PDA

View Full Version : Fokker D.XXI not the be all, end all it was supposed to be.



mortoma
10-07-2009, 10:13 AM
Don't get me wrong, having the Fokker is a truly nice addition to the game. I'll never complain about any additional aircraft. But for years we had numerous Fokker whiners wanting this plane added and they were even more numerous than the Whirlwind whiners. Now I question their enthusiasm.

This plane is the second slowest monoplane in the game, second only to the Polish P.11C and it's not as good in handling as I'd have thought. I just finished my second mission flying it Dgen ( using a bastardized method ) and got left behind by Soviet SU-2 ground attack planes as if I were standing still. I was only able to down two of them by following them back to their base and shooting them on landing approach!

As far as Finish air force aircraft, only the J8A is slower and it's not much slower. All other Finish air force aircraft outclass it, even the Morane MS-406 is much faster, although it's not flyable unless you have mods.


Other Finish aircraft superior as follows:
The Hurricane is far faster, handles better, overall superior armament.
The Buffalo B-239 is somewhat faster, handles better, vastly superior armament.
The Fiat G.50 is significantly faster, handles better, somewhat better armament.

I'm posting this only due to my surprise after discovering the inferiority of the plane. In many ways it's fun to fly.

AndyJWest
10-07-2009, 10:42 AM
I like it: it's got character. Certainly there are contemporary aircraft that outperformed it, but you could say that about many of the more interesting planes in IL-2. It can catch you out with a spin if mishandled, but that is probably realistic too, and it is hardly unique in that. A worthy addition to the sim, even if the uber-plane pilots laugh at it as they chase each other round endlessly in their Ki-84s and La-7s.

rr9
10-07-2009, 10:55 AM
I would think many of the Fokker whiners wanted to see that plane in IL2 because D-XXI was historically important plane. The most important Finnish fighter during Winter war. Not because it was the fastest or had the best armament.

Note that the decision to buy those planes was made already in 1936. These faster plane types you listed weren't available at that time.

GoToAway
10-07-2009, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by mortoma:
Don't get me wrong, having the Fokker is a truly nice addition to the game. I'll never complain about any additional aircraft. But for years we had numerous Fokker whiners wanting this plane added and they were even more numerous than the Whirlwind whiners. Now I question their enthusiasm. Yes, imagine people being enthusiastic for a plane that made up the backbone of a country's combat-worthy airforce for a significant period of time. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I don't think that anyone but you expected it to perform like a P-51. It's common knowledge that it was slow. That's why pilots felt the B-239 was like a hotrod in comparison.

TinyTim
10-07-2009, 11:23 AM
I don't know how close do our D.XXI performance figures match its real life counterpart, but getting left in the dust by an Su-2 is something you should expect. It was a top secret plane in 1941, being kept secret even from Russian pilots (Alexander Pokryshkin, tripple HSU and 59 kill ace mistakenly shot one of them down as his first kill, because he couldn't recognize it). It was unprotected and thus very fast (for 1940), capable of 500kph in its late lightened version. They were still meat on the plate for faster German fighters, so they quickly got replaced by Il-2s and Pe-2s.

http://www.shrani.si/f/d/B0/HcDfYZQ/dxxivsu2.jpg

No intention of stealing the thread, please continue.

Ba5tard5word
10-07-2009, 12:20 PM
Well from what I have read here it was mainly used against Russian bombers while other planes were used to keep the fighters busy. And from what I know, Russian bombers used against Finland at the time were pretty poky and obsolete.

rr9
10-07-2009, 01:21 PM
The bombers Russians used 1939-40 were the best they had at that time. The clearly better ones like PE-2 were not in use yet.

general_kalle
10-07-2009, 03:25 PM
i geuss that means my dreams of getting back at those Me110's that wrecked the danish airforce is out of the question?

BigC208
10-07-2009, 10:29 PM
The DXXI is a good defensive fighter. It can turn on a dime. Many a 109 pilot found out the hard way that turning with a XXI and bleeding of speed was a bad idea. Been flying it ofline a lot now and if the AI bothers to mix it up I do pretty good with it. It's slow but what did you expect from an aircraft with fixed gear and a 830hp engine? I personally think it's one of the better made planes in the game. Great pilot animations moving the controls and when the wooden wing is dammaged it looks pretty real. Good job Viikate!

Kocur_
10-08-2009, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by mortoma:
This plane is the second slowest monoplane in the game, second only to the Polish P.11C and it's not as good in handling as I'd have thought.

Actually D.XXI was never excellent in handling, at least by last biplane fighters standards.

Regarding speed, early Finnish D.XXI were much slower than aerodynamically refined and two-pitch prop equipped Dutch version. It must have affected diving speed too - which I mention after having found that it's almost impossible to extend from Gladiator or Avia B-534, which is so painfully disappointing.
I wonder though if Fokker had passed the knowledge how to make D.XXI slicker to Finns and if they had better props (not fixed pitch that is) in later series?

Anyway lets wait for flyable Dutch D.XXI. The Dutch didn't purchase D.XXI before Fokker could demonstrate improved performance. D.XXI tested by Dutch AF in 1938 attained 460 km/h without armament and radio and 446 km/h with full battle gear - as opposed to merely 418 km/h by early Finnish D.XXI. Flyable Dutch D.XXI will be extremely attractive if it's climb will be replicated by the game - in RL it got to 4 km in 4 minutes and to 7 km in 8 min 3 sec.

Waldo.Pepper
10-08-2009, 12:35 AM
Pardon me but who has said that the Fokker is supposed to be some sort of great performer as you seem to imply in this part of your topic title...

"Fokker D.XXI not the be all, end all it was supposed to be."

It was wanted, whined for and hyped not because of its performance - but solely because of its absence. It was needed because it filled a hole. It was wanted because it was iconic. Because it is what a Spitfire is to a Brit or a Mustang is to a Yank.

It should catch an SB-2, sort of, after a long chase. Here is a passage from Fighter over Finland by Eino Luukkanen.

"Now began a long chase which, from the outset, offered few chances of success, for the enemy bombers were already steaming back towards their own territory, and our Fokkers had little speed advantage over an unladen SB-2. The Russians also enjoyed the added advantage of altitude, but although one or two of the first fighters off the ground managed to get in some long-range shots, these apparently had no effect."

p. 40-41.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/WaldoPepper/book/PagesfromFighteroverFinland.jpg

DKoor
10-08-2009, 06:24 AM
Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
It was wanted, whined for and hyped not because of its performance - but solely because of its absence. It was needed because it filled a hole. It was wanted because it was iconic. Because it is what a Spitfire is to a Brit or a Mustang is to a Yank. Good and correct explanation.
Some airplanes are just missed because of their absence and not their performance.

On top of that, in this case Fokker has enough coolness for export...

Viikate_
10-08-2009, 06:57 AM
Me thinks that mortoma is expecting way too much. Maybe because of Fokker's reputation based on WW1? D.XXI is a Crap Plane™ with capital C.

Here's some comments from finnish Fokker pilot Mauno Fräntilä:

- How was it like to fly the Fokker, in your opinion?
It wasn't anything special, but there was no better. When Mikkeli was bombed I wished it had oars, so we could catch the bombers by rowing. Though it climbed well, it was no dogfighter. It'd lose to the Chaika and I-16.

- The Fokker endured dives well too?
I don't remember if it had a set max dive speed at all. Sure it was heavy to level off, but it was so with all planes in a dive. You have to pull with all your might.

- How about the Fokker guns? You only pulled smoke from the I-16's, but you got one SB-2 in the Winter War?
We were at Ruokolahti, when over 20 SB's were going towards Mikkeli. Six of our planes took off. The bombers were at 5000 meters, so it took time to climb up there, and the SB was almost faster than our Fokker. But they had full loads, so they flew slow. We got to 500 meters from them, below. It was a very cold day, smoke was rising from the chimneys at Mikkeli. We felt sorry for them. We tried to shoot from far away, maybe that's why they dropped their loads early at the town limits and turned back. Then we were on them. We shot at many planes and drew smoke. They flew in close formation for firepower. We had to make some slow down to break their formation, the others wouldn't wait. We knew the blind angles of the SB, so we could hit hard those that were left behind. First the machine gunner. I hit two, but one probably caught fire only after crossing border. The other fell. Then I was out of fuel.

- The small calibre guns were effective at close range?
Yeah, the guns shot at a point 150 meters ahead. There were two guns in the wings and two in the fuselage.

GerritJ9
10-08-2009, 02:26 PM
Best plane to compare the Mercury D.XXI to is, perhaps, the Ki.27. Compare specifications- top speeds are about the same; the Ki is a better climber and more manoeuverable, but the Fokker has better gunpower, can outdive the Ki and is more ruggedly built. In a 1-on-1 duel, the pilot would make the difference.
Both were good when originally designed, but simply overtaken by more modern designs built only one or two years later- such was the rate of advance in plane design in the 1930s.