fw 190a5 flight model

[Herra Tohtori]

I was flying an A-5 (not the fully rated 1.65 ATA version or whatever) on Spits vs 109's server the other day, and I accelerated away from a Seafire Mk.III that tried to get to my tail... It was mostly level, though initially a very shallow dive.

I'd say that's good enough for me.

[JG27CaptStubing]

There is a lot to read through... Sorry but many have argued the current FWs are starting to match up with real world performance numbers. Who's performance numbers? There is always some sort of axe to grind here and I'm sorry but trying to burn off speed from 500 Kmh to 200 Kmh while landing is a tough task even with gear and flaps down which tells me there is something goofy about the current FM. Of course this is anecdotally speaking but when it walks like a duck and talks like a duck it’s a duck. For whatever reason I can’t seem to pull this off during a fight either.

+1

Originally Posted by Herra Tohtori

Sounds very much like what we have in game.

The main discrepancy would be the climb rate and acceleration differences between Spitfires and FW-190 models. In IL-2, it feels that the Spitfire easily climbs and accelerates better than the FW-190.

Flying Spits vs 109s: I've had Spit IXs situated below me in a FW190 A8 at least a 1000m difference both of us flat out level flight and opposite directions... Pull vertical from below and execute an immelman turn and easily catch me without me manuevering flat out. In fact I couldn't even dive away with the current version of HSFX.


I agree with some of the results in turn testing, she does turn a little better and climb a bit better. Top speed seems to take forever to get to now and you can be hunted down by Spits easily if you aren’t extremely careful. Is this historically correct? Who knows… I will leave that to the guys that want to argue performance charts and which ones are correct. The current FW we have been neutered IMO and It’s true the FW has been one of the most altered FWs in the game

[Janosch]

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

...
...
current version of HSFX

There must something wrong with Spit IX flight models, HSFX itself or both.

[MaxGunz]

There's something wrong if you come to conclusions without so much as a single track file.

[JG27CaptStubing]

Well the Spits seem to be flying as normal and I don't recall seeing that the Spit FM has changed. The FWs have certainly changed and it doesn't take a track to prove that. Just fly it and it becomes very obvious.

I will start to take some tracks of some of my engagments if it will help people see the light.

[JG52Karaya]

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

Well the Spits seem to be flying as normal and I don't recall seeing that the Spit FM has changed. The FWs have certainly changed and it doesn't take a track to prove that. Just fly it and it becomes very obvious.

I will start to take some tracks of some of my engagments if it will help people see the light.

Both TD as well as HSFX have changed the original Oleg FMs for the Spitfire family

[fruitbat]

Spits fm's were changed in 4.10 by TeamD, Fw's in 4.11 by TeamD.

(both for the better imo).

[JG27CaptStubing]

Perhaps I wasn't aware of the change back in 4.10 but since I've been flying UP now for the last couple of years I didn 't notice any changes or at least obvious changes to FMs in HSFX.

Is there any documentation on what specifically was changed? Either way the new FW has been nerfed IMO.

[Gaston]

Originally Posted by MaxGunz

Because it is complete physics-violating BS to say that you can from within the plane press down and make the plane heavier. You are now in the realm of violating the 2nd Law of Motion in Grand Crank Style. The classic non-demo is a 150 lb man pulling his bootstraps with 160 lbs force and expecting to lift himself off the ground.
Pressing down on a block that you are not standing on does not apply to pressing down on a plane by any means within the plane. That does not include changing the controls that affect air flow (external to the plane) which does not change the weight of the plane regardless.


.

You don't seem to show much understanding either: Since the engine is obviously grabbing a huge volume of air (hundreds of tons of curving high-speed air, while itself with a contrarian "inner" passive desire to go straight, I might add), where does your restriction stand that the applied force must come entirely from within the aircraft?

I dare say my analogy of pressing down on a flying block with a lever while standing was more apt...

In your view, the aircraft can operate without an environment... This is what spaceships do... They have space around them: That's why they are called spaceships: And the maneuvers they do do indeed come entirely from within...

But this is not how aircrafts work...

Gaston

[Gaston]

Originally Posted by MaxGunz

Ass-uming the pilot can take any 13 or 14 G's beyond momentarily, less than a second.


.

First of all it is not 13 or 14 Gs, but 6-7 Gs plus 3 "Gs" worth of bending: So 9-10 Gs of structural load at most.

(It would explain some unexpected breakage and, interestingly enough, the failure of the P-51s guns to work properly despite likely ground wing-bending testing...

They never tested those guns in actual turning flight, and, as a result, the P-51's gun jams under G load were always triple that of the P-47: Going from 500 mrbf in early '44, to around 1000 in 1945, while the P-47 went from 1500 in early '44 to 3000 + in 1945... The improvements might have been in part due to lower late-war altitudes for both types)

In any case, those Gs are for the airframe's wing bending value, not Gs that the pilot actually feels, or are you just pretending?

Gaston