Simplification must be accepted, but if you talk about drag during climb, you should not mention top speed. Climb happens at much lower speed, and much lower drag (the best climb speed for the I16 is 200 kpm only).
But this is not my main point. Overall, the BF109 was a more modern and effective combat type than the I16, nobody dispute this. More: the 109 still had development potential, while the Polikarpov had reached (and passed) its peak. My point is that numbers on a flight manual are written while testing a plane in ideal conditions, and that the same numbers were seldom if ever reached in operative environment. In my opinion, faster planes suffer more than slower ones. Think at the effect of dirt, mud or light surface damages on a fabric covered biplane compared to the same on a laminar flow Mustang or B24. So, in my opinion, an overall levelling of performances is not that unrealistic. Numbers alone cannot explain how the P39 was outclassed in the Pacific in 1942, and held its own against Luftwaffe in 1945. Or how the P38 fared badly against Luftwaffe and did so well in the Pacific.
In my opinion, the I16 suffered more for Luftwaffe superior tactics in the opening stages of Barbarossa than for superior BF109 performances, and that such tactical situation is very hard to replicate in a game.
|