You probably wanted to say BMS5 :grin:

That may be the right number but any search has always pulled up BMS4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnBd1ZGep34

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Falcon-40/22284732944

Scroll down on the facebook site and you will see several pics I certainly hope that it's real. Not much compares to flying F4 online in the campaign mode. Open Falcon is pretty impressive and quite fun.

From "Wing Leader" by Johnny Johnson:
"Whatever these strange fighter were, they gave us a hard time of it. They seemed to be faster in a zoom climb than a 109....and they turned better than a Messerscmitt"

"The 190 bore strange markings.. this pilot is an Italian!...With wide open throttle (note Gaston) I held the Spitfire in the tightest of shuddering vertical turns...the brute was gaining on me and in another couple of turns would have me in his sights"

That 190 that attacked Johnny was probably a early A1/A2 with less weight and was known when it appeared in -41 to be a excellent dogfighter both in horizontal and vertical manouvers. And those ill concieved circus operations were primary excecuted at medium/low altitude where the 190 had a field day against the Spit 5s.

If the spits and the bombers would have kept their operational altitude above 20k feet the 190s would be more of a dog and suffer more losses. But the brittish bombers at that time suffered from bad ceiling so their recomended combat altitude resulted in the 190s initial advantage in -41.

A vertical turn is a looping, by todays definition as well as by RAF slang back in those days.

Probably Johnson thought about manouverbility of Fw 190 - it mean that at all range speed Fw 190 could make bank turn more rapidly then 109. So initial turn in Fw 190 was better then 109. In sustained turn Fw 190 had no chance with 109. At high speed Fw 190 had adventage in turn over 109 but when speed drop 109 would be better. These is confirmed by other German reports ( also German Raport about Captured LA5FN).


Johnson made some "vertical turns" in his Spitfire Mark V with "Fw 190" on his tail. We dont know if it was loops or maby high yoyo manouvers but definitly he didnt turn horizontaly. If he would do horizontal turns 190 would have no chance with Spitfire. Also at high speed things look little different. Fw 190 with his possibility to change direction of turn much quickly at high speed then Spit could turn initialy better but again when turn would be continued Spitfire would eat Fw 190 with easy.

Other British Ace Alan Deere reported that in some raid over France when his squadron of Spitfires Mark V was attacked by group of Fw 190 he said that the only thing what he could do was horizontal turns against Fw 190.

Also strange in Johhny story is that these "Focker" had italian marks? I wonder if during Diepe invasion there were Italian Fw 190s?

-I'll note what you have provided to back up your assertion: ...


Besides Il-2 Moderator Xiolabu3 defined perfectly well what a "vertical turn" was in those days: Quote (from memory because in a flash of comprehension this "objective" moderator DELETED his own statement...):

"90° bank turns were refered to in those pre-energy days (he then quotes my own "pre-energy" statement in bold here), as "Vertical bank turns" WHICH WAS LATER SHORTENED TO JUST "VERTICAL TURN" IN PILOT SLANG...

Besides that, the context of the text makes it pathetically obvious that this could not be a vertical loop: Here is the ACTUAL text:

"Then we both turned hard TO THE LEFT and whirled round on what seemed to be an ever decreasing circle. With wide-open throttles I held the Spitfire V in the tightest of VERTICAL TURNS."

Please note there is NOTHING OMITTED between those two sentences in this quote: Verify here: http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/471...sononfw190.jpg

In those days anything vertical was not called a turn, period. So JTD, would you care to revise your erroneous statement?

Besides, doesn't Johnny Johnson state at the beginning of the same text: "(FW-190As) They also turned better than the Me-109"?

Also Russian evaluations:

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/t...bat-fw190.html

Quote: -"The speed of the FW-190 is slightly higher than that of the Messerschmitt; it also has more powerful armament and is more maneuverable in horizontal flight."

So ALL these guys are wrong because your kindergarten math disagrees?

Besides, I still think it could have been 19-23 seconds...

And what about this Spitfire pilot?:

-Squadron Leader Alan Deere, (Osprey Spit MkV aces 1941-45, Ch. 3, p. 2: "Never had I seen the Hun stay and fight it out as these Focke-Wulf pilots were doing... In Me-109s the Hun tactic had always followed the same pattern- a quick pass and away, sound tactics against Spitfires and their SUPERIOR TURNING CIRCLE. Not so these 190 pilots: They were full of confidence..."

Result of that fight?: 8-1 for the FW-190As...

FW-190A combat pilot: "It was MUCH better than the Messerschmitt. You could do anything with it: You could CURVE IT, go fast, go high, go low"

But against all that you'd rather take the word of test pilots, especially those of the US Navy right?

Gaston

P.S. As far as opining on a game I have never played, note I have been watching tracks and reading all the forums since 2002, and that I attached "probably" to all my statements regarding the game...

G.

Then you know that in the IL2 series of releases since 2001, the FW series have undergone many changes, all for the worst.

The Antons were the Butcher Birds in the early years of IL2 but soon become the butchered after the various patches/updates, and is now a shadow of its former self.

IMHO
IL2 has been "balanced" to make the online experience "fairer" in the aircraft's year time scale.
You wont see Me 262's in most of these online servers because "its not fair".

As far as the rest of the thread goes ..............

:)

Yes I was aware of that, but still never heard of the FW-190A out-turning lightweight aircrafts, so they must have been porked very early on... Most of what I read on the FW-190A involved endless threads about the cockpit visibility through the lower "bar" (the game design was later proved wrong in later posts with photos taken from an actual cockpit)...

The FW-190A's Low-speed sustained turn rate was much more rarely discussed than its high speed turn rate, which pretty much says everything...

Gaston

All early discussion was related to Eastern front A's

Predominantly these were the complaints.

Poor sustained turn rate.
Poor climb rate.
Lower armoured glass bar, no refraction.

All pilot references in books I have read contradict some of the modelling with the FW's In IL2.

I wont diverse as you are somewhat aware of the failings of this aircraft already in this sim from more expert past forum members that went to great lengths with correct data presentations.