109 advice needed (climb)

[jg27_mc]

Originally Posted by Robo.

What has this 1946 whining got to do with CoD? I flew late war 109s A LOT and sometimes Spitfires, too - they both had flaws and problems, but I never felt the Spitfire were favoured in any way as you describe. You say this, a pure Spit pilot will be telling me about the 109 rocket climb, Spit one granade no wing etc etc. No point discussing any of that here.... Cpt. Doggles said it all.

Insuber's observations are spot on and I am really curious what the new patch brings us regarding the FM adjustments.

Whatever... I am ok with your opinions, although I don't agree with them. Every single AC has it's strong and weak aspects, being that said, it was not the issue in my previous post. I am talking of a completely different perspective (more profound if you wish) you either have the ability to understand it or not.

If you like to have a combat simulation with airplanes modeled like an xbox/PS game, please be my guest. If you were unable to understand the importance of my post regarding CloD and the comparative between the Spit and 109. look at the following quotes:

Originally Posted by luthier

...the guys are poring over Spitfire performance data...

Originally Posted by 6S.Manu

...The thing is related to CloD because the FMs seems to be a copy'n'paste of the 1946's one, at least looking at the ingame FM data.

DM and CEM are totally another matter...

I get chills just thinking how the approaches are going to be made, considering the early past... Of course if you think Spitfires were well done in 1946 comparing the complexity present in both fighters (Spit and 109). I completely rest my case.

Regards.

PS: AFAIK most of 109's if not all (regarding the same period) should be able to out climb Spitfires like in RL. In a late war scenario, as modeled in 1946, only the K4 was able to out climb (in certain conditions) the Spitfire... I guess I didn't quite understood that particular point of view, unless you were thinking biased...