thanks for putting that one to bed.

Manu, you raise some good points IMHO about the fallibility of the RAE tests -- I forgot to add about the 109 pilot not being an actual LW pilot (and preferably an experten to wring out maximum performance from the captured 109). Obviously it was the best the RAE could provide at the time, but it would've been dangerous for a Spitfire pilot to put his trust in those RAE test results for the reasons we've both noted.

What Evangelus (See) suggests is of value and interest from a subjective viewpoint. It can help point to some glaring issues with both aircraft if all pilots' findings agree. Per your post, any actual changes to FM's of any aircraft should be done scientifically using established data. A good example would be the increasing complaints amongst 109 pilots of the wicked flight departure in an accelerated stall that seems to have cropped up with the latest patch + Hotfix. Is this really so? Certainly organized trials with Red & Blue pilots, all on Teamspeak, could establish this fairly quickly during dogfight scenarios. If all (or most) pilots actually find this to be so, then this would certainly be worth noting on the Bugtracker Report as a high priority item.

(As a Red pilot, I get great satisfaction if a pursuing Blue pilot "collides with terrain" at ground level....call it a "maneuver kill". But I would get no satisfaction if it occurs at, say, 2000 feet. I would much rather try for a guns kill as he recovers from the stall or take that opportunity to escape if I'm damaged or Winchester-ammo.)

So, I'm strongly in favour of one-on-one trials with plane swapping simply to get the subjective viewpoints of the pilots as a matter of interest.

@Manu: Any time I've gone head-to-head with a 109 it's been accidental -- usually not paying attention -- and I've always lost! LOL

The 12 lbs boost/100 octane historically was for emergency use only. If a Spitfire pilot uses it for a prolonged chase over the Channel he's asking for oil on his canopy and the 109 to circle back and demolish his badly-shaking aircraft. It DOES make the Spitfire extremely dangerous to the 109 pilot who gets careless in a boom & zoom attack, but the Spit will be far from invincible. It WILL discourage 109 pilots from loitering over RAF airfields as they will no longer enjoy total impunity from Spits clawing their way upwards to meet their airfield suppression attacks.

Spitfires are SUPPOSED to be frightening to its opponents, just as the 109's are frightening to the Spitfire pilots.

You forget the mighty Tempest! ;-)

But it's not really a issue of who's the faster IMO.

The problem resides in the realizing of your plane performance and the enemy's one, and how to fight because of these. Understanding your chances regarding energy state, relative position and territory over which you're fighting.

If I'm in the slower plane, for example a 190 against a P51, do you really think I'm going to follow the P51 in level flight KNOWING that I can't gain on him? No... first I'll try to not be in energetic disadvantage and if I'm forced to fight in that position then I will not stand on the P51's six for more than 5 seconds, above all if he's pointing at his territory. Of course he will attack me again when I turn away.. as he should.

The famous DnB... the most liked tactic of 190s... an impossible tactic without slower planes flown by guys with target fixation issues.

And if you are afflicted by this terrible curse that's target fixation then why don't you fly with a wingman? (here I'm not referring to you pstyle :-) )

You need only to stay over your home base and every 10 minute you'll see some enemy guy coming to strafe you on the landing strip, coming ALONE... give him a faster plane, nothing will change. Except that he will reach you in 30 seconds but it's enough to be killed by your wingman.

And I can't wait for a so well modelled Spitfire. :-)

I'm only stating that it's not really a priority in the sim IMO.. of course it HAS to be modelled for historical accuracy, but if the number of downed Spits is always upper than the number of lost 109s it's not because RAF misses the 12lbs boost... it's because the wrong tactics.

Don't get me wrong, Spitfires ARE FRIGHTENING (seriously, since my first objective is to avoid my own KIA/MIA) but only IF they are in the correct position and flown by an expert guy.

If I scroll the ingame score table and I read that a pair of the DangerDogz veterans are currently flying on a Spit you can bet I'm really worried about this.

But if I find a lonely spit 2km under my position why should I be worried? Probably only if it was a Oleg's Spit25lbs...

About headons, my squad severely prohibits them... there is actually one pilot who keeps doing them but it's the black sheep of the squad (and it's funny since he's our only real military pilot :-D ).

Anyway inside the message board of 12oclockhigh.net a guy posted this (confirmation needed):

As I said many times.. flying was a matter of bravery... it was a dangerous thing and actually some "pilots" were braver than other "pilots"...

It happens in IL2, ROF or DCS too... I'm afraid of the stall/spin and my squadmate, flying the same plane with the same loadout, can out-turn me.

I don't know for sure if the 1a outperforms the 2a at those altitudes, but it certainly outperforms the 109. I'll perhaps fly a test later tonight.

:lol:

Well, I think it's fair to say many Red pilots would disagree about the wrong tactics getting them shot down. But if you are right, then Red pilots will still get shot down even with their 100 octane/12 lbs boost because of these "wrong tactics". However, the strong opposition to the 12 lb boost would indicate many Blue pilots don't think this at all.

Are Blue pilots afraid of Spitfires getting their precious 12 lbs boost because, on a limited basis, the 109's and Spitfires will now be fighting on a more level playing field? Or is it apples-to-oranges, cannon shells-to-rifle bullets? (oops, poor choice of words, eh? ;) )

Quote:
Originally Posted by snapperpuss
"Please leave Snapper and Dutch alone, they are totally right on this subject.
1c is very biased to blue, let me give you a few examples.

Look at Luthier's sig over at Sukhoi. I mean what more proof do you need.
1c makes it so in the spit I have to fly with open canopy now to take advantage of the sound radar, lucky for us they forgot to decrease the performance with open canopy. Another thing MG did is take away the turning ability of the spit, so now I have to pop flaps. Lucky for us you can do it at any speed with no damage to your plane. One of my biggest gripes is
after a DF in the spit there are these huge holes in my wing, why are they there? My plane flies normal. One last thing if you run out of ammo or lose advantage to a 109 just ram him. The uber 109 with its uber DM will usally explode and give you the kill. Just like Billy Joel said Don't ask me why.

We need 100 octane for all red planes and 20lbs of boost. Bring back pre patch spitII. I need the pre-patch spit II, I don't want to take the time to learn my plane its more fun when I can just jump in a spitII and get easy kills."

Even I had to laugh at this one. :)

(And I realize that whoever posted used the nom-de-plume to avoid a possible infraction -- which I wouldn't want to have happen on my account)

It's easy enough for the moderators to check IP logs and see who the real account holder is.