PDA

View Full Version : just wondering about 190A-8/9 climbrate



Danschnell
09-29-2005, 02:38 PM
Hiya people

Just wondering... online whenever I fly the 190A-8 or 9 I notice my climbrate being about half that of my enemies or even any other type of German aircraft. Is this true of my imagination? Has it been documented that the 190s in IL2 grocely underperform?

MEGILE
09-29-2005, 03:08 PM
In a slow speed climb the 190 Antons should be outperformed by quite a selection of contemporary planes.
As for the question of underperformance...



FW-190A8 Speed/Climb performance (http://gamers-review.co.uk/files/Planes/FockeWulf/FW-190A8/Fw190A-8PerformanceCharts1.png)


campare it to the game and see what results you get http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Jetbuff
09-29-2005, 03:25 PM
I wish I knew enough to really find out but alas I do not. All I have is a very subjective feeling that the 190 doesn't climb or accelerate like I thought it should but then again a lot of its other characteristics are spot on (top speed, high speed stall behaviour, the "sinking" at the bottom of the loop, control harmony, etc.) so my best guess is there's a fudge in its FM somewhere that gets most performance parameters just right but fails when it comes to climb. I'm not saying I expect the 190 to outclimb a sptifire for example, but it's nowhere near competitive in that regime... unless I'm doing something grossly wrong with the plane.

The P-47 suffers from the same acceleration penalty I think. Best guess is that it's a quirk in the drag modelling somewhere. Either that or the other planes are overperforming relative to those two. Of course, it could be me just speaking out of my a$$ and that I need to spend more time in both - although I do spend a fair bit of time in the 190.

I wish I had the time to find out.

faustnik
09-29-2005, 03:26 PM
Fw190s climb very well at high speeds. By late 1944, however, most of the enemy a/c are going to have better climb ability.

If you get tired of it, just grab a Dora. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Acceleration does seem really poor, but, the key is not getting yourself into a situation where you rely on acceleration, stay fast.

WWMaxGunz
09-29-2005, 04:16 PM
A rephrase of that:

At highspeed like in a chase, the FW will have better climb than many other planes.
So you keep the speed of the fight high and the other has a choice to slow down in
order to climb better than you. Before he is too high you should be able to zoom
up and blow his slow moving six out of the air unless something else stops you.
That is how the FW's controlled the fights over the Channel in midwar. It did help
to start with an advantage in speed and height, in fact one or the other is a must.

Vrabac
09-29-2005, 07:15 PM
Well FW190 really feels like a pregnant mule when you slow down below some 350kmh. But above it's rather nice. Altough not THAT nice to neutralize it's low speed flaws. The trick is usually to do shallow climb. No zoom climbs. That way you can easily escape a spitfire from 1942-43 since you can climb (under shallow angle, but stil climb) at the speed that is almost as high as spit's maximum level speed. So dive, use the superior high speed characteristics to get yourself a nice firing solution, shoot and climb away from the danger zone GENTLY and QUICKLY by climbing at very small angle. Don't use rudder or roll too much to look behind, you'll just loose energy (that 190 doesn't retain that well anyway) and if you are fast enough most that the opposition can do is make a desperate snapshot that will miss (hopefully- if it hits and you get holes in the wing -no matter how small they are- DIVE AND RUN FOR YOUR LIFE). Get yourself back to the superior position and repeat the procedure (or find yourself anoher target if you hit in the previous attempt, as the armament is FINALLY as deadly as it should be http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif).

It's really not an easy plane to fight with, but it makes it somehow magical, as fighting succesfully in it is especially rewarding and pleasant.

And finally, yes I think that it's climb is very bad. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEXX_Luthor
09-29-2005, 10:35 PM
Faustnik::
Acceleration does seem really poor, but, the key is not getting yourself into a situation where you rely on acceleration, stay fast.
You guys are so close to the truth....fight at high speeds and STAY at high speeds. P-51 players know this (or supposed to know).

Fw-190 (and P-47) acceleration was well known to be at best, extremely average. Don't use 190 (or P-47) as a "109" use it as a "190" or "47" as the case may be. There are tremendous differences between the Fw/JuGG and 109. Don't confuse them. This sounds insulting its so simple especially coming from a mere Offline player, but on these Dogfighter boards you see all the players thinking all the Luftwaffe fighters (and P-47s http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) were variants of late Bf-109s.

It is soooo tempting to slow down by turning tight or pulling the stick way back into a steep climb. Even for the Old Timers, the temptation can be too great to resist. Stay fast.

Buzzsaw-
09-29-2005, 10:51 PM
Salute

Fly a 190A5 or A6 if you want the climb performance. The historical A8 and A9 were considerably heavier and performed worse in the climb, although they had better top speeds at certain altitudes.

faustnik
09-29-2005, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

Fly a 190A5 or A6 if you want the climb performance. The historical A8 and A9 were considerably heavier and performed worse in the climb, although they had better top speeds at certain altitudes.

The Fw190A5 and A6 in PF are limited to 1.42ata@2700rpm. The Fw190A8@2700rpm is given 1.58ata full boost. So, the Fw190A8 has the advantage at the highest power setting at certain altitudes. Of course the normal climb power setting for both is 1.32ata@2400rpm at which the A5/6 does outclimb the A8 in PF.

TAGERT.
09-29-2005, 11:34 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
Hiya people

Just wondering... online whenever I fly the 190A-8 or 9 I notice my climbrate being about half that of my enemies or even any other type of German aircraft. Is this true of my imagination? Has it been documented that the 190s in IL2 grocely underperform? One way to find out, Take Megile's data he provided, set up a test on the Crima map, record a track file while you re-create the climb test, post the track file, and Ill process it for you. That goes for anybody with any plane, PM me if your serious.

faustnik
09-30-2005, 12:22 AM
I did a simple climb test with a stopwatch and the Fw190A8 looked pretty good to me.

WOLFMondo
09-30-2005, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

Fly a 190A5 or A6 if you want the climb performance. The historical A8 and A9 were considerably heavier and performed worse in the climb, although they had better top speeds at certain altitudes.

The A9 does climb well. Just keep the TAS above 350kph and it climbs pretty quickly.

quiet_man
09-30-2005, 01:08 AM
a different explenation would that all other aircraft climb much better than RL, most at slow speed

that's why the 190 seam to "improve" at high speed
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

quiet_man

WWMaxGunz
09-30-2005, 02:37 AM
It is a bit of both, quiet_man.

I look forward to 4.02 as one readme note looks promising in the lowspeed climb/turn area.

Jetbuff
09-30-2005, 03:46 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
It is a bit of both, quiet_man.

I look forward to 4.02 as one readme note looks promising in the lowspeed climb/turn area.
I hope so. I have no hard evidence but I've always felt IL-2 was too lenient at low speeds in terms of drag and therefore E-bleed. It seemed implausible to me that so many planes could climb at just above their stall speeds so well. We shall see.


As for keeping the FW fast, I do prefer to extend in the horizontal over the vertical and 350kph is my "hard deck" when fighting in a 190. I guess I just thought that while it was no stellar climber, it could still climb competently at medium speeds too. (~300 - 350kph IAS) I think I got that impression from one of those 190 Vs Spit reports but I can't remember which one. In it, it did not seem that the 190 was a complete dog when it came to climbing but then again I don't think they noted the speeds at which the climb comparisons were conducted.

Vipez-
09-30-2005, 04:25 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

Fly a 190A5 or A6 if you want the climb performance. The historical A8 and A9 were considerably heavier and performed worse in the climb, although they had better top speeds at certain altitudes.
A-9 was very decent climber, with it's improved wide 3.3m propellor. Allthough a-9 beeing slightly heavier than A-8 it really didn't matter, due to more effective prop, and BMW-801S(T).. So a-9 does outclimb A-8 by a couple of meters/second. Dunno, how its modelled in the game though.

Btw does anyone have any info, if FW-190 A-9/R-11 with a turbosupercharged BMW 801 TS saw any combat ?

MEGILE
09-30-2005, 04:46 AM
I was under the impression no JGs were equipped with A9s with that engine...
only, I think F9s with that engine saw combat... have no idea where I got the reference though.. its stuck in my head. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Vrabac
09-30-2005, 05:29 AM
As for keeping the FW fast, I do prefer to extend in the horizontal over the vertical and 350kph is my "hard deck" when fighting in a 190. I guess I just thought that while it was no stellar climber, it could still climb competently at medium speeds too. (~300 - 350kph IAS) I think I got that impression from one of those 190 Vs Spit reports but I can't remember which one. In it, it did not seem that the 190 was a complete dog when it came to climbing but then again I don't think they noted the speeds at which the climb comparisons were conducted.

You probably mean this one:

http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/VBv190.htm

Well in-game 190 obviously can't make a sustained climb under steeper angle than a spit, but than again I think here a balance compromise was made, since 190 would be simply overpowered against SpitV. Of course, this goes only for group fights where guys flying 190 aren't utterly careless. In 1 vs 1 my impression is that 190 can't fight anyone.

It's also very funny how they found 190 to be "more manouverable". Obviously turn radius isn't everything in RL manouverability... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Danschnell
09-30-2005, 06:06 AM
It seems the 190A-8/9 is a real medium bomber FM. It climbs and looses energy far worse than any other plane... and it turns far worse.

So that means the only thing it can do is fly fast, preferably in a straight line (because manouvers bleed its energy making it useless with slow accelleration.) And, contemporary Allied planes are faster too.

It is strange that so many people think the 190 was a good plane. In fact it was a substandard series. ANY plane can keep its speed fast to stay out of big furballs or escape after shooting etc. Its just that the 190 is so helpless its the only thing it can do.

A decent Allied pilot should down a 190 every time with no problems. You just don't have any advantages in a 190. The only thing that keeps those 190s winning is they are flown by superior pilots. Reds rely on planes, blues rely on pilots.

faustnik
09-30-2005, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by Megile:
I was under the impression no JGs were equipped with A9s with that engine...
only, I think F9s with that engine saw combat... have no idea where I got the reference though.. its stuck in my head. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

New evidence should be out fairly soon indicating that TS/TH powerplants were more common than previously thought. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The White One Project is digging up with a lot of interesting information on the BMW801s.

White 1 Foundation (http://www.white1foundation.org/)

Jetbuff
09-30-2005, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
It seems the 190A-8/9 is a real medium bomber FM. It climbs and looses energy far worse than any other plane... and it turns far worse.
Not really, the P-47 behaves similarly.

A decent Allied pilot should down a 190 every time with no problems. You just don't have any advantages in a 190. The only thing that keeps those 190s winning is they are flown by superior pilots. Reds rely on planes, blues rely on pilots.
I think you're exagerating a bit here. People adapt to the situation - it's a key human trait - and FB has generally been more forgiving of TnB engagements for a variety of reasons like poor aircraft visibility and the tactical nature of the war on the Eastern front. I don't think blue pilots are better (in fact I know so) it's just that anyone who has flown Blue has had to contend with flying planes that have always needed the E and/or numbers advantage to win and have adopted the required tactics for them. With the return of the Minengeschoss and shift of emphasis away from TnB, these tactics are paying off in spades.

Why do I know it's not a Red Vs Blue pilot thing? Because whenever I flew Red pre 4.01 I too would tool around at low altitudes in La5's and yaks getting mixed up in any furball I chanced upon. In fact, I honestly don't ever remember disengaging to gain E in a red plane except in the P-40 which, surprise, surprise, ended up being the plane I was most successful in!

In the yaks and La's of pre 4.01 days I just felt invincible - even if a higher bandit spotted me, I could still deny him the shot and retain enough E to at least force him to pick on someone else.

LEXX_Luthor
09-30-2005, 04:53 PM
I don't remember this far back, but the original FB 1.0 planes absorbed alot more damage too (they say)...never mind original FB I-16, so the one pass banditry didn't work good back then. Is this correct thinking?

faustnik
09-30-2005, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
It seems the 190A-8/9 is a real medium bomber FM. It climbs and looses energy far worse than any other plane... and it turns far worse.

So that means the only thing it can do is fly fast, preferably in a straight line (because manouvers bleed its energy making it useless with slow accelleration.) And, contemporary Allied planes are faster too.

It is strange that so many people think the 190 was a good plane. In fact it was a substandard series. ANY plane can keep its speed fast to stay out of big furballs or escape after shooting etc. Its just that the 190 is so helpless its the only thing it can do.

A decent Allied pilot should down a 190 every time with no problems. You just don't have any advantages in a 190. The only thing that keeps those 190s winning is they are flown by superior pilots. Reds rely on planes, blues rely on pilots.

I strongly disagree with just about everything in your post here Danschnell. The Fw190A8/9 can match a P-47D-27 or P-51D-5/20 in climb rate at low altitude. The same Fw190s can beat many of the Soviet planes in climb at higher altitudes.

The 4.01 Fw190 does not bleed much energy in high speed turns. You can use a shallow turn to gain seperation or position on an enemy.

Contemporary Allied planes are equal to or slower than the Fw190A9 at low altitude level speed. The Fw190s are faster than the Spitfires we have in the sim.

Many of us have beaten many Allied pilots in true dogfights with the Fw190s. We make not go in circles but, we can win the fight for energy advantage in the vertical and get the kill. The roll rate of the Fw190 can also get you low speed kills if you are very familiar with the plane. With the 1942 planset, which is the case for most of my online time, the Fw190 can use its level speed, high speed climb, dive and zoom, roll rate, excellent visibility and superior firepower to flat out dominate.

The P-47 and P-51 are every bit as difficult as the Fw190 and require good pilots for success.

Keep flying the 190, you'll get attached to it! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/A4_2.jpg
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/A6_1.jpg
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/A6_2.jpg
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/A8_4.jpg
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/A8_3.jpg

Sorry 56K guys, had to do it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ratsack
09-30-2005, 06:23 PM
I find I usually get about twice my normal number of kills per sortie when I fly any FW. Against its historical match ups, it's a killer. Positively murderous before 1944.

Ratsack

Buzzsaw-
09-30-2005, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:

The Fw190A8/9 can match a P-47D-27 or P-51D-5/20 in climb rate at low altitude.



They can do more than match the D27, they are superior. The D27 does not meet its historical climbtimes as the my post on that subject showed.

When you compare the 190A5 or A6 to the P-47's, they easily beat them at all but very high altitudes.

CUJO_1970
09-30-2005, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by Vipez-:
Btw does anyone have any info, if FW-190 A-9/R-11 with a turbosupercharged BMW 801 TS saw any combat ?


Yes, the TS powerplant was used.

But there seems to be regular confusion about the superchargers - they were not turbos.

All A-series Focke-Wulfs had mechanical superchargers, not exhaust-driven "turbo" superchargers.

BMW did develop and excellent turbo-supercharger for the BMW801, but it had no official funding and pretty much had to be developed "in-house".

They were used on bombers, however - namely the late Ju-88 series, but not operationally on fighters.

CUJO_1970
09-30-2005, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

Fly a 190A5 or A6 if you want the climb performance. The historical A8 and A9 were considerably heavier and performed worse in the climb, although they had better top speeds at certain altitudes.


It depends on the aircraft setup.

Phillipe Willaume already posted some time ago on another board, and compared climb times from A-4 through A-9 from German(and foreign) tests.

The A-8 and A-9s were certainly capable of matching the earlier climb rates in the series.

TAGERT.
09-30-2005, 08:06 PM
@faustnik

Hey bud, here is the ROC result from your Fw190 climb test
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_RESULTS/ROC/FW190/faustnik_FW190_ROC.JPG

The rest of the test can be seen here

FAUSTNIK THE TEST PILOT (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_RESULTS/ROC/FW190/faustnik_fw190.pdf)

Note, that without some real world data to compair to, that contains the real world test methods, test conditions, and results, it is hard to say if the sim is doing a good or bad job, or if you method was a good or bad job.

If you find some data, let me know and I can plot it along side your in-game results.

CUJO_1970
09-30-2005, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
It is strange that so many people think the 190 was a good plane. In fact it was a substandard series. ANY plane can keep its speed fast to stay out of big furballs or escape after shooting etc. Its just that the 190 is so helpless its the only thing it can do.

A decent Allied pilot should down a 190 every time with no problems. You just don't have any advantages in a 190. The only thing that keeps those 190s winning is they are flown by superior pilots. Reds rely on planes, blues rely on pilots.



All very true!

The FW190 was quite substandard and never really had great success in any role or any theatre it was deployed in.

Not very many pilots were ever successful in it either, although there were a couple(2-3)of aces that flew it.

American and British pilots who flew captured examples of the FW190 absolutely hated to fly them, bemoaning the poor handling characteristics, weak firepower and slow rate of roll.

The engine controls were excessively complicated and demanding on the pilot as well, not to mention the constant retrimming the pilots had to labor through in flight.

A substandard design indeed.

The British were positively thrilled to be flying against the FW190 when it debuted over the channel, and shot it down in droves. No wonder morale in the RAF skyrocketed in 1942!

People probably think it was a good plane because of all that propaganda back then still lingers on today - and it shows because the sim is so heavily biased in favor of blue http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Danschnell
09-30-2005, 08:08 PM
LEXX_Luthor I agree with you. Back in the day the Mg151 was not as effective, and in 2.0, ALL weapons weren't very effective for one pass kills.

Personally, I think that 2.0 was the most historically accurate for firepower, with the exception of the MK108 needing multiple hits to down light fighters.

Now I think all the guns are too powerful. Just one or two 20mm cannon hits nearly always makes a fighter unusable, (even though it usually doesn't down them.) If 20mm cannons were really as powerful as they are now in the sim, the Germans would never have bothered inventing the Mk108. Its just not neccessary because one pass with Mg151 kills everything anyway (or at least disables it.)

I think all weapons should have their effectiveness decreased though... and no, NOT just the Mg151. Don't want to go back to that bias again.

Ratsack
10-01-2005, 02:09 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:

The Fw190A8/9 can match a P-47D-27 or P-51D-5/20 in climb rate at low altitude.



They can do more than match the D27, they are superior. The D27 does not meet its historical climbtimes as the my post on that subject showed.

When you compare the 190A5 or A6 to the P-47's, they easily beat them at all but very high altitudes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And so they should. The P47 is hardly noted as a terrific climber.

Ratsack

ICDP
10-01-2005, 03:03 AM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
LEXX_Luthor I agree with you. Back in the day the Mg151 was not as effective, and in 2.0, ALL weapons weren't very effective for one pass kills.

Personally, I think that 2.0 was the most historically accurate for firepower, with the exception of the MK108 needing multiple hits to down light fighters.

Now I think all the guns are too powerful. Just one or two 20mm cannon hits nearly always makes a fighter unusable, (even though it usually doesn't down them.) If 20mm cannons were really as powerful as they are now in the sim, the Germans would never have bothered inventing the Mk108. Its just not neccessary because one pass with Mg151 kills everything anyway (or at least disables it.)

I think all weapons should have their effectiveness decreased though... and no, NOT just the Mg151. Don't want to go back to that bias again.

The 20mm cannons were excellent anti fighter weapons and could easily take down a fighter with a few hits but bombers took quite a pounding from 20mm's. For this reason the Mk108 was designed, bombers were in major trouble after only 3-4 hits from the Mk108. It was the exception rather than the rule for a fighter to return to base with multiple 20mm cannon hits.

IMHO the weapon effectiveness is just fine (apart from the .50's needed unsynched). If I am in a fighter and get hit by 4x20mm cannons I should not be flying very long. Prior to 4.01 the Mg151 cannons had the wrong loadout and were not doing the damage they should have been. Are you saying that this error (which Oleg fixed) should be returned because you felt it was more realisitic?

p1ngu666
10-03-2005, 06:56 AM
nah i think luther is right, planes seem to die easier.

mg151/20 seems to rapidly dismember planes now, even toughies like b25 and beufighter, ive had them fall apart with just a couple of hits.

megile and fish hacked up my b25 last night very easily with just 2 mg151/20 (dora and he162)
ive seen some guncam footage against 109s where they shoot b17s and nothing much happens, contrasts sharply with my b25 ignighting quickly and falling part like crumbly cake..

faustnik
10-05-2005, 05:44 PM
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/faustnik_FW190_ROCwithReal.jpg

I added in some real numbers to the chart Tagert generated just to check it out. The 4.01 model is OK. I could certainly make up a lot of ground using manual prop pitch. I don't know about getting close to low level figures but, it sure isn't far off everywhere else. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

p1ngu666
10-05-2005, 06:16 PM
yip http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

for what its worth, ive found the a6/5, im really really successful in, even in dogfight servers like afj dedicated...

i did much worse in a yak3p actully http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

TAGERT.
10-05-2005, 06:22 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/faustnik_FW190_ROCwithReal.jpg

I added in some real numbers to the chart Tagert generated just to check it out. The 4.01 model is OK. I could certainly make up a lot of ground using manual prop pitch. I don't know about getting close to low level figures but, it sure isn't far off everywhere else. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif Cool! Sorry I have not got back to this yet.. I got side tracked on the roll rate thing.

faustnik
10-05-2005, 09:22 PM
No problem Tagert. I was tinkering with the graph at lunch and thought I'd post it.

I bet the difference at low level is a test method issue. Either way, manual prop pitch would go a long way to eliminating the difference.

faustnik
10-05-2005, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:


for what its worth, ive found the a6/5, im really really successful in, even in dogfight servers like afj dedicated...

i did much worse in a yak3p actully http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Yeah, I hear you. I know my motto has always been "never turn, ever" in the Fw190, I have to admit I've been sneaking some dogfighting moves in with the Fw190A4 even in "official" squad night missions. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif The Fw190's handling right before stall is very good in 4.01 and you can really mix it with the Spit Vs in the sharp vertical B&Z. The Fw190 is getting closer every patch to living up to its "dogfighter" reputation, not turnfighter, but dogfighter. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Friendly_flyer
10-06-2005, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
ANY plane can keep its speed fast to stay out of big furballs or escape after shooting etc.

I take it you haven't tried the Hurricane?

IL2-chuter
10-06-2005, 01:38 AM
Any improvements in performance due to manual (i.e. emergency backup) prop pitch control would be strictly a gaming issue. On both the 109 and 190 max performance is prop auto, throttle full, manual control should either match (by using the same setting auto would use . . . max rpm) or hurt performance. Game performance appears to differ from reality from what I've seen posted.


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif


And 190 accelleration, particularly from a standstill (takeoff), blows.

faustnik
10-06-2005, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by IL2-chuter:
Any improvements in performance due to manual (i.e. emergency backup) prop pitch control would be strictly a gaming issue. On both the 109 and 190 max performance is prop auto, throttle full, manual control should either match (by using the same setting auto would use . . . max rpm) or hurt performance. Game performance appears to differ from reality from what I've seen posted.


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif


And 190 accelleration, particularly from a standstill (takeoff), blows.

Well, I agree that the Fw190 should have better performance with auto pitch, but, even if it is not realistic, we can use manual prop pitch to gain realistic performance.

And yes, accelleration for the Fw190s is awful, and it was an a/c noted for excellent acceleration. The workaround for that is to keep your speeds up all the time.

I'm not saying the Fw190 model in PF matches averything I've read about the plane, but, it isn't that far off.

MEGILE
10-06-2005, 03:39 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:

I'm not saying the Fw190 model in PF matches averything I've read about the plane, but, it isn't that far off.

This is secret luftwhine speak for, oleg nerfed my klownwagon, be sure.

Jagdklinger
10-06-2005, 04:51 PM
All very true!

The FW190 was quite substandard and never really had great success in any role or any theatre it was deployed in.

Not very many pilots were ever successful in it either, although there were a couple(2-3)of aces that flew it.

American and British pilots who flew captured examples of the FW190 absolutely hated to fly them, bemoaning the poor handling characteristics, weak firepower and slow rate of roll.

The engine controls were excessively complicated and demanding on the pilot as well, not to mention the constant retrimming the pilots had to labor through in flight.

A substandard design indeed.

The British were positively thrilled to be flying against the FW190 when it debuted over the channel, and shot it down in droves. No wonder morale in the RAF skyrocketed in 1942!

People probably think it was a good plane because of all that propaganda back then still lingers on today - and it shows because the sim is so heavily biased in favor of blue Angry Blue Guy

It's nice to hear a voice of reason http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Pig_Mac
10-06-2005, 05:15 PM
Semi-OT:

After getting my p38-late out-dogfighted by a slow 190, i had to try out the early ones to see what was going on.

after a few quickmissions i noticed that the A6 at least, is very nice at turning with flaps. i outmanouvered 2 Ace AI spits (not expecting to do it online).

I really hope i can get the hang on the A6 even after the patch since the FW is such a nice plane. I only played around with the A9 earlier, and it was out of my league, my gunnery still isn't up to the task of insta-blowing up online people in one pass. With the A6 i at least have a few attempts before it's time to break off.

I surely wouldn't call the 190 substandard in any way, me as a pilot of a late one sure is substandard. God i still love this sim!

Jetbuff
10-06-2005, 05:23 PM
If you're using flaps on the 190 you're going about it all wrong. Bring loads of E and a couple of friends for the ultimate butcherbird experience - yes that can be said of most planes but the 190's firepower really makes it worthwhile.

Pig_Mac
10-06-2005, 06:53 PM
If you're using flaps on the 190 you're going about it all wrong.

Try out the early models in a few quick missions, they arn't that bad turners at all. I don't want to be caught up by the one i'm trying to dogfights friends at that time though.

It sure surprised me when the FW stayed on my tail like glue when i went slow and hard turning. If i can pass on that surprise to at least one enemy, it will be all worth it =P

I'm more of an early planes guy, so being able to take at least a turn with my opponent gives me a lot of joy.

I know i prolly should stay away from the 190 since i ain't a BnZ'er at heart. but the Cockpit and the plane just looks soo **** nice, and i always liked the plane, never got a hang of it though. It's like driving a ferrari in a city full of rusty skodas, sadly without a drivers licence.

p1ngu666
10-06-2005, 09:04 PM
oh its pretty simple really, shoot what u can, avoid getting slow, if in trouble, run to a friendly, who will clear your 6.

a5/6 are really nice currently, the a5 has mgff cannons on the outerwings, same FM tho

cawimmer430
10-07-2005, 07:32 AM
So the trick to successfully flying a 190 is to stay fast!? No wonder I suck with that plane. I tend to go after every enemy and that means diving, turning and playing around with the throttle (usually decreasing it in dives) and those things bleed off speed. For me, a YAK would be perfect! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I was wondering why the FW-190 stalls so easily and the turn rate is pretty horrible. I do find the controls to be responsive and the roll-rate seems ok to me, better than the BF-109's. Because of this, I don't fly the FW-190 much.

Of the German fighters, I myself prefer any BF-109 version over the FW-190 because they're easier to control. Only the Ta / Dora / Kurt Tank versions of the FW-190 (long thing snout) are pretty decent and fly better than the regular 190s.

IL2-chuter
10-07-2005, 08:58 AM
And yes, accelleration for the Fw190s is awful, and it was an a/c noted for excellent acceleration. The workaround for that is to keep your speeds up all the time.


HA HA, good one. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

As far as the Ta goes: It should turn a lot better . . . just my gut impression based on pilot's statements and test flight reports . . . just a thought. Also, I think the roll rate should take longer to spool up than it does.

Go, Ferrari (Ferrari fan since 1978) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif (Gosh, Max and Bernie got to get their . . . act . . . together.)

p1ngu666
10-07-2005, 09:17 AM
190 has small wings, advantage is less drag, disadvantage, u turn bad, real bad http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Friendly_flyer
10-07-2005, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by CUJO_1970 and Danschnell:
A substandard design indeed.

You should be careful with the sarcasm, lads. To quite a lot of people irony has something to do with metal.

faustnik
10-07-2005, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
190 has small wings, advantage is less drag, disadvantage, u turn bad, real bad http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Yes, wing small, plane heavy, turn bad.