Plane Ratings
 

I know it would take a LOT of time and effort for someone to do - but it would be great if someone posted up a list of all the planes and their strengths/weaknesses or pros/cons.

This would be a great help to those of us who have no idea what the differences are between planes. I know playing through the single player campaign will give you some idea, but not much.

I love this game and will be spending a lot of time with it - however, i couldn't tell ye (for example) if the spitfire is better/worse than the ju-87 (which is faster? which has a better turning radius? better weapons? etc...)

Thanks peeps! :grin:

The Spitfire is superior in every regard except bombing for obvious reasons. It's faster, accelerates better, turns tighter and has better guns. The JU-87 needed fighter escorts to be kept alive.

But a comparison between all the planes would be great for sure!

Thanks lecter, but that was only an example i was giving. I have little to no knowledge of ww2 planes - so a guide/comparison of each of the planes would be a god-send!!

(thanks though!) ;)

Given the popularity of WWII sims on PC I'm sure someone could google up a list of "vital statistics" (but not me I'm at work and shouldnt even be on here....).

bump

(i won't rest till someone does this!)

Probably easiest to go here and look up the plane you want to know about:
http://www.spitfireperformance.co.uk/
Be sure to look for the exact version, a Spitfire MkIA is completely different to a MkIX for instance. Combat reports are also interesting to read as they compare to the nearest competitor. Reading the Tempest V trials report against a P51B shows exactly why your question is so hard to answer.

What your asking is hard to quantify easily as an early war plane, even a good one is massivly eclipsed by later war planes or top speed, top turning circle, roll rates, ROC etc are all subject to altitude or speed.

Almost all the Spits were actually quite slow (at all heights as well) compared with what they fought and quite poor accelerators. The P51D and the 190's have much better acceleration and top speed at all heights.

You'd probably be also shocked that the main ground attack aircraft used by the RAF in 1944/45 was the Spitfire IX. ;)

Slower and worse accelerating than a JU-87? I only referred to this comparison and I know that the Spit is not really fast.

I'm not shocked at all, and you will agree that a JU-87 is a better bomber than a Spitfire ;)

I know i'm asking a lot for someone to type up a full guide to the planes - but something like this (in the game) would have worked well;

Acceleration: ***
Top Speed: ****
Turning: **
Weapons: *****

Ye get the idea!

Not true. Take a typical late model merlin Spitfire such as the MkVIII or MkIX and you will find it is roughly as fast as a Fw190A5 at all altitudes, though around 25-30mph slower than a P51D at any altitude. However acceleration is better than either fighter, considerably so in the case of the P51D, and a VIII or IX will outclimb a P51D by more than 1000ft per min starting at sea level, and can maintain this kind of advantage up to around 20,000ft, where the climb rates start to become more even and the Spitfire only has a 500ft per min advantage. The Spit can outclimb a Fw190A5 by about 500ft per min at sea level and once over 20,000ft the gap just gets bigger. Compared to a Fw190D9 the Spit will have a similar climb rate and acceleration advantage as over the Fw190A5 but without the D9 falling away so much in climb rate above 20,000ft, and the D9 will be around 30mph faster low down, this advantage dropping to around 15mph at 20,000ft.
This was not because the Spitfire was considered a poor fighter at this point but because the Spitfire lacked the range to be a long range escort, an given its good performance low down and availability in numbers this was the obvious choice for the ground attack/low level intruder role.