Sorry for attributing that to you!

I'm not 100% convinced on the reference to "huge" damage. but I do think the damage decals can be confusing though.

That's a great idea, Evangelus. I recuse myself since no one would believe me to be impartial, and also because I have very little stick time in the 109 to do it justice.

I myself am doubtful as to the accuracy of the RAE's findings with the 109. No slight to the RAE intended, but they were using a captured 109 without benefit of factory techs (AFAIK), specialized factory tools, etc. The statement that the Spitfire easily matched the 109 in a dive raised my eyebrows -- was this indeed a 109 in as-new shape in proper tune and fitting?

I'd be very interested to hear the findings and impressions of all flyers concerned.

I think you and Talisman may be on to something. In flight I've sometimes noticed I wasn't getting full deflection of my ailerons (Spitfires, Hurricanes), but figured that was due to, what? Airstream pressure? On the ground I always had full deflection of all control surfaces, so I never gave it much thought. I never did any altitude/airspeed checks on control surface effect. It may be hardware-related or another bug come to light.

Well, many of us have had over a year "to train [ourselves] on being successful", then with the latest patch we suddenly have the enhanced opportunity to become even MORE "successful" -- with the RAF fighter FM's getting further nerfed. :rolleyes:

As many Blue 109 pilots say: "It's the pilot, not the plane." Well, until the pre-patch Spitfire IIa's were rolled out. Suddenly those Blue pilots weren't saying that anymore! LOL

None of the fighters, LW or RAF, have accurate flight modelling at present. The two that actually came closest, the pre-patch Spitfire IIa and Hurricane Rotol, were penalized because of their relative performance at the time to the 109's inaccurate FM. Go figure: a "coding optimization" patch also managed to slip in FM changes detrimental to the RAF fighters.

No recognition by 1C was given to the 12 lbs boost/100 octane issue with the Spit Ia and Hurri Rotol. It's a shame. The Blue pilots are being denied the "opportunity to be more successful" and are saddled with B&Z impunity over RAF fighters. :rolleyes:

Please NO... those RAE tests are useless since in both the planes there were RAE pilots. We don't know the experience and skill of both nor we know how the fight started (engagement).

We should really limit our knowledge to absolute facts (speed, climb rate ect taking note about the test machine's condition) leaving out all the relative facts (X turn better than Y...) who depends mainly on the pilots.

It isn't. But the people who post reams of 'data' receive a level of support from the members, both on the forum and on the bugtracker.

Great. Unfortunately, no other aircraft has been adjusted to perform more true to life over this altitude, so the Ia is the only a/c worth flying up there. Add to this the ridiculous altitude limit imposed by the 'broken game' as you put it, why should we be smug whilst we're flying around up there between 18and 22,000ft on our own in our Spit Ia, up where no Blue chaps will go?

Don't get me wrong, I agree with me ole mate Snapper on most points he's raised.

Oh and here's a Google translate of Luthier's Sukhoi signature;

'Messershmidt all the chief and commander of the Spitfire'

I see no point in continually quoting RL performance figures at this time. The argument just goes around in circles. I think for the moment until the Dev's are ready to implement more complexed flight/damage model keeping teams balanced is important for online play. Online if one plane is far superior then those who prefer to dominate rather than be challenged will forgo alliances and go for the killer plane. When the 109e-4 was arguably the better ac I would fly the 109e-1. When it was the spit-II dominating I would fly the spit-I. If I'm going to win I like it to be on equal terms. I know I'm not alone, many pilots are tired of imbalanced planes.

It is "Chief of all Messerschmitts and Commander of Spitfires".

Blue pilots had the opportunity to learn in 10 years of IL2... flying a truck called Fw190, provided with ridiculous gunsights and gas tanks, against anti-G planes who didn't overheat and could lose oil for more than 10 minute (I'm not talking only about Spitfires, of course... do you know the old P39?)

They had the opportunity to learn teamwork tactics and to be patient, otherwise they would be fresh meat...

Don't worry, one day they will model the 100octane version and I'm sure nobody will say a thing against... provided that it's modelled as a real plane and not as anti-G machine like the Oleg's planes...

Be sure, SpitIIs were/are/will be not a problem until they are not flown in the correct way.

Just for your knowledge the last time I've flown alone in CloD I found myself against a Spit a 5000km over the channel... he tried an headon (a stupid manouvre I say), he made a 180° flat turn while I was trying an Immelmann turn that I failed to complete because on my lack of experience on CloD planes.

So I was in disadvantage and I've started a gentle dive for my territory... the guy followed me gaining as I was keeping my speed very high (probably a SpitII but who cares?)... he followed me over my home base, down at 1km where two other 109s helped me so that I could take him down.

Simply that was a moron.

Now I'm really getting frightened that this uprising for the 100octane Spitfire as priority, historical or not, it's only to kill the enemy without difficulties... since it's easier to stick you nose on someone 6 gaining on him instead of to lose time in learning tactics and teamwork.

I hear your pain.. but there will always be one aircraft which dives faster/ more stable than the others. Which ever this happens to be, that guy will always be able to follow other aircraft down and kill them. (until we get some actual working clouds to hide in)

In my opinion (based mainly on reading pilot's biographies etc) I would think that, generally the German built fighters (109s and 190s) were "better" in the dive than the British variants. And only the P-51 and P-47s were really their equivalent in the dive - as a general rule.