Insult.

[FOZ_1983]

Originally Posted by nudger1964

but fill me in here then...im no expert on spit verses hurricane...but even i know the hurricane got far more kills that the spitfire in the Battle of britain. ~But, i was under the impression that the hurricane was primarily used to attack bombers, and the spitfire went for the fighters. is that not true? therefore, how would a hurricane fair against a 109 relative to a spitfire?
the only thing ive heard in favour of the hurricane over the spitfire, from veterans, was visabilty for landing, and its abiliity to take damage.

What i remember hearing, again from spitfire veterans, was that the spit was the better aircraft in a dog fight if the pilot was experiance enough to recognise what the aircraft was "saying" to him. that allowed the pilot to push a turn harder and to the absolute limit...knowing that he could read the vibration warnings of imminent stalls, which apparently the 109 just didnt have.

The idea was for the hurricanes to attack bombers, but with all the choas that ensues in air combat it was every man for himself. hurricanes and spitfires were shooting anything and everything. The hurricane did alot better against the 109E than many people give it credit for. To cut a long story short... it could dogfight with a 109E during the battle of britain with relative ease. BUT... this wasnt because the 109 was bad, but because it had to protect bombers and stay close by.

The hurricane was liked by pilots because it was a far more stable gun platform than the spitfire due it its thicker wing and the guns being closer together and not spread oout throughout the wing. Also because it as you say could take a lot of battle damage. But also because it was very forgiving to rookie pilots. Due to the wider landing gear it was much easier to land than the spitfire.

All in all in many people eyes, in 1940 the hurricane was just as good as the spitfire at taking down bombers and fighting with the 109E.

Following the battle of britain, it didnt fair as well in a dogfight but did an outstanding job in other roles such as anti tank duties and night intruder

[nudger1964]

so do the stats reflect that?....must say i thought that the spitfire did get a much higher proportion of fighter kills relative to their numbers....but i could easily be wrong. the stats will tell the story im sure

and the 109s styaing close to bombers...that wasnt the case earlier on in the battle though was it? And yes, i did get that mainly from the movie (battle of britain)...but i do hear that 95% of the movie can be taken as historical record. and its a great movie to boot

[trk29]

If you read the manual that came with the game alot of the devs that worked on the original and 1946 are mentioned in the manual, including Oleg.

[King Jareth]

Originally Posted by trk29

If you read the manual that came with the game alot of the devs that worked on the original and 1946 are mentioned in the manual, including Oleg.

but isn't that because the original IL2 team made the source code so they should rightfully be listed in the credits?

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

We are not busy with Birds of Prey project. It is third party project under control of 1C. We just gave them full source code and did neccessary consultations.

Oleg Maddox post here

[Wireflyer]

Good morning !

It´s true and to my view a flaw of this game that part of the aircraft performance is not displayed correctly.Let´s say climb/turn performance Bf109 vs Spitfire, Turn/Stall characteristics P-51, Me 262 etc. Still I don´t mind and enjoy the game and I am confident the DEV´s they will take care of it.Still I wonder at some point who was the technical advisor, if at all, to this game or if his advise was sacrificed for the gameplay.

As mentioned before by others, part of the success of the Me 109 was the long term experience many ace pilots had with the plane also in combat during the Spanish civil war, honing their skills and tactics. Even the plane might have been superior in some fields over the Spitfire and Hurricane it was mostly up to the pilots experience to win or loose the dogfight. By the time of the Battle of Britain some pilots had already seen combat with the 109 over Spain, Poland and France.

To my view the Hurricane is also underrated vs. the 109. Actually the 109E was quite tricky to fly in low speed maneuvers, because of the spring loaded slats that could extend unevenly and cause a sudden snap roll or at least to loose a good position for a shot while turning with the Hurricane.Just a look at the wing will tell you that for tight low speed turns the Hurricane was much more forgiving, especially for a less experienced pilot.

Internal papers of the Luftwaffe of those days, rating aircraft performance against each other, saw even the Me 110 ahead in performance (also turning !) which was quickly revised during the Battle of Britain, telling pilots not to get into a turning fight with Hurricanes. Just dive for the deck and run....


Greets

Wireflyer

(180h PA-28,350h F-33, 120h PA-42,2600h A319,320,321, 1800h A333-A346 and counting...)