Aircraft Performance

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by usagold2004

I recently did some testing of some IL2 aircraft and thought I'd post it for others and see if anyone else had data to share...

I did level flight tests at maximum continuous power with boost that would not over heat the engine. I did a pull to the vertical (80-90 degrees) for a zoom climb to stall. Airspeeds are Indicated Airspeeds, not True Airspeeds.

Level @ 20k - Zoom Climb
Bf 109 G10 265 mph - to 25k
FW 190 A8 250 mph - to 24k
P 51 D 270 mph - to 25k
Spit 9e 250 mph - to 24k
La 7 3B20 285 mph - to 25k+

they all seemed to be relatively close to data I could find on the internet (wiki) except the La7 which seemed to be significantly too high.

**I just recently found this site with real test data http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
*** here is a site if you are interested in how to calculate TAS and other stuff http://www.scenery.org/faq_aviation.htm

Nothing new. The LA7 has always been known to perform better than it does in real life. Ask your self this question. What country produces the LA7 and what country was this flight sim developed in?

If you go looking hard enough you will find out there are many many flaws with several of the airplanes.

It's been ignored for years.

[SturmKreator]

totally agreed

[KG26_Alpha]

Ah memories of the IL23M dogfighting at 4000m with Bf109's............ that did get corrected though !!!

[MOH_Hirth]

Months ago I did a Fly with FW A-9 and TA152-C at 6000m, in stable fly, MW50 on, the result:
In game FW190A-9 is faster than TA152-C (stable fly), TA's engine looks need more power, i dont remenber now the velocity, but you can check this! In RL TA-152C was more faster than FW A-9, be shure!

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

Nothing new. The LA7 has always been known to perform better than it does in real life. Ask your self this question. What country produces the LA7 and what country was this flight sim developed in?

If you go looking hard enough you will find out there are many many flaws with several of the airplanes.

It's been ignored for years.

One example doesn't really prove anything. How about how the Yak-1 has waaay more torque than pretty much any other single engine fighter (except the IAR-80/81). Or that the Yak-9UT has the wrong 20mm cannons and is slightly robbed of its firepower? Or that the La-5FN seemingly cannot achieve full elevator deflection while the La-5 and La-5F can?

La-7 is somewhat overmodeled but depending on the test data used its not as much as some might think and there is certainly plenty of Russian types that have modeling problems that are in no way optimistic.

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by IceFire

One example doesn't really prove anything. How about how the Yak-1 has waaay more torque than pretty much any other single engine fighter (except the IAR-80/81). Or that the Yak-9UT has the wrong 20mm cannons and is slightly robbed of its firepower? Or that the La-5FN seemingly cannot achieve full elevator deflection while the La-5 and La-5F can?

La-7 is somewhat overmodeled but depending on the test data used its not as much as some might think and there is certainly plenty of Russian types that have modeling problems that are in no way optimistic.

This is a can of worms... But I can't resist making some comments... Same can be said about the cement elevators on the 109 series. Generally speaking some worse than others the G2 being the least.

Don't get me started on the UFO LA5FN which is one of the best Midwar Planes if not the best in the entire game.

20mm in the game favor the Allied planes. The only reason why the 20 seems more effective on the German planes is FWs are shooting 4 of them at you.

Check out the P-38 which suffers from compression WAY too early and it suffers it at LOW Alt which it didn't have that problem.

The F6F is underpowered.

The P47 can run WEP the entire time at high Alt and never overheat.

The P51 suffers from wingshedding which was a problem in the early part of the war and was corrected.

The list goes on and on. It's not going to get fixed so I say get over it and move foward.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

This is a can of worms... But I can't resist making some comments... Same can be said about the cement elevators on the 109 series. Generally speaking some worse than others the G2 being the least.

Don't get me started on the UFO LA5FN which is one of the best Midwar Planes if not the best in the entire game.

20mm in the game favor the Allied planes. The only reason why the 20 seems more effective on the German planes is FWs are shooting 4 of them at you.

Check out the P-38 which suffers from compression WAY too early and it suffers it at LOW Alt which it didn't have that problem.

The F6F is underpowered.

The P47 can run WEP the entire time at high Alt and never overheat.

The P51 suffers from wingshedding which was a problem in the early part of the war and was corrected.

The list goes on and on. It's not going to get fixed so I say get over it and move foward.

You've sort of made my point for me actually

The point is that some planes have problems and that means sometimes those problems are in the negative and sometimes they are in the positive. Completely irregardless of nationality of manufacture. We already know that the some of the Russians think Oleg sold them out by making their planes worse than they think they are supposed to be and the same seems to be true for pretty much everyone else.

I'm not disagreeing that the La-5FN/La-7 series has some modeling aspects that put them above and beyond what test data I've seen available. I've tested it. I know they are. But there are plenty of types throughout the game that have problems both positive and negative.

Now I will put the can of worms back in the cupboard.