PDA

View Full Version : Is The Macchi FM Correct?



Monson74
04-12-2006, 02:48 AM
S! Oleg & Everyone,

I know you can't trust everything you read but according to various websites & books the Macchi fighter series were quite agile but lacked horsepower compared to their mid-'42 counterparts. The Macchis we have in IL2 are fast but feel heavy on the controls - especially the ailerons & they stall/spin easily. They seem more suited for B&Z-style of fighting. Is this correct?

Edit - so far I have only tested the 202s thoroughly not the 205s - I don't know much about the Veltro series anyway.

HotelBushranger
04-12-2006, 03:22 AM
Well, IMO the Macchi (205) FM is inconsistant. Sometimes I can turn with a Spitfire, sometimes I couldn't outturn a B-17. And no, it isn't good at BnZ because after 450 km/h, the controls get extremely heavy. So really, its not good at TnB or BnZ. All accounts I've read indicate it was extremely manouverable, being a competitive fighter in terms of horizontal turnfights against Spitfires.

Rani1973
04-12-2006, 04:34 AM
My grandfather was a fighter pilot of Regia Aeronautica during WW2..He remember the Mc202 and Mc205 were very manouverable and fast expecially at low altitude...
When Italian pilots had the Mc202 the only lack against allied planes was the armament, all the rest was very good..
I dont think here we have the correct FM for Macchi MC202 and 205...But I hope by next patchs Oleg will improve it

Probably is impossible to create a real FM by a sim , but could be apreciable a FM very close to real plane FM

Regards
Rani

HotelBushranger
04-12-2006, 05:33 AM
Well considering almost all aircraft have be readjusted in subsequent patches, I'd assume the same thing will happen here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Hopefully http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ImpStarDuece
04-12-2006, 07:38 AM
I dont know about the rate of roll or elevator authority, but just going by the numbers, a MC 202 should be fairly competitive with a Spitfire in the turn but probably not superior.


Spitfire Vb

Power: 1,470 hp
Weight: 6,700 lbs
Wing area: 242 sq feet

P/W ratio: 4.56 lbs/hp
Wing loading: 27.70 lbs/sq foot

Spitfire IX

Power: 1,720 hp
Weight: 7,450 lbs
Wing area: 242 sq feet

P/W ratio: 4.33 lbs/hp
Wing loading: 30.8 lbs/ sq foot

MC 202

Power: 1,175 hp
Weight: 6,600 lbs
Wing area: 181 sq feet

P/W ratio: 5.62 lbs/hp
Wing loading: 36.5 lbs/ sq foot.

I know that power loading and wing loading aren't the be all and end all and wing shape, airfoil shape and lots of outher factors come into it, but the Spitfires generally have around 20% better power to weight ratio and 20-25% better (lower) wingloading. This indicated (to me at least) that they should turn better than the MC 202.

3.JG51_BigBear
04-12-2006, 02:29 PM
Il2 Compare shows the Spit IX with a much better turn time than the MC 205 at speeds below 380 km/h with the Spit having the greatest advantage at 325-330 km/h. After that they're very close after 410 km/h and practically identical at 430km/h.

pdog1
04-12-2006, 07:23 PM
In real life you could easily BnZ and TnB with the 202/205 no problem. After 1943 when allied air supremacy reigned italian pilots had to bnz to survive. You can't do either well in this game with the planes. Macchi are probably most undermodeled planes in this game.

DIRTY-MAC
04-12-2006, 07:31 PM
I think there is something fishy about them, what Ive read they were suppose to outmanouvre a spit in horisontal turn?

pdog1
04-12-2006, 08:30 PM
lol, currently you can not even out turn hurricane, yet alone spitfire!
Even Mc200 which in real life would fly circles around the lumbering hurricane has to struggle just to keep up with hurricane. Forget about Mc202 that pile of junk cannot even out turn b17.

FritzGryphon
04-12-2006, 08:35 PM
I know wingloading is not everything, but 36.5lbs/ft is remarkably high for such an underpowered plane.

The wing loading is as bad as a 109E, for example, with no slats, and worse P/W.

I think the Mc.202 outturning a Spit, in continuous, sustained turns, is a little farfetched. I'm surprised it turns as well as it does in PF, given those specifications.

IIRC, I tested the sustained turn time to be 19 seconds for MC202 (no PF for me at school, bah). Marginally better than 109F and Hurri, but worse than Spit.

WWMaxGunz
04-12-2006, 08:54 PM
Do those accounts happen to mention relative pilot hours in each type, Macchi & Spitfire?
Do they say outturn at equal speed or in all other situations?
Or is this just another case of read 2 things and supply 6 more by imagination or lack?

It won't match the data everywhere but without data there is only trying to match some ideas
based on some comments. Having never flown what came before the 202, how do you judge how
well the 202 would seem to those pilots? It is nothing like all WWII fighter pilots had the
chance to fly a large variety of what planes were used. It is rare that who was flying the
other plane was known except in cases where that one was rated highly.

So what is the basis for numeric model simulation of the plane only? How much to bet that
Oleg did not begin the Macchis until after having more than a few datum to work from?

So it may change or not but the basis... you want stories filtered through reader minds?
When 4.04 came out I read on SimHQ from Macchi fans they were happy with the planes.

mortoma
04-12-2006, 09:29 PM
I flew an entire offline career starting with the MC-200, all the 202s and then the 205s. I must say the 202 has a very tight turn. It fools you into thinking it doesn't because it will start stalling with ease if you pull back on the stick too hard. It simply has a lot more elevator force than most planes in the sim. So if you hold off and stay just under the stall, you are actually turing like gangbusters. You just don't realize it. That being said, the stated turn times that Oleg uses are accurate and the plane we have in the sim does turn that well, to the very tenth of a second at 1000 meters. Just don't yank back too hard and enjoy it's fuilly accurate turn.

I cannot however, vouch for the accuracy of it's roll rate. That very well may be under-modeled. Couldn't tell you. But learn to fly it and it's turn is very accurate and very good if I may add.......both at high and low speeds. I wonder how many flew a few QMBs in the 202 and made a premature, snap judgement without flying it for a while?? I'd venture to guess quite a few. And they are the first to whine..........

HotelBushranger
04-12-2006, 09:55 PM
Mate, I've been flying the 205 sustained for about a month http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

leitmotiv
04-12-2006, 11:19 PM
I went from gross ignorance of Italian fighters to a huge fan of all Macchis, including the 200, since we got them. Have had a great deal of pleasure with all of them and my main Macchi gripe is the bloody awful rear visibility in the 202 and 205. I agree with mortoma re elevator force---I've found them turning devils and didn't have the tech expertise to explain it but he did fantastically. I was doing as he explained intuitively. And, since when does a Hurricane "lumber"?

HotelBushranger
04-13-2006, 03:29 AM
Yes, mortoma makes some good points about that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

And I agree with you, I too didn't know much but do now. Once again, I have FB to thank for teaching me stuff http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

leitmotiv
04-13-2006, 03:58 AM
Oleg and his elves try to get it right and sometimes they get hammered unjustly. As long as I was just reading about Italian WWII aircraft, I wasn't very interested in them, but, when I had an opportunity to virtually strap one on, my interest escalated. Sims are fantastic teaching tools and terrific fun---what could be better?

Monson74
04-13-2006, 04:41 AM
I didn't think they would be like Spits - more like a Friedrich perhaps or a Mig3 but the aileron compression seems odd when comparing a 200 with a 202 (still haven't tried the 205s much).

269GA-Veltro
04-13-2006, 06:28 AM
Now i would be happy if i could outturn a B-17 with my Veltro.

3.JG51_BigBear
04-13-2006, 09:44 AM
Originally posted by mortoma:
I flew an entire offline career starting with the MC-200, all the 202s and then the 205s. I must say the 202 has a very tight turn. It fools you into thinking it doesn't because it will start stalling with ease if you pull back on the stick too hard. It simply has a lot more elevator force than most planes in the sim. So if you hold off and stay just under the stall, you are actually turing like gangbusters. You just don't realize it.
Good point.

SUPERAEREO
04-13-2006, 03:16 PM
I think the roll rate feels somewhat too slow: it reminds me of the IL-2 rather than of any other sinle-engined fighter.


S!

VW-IceFire
04-13-2006, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by SUPERAEREO:
I think the roll rate feels somewhat too slow: it reminds me of the IL-2 rather than of any other sinle-engined fighter.


S!
The roll rate reminds me of the PF 3.0 Ki-61 series. It was totally bugged out and the plane didn't perform well at all. Infact the FM's feel very much alike to what that was like.

I don't mind the MC.205...its sometimes fun. But I haven't really gotten a good feel for them yet.

Monson74
04-15-2006, 06:05 AM
Yes - it's the roll rate that is wrong I think - it's really slow but the turning is ok I think. It's funny because when it's flown by AI the Macchis roll like Tie Fighters even at very high speed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

VW-IceFire
04-15-2006, 07:02 AM
What were the pilot notes regarding the elevator authority on the MC.205? Its quite low...especially after coming from the hypersensitive at one speed Spitfire and the sensitive at all speeds Tempest.

timholt
04-15-2006, 07:25 AM
I flew an entire offline career starting with the MC-200, all the 202s and then the 205s.

Mortoma - Where did you find this one? I have been looking for a Macchi campaign but I have been unable to find one.

tomtheyak
04-15-2006, 08:16 AM
Originally by timholt:

Mortoma - Where did you find this one? I have been looking for a Macchi campaign but I have been unable to find one.



Ian Boys (map developer and campaign writer extroardinaire) has made an Eastern front Dgen campaign for the Italian contingent.

Go to the SimHQ Il2-AEP-PF forums and check out the sticky thread at the top regarding 'Dgen upgrade 4043' - read it carefully and pick up the complete finished package (one large zip) and then look for the Dgen4045.rar file (which you will need WinRar to open, available as a free download - just google it...)

Hope this helps! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Skioppo
04-15-2006, 09:23 AM
The mc-202 and the 205 were never reported (by real pilots) to be so easy to stall, and never reported they cannot roll.

The Macchis are, in this sim, the only fighters with these problems, and they weren't supposed to have them.

But, they're the latest addiction to the game, I hope the team will fix it as they did with previous problems in past.

Monson74
04-15-2006, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by Skioppo:

(...)But, they're the latest addiction to the game(...)

I suppose you mean addition - but yes, the Macchis are addictive http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WWMaxGunz
04-15-2006, 02:12 PM
The real pilots had feel for the G's and the speed while simmers are numb-butted and
so many tend to be numb all the way up.

Hello! You CAN pull a stall but you don't have to!
Learn the signs then learn the plane.

Or just keep treating them the same way and complain at how wrong the planes are.
We have people here who drive the same way. The road gets some snow or ice and what do
they do when they lose traction? Pound the gas pedal, spin the wheels, and b!tch.

Big Secret: Pulling more stick will not always get faster turns. Find the edge at
every IAS and still keep looking. Watch your speed.

Every plane just by a bit climbs and turns better than it should. Perhaps some more than
others, how to really know unless you've flown the real ones *correctly* yourself?

Daiichidoku
04-15-2006, 06:48 PM
I find the stalls once entered, are unforgiving, and take some doing to recover from

unlike other certain fighters, where u simply center the jstick and it auto recovers before even rolling once *cough*spit*cough*

it rankles though, that while the airframe seems very tough...i very very rarely get controls knocked out...the engine takes "glass jaw" to a whole new level

oh, plus it shares the ridiculous 190 fuel leak bug

WWMaxGunz
04-15-2006, 08:47 PM
Those are spins. You have already passed stall and are uncoordinated to get that far.
It means you haven't paid attention and never took corrective steps.
Not a test pilot, not an Ace, not very good.
Learn to stay inside the stall -- why I never minded the EAW spin-blender canned spins
was you learned where the edges are in that sim, the penalty was quick and fierce.

Stall in a turn, first you are holding speed and then losing badly only a small pull more.
Loosen the stick a bit but also nose down a tiny bit to regain speed only then come back
level. You find yourself rocking the stick to hold the edge, that is realistic.

VW-IceFire
04-16-2006, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
I find the stalls once entered, are unforgiving, and take some doing to recover from

unlike other certain fighters, where u simply center the jstick and it auto recovers before even rolling once *cough*spit*cough*

it rankles though, that while the airframe seems very tough...i very very rarely get controls knocked out...the engine takes "glass jaw" to a whole new level

oh, plus it shares the ridiculous 190 fuel leak bug
Spitfires had benign stall characteristics and that type of behavior is typical of what it should do. I do find the Spitfire stalls more than I expect it to...and you can easily wing it over if you hamfist the controls.

The Macchi's don't seem to stall very much. They go from controlled stall into uncontrolled spinland very quickly. They basically just whip over and start tumbling. If you correct for it with hard rudder and neutral controls it will recover after about 2 seconds but that means you've totally lost advantage in a fight.

I didn't realize it has a fuel leak bug...but I did notice the engine being fairly easy to hit although not all that unlike the 109.

SUPERAEREO
04-16-2006, 02:25 PM
AFAIK the Macchi fighters DID spin rather easily according to real life pilots, but it is the roll characteristics that I find slightly dubious.

The Ki.61's are a bit the same, but then again they had longer wings...


S!

p1ngu666
04-16-2006, 03:06 PM
if they dont have slats they fly pants in the game...

cr42 used to have similer, death stall, near impossible to get out of a stall, and a very sharp departure.

entirely realistic ofcourse http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

iirec it was within 45minutes, the first bunch of service pilots with the cr42 that pilots wanted to start a aerobatic team with the plane

VW-IceFire
04-16-2006, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by SUPERAEREO:
AFAIK the Macchi fighters DID spin rather easily according to real life pilots, but it is the roll characteristics that I find slightly dubious.

The Ki.61's are a bit the same, but then again they had longer wings...


S!
Ahh now that is interesting. If they spun rather easily then I imagine thats what we've got represented in the stall behavior in the game. So I guess the trick will be to keep them from stalling.

Roll is indeed quite low. Much lower than the Ki-61's which at least on the surface looks similar.

SUPERAEREO
04-16-2006, 04:20 PM
One thing is having an abrupt stall, another having one from which it's very difficult to recover.

I find the C.200 perfectly OK, it's the C.202 and C.205 that don't feel right: after all they were little more than re-engined C.200's, and they should have a very similiar behaviour in flight.


S!

WWMaxGunz
04-17-2006, 02:59 AM
If you don't know the difference between stall and spin then how to tell when you are in stall?
If you don't know when you are stalled then how do you know when to quit tightening the stick?
If you don't know that then how are you going to achieve the best turns?
Because once the plane is stalled you have screwed your ability to turn.

Be sure those real Macchi pilots knew when the plane was approaching stall and flew accordingly.
Be equally sure that your PC stick will not give you the feedback the real pilots had nor will
your seat.

So if your first notice of trouble is when you begin to spin, you are nowhere near as good as
the real pilots who would never go that far and laugh at anyone who did.

Capish?

HotelBushranger
04-17-2006, 03:26 AM
Yes but stalls aren't really modelled properly in this game, only spins.

Anyway, the Ki-61 is now great IMO and don't want any changes to it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif

NonWonderDog
04-17-2006, 10:06 AM
As of 4.0, the stall model is really quite good. A spin is just an assymetric stall, after all, and you're not very likely to get a symmetric stall with 2000 hp of propwash in front of the wings.

I haven't spent much time in the Macchi, but I distinctly remember saying to myself that the Macchi stall model was the best in the sim after the first few times I'd flown it. I remember being extremely impressed by the stall fidelity when dogfighting in it, so I did a few standard stalls and spins... at which point I was even more impressed.

I don't understand the complaining here. Spins in the Macchi look almost picture-perfect. It doesn't have that unnatural bobbing flatspin quality most the other planes used to have at all.

WWMaxGunz
04-17-2006, 06:06 PM
Gee NWD, you write as if you almost have some experience at real flying. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

NonWonderDog
04-17-2006, 06:38 PM
Well, I've been around GA airplanes since I was two, and have uncountable hours as a passenger. I unfortunately only have a couple of hours in my name, though, since my relative with the Cessna is 500 miles from my home. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif I'm currently working on an aerospace degree, rather than persuing the pilotage path.

The Macchi really does spin pretty, though. Remember when people were complaining about the spins in the game and referenced video from that Condor Soaring sim as an example of what power-off spins "should" look like? The Macchi looks like that when it spins. Maybe it's a consequence of 4.04; I haven't been able to put much time in lately, so I'd be pleasantly surprised if all the planes spun that well now.

VW-IceFire
04-17-2006, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
Well, I've been around GA airplanes since I was two, and have uncountable hours as a passenger. I unfortunately only have a couple of hours in my name, though, since my relative with the Cessna is 500 miles from my home. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif I'm currently working on an aerospace degree, rather than persuing the pilotage path.

The Macchi really does spin pretty, though. Remember when people were complaining about the spins in the game and referenced video from that Condor Soaring sim as an example of what power-off spins "should" look like? The Macchi looks like that when it spins. Maybe it's a consequence of 4.04; I haven't been able to put much time in lately, so I'd be pleasantly surprised if all the planes spun that well now.
Indeed...most planes stall and spin much better when 4.01 was introduced and have since then. Prior to that the stalls were apparently scripted and now they are more within the FM rather than just a bunch of preset conditions in the software. It looks alot better anyways.

The Spitifre and Tempest are the two I have the most familiarity in regarding the readings of pilots who flew these types and I'm reasonably happy with the way that these two behave. Not saying there isn't room to improve...but its looking pretty good.

WWMaxGunz
04-18-2006, 01:48 AM
As a wing increased Angle Of Attack the lift increases and so does the drag.
The ratio of lift to drag stays the same until the critial AOA and then drag increases more
and more and more. You still have lift but the drag gets immense and when you slow down
you make less lift and less drag but at the ratio set by your AOA and wing. Your wing sets
how sharp the change is, some have a steep drop in lift:drag and others round over and drop
slowly until no lift is produced at all.

So when you're turning hard and you've got the stick jacked back and your AOA goes up,
watch out for two things. First is you're not turning any better and perhaps a bit worse.
Second is you're bleeding speed badly after you've seen the first indicator.
Watch for those because in a sim unless you see stall shudders then those two are what you
have and they should be enough. If you're on the ball then you'll catch it at the first
sign and ease off a tiny bit or go into stick pumping which becomes necessary as your speed
changes.

Another thing that complicates the whole situation yet many simmers are blind to is when
you are slightly nose up in the turn as planes will do that. It adds to the G loading and
changes your AOA higher when you only have a dozen or so degrees typically. IE, you can
screw yourself in ways those pilots you read from would not do and tend not to include in
the story you think you're matching.
If anything, get the nose slightly down through the turn and let gravity assist you. That
is real esp in combat situations as opposed to the nose high noob turn usually accompanied
by a high whining sound from the general cockpit area.

Funny enough, this is a common occurrence in every decent sim with online play for over ten
years now.

geetarman
04-21-2006, 08:22 PM
Yeah, the high speed handling of the 205 stinks. Correct or not? I don't know. Ya wanna fix something on the plane? Fix the high alt performance. It is amazing at 28,000 0 30,000'. Ridiculous. It was a decent low-mid altitude fighter, not a contender at high alt. It does not slow down or lose energy up there, like it should. Try it. Who needs a TA-152 when you have Oleg's 205? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

pdog1
04-21-2006, 10:17 PM
You know the FM of Macchi is off when Fiat g50 can out manuever Mc200 pretty easily
IRL it was the other way around with mc200 being a much better combat machine.

WWMaxGunz
04-21-2006, 10:37 PM
I look at the thread title and think to myself that it is a pc flight sim including combat,
3D terrain done to scale more than industry standard and ground objects that sometimes move
and fire, any online connects, etc, and I have to say

It Can't Be Perfect so how does that relate with anyone's Correct? How many shapes of
correct and incorrect can anyone find in the FM's? Esp when it is about not. Even if you
had the pc power to run air over all surfaces (including the props) there would be people
who would not like something or other that they can't do with it.

The high alt above 10km part of the models is not correct is true in the sim.
Who flies up there? Maybe in a special coop the bombers travel at 9km alt?
Bombers also run out of supercharger efficiency. The B-29's ran to Japan and back 7 hours
each way at right around 20,000ft, not 25,000 in Europe where there was more flak and
opposition and they could pick the alt, 6.5km. It was more efficient, less fuel, more
bombs as calculated and more accurate hits.

MOH_NoXiuS
04-22-2006, 04:21 AM
The roll rate is the main problem, no doubt on this point.

Stigler_9_JG52
04-25-2006, 10:55 PM
Originally posted by pdog1:
lol, currently you can not even out turn hurricane, yet alone spitfire!
Even Mc200 which in real life would fly circles around the lumbering hurricane has to struggle just to keep up with hurricane. Forget about Mc202 that pile of junk cannot even out turn b17.

pdog, your bias is really showing.

If you knew anything about your aircraft, you'd know that of the three (Spit, Macchi and Hurricane), in a pure turning duel, the Hurricane would be the best aircraft. Only its lack of speed is its Achilles Heel. A Hurri is solid as a rock at low speeds, and can turn on a dime under proper handling. You'd have to get something like an Oscar or Zero to be able to out-turn a Hurricane at low speeds.

Not to say you're not right about the Macchis, you understand, but don't discredit your argument by comparing incorrectly with other planes you know little about.

Similarly, you seem to not understand the dynamics at play when you compare a MC202 and a G-50. I bet a G-50 can outturn a 202. But the 202 is so much faster,and climbs so much better, that a smart Macchi pilot wouldn't get sucked into a slow speed turn fest with a Macchi; he's use his better speed, better engine and better climb to sap the G-50 of its limited agility and then move in for a series of telling gunpasses.

Starting to sound to me like you measure every plane by its ability to turn. Bad assumption. Really bad assumption.

pdog1
04-26-2006, 01:02 AM
The only way to get a kill in these birds with the seriously undermodeled mgs is to get up someones behind and hammer away. BnZ passes in macchi are quite usless, to heavy elevator when you only start to go 430kph or so and very poor e-retention. Im not comparing g50 to 202, im comparing g50 to 200. Im not comparing turn rates, im comparing historical tactics. Hurricane pilots had to bnz g50/200 because if they got into a turn fight with them they would be shot down. The way it is now hurricane and 200 are very close in turn rate and 200 roll rate is way slower. Maybe its just the hurri is to uber i don't know.
And why would a 202 fight a g50?

WTE_Galway
04-26-2006, 01:26 AM
its planes with touchy stall/spin characterisitcs that make me happy I have a MSFFB2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Monson74
04-26-2006, 03:03 AM
Originally posted by MOH_NoXiuS:
The roll rate is the main problem, no doubt on this point.

Agree - the turning is actually pretty good I think - on par with the P-40s maybe.

WWMaxGunz
04-26-2006, 08:10 AM
Hurricanes start losing their ability at sustained flat turns with alt like above 4,000ft to
start and by 8,000ft only equal to 109E of the BoB if even that. Excess thrust is real big
in sustained turns. Hurri pilots were to drag 109's down below 4,000ft if followed.

WWMaxGunz
04-26-2006, 08:13 AM
Originally posted by pdog1:
The only way to get a kill in these birds with the seriously undermodeled mgs is to get up someones behind and hammer away. BnZ passes in macchi are quite usless, to heavy elevator when you only start to go 430kph or so and very poor e-retention. Im not comparing g50 to 202, im comparing g50 to 200. Im not comparing turn rates, im comparing historical tactics. Hurricane pilots had to bnz g50/200 because if they got into a turn fight with them they would be shot down. The way it is now hurricane and 200 are very close in turn rate and 200 roll rate is way slower. Maybe its just the hurri is to uber i don't know.
And why would a 202 fight a g50?

What altitudes these all at?

For 30 cal class guns the Bredas really impress me in the sim. It's not like there are eight.

Stigler_9_JG52
04-26-2006, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by pdog1:
The only way to get a kill in these birds with the seriously undermodeled mgs is to get up someones behind and hammer away. BnZ passes in macchi are quite usless, to heavy elevator when you only start to go 430kph or so and very poor e-retention. Im not comparing g50 to 202, im comparing g50 to 200. Im not comparing turn rates, im comparing historical tactics. Hurricane pilots had to bnz g50/200 because if they got into a turn fight with them they would be shot down. The way it is now hurricane and 200 are very close in turn rate and 200 roll rate is way slower. Maybe its just the hurri is to uber i don't know.
And why would a 202 fight a g50?

Well, you brought up the 200/G-50 comparison, not I. And whether with the 200 or the 202, both those planes are superior overall to the Fiat, but the Fiat stands a chance to outturn them both.

I agree with you on the guns; when I fly Itie kites in Target:Tobruk, I have to get in a goodly number of bursts for each kill (while the Hurricane IIs I often fly against can take me down with any one burst of those Hispanos!). While I take issue with the power of the hispanos, I don't complain that my own guns are weak...they just were. But, I also get a certain measure of satisfaction knowing when I do get a kill it is EARNED. Very few cheap, "lucky shot" kills. Occasionally, I'll nick a wing fuel tank with an explosive bullet and get a flamer with a short burst, but not too often. Have to get position and fill your target UP.

However, in some situations, B&Z can work. If you encounter a bomber and there's no escort, and you have the time and opportunity, you can make use of that and pick a guy to pieces.

I remember one time flying a G-50 in Target:Tobruk, and catching a Hurricane escorting two Martin Marylands south of Sicily one time...I dove in, got a B&Z pass on one bomber and got one engine smoking. the Hurricane came after me and I got him to auger in a turnfight (lucky, since he was actually winning that turn duel, but ran out of altitude and spun in!); then, I re-located the bombers, overhauled them off the coast near Gela and managed several nice wingline gunpasses, gunning them both into the briny. That was in a G-50. However, the modeling for it was probably a bit different than IL-2's.

The other case is if your G-50 encounters a Gladiator or Swordfish. No way you're turning with either of those (unless the Stringbag's still carrying a torp). You MUST use your superior speed and B&Z or you'll get lit up.

onebox33
04-26-2006, 06:14 PM
mc205 has one of the worst roll rate of the entire game... i doubt this slow roll can agree with historical references about it...
please Oleg correct this wonderful plane http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

JG53Frankyboy
04-27-2006, 05:05 AM
the only thing i can say about the MC202/205 FMs is that im spinning with them much more than with other planes

Stigler_9_JG52
04-27-2006, 01:27 PM
I find the Macchis in Targetware to be a mite more squirrely than average, especialy if you have cowling flaps open. I have many more accelerated stalls with Macchis than anything else that comes to mind.

You better be spot on with the rudder during maneuvers, or you'll find you're spending more time righting the ship than getting into position for a shot.

Dunno how true or untrue any of that is, but...

Manta_150GCT
04-28-2006, 01:26 AM
Shall we talk about how easy is to kill the pilot even with an armor plate behind?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif

WWMaxGunz
04-28-2006, 11:06 AM
At very close range the bullets may penetrate that otherwise would not.
Large energy is lost pushing through air at mach 1+ speeds to the shockwave they make.
Even 109 seat won't stop 50 cal at close range and none will stop 20mm except at long.

Shot from 5 or 7, the back of the padded seat will not protect all of the pilot.

Make a track and watch. If the impossible happens then send it to 1C. I have and others
have. One time I was able to show 20mm explode inside a cockpit close to pilot and no
wound. Next patch one fix was about fragments not causing damage anywhere then did.
So you find a real error and give evidence instead of opinion then it helps development.
It is only a shame so many people just want to say only how they feel is wrong.