Why I dislike IL-2 games..

[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.

[SEE]

Soviet Ace, Whats your user name on 1946? I will keep an eye out for you.....

[Balderz002]

I dont want to get burned here, but would I be right in saying one area the Western Allies had an advantage over Russian a/c were the radio comms in the cockpits (early war anyways)?

[bobbysocks]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

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.

in a word..NO! P 51s were not zoom and boomers. they were never designed as such but as long range bomber escorts and down and dirty dogfighters. how do i know this? 2 sources. #1 my father flew one in the war. have the films, have the combat reports, have the stories. none of his 7.5 victories were zoom and boom. #2 this link...all 51 jocks reports..

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...t-reports.html

read through these and tell me how many were Z&B? very, very few. latching onto targets of opportunity...a 190/109 crossing in front of them at the right moment...hell yes. but i would guarantee the same situation was available to russian and LW pilots in the heat of battle. hit and run was used by every country for the initial attack. to ambush...use the element surprise was everyone's tactic....it was after that where the real fighting began. some dove way, some mixed it up. LW pilots adopted this tactic because their main objective was the bombers....fighters werent going to wreak havoc on the motherland...why waste time or risk lives on them?
i will not dispute anything you say about soviet ac but this i will challenge you on and back it up by pilot accounts. the 51 was a mid/high long range altitude bomber escort. but was on par with just about everything at lower levels....again read those reports. the main strategy of LW pilots ( if they didnt bail) was to dive for the deck. a vast number of dogfights ended up well below 5k feet ( actually well below 1k). they might have started at 25 or 30k where the bombers were....but i would say more than half ended up in lower altitudes. the 51 held its own at the lower levels. as for turning....the 51 and all allied pilots knew and were schooled which turn to get the lw ac in. 109s sucked in a left hand turns...probably due to engine torgue, etc. so they tried to coax them into that kind of battle. you will see the term "luftberry"...that is a turning battle where ac are lined up like spokes on a wheel...you will also read where the 51 pilots closed the gap in turning battles with in 1 or 2 cycles. they did this dropping 10 degrees of flaps or slamming the elevator trim wheel to get the edge or flying the ac to the point of a stall. it was stated here where lw pilots were told never to dogfight with yaks below 5k... 'stang pilots were never told not to engage lw ac at any altitude. it was go and get'em... and they did to great success. 51s influence spread across continents as they flew missions from england to land in russia. did any yaks or soviet ac go from the the ussr to england? no, why? the eastern airwar and the western airwar were 2 complete different animals and you can not begin to equate the two. had germany adopted a high altitude ( 25k and above) bomber tactic/strategy russian planes and tactics would have evolved much differently. the ussr was able to use the P 39 to great success where in the western airwar it would have never been a real factor in battle. i will never say the 51 was the best fighter of ww2....i will say for the specific role it played it was. every plane designed had a specific task and arena in which it was intended to compete. its all apple and oranges...the roles of ac...the types of battles...and never shall the twaint meet. nor should they. yaks were yaks and 'stangs were 'stangs and the both did what they were designed to.....

[winny]

I'm not a Russian-o-phile by any means (that's Sov Ace's job!)

My favourite aircraft of that era is the Spit (boring choice I know!)

However I'm happy to accept that the P51-D was the best WWII fighter. The weight of evidence seems to be overwhelming. It was also a very effective fighter bomber in Korea (51-H)

It was half a generation in front of the rest of the WWII aircraft (except at the end when the jets arrived) and it showed.

Will someone hurry up and invent time travel so we can go and get the aces and thier mounts and settle this once and for all!

[olife]

hello

i play il2 since it came out and during a long time i think the russians planes of il 2 game were outclassed but now i think it is not exactly right...
i go in my ww2 planes books and i read the la and yak series are very manoeuvrable and can outturn the best germans planes of the east front
the i 153 (hate by a lot of players,lol!!)can turn a loop in 13 or 15 seconds(the bf109e can do the same in 20 seconds).a finish pilots said the 153 is better than the i 16 in dogfight...the i 153 performances in the game seems to be close to his real performances
and all the russians planes of the game too
the only thing which was outclassed in my opinion is the fire power of the rear guns of a bombers and u can open fire with it in the dead angles!!!!not realistic

i think it is not only a question of planes but also a question of tacticals...to exploit the feeblenesses of the ennemies before the ennemies exploit your feeblenesses...not easy and sure easier to say than to do!!!but good for the fun!!!!

have a nice day
good hunting

[SEE]

I took the P51-D for a quick blast in IL1946 and definitley not my choice for T&B so the fact that it also performs poorly in BOP isn't a great suprise. What it was really like is another matter but I guess we are stuck with flight modelling as dictated by the devs.

[Zeroptimus]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

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.

Soviet Ace, you do know that they've recently started producing Yak-3's with Allison engines for commercial sale, right? You know, just so you know...there's an air museum in Seattle about to purchase one, and I've been contemplating selling any firstborns I have for one.