Detailed BOP test data for 20 BOP aircraft available here!

[Widar]

Originally Posted by fuzzychickens

I've already done testing. The difference is huge and it's the difference between getting on the enemy 6 quickly and winning and getting shot down yourself.

Try la7 against 109 - with 109 sens at 10/20 and La7 at 10/20.

Now do the same with La7 and 109 at max sensitivity. The la7 now has a HUGE turn advantage.

This is a fact in this game. You can't compare performance with sensitivity cranked down.

The la7 is a monster turning beast from hell and testing it at reduced sensitivty might as well be testing it at forced reduced performance. Also, at 20/20, the La7 is EASY to fly without stalling in simulator. So it matters big time and certainly worth the risk to turn at max rate in a turn fight.

And yes, A one second turn time difference is HUGE. If you've played IL2 on the PC online and mixed it up in some turn fights - you'd realize that quickly.

I really don't see the point you are trying to make. The La-7 has a 7 second 360 degree turn advantage at 6000 meters over the Me 109 K-4 at 10/20 based on my best test result. I guess you think that this is not huge. In fact, the La-7 seems to the best aircraft overall of the 20 BOP aircraft that I tested.

The best fighter pilots in history avoided turning battles like the devil avoids holy water. The Fw 190 in real life was better maneuverable in all areas but the horizontal turn against the Spitfire and yet it had a 4 to 1 victory ratio against these fighters in the first year that it was introduced even while being outnumbered 10 to 1 on the Channel coast. Like one Spitfire pilot remarked: turning does not win battles.

What was tested is the performance of BOP aircraft under same circumstances with no risk of sudden stall+spin, and like I noted earlier any advantage that is there at 10/20 will also be there at 20/20.

For argument's sake suppose the La-7 is 1.2 seconds faster when "Joe Above Average" makes a 360 degree turn at 20/20 at 6000 m, and the Me 109 K-4 is also 0.9 seconds faster when this same "Joe Above Average" makes the same turn at 20/20. The end result is then still more or less the same as at 10/20 for aircraft test comparison purposes. The big difference however is that "Joe Average" cannot fly at 20/20 in simulator mode and will have to use 10/20 to 17/20 depending on the aircraft flown. In any event, the worst performing aircraft in BOP at 20/20 will not be able to outperform the best performing aircraft in BOP at 10/20 of 17/20. Proportionally the difference is not that great when testing all aircraft at 10/20 or 20/20, if it exists at all.

The really skilled virtual pilots will not get into a horizontal turning fight as it is, and against "Joe Average" it does not matter in any case since you will be able to get on their six in any event, if you are a skilled virtual pilot.

So to sum it up, this discussion is dangerously moving into the direction of a "I want to have the last word" argumentation which is really pointless.

So instead let me say that I look forward to your comparative detailed 20/20 BOP test results, since I disagree with your statement and will leave it at that. If you want to make a 20/20 test report for 20 aircraft: I certainly am not stopping you, more power to you!

[MorgothNL]

Originally Posted by Widar

The big difference however is that "Joe Average" cannot fly at 20/20 in simulator mode and will have to use 10/20 to 17/20 depending on the aircraft flown. In any event, the worst performing aircraft in BOP at 20/20 will not be able to outperform the best performing aircraft in BOP at 10/20 of 17/20. Proportionally the difference is not that great when testing all aircraft at 10/20 or 20/20, if it exists at all.

The really skilled virtual pilots will not get into a horizontal turning fight as it is, and against "Joe Average" it does not matter in any case since you will be able to get on their six in any event, if you are a skilled virtual pilot.

So to sum it up, this discussion is dangerously moving into the direction of a "I want to have the last word" argumentation which is really pointless.

So instead let me say that I look forward to your comparative detailed 20/20 BOP test results, since I disagree with your statement and will leave it at that. If you want to make a 20/20 test report for 20 aircraft: I certainly am not stopping you, more power to you!

The point is not to put the sensitivity at 20/20 per se.
You say the 10/20 for all, makes it equal. But it is not, you give the more instable planes an advantage, wich you WILL notice in game, meaning life or death.

What I would suggest, is to take a plane, make 4 or 5 360 degree turns, and put the sensitivity there, where the plane will just not stall.
This means 12/20 for a hurricane, and 17/20 for a la-7. Now, you HAVE 'equal' situations, and because both planes will handle just as stable, because you tuned the sensitivity for those planes, and no others, 'joe average' will be able to fly the la with 17/20, just as well as with 10/20. But now he makes the turn way faster.

Do you get my/our point?
in short: it is not about MAX sensitivity, it is about the best sensitivity for every plane seperate. 10/20 will be good for a hurricane, but will limit the la

EDIT: plz dont read this as a bitching post, im just trying to make you realise, the sensitivity does really matter, and 10/20 for each test, is not fair for many planes.
earlier this day, I was flying my spit, and got shot down 3 times in a row by a la-7. I could just not outfly him, were i normally can. Then I realised my sensitivity was not set for the spit, I put it just 1 notch up, and it made all the difference. like I said, sensitivity can mean life of death

PS.you are dutch, arent you?

[Widar]

Originally Posted by MorgothNL

The point is not to put the sensitivity at 20/20 per se.
You say the 10/20 for all, makes it equal. But it is not, you give the more instable planes an advantage, wich you WILL notice in game, meaning life or death.

First of all, thanks for the reply. It seems however that my previous remarks have not all hit home. I will expand on them.

The least stable BOP aircraft of the 20 that were tested, meaning the ones that were most prone to sudden violent stalls+spins, were the Fw 190´s and the P51´s. These BOP aircraft are also the worst overall performers in the test. So there is no advantage at all there at 10/20 for the Fw 190´s and P51´s, as you are suggesting in your post, based on my test results, quite the contrary. The BOP La-7, La-5FN and the Spitfires were the best overall BOP performers in the test and in that order at 10/20 and will also be so at 20/20. The BOP Fw 190´s and P51´s are very difficult - if not impossible - to control for an average virtual pilot at 20/20 or even 15/20. The BOP La-7, La-5FN and Spitfires however can probably be flown by just about every average virtual pilot at 15/20. So I have to disagree with the point you want to make based on the test results.

Originally Posted by MorgothNL

What I would suggest, is to take a plane, make 4 or 5 360 degree turns, and put the sensitivity there, where the plane will just not stall.
This means 12/20 for a hurricane, and 17/20 for a la-7. Now, you HAVE 'equal' situations, and because both planes will handle just as stable, because you tuned the sensitivity for those planes, and no others, 'joe average' will be able to fly the la with 17/20, just as well as with 10/20. But now he makes the turn way faster.

Do you get my/our point?
in short: it is not about MAX sensitivity, it is about the best sensitivity for every plane seperate. 10/20 will be good for a hurricane, but will limit the la

This again is the Michael Schumacher or more appropriately the Erich Hartmann principle that you bring forward like fuzzychickens did earlier.

I understand the point you are trying to make, but it is like I explained earlier - in my opinion - an invalid one for TESTING in BOP since it is based on something subjective and personal. To make test results comparable you must have objective equal conditions for the BOP aircraft. The objective hard technical aspects of a BOP aircraft are hard data, meaning they are registered by the programmers in the data files for each BOP aircraft.

The objective hard technical aspects are the ones that I wanted to test because these cannot be influenced by virtual pilot skill. The soft subjective aspects - if you will - are virtual pilot skill and this is subjective, vague and personal, there is no clear way to measure it. So therefore I needed to eliminate that from the tests and for this 10/20 was found to be the best setting.

For example, during the online part of the testing a friend of mine started flying the BOP Fw 190 A/F-8 at 20/20 and started stalling+spinning at every manoeuvre. For the tests it was required that he kept flying at 20/20 so he soldiered on dutifully. After a while his good subjective `pilot´s hand´ got the hang of the BOP Fw 190 A/F-8 and he was to turn, roll, climb and dive at 20/20 quite successfully. I was still able to stay on his tail at 17/20 in the same Fw 190 A/F-8 in all test manoeuvres and at various altitudes mind you. For him however 20/20 had become the best setting in the BOP Fw 190 A/F-8, for me it was 17/20. Another friend that was later involved in the testing could just not control the BOP Fw 190 A/F-8 at 20/20 or 17/20 no matter how long that pilot flew the aircraft. This is the Erich Hartmann principle at work if you will.

The `best` sensitivity setting for you will not necessarily be the best sensitivity setting for `Joe Average`. The `best` sensitivity setting for a BOP aircraft is a subjective and personal factor. A friend of mine always flies at 20/20 in every aircraft in simulator mode, but this can hardly be a benchmark for `Joe Average`. You can of course test to find your own personal ´best´ sensitivity setting for each BOP aircraft, the results will be very interesting indeed but they also will be very personal and subjective since they depend greatly on your particular virtual pilot skill level and the controller used. The object of my test however, are the BOP hard data technical aircraft aspects and not the subjective virtual pilot skill. And since testing has revealed that any BOP flight advantage that is there at 10/20 will also be there at 20/20, and generally proportionally about the same at that, the end result of the subjective test that you describe will never alter the fact that the worst performing aircraft in BOP will proportionally do just as bad at 20/20 as at 10/20.

At 10/20 `Joe Average` can roll and turn the BOP Fw 190 and P51 - the worst piston engine performers tested in BOP - with maximum flight stick pressure applied during manoeuvres without the danger of suddenly stalling+spinning and that at least is an objective benchmark for testing the hard technical aspects of BOP aircraft performance and at the same time eliminates the subjective virtual pilot skill factor in testing. It is not the final word in testing though nor is it meant to be, to be sure.

I hope that this will put the Erich Hartmann principle discussion to rest.

Originally Posted by MorgothNL

EDIT: plz dont read this as a bitching post, im just trying to make you realise, the sensitivity does really matter, and 10/20 for each test, is not fair for many planes.
earlier this day, I was flying my spit, and got shot down 3 times in a row by a la-7. I could just not outfly him, were i normally can. Then I realised my sensitivity was not set for the spit, I put it just 1 notch up, and it made all the difference. like I said, sensitivity can mean life of death

No offense taken. As I said in my previous posts, different sensitivity settings can make a difference of give-or-take a second with some of the BOP aircraft that I tested online with friends. But based on this same testing the best performing BOP aircraft do both better at 10/20 and at 20/20, and generally proportionally the same at that. The example you give actually underlines this when combined with the Erich Hartmann principle.

In my tests the BOP La-7 best 360 degree turn at 6000 meters was done in 21.64 seconds (that was best of three by the way and the worst turn was about 1 second slower) and the BOP Spitfire Mk. XVI made the same turn (best of three) at 20.65 seconds. That is a difference of just 1 second.

In your example you were flying against – at an unknown altitude and speed - a BOP La-7 virtual pilot at unknown La-7 sensitivity settings and you then turned your Spitfire (I presume the Mk. XVI) sensitivity settings to maybe 17+/20 and were able to turn with the La-7. This hardly qualifies as a test example since the exact test circumstances are not known and subjective virtual pilot skill (the Erich Hartmann principle) is hard at work also in your case.

The BOP La-7 at 20/20 will however outturn all BOP Spitfires at 20/20 at low/medium altitudes. So in all probability the La-7 virtual pilot you faced had his sensitivity at a lower setting (i.e. 15/20) giving you maybe <= second less in a turn with your Spitfire which - combined with the probability that you also are a better virtual pilot (better ´pilot´s hand´) than the La-7 pilot - levels the playing field for you and gives you the ´edge´ you needed to be victorious. I presume you are an ´above average pilot´, since I remember a thread where you are complimented for outfighting your adversaries at three to one odds for something like 8 minutes, which is something that `Joe Average´ is not capable of to be sure.

I have observed a very good virtual pilot in BOP online who is able to outfight just about anybody in a Me 109 G-6, even pilots on my friends list that I know to be really good and hard to beat in a Spitfire Mk. XVI. Look at the test results of the Me 109 G-6 and based on them the Me 109 G-6 pilot´s success cannot be attributed to the BOP Me 109 G-6 flying qualities which are really quite inferior to the BOP Spitfire Mk. XVI´s that the virtual Me 109 G-6 pilot I refer to outfought. Incidentally, I also did online tests with friends at 17/20 with various BOP Spitfires and BOP Me 109´s and the advantages that you will see at 10/20 in the test table are also there proportionally at 17/20.

If you would like to see more tests to find the overall most superior aircraft in BOP of the 20 that I tested, there is really no need for that anymore. Take the La-7 and learn to fly it at 20/20, it is the best mount of the 20 BOP aircraft on the test list. The really good virtual pilots however will pick the worst BOP aircraft on the list, i.e. the Fw 190´s and P51´s, and will be victorious in them online against La-7´s just to show their opponents how good they are.

Originally Posted by MorgothNL

PS.you are dutch, arent you?

Guilty as charged.

[fuzzychickens]

"What was tested is the performance of BOP aircraft under same circumstances with no risk of sudden stall+spin, and like I noted earlier any advantage that is there at 10/20 will also be there at 20/20."

Any advantage there at 10/20 may be not as great, the same, or more at 20/20. This is all I'm saying. It's basically the same reason the other poster suggested sensitivity settings adjusted for each plane to the point before it stalls so the best corner speed for all planes can be reached - I doubt best corner speed is reached for a lot of planes at 10/20 (La7 certainly not).

But you are not interested in max turn rates based on how you set up the tests, so for your purposes it may not matter anyway.

Really it's a difference in the data that we find important. It's your test, so I'm not complaining - just offering a different point of view.

[imnotgeoff]

wow that must of taken quite a while to do

[Widar]

Originally Posted by fuzzychickens

Any advantage there at 10/20 may be not as great, the same, or more at 20/20. This is all I'm saying.

Thanks for the response. I still look forward to your 20/20 test results! Like I said earlier, according to the tests I conducted, proportionally the difference at 10/20 will be about the same - more or less - at 20/20. In some cases more, in some cases less, and also dependant on virtual pilot skill at 20/20. But the worst performers at 10/20 will remain the worst performers at any setting.

There are many more things I can think of that can be tested, like turn, roll, climb and dive rate at different altitudes for instance and at different asynchronous elevator/aileron sensitivity settings, angles, rudder applied, flap settings etc. For instance a Spitfire pilot in real life was told to generally avoid fighting a Fw 190 below 3000 ft., since the Fw 190 has a really great manoeuvrability advantage at that altitude according to WWII RAF RAE tests with captured Fw 190´s. When I tested this I found that this is not evident in BOP. That is also one of the reasons that the overall turn and roll manoeuvrability for the 20 BOP aircraft on the test list was only tested at just one certain altitude. Draw your own conclusions from the Fw 190 example and think of the time required to also do all those other type of tests I described and then registering the test results, and think if it is going to tell you anything substantially more or different than the test results that are there now.

If you want to know which BOP aircraft of the 20 that I tested has the tightest horizontal turning circle in seconds in BOP at 20/20 at low/medium altitude that is easy, it is the La-7. There is really no reason for more tests to confirm this and to know how many seconds or tens of seconds precisely you can win by flying at 20/20 as compared to 10/20 or 17/20. But you are free to carry out your own tests and I look forward to the results. Also include the I-153 and the I-16 in your tests if turning circle in seconds is your main interest.

I respect your comments and opinion, and as far as my test results go, they are there and available for free for all forum members to either use them or don´t use them.

Interesting questions that remain are: where are the flight characteristic test results of all BOP aircraft that were registered by the professional testers that were employed by the developer/publisher? Where are the official Gaijin BOP in-game simulator mode aircraft statistics?