Spit/109 sea level speed comparisons in 1.08 beta patch

[JtD]

Turn radius is for turns at sea level. Estimated best sustained turn. Corresponding turn times from same calculation:
Hurricane I: 17.6s
Spitfire I: 18.2s
Bf 109E-3: 20.5s
Bf 110C-4: 20.5s (was also calculated, with radius of 840ft)

[Crumpp]

Turn radius is for turns at sea level. Estimated best sustained turn. Corresponding turn times from same calculation:
Hurricane I: 17.6s
Spitfire I: 18.2s
Bf 109E-3: 20.5s
Bf 110C-4: 20.5s (was also calculated, with radius of 840ft)

While absolutely correct for relative performance, just examining a single point of best performance does not give one the best picture of the relative dogfighting capability.

Looking at one single point in the envelope tells us the Bf-109E3 is hopelessly outclassed IF it tries to match the Spitfire at the Spitfires best performance velocity.

Fortunately, all airplanes have their own unique best performance speeds and the Bf-109E3 is no different.

Here we can see the entire sustainable load factor envelope for both aircraft.



What is shows us is that in order for the Spitfire to realize it's turn performance advantage, it must go slower than the Bf-109E3 by some 30Kph or 18 mph.

That means the Bf-109E3 gains the initiative in the fight if the Spitfire tries to use its sustained turn advantage.

Once more, the Bf-109E3 pilot can take his aircraft all the way to its best sustained turn performance point without fear of losing the initiative.

Factor in the stability characteristics and these airplanes are very evenly matched in close quarters dogfighting.

[pstyle]

That means the Bf-109E3 gains the initiative in the fight if the Spitfire tries to use its sustained turn advantage.

Can you reword this so it does not come accross as a bizarre contradiction?

[Crumpp]

Can you reword this so it does not come accross as a bizarre contradiction?

It is not a bizarre contradiction in aerodynamics.

It is a general trend in aircraft performance. You have stumbled across the reason why designers concentrated on high speed instead of low speed performance.

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by pstyle

That means the Bf-109E3 gains the initiative in the fight if the Spitfire tries to use its sustained turn advantage.

Can you reword this so it does not come accross as a bizarre contradiction?

Ah yes, he seems to be slightly confusing again. What I think he's trying to say is that a 109 turns better than a Spitfire at higher speeds - which is no news and pretty obvious, but it also has nothing to do with sustained turn times comparsions.

I'd like to see a Hurricane in the game that has better sustained turn than a Spitfire AND a 109. What we have got now is:

1 Spitfire
2 109
3 Hurricane

[Osprey]

Let me add in game speed, climb and dive to that Robo

1. 109
2. Spitfire
3. Hurricane

1. 109
2. Spitfire
3. Hurricane

1. 109
2. Spitfire
3. Hurricane

.....still willing to take the Hun on

[pstyle]

Allow me to ask again, what I'm reading in that odd sentance is;
The spitfire has an advantage, unless it tries to use it.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by pstyle

Allow me to ask again, what I'm reading in that odd sentance is;
The spitfire has an advantage, unless it tries to use it.

it roughly translates in Crumpp parlance to:

The Spitfire has an advantage until it is matched against anything German and I produce the graph to prove it'

takes a little time to learn Crumpp but it becomes reasonably predictable.

[JtD]

Originally Posted by pstyle

The spitfire has an advantage, unless it tries to use it.

Great summary. I guess that's the way he put it, but it boils down to the statement that the faster plane generally holds the advantage. This remains true in turnfights. The 109 has the choice to maintain the higher airspeed at a lower corner velocity, the Spitfire has the choice to maintain a higher corner velocity at a lower airspeed, so the 109 can maintain the initiative.

It should be noted that on Crumpps chart the 109 has a level speed advantage of ~18 knots, however representative that is for a BoB scenario.

[Crumpp]

Feel free to calculate it yourselves!!

which is no news and pretty obvious, but it also has nothing to do with sustained turn times comparsions.

The performance is the sustained envelope. It is just over the entire envelope both aircraft can sustain instead of just choosing one single point.


So it is everything to do with sustained turn time comparisions as it IS A SUSTAINED TURN TIME COMPARISION under the same condition of flight. At the same altitude and airspeed, that is how the relative performance will play out.


You do understand the Spitfire and BF-109 do not achieve their best turn performance under the same conditions of flight?