The Bf109 is best in alt range of 0-5000

[ga_332]

Ok I study the manual and look slike the 109 v spit is faster, better climber, dives better in the alt range of 0-5000 m .

So in short if you are flying the 109 keep you self in the alt range from 0-5000 and you should have the uperhand against spit/Hurricane.

Do you guys agree?

[6S.Manu]

Ok I study the manual and look slike the 109 v spit is faster, better climber, dives better in the alt range of 0-5000 m .

So in short if you are flying the 109 keep you self in the alt range from 0-5000 and you should have the uperhand against spit/Hurricane.

Do you guys agree?

The FM are still bugged.. I would not expect realistic performances yet.

[lacusch69]

Ok I study the manual and look slike the 109 v spit is faster, better climber, dives better in the alt range of 0-5000 m .

So in short if you are flying the 109 keep you self in the alt range from 0-5000 and you should have the uperhand against spit/Hurricane.

Do you guys agree?

Absolut irreal OVER 5000...

Check this: http://www.pumaszallas.hu/il2cod/COD_performance_charts_v01.jpg

And check this: http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109E_SwissJ347/109E_J347.html

Online: 109 is absolut loser versus british planes...

[VO101_Tom]

And check this: http://www.pumaszallas.hu/il2cod/COD_performance_charts_v01.jpg

I modified this file, copy (from cod manual) the Ju 87 too (It would be superb, if in the manual the graphs would be drawn in identical scale and a direction). Hah... Ju 87 can climb higher, than the 109? I have to try it, i can't believe it...

But... interest, that Hurricane have almost identical performance characteristics, than the most modern spitfire of BoB. I would be curious about a detailed graph, separate the variants of all aircrafts (like old Il-2 compare).

(Igen, megdumálhatnánk magyarul is, de ez nem csak Lacuschnak szól :) )

[Kwiatek]

For historical data look here in these topic:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20110

[ga_332]

Ok guys, History or not, my point is this that in the current state off the game in COD by the manuals for the game/COD the bf109 is better in all parts from 0-5000 m. v the spit/Hurricane, right.........Yes or no ;)

[Lixma]

I've been able to climb away from both Hurricanes and Spitfires online. The Hurricane is obviously a bit easier to escape than the Spitfire. Against a determined Spitfire you need the patience of a saint and a whole channel's worth of distance to get yourself safe. But you can get away. Just don't expect to magically fly away from a Spit/Hurri from a similar energy state. The performance difference between aircraft is terrifyingly (and enjoyably) slender.

So, subjectively, i've found the 109 and Spit to be more or less equal in speed.

The 109 has a slight but usable advantage in climb rate.

Turn rate....109 shouldn't bother attempting it.

The Spit and Hurricane have better acceleration than the 109.

I repeat, these are just subjective, non scientific, tentative conclusions based on limited online scraps. Don't think i've ever gone much over 5k, either.

[Viper2000]

I think that the Spitfire and the 109 are close enough in performance that with CEM on the pilot who best manages his aeroplane will probably win.

The reality is that performance doesn't matter anything like as much as SA.

The 109 has a firepower advantage whilst its cannon last, and in many ways its cockpit is superior at this stage in the war for day VFR cruising & fighting. Ammunition counters are especially valuable. OTOH, the cockpit workload for fighting is somewhat higher, especially if you get low and slow due to the need to continually adjust prop pitch & two radiators. The poor rear view is also a handicap.

Later on, given +12 boost, the Spitfire especially will give the early 109 an extremely hard time below about 3 km, and I suspect that online there will either be a limitation of access to 100 octane for the RAF or else a reliance upon the artificial addition of large numbers of early 109F0 aeroplanes to balance things up, especially given the tendency of online fights towards relatively low altitudes.

Having said that however, I suspect that there are quite a lot of tweaks to be made to all the models yet, so it's too early to reach definitive conclusions about relative performance.

[ga_332]

Thx for your feedback gents ;)

[skouras]

during BOB both planes had almost the same specs
EXCEPT that the Spit was a little faster than the me109 and the me109 could get higher than the Spit:-)
Accordind from pilots of BOB they said that the main feature of the spit by far was that could make tighter turns
the best escape maneuver from Luftawwe pilots was to stick forward and dive while the Spit had to roll over to dive and follow him
so this little things makes this planes better than the other ones:-)
Personnal i like to fly the me109


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e-Ra0dH-Lg&feature=related

[AnarchyZG]

COD Spits seem to be unimpresed by stick forward evasive manuever as of lately...

[skouras]

this is why some people complain about this feature:evil:

[Buzpilot]

Anyone know or have data about the different acceleration between 109 and spits?
I know 109 often used boom and zoom, maybe because it was effective against loosing speed?
It would also explain why spits excelled in turn fights, better acceleration would loose top speed, but help keeping turn speed.

[bugmenot]

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/wade-accel.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/wade-data.jpg