PDA

View Full Version : Bf109Z is a rocket



jimDG
01-08-2006, 07:10 AM
Had some fun the other day on an arcade server; I picked a bf109Z and B'nZed in it. Gee, that thing will climb extremely well at 120 km/h indicated airspeed, at the verge of a stall - it felt as if it was at 50deg angle to the horizontal and still moving upwards at 20 m/s! Which made it virually uncatchable in such a climb by anything else (even though its best climb speed turned out to be about 170-190 km/h). Are there more a/c like this? Have I re-discovered America? Or is it just the 109Z (makes no sense though)?
I must say - to this point I clung to the view that anything climbs best at 250 km/h and above, and never attempted climbs at lower speed than this in any of the game aircraft (except the biplanes and the I16)

jimDG
01-08-2006, 07:10 AM
Had some fun the other day on an arcade server; I picked a bf109Z and B'nZed in it. Gee, that thing will climb extremely well at 120 km/h indicated airspeed, at the verge of a stall - it felt as if it was at 50deg angle to the horizontal and still moving upwards at 20 m/s! Which made it virually uncatchable in such a climb by anything else (even though its best climb speed turned out to be about 170-190 km/h). Are there more a/c like this? Have I re-discovered America? Or is it just the 109Z (makes no sense though)?
I must say - to this point I clung to the view that anything climbs best at 250 km/h and above, and never attempted climbs at lower speed than this in any of the game aircraft (except the biplanes and the I16)

Kocur_
01-08-2006, 07:20 AM
Well I think we must begin with informaton that Bf-109Z as in the game. i.e. with DB-605 not only never flew, but never existed in any material form. If "Bf-109Z" isnt a UFO, what is...?

Grue_
01-08-2006, 07:21 AM
Some people around here might argue about the flight model of this particular aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The description 'fantasy plane' is overused but was invented for planes like the 109Z.

VW-IceFire
01-08-2006, 08:03 AM
A purely what-if aircraft with a similarly what-if flight model I think. I remember the heyday when thats all you could find on a dogfight server sometimes. Thats usually when I would go hunting.

tjaika1910
01-08-2006, 08:30 AM
Then Z and the twin Heinkel has no proper damage FM. They fly like normal when half of the aircraft is shot to pieces and spinning around a no existing axis. (same as the float plane zero, if the floater is shot away, it still lands like normal on water)

jimDG
01-08-2006, 10:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tjaika1910:
Then Z and the twin Heinkel has no proper damage FM. They fly like normal when half of the aircraft is shot to pieces and spinning around a no existing axis. (same as the float plane zero, if the floater is shot away, it still lands like normal on water) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

not in my experience - it did pull to one side/ get slower with holes in the wings, and deffinitely spun down and crashed with one of the wings blown away. that the AI can still fly with a half a wing missing is a known problem with the AI

jimDG
01-08-2006, 10:26 AM
well it sure does have lots of wing area, and quite some power to hang on those props. dont know what its weight is - if those 2 fuselage have been lightened (by virtue of having 2 of them - to which the elvator forces are applied - i.e. less strengh needed) than 120 km/h climb is feasable. besides - a twin is less susceptible to torque (which would increase the stall speed) even with props rotating in one direction

Kocur_
01-08-2006, 10:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jimDG:
if those 2 fuselage have been lightened (by virtue of having 2 of them - to which the elvator forces are applied - i.e. less strengh needed) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I dont think that fuselagges would get lightened, as IMHO it would be sacrificed for sake of standarization and larger production. I think we can safely assume that fuselages would be standard Bf-109 ones.

Kuna15
01-08-2006, 11:28 AM
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b366/Kuna15/pacific_fighters/bf-109z_eleshot.jpg

That aircraft flew without any major problems.
It is because visual model does not follow damage model.

JG52Karaya-X
01-08-2006, 02:25 PM
Try out the P38L_Late... it has a similar climbing attitude and no torque which makes it easier to stay in the climb. The aircraft wants to climb at 220km/h all by itself - but you can get into an even steeper climb!

Kuna15
01-08-2006, 02:55 PM
Unfortunately for P-38L, Bf-109K-4 on 100% fuel will outclimb P-38L on 25% fuel. From deck up to 5k. That was the case in 401m when I checked RoC of some aircrafts.
I will check out few aircrafts in 402, as things have slightly changed.

Hawgdog
01-08-2006, 03:11 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v22/HawgDog/Sing1.jpg

Unknown-Pilot
01-08-2006, 03:14 PM
If it's Luftwaffe and **** good, there *must* be something wrong. That is the attitude of this place. Always has been (and I've been here since IL2 1.04). So *any* avenue of attack will be taken to try to cut it down. If it's a plane that saw little to no combat, then it's a bloody circus. (Nobody say **** about the commie what-ifs.)

I will point out to you all, yet again, that Oleg HIMSELF said that the aerodynamic principles and design of the 109Z were very sound, and it was 'very easy' to make an FM for it.

You all love to assume he knows best any other time. I love how all that changes with LW planes.

So - if you are right that "Oleg knows best" and has all the credentials, then it would seem that you don't have a leg to stand on with this...... do you?

Of course, in the absence of original tests, you could always display your collective aeronautical engineering knoweldge and show exactly how it's "wrong".

We know that won't happen. But we can always hope, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

In the mean time, I will point out that it has twice the power of a non-Z, with less than twice the weight, and far less than twice the drag.

jimDG
01-08-2006, 04:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jimDG:
if those 2 fuselage have been lightened (by virtue of having 2 of them - to which the elvator forces are applied - i.e. less strengh needed) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I dont think that fuselagges would get lightened, as IMHO it would be sacrificed for sake of standarization and larger production. I think we can safely assume that fuselages would be standard Bf-109 ones. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

why, its easy to take a few ribs out without affecting serial production.
But, on second thought, the ideal weight saving place is the wing - the load (weight) is distributed - it's in 2 places rather than one (in the center)- so , a lighter wing would bear the same loads (as a for a single BF)

jimDG
01-08-2006, 04:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kuna15:

That aircraft flew without any major problems.
It is because visual model does not follow damage model. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hm, that should actually be able to fly, had a piece of elevator survived on the left boom.. bit like burt rutan's asymetric designs.

p1ngu666
01-08-2006, 04:24 PM
the problem with the 109z is that its a plane that never happened. the z they bulit was made with F airframes, not the g6 like we have ingame. the f probably flew briefly when it was blown to bits by a bomb.

LStarosta
01-08-2006, 04:25 PM
I heard someone once say that it saw combat at one time in the war.... when the factory was overrun.

Unknown-Pilot
01-08-2006, 04:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
the problem with the 109z is that its a plane that never happened. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Grasping for anything that can be used.... This much of a fuss was never raised over the Bi-1. But, all we have to do is look at the symbols it wears and we have the answer to that....

berg417448
01-08-2006, 04:41 PM
I remember quite few posts in the past complaining about the I-185 and the Bi-1.

LEXX_Luthor
01-08-2006, 05:10 PM
Thanks Unkown_Pilot, you have good insight into WW2 pilots and engineers. Military aviation enthusiasts talk about how Bf-109Z planned production version in the sim would have performed as long range escort fighter (not arcade Online Squad dogfighter), long range high speed jabo (not arcade Online Squad dogfighter), and long range high speed recce platform (not arcade Internet Squad dogfighter).

But, silly me, this is not the right webboard for that. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

The -Z haters in this thread are nothing compared to those "JG" Online dogfighter squads that are getting mauled by the La-11 in the dogfight servers. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

SeaFireLIV
01-08-2006, 05:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
the problem with the 109z is that its a plane that never happened. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Grasping for anything that can be used.... This much of a fuss was never raised over the Bi-1. But, all we have to do is look at the symbols it wears and we have the answer to that.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There have been plenty of complaints against the Russian experimental planes and (non-experimental planes), mostly from one-sided Axis players like yourself.

LEXX_Luthor
01-08-2006, 05:41 PM
Actually more, because unlike 109Z, the BI-1 and I-185 came much closer to service, and so cause even greater Panic and Fear among teh flight sim dogfighers. La-11 is the most hated though.

JG5_UnKle
01-08-2006, 06:15 PM
Now now lexx - behave http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

We all know teh 109T is the Haxx0rs choice http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

http://149.142.139.138/Web/CB/Bf109-t3.jpg

Badsight.
01-08-2006, 06:51 PM
the Bf-Z is a super fun plane to fly

anyone who says otherwise is fooling themselves

p1ngu666
01-08-2006, 06:55 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

there was *plenty* of moans about the bi1, but its not that good a aircraft, and it did go into production but factory was bombed along with all/most of the produced planes.

bi1 has tiny amount of ammo, and only 2 20mm cannons, had compressability and didnt turn well, your unlikely tobe killed in it, equaly your unlikely to kill in it. its perhaps the plane your least likely to achive ace in a day in.

like PR pilots against me163, u just haveto dodge till they quickly run out of fuel, and bi1 has worse performance than me163.

i185 got whined, and whines a plenty. most whines are about planes u normaly find on the dogfight servers. 109,190,spit,p51,la7(old classic)p38,p47 are the most whined about, lagg3 crops up now and then, and sometimes the odd IJA/IJN thread pops up (excluding the ki84)

the japanease planes are also the most badly modeled of any nations tbh. heard a great comment from a american flier, "we thought oleg couldnt hate anyone more than the american fliers, and then he added the japanease planes....)
heck, did u know the zero 5b is missing a gun, and that all japanease planes are probably too slow?

the 109z that was made used the F series stuff, personaly id like that one, with 15mm cannons, be fun http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

our 109z is based on g series that never got past the "napkin" phase (nickin a tagart/gib term hehe)

in the past, when p38 was a dog, and the 109z flew really nice, that gratted alot. plus the z had more firepower than the average battleship with 4 or 5 30mm cannon.

the recipy of our z isnt that great either, take two of the worst 109 subtypes, chop off part of a wing on each and stick together, remmber to glue that imensly strong single spar well!.

now to lighten it remove the cowl machine guns, but keep the bulged cowl covers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif! ze americans will respect u more if u got .50cals

now add 2 30mm mk108s to the outer wings, yes, yes i know they wherent ever used on a operation 109 but dont worry about the handling either!

now take controls from right cockpit and put them in the left, no U make it fit, we will just take midget pilots from the 190 school dont worry.

add a little salt.

cover the 2nd pit with metal, and while u at it stick a 30mm cannon in the middle there.

ofcourse we have mk108s behind the engine too!
add some more fuel somewhere too, while your at it.

now take off in this heavyweight bodge job and marvel at its speed and handling!, became the bain of arcade servers with ur 5 30mm cannons, while proclaiming that the total firepower is whatever your favourite guns firepower should be for just one (mk108,151/20,50cal are favourites)

Unknown-Pilot
01-08-2006, 07:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
the problem with the 109z is that its a plane that never happened. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Grasping for anything that can be used.... This much of a fuss was never raised over the Bi-1. But, all we have to do is look at the symbols it wears and we have the answer to that.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There have been plenty of complaints against the Russian experimental planes and (non-experimental planes), mostly from one-sided Axis players like yourself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

"plenty" only to the red-whiners who count each complaint against their planes as 10 or 20.

one sided Axis players like me...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Obviously the screen name is appropriate because I am quite clearly 'unknown', as evidenced by your comment. In light of that, it would be best to check yourself. Unless.....you like the taste of foot. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Unknown-Pilot
01-08-2006, 07:13 PM
So pingu, when are you going to enlighten Oleg with your doctorate level knowledge in his field? I'm sure he could use someone like you to make this game of his realistic. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

So....about tip vorticies, and corner drag? Yeah, I noticed you didn't even get in the vicinity of those points. Little wonder why. (to say nothing of how inaccurate you were about the weight savings)



Always the same people...... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-08-2006, 07:23 PM
pingu:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">there was *plenty* of moans about the bi1, but its not that good a aircraft, and it did go into production but factory was bombed along with all/most of the produced planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I know BI-1 factory was overrun by fire, but I didn't know it was bombed. R U confusing this with Factory -Z ?

SeaFireLIV
01-08-2006, 07:30 PM
OI! Lay off Pingu! He`s doing his best! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

p1ngu666
01-08-2006, 07:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
pingu:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">there was *plenty* of moans about the bi1, but its not that good a aircraft, and it did go into production but factory was bombed along with all/most of the produced planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I know BI-1 factory was overrun by fire, but I didn't know it was bombed. R U confusing this with Factory -Z ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

maybe, thought bi~1 was bombed, but could have been fire, got destroyed tho.

i dont know much about aerodynamics, however i can read, and plenty of stuff is wrong in the game, japanease stuff especialy. like the 5b is unique among zeros, in have 3 different types of guns, not in this game...

Hawgdog
01-08-2006, 07:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:

Always the same people...... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh how very true.........since early in 2002, almost FOUR years ago when IL2 was about 14 planes...
I've seen 'em come....I've seen 'em go...

Kocur_
01-08-2006, 10:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jimDG:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jimDG:
if those 2 fuselage have been lightened (by virtue of having 2 of them - to which the elvator forces are applied - i.e. less strengh needed) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I dont think that fuselagges would get lightened, as IMHO it would be sacrificed for sake of standarization and larger production. I think we can safely assume that fuselages would be standard Bf-109 ones. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

why, its easy to take a few ribs out without affecting serial production.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not in case of Bf-109 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Frames were not separate parts! They were stamped - bent inside rear edges of skin panels.

jimDG
01-09-2006, 12:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jimDG:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jimDG:
if those 2 fuselage have been lightened (by virtue of having 2 of them - to which the elvator forces are applied - i.e. less strengh needed) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I dont think that fuselagges would get lightened, as IMHO it would be sacrificed for sake of standarization and larger production. I think we can safely assume that fuselages would be standard Bf-109 ones. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

why, its easy to take a few ribs out without affecting serial production.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not in case of Bf-109 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Frames were not separate parts! They were stamped - bent inside rear edges of skin panels. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

d@mn http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

alert_1
01-09-2006, 01:28 AM
No greater UFO then LaGG 3 type 4 (and 29,35). With only 1080hp and takeoff weight 3346kg it must use some extaterrestrial technology to fly like that...just try it and compare with Me109E,F (which have much better powerloading and even wingloading!
I looks liek Oleg is not usfing single FM for all planes but at least two FMs: one for his favourites and another the others...

GR142-Pipper
01-09-2006, 02:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
Of course, in the absence of original tests, you could always display your collective aeronautical engineering knoweldge and show exactly how it's "wrong".

We know that won't happen. But we can always hope, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Please. The 109Z is a completely ficticious aircraft that is really nothing more than a whimsical programmer's joke that was included just for fun. Does it belong? Of course not and I my view its presence cheapens the game. However, the good news is that the better servers don't include it in the mix so it's not that big a deal.

GR142-Pipper

jimDG
01-09-2006, 03:37 AM
a little clarification: i did not mean to say that the 109Z is uber. I was merely pointing out that it has a maneuver up his sleave that no other a/c can emulate/follow. However, one doesnt need to follow a 109Z in a steep 60 deg, 120km/h 20m/s climb. A la7 will kill a 109z every time, if not fooled by this stuff - all a la7 needs to do is spiral climb arround the 109Z and outclimb it..tough to get right though, I lol-ed every time someone poined the nose of their a/c at me only to tumble out of the sky half a minute latter. And above 5000m a ta152 would actually be able to (almost) follow a 109Z in any angle climb (the ta152 is also a good climber at the verge of stall- 150km/h at ground level and it would still be climbing).