Spit IIa

[jojovtx]

Originally Posted by Whiski

Read my post again, fact is what I am looking for, various websites giving specs to compare in game performance to either prove or disprove its current modeled state. But thanks for your input.

Whiskey

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi

Simple its not over modelled the other aircraft are under modelled..

There is your answer. Move on to new ground, this horse has suffered enough.

[Whiski]

Originally Posted by jojovtx

There is your answer. Move on to new ground, this horse has suffered enough.

May have been beaten to death but still not proven to be over modeled. Nor have the 109's been proven to be under modeled. Have they been tested using specs gained from a well known sources with results to back either claim?


Whiskey

[310_cibule]

Originally Posted by Whiski

May have been beaten to death but still not proven to be over modeled. Nor have the 109's been proven to be under modeled. Have they been tested using specs gained from a well known sources with results to back either claim?
Whiskey

It was. By the Blues

[Hellbender]

Question that arises in that context for me: Did the historical Spit IIa had a better climbing rate than the 109 E-4 ? Can´t find any proper info on that in wiki. It just says that the IIa had a better climb rate than the Mk I but was it better in the end than the 109 concernign climbing rate ??

[Redroach]

Quite simple: Many, too many people in these forums think of themselves as a unique snowflake and are completely convinced that they have something to contribute or to prove that the rest of the world seems to conspire on to keep it secret. Thus, non-existent issues will be taken up and defended, and promoted, even if contradicted repeatedly - (objective) truth is of no concern to those people.
Its something like an OCD, really.

see also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect

[310_cibule]

Originally Posted by Redroach

Quite simple: Many, too many people in these forums think of themselves as a unique snowflake and are completely convinced that they have something to contribute or to prove that the rest of the world seems to conspire on to keep it secret. Thus, non-existent issues will be taken up and defended, and promoted, even if contradicted repeatedly - (objective) truth is of no concern to those people.
Its something like an OCD, really.

see also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect

Absolutely!

Yesterday on Atag server I had a hurri on my tail which pursued me over the whole channel flying low (so not a hurri with energy advantage). I could not loose it in my 109 even though I was at its ingame max speed of something between 450-460 kph (at least my extensive offline tests yielded this as the implemented max speed for the 109 whatever type). Sorry, but this is definitely not historic right now.

But to my knowledge they will anyhow overhaul the FM completely so we simply have to wait with what they come up with in the future and then see again.

I just want historic performance. Old IL2 was not that bad - at least it got the overall tendencies right.

[Hellbender]

Yeah, I realized that too that the Hurricane Rotol ahs almost the same climbing rate, dive speed and max speed at sea level as the 109. Also I accelerates as fast as the 109 from my observations in the Rotol. However, the turning rate is only slightly better than the 109 meaning that the King of turning is still the spitfire.

[Ze-Jamz]

I think the Hurri and 109 situation makes the problem more noticeable in the FM's wether it be the 109 to slow or the rotol to fast

[ReconNZ]

Originally Posted by Hellbender

Yeah, I realized that too that the Hurricane Rotol ahs almost the same climbing rate, dive speed and max speed at sea level as the 109. Also I accelerates as fast as the 109 from my observations in the Rotol. However, the turning rate is only slightly better than the 109 meaning that the King of turning is still the spitfire.

Sorry lads this is not accurate at all. The 109's (E4 Especially) have a much better climb rate than the rotol in this game, and they are faster at sealevel.

All you Blue drivers didnt evolve the dive and run strategy that you are all so fond of because it didnt work. Oh and lets not forget your cannons.

I fly hurries all the time and the 109 is slightly faster at sea level - just enough so that while you might not loose us completely, you can quite easily draw away out of gun range. It also climbs much better - in a boom and zoom situation the 109 will be able to hold energy and EASILY out climb a hurri everytime.

That may well be historically accurate, so its fine, but it is a little rich when the 109 drivers who are so used to having the advantage and the ability to always run away, then moan like little girls when they come up against a correctly modelled SpitII - which is supposed to be a better aircraft than the 109.

Plus as you would expect a hurri with E can outpace a 109 of course for as long as the E advantage is relevant.

The one good thing though, the current advantage to Blue is forcing us red pilots to evolve better tactics and improve our skill levels. When the devs finally come out and clear up this debate once and for all by stating that the planes are correctly modelled, we will be well placed to make the most our our better aircraft.