Why I dislike IL-2 games..

[FOZ_1983]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

I can sense a long post from Soviet Ace on its way. lol

Yup! Thats what i'm waiting for haha. He prob started writing the reply hours ago, he's still doing it now.

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

I can sense a long post from Soviet Ace on its way. lol

Originally Posted by FOZ_1983

Yup! Thats what i'm waiting for haha. He prob started writing the reply hours ago, he's still doing it now.

Strong are these two... screw it, I'll just go on my rant now... saves time and stuff.

1. Both the Spitfire and P-51D could be out turned by a La-7. Reason behind that, is because of a little thing called wing loading and roll... that's why Russian planes have the guns in the nose; because when you load up your wings with guns and ammo, you're not going to be able to turn and roll as easy or as fast as a plane without guns and ammo in the wings.

2. The P-51D is only recognized as the WESTERN Power's best WW2 fighter, while the Yak-3 is recognized as Russia (Eastern) Power's best WW2 fighter. And like Winy said, German, Romanian, Hungarian, etc. pilots were told not to do combat against Yak-3s any lower than 5,000 feet or they'd be chewed up and spit out... which was said because of a little air battle that took place between 9 Yak-3s and 60 German planes (including some Ju-87s.) The ensuing fight ended up with only one Yak-3 being forced down because of engine problems, and twenty+ confirmed and more probables of German 109s, 190s, and all Ju-87s being downed. (You won't find any sort of situation like that on the Western Front.)

3. Considering that La's and Yak's were made out of light materials, and had somewhat loose fittings (for flexibility and stress factors) they could take more Gs at lower altitudes (which they're made to dogfight under, unlike the high altitude P-51, and medium-high altitude Spitfire.)

4. I'm not sure what you're settings are at, but unless it's something like Arcade, I'm not sure how you could be out turned by an Il-4 that would have to stall out and drop out of the sky, by doing too tight of a turn or doing combat with a fighter at all.

5. Russian planes are FAR superior, than any German, British, American, or Italian fighter planes at low altitudes. The Japanese, are the closest country during WW2 to get near how well the Russian planes were at maneuvering. And even by just looking at some of their planes, a Japanese Zero A6M2-21 or A6M3 could easily combat a Yak-3 in combat and probably take it out without much problem... except for the larger wings, those'd probably give the Zero some trouble... not much though.

6. HI GUYS!!!!

EDIT: Also, play some '46. The planes on there are highly accurate, and I've played countless times against Japanese planes in Russian planes. I usually break 50/50, so that should tell you something about Japanese planes, while other nation planes, I usually clobber them.

[FOZ_1983]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

Strong are these two... screw it, I'll just go on my rant now... saves time and stuff.

1. Both the Spitfire and P-51D could be out turned by a La-7. Reason behind that, is because of a little thing called wing loading and roll... that's why Russian planes have the guns in the nose; because when you load up your wings with guns and ammo, you're not going to be able to turn and roll as easy or as fast as a plane without guns and ammo in the wings.

2. The P-51D is only recognized as the WESTERN Power's best WW2 fighter, while the Yak-3 is recognized as Russia (Eastern) Power's best WW2 fighter. And like Winy said, German, Romanian, Hungarian, etc. pilots were told not to do combat against Yak-3s any lower than 5,000 feet or they'd be chewed up and spit out... which was said because of a little air battle that took place between 9 Yak-3s and 60 German planes (including some Ju-87s.) The ensuing fight ended up with only one Yak-3 being forced down because of engine problems, and twenty+ confirmed and more probables of German 109s, 190s, and all Ju-87s being downed. (You won't find any sort of situation like that on the Western Front.)

3. Considering that La's and Yak's were made out of light materials, and had somewhat loose fittings (for flexibility and stress factors) they could take more Gs at lower altitudes (which they're made to dogfight under, unlike the high altitude P-51, and medium-high altitude Spitfire.)

4. I'm not sure what you're settings are at, but unless it's something like Arcade, I'm not sure how you could be out turned by an Il-4 that would have to stall out and drop out of the sky, by doing too tight of a turn or doing combat with a fighter at all.

5. Russian planes are FAR superior, than any German, British, American, or Italian fighter planes at low altitudes. The Japanese, are the closest country during WW2 to get near how well the Russian planes were at maneuvering. And even by just looking at some of their planes, a Japanese Zero A6M2-21 or A6M3 could easily combat a Yak-3 in combat and probably take it out without much problem... except for the larger wings, those'd probably give the Zero some trouble... not much though.

6. HI GUYS!!!!

EDIT: Also, play some '46. The planes on there are highly accurate, and I've played countless times against Japanese planes in Russian planes. I usually break 50/50, so that should tell you something about Japanese planes, while other nation planes, I usually clobber them.

And their you have it!!

1 - Agree
2 - Debatable (some argue for the P51 as the greatest fighter, others the Spit)

3 - Agree
4 - Definately agree
5 - Would be a nice fight to see, cant comment though because i have not flown a zero

6 - Alright mate!!

7 - Lagg, Yak, Shitfire, Zero, P-Shitty1, All inferior to the Hurricane.

8 - Maybe 7 is a lie.

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by FOZ_1983

And their you have it!!

1 - Agree
2 - Debatable (some argue for the P51 as the greatest fighter, others the Spit)

3 - Agree
4 - Definately agree
5 - Would be a nice fight to see, cant comment though because i have not flown a zero

6 - Alright mate!!

7 - Lagg, Yak, Shitfire, Zero, P-Shitty1, All inferior to the Hurricane.

8 - Maybe 7 is a lie.

You know, realistically, a Hawker Hurricane Mk II against a LaGG-3 Series 4 or Series 35, probably wouldn't be that bad of a match up. Both have obvious faults, that would be equal to each other, and their HP is about the same, along with some other things by just looking at their stats. So that would make for an interesting dogfight... I'll have to try that on '46 and see how the outcome is.

[FOZ_1983]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

You know, realistically, a Hawker Hurricane Mk II against a LaGG-3 Series 4 or Series 35, probably wouldn't be that bad of a match up. Both have obvious faults, that would be equal to each other, and their HP is about the same, along with some other things by just looking at their stats. So that would make for an interesting dogfight... I'll have to try that on '46 and see how the outcome is.

Would be good one one of those "dogfight" kind of programmes.

Hurricane is a big target (for a fighter) and slower than most. But packs a punch, has a good turn radius.

LaGG is much the same, just a smaller target!!

Would like to see that fight!!

I think number 5. Just about explains it all, AT LOW ALTITUDE, I have never seen any dogfights on IL-2 that take place at about more that 5000ft. But why is also the Spitfire so Spinny? Maybe the Western planes are not as good but they certainly knocked down their performance a bit, I have the same problem with 1946, Get the flight 1 P-51 for FSX (Thats how a pony Handles!) Then fly the one on 46'.
Until you do that you will not see I am getting at, and don't call the Flight 1 addons Innacurate, they had access to two Real FLYING P-51's, that I had the fortune to sit in...
Regards,

Jack

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by Jack Morris

I think number 5. Just about explains it all, AT LOW ALTITUDE, I have never seen any dogfights on IL-2 that take place at about more that 5000ft. But why is also the Spitfire so Spinny? Maybe the Western planes are not as good but they certainly knocked down their performance a bit, I have the same problem with 1946, Get the flight 1 P-51 for FSX (Thats how a pony Handles!) Then fly the one on 46'.
Until you do that you will not see I am getting at, and don't call the Flight 1 addons Innacurate, they had access to two Real FLYING P-51's, that I had the fortune to sit in...
Regards,

Jack

It's already known that in BoP, the P-51s and other planes are screwed up, but it seems you're following more of the legend and myth of the P-51 than actual statistics. In reality, the P-51 was not a low altitude fighter, and wasn't all the hype that it's given like on the History Channel and in books. If you fly it at high altitudes in 1946, you'll see that it handles like a gem and terrible slug at lower altitudes. I've never had any problems with '46 and the P-51s capabilities at high altitudes.

In the past, when I've played online, the people do seem to know at what altitudes their planes fly; and if they don't they get chewed up by everyone else. Specially since on '46, you do realize how bad your plane handles at the wrong altitudes.

And if you really have a problem with Russian planes, you should just do like you're supposed to do in a P-51, and that is to boom and zoom. Hit and Run tactics, are what make up the P-51s high kill rate. Turning and Burning, are what make up Russian tactics and fighters.

And for the matter of sitting in planes. I've had the honor at the last Planes of Fame Air Show to sit in both a P-47D, P-51D, Yak-3 (which was AWESOME!) and plenty of other planes. So it's not a matter of sitting in a plane, to suddenly understand how it handles. You have to read deep into the planes.

[David603]

Originally Posted by Jack Morris

I think number 5. Just about explains it all, AT LOW ALTITUDE, I have never seen any dogfights on IL-2 that take place at about more that 5000ft. But why is also the Spitfire so Spinny? Maybe the Western planes are not as good but they certainly knocked down their performance a bit, I have the same problem with 1946, Get the flight 1 P-51 for FSX (Thats how a pony Handles!) Then fly the one on 46'.
Until you do that you will not see I am getting at, and don't call the Flight 1 addons Innacurate, they had access to two Real FLYING P-51's, that I had the fortune to sit in...
Regards,

Jack

I'm not sure how accurate Flight 1 P51 is (not into FSX), but its worth pointing out that taking flight characteristics from real P51's flying today can be rather misleading.

Almost all are substantially lighter than a WWII spec P51, which is a natural result of taking out the guns, armour, unwanted fuel tanks, and bulky WWII spec radio equipment. A number don't even have the original Packard Merlin engines, being fitted with the lighter Allison V-1720.

Several WWII test pilots noted that the P51 lost most of its original pleasant flying characteristics when the change was made from the lighter Allison engined P51A to the heavier Merlin engined P51B-D, so it follows that if you remove this added weight then you will get a plane with much improved handling.

That said, I am not defending how the P51D in Birds of Prey flies, because by the devs own admission they made a mistake with the fuel loads for the P51D when the game first came out, although this was fixed for the PS3 version with a patch.