I Want my 4.09 Spit FM's back.........

[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by Fenrir

Manu, as a Lufty flyer I respect, can you see the issue here with the ailerons?

It also seems to get worse with the more powerful spits, which is counter intuitive; surely, more power = more torque = LEFT wing drop, not right as with the 4.10 spits.

It's been a long time since those halcyon days on Spits V 109s buddy, I hope you are well.

I'm now a DangerDog, and very well thanks mate. The Black Dragons fell by the wayside after an enforced hiatus, spend most of my time mainly online co-oping with the squad and a very merry, fun loving bunch they are! You still fly Spits V 109s? 4.10 or modded?

this and

Originally Posted by Triggaaar

Why are you laughing, are you not interested in having accurate modelled planes in the game you play? Presumably you're not commenting on the accuracy of the flight model, since you only fly axis planes and wouldn't know much about how the allied planes fly. Those of us that fly both allied and axis planes like them to be as well modelled as is sensible in a game.

this are commendable posts. obvious desire for accuracy borne out of flying both sides.

however this,

Originally Posted by Oktoberfest

The Spit wasn't modelled correctly at all before 4.10m anyway. Magic E-Retention, 90° turns in less than one sec at 500 kph, no overheating, ability to keep dogfighting even if full of lead.... The examples are countless. Now at least, they are more close to real physics.

BTW, I fly the 110 for already 4 years now, neraly exclusively. You sure need a lot of trim to have it fly level, and also to counter the torque of he engines. I got used to that. I think Spitfire pilots will just have to learn that too now.

isn't. i cannot understand folk who fly only one side, or only one plane, and then decide to deride their opponents as either idiots or inferior in skill for their choices. it smacks of the same snobbery and high horsed-ness that some full switch flyers exhibit.
and this hardly gives you a qualified opinion does it?

Originally Posted by 6S.Manu

Look I am one of the guys who don't care if the plane if 5km/h faster than the real plane and so on: I'm perfectly aware that the margin of error of 5% is good enough.

But I'm one of those who likes to review the airplanes flying them in battle environments; I fled Spitfire a lot in training sessions and to balance online missions.
I become a Oleg's Spit-hater because of the great differences between this kind of plane and the other in IL2 (above all his counterparts). The Spitfires were incredible.

Then I think you have to understand if some pilots who really has resigned themself to fly a wierd Fw190 (the "bar" is only the peak of the iceberg in that plane, you'll see) now they find "relaxing" that the plane of their nightmare has been tuned down. After years of "luftwhiners" name calling...

You say that it's easier to survive in a 109 and 190: you're right because people must learn to fly the 109/190 the right way while noobs in the old spitfire model could still score many kills against average pilots and sometimes against veterans too since they don't think about their survival. Infact today I usually don't attack a spitfire at my same altitude. Of course there are exceptions like Fenrir and his teammates and one guy in TD (sorry can't remember the name in this moment) and maybe some others: they used the Spitfire in the way a warbird should be used (!energy fighting!) and could not be killed even if outnumbered.

So IMO this is a great patch since also the average Spitfire pilot has to learn the basics of air fighting.

My squad is used to fly training dogfights at 7km with SpitV vs 109F and the first day using the 4.10 Spitfire all the "Red" pilots were surprised and happy at the same time. The common exlamation was "FINALLY!".

Now I can return to love that plane in IL2 too (but Fenrir is right about those issues).

tbh i'm pretty firmly of the opinion that spitfires may be easy to fly, but they are hard to excel in. i find 190s are far deadlier, either in my hands or in those of my opponent. i find spitfires irritatingly hard to get guns on, but as long as i am not being stupid i don't fear them as much as a 190. i also try not to attack people at my altitude, but that's in any airframe barring possibly a 190, where i can rely on the heavy armament and a reasonable speed/dive advantage. overall... hell i don't know, i'll get used to it! however i would say if you take damage in a spitfire it robs you of it's main, defensive, tool - a stable fast rate turn. a 109 or 190... couldn't turn in the first place, so nose down and flee.

Originally Posted by Oktoberfest

ROFLMAO LOL MDR

At least my plane taught me some skills to defeat better planes. I doubt it happens with the spit.

lol. sure it does, being pinned to the deck by a faster 109 or 190 being flown by someone with two brain cells to rub together. but then that's a lesson in defeating better pilots.

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

This thread delivers. Can't wait to see the amount of whinery when IL-2:CoD is out. Then each and every armchair combat ace pilot X or Y is like a kid with a lollipop pulled out of their mouth when their fabled plane does not act like a X-Wing or TIE. This same crap discussion about Spit vs 109/Allied vs Axis has waged on since first flight sims from stone age and only between the GAMERS..or should use word lamers. This pathetic horde of "know it all sim pilots" are like kids on a sandbox arguing who's daddy has biggest epeen. And of course everyone here knows better how it was and should be, than the real vets, for sure. We would beat them vets all if given chance..right? This never ends..and you still wonder why no-one wants to make a flight sim?

I bet every "Mr.Pompom" / "Herr Bratwurst", depending on color orientation blue/red, would whine even given a chance fly the real plane and it would not fly up to expectations Please, bring on CoD and the new evolution of whinery

funniest post of my day

[SEE]

Originally Posted by Sven

?
I can make a quote if you want, If I remember right this is what a spitfire pilot said in an interview: "The spitfire could be flown by any idiot."
In that point of view IL2 got it spot on, the plane is meant for idiots.

I doubt that pilot meant it in the way you have interpreted. For sure, there will be testing times for Spitty/Hurricane pilots in CoD with a/c that have inferior firepower and requires utmost concentration when engaging the Bf's. A wise pilot will not try and follow it in a dive and neither will he be able to match it in a climb. He will certainly need to manage his energy trade off in T&B and deal with the carburretor float problem - these facets alone require the pilot to have the necessary awareness and skills that an 'idiot' would hardly posses. We will see in March - hopefully........

[Faustnik]

Originally Posted by IceFire

I've noticed the CoG seems to be slightly further back and that there is more lateral instability during aileron movements. Some people describe this as "rolling around" but that's inaccurate. Proper trim and rudder coordination and you barely notice it... I didn't right away and instead was enjoying flying the later model Spitfire LF.Vb and chasing down FW190s and Bf109-6s on the deck (boy were they surprised!).

The 4.10 Spits are great! MkV don't have to turn in circles.

Hopefully many other planes will be updated in 4.11.

[MicroWave]

Fascinating. 7 pages in a little more than 24 hours.

You gotta love this game.

[SEE]

Originally Posted by MicroWave

Fascinating. 7 pages in a little more than 24 hours.

You gotta love this game.

and guess who's bloody fault that is......lol.....

[Sven]

Originally Posted by SEE

I doubt that pilot meant it in the way you have interpreted. For sure, there will be testing times for Spitty/Hurricane pilots in CoD with a/c that have inferior firepower and requires utmost concentration when engaging the Bf's. A wise pilot will not try and follow it in a dive and neither will he be able to match it in a climb. He will certainly need to manage his energy trade off in T&B and deal with the carburretor float problem - these facets alone require the pilot to have the necessary awareness and skills that an 'idiot' would hardly posses. We will see in March - hopefully........

And you interpreted my way wrong, that's why we should stop interpreting. The pilot obviously meant flying the plane not mastering it, that's something totally different. The plane was meant for idiots ( read fresh pilots, as the Spitfire pilot obviously meant.)

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Just because there's a Spit +25lbs doesn't mean it can run that for ages like it does in the sim and this goes for every other plane too, regardless if it's allied or axis. You know what the maximum continuous power was for most Spit Mk.IXs? A mere 8-9lbs of boost!

Indeed, take-off power for any mark of Spit is usually about +7-+9 pounds per square inch of boost. Doesn't work in the game, but never mind. That's more a question of the scales on the gauges not really matching up with the throttle axes the way they ought to because it's just a sim.

[Triggaaar]

Originally Posted by Sven

If I remember right this is what a spitfire pilot said in an interview: "The spitfire could be flown by any idiot."
In that point of view IL2 got it spot on, the plane is meant for idiots.

I assumed you were just being silly with that comment, but...

Originally Posted by Sven

The pilot obviously meant flying the plane not mastering it, that's something totally different. The plane was meant for idiots ( read fresh pilots, as the Spitfire pilot obviously meant.)

Er, what? Are you for real? It was designed as an interceptor, with good climb rate and high manoeuvrability.

You think the Spitfire was designed primarily with fresh pilots in mind (so it could have been better if designed with experienced pilots in mind). You're either trying to stir up an arguement, or you're clueless. It's impossible to argue that the Spitfire wasn't highly capable in real life dogfights.

Originally Posted by Oktoberfest

At least my plane taught me some skills to defeat better planes. I doubt it happens with the spit.

So the real Spit was designed for idiots, and consequently those idiots never learnt to defeat better planes. It's a wonder any Spit pilot scored a kill.

I like to fly Spits and although I've flown 109s and 190s a lot, I flown Spits a lot more. But I get more kills more easily in a 190. Fly high, drop down and boom, there's nothing of the opponent left, even if they're in a well armoured IL2. And if a pair of Spits are on your tail, into a gentle dive and bye bye Spits. When flying a Spit against a couple of 109s or 190s though (lets say one of each in this example) it's a different matter. Running is not an option. You'll probably get shot down, but you'll learn a fair bit along the way, and when you win the fight it feels good. Meanwhile the 190 pilot learns that he's going to have to completely blow the Spit up to stop the 109 stealing the kill, and the 109 pilot learns to cut in.

[Sven]

"Er, what? Are you for real? It was designed as an interceptor, with good climb rate and high manoeuvrability."

I never said it wasn't?

"You think the Spitfire was designed primarily with fresh pilots in mind (so it could have been better if designed with experienced pilots in mind). You're either trying to stir up an arguement, or you're clueless. It's impossible to argue that the Spitfire wasn't highly capable in real life dogfights."

It is a good and easy highly capable fighter, that's why it could be flown by even idiots, that's totally right, what are you trying to say? Every plane which was very succesful in combat was produced in large numbers was easy enough to let even raw pilots get off in the air, otherwise it wouldn't have been a succesful plane wouldn't it? That's exactly what the Spitfire pilot meant, a good front line fighter, as it's intercepting role of bombers was given to the hurricanes.

I think you made a mistake on your last quote, since I never wrote it
Oktoberfest was the author I believe. Am I trying to get into an ever lasting argument or are you? This all doesn't makes much sense to me.

[Krt_Bong]

The Making Sense Forums are on another website, sorry