i have been reading what has been said and if you are going to say that the 109 g2 is fast than the Fw 190 or the TC152 that great but it would help to know thing like the fuel loads as this play a big part on how fast the aircraft flys. And like some of the post that i have read it how you are flying the aircraft and part of this is how the aircraft is setup.

109 G2 range 545 km
190 D9 range 837 km
TA 152 range 1200 km

Not directly. Mass effects acceleration, but not top speed. Top speed is effected by drag and available power to overcome it. However, in case of low speed maneuvering, aircraft with larger power to weight ratio may look faster, because of its greater acceleration. As speed increases, effects of power to weight ratio melt in front of increased drag. In fact, larger mass is desirable in high speed applications as it increases diving performance and helps to conserve kinetic energy.

This is not a question which is faster: D9 or G2. D9 is surely faster (regarding top speed) at all altitudes in level flight. The question is: what mistakes has SturmKreator done?

More weight equals more angle of attack to stay level, and more alpha means more drag. In fighters this is less evident than in bombers (think of B17 speed with load...), unless there is a significant fuel load, as is for long-range planes.
I don’t know how much this is modeled in game. Surely, trim, mixture, prop pitch, supercharger speed and radiator shutters position all have a BIG effect.

Induced drag tends to be greater at lower speeds because a high angle of attack is required to maintain lift, creating more drag. However, as speed increases the induced drag becomes much less, but parasitic drag increases because the air is flowing faster around protruding objects increasing friction.

Most bombers are victims of large induced drag, because they are designed to be "heavy" and often fly at relatively low speed which makes requirement for greater angle of attack to get enough lift. Fast fighters have more problems with parasite drag than with induced one as at high speeds induced drag makes only small part of total drag. The other thing is climbing: larger mass isn't good for it.

I've been watching these discussions for years now, they are for the most part pointless, especially considering the aged nature of IL2. As for IL2 not being worth $20, that's just plain foolishness. I know IL2 is not perfect, but the amount of bitching people do is just insane. And as for even bothering to convince people who obviously know EVERYTHING, that they just need to accept that they don't: that is a waste of time too. Drafting this post was a waste of time too, but as I've already lost that few minutes of my life I might as well hit send.

ABSOLUTELY... I've always maintained.. that charts are more accurate than RL (and SIM) flying. :cool:







:mrgreen:

Yezzzir Ur english sucks and so does ur manners - the latter being the worst! Ur english being bad is ok and well accepted in here and which U don't have to apologize for - most of us doesn't master the english language.
But Ur anger and lack of selfcontrol that shines through this thread is an interely another matter.
Behave, be disciplined and use some selfcontrol when arguing and pointing out a reasonable problem, otherwise Ur thread will be ignored and fade away unnoticed - tackled like an outbreak of childish anger/wrath...


DK-nme

Ur?

try:

1) your

2) you're (you are)

Well YES I know that, and geez, I was just tring to use normal on-line language!!!
U, Ur and U're - YOU get the point!


DK-nme

Sturm's english is better than my anything else!

When I went to France all I had to do was try to speak in french and the locals were so horrified at what I was doing to their language that they replied in english and asked me not to speak french again!