 - 621
1000 - 602 - 618 - 627 - 631 - 632
2000 - 624 - 646 - 643 - 643 - 628
3000 - 650 - 677 - 630 - 650 - 655

Is there any other fighters that should be among these?

and how does these aircraft compare in climb?

Robban75 you are good at these tests, would it be possible for you to do a climb test?

DIRTY-MAC
01-17-2006, 09:34 AM
Who is the speed king in FB from 0m-3000m?
I asked this in another thread but it got locked,
Robban75 posted these, thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Alt -- K-4 - P51 - La7 - D-9 - D-9'45

0m --- 590 - 608 - 612 - 614 - 621
1000 - 602 - 618 - 627 - 631 - 632
2000 - 624 - 646 - 643 - 643 - 628
3000 - 650 - 677 - 630 - 650 - 655

Is there any other fighters that should be among these?

and how does these aircraft compare in climb?

Robban75 you are good at these tests, would it be possible for you to do a climb test?

Lazy312
01-17-2006, 10:18 AM
Best climber I found (0-5km) is K4, it was under 3 minutes. Best sustained climber (so that engine would not never overheat) was G2, about 3,7 mins to 5000m.

DIRTY-MAC
01-18-2006, 06:28 AM
bump

3.JG51_Stecher
01-18-2006, 07:22 AM
If we're staying within FB's prop driven aircraft, the game's super boosted Mustang Mk. III will put them all to shame at these altitudes, 651km/h@SL. Robban, those all look high to me. Wind and fuel?

tigertalon
01-18-2006, 07:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DIRTY-MAC:
Who is the speed king in FB from 0m-3000m?
I asked this in another thread but it got locked,
Robban75 posted these, thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Alt -- K-4 - P51 - La7 - D-9 - D-9'45

0m --- 590 - 608 - 612 - 614 - 621
1000 - 602 - 618 - 627 - 631 - 632
2000 - 624 - 646 - 643 - 643 - 628
3000 - 650 - 677 - 630 - 650 - 655

Is there any other fighters that should be among these?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

U forgot MustangIII matey http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

3.JG51_Stecher
01-18-2006, 07:59 AM
Well, if I catch a 135 tail wind with 25% fuel, I'm pretty much matching those numbers. Using this set up instead of the "Oleg Standard" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif, the Mustang Mk. III goes 659km/h@SL. Whoooosh!

neural_dream
01-18-2006, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DIRTY-MAC:
Robban75 posted these, thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
Alt -- K-4 - P51 - La7 - D-9 - D-9'45
0m --- 590 - 608 - 612 - 614 - 621 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
These are definitely not Oleg-Standard values, and probably not even in the same conditions for each aircraft.

First of all which La7 is that.
Both Doras are slower than both La7s at sea level.
The Mustang MkIII is much faster than all these (top speed only).
I think only the K4 is about correct. Don't remember very well though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

3.JG51_Stecher
01-18-2006, 09:00 AM
Using the Oleg Standard, TAS(km/h) at sea level:

Mustang Mk. III----651
Fw 190D-9 Late----610
Fw 190D-9---------604
La-7---------------604
P-51D-5/20--------598
P-63C-5-----------597
Fw 190A-9---------591
P-38L Late---------590
Bf 109K-4----------585

Lazy312
01-18-2006, 09:03 AM
In my hands in 4.02 (not full tank however, with full tank the speeds are up to 5 km lower):
Alt -- K-4 - P51 - La7 - D-9 - D-9'45
0m --- 587 - 601 - 606 - 610 - 617

jugent
01-18-2006, 11:20 AM
Top speed is a dull knife to tell how fast a plane can fly.

The FW 190-Dora takes quite a long time to reach its top speed.

If you are trying to avoid a spit by diving away from it, the both aircrafts get more speed than its top-speed, but the Dora loose its speed much faster than the spit, so in the game, the spit has good chances to get close to the dora.
And the dora loose much speed if it got some hits in the wing. One occasion I was hit by four round from the spits MG in my wing, no visual damage, but the damage reduced the topspeed of my a/c with aprox 100km/h, or I didnt got the time to reach the topspeed before I got killed by the spit.
So topspeed doesnt give the whole truth

DIRTY-MAC
01-18-2006, 05:06 PM
What about comparing climb on these fighters? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

3.JG51_Stecher
01-18-2006, 11:58 PM
Here are some of the better climb times to 5000m.

Bf 109K-4---------3:04
Bf 109G-10--------3:25
Bf 109G-6/AS------3:29
Bf 109G-14--------3:34
Yak-9U------------3:40
P-38L Late---------3:48
Mustang Mk. III----3:53
Fw 190D-9---------3:53
La-7---------------3:58
Spitfire Mk. IX------4:02

WOLFMondo
01-19-2006, 12:43 AM
What sort of climb angle did you use for the mustang MkIII? I'm pretty sure it will climb to 4000m allot faster than that in a shallow climb.

3.JG51_Stecher
01-19-2006, 01:05 AM
For aircraft in this class, I typically hold 280km/h IAS. That includes the starting speed. No zoom climbing. I tried the Mustang III at 320, and it shaved 5 seconds off the time. At 350, it knocked it back to 4 minutes flat. Unless you just made a typo, the Mustang III should get to 4000m a lot faster than my times. Because I'm going to 5000m. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hristo_
01-19-2006, 04:02 AM
I was always under the impression that under all practical circumstances La-7 was faster than D-9 on the deck.

Since I consider myself no newbie, I have yet to outrun a La-7 on the deck in D-9. Hmmmm

neural_dream
01-19-2006, 05:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
Since I consider myself no newbie, I have yet to outrun a La-7 on the deck in D-9. Hmmmm </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
And you will never. The La-7_3xB20 reaches 610km/h 5 mins before the Dora.

Lazy312
01-19-2006, 06:23 AM
La-7 3x20 never reaches 610 kph on the deck.

Just tested, 100% fuel, no wind, Crimea map.

La7 - 606
La73xB20 - 606
FW190D9 - 609
FW190D9late - 614

neural_dream
01-19-2006, 06:29 AM
Try again http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Same settings (100%, blah blah). Keep same altitude (not even 1m of change for 30sec) and be more careful. only elevator trim.
610 for 2xB20, 609 for 3xB20.
The top speed isn't important. The La7 reaches 605km/h in no time, while the Dora MW50 needs to dive for that. Otherwise it takes a looong time to go over 600km/h. The same for Mustang MkIII. It goes over 650, but the next day http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Lazy312
01-19-2006, 06:35 AM
well i am pretty sure i didn't change altitude for minutes..

Hristo_
01-19-2006, 07:35 AM
So, why is that two planes have similar top speed but so different level acceleration ?

What is powerloading difference ? How is relative power/drag of both planes ?

Yes, I have noticed that Dora dives better than La-7. Even Fw 190A-8 can pick up speed faster in a dive.

Friendly_flyer
01-19-2006, 07:41 AM
Even I know the answer to that one: The FW-s are rather heavy planes, giving them better dives but harder to get up to level speed.

Hristo_
01-19-2006, 08:16 AM
Weight has to do with low speed acceleration (and sustained climb). High speed acceleration has much more to do with drag.

DIRTY-MAC
01-19-2006, 06:57 PM
cool

LEXX_Luthor
01-19-2006, 07:14 PM
Hristo:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Weight has to do with low speed acceleration (and sustained climb). High speed acceleration has much more to do with drag. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I would imagine -D9 is far more high speed aerodynamic than -7, of course I don't KNOW that. robbans's old accel tests showed La7 better accel at low speeds, but D9 taking over at high speeds. This was with Olde FM though from last year, which may imply D9 should reach top speed sooner, but its not now?

Good testing stuff here.

LEXX_Luthor
01-19-2006, 07:23 PM
...but maybe not, if La can pull ahead for long enough in speed gain. Does that make sense? Dunno.

DIRTY-MAC
01-19-2006, 07:31 PM
Maybe we should do some test with a time limit for top speed?
like 20 seconds from 300km/h?
as online its not often you got that much time to try to outrun a stalker...???

Hristo_
01-20-2006, 12:23 AM
Just some experience from DF servers. 4/5 of population flies La-7 3xB-20, Ki-84c or Yak 3P, with roughly equal spread. By far most of the fighting is on the deck. Checking the log, I see that almost everyone takes 50% fuel.

Flying either Fw 190A-8 or Fw 190D-9 1945, I try to preserve an E cushion in such a dangerous environment. I never let my speed drop below 400 kph.

In Fw 190D-9 (1945), I make a pass on a slower La-7, while doing 400-600 kph. If he follows, I extend. If we are diving, he won't catch me. If we are in a flat chase, he will start gaining of me very soon. Even with rads closed and ball centered, I can watch in outside view him being faster, closing the distance by 10m every 2-3 seconds (this translates to 12-18 kph).

If I remember correctly, slip indicator on La-7 is quite out of sight, isn't it ? La-7 pilots must be of superb skill if they can coordinate their flying without looking at the ball all the time.

jugent
01-20-2006, 02:39 PM
Oleg want things to be this way.
According to three different test of the FW190 it got a much better acceleration than the spit, in this game its the opposite.
If the FW got its true characteristics, it would be too good.

LStarosta
01-20-2006, 10:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jugent:
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Disagree 100%.