PDA

View Full Version : Would Erich Hartmann survive through



alert_1
01-29-2007, 05:10 AM
WW II if he had to fly "our" Me109G6?
Because "our" Me109G6 is raeal brick when compared not only to its predecessor - Me109G2 - but also to Yaks, La5F,FN and many others adversaries...
Real Me109G6 had the same engine as G2 with the same horsepower (1475hp) and was only about 50kg heavier (2xMG131/13 24kg each vs. 2xMG17 cca 12kg each - munition 300 13mm vs. 900 7.92, the same MG151/20 and bigger wheels - altogether +50kg..but in the sim its HUGE difference in handling and performance...

alert_1
01-29-2007, 05:10 AM
WW II if he had to fly "our" Me109G6?
Because "our" Me109G6 is raeal brick when compared not only to its predecessor - Me109G2 - but also to Yaks, La5F,FN and many others adversaries...
Real Me109G6 had the same engine as G2 with the same horsepower (1475hp) and was only about 50kg heavier (2xMG131/13 24kg each vs. 2xMG17 cca 12kg each - munition 300 13mm vs. 900 7.92, the same MG151/20 and bigger wheels - altogether +50kg..but in the sim its HUGE difference in handling and performance...

Whirlin_merlin
01-29-2007, 05:14 AM
Oh please, your not even trying.

DKoor
01-29-2007, 05:17 AM
That sort of question is out of mind.
Game=not real world
Game=not real world

You must repeat it many times until you realize weight of that sentence. And how stupid it is to compare so complex thing with so simple thing.

Just a crude example: Bf-109G6 and LA-5 may be perfectly modeled in the game (I don't say they are) but game did not take into consideration quality of material of which aircraft is produced, game did not take into account pilot restrictions, game did not take into account in fact ANYTHING other than flight model and quite crude damage model + elementary pilot model. Coolant leaks are not modeled at all.

RegRag1977
01-29-2007, 05:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by alert_1:
WW II if he had to fly "our" Me109G6?
Because "our" Me109G6 is raeal brick when compared not only to its predecessor - Me109G2 - but also to Yaks, La5F,FN and many others adversaries...
Real Me109G6 had the same engine as G2 with the same horsepower (1475hp) and was only about 50kg heavier (2xMG131/13 24kg each vs. 2xMG17 cca 12kg each - munition 300 13mm vs. 900 7.92, the same MG151/20 and bigger wheels - altogether +50kg..but in the sim its HUGE difference in handling and performance... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree,G6 is among the birds i cannot understand...

JG52Uther
01-29-2007, 05:43 AM
I agree the G6 has problems,but I have seen people do VERY well with it against La's etc in online wars. Jump in it and fly directly into a furball at 500 meters and you deserve to get owned.

JugHead-usmc
01-29-2007, 05:50 AM
I got to admit he was an excellent pilot, he had a price on his head as well.Chuck Yager once said it's not the machine but the man that takes the cake.

Brain32
01-29-2007, 06:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
Jump in it and fly directly into a furball at 500 meters and you deserve to get owned. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes you do, however with a good plane choice you can avoid what you deserve in il2 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

cawimmer430
01-29-2007, 09:08 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/1539/hartmannspeechsd4.jpg

XyZspineZyX
01-29-2007, 09:49 AM
????

This is a non-issue. Erich Hartmann was not successful because he plane was great

he was successful because he was an extremely disciplined combat pilot. He did not dive into a formation of enemies, and use dazzling uber tactics and stunning aircraft performance to outfly the world

He would examine the situation after securing all advantages, and if he couldn't make a clean pass with minimum risk, he would not make the attack

MEGILE
01-29-2007, 09:59 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Real Me109G6 had the same engine as G2 with the same horsepower (1475hp) and was only about 50kg heavier (2xMG131/13 24kg each vs. 2xMG17 cca 12kg each - munition 300 13mm vs. 900 7.92, the same MG151/20 and bigger wheels - altogether +50kg..but in the sim its HUGE difference in handling and performance... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

HuninMunin
01-29-2007, 10:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by cawimmer430:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/1539/hartmannspeechsd4.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
New Windows background http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

XyZspineZyX
01-29-2007, 10:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're drunk. We'll discuss Hartman after you sober up!

joeap
01-29-2007, 10:23 AM
Cripes, when blue players whine or even joke it's "cool"...when red do it's cause they are brainwashed by Soviet or Hollywood propaganda. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Glad I am a red/blue player. I just like planes, and history.

MEGILE
01-29-2007, 10:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
Cripes, when blue players whine or even joke it's "cool"...when red do it's cause they are brainwashed by Soviet or Hollywood propaganda. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Glad I am a red/blue player. I just like planes, and history. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

suck it up there marilyn

It takes a man to post on an itnernet webboard

joeap
01-29-2007, 10:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
Cripes, when blue players whine or even joke it's "cool"...when red do it's cause they are brainwashed by Soviet or Hollywood propaganda. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Glad I am a red/blue player. I just like planes, and history. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

suck it up there marilyn

It takes a man to post on an itnernet webboard </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Still drunk? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Copperhead310th
01-30-2007, 07:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by alert_1:
WW II if he had to fly "our" Me109G6?
Because "our" Me109G6 is raeal brick when compared not only to its predecessor - Me109G2 - but also to Yaks, La5F,FN and many others adversaries...
Real Me109G6 had the same engine as G2 with the same horsepower (1475hp) and was only about 50kg heavier (2xMG131/13 24kg each vs. 2xMG17 cca 12kg each - munition 300 13mm vs. 900 7.92, the same MG151/20 and bigger wheels - altogether +50kg..but in the sim its HUGE difference in handling and performance... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Look, whatever you've been smoking.....STOP! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif It's not healthy, it's illieagal, and with Sh*t that good, you'll have Cheech & Tommy calling your house @ 3 am Saying "Waaaaaz happeniiiiing!" So do both us & yourself a favor, call Nacy Reagan and get a personal escourt to Betty Fords place and for God sakes stop doing drugs!
Jeez. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
109G6 porked hahaha lol pa-laease. Next time try spending more than 3 hours behind the stick before you start your whine fest. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I give it 2 hours tops and this thread will have more whine than the Nappa Valley.

Akronnick
01-30-2007, 08:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Copperhead310th:

I give it 2 hours tops and this thread will have more whine than the Nappa Valley. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you have documents to support that position?

Because I can assure you that before this thread reaches three pages, some luftexperten will have charts, graphs, scanned pages of grainy documents in German, photographs and Javascripts to show precisely how porked the G6 is.

Copperhead310th
01-30-2007, 09:17 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif right. and shortly after that Tagert will pop in & show them how stupid they all really are. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

AKA_TAGERT
01-30-2007, 09:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by alert_1:
WW II if he had to fly "our" Me109G6?
Because "our" Me109G6 is raeal brick when compared not only to its predecessor - Me109G2 - but also to Yaks, La5F,FN and many others adversaries...
Real Me109G6 had the same engine as G2 with the same horsepower (1475hp) and was only about 50kg heavier (2xMG131/13 24kg each vs. 2xMG17 cca 12kg each - munition 300 13mm vs. 900 7.92, the same MG151/20 and bigger wheels - altogether +50kg..but in the sim its HUGE difference in handling and performance... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>sounds like someone is still getting thier arse handed to them by the ingame AI?

AKA_TAGERT
01-30-2007, 09:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif right. and shortly after that Tagert will pop in & show them how stupid they all really are. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>done and done

PBNA-Boosher
01-30-2007, 09:40 PM
My answer, YES. He probably would. He wasn't stupid and he did not just jump into any furball. He weighed his chances before he went in, unlike most of us.

Vipez-
01-30-2007, 10:51 PM
Well, 109G-6 (and Late) is lacking about two seconds in her sustained turn rate, no matter what BS anti-109-whiners like Copperhead and Tagert come up with. The climb rate is also kinda weird compared to G-2, when it should be pretty much the same..

Cajun76
01-31-2007, 12:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vipez-:
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Well, 109G-6 (and Late) is lacking about two seconds in her sustained turn rate</span> , no matter what BS anti-109-whiners like Copperhead and Tagert come up with. The climb rate is also kinda weird compared to G-2, when it should be pretty much the same.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Embarrassing question, but are your slats popping out? You're not really turning until the slats pop out....

XyZspineZyX
01-31-2007, 05:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vipez-:
Well, 109G-6 (and Late) is lacking about two seconds in her sustained turn rate, no matter what BS anti-109-whiners like Copperhead and Tagert come up with. The climb rate is also kinda weird compared to G-2, when it should be pretty much the same.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The issue here is not
"is an aircraft that Hartmann flew accurately modelled"

The issue is
"Would Hartmann have survived"

The answer to that question is an inarguable

"<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Yes</span>"

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If you don't like what Copperhead and/or Tagert have to say about German aircraft in this sim, that's your look-out, but the modelling of the aircraft is not what this discussion is about and is irrelevent to the question. Erich Hartmann would take the aircraft we have in-game and succeed, because he was arguably the best combat pilot the world ever produced

"Combat pilot" does not mean "dogfighter".

JG52Karaya-X
01-31-2007, 05:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cajun76:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vipez-:
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Well, 109G-6 (and Late) is lacking about two seconds in her sustained turn rate</span> , no matter what BS anti-109-whiners like Copperhead and Tagert come up with. The climb rate is also kinda weird compared to G-2, when it should be pretty much the same.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Embarrassing question, but are your slats popping out? You're not really turning until the slats pop out.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Best turntime of the Bf109G2 is between 20.0 - 20.5 secs ingame (which is spot on with Russians tests of a captured plane at Stalingrad).

Best turntime of the Bf109G6 (both versions) is around 23 secs ingame, thats more than a gondola equipped G6 took to make a full circle.

Same engine, just 70kg plus --&gt; should turn at 21secs AT WORST, but it doesnt.

Vipez-
01-31-2007, 08:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB462cid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vipez-:
Well, 109G-6 (and Late) is lacking about two seconds in her sustained turn rate, no matter what BS anti-109-whiners like Copperhead and Tagert come up with. The climb rate is also kinda weird compared to G-2, when it should be pretty much the same.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The issue here is not
"is an aircraft that Hartmann flew accurately modelled"

The issue is
"Would Hartmann have survived"

The answer to that question is an inarguable

"<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Yes</span>"

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If you don't like what Copperhead and/or Tagert have to say about German aircraft in this sim, that's your look-out, but the modelling of the aircraft is not what this discussion is about and is irrelevent to the question. Erich Hartmann would take the aircraft we have in-game and succeed, because he was arguably the best combat pilot the world ever produced

"Combat pilot" does not mean "dogfighter". </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Atleast i'm not mixing my personal feelings about how some planes should or should not behave in the sim as much as some people do in here http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif ..

And I'd say he wouldn't have survived, just take a look at the number of aces in Hyberlobby http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif ..

Feuer Frei!

JG53Frankyboy
01-31-2007, 08:51 AM
and what im wondering is:
the G-2 and G-6 have almost the same speed at SL.
but at 6000-7000m they have a speeddifference of ~30km/H ?

AKA_TAGERT
01-31-2007, 09:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vipez-:
Well, 109G-6 (and Late) is lacking about two seconds in her sustained turn rate, no matter what BS anti-109-whiners like Copperhead and Tagert come up with. The climb rate is also kinda weird compared to G-2, when it should be pretty much the same.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Got Track?
Reson I ask is the last time some smacktard accused me of being an anti-109-whiner (Izzies 109K turn whine) I showed him the errors he made in his attempt!
Then I proceeded to do what the smacktard claimed could not be done by simply doing the test right.

SAVVY?

BillyTheKid_22
01-31-2007, 09:20 AM
http://www.luftfahrtkunst.de/Inhaltsverzeichnis/Heinz_Krebs_Aviation_Art/Luftfahrtkunst_Heinz_Krebs_3/Erich_Hartmann_Portrait_tn.jpg


Great nice, Colonel Hartmann flying an F-86 fighter jet of the West German air force in 1961. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 09:27 AM
Gunpods?

PFflyer
01-31-2007, 10:20 AM
The poor performance of the luftwaffe aircraft in this sim, demands that those who fly them use more historical tactics to do well in them, than those who fly the VVS aircraft in this sim.

The Luftwaffe aircraft in this sim are often not as fast, nor will they turn as well, so you have to use energy tactics. Also fly on full-real type servers that do not have big red arrows and words attached to your aircraft, this way you can have the element of surprise, which was important to have in WWII.

On a good full-real type of server, you can get that hog of a 109g6 or FW190A up high in a good spot, and zoom down on the La-5/7, Mig or P-39 or Spitfire, take a good shot, then either zoom back up out of harm's way or just go on down at high speed and head for home.
This is what Hartmann would have done, and it is what you can do to garner some success for yourself.

All the above mentioned allied craft, either have a turning or speed advantage over their contemporary axis craft, or both, so if you tangle with them at equal E, even those red pilots who are 5-year-old gamer/schoolgirls will get shots on you.

Mass has been added to the 109g2 in 4.07, so the acceleration between g2 and g6 models is much closer now than it has ever been. Not that that is a good thing.

So to do well in axis craft, you have to be a great virtual pilot, just as Hartmann was a great actual pilot.

To take a 109g or 190A up against many allied craft with equal E, you have to be brilliant, much better than those who fly red, and to use Hartmann's tactics you have to have the extra patience and smarts that he had over his red opponents.

Because of this, flying and getting kills in the 109s and 190As is that much more satisfying than doing the same thing in a red craft that has a speed or turning advantage.

Those who do well in Red aircraft, who are dependent on their speed, turn, and multiple guns, usually cannot do squat when they get into a axis craft with one 20mm nose cannon because they actually have to learn to aim. Nor can they do anything in a 190A, because they can no longer out-turn everything in the sky. they are a bunch of novices.

The highest level of this sim that can be reached, is to be able to do well flying an axis craft on a full-real server. Everyone else is a step down the ladder........

AKA_TAGERT
01-31-2007, 11:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer:
The poor performance of the luftwaffe aircraft in this sim....... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Easy to say..

Not so easy to prove..

No one has presented anything here to suport that statement! Just saying it does not make it true! By support I mean some real world data and a track file showing that the in-game plane can not do what the real world data said it could.

With that said, I have found in my analysis of track files that most of the whines that go on around here say more about the sim pilot than the sim! Put another way, the sim is modling the plane just fine, it is the pilot that is in error.

faustnik
01-31-2007, 11:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer:
The poor performance of the luftwaffe aircraft in this sim, demands that those who fly them use more historical tactics to do well in them, than those who fly the VVS aircraft in this sim.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What???????????????????????

LW has the advatage until mid 1943 and no clear disadvatage until 1944 with the La5FN and Yak-3s hitting the scene.

mynameisroland
01-31-2007, 11:54 AM
Why not try and test turn time of Fw 190 A5 series and Bf 109 G6 and see if they match Russian data?

AKA_TAGERT
01-31-2007, 12:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Why not try and test turn time of Fw 190 A5 series and Bf 109 G6 and see if they match Russian data? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I would.. if I was the one whining about them.

As I did with the P38J! I found the data, did the test, found that the in-game P38J ROC did not match the real world data, submited it to Oleg, he responded with a comment about the data, I pointed out the times were listed as fractioins not hours and min, which in turn was the cause of the error, Oleg agreed and in the next patch fixed the P38J ROC!

Simple!

If you TAKE the time (find the data, do the test) and Oleg HAS the time, he will fix it if it is something that can be fixxed and not a limitaiton of the simulation itself.

msalama
01-31-2007, 12:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"Combat pilot" does not mean "dogfighter". </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...nor does it mean "your average whiney IL-2 punter who blames Oleg for his bad pilotage" for that matter http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

FritzGryphon
01-31-2007, 12:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> If you TAKE the time... Oleg HAS the time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agree 100% Send good bug report to the bug email, and it usually gets fixed. Whining here on the forum is a waste of internet.

I've got tracks for 22.5 seconds for 109G6 early at 260km/h and 290km/h IAS.

Now, who's got the chart saying it should be different?

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 12:46 PM
So Erich Hartmann with 352 confirmed kills, his 2nd not being until early 1943, and definitely
NOT a turnfighter who in fact did not stick around after taking his shot would not have
survived the war in the IL2 109G-6 Early (would have been shot down before the Late would
have come along) because someone feels that the G-6 Early is slower on sustained flat turns
by less than 10%?
Somehow it becomes the plane, not the pilot even when the pilot is Erich Hartmann?

I think that someone rates themself on a scale just a bit on the manic side.

mynameisroland
01-31-2007, 01:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Why not try and test turn time of Fw 190 A5 series and Bf 109 G6 and see if they match Russian data? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I would.. if I was the one whining about them.

As I did with the P38J! I found the data, did the test, found that the in-game P38J ROC did not match the real world data, submited it to Oleg, he responded with a comment about the data, I pointed out the times were listed as fractioins not hours and min, which in turn was the cause of the error, Oleg agreed and in the next patch fixed the P38J ROC!

Simple!

If you TAKE the time (find the data, do the test) and Oleg HAS the time, he will fix it if it is something that can be fixxed and not a limitaiton of the simulation itself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My point Tagert, is that its fine you saying got track? but if you cant be a*rsed testing and using the device link on Axis types then whats the point?

See Fritz for the Bf 109 G6 track and see the whiners for the chart.

BlitzPig_DDT
01-31-2007, 01:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> If you TAKE the time... Oleg HAS the time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agree 100% Send good bug report to the bug email, and it usually gets fixed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Usually" being the operative term, apprently.

At least 2 people have done extensive testing, and accumulated extensive data which shows an obvious problem (with a certain plane), and sent it all in, and gotten no response (or so they say).

Makes one wonder if the plane in question is as important as the data and testing. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 02:07 PM
Since when did 2 guys spared from SOW:BoB part time become "Oleg HAS the time"?

AKA_TAGERT
01-31-2007, 02:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
My point Tagert, is that its fine you saying got track? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Gee thanks for your permission! To be honest I didn't realize I needed it! But thanks all the same!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
but if you cant be a*rsed testing and using the device link on Axis types then whats the point? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh that is easy to answer! See the analysis part is the easy part.. for me anyways in that I am all set up to do it!

There are two hard parts..

1 Finding the REAL WORLD DATA
2 Finding the time to do the testing

We all know how hard test data is to find, as for the performing the in-game test any smacktard can fly and record a track! But to fly it as it was under the same conditions is not trivial! Mater of fact most people here could not do it IMHO! Which is based on all the track files I have been sent over the years! Which only goes to show these smacktards are whining about their skills and not the simulation, but are too ignorant to even realize the problem is in the mirror!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
See Fritz for the Bf 109 G6 track and see the whiners for the chart. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not my job! I don't have the time to chase people around and beg them for data, especially when 90% of the time the results are going to show the sim pilot is in error not the sim! If they care and really want to get to the bottom of things they will send me the data and the track file to naca_testing@yahoo.com, otherwise they are just whining to be whining IMHO! Makes them feel better to blame the plane than consider the possibility that it may be due to the fact that they just suck

AKA_TAGERT
01-31-2007, 02:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Since when did 2 guys spared from SOW:BoB part time become "Oleg HAS the time"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Once again your addressing/responding to something I didnt say!

WHY? Because once again you FAILED to quote what was actully said and addressed/responded to what you THINK I said.

Here is what I actully said.. i.e. not taken out of context or passed though the Maixe summary processing unit (aka brain)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Me:
If you TAKE the time (find the data, do the test) and Oleg HAS the time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Note the big "IF" starting it all off and the "AND" with regards to Oleg!

Removing the stuff in parnes to make it easier to read

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Me with bold/cap parts added:
IF you TAKE the time AND Oleg HAS the time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Put another way..

<span class="ev_code_red">IF</span> (youTakeTime <span class="ev_code_red">AND</span> OlegHasTime) <span class="ev_code_red">THEN</span>
bugfix = TRUE;
<span class="ev_code_red">ELSE</span>
bugfix = FALSE
<span class="ev_code_red">END IF;</span>

SAVVY?

AKA_TAGERT
01-31-2007, 03:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> If you TAKE the time... Oleg HAS the time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agree 100% Send good bug report to the bug email, and it usually gets fixed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Usually" being the operative term, apprently.

At least 2 people have done extensive testing, and accumulated extensive data which shows an obvious problem (with a certain plane), and sent it all in, and gotten no response (or so they say).

Makes one wonder if the plane in question is as important as the data and testing. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>"or so they say" being the operative phrase.

Cajun76
01-31-2007, 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 PFflyer:
The poor performance of the luftwaffe aircraft in this sim, demands that those who fly them use more historical tactics to do well in them, than those who fly the VVS aircraft in this sim.

The Luftwaffe aircraft in this sim are often not as fast, nor will they turn as well, so you have to use energy tactics. Also fly on full-real type servers that do not have big red arrows and words attached to your aircraft, this way you can have the element of surprise, which was important to have in WWII.

On a good full-real type of server, you can get that hog of a 109g6 or FW190A up high in a good spot, and zoom down on the La-5/7, Mig or P-39 or Spitfire, take a good shot, then either zoom back up out of harm's way or just go on down at high speed and head for home.
This is what Hartmann would have done, and it is what you can do to garner some success for yourself.

All the above mentioned allied craft, either have a turning or speed advantage over their contemporary axis craft, or both, so if you tangle with them at equal E, even those red pilots who are 5-year-old gamer/schoolgirls will get shots on you.

Mass has been added to the 109g2 in 4.07, so the acceleration between g2 and g6 models is much closer now than it has ever been. Not that that is a good thing.

So to do well in axis craft, you have to be a great virtual pilot, just as Hartmann was a great actual pilot.

To take a 109g or 190A up against many allied craft with equal E, you have to be brilliant, much better than those who fly red, and to use Hartmann's tactics you have to have the extra patience and smarts that he had over his red opponents.

Because of this, flying and getting kills in the 109s and 190As is that much more satisfying than doing the same thing in a red craft that has a speed or turning advantage.

Those who do well in Red aircraft, who are dependent on their speed, turn, and multiple guns, usually cannot do squat when they get into a axis craft with one 20mm nose cannon because they actually have to learn to aim. Nor can they do anything in a 190A, because they can no longer out-turn everything in the sky. they are a bunch of novices.

The highest level of this sim that can be reached, is to be able to do well flying an axis craft on a full-real server. Everyone else is a step down the ladder........ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Someone made a poo-poo in his diaper, run along and clean that up....

http://www.thebeanshop.com/upload/pictures/granny%20lg.jpg

Tator_Totts
01-31-2007, 04:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cajun76:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vipez-:
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Well, 109G-6 (and Late) is lacking about two seconds in her sustained turn rate</span> , no matter what BS anti-109-whiners like Copperhead and Tagert come up with. The climb rate is also kinda weird compared to G-2, when it should be pretty much the same.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Embarrassing question, but are your slats popping out? You're not really turning until the slats pop out.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://home.carolina.rr.com/squad/Smileys/rollingonthefloor.gif

Akronnick
01-31-2007, 04:34 PM
C'mon guys, where are those grainy German language charts and graphs you guys are just itching to post? We're halfway through page three and nothing. I'm disappointed!

Anyhoo, Hartmann got 352 kills without a refly button.

If he didn't have to worry about stupid stuff like, oh, I don't know, not getting shot, he'd pwn all us n00bs.

carguy_
01-31-2007, 04:40 PM
You know what I`d do to troll?

Post all those evidence charts whenever I can to make`em go blind of their bias.Got any of those?POST`EM,even if it means posting the same stuff for the 100th time.

G6early?Why all the commotion?No one flies that plane online anyway.


Hartmann?Are you forgetting he flew ~1000 sorties?By definition of majority of you ppl he was a n00b.


PS.Oh and I`d stop whining now that we have the best FM ever mostly because more can go wrong than good.Stay as it is,no changes,the G6 is good.Leave it all like that.

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 07:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Since when did 2 guys spared from SOW:BoB part time become "Oleg HAS the time"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Once again your addressing/responding to something I didnt say!

WHY? Because once again you FAILED to quote what was actully said and addressed/responded to what you THINK I said. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I responded to what you wrote but your own language/writing skills FAILED to convey your
own meaning. Instead you wrote what could be correctly taken more than one way. Your fault,
not mine.
Since I got that quote out of one of FritzGriffons posts I didn't know it was YOU that wrote
it or I would have considered, geez his communications skills suck oil and he is so touchy
I had better turn this around at least 3 ways since I'm not a freaking MINDREADER.

Well, your spelling has improved. Going to get past 8th grade this year?

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 07:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
PS.Oh and I`d stop whining now that we have the best FM ever mostly because more can go wrong than good.Stay as it is,no changes,the G6 is good.Leave it all like that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Final patch is coming. That means it's time for all the whiners to rally their BS.

With all the 'noise', real issues that can be shown accurately are likely to see no attention.

AKA_TAGERT
01-31-2007, 07:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
No, I responded to what you wrote </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not true..

Here is what you you said..

"Since when did 2 guys spared from SOW:BoB part time become "Oleg HAS the time"?

Which you took out of context where I said..

"If you TAKE the time and Oleg HAS the time"

As you can see you totally ignored the first half that clearly says "IF" followed by "AND"

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
but your own language/writing skills FAILED to convey your own meaning. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Funny.. because everyone understood it but you.. So that would imply that it has more to do with your language/reading skills FAILED to convey to you what it ment.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Instead you wrote what could be correctly taken more than one way. Your fault, not mine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Funny.. because everyone understood it but you.. So that would imply that it was your fault not mine

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Since I got that quote out of one of FritzGriffons posts I didn't know it was YOU that wrote it or I would have considered, geez his communications skills suck oil and he is so touchy I had better turn this around at least 3 ways since I'm not a freaking MINDREADER. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actully the want-to-be mindreader thing is what gets you into trouble in the first place! In the future you would be well served to simply address what was actually said instead of trying to 2nd guess what someone means and applying your turn around 3 times MINDREADER games.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Well, your spelling has improved. Going to get past 8th grade this year? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well I never claimed to have the best gramar or spelling.. I simply pointed out that your the only one that did not understand what I said.

As for 8th grade.. Well I am still in the Aerospace Engineering workforce.. Where as you are.. on extended leave? Let me guess, you caught wind of the axe falling on your neck and decided to trump up some STRESS excuse? The more I have to deal with you, the more that seems to fit! The real reason why your out of work force.. Engineering wise.. Is that simple "IF" "THAN" "AND" Logic confuses you.. Thus before you got fired, you made up some medical excuse. Probably the best for you and any the employer.. Money wise in that had you managed to remain in the work force, that combined with your fragile ego that will not allow you to admit you made a mistake, You were just a big law suit HR incident waiting to happen anyways!

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 08:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
"If you TAKE the time and Oleg HAS the time"
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which can be read two different ways. But you are blind to that, surprise, surprise.
Maybe if you could stick that up your spreadsheet or somewhere else you can see it then
you might learn something new. hint, the first IF does not necessarily associate past
the first condition.

IF you wrote code that sloppy THEN it would return garbage.

Place your emphasis where you want, explain away. I did not read you mind and had I known
it was you I would have left it alone like it carried both leprosy and AIDS.

I won't bother apologising since it is you and you have already spewed about it.

AKA_TAGERT
01-31-2007, 08:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
"If you TAKE the time and Oleg HAS the time"
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which can be read two different ways. But you are blind to that, surprise, surprise.
Maybe if you could stick that up your spreadsheet or somewhere else you can see it then
you might learn something new. hint, the first IF does not necessarily associate past
the first condition.

IF you wrote code that sloppy THEN it would return garbage.

Place your emphasis where you want, explain away. I did not read you mind and had I known
it was you I would have left it alone like it carried both leprosy and AIDS. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hey.. if believing that is what it takes for you to get to sleep at night..

By all means dream on!

We wouldn't want you to get real upset and kick your dog.. or worse!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
I won't bother apologising since it is you and you have already spewed about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well look at the bright side.. At least some part of you realizes that you should apologize (Freudian slip?) but your fragile ego wont let you.

Marcel_Albert
02-01-2007, 04:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer:
The poor performance of the luftwaffe aircraft in this sim, demands that those who fly them use more historical tactics to do well in them, than those who fly the VVS aircraft in this sim. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What ???!! lol!!

Luftwaffe aircaft are BY FAR the best planes in the sim , nothing is better than 109F4 in 1941 , G2 , 190A4 in 1942 , 190A5 in 1943 , in 1944 you got the Dora and K4 that are only challenged by Mustangs in overall performances .

It sounds you never flews in online war with Lagg-3 and Yak-1 against uber G2's and mighty 190 , nothing is more easier than to fly in these planes , 109 outclimb everything and forgive everything and is insanely manoeuvrable at very low speed , barely stalls , 190 is the fastest and devilish firepower and retain energy like no other with great visibility and manoeuvrability at high speeds , both outdive , and outrace in combat most allied planes except a few exceptions .

Fly online wars with the Soviet Air force , you will learn the true meaning of tactics , not just the mere boom and zoom energy fight from the sun , that is basic , i mean real group tactics to overcome the fact that your aircraft is worse in climb , vertical , speed , energy fight , firepower and dive speed to name a few ...... here you need to be a Great pilot .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer:
The Luftwaffe aircraft in this sim are often not as fast, nor will they turn as well, so you have to use energy tactics. Also fly on full-real type servers that do not have big red arrows and words attached to your aircraft, this way you can have the element of surprise, which was important to have in WWII.

On a good full-real type of server, you can get that hog of a 109g6 or FW190A up high in a good spot, and zoom down on the La-5/7, Mig or P-39 or Spitfire, take a good shot, then either zoom back up out of harm's way or just go on down at high speed and head for home. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are joking i hope !

Luftwaffe planes not as fast ??? what is faster , P-39 , P-40 , Yak-1 , Lagg-3 , La-5 (very slow above 2000 m ) or Bf 109G2 and Fw-190 A ???

Only VVS planes that are really as fast are La-5FN and Only below 2000meters .... Otherwise it's true that the P-51C in the West in late 1943 as well as Spits are at least equal opponents , but that's all good . All other allied planes are slower before 1944 , and in 1944 , La-7 or Yak-3 are slower than anything German (K4 , D9 , G10 , even A5 actually ) except at low altitude ... just fly above 5000meters and we cannot decide the conditions of the fight , German planes can .... and we cannot dive to flee at 850-900km/h and keep the energy and speed like 109 and 190 , we fight until the end and need to be better organized and tactically skilled !


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer:
This is what Hartmann would have done, and it is what you can do to garner some success for yourself.

All the above mentioned allied craft, either have a turning or speed advantage over their contemporary axis craft, or both, so if you tangle with them at equal E, even those red pilots who are 5-year-old gamer/schoolgirls will get shots on you.

Mass has been added to the 109g2 in 4.07, so the acceleration between g2 and g6 models is much closer now than it has ever been. Not that that is a good thing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

First , if you buy the fascist propaganda , that's good , but Hartmann may have been a good pilot , anyone could make a thread and ask how Pokryshkin , Rechkalov or Vorozheikin would do with ingame P-39 and Yaks , it's not like that guy is superior to anyone cause he has inflated scores , many historians dispute his real tally by the way .

Secondly , fly a Airacobra , on consistent basis against Messers ,and tell me where do you see advantages over 109's or 190's , actually the 109 is the best overall fighter of the war all years mixed , nothing is easier than to make kills in it , you just climb in spiral , look well around you , then fall on your pursuer when he stalls , it's really a child game , and in 190 , you just stay fast and fly high , nothing is more easier to bag points with it , you are always faster ... Only one pass and it's enough for a kill , extremely easy to shoot at high speed in deflection with it , extremely solid , awesome visibilty , awesome firepower , awesome energy fight capability , this Fokker thing is just invincible until late 1943 when properly flown with a wingman ... Very easy to master , it's really a piece of cake and nothing compared to the ability to survive in inferior aircrafts in performances like VVS aircrafts until 1944 , here you need to be Really competent , especially in escorts .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer: So to do well in axis craft, you have to be a great virtual pilot, just as Hartmann was a great actual pilot.

To take a 109g or 190A up against many allied craft with equal E, you have to be brilliant, much better than those who fly red, and to use Hartmann's tactics you have to have the extra patience and smarts that he had over his red opponents. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not Hartmann's tactics , these energy tactics were invented in WWI , and BTW low speed turning isn't everything ... the planes that rely on low speed turning are the planes that lack speed and ability to retain well the energy . Your only "weak" plane is the G6 , and it's a fantastic weapon in the hand of VVS virtual pilots ,we are pleased to be in such a plane that dives so well , so good in the vertical plan , climb so well and has such 30mm firepower with such good speed at medium altitude ( great speed above 5000m compared to VVS a/c ) , i'd not trade it for a Yak-9T , but the G6 is a very good plane in game when properly flown .
As for the Fw-190 , this plane was not designed to turn tight at low speed , it's not because you cannot turn with Spitifires or Yak-1B that this plane is "hard" or "difficult" to fly , actually , the FW-190 is very easy to fly , feels light and manoeuvrable at good speeds , and a real killer at high speed combat in the vertical when you engage at altitudes , the plane is just the best of the front until 1944 , and it is the case in the sim when you fly it to its strengths ....


Really , If i give the game to a noob , i'd advise him to fly the 190 because he can see very well around him , barely needs to shoot to blow up in flames other a/c , even at 500m with those 4 cannons (!) and can outrun/dive anything , i'd just tell him not to bother turning and always to stay fast with boost and 103% throttle , never any overheating , and to just climb at 350km/h then dive on the dots to blow them in pieces and dive and close rad if he had something behind as nothing will catch him , very easy .Same for 109 , i'd tell him ok , this one you will never stall with it , just climb , climb , then when your opponent cannot follow anymore just dive on him and finish him , simple , nothing can happen to you , stay fast and alway climb , or dive .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer:
Because of this, flying and getting kills in the 109s and 190As is that much more satisfying than doing the same thing in a red craft that has a speed or turning advantage.

Those who do well in Red aircraft, who are dependent on their speed, turn, and multiple guns, usually cannot do squat when they get into a axis craft with one 20mm nose cannon because they actually have to learn to aim. Nor can they do anything in a 190A, because they can no longer out-turn everything in the sky. they are a bunch of novices.

The highest level of this sim that can be reached, is to be able to do well flying an axis craft on a full-real server. Everyone else is a step down the ladder........ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol , that is funny what you say , Luft planes are clearly better in almost everything , especially in speed until the P-51 and late VVS Yakov and Lavochkina models appear and with restrictions (only low altitude for VVS ) , and you still say that those who fly Red with inferior planes in term of performances are novices !? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I think that you don't realize how difficult it is to succesfully defeat organized squads flying blue with 109 and 190 , when you are on Migs , P-40 , P-39 , Yak-7B , Lagg etc.. that are clearly inferior , and how much tactical rigor , skills and experience it requires , to fight planes that outrace , outclimb , outdive , outgun , outaccelerate (109) and can even outturn you in some cases (example : 109F4 against P-39 slow speed or 109F4 against Yak-1)
If you want to become a better pilot , you better off not scorn the VVS pilot and learn by yourself how difficult it is , not only that , but what you call "Hartmann's tactics " and which could also be called "Pokryshkin's tactics " , you can use these also with Allied planes , here it is not a sport and so easy , it is a necessity because our planes needs skilled pilots to overcome their shortcomings http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hoenire
02-01-2007, 05:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
What ???!! lol!!

Luftwaffe aircaft are BY FAR the best planes in the sim , nothing is better than 109F4 in 1941 , G2 , 190A4 in 1942 , 190A5 in 1943 , in 1944 you got the Dora and K4 that are only challenged by Mustangs in overall performances .

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spit Vb in '41
G2 is nice for '42 apart from rear vision - FW is always good if you fly it correctly
Spit VIII - '43
Spit IX 25lb in '44

Overall the Spit is a fantastic BnZ 'plane, but so few fly it like that...

Apart from that, of course Hartmann would have survived - he'd just have selected a FW instead of a 109... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BillyTheKid_22
02-01-2007, 06:36 PM
http://worldwar2.free.fr/uniforme75.jpg


Erich Hartmann!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Brain32
02-01-2007, 06:55 PM
@Marcel_Albert
First on Western Front I'll give you credit for up to 1942, in 1943 things even up, in 1944 allies generally hold superiority due to tactical reasons. You can pretty much leave 109's behind after 1942 and never look back, now I know some people think late 109's are good but they are really nothing special and those that have problems with them are probably big time n00bs.

I haven't flown much Eastern front lately(20-30 sorties a month ago) but when I do and when I choose VVS I tend to choose Yak's as they are my favourite and as those planes are simply a great design IMO. I had no problems engaging Luftwaffe in them (Yak9,Yak9D,Yak9U,Yak3) at the very best they could run away from me - and they sure did that often, atleast the smart ones did http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
And yes you are right VVS has no hi-alt plane to compete up there(although Yak9U(and La7) is very fast and only Dora or K4 surpass it), but I can't remember il2's ever asking me for escort at 6000m anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

carguy_
02-01-2007, 08:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
I haven't flown much Eastern front lately(20-30 sorties a month ago) but when I do and when I choose VVS I tend to choose Yak's as they are my favourite and as those planes are simply a great design IMO. I had no problems engaging Luftwaffe in them (Yak9,Yak9D,Yak9U,Yak3) at the very best they could run away from me - and they sure did that often, atleast the smart ones did http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
And yes you are right VVS has no hi-alt plane to compete up there(although Yak9U(and La7) is very fast and only Dora or K4 surpass it), but I can't remember il2's ever asking me for escort at 6000m anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Be easy on him,the boy doesn`t have a clue.All of those red heroes claiming that flying LW is walk through the park do just that - claim without anything they can base their thesis on.There is a squad I call elite that flies both sides and it does equally well fly red or blue with one difference being that when flying blue the achievements are somewhere above average whereas their red achievements stand out of the whole red community as friggin experts.Flew against them and with them.One time it is a very unpleasant experience,second time it is an easy mission.When flying red,they singlehandetly move the frontline.

There is also one pilot who is a LW expert.So he wanted to silence reds like our friend here and flew red for some time.Result is him being far more succesful flying red.He considers flying red a pleasure.


The boy is just another red pilot with an inferiority complex.They can`t do good with La5FN even if they have tactical advantage from the start till the end of Barbarossa.He`s probably very frustrated from dying bcause of his own mistakes.

I can ofcourse be wrong.He can reveal his AW nick and show his LW stats.That would be a good start.

WWMaxGunz
02-01-2007, 10:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
I won't bother apologising since it is you and you have already spewed about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well look at the bright side.. At least some part of you realizes that you should apologize (Freudian slip?) but your fragile ego wont let you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you had the sense and you do not then you would recognize that I don't do the common
courtesies with dense oafs like you.

There's only one if there, you do not have the sense to recognize anything but your entirely
self-centered view. No one should apologize to you for anything. Your parents should have
apologized for the way they raised you.

AKA_TAGERT
02-01-2007, 10:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
I won't bother apologising since it is you and you have already spewed about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well look at the bright side.. At least some part of you realizes that you should apologize (Freudian slip?) but your fragile ego wont let you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you had the sense and you do not then you would recognize that I don't do the common
courtesies with dense oafs like you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well try and look at the silver lining here..

Your reply is worthless!

But!

At least you addressed something I actully said for once!

How?

You took my advice and QUOTED what I actully said in your reply to me.

This is progress!

Keep up the good work! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
There's only one if there, you do not have the sense to recognize anything but your entirely
self-centered view. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Self-Centered?

Hardly!

In that I realise what your saying, and that is you need two "IF" to understand/follow the logic.. i.e.

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">IF (this) THAN
IF(that) THAN
bugFix = true
END IF
ELSE
bugFix = false
END IF</pre>
Where as everyone else can understand/follow the logic of one "IF" followed by one "AND".. i.e.

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">IF (this AND that) THAN
bugFix = true
ELSE
bugFix = false
END IF</pre>
No wonder your out of work!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
No one should apologize to you for anything. Your parents should have
apologized for the way they raised you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Again, try and look at the bright side!

At least some part of you realizes that you should apologize (Freudian slip?)

But..

Your fragile ego wont let you.. still

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 02:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
Be easy on him,the boy doesn`t have a clue.All of those red heroes claiming that flying LW is walk through the park do just that - claim without anything they can base their thesis on.There is a squad I call elite that flies both sides and it does equally well fly red or blue with one difference being that when flying blue the achievements are somewhere above average whereas their red achievements stand out of the whole red community as friggin experts.Flew against them and with them.One time it is a very unpleasant experience,second time it is an easy mission.When flying red,they singlehandetly move the frontline.

There is also one pilot who is a LW expert.So he wanted to silence reds like our friend here and flew red for some time.Result is him being far more succesful flying red.He considers flying red a pleasure.


The boy is just another red pilot with an inferiority complex.They can`t do good with La5FN even if they have tactical advantage from the start till the end of Barbarossa.He`s probably very frustrated from dying bcause of his own mistakes.

I can ofcourse be wrong.He can reveal his AW nick and show his LW stats.That would be a good start. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You should be less arrogant and condescendant really , that's the real start ...

Belittling and trying to put down people you don't even know only helps to hurt the little credibility you can have on a board dedicated to debate our opinions .

Not to mention that everything i said is supported by facts and figures unlike what you said which is a worthless example , i could quote dozens to infirm it .

By the way your post aimed to personal attack is void since i have been flying also Blue for 1 year under IV./JG54_Fritz and look at my results in online wars and dogfight and ask regulars about me , then after we talk .

Oh , and you know , you named inferiority complex , when actually , those who suffer this complex need to call other unknown people "Boy " and belittling them to get more confidence in themselves , you should be more cautious about betraying yourself so easily , it's pathetic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
@Marcel_Albert
First on Western Front I'll give you credit for up to 1942, in 1943 things even up, in 1944 allies generally hold superiority due to tactical reasons. You can pretty much leave 109's behind after 1942 and never look back, now I know some people think late 109's are good but they are really nothing special and those that have problems with them are probably big time n00bs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

First , don't want to sound pretentious , but i fly this sim for 3 years online in squad and regularly do online air campaign in full , i know exactly every single Soviet and German planes and don't consider i have to show you my personal scores to show my point , but actually we are very far from noobs ( i accept any challenge btw , just PM me ) , this said i can tell you nothing Soviet outrace a 109 after 1942 , not until the La-7 . Only one that does is La-5FN below 2000m . Read Il-2 compare maybe it's not 100% accurate but give you a good idea .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
I haven't flown much Eastern front lately(20-30 sorties a month ago) but when I do and when I choose VVS I tend to choose Yak's as they are my favourite and as those planes are simply a great design IMO. I had no problems engaging Luftwaffe in them (Yak9,Yak9D,Yak9U,Yak3) at the very best they could run away from me - and they sure did that often, atleast the smart ones did http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
And yes you are right VVS has no hi-alt plane to compete up there(although Yak9U(and La7) is very fast and only Dora or K4 surpass it), but I can't remember il2's ever asking me for escort at 6000m anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea well , it seems you are an offliner , flying against real people , organized experienced squad is about as different from Offline as ice and fire . No dumb tactics and AI here , only pure group tactics and real intelligent pilots

Fly online wars , and you'll see that experienced LW aren't fools , they fly their planes even above 7000m when it is required , their best speed is around 5000-6500m in these birds .

Indeed Yakovlev is a great plane , my favourite with Airacobra , the Lavochkins are also good , but in pure performances , these are inferior or slightly inferior to 109's and 190 in everything and these doesn't change until late 1943 and 1944 , someone posting that flying blue is hard when you have obviously the very best planes until 1944 is somewhat ridiculous .

Not to mention , that Noobs , like you say , are people that doesn't know how to use late 109' to their advantages , these late 109 are superior to almost anything they have in front (except Mustangs and maybe boosted Spits ) since they can decide or not the conditions of the engagements and can fight at altitudes above 4000m like no other VVS fighters , can disengage at will , almost always have the initiative , can outdive , outclimb almost all our planes , and have a fanttastic fast fire rate of 30 mm cannon which only needs one half pass to score a kill .

Anyhow , i respect your opinion and i am open to your point of view , and cheers Brain for having been respectful and expressed your opinion in a civilized way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

carguy_
02-02-2007, 03:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
You should be less arrogant and condescendant really , that's the real start ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My reply is merely a result to your attitude which is typical for any red virtual pilot.Glorification of red pilots based solely on plane performance reveals your shortsighness as you are unable to view the issue from more than one perspective,let alone take any other combat factors into account.Either that or you`re simply lying.Such a demagogy deserves nothing else really.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Belittling and trying to put down people you don't even know only helps to hurt the little credibility you can have on a board dedicated to debate our opinions . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh I really don`t care,everyone who remembers me knows me from that side because I like to put down wiseguys who don`t know what they`re talking about.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Not to mention that everything i said is supported by facts and figures unlike what you said which is a worthless example , i could quote dozens to infirm it . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Facts and figures.....waiting for those....
Infirm at will http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
By the way your post aimed to personal attack is void since i have been flying also Blue for 1 year under IV./JG54_Fritz and look at my results in online wars and dogfight and ask regulars about me , then after we talk . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ofcourse you make it a personal attack.How could you even reply if your post didn`t consist 90% in telling how big,bad abd ugy I am.
Been flying in all online wars xcept pacific up to date and I don`t remember you.

Unlike your worthless talking I presented a pilot and a squad in current most popular online war which contradict your entire post.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Oh , and you know , you named inferiority complex , when actually , those who suffer this complex need to call other unknown people "Boy " and belittling them to get more confidence in themselves , you should be more cautious about betraying yourself so easily , it's pathetic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


My confidence is supported by ~1000 online sorties,not by a single post here on the forums.
You talk like a boy so I call you a boy.I`ve seen the likes of you all those years and nothing changed.People like you refuse to view any issue from multiple perspectives yetpreach as if you were amongst the game creators.Go on continue stating that VVS planes are utter #### compared to LW.You only make others take you for a lunatic.


Waiting for the links to the data. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

JG52Karaya-X
02-02-2007, 03:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
What ???!! lol!!

Luftwaffe aircaft are BY FAR the best planes in the sim , nothing is better than 109F4 in 1941 , G2 , 190A4 in 1942 , 190A5 in 1943 , in 1944 you got the Dora and K4 that are only challenged by Mustangs in overall performances. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You've apparently never flown the Spits...

Oh, I do know a couple of birds that can quite hold their own against these, the Yak1B, most or all Yak9s, of course the super La5s, the LaGG3S66 isnt that shabby either.

Yes the 109F4 is pretty much unchallenged in '41 but then thats how it was at that time.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It sounds you never flews in online war with Lagg-3 and Yak-1 against uber G2's and mighty 190 , nothing is more easier than to fly in these planes </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Really? Now I've flown in most or all of the badc online wars and what your saying is not true. The reds normally get quite a bunch of high performance planes, for sake of "balancing", even if they were not there at the time (La5s in mid-42, P39s - especially the 1550hp D-2 wonder bird - at the same time as well, etc.)

And about the 109 being soooo easy to fly, yea it really needs a great pilot to fly the Yaks and La5s, just jerk the stick all back and you're good to go, you can't do that in any other plane, not even the Zeros.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">109 outclimb everything and forgive everything and is insanely manoeuvrable at very low speed , barely stalls , 190 is the fastest and devilish firepower and retain energy like no other with great visibility </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, now that is just BS, as said compare the Yaks and Las to the 109s and you will see the difference. 190 retains energy like no other? Must be a different sim to IL2, half a turn and you've lost a great deal of speed, king of energy retention is still by far the Spitfire in IL2. Btw, cockpit bar anyone? And the Yaks and La5s have great visibility so what are you b1tching about?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Fly online wars with the Soviet Air force , you will learn the true meaning of tactics , not just the mere boom and zoom energy fight from the sun , that is basic , i mean real group tactics to overcome the fact that your aircraft is worse in climb , vertical , speed , energy fight , firepower and dive speed to name a few ...... here you need to be a Great pilot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tactics on the red side in online wars... havent come across any, maybe by "tactics" you mean "exploits", then thats true. You mean for example the fact that they throw their bombers into suicide missions without escort because they dont have to give a damn about loosing them because of an unlimited planeset. And most of the times they just throw all their fighters into one mission, its so predictable http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">First , if you buy the fascist propaganda </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">that's good , but Hartmann may have been a good pilot , anyone could make a thread and ask how Pokryshkin , Rechkalov or Vorozheikin would do with ingame P-39 and Yaks , it's not like that guy is superior to anyone cause he has inflated scores , many historians dispute his real tally by the way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, like who? All of his kills have been claimed in good faith and with wingmen or groundtroops witnessing the kill, whats your backup to that wild statement.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Secondly , fly a Airacobra , on consistent basis against Messers ,and tell me where do you see advantages over 109's or 190's , actually the 109 is the best overall fighter of the war all years mixed , nothing is easier than to make kills in it , you just climb in spiral , look well around you , then fall on your pursuer when he stalls , it's really a child game , and in 190 , you just stay fast and fly high , nothing is more easier to bag points with it , you are always faster ... Only one pass and it's enough for a kill , extremely easy to shoot at high speed in deflection with it , extremely solid , awesome visibilty , awesome firepower , awesome energy fight capability , this Fokker thing is just invincible until late 1943 when properly flown with a wingman ... Very easy to master , it's really a piece of cake and nothing compared to the ability to survive in inferior aircrafts in performances like VVS aircrafts until 1944 , here you need to be Really competent , especially in escorts. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fly a P39D-2... then we'll talk again

Ánd about the "red pilots are the heroes": http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif, got pwned? want a cookie?

From the Yak1B to the Yak9, Yak9T, Yak3, La5, La5F, La5FN, La7, LaGG3S66 you've got a whole bunch of good aircraft. They can catch the 109s and 190s on the deck, can outturn them both, outclimb the 190s with ease, some of them also the 109s, ...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer: So to do well in axis craft, you have to be a great virtual pilot, just as Hartmann was a great actual pilot.

[quote]As for the Fw-190 , this plane was not designed to turn tight at low speed , it's not because you cannot turn with Spitifires or Yak-1B that this plane is "hard" or "difficult" to fly , actually , the FW-190 is very easy to fly , feels light and manoeuvrable at good speeds , and a real killer at high speed combat in the vertical when you engage at altitudes , the plane is just the best of the front until 1944 , and it is the case in the sim when you fly it to its strengths </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In the FW190 you have 2 or 3 passes on your enemy, after that you will have lost all your surplus energy and your opponents will have come co-E with you then its rtb for you. It just cant keep up the fight for long. On dogfight servers like WC that's not such a problem, you just come to fight another day but in online wars this is fatal, because if you have to break off to rtb you've lost the mission, easy as that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Really , If i give the game to a noob , i'd advise him to fly the 190 because he can see very well around him , barely needs to shoot to blow up in flames other a/c , even at 500m with those 4 cannons (!) and can outrun/dive anything , i'd just tell him not to bother turning and always to stay fast with boost and 103% throttle , never any overheating , and to just climb at 350km/h then dive on the dots to blow them in pieces and dive and close rad if he had something behind as nothing will catch him , very easy .Same for 109 , i'd tell him ok , this one you will never stall with it , just climb , climb , then when your opponent cannot follow anymore just dive on him and finish him , simple , nothing can happen to you , stay fast and alway climb , or dive. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now that just has to be a joke, a noob will go down blazing in a 190. He will either loose his energy in too tight maneuvers and then get eaten by his enemies, and he wont make any kills either because it affords a good deflection shooting skill that a noob lacks of course. A beginner needs a plane thats also able to keep up a fight once he's lost his initial advantage, and the FW is not that kind of plane, La5FN/La7 and Yak3 come to mind.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I think that you don't realize how difficult it is to succesfully defeat organized squads flying blue with 109 and 190 , when you are on Migs , P-40 , P-39 , Yak-7B , Lagg etc.. that are clearly inferior , and how much tactical rigor , skills and experience it requires , to fight planes that outrace , outclimb , outdive , outgun , outaccelerate (109) and can even outturn you in some cases (example : 109F4 against P-39 slow speed or 109F4 against Yak-1)
If you want to become a better pilot , you better off not scorn the VVS pilot and learn by yourself how difficult it is , not only that , but what you call "Hartmann's tactics " and which could also be called "Pokryshkin's tactics " , you can use these also with Allied planes , here it is not a sport and so easy , it is a necessity because our planes needs skilled pilots to overcome their shortcomings http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh good lord, we are doing circles here over and over.

alert_1
02-02-2007, 04:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Not to mention , that Noobs , like you say , are people that doesn't know how to use late 109' to their advantages , these late 109 are superior to almost anything they have in front (except Mustangs and maybe boosted Spits ) since they can decide or not the conditions of the engagements and can fight at altitudes above 4000m like no other VVS fighters , can disengage at will , almost always have the initiative , can outdive , outclimb almost all our planes , and have a fanttastic fast fire rate of 30 mm cannon which only needs one half pass to score a kill . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah you can fight at 4000m till cows go home, but you'll be alone. All those La,Yaks, IL2,A20 are flyning donw under 2000m in their kingdom and zou are supposed to engege them in Me109/Fw190. Witt heavy elevator in Me109 it's verz hard to make succesful pass, it requires a lot of experience to trim elevator accordingly to get good firing solution, and you lose some energy in the process.
And dont forget, La5 has copmarable acceleration to Me109 maybe even better and is overmodelled in turn performance, so not easy to fly Me109.
In Fw190 all you have in 1-2 passes, if enemy spots you (usually does), all he have to do is jerk stick a little and you attack is in vain...a lot of patience and experience is needed for Fw190 (except o fFw190D, which is truly fighter, but then you have usually La7 against you, the most overmodeled fighter in teh sim..)

Brain32
02-02-2007, 05:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> First , don't want to sound pretentious , but i fly this sim for 3 years online in squad and regularly do online air campaign in full , i know exactly every single Soviet and German planes and don't consider i have to show you my personal scores to show my point , but actually we are very far from noobs ( i accept any challenge btw , just PM me ) , this said i can tell you nothing Soviet outrace a 109 after 1942 , not until the La-7 . Only one that does is La-5FN below 2000m . Read Il-2 compare maybe it's not 100% accurate but give you a good idea . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sorry I have A LOT of expirience too, and like I said before I didn't always fly Axis, do you know what is one more reason I fly Yak's when I fly VVS? Because Lafka's are for pu$$ies real men fly Yak's, Yak atleast has the torque, can stall, feels wing damage etc. Also I have to tell you that I did fly against organized people and that they could only kiss my @ss while I was in a Yak9 at 5000m fighting against 109G2, sure I had no power to engage them immidiately, but after few passes(gotta love the rear view in a Yak9 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) they simply had to run, like I said they tend to run away from me - I probably stink too bad http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
BTW why did you reply this on my Western Front comment? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Yea well , it seems you are an offliner , flying against real people , organized experienced squad is about as different from Offline as ice and fire . No dumb tactics and AI here , only pure group tactics and real intelligent pilots

Fly online wars , and you'll see that experienced LW aren't fools , they fly their planes even above 7000m when it is required , their best speed is around 5000-6500m in these birds . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Offliner, hehe why do you say things like that and expect others to be polite to you? As for online wars I had a brief expirience in ADW, is that good enough? Anyway I came there late in the war, I must say it was pretty strange, I didn't know VVS consisted only of La7's with occasional La5FN late in the war, did they stop producing Yak's and returned P39's to Americans? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Well anyway I had to bail once, and shot one UF..I mean La7, but when you are assigned to JABO squadron flying FW190A8 and A9 against swarms of LA7's... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif This is also one of the reasons my ADW expirience was short, I find no pleasure in playing somebodys moving target http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

In the end, since we had a polite discussion I can only say; lets' agree on disagreement, because we obviously have very differents points of view on this subject http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WWMaxGunz
02-02-2007, 05:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
I didn't know VVS consisted only of La7's with occasional La5FN late in the war, did they stop producing Yak's and returned P39's to Americans? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If all VVS pilots were trained in all types available and given the choice as DF allows, what
would you see? Same for LW, Doras und Schwalbes? Or Ta's, perhaps Pfiels instead of Doras?

Brain32
02-02-2007, 05:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
I didn't know VVS consisted only of La7's with occasional La5FN late in the war, did they stop producing Yak's and returned P39's to Americans? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If all VVS pilots were trained in all types available and given the choice as DF allows, what
would you see? Same for LW, Doras und Schwalbes? Or Ta's, perhaps Pfiels instead of Doras? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Max you had to be there to understand what I'm talking about and ADW(Air Domination War) was not a DF server http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Abbuzze
02-02-2007, 06:27 AM
The problem of all dogfights/combats in this game is the non existing complex engine mangagement!!!

Usually 110% power + WEP after take off, till the engine overheats, that´s the way most of us do, or at least we could if we want to, this is BS! Topspeed and max. climb is something for greatest danger usually a pilot would save his engine to let him go home. This is not necessary in this game. We get a funny "overheat" message, this is nonsense. An engine is not dying because of overheat but because of overstress! Ballbearings, Sparks, Pistons... this are the critical parts.

They way we fight here is not historical. Finnish pilots answerd to the question, "was the 109 easy to get out of a stall?" - I don´t know, I never stalled - NO ONE of us can say the same! Thats the way why we talk about 0.3 sec difference in sustaind turn rate...


So Hartmann would be succsessfull with our FB 109G6, but he wouldn´t be a topscorer in a dogfightroom! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Polyperhon
02-02-2007, 08:41 AM
Again we come across the argument that the one or the other plane is not simulated in IL-2!

After the much rap for the -suppose to be- inferior performance of P-51 in IL-2 , then again we go with Bf 109. And then again people come and argue that one or the other plane is worse in the sim than reality!
My point is:Trust Oleg and his team.They know what they are doing.Fly the planes and then decide what is the best.Not try to fit your own pre-fixed idea about the one or another plane.

I think the IL-2 caused a bit of a sensation the past years because it changed all these pre-fixed ideas and the myths that have been created all these 60 years that passed since WW II.

Myth No1)

The Bf 109 was dated after 1943

Myth No2)

Spitfire had more development potential than Bf 109 (we still wait Oleg to give us the Mk XIV to resolve that once for good)

Myth No3)

The soviets liked the P-39 because their planes were really ****

I could go on with many more myths,but then I would open so many topics that is better to leave it like this.

I agree in general with Marcel_Albert:This guy is obvious that he's an experienced player and he knows about flying,air fight tactics and mostly a sense of reality.
I disagree only the his opinion that the Fw 190 can maintain its energy, for me the best plane on this is the P-39,(BETTER than the P-51),only that P-39 doesn't have much anyway!
I can talk more about the Bf 109 which is the plane that I do better in the IL-2 (and the P-39,I "kill" with this so well that I start to think that I am one of the best on this,since I haven't anyone that claims to be so effective in P-39s!).Marcel is the first guy that described AT LAST accurately what the Bf 109 is.
Actually so perfect,that to add something about Bf 109 flying performance is pointless.
The only thing that I can add is that the Bf 109 (and the Fw 190) were perfect overall fighters.They might had been worse in some aspects compared with the one or another plane in various stages of the war,but their general performance was superior, from vastly superior (until 1944) to slightly (after mid-1944).Actually there was this crucial gap from March-April 1944 until October of that year,until the introduction of Bf 109K and Fw 190D that allies catched up.
Virtually the same spec Bf 109s were flown in the east and west front,against VVS low alt fighters and big 4 engined bombers.The AS models reduction of performance in low altitudes was marginal.Even the wing-pod models could mix up with enemy fighters with success (I constantly "fly" with the wing pods when conditions permit and still continue to score P-51s),even without this Mk108 could shoot down a B-17.
Marcel explained why Hartmann used to fly in that way (he was just taking advantage of his plane strong points), but nobody understood the fact that he was such an able guy that would kill the enemy in his FIRST pass to his target,therefore there was need to dogfight!Was that so difficult to understand?

Brain32
02-02-2007, 09:09 AM
Out of each contries main fighter types 109's are by far the easiest to shoot down, it's so efortless that it's on a margin of having fun.
I find beating computer in solitaire a greater challenge, sure I rarely had the opportunity to face the 109K4 as it's declared uber(ROFLMAO) and banned almost everywhere, but I doubt I would have trouble engageing them...
Think of it what you want, the stiffness of elevator that is exaggerated even by most pessimistic accounts, nearly completely prevents 109's to be as good as some people claim they are, maybe those people did not touch 109's since like 3xx versions of the game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

AKA_TAGERT
02-02-2007, 09:21 AM
Your forgot something..

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
Out of each contries main fighter types 109's are by far the easiest to shoot down, it's so efortless that it's on a margin of having fun.
I find beating computer in solitaire a greater challenge, sure I rarely had the opportunity to face the 109K4 as it's declared uber(ROFLMAO) and banned almost everywhere, but I doubt I would have trouble engageing them...
Think of it what you want, the stiffness of elevator that is exaggerated even by most pessimistic accounts, nearly completely prevents 109's to be as good as some people claim they are, maybe those people did not touch 109's since like 3xx versions of the game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There that's better

JG52Karaya-X
02-02-2007, 09:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Polyperhon:
I agree in general with Marcel_Albert:This guy is obvious that he's an experienced player and he knows about flying,air fight tactics and mostly a sense of reality. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Obvious? By what?

And sense of reality? The only thing he has been doing is shouting how inferior all russian planes are and how anybody flying them must be an uber ace...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I disagree only the his opinion that the Fw 190 can maintain its energy, for me the best plane on this is the P-39,(BETTER than the P-51),only that P-39 doesn't have much anyway! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

P39 retains its energy better than the P51, based on what? Sorry, that just sound ridiculous.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Even the wing-pod models could mix up with enemy fighters with success (I constantly "fly" with the wing pods when conditions permit and still continue to score P-51s),even without this Mk108 could shoot down a B-17. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Taking gunpods on the 109s... that clearly shows that you're not a serious 109 pilot, easy as that.

See its nice that you want to backup your squadmate/close friend (isnt it so) but you dont need to come here and repeat everything he said like a perrot.

WWMaxGunz
02-02-2007, 10:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Abbuzze:
The problem of all dogfights/combats in this game is the non existing complex engine mangagement!!!

Usually 110% power + WEP after take off, till the engine overheats, that´s the way most of us do, or at least we could if we want to, this is BS! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you mean that the real pilot was unable to misuse the engine of his plane?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Topspeed and max. climb is something for greatest danger usually a pilot would save his engine to let him go home. This is not necessary in this game. We get a funny "overheat" message, this is nonsense. An engine is not dying because of overheat but because of overstress! Ballbearings, Sparks, Pistons... this are the critical parts. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It takes heat burning gas to make that stress. Lubrication breaks down past a certain
temperature at a rate determined by the overtemperature and causes more heat produced with
less power produced and yes, can seize the motor in time.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">They way we fight here is not historical. Finnish pilots answerd to the question, "was the 109 easy to get out of a stall?" - I don´t know, I never stalled - NO ONE of us can say the same! Thats the way why we talk about 0.3 sec difference in sustaind turn rate... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You think that is because it is impossible to stall? Or that they would not keep pulling the
plane into and through stalls like players? Like, maybe since they are in the moving plane
that they can feel changes in speed and lift and attitude of the plane that player cannot?

But...blame it on the FM.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So Hartmann would be succsessfull with our FB 109G6, but he wouldn´t be a topscorer in a dogfightroom! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He might have gotten a kick out of playing co-ops with the right group. Or not.

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 11:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
My reply is merely a result to your attitude which is typical for any red virtual pilot.Glorification of red pilots based solely on plane performance reveals your shortsighness as you are unable to view the issue from more than one perspective,let alone take any other combat factors into account.Either that or you`re simply lying.Such a demagogy deserves nothing else really. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Your reply was meant to personal attack someone who doesn't agree with you , your whole argument was "you don't agree with me , so you must be a noob , a little boy " whereas my reply is based on many years of experience and deep knowledge of German aircraft ingame that have no equal until 1944 on the Eastern front .

Nobody said VVS plane are utter crapp ,you are making a deal out of it , but the fact is that they are indeed inferior in performance, that is a reality , the P-39 like said Polyperhorn is a good aircraft that retains its energy very well to overcome its lack of speed , or youahev the Yak-9 .

Fort the La i think some people are misguided or never fly them very well , these overheat very fast and are bad performers at altitudes .

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 12:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
You've apparently never flown the Spits... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Who talked about Spits , this plane wasn't liked by VVS pilots and fough in small numbers , it's not really a VVS plane and the mark V that fought in Soviet Union in 1943 was still clearly inferior to anything German .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
LOL, now that is just BS, as said compare the Yaks and Las to the 109s and you will see the difference. 190 retains energy like no other? Must be a different sim to IL2, half a turn and you've lost a great deal of speed, king of energy retention is still by far the Spitfire in IL2. Btw, cockpit bar anyone? And the Yaks and La5s have great visibility so what are you b1tching about? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're not supposed to turn at low speed with a FW-190 nor that you are supposed to follow in a dive with a Lagg-3 .

The word Bittching is offensive , friendly warning , nobody did that , i was talking about advantages of a plane in all respect (that includes cockpit visibility of course , very important ) . If you want me to express my knowledge of English insults i can too ..


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Tactics on the red side in online wars... havent come across any, maybe by "tactics" you mean "exploits", then thats true. You mean for example the fact that they throw their bombers into suicide missions without escort because they dont have to give a damn about loosing them because of an unlimited planeset. And most of the times they just throw all their fighters into one mission, its so predictable http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yes there are noobs in all sides , personally i prefer to be shot down than losing an IL-2 during escort mission , because for us , realism and immersion go before our egos .

And in reality , if you learn well history , you will discover that the strong point of VVS was that they were escorting very effectively , wheras Luftwaffe was awful at it , they lost a crazy amount of bombers partly because their fighters wings had too much freedom , for example the JG-54 "Grünherz" was famous among the KG in their front because it was one of the few squadron that could escort pretty well .


Talking about Red tactics , Fly Yak-1 , lagg-3 , Yak-7 , Mig , P-40 , P-39 against G-2,190A that are faster , better in dive , more manoeauvrable at high speed , and can decide the condition of the fight , and have the initiative , fight against better planes and you will see what i am meaning about tactics...

I mean Echelon tactics , High rigor in covering each other , vertical tactics with the other echelonned action group etc.. many tactics i can't explain here in a foreign language .



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:

Yes, like who? All of his kills have been claimed in good faith and with wingmen or groundtroops witnessing the kill, whats your backup to that wild statement. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No it is not , many Historians believe he actually had barely more than 80 victories , and that out of this many have been faked ( "one for you , one for me " was a commong thing among LW pilots at the end of their sorties , unlike VVS they didn't any material proofs to confirm victories ... if you believe all their claims , Soviet VVS would have been destroyed by early 1943 , reality is opposite ) .

Read more about this in aviation press , i have far more respect for someone like Hans Ulrich Rudel or Marseille .

By the way , Hartmann was made an icon of propaganda if you don't know , at a time where the Lufwaffe was getting Destroyed on Eastern Front ( mid 1943 , the Stalingrad of the air at Kursk and after )AND Western front in mid-1943 to 1944 , Hartmann's figure was very important for the Nazis to keep appearances and morale high ....hence astronomical figures ..
Also may i remind you that you are speaking
about Nazis pilot that whatever the energy deployed nowadays to show them like innocents saints , where the guys on Eastern front shooting civilians , machine gunning innocents and parachutes by hundred thousands and widely supported the politics in places as well as badly wanted the war at first , i'm no noob and watched and get interested in History for 15 years , have seen all sorts of video footages , testimonies and my Grand-father himself fought in this war , Nothing was more Nazi than the Luftwaffe (well except SS ) , never forget this , it's plain truth .

This generation looking at these men through the eyes of internet interviews and rumors is funny , sure you had a lot of young men just wanting to fly , but the majority was not guys like Rall but rather guys like Trautloft if you know what i mean .... these were no "knights of the air" but "assassin of the skies at the service of a fascist regime that pushed away the limits of savagery .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:

Fly a P39D-2... then we'll talk again

Ánd about the "red pilots are the heroes": http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif, got pwned? want a cookie? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know well P-39 D2 , you are the one that doesn't know it , otherwise you wouldn't react like it's a very good plane , that because you saw it in IL-2 Compare , you saw its top speed ignoring that you never attain this speed in combat , actually , fly it online ,and you will see that you always lack speed against 109 's , Hence why the Q model was purchased and arrived in Soviet Union in late 1943 .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
From the Yak1B to the Yak9, Yak9T, Yak3, La5, La5F, La5FN, La7, LaGG3S66 you've got a whole bunch of good aircraft. They can catch the 109s and 190s on the deck, can outturn them both, outclimb the 190s with ease, some of them also the 109s, ...[/QUOTE)

No they cannot catch the 190 , they can barely catch the 109 , never have the tactical initiative , cannot ouclimb nor outdive them , are outgunned and outraced by 190 to quote a few , don't act like your planes are anything infeior , and by the way , turning at low speed as i said before , is NOT an advantage in mass combat , because it means that all else startegies failed , when you turn at slow speed , it is a form of defeat .

Why do you mention La-7 ? this is common knowledge that it was one of the best propeller plane of WWII , nothing worng that you can catch 109 with it , i am talking of all VVS planes except later Yakov and lavochkina .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
In the FW190 you have 2 or 3 passes on your enemy, after that you will have lost all your surplus energy and your opponents will have come co-E with you then its rtb for you. It just cant keep up the fight for long. On dogfight servers like WC that's not such a problem, you just come to fight another day but in online wars this is fatal, because if you have to break off to rtb you've lost the mission, easy as that.[/QUOTE)

That is true , but you fail tomention that 2-3 passes for 190 means 2-3 kills for a decent pilot , not to mention that if you have a wingman and proper tactics you can still continue the fight . It's true the 190 is not the best weapon on HL online server dogfight low altitude slow speed combat , but i don't think it was designed for this you know .


[QUOTE]Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Oh good lord, we are doing circles here over and over. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not at all , if you are objective , German fighters from 1941 to 1944 are far better than VVS planes , thus why you need more rigor , more tactical astuteness when flying Red side to overcome the shortcomings of your planes .

Good post Polyerphon http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Fully agree
In defence of Polyerphon , P-39 has a more aerodynamical profile indeed .

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 12:15 PM
I am not taking sides this is just my observations from flying miniwar/dogfight servers (I prefer the name miniwar because there is a team objective much the same as online wars, but they last only 1.5 hours for the map).


When I fly red Eastern front, if there isnt an La5 there I am lost.

I think this is the only plane that can really stand up to the German planes from 1942. Fights between the 109G2 and La5/La5F are very balanced.

The La5FN is a 1944 plane, not 1943, so its labelled wrong. If online wars are using it in 1943 then its wrong, period.

I find it much easier to fly blue 1941-1943 - as long as there is not a La5FN in 1943

1941-109F4
1942-190A4/109G2
1943- 190A5/109G2

1944- once the La5FN comes on the scene then its dominating the early 1944 LW fighters. The difference is that it can both outturn AND outrun the German planes (I believe that most of hte Soviet planes in earlier years can at least outturn the German planes), so they really have no option except teamwork.

1945 - Dora/Me262 are competetive vs the La7.

So theres only really 1944 and the La5FN where the RUssians have an advantage.

I much prefer flying blue on the Eastern front and have far more success.

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 12:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
Because Lafka's are for pu$$ies real men fly Yak's </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm , not very kind

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
Offliner, hehe why do you say things like that and expect others to be polite to you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Mate, i said this , because you said yourself " IL-2 never send me on escorts at 6000m " , so i assumed that you were not online player ..very logical conclusion (deduction actually)

Simple , only the DGen sends you and make the mission on its own , so it meant you were talking of offline game .

online in real historical coops , 90% of the fights happens above 3-4000 meters , and that is a for a good reasons , the performances of Luft fighters are best over 4000m and Soviet planes perf are worse above 4000m .



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:

I mean La7, but when you are assigned to JABO squadron flying FW190A8 and A9 against swarms of LA7's... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif This is also one of the reasons my ADW expirience was short, I find no pleasure in playing somebodys moving target http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif (/QUOTE]

Well that is about 1% of the situation you will encounter in IL-2 and is perfectly logical since La-7 is Much better at low altitude and this historically accurate .

It's practical to take exceptions as rules , but these are extreme cases and indeed in these case you need a good cover like all bopmbers of all sides would by the way ( IL-2 are in teh same situation when slow Yak-7B escort and 190 attack ...)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Brain32:
In the end, since we had a polite discussion I can only say; lets' agree on disagreement, because we obviously have very differents points of view on this subject http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed , very different , well not so polite too in your last post , but nevermind , always keep in mind that if we all agreed on everything , this forum would be useless , it is a place where many peope disagree and express their view in all fairness , and i encourage you to do so mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Good post Xiolablue , i agree http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
La-5FN was a shock suprise when it arrived , but really , it's not that of a dangerous plane , it overheats VERY VERY quick , cannot sustain it smax speed , and is quite slow above 2500meters , add to that that it doesn't turn well at high speeds to be able to follow the Fokkers http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But indeed it's a great plane , it has plenty of advantages like great accel , decent climbrate etc.. Thank God .

Brain32
02-02-2007, 12:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Talking about Red tactics , Fly Yak-1 , lagg-3 , Yak-7 , Mig , P-40 , P-39 against G-2,190A that are faster , better in dive , more manoeauvrable at high speed , and can decide the condition of the fight , and have the initiative , fight against better planes and you will see what i am meaning about tactics... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes fly 1940-1941 VVS planes against mmid-late 1942 German planes what is your point here this is funny stuff. I flew LaGG3 and Yak9 against 109G2's and FW190A4 and kicked their @ss so bad it wasn't funny, the smart ones tried a pass or two and then runned away like Devil himself is chasing them as the war progresses into 1943 and 44 it only get's easier http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> There that's better </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If it makes you happy... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 12:19 PM
I fly both sides , my favourite plane is the FW190, and if there is no La5, I find flying red and fighting 109's and FW190's on the Eastern front very hard.

Just played a 1941 map with 109F4/109E4 vs i16/Yak1/Lagg3-4 series.

I was red, and any 109 pilot who knows what he is doing can just B&Z with impunity. As soon as anyone gets near him he can zoom off at high speed, gain height and come back again.

Another map was

1942 - Hurricane IIc/P40 field Mod/Lagg3/Pe3 vs 109G2/Fw190A4/He111/Stuka

Now I am not complaining, we had some good fights, but I think its quite obvious, Blue have the advantage in these.

Just observations.

Badsight-
02-02-2007, 12:36 PM
to answer the thread starter , no he wouldnt survive

if he had to do continual sorties in FB coops untill he matched his RL kill tally , an AA or Ai or human player would get him first

Brain32
02-02-2007, 12:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
Because Lafka's are for pu$$ies real men fly Yak's </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm , not very kind </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, not to Lavochkin pilots atleast..

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
Offliner, hehe why do you say things like that and expect others to be polite to you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Mate, i said this , because you said yourself " IL-2 never send me on escorts at 6000m " , so i assumed that you were not online player ..very logical conclusion (deduction actually)

Simple , only the DGen sends you and make the mission on its own , so it meant you were talking of offline game .

online in real historical coops , 90% of the fights happens above 3-4000 meters , and that is a for a good reasons , the performances of Luft fighters are best over 4000m and Soviet planes perf are worse above 4000m . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes that was a missunderstanding I meant I never saw anybody going that high in il2(the plane not the game). The thing is late in the war, VVS planes are completely superiour below 5000m while German planes have some advantage at higher alts, La7 and company were really suffering up high in WW2 not quite so in this game, if you guys for some reason go that high and get in trouble then that is your fault, what you imply here would be the same as if we would whine because P47 kick the living sh1t out of anything German up high, and like I said La7,Yak9U are not that bad up high...
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
In the end, since we had a polite discussion I can only say; lets' agree on disagreement, because we obviously have very differents points of view on this subject http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed , very different , well not so polite too in your last post , but nevermind , always keep in mind that if we all agreed on everything , this forum would be useless , it is a place where many peope disagree and express their view in all fairness , and i encourage you to do so mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Good to hear that, I tend to express strong and clear, it may sound a bit harsh but I mean nothing wrong http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JG52Karaya-X
02-02-2007, 12:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
No it is not , many Historians believe he actually had barely more than 80 victories , and that out of this many have been faked. Read more about this in aviation press , i have far more respect for someone like Hans Ulrich Rudel or Marseille.

By the way , Hartmann was made an icon of propaganda if you don't know , at a time where the Lufwaffe was getting Destroyed on Eastern Front ( mid 1943 , the Stalingrad of the air at Kursk and after )AND Western front in mid-1943 to 1944 , also may i remind you that you are speaking about Nazis pilot that whatever the energy deployed nowadays to show them like innocents saints , where the guys on Eastern front shooting civilians , machine gunning innocents and parachutes by hundreds and widely supported the politics in places as well as badly wanted the war at first , i'm no noob and watched and get interested in History for 15 years , have seen all sorts of video footage and my Grand-father himself fought in this war , Nothing was more Nazi than the Luftwaffe , never forget this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now THAT is some propaganda BS, where the hell are you coming up with this stuff.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">This generation looking at these men through the eyes of internet interviews and rumors is funny , sure you had a lot of young men just wanting to fly , but the majority was not guys like Rall but rather guys like Trautloft if you know what i mean .... these were no "knights of the air" but "assassin of the skies at the service of a fascist regime that pushed away the limits of savagery. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

And I guess the Soviet REGIME was so much better than the Nazis! What a bunch of total BS, The Soviets had concentration camps just like the Nazis, they murdered political enemies way before the NSDAP rose to power, and in fact they killed more jews than the Nazis, difference being not for racist reasons but because they were labelled political enemies, so dont try to sell me this sort of cr@p. The Soviet regime was just as criminal if not even more than the Nazis, total number of victims of the Soviet regime probably being much much higher than of the Nazis (Lenin murdering most or all of his opponents, Stalins purge among officers, regular slaughtering of uprisings, etc.).

And about the expression of "Nazi pilot", I guess to you everyone in the LW, not lets say in the whole Wehrmacht was a believing Nazi. So what about your heroic Soviet soldiers, I guess they were the dear, people-loving kind of person huh?

You cant just make everyone on the German side into a Nazi, just as well as you cant make everyone on the Soviet side an arch-communist and server of the party. If you do that you just show your complete biasedness and prejudice.

It just goes to show who the BIASED person is in this discussion. You said you only entered this discussion for realisms sake but thats just superstitious talking, in fact you just want to please your mind and make sure your own fantasy version of WWII is realized, glorious Soviets crushing those disgusting, barbaric, children slaughtering Fashist http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

I for myself never start bashing one sides planes/pilots/etc, I just get into a discussion when people like you come up and try to sell us their version of history and how it should be like based on their feelings and impressions.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I know well P-39 D2 , you are the one that doesn't know it , otherwise you wouldn't react like it's a very good plane , that because you saw it in IL-2 Compare , you saw its top speed ignoring that you never attain this speed in combat , actually , fly it online ,and you will see that you always lack speed against 109 's , Hence why the Q model was purchased and arrived in Soviet Union in late 1943. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, you just showed off your lack of knowledge on the P39s and your inability as a pilot, the D-2 being actually THE BEST(!!) of them ingame, just compare climrates, turnrates and low level speeds, do some damn ingame tests for once, the D-2 is superior in this regard to any other version including the N1, Q1 and Q10, and thats because we have a rare 1943 boost version with 1550hp instead of its real 1250hp, its just people seem to ignore that whenever they place it on dogfight servers in 41 scenarios where it beats the **** out of the Bf109F4 if flown right (it outclimbs and outruns it quite nicely up to 4000m) but I doubt your the man for that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">No they cannot catch the 190 , they can barely catch the 109 , never have the tactical initiative , cannot ouclimb nor outdive them , are outgunned and outraced by 190 to quote a few , don't act like your planes are anything infeior , and by the way , turning at low speed as i said before , is NOT an advantage in mass combat , because it means that all else startegies failed , when you turn at slow speed , it is a form of defeat. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They do, especially in the online wars where we have Yak9s and 9Ts facing FW190A4, the derated '41 version, but hey you dont mind that do you? And about the speed loss, I was talking about high speed maneuvering, at no point did I talk of low speed turning, you just filled that in there yourself, I know how to fly the FWs in contrast to you.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Why do you mention La-7 ? this is common knowledge that it was one of the best propeller plane of WWII , nothing worng that you can catch 109 with it , i am talking of all VVS planes except later Yakov and lavochkina. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it certainly was one of the best, thats why I added it in there because you were trying to sell us how poor and inferior your VVS crates are even in '44, do you get it now? Goooood!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">That is true, but you fail tomention that 2-3 passes for 190 means 2-3 kills for a decent pilot , not to mention that if you have a wingman and proper tactics you can still continue the fight . It's true the 190 is not the best weapon on HL online server dogfight low altitude slow speed combat , but i don't think it was designed for this you know. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again you just added in the low altitude, slow speed combat, I know your just a poor VVS pilot who cant think higher than 3k but pls try again later!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Not at all , if you are objective , German fighters from 1941 to 1944 are far better than VVS planes , thus why you need more rigor , more tactical astuteness when flying Red side to overcome the shortcomings of your planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you feel they are so much better then fly them, otherwise just shut up.

carguy_
02-02-2007, 01:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
Nobody said VVS plane are utter crapp ,you are making a deal out of it , but the fact is that they are indeed inferior in performance, that is a reality , the P-39 like said Polyperhorn is a good aircraft that retains its energy very well to overcome its lack of speed , or youahev the Yak-9 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Oh but I repeat that you are unable to percept the fact that plane performance is just one of the factors in combat,not even the 2nd factor.

From entering of the Yak1b doing a 1v1 vs it below 5500m is a matter of skills and luck.A Yak will always outmaneuver the 109 above 210km/h.And if you get in trouble just turn,you`re free.A coalt fight in the Yak from 1b and later is easy.


P39 is the best VVS plane until the La5F enters the scene.The D2 outperforms the F4 while the N1/Q1 are on par with G2 only that they have better armament,rear view and energy retention characteristics.Seeing a P39 doing a 240 turn and gaining on you is nothing anormal in the game.N1/Q1 superior to G2 under 5500m and over 220km/h.
It does have one bad side,the stall.Once you snap her it`s very hard to recover.I guess that`s why red pilot`s don`t like it very much.Compared even to a Yak it is vicious below 220km/h.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Talking about Red tactics , Fly Yak-1 , lagg-3 , Yak-7 , Mig , P-40 , P-39 against G-2,190A that are faster , better in dive , more manoeauvrable at high speed , and can decide the condition of the fight , and have the initiative , fight against better planes and you will see what i am meaning about tactics... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Talking about blue tactics,fly EmilE7 vs Yak1,P40E and Mig.Also try F2 with 15mm cannon against LaGG3.
All of those are on par with Emil with P40E being faster,more maneuverable and better armed.
For one LaGG3 you need three 109F2 attacking at once to cause fatal damage to LaGG3.
Also,under 3000m all of the listed `41VVS birds rule the airspace.
So you see,even when taking other important combat factors that you ignore out of the picture,things don`t look pretty for the LW.

One thing is for sure though,the LW birds can resign from fight whenever they want provided the fight occurs above 2500m.But other combat factors take care of that.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">online in real historical coops , 90% of the fights happens above 3-4000 meters , and that is a for a good reasons , the performances of Luft fighters are best over 4000m and Soviet planes perf are worse above 4000m . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is so untrue you should not be so primma donna at my attitude towards you.Who are you kidding here?Why are you lying?

The only time when fights happen above 3000m-4000m is when He111/Ju88 go to strategic attack or some suicidal red pilot chooses that alt for recon/strategic attack.

Almost all fights happen @2000m and below.Red fighters when attacked are forced to reduce altitude in a defensive maneuver and stay there since climbing in combat area for them is suicide.

90% of red bombers come in @500m for attacks/recons covered by two groups of red fighters at different altitudes.The group set higher forces LW to reduce alt/run away and then the 2nd group lower takes care of them.If LW fighters ignore red fighter cover,things look even worse for LW.

High alt fights started with entering of La5F/LaGG3S66/La5FN into combat.Not all LW fighters extend above 4000m.G6 early that is 60% of blue fighter planeset(not currently) in Kuban `43 is inferior to all listed above red fighters at all altitudes.

Even now when we`re at Kiev`43 you "opinion" is false as all IL2 that now make up for 60% of bombers never exceed altitude of 2000m.

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 01:33 PM
First Karaya , i will not comment your political statements (that are wrong btw , PM me i'll answer you ) for respect to the moderators and the topic starter , as obviously , your strategy is to destroy the thread and i will not fall into that trap .

Secondly , readers and moderators can make their opinion by themselves through reading the thread , the exagerated agressivity of your last post not only contrast with the rest of the users posting , but also betrays not only angryness but also your political situation , i think that it is serious what you claim about Jews ans purely wrong , you should really weight what you say and remember that without Soviet Union ad all this courageous men that scrificed their lives , you probably wouldn't be posting today .

Note the non aggressive tone of my post http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif



Moreover on the P-39 D2 You are completely wrong Karaya , this utter nonsense , the P-39 D2 doesn't climb better than later Q models , i know very well this in reality as i'm in love with Airacobras . And yes IL-2 Compare is wrong in this , it is not an accurate tool for this , it's the AI perfs ...leave Il-2 compare and FLY it .... and btw , it far INFERIOR to Bf109 in climb anyway ......

Oh , and you are also wrong on P-39 date , ingame it is rated 1941 , but it is not a 1941 on Eastern Front , actually , it fought on the Eastern front from late-42 for the first exemplaries , but widely in 1943 .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
And about the expression of "Nazi pilot", I guess to you everyone in the LW, not lets say in the whole Wehrmacht was a believing Nazi. So what about your heroic Soviet soldiers, I guess they were the dear, people-loving kind of person huh? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not "my " expression" , it's the reality , whatever ....

These guys indeed saw at least one member of their family killed by the "superior race " during this war , their villages burned or family starving , may i remind 21 millions of people were killed directly or indirectly by Nazis in Soviet Union , just try 1 second to visualize this number in your head if you can
tell , indeed these pilots were fighting for freedom of their country , not for domination .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
You cant just make everyone on the German side into a Nazi, just as well as you cant make everyone on the Soviet side an arch-communist and server of the party. If you do that you just show your complete biasedness and prejudice. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I never said that , the attitude of the desperate person is to make someone say what he never said , i understand , but this is poor rethorics ....

I never said they were all Nazi , nice invention http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Whether you want it or not , not all were die hard NSDAP , but majority of them were committed and nazi whether you accept it or not , Luftwaffe was one of the most Nazified institution , it is not to be proved , it is widely accepted by Historian and already proven , Kriegsmarine was less for example . Only thing you can say is that a fair number of pilots were not that inolved in it , but this was not the majority , but more the veterans .

BTW pre-war Germany was in big majority Nazi , my grandfather was living in Germany you know , we talked about this .. and i guess you don't know anything about it obviously , or you would not say this , because as you might have heard , they all "turned their coat" when the defeat became inevitable .. until today they blame defeat on Hitler and high command , while before 1943 , the guy was a national hero ..

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
It just goes to show who the BIASED person is in this discussion. You said you only entered this discussion for realisms sake but thats just superstitious talking, in fact you just want to please your mind and make sure your own fantasy version of WWII is realized, glorious Soviets crushing those disgusting, barbaric, children slaughtering Fashist http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol , here you resort to ridiculous arguments , pleae my mind ? lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Why ? how ?
Ridiculous really , maybe edit your post http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
I for myself never start bashing one sides planes/pilots/etc, I just get into a discussion when people like you come up and try to sell us their version of history and how it should be like based on their feelings and impressions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aha , as i said before , readers and moderators can see how i never bashed any plane , i only was full of praise for German planes , that is for sure , you are really silly here .



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
They do, especially in the online wars where we have Yak9s and 9Ts facing FW190A4, the derated '41 version, but hey you dont mind that do you? And about the speed loss, I was talking about high speed maneuvering, at no point did I talk of low speed turning, you just filled that in there yourself, I know how to fly the FWs in contrast to you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Antoher stupid argument , of course if you put A4 which is a 1942 plane against Yak-9T which is late 1943 , you 'll have problems ........ only below 2500meters http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Exactly like if you put Lagg-3 1941 verus Fw-190 A5 .... ..

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:

Yes it certainly was one of the best, thats why I added it in there because you were trying to sell us how poor and inferior your VVS crates are even in '44, do you get it now? Goooood! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No i was talking calmly about VVS planes from 1941 to 1943 that are indeed good planes , but inferior to German planes as opposed to PF flyer was telling in the first post , by no means i said they were poor ....

This is another proof of your lack of honesty in this ...


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
If you feel they are so much better then fly them, otherwise just shut up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Quoted for moderators purpose .

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 01:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
Oh but I repeat that you are unable to percept the fact that plane performance is just one of the factors in combat,not even the 2nd factor.

From entering of the Yak1b doing a 1v1 vs it below 5500m is a matter of skills and luck.A Yak will always outmaneuver the 109 above 210km/h.And if you get in trouble just turn,you`re free.A coalt fight in the Yak from 1b and later is easy.
P39 is the best VVS plane until the La5F enters the scene.The D2 outperforms the F4 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right , but i never said the opposite , i just said that VVS planes between 1941 and 1943 are inferior to LW planes in performances , thus why you need extreme rigor and tactical awareness to overcome the best organized squads online and it is how it happened also in real life .

The P-39 D2 , i repeat it again is not the opponents of 109F4 , it is a plane that arrived in consistent number in 1943 on Soviet front , before they fought with Airacobra I that is far inferior to 109F4

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
while the N1/Q1 are on par with G2 only that they have better armament,rear view and energy retention characteristics.Seeing a P39 doing a 240 turn and gaining on you is nothing anormal in the game.N1/Q1 superior to G2 under 5500m and over 220km/h. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry mate, but the P-39N is mid-1943 , not 1942 (game tells production date here ) , and it doesn't over-perform the G2 by any strecth of the imagination , lesser speed , lesser climbrate , lesser slow speed handling , lesser dive ability and so on .

Only the Q10 does better , but that is a December 1943 , early 1944 plane .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
It does have one bad side,the stall.Once you snap her it`s very hard to recover.I guess that`s why red pilot`s don`t like it very much.Compared even to a Yak it is vicious below 220km/h. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Personally i love it , it's true that the stall habit is annoying , but once you master it , it's ok , P-39 is an energy plane , it needs to be flown like a Mig .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
Talking about blue tactics,fly EmilE7 vs Yak1,P40E and Mig.Also try F2 with 15mm cannon against LaGG3.
All of those are on par with Emil with P40E being faster,more maneuverable and better armed.
For one LaGG3 you need three 109F2 attacking at once to cause fatal damage to LaGG3.
Also,under 3000m all of the listed `41VVS birds rule the airspace. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Honestly it much depends on the skills of your pilot , these planes are quite matched , E7 outclimb and outdive them , while the others outmanoeuvre them , Thank God we have at least a something to rely on to to make the differecce.

As for 109F2 , i respectfully disagree , it is superior to any other VVS plane of the term of pure performances

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
So you see,even when taking other important combat factors that you ignore out of the picture,things don`t look pretty for the LW.
One thing is for sure though,the LW birds can resign from fight whenever they want provided the fight occurs above 2500m.But other combat factors take care of that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I flew also LW side for quite some time, you should never fly under 3000m unless you are obliged to , but even in thess cases you should have an echellonned cover above you .



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
That is so untrue you should not be so primma donna at my attitude towards you.Who are you kidding here?Why are you lying?
The only time when fights happen above 3000m-4000m is when He111/Ju88 go to strategic attack or some suicidal red pilot chooses that alt for recon/strategic attack. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We may disagree and i appreciate the neutral tone of your post , but i am by no means a liar .
He-111 should cruise at 2500-3000 , you must be 1500-2000 meters above , as i said , 90% of the full switch online coop mission i fly , there are engagement Above 3-4000m .
In dogfight servers, things are different for gameplay purposes (indivual engagements , low alt because no one wants to spends 6 minutes climbing etc.. )


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:

Almost all fights happen @2000m and below.Red fighters when attacked are forced to reduce altitude in a defensive maneuver and stay there since climbing in combat area for them is suicide. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not at all , that's why we use like in real life by the way , the Echelon tactics , with different groups at different altitudes and distances , fights happen at all kind of altitudes , and when fights are under 2000m , it means that the blue tactics have failed in the cases of aerial superiority missions .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
90% of red bombers come in @500m for attacks/recons covered by two groups of red fighters at different altitudes.The group set higher forces LW to reduce alt/run away and then the 2nd group lower takes care of them.If LW fighters ignore red fighter cover,things look even worse for LW. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed , you are right , Red bombers and Ilyoushine bomb very low on purpose , to get a better protection from us if they are attacked .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
High alt fights started with entering of La5F/LaGG3S66/La5FN into combat.Not all LW fighters extend above 4000m.G6 early that is 60% of blue fighter planeset(not currently) in Kuban `43 is inferior to all listed above red fighters at all altitudes.

Even now when we`re at Kiev`43 you "opinion" is false as all IL2 that now make up for 60% of bombers never exceed altitude of 2000m. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed , the 109 G6 , exactly like i said in my first post , is probably the only LW fighter that is realtively weaker than the rest , but as i said , in the hands of VVS virtual pilots used to have a lot of disadvantages until 1944 , it is a very good weapon , its climbrate , fast firing 30mm is incredible (only half a pass and you score the kill ) , and especially its speed above 4000m is excellent until 7000+, which is very different from VVS plane . For example only the La-5 FN can go at these kind of speeds atthese altitudes , but cannot sustain it and overheats extremely quickly .

Anyhow , i thank you for having been respectful and expressed your point of view that i respect , in a peaceful manneer without resorting to personal attacks , thanks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Bewolf
02-02-2007, 01:52 PM
LOL!!!!


gosh that guy cracks me up. more please! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 01:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
If you feel they are so much better then fly them, otherwise just shut up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a very good point Marcel. I fly the Fw190 because I feel shes the best bird and I do best in her.

If you feel the Blue birds are better why not just fly them?

I get annoyed with people saying that Spitfires are too good, and then they fly blue all the time, if people feel they are so good then just fly them - there are plenty of people who will gladly shoot you down many times over in a FW190/Bf109. No sense in hating the plane you are best in.

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 02:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
If you feel they are so much better then fly them, otherwise just shut up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a very good point Marcel. I fly the Fw190 because I feel shes the best bird and I do best in her.

If you feel the Blue birds are better why not just fly them?

I get annoyed with people saying that Spitfires are too good, and then they fly blue all the time, if people feel they are so good then just fly them - there are plenty of people who will gladly shoot you down many times over in a FW190/Bf109. No sense in hating the plane you are best in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with you Xiolablue , well the answer to your question is because i am above all a great admirer of Russian culture and language since i'm akid , and i also love challenge . that didn't prevent me to fly Blue for more than a year though , with very nice people , as i'm curious and appreciating German planes of that period , but i'm passioned about aviation and my favourite planes flews on the Soviet side , this also doesn't prevent me to remain objective about relative advantages and disadvantages between all these warbirds http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 02:29 PM
It would definitely be interesting if an online war used percentages of planes used in real life.

Like red mostly has Yak9's and Blues have 109G6 in 1943.

Is this how it happens?

I would class Bf109G6 and Yak9 as very close in performance in game, but I havent flown them too much.

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 02:39 PM
Yes , i agree Xiola , indeed , Yak-9 and 109G6 is the closest match you can have in 1943 in the Eastern Front from the Soviet side point of view , Yak-9 being the best of Soviet aviation at the time with P-39 according to many VVS veterans , and 109 G6 being probably the worst fighter the German had at this time of the war ( at the time he appeared wich is December 1942 , it was not a improvement from the G-2/4 in term of flights characteristics , it was tougher though for engaging bombers ).

I would even say that the Yak-9 has a clear advantage over the 109G6 in performances (faster more manoeuvrable under 5000 m even at high speeds ) . You really need to stay fast and fly high with G6 and think well before losing altitude during combat when there are Yak-9's around , for example in order to follow an ennemy .

This is one of the few exceptions you can find , until late 1943 La-5FN that is better below 2000m (meagre advantage ) than the best of LW (190 A5 ) then after , it's 1944 VVS planes that were historically superior to LW planes at low altitude , so nothing is wrong there .

carguy_
02-02-2007, 02:47 PM
Airforce War Dynamic Planeset (http://war.by-airforce.com/planeset.html)



After some balancing out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 02:56 PM
Hmm, I dont like the La5FN being there Carguy.

It would be better remove the FW190A6 and to have 60% Yak9Ds and 30% La5F, 10%Yak1B in 1943. No La5FN's at all in that year.

I would like to see La5FN appearing in 1944 when the 109G6A/S and 190A8/A9 are around.

This is purely how I would see a balanced planeset. Probably others have different opinons.

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 03:03 PM
Indeed , from my books about Soviet aviation , they say that the La-5FN arrived in great numbers in the squadrons only in very late 1943 and early 1944 , a very few numbers of them flew at Kursk in the summer 1943 , but these planes arrived late and fought in very tiny numbers there , only a few of them .

Same for Yak-3 , this plane arrives in little numbers in the first quarter of 1944 , but it's not until after the summer that their numbers increase to a decent amount . Soviet VVS was operating a huge majority of Yak-9 , La-5F , P-39N/Q etc.. (1942/43 planes ) in 1944 .

I think humbly that this planeset should be modified for historical credibility reasons , replacing LA-5 FN with Yak-9 that were the planes among the most common in WWII Soviet VVS .

carguy_
02-02-2007, 03:06 PM
Actually,the planeset is very balanced,maybe the most in AW history.Very good IMO even if I`d like to have only really featured planes there.

B25 is not listed but acts as a human bomber.AW war planeset is very complicated case of red fairplay doctrine.Fact is that LW did het the Me110 in `41.

Admins already said there will be no Me262 in `44-45 scenarios http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Anyway,one would have to check that.Looking into a book with real figures would be nice.
Things I really doubt is absence of Yak9 and Me109G6early.

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 03:06 PM
I think the point is Marcel, that the La5FN DID appear in 1943, but the version we have in game is a very late La5FN, I have been told the numbers match the La7 prototype La5FN.

The La5FN apparantly increased in performance dramatically over the period it was produced.

If we did actually have a 1943 performing La5FN then it would be great, but it isnt. Its 1944 performance.

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 03:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
Actually,the planeset is very balanced,maybe the most in AW history.Very good IMO even if I`d like to have only really featured planes there.

B25 is not listed but acts as a human bomber.AW war planeset is very complicated case of red fairplay doctrine.Fact is that LW did het the Me110 in `41.

Admins already said there will be no Me262 in `44-45 scenarios http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Anyway,one would have to check that.Looking into a book with real figures would be nice.
Things I really doubt is absence of Yak9 and Me109G6early. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats cool then mate, having never played Online war, I am really speaking without any authority on the subject.

I am talking from dogfight server point of view. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Its a shame there will be no Me262, the La7B20 vs Me262 fights are very good! Its certainly possible to shoot down Me262's with the La7B20.

Especially as you have the ability to limit the numbers. I think there should be a few Me262's vs Yak3's and La7B20's for sure.

Plus many will kill themselves as its very easy to set your engine on fire by accident.

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 04:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I think the point is Marcel, that the La5FN DID appear in 1943, but the version we have in game is a very late La5FN, I have been told the numbers match the La7 prototype La5FN.

The La5FN apparantly increased in performance dramatically over the period it was produced.

If we did actually have a 1943 performing La5FN then it would be great, but it isnt. Its 1944 performance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Honestly , i respect your opinion but disagree http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

AFAIK , all La-5FN had the same engine and no specific modification was made on them , what i think is that generally speaking , in IL-2 , we have the ideals performances modelled in most planes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


In the case of LA-5 FN , this was a great plane at the time it appeared which is late 1943 in decent numbers , problem is that these Soviet a/c are under-estimated mainly because of lack of informations , for example , read this excerpt of document made by a serious author , :

http://img74.imageshack.us/my.php?image=page096cv0.jpg

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 04:09 PM
Really mate, I know people who tested the performance and then checked it with the Soviet test figures

I will try and find the thread for you. Maybe you can put us right if its wrong http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

EDIT:-

La-5FN

Semyon Lavochkin had in fact conducted 2 development projects in parallel during the development of the La-5F. The 2nd made use of Shvetsov's ASh-82 FN engine which incorporated direct fuel injection boosting its take off power further to 1850 hp which was apparently sustainable as augmented power for a period of upto 10 minutes during flight.

Work continued on the La-5FN throughout the La-5F trials of January and February 1943 and the first prototype La-5FN was ready for testing on the 26th March 1943.

The key advances were around the use and mounting of the engine. A large super charger air intake had been added to the top of the engine cowling to provide air for the deep breathing Ash-82FN engine. The exhaust stack was modified to provide independent exhausts for each cylinder to be routed to the revised exhaust flap.. Thus cutting down exhaust pipe degradation and allowing better control over cylinder head temperatures. Cowling was slightly modified to give a lower drag characteristic.

Venting of the rear engine compartment and cannon compartment was improved. The prototype had a metal main wing spar but this was not incorporated until late1943 production runs. A duraluminum plate was added below the cockpit above the wing roots. In the cockpit thicker armoured glass (front and rear) was included in later models, the radio was improved and opening of the canopy made easier.

Tests performed during April of 1943 showed it to be a significant improvement over the La-5F, specifically in terms of climb and speed. The La-5FN was immediately ordered into serial production and the first batch was sent to the Kursk front in June 1443.

Whilst still suffering many of the cockpit discomforts of the earlier La-5 series it quickly proved its self in action. It out performed the Bf109G2 in speed and vertical manoeuvring and equalled the then new Bf109G6 in both aspects of performance. It could not however equal the top speed of the FW190A3-4 but was able to both out climb and out turn it in the much quoted combat turn manoeuver.
However through out 1943 and 1944 the La-5 FN benefited from a continued weight saving program as certain wooden parts were replaced with light alloy parts. The fuel tanks were later changed to a 4 tank set ( when the metal sparred wings were adopted) but this did not add to the aircrafts range which had been reduced by the heavier breathing engine. Combat mission flight duration at full power was now only 40 minutes, however this could be extended to 2 hours and 32 minutes when at reduced engine revs of 1600rpm.

Continued development of the control surfaces and trim reduced control stick forces to a point where these "provided a considerable improvement in handling and manoeuverability".

During 1943 a total of 5048 La-5F and La-5FN aircraft were built across 4 aircraft factories. 4619 being built at GAZ-21 Nizhny-Novgorod (Gorkii). Production of the La-5FN continued until November1944 during which time a further 3826 were produced in parallel with the then latest mark the La-7.



Note 'It was not as fast as a FW190A3,' yet in the game its a fast as a FW190A8.

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 04:18 PM
PLease read this thread and reply with your thoughts Marcel http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (and anyone else)

http://www.battle-fields.com/commscentre/showthread.php...p=20&highlight=la5FN (http://www.battle-fields.com/commscentre/showthread.php?t=10155&page=3&pp=20&highlight=la5FN)

This is where I got the info from on the La5FN.

If you have a source saying a serial 1943 La5FN could do 590kph then pls post it mate.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v662/aegeeaddict/18.jpg

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 04:37 PM
Thanks for the link mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I trust very much Tigertalon , just like Robban , they made very interesting testings in the past http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But in this thread all i see is someone named RolandWalker trying to flame the La-5FN and other people trying to explain him why it's not wrong .

Basically , the top speed is correct with a small margin of error , LA-5FN could reach 580km/h at SL historically .

The problem he raises is about overheating , and i think as many poster told him , he should fly the LA-5FN more , because it actually overheats quite quickly with 100%rpm (prop picth as game says) and once it overheats , afterwards , it's impossible to go full power without overheating a few seconds after as opposed to other planes , the cooling system is quite unneffective (can't maintain top speed for long ) , the same is true for the Hellcat or the Corsair/P-47 ingame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

This said , this is only at sea level and as point my link , this aircraft had a real impact at altitude when it became available , it was the first VVS plane to show superior performances to the best LW planes at low altitudes historically , but we must also not forget that it was barely faster than a 109 G6 at altitudes above 3000m , it's a real challenge against faster Antons at altitudes with it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The other point he raises is about Lagg engines , but again he is ill-informed , the Great strength of Soviet engines, especially the one on the Lagg-3 was that it could fly even without 4 cylinders (!) , it was unique at the time , for instance , the Bf-109 couldn't afford to lose more than one cylinder , many VVS pilots accounts and technical accounts confirm this .


Overall , we must also say that these were tested on 4.02 version , and i think that the result of the tests are quite good actually , quite close to the tests datas , especially if you take into account that not all production planes had identical performances depending on the conditions of the test and especially the factory where it comes from, i'd need to watch the tracks , but in a shallow dive at SL or by insisting much or without armament , it's not surprising that you can take an extra 10km/h and i think many examples of all sides planes sometimes exceeds or are under the specifications by a tiny margin like here in the sim .

I think that it is a typo in your document , because if you look at the La-5 in your same document , it states 580km/h at sea level Xiola (this a performance of the improved M-82FN engine , not of La-5 for sure ), they probably/surely inverted both datas by mistake http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Xiolablu3
02-02-2007, 04:57 PM
Rgr thanks.

Roland is OK mate, he just prefers Blue planes to red, so he fights his corner.

But honestly I have always thought that the La5FN in IL2 is a 1944 spec. As in a cleaned up, tweaked plane.

I will do some more reading and we can chat about it some more.
Please show any docs you have http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Thanks again.

Marcel_Albert
02-02-2007, 05:02 PM
No problem mate , it was a pleasure to speak with you because you are a honest person in the discussion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I have no documents about La-5FN tests to be honest , only documents (books) about how it fought , who fought in it and when http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

cheers http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Polyperhon
02-02-2007, 05:13 PM
I am really annoyed by the agressive style of JG52Karaya-X.Not only I am a serious Bf 109 player,but I have a long history on and off line.In the first year or so I was not using the pods ( I should had made it clear that I use the Mk108 pods)however once I had started to use them,initially as a curiosity change,I stayed with them and rarely I abandon them.The advantage of Bf 109 is usually so obvious (in all the things that Marcel explained so clearly) that it makes a lot of sense if you know what you 're doing.Having a triplet of 30mm gives greater possibility of a hit with just a one-bullet shot (therefore 3 bullets) and decimates bombers in seconds,therefore not exposing the plane to defensive fire.This guy might be too much influenced by the continuous reports in today's press but if is that the case,why they used them so much then?
Do I have to explain why P-39 was so aerodynamically efficient?I don't think here is the place to do a course in aerodynamics!My compliments to Marcel.The guy really knows.P-39 is a plane that you really have to fly it.It takes skill to extract its perfomance.You have to continually play with the throttle, the rudder and the flaps.You have to get the feeling of the plane and to know how much you can turn the stick depending of the speed,angle of attack etc.It's not a spitfire that you can just jump on the cokpit and just go.The thing is to avoid to stall,if you do there is indeed not much you can do.

JG52Karaya-X
02-03-2007, 02:04 AM
Firstly I excuse myself, if you felt attacked by my words.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Polyperhon:
Not only I am a serious Bf 109 player,but I have a long history on and off line. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So do many others, in fact I've been around here since 2001, under a different name but then again things change.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In the first year or so I was not using the pods ( I should had made it clear that I use the Mk108 pods)however once I had started to use them,initially as a curiosity change,I stayed with them and rarely I abandon them.The advantage of Bf 109 is usually so obvious (in all the things that Marcel explained so clearly) that it makes a lot of sense if you know what you 're doing.Having a triplet of 30mm gives greater possibility of a hit with just a one-bullet shot (therefore 3 bullets) and decimates bombers in seconds,therefore not exposing the plane to defensive fire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But the problem I have with them (and thats why I said no serious 109 pilot takes them):

- They reduce performance to a level where you just cant afford to engage enemy fighters. Your topspeeds, acceleration, climbrate and most of all your agility is crippled. High speed passes on enemy fighters are out of the question, if they see you they will bank away with total ease and you will not be able to pull lead on them. Gunpods in real life were only used against bombers, only in emergencies when hard pressed by the enemy a gunboat 109 would attack enemy fighters. Furthermore the single 30mm on the later 109s for me is more than enough to deal with any kind of target, and the extra performance comes in handy should enemy fighters join the fight. From your statement it sounded like you take gunpods in general when available.

- And in the case of the 30mm gondolas, they were very very rare in real life. Up to now I've only seen one picture of 30mm gondolas mounted under the wings of a G6 or G14, and that might only have been a test bed, no combat reports mention the use of 30mm gondolas on the 109s. I personally also cant believe that the Gs wings would stand the extra weight (and so far out of the wing), it was not until the K-6, which received strenghtened wings, that such gunpods became useable.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It takes skill to extract its perfomance.You have to continually play with the throttle, the rudder and the flaps.You have to get the feeling of the plane and to know how much you can turn the stick depending of the speed,angle of attack etc.It's not a spitfire that you can just jump on the cokpit and just go.The thing is to avoid to stall,if you do there is indeed not much you can do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Strongly depends on the version. The D and N version are the most unstable and stall/spin prone of these, the Qs are quite easy to recover. Anyway the Cobras have improved quite a bit over time, if you remember the old IL2 they were very dangerous to turn in then, this has gradually decreased with time.

I will still stand by my opinion that the P39D-2 is the best Airacobra ingame, and yes I did do ingame tests and not just look at Il2Compare (which btw doesnt show the planes complete performance, its lacking a 100% curve for example).

JG52Karaya-X
02-03-2007, 02:09 AM
About the La5, here is a German test of a captured La5:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Sie bot unseren Jagdfliegern unterhalb 3000m einen beachtlichen Gegner
Die Oberfläche besonders die Tragflächen ist gut auch die seitlich nach vorn austretenden Slots sind gut eingepaßt.
Das Flugzeug befand sich in einwandfsreiem Zustand. Betriebsstunden sind nicht bekannt; es war schon längere Zeit im Flugbetrieb.

Der Motor darf mit Höhenlader nicht mit Notleistung gefahren werden. Die Abfallhöhen liegen auch so niedrig,daß die volle Notleistung weder im Steig- noch im Horizontalflug
mit Höhenlader erreicht wird.
Flugzeugdaten: Fluggewicht incl. Mun. und Flugzeugführer
3347kg.
Flächenbelastung 191kg/m2
Startleistung 1850PS
Nennlöeistung bei 2400U/min und 1,36ata
Notleistung bei 2500U/min und 1,6ata
Laderumschalthöhe (mit Hand) 3.500m

Geschwindigkeiten: Notleistung 0km 520kmh
NennleistungOkm 490kmh
Notleistung 1kmAbfallh. 540kmh
Nennleistung 2,4kmAbfallh 540kmh
Nennleistung 5km Abfallh. 560kmh
Nennleistung 6,5kmAbfallh. 540kmh

Steiggeschwindigkeiten:
Nennleisztung 0-3km 16-17m/s
Nennleistung 4km 13m/s
Nennleistung 7km 6m/s
Gipfelhöhe:
8-9km

Eigenschaften:

Führersitz: Der Führersitz ist bequem. Die Sicht nach vorn ist ausreichend,bei Start Landung und Rollen aber auch durch den Doppelsternmotor stark behindert. Am Boden und im Fluge stöt die starke Abgasbelästigung.
Antriebe,Luftschraubenverstellung,Kühler,Kiemen,Tr immung etc. bestehen vorwiedend aus Bowdenzügen und Kabeln, wodurch viel toter Gang und Antriebsweichheit entsteht.

Start: Ausbrechneigung ist entsprechend der Motorleistung vorhanden aber zu beherrschen. Die geringe Bodenfreiheit der Luftschraube ist dabei zu beachten.

Stabilität,Steuerkräfte und Wirkung: Im normalen Anstellwinkelbereich ist die Laängsstabilität auch bei Vollgassteigflug überraschend gut. Die Höhensteuerkräfte sind normal. Bei Steilkurven sind die Höhensteuerkräfte eindeutig positiv und ziemlich hoch, so daß sich bei längerer Dauer nachtrimmen empfiehlt.
Statische Richtungsstabilität ist vorhanden bei normalen Steuerkräften, die im Langsamflug stark abnehmen.
Dabei verschlechtert sich auch die Wirkung stark.
Dynamische Richtungsstabilität ist schwach vorhanden, die Dämpfung ist schlecht. Schwingungen klingen nur langsam ab.
Doch ist die Schwingungsdauer(bei 450kmh in 2000m etwa 3sec.) nicht so kurz, daß man die Schwingung nicht durch Eingreifen augenblicklich beenden könnte. Schießanflug ist daher gut möglich.
Schieberollmomente sind schwach vorhanden.
Die Queruderwirksamkeit ist ausgezeichnet. bei 450kmh beträgt die Rollzeit knapp 4sec. Bei 600kmh lassen die Quersteuerkräfte gerade noch hohe Ruderlegegeschwindigkeiten zu. Beim Schieben ändert sich die Knüppellage merklich.

überziehen:Mit Nennleistung Klappen und Fahrwerk ein treten bei 200-210kmh die Slots heraus, die Quersteuerkräfte sinken ab bis zum überausgleich. Bei 180kmh scheint die rolldämpfung zu verschwinden. Beim Schieben oder geringer Fahrt kippt das flugzeug auf die Fläche. Zieht man weiter durch so wird das Höhensteuer schlagartig kraftlos bis überausgeglichen, seine Wirkung verschwindet nahezu.

Landung:Anschweben unter 200kmh nur mit Gas. es empfiehlt sich en Zustand auszutrimmen da die Höhensteuerkräfte trotzdem beim Abfangen beachtlich hoch werden.Schlechte Fahrwerks-Federbeindämpfung.

Taktische Folgerungen und Vorschläge: Die LA5 ist entsprechend ihrer Motorleistung besonders für den Kampf in niederen Höhen angelegt. Die 109 mit MW50 ist im ganzen Bereich in Höchstgeschwindigkeit und bestem Steigen überlegen. Die Beschleunigungsverhältnisse dürften ähnlich liegen. Die Querruderwirksamkeit ist besser als bei der 109.
Die Kreiszeiten der LA5 sind am Boden besser als die der 190
und schlechter als die der 109. Auch im besten Steigen ist die 190 bis etwa 3km schlechter. Infolge Ihres höheren Gewichts beschleunigt die 190 schlechter, ist dafür aber bei allen angedrückten Flugzuständen überlegen und wenn sie mit hoher Fahrt wegzieht. Abgesehen von plötzlichen Ausweichbewegungen ist es dem höheren Gewicht und der höheren Flächenbelastung der 190 entsprechend grundsätzlich richtig anzudrücken (Vergleich Thunderbolt), bei hoher Fahrt
flach wegsteigend sich abzusetzen um in neue Angriffsposition zu kommen (bei Va des besten Steigens steigt die LA5 in steilerem Winkel), das flugzeug nicht von Fahrt kommen zu lassen und längere "Kurbeleien" zu vermeiden, denn es ist nicht anzunehmen das die Russen, die an schlechtere Flugeigenschaften gewöhnt sind, sich durch die beschriebenen Kurveneigenschaften der LA5 beeindrucken lassen. Auf die geringe Flugddauer von etwa 40min. bei nennleistung, die sich bei Flug mit Höhenlader weiter verringert, sei hingewiesen. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v639/Karaya/La5g2_402lo.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v639/Karaya/La5g4_379lo.jpg

Also note that Forszah was only useable up to 2000m, in IL2 you can run it at all heights.

JG52Karaya-X
02-03-2007, 03:28 AM
No Marcel I'm not trying to destroy this thread, you are doing this quite well all by your own by your blurred and twisted view of history and extreme ideas, lets see again:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
No it is not , many Historians believe he actually had barely more than 80 victories , and that out of this many have been faked ("one for you , one for me " was a commong thing among LW pilots at the end of their sorties , unlike VVS they didn't any material proofs to confirm victories ... if you believe all their claims , Soviet VVS would have been destroyed by early 1943 , reality is opposite ). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is non-sense, the LW had one of the most strict systems for verifying kills, you needed at least one witness to get a confirmation. Also kills could not be divided into halves, quarters and so on like in the USAAF and there were no "probables" like in the RAF, either you could prove you had destroyed the plane and got the whole kill yourself or you didnt. Furthermore aces like Hartmann were not the kill-greedy sort of guy you are trying to depict them as, in fact if they weren't totally sure about who shot this or that plane down they would not file a claim. There is a famous quote of Gerhard Barkhorn after he had come back from a flight and pilots were not sure who in the end had shot down this and that plane, Barkhorn did not file a claim as he was not 100% sure about the validity of his claim and instead said "give these kills to the poor" (to the more inexperienced pilots)

If you cannot come up with any proof against this, your argument is just a wild and very unhonourable stab at a group of persons that cannot defend themselves anymore. I would demand that you step back from this claim!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Read more about this in aviation press , i have far more respect for someone like Hans Ulrich Rudel or Marseille. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I do, I have lots and lots of books here at home as well as magazines, I dont know what stuff you are reading but it seems to conflict with anything I have ever seen.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">By the way, Hartmann was made an icon of propaganda if you don't know , at a time where the Lufwaffe was getting Destroyed on Eastern Front (mid 1943, the Stalingrad of the air at Kursk and after)AND Western front in mid-1943 to 1944 , Hartmann's figure was very important for the Nazis to keep appearances and morale high... hence astronomical figures. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hartmann was made an icon by the propaganda, thats true, but then even more so were Hans Ulrich Rudel and Marseille and Hermann Graf, these actually toured around Germany to boost moral back in the country and among the troops. Anyway this bears no proof of their PERSONAL political activity, they were simply ordered to do these tours, they did not choose them freely. And when we talk about propaganda, may I remind you that the Germans were not the only ones? I guess no country in WWII was free of propaganda, especially not the Soviet Union with its declared Heroes and Aces.

Hartmanns kill figures (and also those of his equally successful comrades on the Eastern Front) can be backed up by Soviet loss reports in the areas and regions he was operating during the war quite nicely. If you refuse to accept this I cannot help you (and noone else either).

To again come to this most controverse paragraph

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Also may i remind you that you are speaking about Nazis pilot that whatever the energy deployed nowadays to show them like innocents saints , where the guys on Eastern front shooting civilians , machine gunning innocents and parachutes by hundred thousands and widely supported the politics in places as well as badly wanted the war at first , i'm no noob and watched and get interested in History for 15 years , have seen all sorts of video footages , testimonies and my Grand-father himself fought in this war , Nothing was more Nazi than the Luftwaffe (well except SS ) , never forget this , it's plain truth. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My dear friend, you just display your complete anger and biasedness here, german fighter pilots did not strafe civilian targets, they did not shoot at parachutes either, GOERING HIMSELF(!) had given the order not to shoot at any bailed out pilots hanging in their chutes, as much as he was a Nazi, he was also a man of the old school of WWI meaning he did believe in a sort of "etiquette" in air combat, he actually discussed this with his fighter pilots and they agreed on this matter. German fighter pilots did certainly NOT do what you are accusing them here of.

You seem to confuse the air war with the ground war. Yes on the ground there were terrible slaughters and massacres both among captured soldiers as well as among civilians and the Waffen SS did a lot of horrible things there, but so did the Russians. Ever talked to Women who have experienced the cruelty of the Red Army at the end of the WWII? I have and these are very moving and shocking stories, Red Army soldiers raping and afterwards murdering young women and girls, sometimes in front of their husbands/fathers. Thousands of German soldiers who did not come back from their captivity in Russian Gulags, after and during the war. Are these your declared idols and heroes? They are not an OUNCE better than the Nazis, not a bit.

Didnt Churchill state, after the Western nations had allied with Stalin and the Soviets: "A pact with a devil against an even greater one"

I have not one but 2 grandfathers who fought in the war, one in the Balkans against Partisans and later in the last days at the Austro-Hungarian border, and the other on the Eastern front (not sure where exactly). The latter one survived a burst from a Russian MP, 3 rounds had smashed through his left cheek and came out the other side, he survived but he did take scars from that. Just like your grandfather was not very fond of the Germans they were not very fond of the Soviets.

You see there are always 2 sides of a medal, but you seem to just stick to your side (the Soviet) refusing any inputs that might contradict your view.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">This generation looking at these men through the eyes of internet interviews and rumors is funny , sure you had a lot of young men just wanting to fly , but the majority was not guys like Rall but rather guys like Trautloft if you know what i mean... these were no "knights of the air" but "assassin of the skies at the service of a fascist regime that pushed away the limits of savagery. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again I state:

The Soviet REGIME was not a tad better than the Nazis! They had concentration camps just like the Nazis, they murdered political enemies way before the NSDAP rose to power in 1933, and in fact they killed more jews than the Nazis, difference being not for racist reasons but because they were labelled political enemies, THIS IS A FACT, believe it or not. The Soviet regime was just as criminal if not even more than the Nazis, total number of victims of the Soviet regime probably being much much higher than of the Nazis (Lenin murdering most or all of his opponents, Stalins purge among officers, regular slaughtering of uprisings, etc.). While you want to sell us that the Soviets were a heroic band of brothers you also seem to refues to accept and see the war crimes and crimes against humanity that the Soviet Regime was responsible for.

I am not a friend of either system, and I have come to accept and agree on the criminal side of both systems, you on the other hand cant seem to grasp that, if you cannot loose your one-sided-ness, this discussion is over!

Marcel_Albert
02-03-2007, 07:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Also note that Forszah was only useable up to 2000m, in IL2 you can run it at all heights. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You see in game "Forzah", but it has no influence on the speed ingame , the La-5FN has the speed it should have according to trials at most altitudes , the performances are well matched , there is a real obsession against it , it seems .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
No Marcel I'm not trying to destroy this thread, you are doing this quite well all by your own by your blurred and twisted view of history and extreme ideas, lets see again: </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My ideas are historical facts shared by a majority of people on earth and are no extreme by any stretch of the imagination , my grandfather lived in Germany before the war ,he fought there , and i trust him more as well as respected historian than a random guy on forum making his hobby to flame people and make them say what they didn't say .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
This is non-sense, the LW had one of the most strict systems for verifying kills, you needed at least one witness to get a confirmation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL , correct your statement ....
they had one of the most laxist system because you only needed your wingman to say "yes he did it " .
Seriously be honest just one second , this is ridiculous what you say .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Also kills could not be divided into halves, quarters and so on like in the USAAF and there were no "probables" like in the RAF, either you could prove you had destroyed the plane and got the whole kill yourself or you didnt. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But fact is USAAF pilots don't come up with ridiculous numnbers unverified most often by the loss list of VVS .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Furthermore aces like Hartmann were not the kill-greedy sort of guy you are trying to depict them as, in fact if they weren't totally sure about who shot this or that plane down they would not file a claim. There is a famous quote of Gerhard Barkhorn after he had come back from a flight and pilots were not sure who in the end had shot down this and that plane, Barkhorn did not file a claim as he was not 100% sure about the validity of his claim and instead said "give these kills to the poor" (to the more inexperienced pilots) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea well if you ask me , that proves nothing actually , secondly i never had any judgement of valour against Hartmann , i don't know this guy , i don't see why you again put words in mouth and tell me i said he's greedy , i never said that .

Thirdly , to come up with VVS pilot when they actually had a very high number of their kill over ennemy territory cancelled because they needed a material proof , particularly over the Baltic sea , and i don't mention the "group" kills of thousands of pilots that aren't counted individually , many aces like Safonov were attributing the kills to their young wingmen to boost their confidence and responsiblity , it's not comparable with LW , the personal score was not important for VVS pilot , the squadron score was more important and they didn't have such big rewards for kills which can be another valid reason to overclaim .


What i told you , and some important studies that has been given public has been made about his score tally , and it is very unlikely not to say impossible that he has achieved this 352 figure ,Historian says that at best , he scored about 80 when they compare with loss lists , but at that particular time , they needed to boost the morale of young pilots coming to the front line , and Hartmann was this perfect hero they needed because he enlisted and arrived late in combat action . Again it is not my claim , it is widely accepted by some serious people tha have investigated the archives . Anyhow i dont't give a penny , since these things are debatable with critical and respectful people and perhaps i shouldn't have mentionned this . I understand it's harsh when someone comes and tells you something that break a dream in your head , i understand it though .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Hartmanns kill figures (and also those of his equally successful comrades on the Eastern Front) can be backed up by Soviet loss reports in the areas and regions he was operating during the war quite nicely. If you refuse to accept this I cannot help you (and noone else either). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No it is not , and that's why PhD and a historian made a study about this and published about the subject .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
My dear friend, you just display your complete anger and biasedness here, german fighter pilots did not strafe civilian targets, they did not shoot at parachutes either, GOERING HIMSELF(!) had given the order not to shoot at any bailed out pilots hanging in their chutes, as much as he was a Nazi, he was also a man of the old school of WWI meaning he did believe in a sort of "etiquette" in air combat, he actually discussed this with his fighter pilots and they agreed on this matter. German fighter pilots did certainly NOT do what you are accusing them here of.

You seem to confuse the air war with the ground war. Yes on the ground there were terrible slaughters and massacres both among captured soldiers as well as among civilians and the Waffen SS did a lot of horrible things there, but so did the Russians. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wonder who made your education , but you are in an advanced state of brainwashing here .. you claim LW didn't strafe civilians ?? get a history book seriously , they bombed villages and killed millions of people there , do you seriously have a clue of what you are tallking about or are you blinded by your third reich nostalgia ?

Or you think they were living on another planet or ? It was War dude , and a bitter one , the most violent and unfair mankind has known , don't tell me you don't know about how they were not only encouraged to straffe the "untermenchschen" but ordered to bomb them night and day for 3 years . As for shooting parachutes , it's indeed controversial ,but if you ask me , it wouldn't be surprising that so called pilots of the "new race" wree advised or willingly did it at the beggining of the campaign in 1941 ,when "all was smooth and succesful" seeing the numbers of pilots Soviet had at the very beggining , it was the largest Airforce on earth .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:Ever talked to Women who have experienced the cruelty of the Red Army at the end of the WWII? I have and these are very moving and shocking stories, Red Army soldiers raping and afterwards murdering young women and girls, sometimes in front of their husbands/fathers. Thousands of German soldiers who did not come back from their captivity in Russian Gulags, after and during the war. Are these your declared idols and heroes? They are not an OUNCE better than the Nazis, not a bit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Because i said i have declared heroes ?
Let me get things straight , this will be my last post to answer you , because here you reach some peaks in term of bad faith and stupidity .
Nobody was discussing the Russians in this thread (by the way Soviet is not Russia , but all Soviet Union ) , i was discussing the performances of planes .

Secondly , if you dare to compare what the Russian army did at the end of war compared to the nearly 20 millions slaughter your nazi friends did only there , you have some serious guts and not afraid of ridicule .

Thirdly , i wonder why you want to make of me , someone who defends the crime of others , but i must say you are quite poor in rethorics .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Didnt Churchill state, after the Western nations had allied with Stalin and the Soviets: "A pact with a devil against an even greater one"

I have not one but 2 grandfathers who fought in the war, one in the Balkans against Partisans and later in the last days at the Austro-Hungarian border, and the other on the Eastern front (not sure where exactly). The latter one survived a burst from a Russian MP, 3 rounds had smashed through his left cheek and came out the other side, he survived but he did take scars from that. Just like your grandfather was not very fond of the Germans they were not very fond of the Soviets. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand and Respect this about your Grandfather http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


However my Grandfather was actually (because he's dead now ) very fond of Germans ,he lived with them peacefully and was working there before the war , but he left in 38 because he was NO fond of Nazis that were the huge majority at this time whether you want to believe it or not , Luftwaffe was by no means an exception , it was actually a symbol .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
You see there are always 2 sides of a medal, but you seem to just stick to your side (the Soviet) refusing any inputs that might contradict your view. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which view ??? i'm not thinking in binary thank God , my view are much more complex than you can imagine .



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:

The Soviet REGIME was not a tad better than the Nazis! They had concentration camps just like the Nazis, they murdered political enemies way before the NSDAP rose to power in 1933 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Who is "They" for you ....the Soviet people ? think before posting really ... by the way , who cares who is better , why do you bring this here , everybody don't give a damn about this , this is very far from the topic , if you really want to speak out your mind with your fellow about politics , there is a a forum about axis history , just type axishistory on google

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
and in fact they killed more jews than the Nazis, difference being not for racist reasons but because they were labelled political enemies, THIS IS A FACT, believe it or not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you say is serious and its funny how you throw so lightly such ridiculous statement .
Nazi Germany extreminated about 6 millions of Jews and several other millions of other ethnic groups and political tendencies .

Now you say Soviet Union killed more Jews ... that is pathetic really ..

May i remind you that hundred of thousands of Jews fought with the Red Army , and live in USSR now in Russia peacefully and never in the Soviet Union , they were threatened to be exterminated or deprived of their rights as a consequence of racial discrimination .

You want to compare some political purges because the Jews were largely part of the Intelligentsia at the time in a context of purges of intellectual elite , with Nazi guys that wanted to eradicate a race of the planet for the rest of the times , you really don't lack nerves , that's for sure .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
While you want to sell us that the Soviets were a heroic band of brothers you also seem to refues to accept and see the war crimes and crimes against humanity that the Soviet Regime was responsible for. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I sell nothing , i never expressed my opinion on the subject , i sure don't have admiration for the fascists side soldiers , and that's for personal reasons , if you have seen what i saw then you could judge , but i nonetheless respect some of them as any side worthy soldier who did his duty .
But this tactic of yours to actually draw me in a discussion i never wanted to have with someone in such disposition of mind , perhaps you have succeeded , but i think it affected more your credibility than mine , seeing the nice amount of rubbish you claimed .

This said , i have just only one thing to say .
God bless the Red army that you dislike so much lol .

Thanks to the sacrifice of these courageous men , the world got delivered from this Evil threat , i have the highest respect for these comrades that fought for freedom and a better world from their point of view , and they did it against all odds , this people , this Soviet people has suffered hell during this 20th century in his flesh , and if you have a clue , what they did is extraordinary , you don't seem to realize the price they paid for it and what they endured but nevermind .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
I am not a friend of either system, and I have come to accept and agree on the criminal side of both systems, you on the other hand cant seem to grasp that, if you cannot loose your one-sided-ness, this discussion is over! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is sure over now Thank God , i still resisted to enter any political considerations regarding your provokation on the subject which is good , please let's stop putting word in my mouth and trying to get political , we don't agree , end of , let's just end it , anyhow it will be my last post in this topic regardless of your answer , as i initially posted about planes behaviour and relative performances between them ,then you drew me into hitler vs staline discussion i luckily avoided , i was already enough annoyed by your first aggressive post while before i have been kind , but now it's gone too far .

JG52Karaya-X
02-03-2007, 09:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">My ideas are historical facts shared by a majority of people on earth and are no extreme by any stretch of the imagination , my grandfather lived in Germany before the war ,he fought there , and i trust him more as well as respected historian than a random guy on forum making his hobby to flame people and make them say what they didn't say. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mine are also backed up by historical facts, so it is word vs word, fine by you?

Argument busted

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">LOL , correct your statement ....
they had one of the most laxist system because you only needed your wingman to say "yes he did it " .
Seriously be honest just one second , this is ridiculous what you say . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So to you they were all cheating liars who made up their kills and backed each other up while doing so, sounds very objective to me. And I guess to you only the Soviets had an honest kill verification system!?

Think again

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> But fact is USAAF pilots don't come up with ridiculous numnbers unverified most often by the loss list of VVS </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Really? This is not intended as a stab against the USAAF but the bomber gunners often claimed more airkills than there were LW planes in the air or even servicable at that time and in that particular region, this has been noted and is a fact. Read Pierre Closterman's "The Big Show" for example, he mentions the US overclaiming in the air both by fighters and bomber gunners.

Argument busted

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Yea well if you ask me , that proves nothing actually , secondly i never had any judgement of valour against Hartmann , i don't know this guy , i don't see why you again put words in mouth and tell me i said he's greedy , i never said that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't? That's funny because not too long ago you said:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">No it is not , many Historians believe he actually had barely more than 80 victories , and that out of this many have been faked ("one for you , one for me " was a commong thing among LW pilots at the end of their sorties , unlike VVS they didn't any material proofs to confirm victories ... if you believe all their claims , Soviet VVS would have been destroyed by early 1943 , reality is opposite ) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are contradicting yourself here. By faked kills one can understand "made up" or not? That would leave the impression on me he is greedy for kills, what other reason would be do that otherwise? Again what are these "many historians" that you are talking about, did you ever care to read "Blonde Knight of Germany", a kind of bio-graphy written by 2 American authors who took their time to interview Hartmann, his old comrades and friends, archives of the LW, logbooks, etc.? You should do that once! I'm still waiting for the title of the publication that states that Hartmann had barely 80 airkills!

Argument busted

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> What i told you , and some important studies that has been given public has been made about his score tally , and it is very unlikely not to say impossible that he has achieved this 352 figure ,Historian says that at best , he scored about 80 when they compare with loss lists , but at that particular time , they needed to boost the morale of young pilots coming to the front line , and Hartmann was this perfect hero they needed because he enlisted and arroved late in combat . Again it is not my claim , it is widely accepted by some serious people . Anyhow i dont't give a penny , since these things are debatable with critical and respectful people . I understand it's harsh when someone comes and tells you something that break a dream in your head , i understand it </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're still not giving any reference on that "study" that's thought to break Hartmanns kill tally of 352, I wonder why...
Actually even some pilots in JG52 didn't believe the high kill-counts of Hartmann (OLT. Obleser for example) until Hartmann arranged it so he flew wingman for Hartmann, that's when that guys doubts vanished as he himself saw Hartmann sweep the skies of soviet fighters. About the side-snip "debatable with critical and respectful people", when is something debatable for you? When everybody jumps your bandwagon and agrees with what you make up here, and when somebody proves you wrong he is obviously ill-educated, biased or even worse? You are just dealing out below-the-belt blows because you obviously cant keep up your cover by providing believable and honest sources.

Against your widely accepted "serious people" I can put up several books:

Blonde Knight of Germany, Constable & Toliver
The German Fighter-aces 1939-1945, Constable & Toliver
Graf & Grislawski, Christer Bergström
Black Cross Red Star Vol. I and II, Christer Bergström

Get them, read them, stop putting up ridiculous claims, even if it means bursting your own fantasy bubble. I know it might hurt but that's what truth does at times!

Argument busted

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder who made your education , but you are in an advanced state of brainwashing here .. you claim LW didn't strafe civilians ?? get a history book seriously , they bombed villages and killed millions of people there , do you seriously have a clue of what you are tallking about or are you blinded by your third reich nostalgia? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Firstly you are (as always) putting words into my mouth, I didn't say LW, I said FIGHTER PILOTS, and that's what we were talking about, the Germany fighter pilots never strafed civilians and/or shot at other pilots in their chutes. The Bomber force is a different matter, but we are clearly discussing about fighter pilots.

You know you sound just like the ridiculous show-trial that Hartmann was put up against, which blaimed him of killing innocent civilians because supposedly the rounds he fired in aircombat fell onto soviet soil and killed innocent civilians, of course a ridiculous claim but you seem to be on the same wavelenght.

On the matter of bombing civilian targets, every side had its dark spots here, the Germans with the bombardement of Kopenhagen, London and many others, the US and British with the bombardement of cities like Dresden, crowded with refugees and civilians and of no military worth, using fire bombs, the Japanese with the attack on Pearl Harbour, noone is innocent in war, there are no heroic victors, there are only murderers.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Or you think they were living on another planet or ? It was War dude , and a bitter one , the most violent and unfair mankind has known , don't tell me you don't know about how they were not only encouraged to straffe the "untermenchschen" but ordered to bomb them night and day for 3 years . As for shooting parachutes , it's indeed controversial ,but if you ask me , it wouldn't be surprising that so called pilots of the "new race" wree advised or willingly did it at the beggining of the campaign in 1941 ,when "all was smooth and succesful" seeing the numbers of pilots Soviet had at the very beggining , it was the largest Airforce on earth. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know what ill-minded soviet propaganda books you have been reading but no, Hartmann and his fellow comrades were not the racist, Russian hating bunch of Nazis that you are describing here. Read any of the three books I've quoted above, get some western literature and not the soviet propaganda stuff you obviously have your bookshelves full of. See what you are actually doing here is a very mean and low-leveled racist attack.

The LW was contrary to what you want to make believe probably the least racist of all branches of the Armed Forces of Germany. There are more than enough stories of both German and Soviet pilots that serve as a proof of that.

Just care to give me a single report of German figher pilots strafing innocent people or shooting bailed out crews in their chutes? I'm waiting

Argument busted

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Let me get things straight , this will be my last post to answer you , because here you reach some peaks in term of bad faith and stupidity. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No I am actually very patient and undertanding but as it seems this is not working with you.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Nobody was discussing the Russians in this thread (by the way Soviet is not Russia , but all Soviet Union ) , i was discussing the performances of planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh you did change the topic into this direction, be sure of that and this was barely a mean to defeat your argument how the LW and the Armed forces of Germany were stock full of Nazis (read your own post for that). Btw I never talked about the RUSSIANS, I always talked about the SOVIETS, again you are putting words into my mouth

This is what I said:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Ever talked to Women who have experienced the cruelty of the Red Army at the end of the WWII? I have and these are very moving and shocking stories, Red Army soldiers raping and afterwards murdering young women and girls, sometimes in front of their husbands/fathers. Thousands of German soldiers who did not come back from their captivity in Russian Gulags, after and during the war. Are these your declared idols and heroes? They are not an OUNCE better than the Nazis, not a bit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Secondly , if you dare to compare what the Russian army did at the end of war compared to the nearly 20 millions slaughter your nazi friends did only there , you have some serious guts and not afraid of ridicule.
Thirdly , i wonder why you want to make of me , someone who defends the crime of others , but i must say you are quite poor in rethorics. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nowhere did I try to defend the crimes of the Nazis, my only concern was to show you that the Soviets were equally capable at comiting war crimes and nowhere near the heroic ideal that you are displaying here but you do not want or cannot understand that point. Both the Nazis and the Soviets were criminal regimes in their own right, that is a fact and I seriously hope you do agree with that if not with the rest.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Which view ??? i'm not thinking in binary thank God , my view are much more complex than you can imagine </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is quite interesting when keeping in mind your previous posts.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Who is "They" for you ....the Soviet people ? think before posting really ... by the way , who cares who is better , why do you bring this here , everybody don't give a damn about this , this is very far from the topic , if you really want to speak out your mind with your fellow about politics , there is a a forum about axis history , just type axishistory on google </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Read again:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The Soviet REGIME was not a tad better than the Nazis! They had concentration camps just like the Nazis, they murdered political enemies way before the NSDAP rose to power in 1933 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Another try of putting words into my mouth, I was talking about the soviet regime clearly as can be seen, and other than you I don't hold a grudge against any countries people, I actually think both the German people as well as the people of the Soviet Union were victims of their respective ruling class and supressed both in their freedom and free will. And I was also not trying to outweight one side for the other, war is a crime, and there are no winners, no heroes. No I don't want to go further about politics, actually I despise it in all its forms.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> May i remind you that hundred of thousands of Jews fought with the Red Army , and live in USSR now in Russia peacefully and never in the Soviet Union , they were threatened to be exterminated or deprived of their rights as a consequence of racial discrimination. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As I clearly stated early they were not hunted down because of racist or ethnic reasons but because of political reasons (being regarded as enemies of the communism), again you've put words into my mouth but I've come used to it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You want to compare some political purges because the Jews were largely part of the Intelligentsia at the time in a context of purges of intellectual elite , with Nazi guys that wanted to eradicate a race of the planet for the rest of the times , you really don't lack nerves , that's for sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well the end result is the same isnt it, no matter what the driving force of the slaughter was. So yes the Soviets were quite on par with the Nazis.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> This said , i have just only one thing to say .
God bless the Red army that you dislike so much lol .

Thanks to the sacrifice of these courageous men , the world got delivered from this Evil threat , i have the highest respect for these comrades that fought for freedom and a better world from their point of view , and they did it against all odds , this people , this Soviet people has suffered hell during this 20th century ,and if you have a clue , what they did is extraordinary , you don't seem to realize the price they paid for it and what they endured but nevermind. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, bless the Red Army and the Soviet regime that drove so many peace-loving and free nations under their reign before and after WWII by use of any means necessary and who crushed any kind of uprising with cruel force. It really is a shame what you are expressing here and it just goes to show your true face.

Actually I feel sorry for you as you seem to mean all of this seriously, your bitterness, anger and hatred is astonishing.

Badsight-
02-03-2007, 05:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
Basically , the top speed is correct with a small margin of error , LA-5FN could reach 580km/h at SL historically . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>ya , the 1944 La5FN could do that , ours can go even faster , with a 1943 lable :O
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
The problem he raises is about overheating , and i think as many poster told him , he should fly the LA-5FN more , because it actually overheats quite quickly with 100%rpm (prop picth as game says) and once it overheats , afterwards , it's impossible to go full power without overheating a few seconds after as opposed to other planes </div></BLOCKQUOTE>PFFFFFT!
when your in a LA , the last thing you need to worry about is overheat damadge
so again , PFFFT!

stalkervision
02-03-2007, 06:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by cawimmer430:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/1539/hartmannspeechsd4.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Erich H. "Hay leave me alone. Can't you see I am dead already?" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

stalkervision
02-03-2007, 06:40 PM
To answer the original question just a tiny bit here is a direct quote from Harman from his book, "The Blond Knight of Germany"

"Older models of the Me-109 which the luftwaffe was forced to use without methanol injection for emergency high altitude power or for escape were at a serious disadvantage in combat with the Mustang"

fighter_966
02-03-2007, 07:41 PM
Luftwaffe was one of the free from nazi thinking
units in germany during war but where you could stamp on nazis was waffen SS its ordinary groups as in its so called Erzatsgroups (units that killed civilians) Gestapo an SD.Nazis just used aces deeds in their propaganda, Nazis didnt like the individual spirit of Luftwaffe that much.Anyone can read for example from Lipferts diary how he describes his commander called Krupinski http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif( not so nazitype http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif but professional soldier http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif.In fact when
Adolf suggested that Luftwaffe should have Hitler youth squadron http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif. Göing who was Nazi but from oldschool said no and also Galland said no http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif to idea Despite fact that Galland was favoured by Adolf and disliked by Göing.Other units that were almost nazi free were Kriegsmarine and
Abhwehr.Everyone can also read what Adolf liked about his general staff or what his generals liked about him.Göing wasnt liked by his pilots.And answer to that Question In my opinion
Hartmann would have survived easily http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Marcel_Albert
02-04-2007, 04:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight-:
the 1944 La5FN could do that , ours can go even faster , with a 1943 lable :O </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Badsight , our La-5FN is 1943 , and besides there has never been any "1944 version" , all La-5FN were fitted with same engine and airframe
ad our version corroborates the Soviet tests .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight-:
PFFFFFT!
when your in a LA , the last thing you need to worry about is overheat damadge
so again , PFFFT! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have four tracks to submit to you i have made this morning .
If someone is kind enough to host them for me , i'll gladly send them .

here are the result of my tests :

1)- 1st track is called " Rad closed Bf" : conditions are Crimea map , 100%fuel , start at 200m and radiator closed , i shut the track as soon as it overheats .
Result is : 109 G2 overheats after 2,41 minutes .

2)- 2nd track is called "Rad closed La" : same conditions , i stop the test as soon at it overheats .
Result is : La-5 FN overheats after 2,51 minutes . conclusion : 109 G2 overheats faster than La-5FN


3)- 3rd track is called " La5 FN test " : conditions are crimea map , rad open then i close it to simulate combat conditions :

La-5FN overheats after a bit more than 3 minutes , then even with 70% of throttle and open radiator you cannot stop the overheating , you put 60% throttle and wait . Once the engine is back to normal , you put back 110% throttle , then in less than 4 seconds it overheats again .

After wards in the test i put rad Open and only 95% of throttle , it overheats extremy quickly , basically , once you overheat with it , afterwards , you cannot go to full power in combat conditions .

Conclusion : you cannot maintain full power in La-5FN for more than 3 minutes in IL-2, and max power allowed afterwards is rad open , 90% throttle with 100% rpm (and it will overheat still but after some time , you have a margin ), this will mean that will not reach full speed , not even close nor can maintain your top speed .



4)- 4th track is called " BF Test " , same conditions .

110% throttle , rad/auto (i did on purpose to show how you don't even need to open it except if you overheat ) at very beggining then i close it .

Bf 109 overheats in about 3 minutes , then you immediately open the rad and put 105% throttle , then Immediately it cools down and go full power again and cruise over Crimea , (see the track ) . I'm always at my top speed (500-510 IAS , 520 in shallow dive ) and the engine almost never overheats more than 3 seconds , because i immediately put 105% throttle (or at worst 100% for a few seconds in the worst case of climbing at low speed ) and everything is fine .

Conclusion : you never have overheating problem in IL-2's 109 G2 if you put back 105% throttle and open rad as soon as you get the overheat message . And you are always at your top speed (or Very near ) .



I really want to send you the track ,so please send me your email by PM , so i can show the truth to other people , if some doubt my honesty .

Anyhow , anybody can test it , go in Crimea map , 100% fuel , 12.00h , 100meters , full power , rad open at first then close it after some time to reach top speed then see what happens AFTER the overheating , and which plane is a pain in the neck with overheating , and which plane is not even bothered .

IIJG69_Kartofe
02-04-2007, 05:29 AM
Why nobody attack the 275 victories of G. RALL?
Or the 301 victories of the ex-NATO general G. Barkhorn?

Hmmm?

Maybe because G.Rall is still alive and can defend himself?

You know, the 352 victories don't come from H. Hartmann himself, the 8 may 45 the didn't know himself how many victories he had.

The number comes from the soviets who use it against him in his trial in 1949, this number is synonym of 10 years of gulag in USSR for him.

You wants to discuss about his victories and re-write history, COUNT THEM YOURSELF! (http://math.fce.vutbr.cz/safarik/ACES/luftwaffe.wartime.aerial.victory.credits.html)


Then here you can have the advice of 2 REAL HISTORIANS about the working of Mr D. KHAZANOV, the "author" who was at the origin of the "80 kills only" rumor.

An over-view of Dimitri Khazanov's article in Le Fana with comments by Jean-Yves Lorant and Hans Ring (http://members.aol.com/falkeeins/Sturmgruppen/hartmannclaims.html)

I recomand you the reading of Hans RING books

http://books.stonebooks.com/cgi-bin/foxweb.exe/base/author?ring_hans

Marcel_Albert
02-04-2007, 05:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by IIJG69_Kartofe:
Why nobody attack the 275 victories of G. RALL?

Hmmm?

Maybe because G.Rall is still alive and can defend himself?

You know, the 352 victories don't come from H. Hartmann himself, the 8 may 45 the didn't know himself how many victories he had.

The number comes from the soviets who use it against him in his trial in 1949, this number is synonym of 10 years of gulag in USSR for him.

You wants to discuss about his victories and re-write history, COUNT THEM YOURSELF! (http://math.fce.vutbr.cz/safarik/ACES/luftwaffe.wartime.aerial.victory.credits.html)


Then here you can have the advice of 2 REAL HISTORIANS about the working of Mr D. KHAZANOV, the "author" who was at the origin of the "80 kills only" rumor.

An over-view of Dimitri Khazanov's article in Le Fana with comments by Jean-Yves Lorant and Hans Ring (http://members.aol.com/falkeeins/Sturmgruppen/hartmannclaims.html)

I recomand you the reading of Hans RING books

http://books.stonebooks.com/cgi-bin/foxweb.exe/base/author?ring_hans </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Good post Kartoffe , i have to admit , i didn't know about these work , and i'll try to read Hans Ring books .

Don't be too harsh on me , i was flying in the same squad as yours JG69_Janus 3 years ago , as your wingman with your friend Niklaus for a few months http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

This said , i didn't say he didn't do this figure , i said that thess figures are controversed , and personally i don't believe these figures , but as you pointed , there are quantities of books i didn't read about him and i should read about the Nazi airforce and its pilots .

What is more important from my point of view , is to know why today , is it so important for someone to post when another one doubts these figures , and aggress him as well as accuse him of Stalinism because i highly respect the bravery and sacrifice of the Soviet people during this war ..

Khazanov is not the only one who doubted it , there are many more , perhaps he's wrong , perhaps he's right , i don't care to be honest , i should not have mentionned it and regret it , and i admit my lack of accuracy on this statement that was a detail in my post by the way , but still don't understand the disproportionned reaction one had about this , anyone has his opinion on the subject , and people like Rall or Barkhorn had all the war to achieve these figures and were some the finest fighter pilot of their country that had the luck to survive , i still doubt some pilot's tally , but not their skills , it's just my opinion that a number of knowledgeable people share simply because you cannot re-trace in details all the JG aces claims , you can only estimate comparing with the ennemy loss list and also not ignore that in many cases , some figures were inflated for propaganda reasons .

Would be good to confirm or infirm the results of overheating tests about La-5FN too

Blutarski2004
02-04-2007, 06:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
Good post Kartoffe , i have to admit , i didn't know about these work , and i'll try to read Hans Ring books. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


.....The two books by Christopher Shores & Hans Ring which I have read, "Fighters over the Desert" and the follow-up book "Fighters over Tunisia" are excellent works of objective scholarship.

IIJG69_Kartofe
02-04-2007, 06:28 AM
Marcel,

reverse your point of view and ask yourself why people try to decrease the number of kills claimed by german pilots (or by soviets courts http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)despite the proofs easily availiable by historians since the falling of the eastern block(Bundesarchiv, Luftwaffe archiv in Freiburg, ...).

Why and for what purpose?

Marcel_Albert
02-04-2007, 06:41 AM
Thank you Blutarsky http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Kartofe , good point , probably because they want to break what they think are myths and are still strong today , but probably also because many of these propaganda icons are used with great effect in the contemporary neo-nazi rethoric , that is getting a lot of ground today in many European countries sadly , including Russia .

I'm aware that history is written by the victors and in many case , it's unfair to the memory of many people and especially the German people who suffered very hard , but we must also not forget the other side of the coin which is to de-responsibilize the people who fought under the fascist banneers during this war , and try to make people believe that only Hitler and his NSDAP was nazi and committed to this cause while all others were innocent people forced to carry his evil plans , i think it's dangerous and historically very wrong when you understand well the period in this country during the 30's , i think humbly that there need to be a middle ground between these two conceptions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

stalkervision
02-04-2007, 08:38 AM
The simple fact is german pilots flew many many more missions then most airforce pilots. They got more kills because they were always in a "target rich" enviroment and because of all these missions they flew. They were usually right on the front lines and didn't have to fly far either to find enemy planes. Hartman and other Luftwaffe pilots flew as many as six to seven missions a day. There was no limit to the missions they had to fly either. They flew until the end of the war or until they were shot down and killed.

Polyperhon
02-04-2007, 05:14 PM
But why we discuss the victories of the LW?

Look here this

Finnish Bf 109G tally:
HLeLv 24 HLeLv 28 HLeLv 30 HLeLv 34
Victories 304 15 3 345
Losses in combat 14 0 2 18

Are these accurate? And if they are,what is the reason? Is it so difficult to accept the fact the Bf 109 was the best hunter-killer of the WW II?

Ken_Det
02-04-2007, 06:11 PM
1 on 1 with me he did not do so well.
In game Quick mission builder.
I was in a P47D, and he came straight at me so I gave him a good burst at the same time he did the same.
He knocked out my engine, and I did the same to him.
I seen a few of the rounds hit him in the canopy area.
He pulled to the lower right of me.
I turned to my left just missing each other.
I glided, and turned to my right to look over my shoulder to see what he was up to.
To my supprise his plane headed stright to the ground smokeing all the way.
I seen no parashoot in the air near where he went down.
After that I looked for a treeless area to land, and pulled it off with out a hitch.
What a rush.
True story http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

MrMojok
02-04-2007, 08:33 PM
Ah, but how do you KNOW it was Hartmann?

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

Cajun76
02-04-2007, 09:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Polyperhon:
But why we discuss the victories of the LW?

Look here this

Finnish Bf 109G tally:
HLeLv 24 HLeLv 28 HLeLv 30 HLeLv 34
Victories 304 15 3 345
Losses in combat 14 0 2 18

Are these accurate? And if they are,what is the reason? Is it so difficult to accept the fact the Bf 109 was the best hunter-killer of the WW II? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Almost certainly, it's the plane, not the pilot. I don't know why they even bothered putting those frail sacks of flesh under the canopy of the Mighty 109. Ballast, I guess.

Ken_Det
02-04-2007, 09:37 PM
You can pick his plane in the list of plane's to fly against.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMojok:
Ah, but how do you KNOW it was Hartmann?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Badsight-
02-04-2007, 10:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
Badsight , our La-5FN is 1943 , and besides there has never been any "1944 version" , all La-5FN were fitted with same engine and airframe
ad our version corroborates the Soviet tests. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>please spare me the propaganda . & if you cant then at least post truthfull propaganda (lol)

ive done the reading , ive tested the plane . you think its performance is historically accurate
well . . . . . HAHAHAHA! . . . .

Badsight-
02-04-2007, 11:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
Conclusion : you cannot maintain full power in La-5FN for more than 3 minutes in IL-2, and max power allowed afterwards is rad open , 90% throttle with 100% rpm (and it will overheat still but after some time , you have a margin ), this will mean that will not reach full speed , not even close nor can maintain your top speed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>oh noes! the overheat message has appeared!!!!!

marcel - test till your engine stops . then you will see my point

Badsight-
02-04-2007, 11:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
But honestly I have always thought that the La5FN in IL2 is a 1944 spec. As in a cleaned up, tweaked plane. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>thats exactly what it is

lack of running problems aside , its performance matches (i.e. slightly better) the late production La-5FN . which was trial tested with the La-7 , before La-7 production started

goes good for 43 yah ? :-)

Marcel_Albert
02-05-2007, 02:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight-:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
But honestly I have always thought that the La5FN in IL2 is a 1944 spec. As in a cleaned up, tweaked plane. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>thats exactly what it is

lack of running problems aside , its performance matches (i.e. slightly better) the late production La-5FN . which was trial tested with the La-7 , before La-7 production started

goes good for 43 yah ? :-) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did the testing , overheating is barely an issue with 109G2 , you just put 105% throttle as soon as it overheats , open rad and you're done .

Not sure you read as much as i read about this plane , what is sure is that you'd want it to be porked out of your mere opinion and didn't answer my track request .

If you are so sure of yourself , why don't you email Oleg with your documents if you think you know better Soviet planes than Russian engineers and have more trustable sources than them . Again AFAIK , all La-5FN had the SAME engine , techniques of engine fabrication and quality of assembling improved by 1944 , they put more metal part in the wings , but the airplane was the same , the engine delivered the same output .

Ah anyway , I give up .... this is not a place for honest people but largely for bored and biased lobbyists here .. as soon as you say a diffrent opinion you suffer terrorist attacks .

I did the testing , i asked kindly for posting the track , i was honest and asked good questions , nobody answer , the tests are ignored because they don't fit their own agendas and they come up with "this is uber " blabala , "i read more than you did blabla " ok fine, email Oleg and Ilya then , rumors will not be sufficient to change their mind .

Oh an no personal attack again pls , i want this sim to be right too , whether you pork or improve the FM of any plane , this FN version was the first VVS plane to be sueprior to their ennemy counterparts at low altitude , it's not my opinion , it's a historical fact .

MrMojok
02-05-2007, 03:04 AM
How long were you able to run your plane until the engine expired, Marcel?

The LaGG I mean.

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 03:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
Out of each contries main fighter types 109's are by far the easiest to shoot down, it's so efortless that it's on a margin of having fun.
I find beating computer in solitaire a greater challenge, sure I rarely had the opportunity to face the 109K4 as it's declared uber(ROFLMAO) and banned almost everywhere, but I doubt I would have trouble engageing them...
Think of it what you want, the stiffness of elevator that is exaggerated even by most pessimistic accounts, nearly completely prevents 109's to be as good as some people claim they are, maybe those people did not touch 109's since like 3xx versions of the game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with you mate, after the Bf 109 G2 the only dangerous 109 is the one you dont see sneak up on you in a dogfight that hits you with a Mk 108. G6 ***, G10s and K4s are all crippled by their elevator authority, their poor turn and their pathetic DMs. When I see a 109 I know I can out turn it at any reasonable speed and I know I can run away from it if I am in anything other than a Spitfire lol

ViktorViktor
02-05-2007, 04:00 AM
I used to have my doubts about the kill claims of Luftwaffe pilots, especially Hartmann.

But if you compare the number of sorties they flew to the number of kills they achieved, the resulting ratio is in the same ballpark as that of the Allied aces.

The deciding factor in the number of kills achieved by Luftwaffe aces is the staggering amount of missions they flew.

It's been awhile since I read the data, but I believe that Hartmann flew over 10000 missions. If the top allied aces got to fly so many missions several of them would have ended up with 250-350 kills.

Bud Andersen did in fact discuss this and his projected kill total would have been in the neighborhood of 150-200, if he had flown as many missions as the top luftwaffe aces.

So the top luftwaffe aces were not supermen, but they were expert flyers who saw 10 times more combat than their allied counterparts, and so got 10 times more kills.

ViktorViktor
02-05-2007, 04:03 AM
Whoops I think I mean 1000, not 10000 missions.

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 04:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
If you feel they are so much better then fly them, otherwise just shut up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a very good point Marcel. I fly the Fw190 because I feel shes the best bird and I do best in her.

If you feel the Blue birds are better why not just fly them?

I get annoyed with people saying that Spitfires are too good, and then they fly blue all the time, if people feel they are so good then just fly them - there are plenty of people who will gladly shoot you down many times over in a FW190/Bf109. No sense in hating the plane you are best in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Xiola, you know that I fly red and blue and that I have favourites on both sides. What Marcel is saying is inaccurate, neccessity dictates that on any server where ground targets are important there will be combat at low altitudes. I am relatively inexperienced in flying Yaks yet I can always turn the table against Fw 190s and I find it easy to combat 109s - even the scary G2 isnt so bad if you are in a Yak 1B or a Yak 9. This means that even a reasonable pilot can take a Yak and cause problems for a good Fw 190 pilot. After one or two passes the Fw 190 has to run away or I will kill him - it really is as brutaly simple as that. Similarly if I catch a Fw 190 co height or lower than me I can force a fight and unless team mates or AAA intervene the Fw 190 is in deep trouble.

Likewise on the Western allied side the Mustang (from P51 B through to Mustang III) and the Tempest really outclass most of the Luftwaffe equipment until the 262 and Dora 9 arrive, while the Spitfire - in all its forms - is a very dangerous opponent because it is controlable at high speeds unlike the 109 and easily rules the roost at altitude.

So when I kill a Fw 190 A4/5 in my Yak 9 does that make me a 'better' pilot than when I do the same but vice versa ?

All you are required to do Marcel is switch your tactics depending on what aircraft you fly. If I fly in a fighter that is superior in most if not all aspects of performance below 3000m then I tend to stick there. Its like when you fly Blue against the RAF and the USAAF - its best to stay well below 6000m and try and fight at medium to low altitudes because thats where you have equality or some advantage. You imply that just because an aircraft is faster and better at heights that it is easy to fly, that goes both ways. Why is IL2 not dominated purely by P47s and P51s ? The answer is that faster aircraft need a lot of skill to do well in, your gunnery has to be superior, your manuvering and tactical planning has to be superior, you have to be much more patient and your teamwork has to be at least equal. I know this because I have experienced flying 'easy' and 'difficult' fighters on both sides and I know exactly how good/bad a Fw 190 is or how good/bad a I-16 is.
You have many more are more options flying a Yak 9, a La 5 or a Spitfire than you do flying a Bf 109, a Mustang, a P47, a P38 or a Fw 190. You can use energy tactics and boom and zoom or you can fight very effectively in the horizontal. What really seperates the Russian planes from lets say a Mk 108 armed 109 or a Fw 190 with 4 x 20mm cannons is the ammunition load carried and effective fire power. If the Yak 9 carried 3 x the amount of ammunition good pilots would score 7,8 or 9 kills per sortie in it - just like in a Fw 190.

So please dont go on about politics or how heroic Red pilots are, admit that you have your own advantages and USE them.

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 04:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ViktorViktor:
I used to have my doubts about the kill claims of Luftwaffe pilots, especially Hartmann.

But if you compare the number of sorties they flew to the number of kills they achieved, the resulting ratio is in the same ballpark as that of the Allied aces.

The deciding factor in the number of kills achieved by Luftwaffe aces is the staggering amount of missions they flew.

It's been awhile since I read the data, but I believe that Hartmann flew over 10000 missions. If the top allied aces got to fly so many missions several of them would have ended up with 250-350 kills.

Bud Andersen did in fact discuss this and his projected kill total would have been in the neighborhood of 150-200, if he had flown as many missions as the top luftwaffe aces.

So the top luftwaffe aces were not supermen, but they were expert flyers who saw 10 times more combat than their allied counterparts, and so got 10 times more kills. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

One other factor is that even if an RAF or a USAAF pilot flew 1000 combat missons he would still not encounter the enemy as often as a Luftwaffe pilot who flew only 300 missions. So numerical inferiority increases the chances of bumbing in to targets yet also exponentially increases the chances of you getting killed when you do meet them.

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 04:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
Thanks for the link mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I trust very much Tigertalon , just like Robban , they made very interesting testings in the past http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But in this thread all i see is someone named RolandWalker trying to flame the La-5FN and other people trying to explain him why it's not wrong .

Basically , the top speed is correct with a small margin of error , LA-5FN could reach 580km/h at SL historically . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lol glad to know Im infamous. As for a normal 1943 production La5 FN reaching 580 km/h at sea level - No chance.

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 04:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Rgr thanks.

Roland is OK mate, he just prefers Blue planes to red, so he fights his corner.

But honestly I have always thought that the La5FN in IL2 is a 1944 spec. As in a cleaned up, tweaked plane.

I will do some more reading and we can chat about it some more.
Please show any docs you have http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Thanks again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the recomendation Xiola, but I want to correct you on one point. I like Blue AND Red planes, I dont like bogus planes like the La5 FN or certain imbalances in IL2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif lol

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 05:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
Thanks for the link mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I trust very much Tigertalon , just like Robban , they made very interesting testings in the past http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But in this thread all i see is someone named RolandWalker trying to flame the La-5FN and other people trying to explain him why it's not wrong .

Basically , the top speed is correct with a small margin of error , LA-5FN could reach 580km/h at SL historically . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was not trying to flame the La5FN I was pointing out that this plane clearly overperforms to performance figures which match those of the La7. Yet in reality the La7 was developed because the La5 FN COULDNT catch the Fw 190 F8 at low level - in game the La5 FN does so with ease.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
The problem he raises is about overheating , and i think as many poster told him , he should fly the LA-5FN more , because it actually overheats quite quickly with 100%rpm (prop picth as game says) and once it overheats , afterwards , it's impossible to go full power without overheating a few seconds after as opposed to other planes , the cooling system is quite unneffective (can't maintain top speed for long ) , the same is true for the Hellcat or the Corsair/P-47 ingame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE> All aircraft overheat at max throttle max pitch settings, the La5 FN is not unique here Marcel. What you have elected to ignore is that the difference between max and continous settings in the La5 FN is small, much smaller than lets say a Fw 190 A8 at 110% WEP and one at 100% rad open no WEP, therefore taking in to account that BOTH aircraft experience engine overheat the one with the faster 'normal' max speed will prevail. As for Corsair, Hellcat and P47, I have no problem maintaining very high speeds in them. Maybe you should practice more in these aircraft and learn their overheat models.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
This said , this is only at sea level and as point my link , this aircraft had a real impact at altitude when it became available , it was the first VVS plane to show superior performances to the best LW planes at low altitudes historically , but we must also not forget that it was barely faster than a 109 G6 at altitudes above 3000m , it's a real challenge against faster Antons at altitudes with it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Incorrect, unless you classify up to 4000m as sea level too. In our game the La5 FN shows no trouble until approaching 5000m, all the Fw 190 can do is run away, it cannot fight because the e retention of the La5 FN compensates for any lack of HP at altitude. As for it being a challenge to fly one against a Fw 190 at height, yes it certainly is difficult - as it should be - but lets not exagerate and pretend the La5 FN is useless above 3000m that is silly.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
The other point he raises is about Lagg engines , but again he is ill-informed , the Great strength of Soviet engines, especially the one on the Lagg-3 was that it could fly even without 4 cylinders (!) , it was unique at the time , for instance , the Bf-109 couldn't afford to lose more than one cylinder , many VVS pilots accounts and technical accounts confirm this . </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Soviet engine robustness maybe something that you have read about in Soviet books but in reality even when looking at the famed T 34 tank(which as it turns out had inferior reliability to the Sherman), engines from the USA or even Britain and Germany equalled or surpassed Russian reliability levels while running at higher ratings with more complex supercharging aparatus. The Klimov series certainly were no more capable of running on 8 cylinders than the DB 600 family, infact how often would any inline engine survive and rtb after having 4 cylinders shot away ? Engines like the R - 2800 were famed for their toughness and even the BMW 801 could fly with cylinders shot away - what makes you think Soviet designs were any better ? You are the one who sounds ill informed here, its like indoctrinated propaganda is spouting from you every time you open your mouth - Erich Hartmann the Nazi pilot who only scored 80 kills (Still more than top allied ace ? Oh must have been his uber G6 lol), all Red fliers are heroes ect


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
Overall , we must also say that these were tested on 4.02 version , and i think that the result of the tests are quite good actually , quite close to the tests datas , especially if you take into account that not all production planes had identical performances depending on the conditions of the test and especially the factory where it comes from, i'd need to watch the tracks , but in a shallow dive at SL or by insisting much or without armament , it's not surprising that you can take an extra 10km/h and i think many examples of all sides planes sometimes exceeds or are under the specifications by a tiny margin like here in the sim .

I think that it is a typo in your document , because if you look at the La-5 in your same document , it states 580km/h at sea level Xiola (this a performance of the improved M-82FN engine , not of La-5 for sure ), they probably/surely inverted both datas by mistake http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting opinion, Ive noticed something else about the document - why is the La 9s speed lower than the La7 we have in game?

Anyway, as Xiola said, if you have any data that proves the La5 FN was capable, in 1943 of running at 580/590 km/h plus at sea level then please post it. Xiola also posted that the Russians found that the La 5 FN was slower than the Fw 190 A3/4

stalkervision
02-05-2007, 05:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ken_Det:
1 on 1 with me he did not do so well.
In game Quick mission builder.
I was in a P47D, and he came straight at me so I gave him a good burst at the same time he did the same.
He knocked out my engine, and I did the same to him.
I seen a few of the rounds hit him in the canopy area.
He pulled to the lower right of me.
I turned to my left just missing each other.
I glided, and turned to my right to look over my shoulder to see what he was up to.
To my supprise his plane headed stright to the ground smokeing all the way.
I seen no parashoot in the air near where he went down.
After that I looked for a treeless area to land, and pulled it off with out a hitch.
What a rush.
True story http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have shot down "Hartman" many many times without really trying very hard. The thing is the AI Hartman doesn't fly at all like the real one did. Now a few of the Russian ai aces are totally different matter to fight one on one. They are really really good at dogfighting and know just the right moves to get behind you if you don't completely pull out all the stops to win agains't them.

Marcel_Albert
02-05-2007, 06:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
I was not trying to flame the La5FN I was pointing out that this plane clearly overperforms to performance figures which match those of the La7. Yet in reality the La7 was developed because the La5 FN COULDNT catch the Fw 190 F8 at low level - in game the La5 FN does so with ease. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It certainly could Roland , La-5FN was doing 580km/h at SL , the A8 wasn't much faster , and more importantly , the LA-5FN had a better power/weight ratio which got him a better acceleration that is so important in combat situation .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
All aircraft overheat at max throttle max pitch settings, the La5 FN is not unique here Marcel. What you have elected to ignore is that the difference between max and continous settings in the La5 FN is small, much smaller than lets say a Fw 190 A8 at 110% WEP and one at 100% rad open no WEP, therefore taking in to account that BOTH aircraft experience engine overheat the one with the faster 'normal' max speed will prevail. As for Corsair, Hellcat and P47, I have no problem maintaining very high speeds in them. Maybe you should practice more in these aircraft and learn their overheat models. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course any engine overheats at max throttle and rpm , nobody said the opposite , what is interesting is HOW you can cool them effectively in combat situation AFTER THEY OVERHEAT , i have made tracks to show that for instance , a Bf109G2 can be cooled almost instantly once you overheat by opening rad and putting 105% throttle .

Whereas with a LA-5FN you overheats 10-15 seconds after the G2 , but once you overheat , it's afterwards impossible to go full power with full rpm , there is no 105% or 103% exploit with it , you contantly overheat afterwards only a 4-5 seconds after you put full throttle , the engine overheating is really an issue with this plane unlike with the 109 , but i have NO PROBLEM about it , it's just a notice and aimed to answer to someone who said La-5FN don't overheat which is ridiculous , overheating is the plague of later Lavochkins in combat .

I wasn't talking about anything else than that , which proves that with a La-5FN , you cannot keep max speed and power for long once you already went for 3 minutes full power and rpm .

I know perfectly well the cooling settings for US planes , i constantly fly American aircraft as well as VVS aircraft in game , as i said in combat situation you need to reach your top speed very quickly , i wasn't talking about putting 80% thottle and pitch to reach top speed slowly , of course you can do that in any plane , i was talking about achieveing top speed in combat situation as quick as possible , again my tracks show that after 2,51 minutes , once you overheat with La-5FN , serious cooling problems arrives and you cannot go full power and rpm again (ie:to outclimb ) in combat situation whereas with a G2 , all youhave to do is open rad put 105 or 103% throttle and the effect is immediate ...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland: Incorrect, unless you classify up to 4000m as sea level too. In our game the La5 FN shows no trouble until approaching 5000m, all the Fw 190 can do is run away, it cannot fight because the e retention of the La5 FN compensates for any lack of HP at altitude. As for it being a challenge to fly one against a Fw 190 at height, yes it certainly is difficult - as it should be - but lets not exagerate and pretend the La5 FN is useless above 3000m that is silly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't say it's useless or didn't mean it , i said it's no match for any Fokkers above these altitudes , which is true .

I don't see why you say that FW-190 only can dive , they easily outrun the FN above 3000m , that is only at 6000m that things are more less matched , but FW is superior at this altitudes , beause of its clearly better high speed manoeuvrability and dive speed .
By the way , i will not call you liar like you did , but the 190 retains its energy way better than La-5FN afaik , especially since 4.071



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland: Soviet engine robustness maybe something that you have read about in Soviet books but in reality even when looking at the famed T 34 tank(which as it turns out had inferior reliability to the Sherman), engines from the USA or even Britain and Germany equalled or surpassed Russian reliability levels while running at higher ratings with more complex supercharging aparatus. The Klimov series certainly were no more capable of running on 8 cylinders than the DB 600 family, infact how often would any inline engine survive and rtb after having 4 cylinders shot away ? Engines like the R - 2800 were famed for their toughness and even the BMW 801 could fly with cylinders shot away - what makes you think Soviet designs were any better ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was talking about the DAMAGE ........ Got it ?? DAMAGE ...

and this is confirmed by REAL ACES like Nikolay Golodnikov and engineers as well as TV history documents , these engines of Lagg could take a high punishment , highest than their German counterparts , i NEVER SPOKE about the R-2800 that equipped planes later on in the war and that were EXCEPTIONAL engines .

and i NEVER SAID ANYTIME THAT AMERICAN ENGINES WERE WORSE ? you invent this , and that really annoys me , i LOVE US engines and Planes and will never say anything bad against them , these were the Highest quality planes of the war , with in fact by far the best engines and the most reliable with highest quality of manufacture , this lack of honesty is over the top , i would never even think what you attribute to me .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
You are the one who sounds ill informed here, its like indoctrinated propaganda is spouting from you every time you open your mouth - Erich Hartmann the Nazi pilot who only scored 80 kills (Still more than top allied ace ? Oh must have been his uber G6 lol), all Red fliers are heroes ect </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I never spouted propaganda , all i said is backed by reading and by the devs themselves , i never once in this thread said "that is overmodelled , this is overmodelled" , i just post to DEFEND the sim and express my opinion from a VVS virtual pilot that are a SMALL minority not vocal on this forum , i don't want Oleg to change the sim and make it unrealistic , because noobs come here to whine constantly without grounding or with weak proofs , and want to pork their "ennemy" planes , often because they don't use their own superior planes to their strengths or want total domination .

What i want is REALISTIC sim , if the LA-5 should be toned down fro realistic reasons , then YES , i'll be glad , but if it'zs not grounded and based on opinions and rumors , then NO , i would be really pished of it .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Interesting opinion, Ive noticed something else about the document - why is the La 9s speed lower than the La7 we have in game? [/QUOTE)

It's the most rational opinion , unless you can explain how a La-5 of 1942 is supposed to do 580km/h at SL with a M-82 ..... it's CLEARLY a typo , they interverted the datas . The mistake in this document are suspicious , the best datas are the one coming from the Constructor , Net archives are nowadays subject to falsification , just grab photoshop ...

Everyone know the address of Oleg and 1:C if you have genuine sources they don't possess , EMAIL them , but do you think it's good to always whine and complain and put bad rumours on a plane and create controverse on public forum when you are actually unsure and come with documents wth mistakes in it . I think this is arrogant and not kind , arrogant , because Oleg isn't a noob and has tons of datas about these planes , and not kind because all it does is to divide the community and put the shamble on the forum ...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Anyway, as Xiola said, if you have any data that proves the La5 FN was capable, in 1943 of running at 580/590 km/h plus at sea level then please post it. Xiola also posted that the Russians found that the La 5 FN was slower than the Fw 190 A3/4 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No Xiola posted a test datas that shows that LA-5FN is doing 580 kM/h at SL , in fact they attribute it to the LA-5 but they made a mistake and interverted , its the only rational explanation , as a La-5 cannot reach 580 km/h at SL , only a FN can do .

By the way the engine of the LA-7 is not much different from the one of FN , small modifications were made and plane was lightened and engine delivered more power in altitude , as well as radiator moved which improved aerodynamics . SL difference with FN version was not very important , it's at altitdue that the 7 was clearly better .

Secondly , i have nothing to prove , i'm not the one moaning and whining to pork a plane !!!

And i have disgust for this frame of mind which consist of thinking that anything Russian MUST be inferior , i have disgust for this attitude .....

i m' happy about most FM ingame that are quite close to their specs datas , and have Great respect for the improvement and work done by Oleg since 4 years to improve the sim , for me , the further improvements of the sim are elsewhere , in the physic code , perturbations/wind streams , negative torque , real time damage models , engine failures and inflight real complex management etc.........

The one who has to prove is the one who complains , but i agree it's much easier to complain here , treat the people who don't have the same opinion as yours with scorn , make them say what they didn't say and don't post any sources .

But Email Oleg guys , email 1:C with real proofs not internet links , to make your points , it's very easy to flame me because i defend the sim and don't speak well English , i can't defend myself properly , but ok ..... I'm off for good unless someone insult me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Badsight-
02-05-2007, 06:21 AM
ok , you obviously realise our La-5FN is a 1943 plane

what you seem to be ignoring is that its performance matches (slightly better) the test made of the improved 1944 model

so we dont really have a 1943 La-5FN

as for the overheat - just test the 2 planes you mentioned . see how long each one runs with the overheat message displayed .
basically it dont matter if the overheat message is showing for your pooor Lavochikn . the thing has the little engine that CAN!

AND BY THE WAY , the Real La-5FN had overheating problems its whole service life , fast overheating isnt a bug! , UNBELIEVEABLE endurance may be tho!

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 06:32 AM
Marcel, I would like to say that you are the equivalent of a Russian aircraft Kufurst but that would be doing a diservice to him.

You have set up a slanted test where you complain that the Bf 109 G2 can run at 103% with radiators open continously. The La 5 FN can exceed the G2's sea level speed on normal max power alone. So no need ever to overheat the engine. If you are chasing a Fw 190 again all you need to do is use max continous settings because you will catch him. Try flying a Fw 190 A8, overheat the engine, then cool it and try and see what max speed you achieve with the radiators open. Again the La 5 FN has a much higher speed at normal 100% power than the Fw 190 has at 100% settings. The German aircraft suffers a huge loss in performance with WEP disengaged so much so that it becomes 30/40 km/h slower than the La5 FN on the same settings.

As for my anything Russian must suck attitude, again you are to quote yourself (note I did not introduce this term in to the discussion you did) 'Lying'. I have for the most part answered your blatant 'lies' with the contradictory opinion that VVS aircraft are very good in IL2. I am questioning your unflinching belief in all things Soviet being uber in REALITY. Just because some VVS ace said his Klimove engine could take him back to base with FOUR cylinders shot off does not mean anything in the broader context. You are the one trying to set apart Russian engines claiming them as excellent examples of robustness, similarly im sure you also believe in the myth of delta wood contstruction being superior - oh that is right up to the point where Russian aircraft begin to be made exlusively from metal alloys.

As for me attacking you personally. Better calm down Marcel and take a reality check. Your persecution complex has began to cloud your judgement. You had formed an opinion of me before I even replied to one of your posts. You wont allow yourself to see the picture from both sides, you have already exposed your thinly veiled alleigences by attacking Erich Hartmann ( you got pwoned there by the way) and then also typing political BS - while ignoring the attrocites commited by your 'Heros'.

I ask you again : When I shoot down Luftwaffe planes in my oh so outclassed Yak 9 does that instantly make me a better pilot than if I was flying the Fw 190 ?

No it doesnt. So stop whining that you are some sort of underdog because I fly Red too and I dont need to dress anything up.

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 06:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight-:
ok , you obviously realise our La-5FN is a 1943 plane

what you seem to be ignoring is that its performance matches (slightly better) the test made of the improved 1944 model

so we dont really have a 1943 La-5FN

as for the overheat - just test the 2 planes you mentioned . see how long each one runs with the overheat message displayed .
basically it dont matter if the overheat message is showing for your pooor Lavochikn . the thing has the little engine that CAN!

AND BY THE WAY , the Real La-5FN had overheating problems its whole service life , fast overheating isnt a bug! , UNBELIEVEABLE endurance may be tho! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not to mention the speed achieved with radiators open compared to 109 ect Why even look at the G2 anyway ? The La5 FN shouldnt be fighting G2s.

One other thing often ignored is that in reality the La5 FN leaked copious amounts of carbon monoxide in to the cockpit and was a death trap.

Badsight-
02-05-2007, 06:44 AM
well roland , to be fair - the DB-605 couldnt pull 1.42ATA untill late 43 . BOSCH took a while getting sparkplugs designed that could handle running that

but its like the Mk5 Spitfire . the G2's top-speed matches one level of tune but climb matches another

the La-5FN however doesnt discriminate between tests . it blows away early test performance levels & matches (betters) the mid-1944 test performance . Marcel just needs to read about it more . he must be like the last person left playing FB who hasnt come across this yet

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 06:50 AM
True about the 1.42 ATA rating, but as you pointed out the G2 is a hodge podge of climb/speed charts made in to one plane. The La5 FN as a 43 model is blatant BS and thanfully on the servers where I fly (despite me clearly being proved wrong ... apparently) the La5 FN is only used on 44 maps. 43 and earlier the VVS has to fly the La5 and La5 F.

As for Marcel being the last person to know about this, I dont buy it. He knows about it but his strict belief structure tells him that only Facists and Fairies believe it.

Marcel_Albert
02-05-2007, 06:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
You have set up a slanted test where you complain that the Bf 109 G2 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I NEVER complained , as i said in my post in bottom page 7 , i have absolutely no problem with it .

I posted and did these test to ANSWER to someone who claimed that La-5FN was barely overheating and had no problems with that , these tests were to show that it is untrue , it's rather the opposite .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
The La 5 FN can exceed the G2's sea level speed on normal max power alone. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course , where is the problem , that's fully realistic , historically accurate .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
As for my anything Russian must suck attitude, again you are to quote yourself (note I did not introduce this term in to the discussion you did) 'Lying'. I have for the most part answered your blatant 'lies' with the contradictory opinion that VVS aircraft are very good in IL2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whatever , VVS a/c are inferior to LW planes until late 1943 in game and in reality , that is a fact , and no need to expand on this , no time to make your education

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
I am questioning your unflinching belief in all things Soviet being uber in REALITY. Just because some VVS ace said his Klimove engine could take him back to base with FOUR cylinders </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not With , but Without yes , and not just VVS aces , but also engineers and historians of TV channels report on Barbarossa .

never spoke about anything Soviet "uber" , maybe try to pick other ideas to diffamate me .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
shot off does not mean anything in the broader context. You are the one trying to set apart Russian engines claiming them as excellent examples of robustness, [/QUOTE)

I'm tryin anything moron , i merely answered a claim that there was a problem with M-105 engine on the Lagg-3 , i just said what many knowledgeable people and no forum fools said .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mynameisroland:
similarly im sure you also believe in the myth of delta wood contstruction being superior - oh that is right up to the point where Russian aircraft begin to be made exlusively from metal alloys. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pff , you're pathetic , didn't think you'll desperately need to go so low to try to annoy me , Delta wood was indeed very solid and Soviet didn't have the choice after the initial loss of most of their industrial site , they had to make priority for steel and build their fighters with delta wood , some British and French planes were built in wood like the Mosquito and Hurricane or Arsenal VG , and these were quite tough plane , of course Metal is tougher , more durable , why do you think there so few Yaks nowdays , but wood is better to absorb the small caliber damage .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:, you have already exposed your thinly veiled alleigences by attacking Erich Hartmann ( you got pwoned there by the way) and then also typing political BS - while ignoring the attrocites commited by your 'Heros'. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't attack Hartmann , i gave my opinion shared by many people on his figures , and i'm entitled to my opinion , just like you are entitled to believe what you want and worship whatever and whoever you want.

I never spoke about Soviet atrocities and carefully avoided any political consideration on this forum by respect to the moderators and topic starter , and never spoke about my Hero but merely said that i'm glad that the Allies have won , and have high respect for the sacrifice and bravery of the Soviet people who lost 21 millions of people as well as American , Canadian , British etc.. soliders that gave their lives to get rid of that cancer of humanity .

I am by no mean Stalinist or communist or anything you would love me to be , and people can judge how low and far you go to try to put me in difficulty perfectly knowing the problem of expressions in English i have , but i will answer you to death now , cause you touched the sensible point , i can't stand injustice , and you are being very unfair and nasty here .

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 07:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
You have set up a slanted test where you complain that the Bf 109 G2 [/QUOTE)


I never complained , as i said in my post in bottom page 7 , i ave absolutely no problem with it .

I posted and did these test to ANSWER to someone who cliamed that La-5FN was not overheating , these tests were to show that it is untrue , it's rather the opposite .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mynameisroland:
The La 5 FN can exceed the G2's sea level speed on normal max power alone. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course , where is the problem , that's fully realistic , historically accurate .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
As for my anything Russian must suck attitude, again you are to quote yourself (note I did not introduce this term in to the discussion you did) 'Lying'. I have for the most part answered your blatant 'lies' with the contradictory opinion that VVS aircraft are very good in IL2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whatever , VVS a/c are inferior to LW planes until late 1943 in game and in reality , that is a fact , and no need to expand on this , no time to make your education

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
I am questioning your unflinching belief in all things Soviet being uber in REALITY. Just because some VVS ace said his Klimove engine could take him back to base with FOUR cylinders </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not With , but Without yes , and not just VVS aces , but also engineers .

never spoke about anything Soviet "uber" , maybe try to pick other ideas to diffamate

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
shot off does not mean anything in the broader context. You are the one trying to set apart Russian engines claiming them as excellent examples of robustness, [/QUOTE)

Im' tryin nothing <span class="ev_code_RED">moron</span> , i merely answered a claim that there was a problem with M-105 engine on the Lagg-3 , i just said what many knowledgeable people and no forum fools said .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mynameisroland:
similarly im sure you also believe in the myth of delta wood contstruction being superior - oh that is right up to the point where Russian aircraft begin to be made exlusively from metal alloys. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pff , you're pathetic , didn't think you'll desperately need to go so low to try to annoy me , Delta wood was indeed very solid and Soviet didn't have the choice after the initial loss of most of their industrial site , they had to make priority and build their fighters with delta wood , some British and French planes were built in wood like the Mosquito and Hurricane or Arsenal VG , and these were quite tough plane , of course Metal is tougher , more durable , why do you think there so few Yaks nowdays , but wood is better to absorb the small caliber damage .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:, you have already exposed your thinly veiled alleigences by attacking Erich Hartmann ( you got pwoned there by the way) and then also typing political BS - while ignoring the attrocites commited by your 'Heros'. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't attack Hartmann , i gave my opinion shared by many people on his figures , and i'm entitled to my opinion , just like you are entitled to believe what you want and worship whatever and whoever you want.

I never spoke about atrocities and carefully avoided any political consideration on this forum by respect to the moderators and topic starter , and never spoke about my Hero but tmerely said that i'm glad that the Allies have won , and have high respect for the scarifice and bravery of the Soviet people as well as American , Canadian , Brtish etc.. soliders that gave their lives to get rid of that cancer of humanity .

Iam by no mean Stalinist or anything you would love me to be , and people can judge how low you go to try to put me in difficulty perfectly knowing the problem of expressions in English i have , but i will answer you to death now , cause you touched the sensible point , i can't stand undairness , and you are being very unfair and nasty here . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tripe

You have even labeled me a <span class="ev_code_RED">moron</span> - you, the man who stands for fairness and politeness - what a hypocrite you are lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif . Thanks! Despite your proclimations to just telling it like it is, you are as biased as the people you despise. You ignore any useful points and have now chosen to focus on personal attacks and supposed agendas.

As for the G2 VS La5FN MATCH UP being fully realistic, then I suggest you play on servers where the La5 FN is flown against its 44 contemporaries and not a 1942 aircraft. Again, you have yet to comment on the fact that the La5 FN can outrun the G2 easily at normal max settings not even engaging its boost. So what is the point of your overheat comparison?

VVS planes in IL2 are not outclassed in in 41 to 43, any man with a keyboard and a monitor can be an ace in a I-16. The Yak 9 and 1B outclass all Luftwaffe fighters in dogfights above stall speed ( please dont say that fights do not occur under 3000m ). The P39 and P40 are very effective and only ask that the player uses tactics to do well in them. The La5 arrives and again outclasses the Fw 190 A4 and Bf 109 F4/G2 at low altitudes.

If I what I am saying is rubbish then why are servers full of people happy to fight in these 'awful' aircraft ? They cant all be motivated by their love for Russia. You are clinging on to the belief that Blue aircraft in IL2 are something special. They are not, they are counterable by proper use of tactics.

Marcel_Albert
02-05-2007, 07:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mynameisroland:

Tripe

You have even labeled me a moron - </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


You labelled me person with persecution complex , made personal attack on me , and tried to make people believe that i worship Stalinist and defend their crimes while i religiously avoided any discussion about this as it has nothing to do in the discussion , i think i've been very kind actually , the kindest i could be under such circumstances .


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland: you the man who stands for fairness and politeness. Thanks! Despite your proclimations to just telling it like it is, you are as biased as the people you despise. You ignore any useful points and have now chosen to focus on personal attacks and supposed agendas. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually , before your intervention based on personal attack and falsesly attributed statements, everything was fine , but problems of personal attacks is that you can stand 1,2 ,3 times but afterwards , my patience run out .
There are some people for who politeness equal weakness sadly , i have to adapt it .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
VVS planes in IL2 are not outclassed in in 41 to 43, any man with a keyboard and a monitor can be an ace in a I-16. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL ! Sure the I-16 is the new best be sure .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
The Yak 9 and 1B outclass all Luftwaffe fighters in dogfights above stall speed ( please dont say that fights do not occur under 3000m ). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lie , YAK doesn't outclass the 109G2 before 1944 , they equal their performance prior to Yak-9 and surpass it with Yak-3 only at low alt .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland: The P39 and P40 are very effective and only ask that the player uses tactics to do well in them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

P-39 and P-40 are clearly inferior to Bf109G2 and Fw-190 antons in performances as aerial superiority fighters , they are slower , less manoeuvrable , have vices (spins ) among other things .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:The La5 arrives and again outclasses the Fw 190 A4 and Bf 109 F4/G2 at low altitudes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not true , the La-5FN Yes , but not the La-5 .

Only thing the La-5 does better than 109G2 is to outrun him at SL , but 109 outturn , outdive , outclimb and outaccelrate him . 190 outgun , outrace and outmanouevre it at high speeds as well as outdive him .

The ONLY plane that is noticeably better is La-5FN at low alt hence why you want it to be porked ...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
If I what I am saying is rubbish then why are servers full of people happy to fight in these 'awful' aircraft ? They cant all be motivated by their love for Russia. You are clinging on to the belief that Blue aircraft in IL2 are something special. They are not, they are counterable by proper use of tactics. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They are MUCH MORE Blue flyers than VVS flyer , i can tell this for sure on HL , i fly in it since 3 years , the most numerous and popular side are firstly USAAF and Luftwaffe by a country mile , then you have many Spit flyers , a decent amount of VVS flyer (mainly Eastern Europe , Ukraine , Russia , France etc. ) and a minority of Japanese flyers .

Tiger27
02-05-2007, 07:13 AM
Have to laugh at this post, apart from it being totally sidetracked from its original intent of discussing whether Hartmann would have survived this sim, there is one thing I'd like clarified, I've been flying this sim since the demo and the one question I have for both sides of the argument is, when refering to the various abilities of the planes in Il2 which particular patch are you all talking about?

mynameisroland
02-05-2007, 07:22 AM
1st of all please itemise and post all of the personal attacks I have alledgedly made against you - If you fail to do this I please ask that you shut up with your persecution complex and focus of the point at hand.

Secondly only a biased player can fail to see how good the I-16 in early war scenarios - oh I forgot thats the problem.

Thirdly, Lie - sorry ? Doesnt the Yak 1B exceed the Ya 9's performance in some areas matching the Bf 109 G2s speed up to 2000m and out turning it ? Sorry to bust your argument there Marcel.

Fourthly, The P39 and P40 can comfortably compete with the Bf 109 F4, E4, E7 and IAR 81 they can even compete with the later G2 and A4 if flown with skill. What is contentious in what I have said here ? Nothing! You are so plainly trying to deceive that you only pick the G2 and A4 in your comparisons ignoring the fact that there are other Blue aircraft in the comparison because they do not fit your argument. Lastly, the P39 D2 easily beats the A4 and matches the G2 up to 16,000ft.

Your last point is laughable German and USAAF planes RoXoR!!! Dont look at hyperlobby as an indication. If you think that USAAF and Luftwaffe are the most popular sides you must fly exclusivly on Western Front servers. Try fly on servers with VARIED plane sets and matchups. You know, servers that try and match up teams?

Marcel_Albert
02-05-2007, 07:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
1st of all please itemise and post all of the personal attacks I have alledgedly made against you - If you fail to do this I please ask that you shut up with your persecution complex and focus of the point at hand. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just read your latest posts back

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Secondly only a biased player can fail to see how good the I-16 in early war scenarios - oh I forgot thats the problem. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Who said it was bad ?
It's a good plane , but nothing like a 109F , and you say i'm biased ?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Thirdly, Lie - sorry ? Doesnt the Yak 1B exceed the Ya 9's performance in some areas matching the Bf 109 G2s speed up to 2000m and out turning it ? Sorry to bust your argument there Marcel. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Look , read more about Yak and stop looking IL-2 compare to answer me , Yak-9 historically was heavier , but clearly more manoeuvrable at high speeds , dived better , more reliable aiframe to deformations at high speeds , more resistant and faster at altitudes , it's indeed the closest match to 109G2 at that time ,widely accepted by any specialists and book writers about yaks as well as veterans .... ok ?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Fourthly, The P39 and P40 can comfortably compete with the Bf 109 F4, E4, E7 and IAR 81 they can even compete with the later G2 and A4 if flown with skill. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea with SKILL , that is exactly what my very first post on the topic was claiming , thanks for confirming my thoughts .

However it is by NO MEANS on equal term with the best German fighters (A4 and G2 ) , by NO MEANS . You need a lot of rigor , training and group tactics to overcome your a/c shortcomings when flying VVS until later in the war .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
What is contentious in what I have said here ? Nothing! You are so plainly trying to deceive that you only pick the G2 and A4 in your comparisons ignoring the fact that there are other Blue aircraft in the comparison because they do not fit your argument. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL !!!!

Let me reverse the argument , you constantly bring up the LA-5FN to claim how superior and overmodelled the VVS plane are ...... rubbish eh ?
Let's speak about Migs , Lagg-3 , Yak-7B , P-40C etc... , no problem

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Lastly, the P39 D2 easily beats the A4 and matches the G2 up to 16,000ft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not true , in 1-on-1 , the P-39 has an adavantage , more maneuvrable at low speed , but other wise the 190A4 is faster in combat , better at high speed, outdive him , but indeed , without the P-39 D in early 1943 , the VVS would have had more problems because it was perfectly suited to Eastern Front , and they got great results with it , and the lowest loss rate in this plane . It's good plane , and i'm glad we have some planes that can approx equal some of their axis counterparts .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Your last point is laughable German and USAAF planes RoXoR!!! Dont look at hyperlobby as an indication. If you think that USAAF and Luftwaffe are the most popular sides you must fly exclusivly on Western Front servers. Try fly on servers with VARIED plane sets and matchups. You know, servers that try and match up teams? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't talk about planes performances , i talked about popularity , you see how you deform everything ? really pathetic .

Yes i fly online more often on USAAF planes in the Western Front , that is the most often because they are so few servers with VVS planes and i really like US planes that are by the way at serious disadvantage until they get the Mustang and later Jugs , in performances and firepower , it's a good challenge to fly US in ETO ....

And by the way , i know that i can fly mixed servers , i know perfectly what i' m talking about , HL is the main criteria to estimate the number of the total online community of IL-2 and approx know which side has the majority of pilots , as it is were most of the pilots fly this sim online

stalkervision
02-07-2007, 07:49 AM
The yak series of aircraft were excellent and even German fighter pilots said so&lt;Gunther Rall for one..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEcT5cWm1bQ&mode=related&search=

MrMojok
02-07-2007, 10:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ken_Det:
1 on 1 with me he did not do so well.
In game Quick mission builder.
I was in a P47D, and he came straight at me so I gave him a good burst at the same time he did the same.
He knocked out my engine, and I did the same to him.
I seen a few of the rounds hit him in the canopy area.
He pulled to the lower right of me.
I turned to my left just missing each other.
I glided, and turned to my right to look over my shoulder to see what he was up to.
To my supprise his plane headed stright to the ground smokeing all the way.
I seen no parashoot in the air near where he went down.
After that I looked for a treeless area to land, and pulled it off with out a hitch.
What a rush.
True story http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have shot down "Hartman" many many times without really trying very hard. The thing is the AI Hartman doesn't fly at all like the real one did. Now a few of the Russian ai aces are totally different matter to fight one on one. They are really really good at dogfighting and know just the right moves to get behind you if you don't completely pull out all the stops to win agains't them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's just a skin on a plane, with a name attached to the filename. That doesn't make it any more like Hartmann than you would, if you chose to fly with that name online.

BillyTheKid_22
02-07-2007, 10:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
The yak series of aircraft were excellent and even German fighter pilots said so&lt;Gunther Rall for one..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEcT5cWm1bQ&mode=related&search= </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



Howdy!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Great video!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Zoom2136
02-07-2007, 11:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFflyer:
The poor performance of the luftwaffe aircraft in this sim, demands that those who fly them use more historical tactics to do well in them, than those who fly the VVS aircraft in this sim.

The Luftwaffe aircraft in this sim are often not as fast, nor will they turn as well, so you have to use energy tactics. Also fly on full-real type servers that do not have big red arrows and words attached to your aircraft, this way you can have the element of surprise, which was important to have in WWII.

On a good full-real type of server, you can get that hog of a 109g6 or FW190A up high in a good spot, and zoom down on the La-5/7, Mig or P-39 or Spitfire, take a good shot, then either zoom back up out of harm's way or just go on down at high speed and head for home.
This is what Hartmann would have done, and it is what you can do to garner some success for yourself.

All the above mentioned allied craft, either have a turning or speed advantage over their contemporary axis craft, or both, so if you tangle with them at equal E, even those red pilots who are 5-year-old gamer/schoolgirls will get shots on you.

Mass has been added to the 109g2 in 4.07, so the acceleration between g2 and g6 models is much closer now than it has ever been. Not that that is a good thing.

So to do well in axis craft, you have to be a great virtual pilot, just as Hartmann was a great actual pilot.

To take a 109g or 190A up against many allied craft with equal E, you have to be brilliant, much better than those who fly red, and to use Hartmann's tactics you have to have the extra patience and smarts that he had over his red opponents.

Because of this, flying and getting kills in the 109s and 190As is that much more satisfying than doing the same thing in a red craft that has a speed or turning advantage.

Those who do well in Red aircraft, who are dependent on their speed, turn, and multiple guns, usually cannot do squat when they get into a axis craft with one 20mm nose cannon because they actually have to learn to aim. Nor can they do anything in a 190A, because they can no longer out-turn everything in the sky. they are a bunch of novices.

The highest level of this sim that can be reached, is to be able to do well flying an axis craft on a full-real server. Everyone else is a step down the ladder........ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess some people have to justify the fact that they are POOR pilot.... I think they call RATIONALISATION.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

stalkervision
02-07-2007, 01:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">On a good full-real type of server, you can get that hog of a 109g6 or FW190A up high in a good spot, and zoom down on the La-5/7, Mig or P-39 or Spitfire, take a good shot, then either zoom back up out of harm's way or just go on down at high speed and head for home.
This is what Hartmann would have done, and it is what you can do to garner some success for yourself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In real life 80% or more of the people shot down never ever knew they were the target till it was to late. True statistic..


A real actual fighter pilot never ever seeks a dogfight. This is as true now as in all aircombat from ww1 to present. The goal is a quick kill and leave before someone kills you.

msalama
02-07-2007, 01:48 PM
So would Erich Hartmann survive if he flew any machine in IL-2? Definitely not. All this stupid whining would've killed him for sure http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif