PDA

View Full Version : FW 190s - Very touchy!



GazzaMataz
05-19-2004, 10:07 AM
I have recently been flying the FW 190s versions from A4 - D9 in AEP and I find them very temperamental. When I say that I mean they are not very manouverable when doing loops, s-slips and barrel rolls etc they seem to wanna stall and spin easily.

Thing is I find the Me-109 much more controllable and yet in Ill-2 it's the other way around... is this me or has anyone else had this problem?

Tickety boo...
Gazzamataz
http://www.gazzamataz.com

GazzaMataz
05-19-2004, 10:07 AM
I have recently been flying the FW 190s versions from A4 - D9 in AEP and I find them very temperamental. When I say that I mean they are not very manouverable when doing loops, s-slips and barrel rolls etc they seem to wanna stall and spin easily.

Thing is I find the Me-109 much more controllable and yet in Ill-2 it's the other way around... is this me or has anyone else had this problem?

Tickety boo...
Gazzamataz
http://www.gazzamataz.com

TheEngine88
05-19-2004, 10:49 AM
I prefer the 109s, personally. The FWs have very nice firepower, but I'll take a 109 over them any day.

I may sound crazy, but I prefer the way the 109 turns as opposed to the 190s. The 109 is hardly a knife-fighter, but IMO its better than the 190, at least in this regard.

HamishUK
05-19-2004, 10:58 AM
Very looong ongoing debate about the FW series. They are not what they should be and should be superior to the 109 in all respects.

Unfortunately this is not the case and over two years much has been debated on the fact!

http://www.blitzpigs.com/images/Ham-SigPic.jpg

TheEngine88
05-19-2004, 11:06 AM
I believe the majority of Luftwaffe aces flew primarily 109s, or is that inaccurate?

"Pain Fades, Glory lasts forever, Chicks dig scars."

KarayaEine
05-19-2004, 12:22 PM
190A's have always been twitchy (even in the original IL-2).....if you even blink they roll like crazy. The Dora is the best flying of the bunch. Very agile around the roll axis but controllable. They still hold their energy in the turn better than the 109 tho.

Johann

Horrido!
"We need more ammo!"
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid106/p5f881fba318d7f0779ac1d9df0ace079/f96e6284.jpg

"Achtung Kommandant, sind Sie Fl├┬Ąche auf Feuer"

LEXX_Luthor
05-19-2004, 12:48 PM
Yes, Fb109s were far more competitive as pure dogfighters, which when used defensively as the WAR was being lost were more desperately needed than the far greater offensive capabilities of FW (and were cheaper to make too). Don't expect to see this kind of reasoning when it comes to getting internet Brownie Points in dogfight servers.

Korolov
05-19-2004, 12:53 PM
Trick to fly Fw-190:

#1:Find a externals off, cockpit on server.

#2:Get a wingman.

#3:Kick butt. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

GazzaMataz
06-01-2004, 02:26 AM
I been reading 'FW 190 Aces of the Russian Front' recently and it was with interest that I noted that the FW had a fatal flaw... 'that the stall was sudden and vicious'.

'Let the speed fall below 127 mph and, without warning, the port wing would drop so violently that the FW 190 would turn on its back. Pull into a G-stall in a tight turn and it would flick over into opposite bank and you had an incipient spin on your hands'.

One other word of warning was 'if the FW's engine stopped the advice was to get out quick! Powerless the FW 190 had the glide characteristics of a brick'.

So all newbie FW pilots out there let that be a warning. I tried these scenarios (couldn't wait) and lo and behold the FW does just this.

Tickety boo...
Gazzamataz
http://www.gazzamataz.com

dadada1
06-01-2004, 03:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HamishUK:
Very looong ongoing debate about the FW series. They are not what they should be and should be superior to the 109 in all respects.

Unfortunately this is not the case and over two years much has been debated on the fact!

http://www.blitzpigs.com/images/Ham-SigPic.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Superior in all respects ? What about climb and turning cirle. I've never seen it stated in any book that FW 190 was superior in these respects.

KGr.HH-Sunburst
06-01-2004, 06:17 AM
i believe the FW190 is very well modeled
but i cannot understand why it is a better aircraft then a 109 in the game its the otherway around IMO the 109 got everything better then the 190 except high speed handling and firepower.

the 190 bleeds E like a pig
it climbs like a pig
it turns like a pig
its acceleration is far worse then the 109

so you tell me why the 190 was abetter aircaft as a fighter ?
when it comes down to killing bombers well yea the 190 wins hands down but thats about it
and its better suited for ground attack

the problem is when you dont have an alt advantage above your enemy your pretty much dead as you can not turn ,climb or run away (except D9)
so the key to fly her is HIGH above um all and when you are in numbers and do some BnZ i think this is the most deadly aircraft in the game
its the best team aircraft in the game but we know how that goes in DF servers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.freewebs.com/fightingpumas/
http://img31.photobucket.com/albums/v94/sunburst/sigp51-D9.jpg
''All your Mustangs are belong to us''

Bremspropeller
06-01-2004, 07:12 AM
The 190 out-accelerated everything when it came up in 1941.
It still was at least even when the Spitfire IX came in 42.

The 190 also was was faster than the 109 and retained it's energy much better.

It could do anything as well or better than a 109 -except climbing.

It could be out-manoeuvred at low speeds, but until the Mustang arrived in GB, there was no plane to fight (and actually TURN) with the 190 at high speeds.

It dove like a brick (P-47 was the first to dive faster) and had a view from the cockpit line no a/c in europe had before.

It was very forgiving to fly (those "Snap stalls" only accured when pulling Gs") and had no tendency to spin (just like the 109).
Both a/c really had to be forced to spin.

It's wider track-width made it easier to handle on the airstrips and allowed to land the a/c with a sinkrate of 5 metres per second - so you cold "land it into the ground" as an unexperienced pilot.

It had no tendency to break-out during the take-off and any torque-induced yaw-movement to the left could easily compensated with the rudder.

Flaps and the undercarriage were powered by electricity - push a button in the cockpit and the flaps/ gear go up or down.

The engine was controlled by one single lever - a pilot could concentrate much more on his tasks and did not always have to adjust his engine-settings.


In comparison to the real Fw190s, the a/c in game is still a bit tweaked, but it's still my favourite aircraft - in game and in reality.

http://www.ccbirding.com/thw/id/peregrine2--hwi.JPG
Da B&Z bird !

http://www.virtual-jabog32.de
http://www.jg68.de.vu

GazzaMataz
06-01-2004, 07:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Both a/c really had to be forced to spin.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well I must be **** cos I can get both to spin all too often... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Tickety boo...
Gazzamataz
http://www.gazzamataz.com

jurinko
06-01-2004, 07:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HamishUK:
Very looong ongoing debate about the FW series. They are not what they should be and should be superior to the 109 in all respects.

Unfortunately this is not the case and over two years much has been debated on the fact!

http://www.blitzpigs.com/images/Ham-SigPic.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In comparative trials between Fw 190 A-3 and Bf 109 F, 109 was better in sustained climb and acceleration.
Fw was better in speed, dive, zoomclimb, ruggedness, firepower, roll, versatility, range, undercarriage, automation systems.
For 1:1 fight, 109 was better. For real war, 190 was better.

---------------------
Letka.13/Liptow @ HL

HamishUK
06-01-2004, 09:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dadada1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HamishUK:
Very looong ongoing debate about the FW series. They are not what they should be and should be superior to the 109 in all respects.

Unfortunately this is not the case and over two years much has been debated on the fact!

http://www.blitzpigs.com/images/Ham-SigPic.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Superior in all respects ? What about climb and turning cirle. I've never seen it stated in any book that FW 190 was superior in these respects.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right Statistically a 190 was only slightly inferior in climb and turn ability. However the 190's speed and general handling were far more superior to the 109. The Focke-Wulf was not only faster but its superior handling and faster roll rate gave it an edge in the hands of even less experienced pilots. Such sparkling performance combined with the 190's superior armament presented Allied pilots with a real challenge until German pilot training began to drop in quality.

The 109 was a far more difficult aircraft to learn the ropes on and fight in.

Maybe my term in all respects was overzealous but in terms of real life it was 'far superior'.

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/Ham1.jpg

Bremspropeller
06-01-2004, 09:25 AM
@ Gazza: The REAL a/c had no tendecy to spin...

But u're on Maddox-5...don't forget that ! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


@ Jurinko: In combat, even the heavier armored Fw190F could easily out-accelerate the 109.
A 109-pilot said in an interview that both pilots (Fw190 and Bf109) opened throttle in flight at the same time and the Fw simply ran away.
He said that he wondered why he and his squadron had to fly escort missions for the JaBos, when they indeed were the superrior a/c with their fighter-bombers.

BTW: there were some aces among the fighter-bomber units. One excample: August Lambert (SG77 - Schlachtgeschwader 77") achieved 118 victories.

http://www.ccbirding.com/thw/id/peregrine2--hwi.JPG
Da B&Z bird !

http://www.virtual-jabog32.de
http://www.jg68.de.vu

gates123
06-01-2004, 09:27 AM
I find the 190 much more formidable then the 109 and classify it as one of MY favorite planes in the game, oh and I love the new A-6.

http://www.flightjournal.com/images/index_photos/gunslinging.jpg
Did anyone see that or was it just me?

BlitzPig_DDT
06-01-2004, 09:33 AM
Interesting to hear about it being so close in turn to the 109. That is the first I've heard this (even in literature) and could also lead some to the false impression that the 109 is overmodeled.

The 190 was not 'impressive' in turn or climb. It was the better (much better, 1 would think, since some 109 aces were known to actually turn fight with the VVS planes, Yaks and Las included. Granted, not often, and with Fs and G2s, but still......) turn ability, climb, and spiral climb capabiliteis that made the 109 a favorite with most of the aces. Granted, familiarity was part of it, but, I can see it from their perspective and might have been inclined to follow suit if I we're in their place.

That said, the 190 was known for amazing build quality, with very tight seams, and it also had rather low drag.

In fact, it is not much different at all from the La series, and should have about the same E bleed. In this game, it doesn't. That is the second largest flaw with the plane (1st being the view).

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif

HamishUK
06-01-2004, 09:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jurinko:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HamishUK:
Very looong ongoing debate about the FW series. They are not what they should be and should be superior to the 109 in all respects.

Unfortunately this is not the case and over two years much has been debated on the fact!

http://www.blitzpigs.com/images/Ham-SigPic.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In comparative trials between Fw 190 A-3 and Bf 109 F, 109 was better in sustained climb and acceleration.
Fw was better in speed, dive, zoomclimb, ruggedness, firepower, roll, versatility, range, undercarriage, automation systems.
For 1:1 fight, 109 was better. For real war, 190 was better.

---------------------
Letka.13/Liptow @ HL<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought we were talking about real life and not Maddox's version?

My point is that if you speak to any RAF 'player' then you will find that the comparisons they place on service combat with the two planes tells a remarkably different story from 1C's showing. The FW190 was a plane to be feared even in inexperienced hands. The 109 was respected but in the hands of a new pilot it was a handful.

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/Ham1.jpg

Franzen
06-01-2004, 09:49 AM
I just flew the A4 online against the later G series 109. He came after me while I was taking off but I managed to get some distance. Much to my surprise I was able to out run him. Of course it can't accelerate like the 109 but once you get it moving the A4 becomes fast.
I find the 190 requires a lot of patience and strategy. An alt advantage is great but not neccessary. It does bleed a lot of energy when turning and looping so you have to do everything big. I also like the stall characteristics cause it's so easy to regain control. If needed I stall to make the enemy pass me, it's dangerous but possible. If you're used to flying Allied planes I'm sure you'd just about hate the 190. The A4 is my favorite of the 190s. Just my humble opinion.

Fritz Franzen

Chanel505
06-01-2004, 10:09 AM
Eric Brown wrote about the FW-190 &gt;the FW-190 make all maneuver better then a Spitfire, the Spitfire wins in a closed circle&lt;, he said the FW-190 was better than a Bf-109, and the FW-190, Ta-152 and Ju88 was the best planes
with piston engines which Eric Brown has flown of german aircrafts. About the Ta 152 H1 Werk-Nr 150 168 Eric Brown wrote, that the Ta-152 can bet Mustang III and Tempest V in all aspects, in many aspects was the Ta-152 better.
The agility of Ta152 H1 and Spitfire XIX:

The angle of climb was in Ta-152 more steeply and the climb speed was slower, over 9145 meter climbs the Ta-152 H1 faster then the Spitfire XIX, at 9150 meter to 10700 meter was the Spit with Ta-152 even, over 10700 meter was the Ta-152 H1 better in climb than the Spit XIX. On the way to Brize Norton flow Eric Brown in 10700 meter and reach a speed of 684 KM/H, the Spit XIX was 56 KM/H faster in 10700 meter than the Ta-152 H1, but Eric flow whitout GM-1 all the time, the reason was after the war was no nitrogenprotoxide available.
In maneuver was both planes even.
Eric said the FW-190 and the Ta-152 was germans best fighters with piston engines.

[This message was edited by Chanel505 on Tue June 01 2004 at 09:40 AM.]

JG14_Josf
06-01-2004, 10:12 AM
Jurinko wrote:

"In comparative trials between Fw 190 A-3 and Bf 109 F, 109 was better in sustained climb and acceleration.
Fw was better in speed, dive, zoomclimb, ruggedness, firepower, roll, versatility, range, undercarriage, automation systems.
For 1:1 fight, 109 was better. For real war, 190 was better."

Mike Spick wrote:

"With the advent of the FW190A, this was not as critical as it once had been. The aircraft was a superb dogfighter, and its pilots used it as such. The previous summer, faced with slashing attacks by the 109s, the constant complaint of RAF pilots was that 'Jerry' didn't stay and fight , totally ignoring the fact that in the 109 this was tactically correct. Now they were repaid in spades: in his new FW 190A, 'Jerry' stayed and fought as never before."

Contrast the quote from Mike Spick with this quote from Jurinko.

"For 1:1 fight, 109 was better."

Helmut Lipfert wrote:

"I made the interesting discovery that the ground attack pilots in their Fw 190s were faster at low level than we were. On the way home I waved over one of the Focke Wulfs and gestured to the pilot that I wanted to race.
We started out at the same speed, then opened the throttles simultaneously and slowly but surely the "190" pulled ahead. I couldn't keep up, even though the aircraft I was flying certainly wasn't a poor one. But this was no fighter which left me behind, but a close-support aircraft for which we "faster" fighters were supposed to be flying escort. But it was not only in level speed that this bird was superior to us. Its main strength lay in its enourmous firepower and diving speed"

Eric Brown wrote:

"It was concluded that the Fw 190 pilot tyring to "mix it" with a Spitfire in the classic fashion of steep turning was doomed, for at any speed - even below the German fighter's stalling speed - it would be out-turned by its British opponent. Of course, the Luftwaffe was aware of this fact and a somewhat odd style of dogfighting evolved in which the Fw 190 pilots endeavored to keep on the vertical plane by zooms and dives, while their Spitfire-mounted antagonists tried everything in the book to draw them on to the horizontal."

Compare Eric Browns quote with Mick Spicks quote and the real reason why the FW190 was a better dog fighter than the 109 is clear.

An odd style of dogfighting evolved and it is called energy fighting.

Read Fighter Combat by Robert Shaw and this understanding becomes quite clear.

If the real FW190s were able to dogfight and win against spitfires using energy tactics as described by Eric Brown, and if the 109s were not able to dog fight Spitfires as described by Mick Spick, then what does that say about how the 109 stacks up against the Fw190?

"In contests of [tactics] it is bad to be led about by the enemy. You must always be able to lead the enemy about"
Miyamoto Musashi

"Fly with the head and not with the muscles. That is the way to long life for a fighter pilot. The fighter pilot who is all muscle and no head will never live long enough for a pension"
Colonel Willie Batz, GAF 237 Victories, WW-II

Quotes are taken from the book: Fighter Combat by Robert Shaw.

Zen--
06-01-2004, 10:20 AM
The 190 described above is not the 190 we have in AEP.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

-Zen-

tfu_iain1
06-01-2004, 10:31 AM
still, the firepower... when diving on a surprised target, it helps to be able to dispatch it or critically disable it in a single pass


i still wish we could fire the machine guns soley on the 190... pisses me off that i have to waste 20mm ammo taking discerning shots

CRSutton
06-01-2004, 11:27 AM
I think a lot of people miss the point. The 190 thought to be a simpler plane to fly. In the hands of a great pilot the 109 was considered as good or better. But a war such as WWII tends to produce tons of average pilots and very few experts. Pilots tended to die or wear out fast. The most important planes are the ones that the average pilot can fly and do something productive with. The 190 fit the bill for this and was the better plane for the late war LW as pilot skills tended to degrade.

The same argument is made against the Martin Marauder vs the B25. The Martin bomber was an excellent air plane. Well built, fast, sturdy with a good bomb load. But it was considered a "hot" plane to fly. That is, it took a lot of pilot skill to master.

The B25 in its own way was a great airplane, but it did not perform like the martin. However, the B25 was loved by its aircrews as it was an easy plane to fly. That is aircrews really felt like it was a great plane to be in as it was a good bet to get you home.

We tend to be obsessed with performance on this web page. However, I suspect real pilots had different favorites for different reasons. I suspect that "easy to fly" and "most likely to get them home would be the top choices-over almost all performance aspects."

BlitzPig_DDT
06-01-2004, 11:55 AM
Ah, but the best way to get home is to kill the enemy. Being shot at, and/or chased, even if your plane is faster, isn't as good as being able to turn tables and become the hunter in the engagement.

The 190 had great guns, could dive fast, had phenomenal roll, was tough, and fairly fast in level flight. However, once pilots entered the equation, it lost a bit of it's shine. There was a Jug pilot in Zemkes Wolf Pack (IIRC) that could roll his Jug "with any 190". How? Dude was strong, and at certain speeds, that plus the limitations of cracking your skull against the canopy as you whip it around kind of equalize things a bit. The Jug and Mustang could dive as well as or better than the 190, had equal or better vis, and guns that could kill them, particularly the Jug, which was also tougher, and faster at alt.

I know, I know, this is about 190 vs 109. Still - if the enemy can see as well as you, is as fast or faster, tougher, has equal or better firepower, can outdive you..... where is the advantage here? How is the 190 'more apt to bring you home'?

The 109 had the advantage. It's T:W ratio let it damn near hang on it's prop in a slow spiral climb where the engine is doing a lot of the work as compared to the wings. The enemy, if he agrees to let you drag him up, will stall trying to follow you, and you can just roll over and dive on him and take him out. If he doesn't agree, you still got away.

Also, the 190 has a lot of historical credit for the Kommandogeraet (which it should), but the 109 was also automated. It's best performance came from automatic control.

So how was the 109 all that much more difficult to fly? Take offs and landings might have been more of an adventure to the cavalier pilot, but, as far as "getting home", that's irrelevant (essentially).

Perhaps the 190 was more comfortable, with more interior room, nicer looking panels, electric trim, less need for trim, easier on the legs, etc. But, I don't see that as the same thing. Skill and endurance are different.

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif

Bremspropeller
06-01-2004, 01:01 PM
You needed less force to handle the 190.
Stickforces quickly raised with increasing speeds with the 109.

Another old debate: I doubt that eight cal. 50s are better than four 20mm canons (with HE ammo).

As far as "getting home": the 190 was much tougher. About 5% of any 109 lossed happened during take-off or landing. I think this says enough about the "adventure" of flying the 109.


Pilots having flown the 109 for over 1000 missions will of course prefer the a/c they are used to. But most pilots pretty much apreciated the appearance of the new fighter type.


The 190 had 1.5 times the range of the 109.

http://www.ccbirding.com/thw/id/peregrine2--hwi.JPG
Da B&Z bird !

http://www.virtual-jabog32.de
http://www.jg68.de.vu

BlitzPig_DDT
06-01-2004, 01:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
You needed less force to handle the 190.
Stickforces quickly raised with increasing speeds with the 109.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, that's what I was talking about. Lovely language, English. 2 people can say the same thing and mean 2 different things. lol

When people talk "easy" to fly, they also say "but the experten could handle it". To me, that is not a question of endurance, which is what you allude to here. Rather, it's one of skill. As if you had to have 9 hands tweaking 30 dials and switches vs. a single lever (well, 2 really) control system.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Another old debate: I doubt that eight cal. 50s are better than four 20mm canons (with HE ammo).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps. It's "the thing to do" to down play the M2. Whatever. Point is, it was more than enough, even when "only" in sextuplets, to kill the 190. With 8, fuh'gedd'about it.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>As far as "getting home": the 190 was much tougher.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. It was. But, getting shot at by the enemy isn't the way to get home. That's my point.

The Yak3 was rather soft. I would still rather have that than a 190 (much as I like the 190) if I were being thrown up with little in the way of training in a very hostile environment with others of little training while being outnumbered. Sure, it would go down quicker if hit, but the point is, you'd stand a better chance of not getting hit, as well as bringing your own guns to bear.

If you run, the enemy will chase you home. Then what? You're not likely to run a Mustang or Jug dry. Especially after they had french air bases.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>About 5% of any 109 lossed happened during take-off or landing. I think this says enough about the "adventure" of flying the 109.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"to the cavalier pilot". This is the only point of "difficulty" in terms of skill that I see. But, if you take your time, it's quite doable. Else none of those kids would have ever gotten off the ground and back home again - but they did.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Pilots having flown the 109 for over 1000 missions will of course prefer the a/c they are used to. But most pilots pretty much apreciated the appearance of the new fighter type.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, familiarity certainly plays a part.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The 190 had 1.5 times the range of the 109.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But not enough to run a US fighter dry, so it's kind of moot in a way. (from a "survival" frame of mind - it made a big difference in terms of a war winning (type) plane, but that's a different matter)

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif

Bremspropeller
06-01-2004, 02:27 PM
Of course, fighting means using your strengths and avoiding your weak points.
The Experten could rather do this than the "boys", but my point was that the 190 was less fatiguing the pilot during a flight or even a fight.
Physical stress to the pilot also decreases spiritual power. This issue is the thing I was talking about.


Yeah, it there's a plane that chases you home, the issue of toughness isn't really one thing to count on, but flying an a/c whith higher survival-chances is still a better choice.
Just think of the Thunderbolt it had the lowest loss-ratio due to it's toughness.
On one ocassion, a 190 flew over 120km home to it's home base (across the channel !) after being hit by a Spitfire's Hispano-rounds (two cylinders were destroyed by them...).
The pilot wouldn't have made it home with a Bf109.

In his book "Feindber├╝hrung", Julius Meimberg (JG2, JG53, 56 victories) says that just one moment of unawareness was enough to make your flight end in a disaster.


The range was surely not enough to run a 47 or 51 dry, but you could run a Spitfire dry or some russian fighters.

http://www.ccbirding.com/thw/id/peregrine2--hwi.JPG
Da B&Z bird !

http://www.virtual-jabog32.de
http://www.jg68.de.vu

Manreaper
06-01-2004, 03:45 PM
How do you get the 190s to turn sharply without stalling?

Bremspropeller
06-01-2004, 04:27 PM
Fly a high yo-yo http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.ccbirding.com/thw/id/peregrine2--hwi.JPG
Da B&Z bird !

http://www.virtual-jabog32.de
http://www.jg68.de.vu

BlitzPig_DDT
06-01-2004, 04:34 PM
Brem, I guess what I was getting at is - I don't think the difficulty was much more than the endurance required. The only think the experten would have to help them there, really, would be experience/tolerance.

However, that is the sort of thing that isn't really model-able, and it could lead some to assume that the 109 is overmodeled, or even that the 190 is undermodeled (which it, the 190, is, but in different ways).

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif

Chanel505
06-01-2004, 04:42 PM
The stallspeed of the FW-190 was 204 KM/H at slowspeeds, whitout warnings, the left wing tilted down by stalls the plane goes in upside-down position. The some was at highspeeds in confine turns. The aileron was very easy to handling in speeds to 645 KM/H, after this speeds the pilot need more power. The elevator needet more forces in particular over 565km/h, the aileron and alevator harmonized great and dont needet rudder, this was the FW-190 strong side, in highspeed dives the Focke needet a fine feeling to pull up and it was not easy, this was the bad side, otherwise she stalls. The FW-190 have advantages in half loops with 180Ô? role on the edge of the loop, becouse his drags.
The best defensive figure was a split s.
In dives was the acceleration excelent http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. The drag and the aileron and hormonized control was the FW-190 his stongest part.
It was a excelent aircraft but dont fly with the FW-190 closed circles, this wrote Eric Brown about the FW-190. In FB we have not this advantages, becouse the stick forces are not simulated, the role rate of other aircraft is to fast, and the drag of the FW-190 is to low, and she overheated to fast. And any other aircraft are to quickly in sealevel. In 2.00 was the FW-190 better. I have the some probs than GazzaMata. It was my favorite aircraft in FB. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
06-01-2004, 04:56 PM
best jears for FW were 41 to 43.

you can just try 42, spit vs A4.

i think the FW has quite a good chance, and even the OV says that they were dangerous.

anyway. the problem i get in FW is the aiming. in a 109 i can at least try a high defelection shot, in FW forget about it.

in reality one of the best defence tactics for FW was the so called Scherenman├┬Âver - Scissors (?). But in the game the eBleed will stop you doing this succesfull.
you can outroll the enemy but as soon as u start to pull a BIT you will get slower and slower...you may manage to get rid of the enemy, but if this happens u are a: slow b: handycapped in aiming...

Still the FW is must effective when flying with Wingman. You need good teamwork, speed and something a 109 will forgive, you will need situation awarness, quite a lot of it.

http://www.g-c-p.de/sigbib/hh/blacksheep.jpg

faustnik
06-01-2004, 05:02 PM
Don't you guys think the 190 in 2.01 is incredibly forgiving at low speeds? It seems much different to me than 2.00. The 190 just does not have the sharp stall and spin anymore.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com) is recruiting
CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25)

NegativeGee
06-01-2004, 05:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Don't you guys think the 190 in 2.01 is incredibly forgiving at low speeds? It seems much different to me than 2.00. The 190 just does not have the sharp stall and spin anymore.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
_http://www.7jg77.com is recruiting_
_http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think it can be turned alot harder than previously was possible..... thats my impression at least.

The sharp stall is still there (it might even occur more suddenly than before) but you have to push the plane harder to make it happen.

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - G├╝nther Rall

http://www.invoman.com/images/tali_with_hands.jpg

Look Noobie, we already told you, we don't have the Patch!

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
06-01-2004, 05:43 PM
true the plane itself can turn a bit better, but have u tryed to fight a P51D in an A8 ?
or a B in an A8 ? or even a C in A8 ?

start at equal conditions...u will loose. because the 51's seems to be able to do absolute incredible tight manouvers now...

and DONT take A9! A9 was even less used than Me262! (but feel free to try, i myself can't hold myself vs. an equal (or even worse!) pilot in P51) but it may just seems this way i don't know for shure.

http://www.g-c-p.de/sigbib/hh/blacksheep.jpg

NegativeGee
06-01-2004, 06:14 PM
Yes, very true, although the FW-190A's do turn better, it doesn't change basic way to fly the plane, ie. don't turn fight.

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - G├╝nther Rall

http://www.invoman.com/images/tali_with_hands.jpg

Look Noobie, we already told you, we don't have the Patch!