Let's say that you are cruising at alt >5km and want to add some power.

Since your are cruising your eng regime is low with low rpm <2000 and ata <1 (probably 0,8) .

When you push the throttle, you'll see that your eng won't react as much as you want with the boost raising only a little as the eng torque is not strong enough to balance the torque of the prop with the amount of air it can ingest at the moment.

In that situation lowering the prop pitch will lower the torque needed to spin the prop giving the eng more torque to raise the (eng) rpm. Once the eng rpm start raising, the compressor can spin up the compressor wheel that will deliver more air in the cylinder.

More air, more fuel, more torque, more power -> the speed increase up to a point that you have a new balance. Obviously once the "ata" & the speed raise you need to coarse back slightly the prop pitch monitoring closely those 3 values (the position of the throttle, the boost level and the rpm gauges).

Note that there is no spectacular results to expect from this but still you'll get some better result and will raise your op ceiling in the beast

~S!

Tomcat, I don't have a problem against either the Hurri or the 1 and 1a spits, I just don't turnfight fullstop, I also don't use the mineshells as I fly the E-1. I tried the e-4 out when I initially downloaded the patch but quickly returned to my old faithful, I still think the E-1 is the best 109 of the ones in game, it suits my style anyway! The only plane I can't combat is the IIa unless I catch him totally unaware.

Craig

Ze-Jamz, and David, you can still comapare it to driving a car, think like this, you are cruising in your car at 100kph in 5th gear at 2000rpm, you want to overtake someone you can just stamp on the gas and wait for the engine to get higher in the rev range where it makes most power, or you can downshift to 4th, which will put the engine Into it's powerband so to speak and accelerate quicker, eventually you will still have to change back into 5th but you will be going faster at this stage and the engine will already be near it's peak. Most engine types develop their peak at around 2/3- 3/4 of their max revs.

Craig

dont you mean increase the proppitch???at least on the gauge its an increase of it.
when do i know that i overreved the engine enough??
i observed, that when i go from level flight into a climb, and increase the prop pitch(meaning going from 10 to eleven o clock on the gauge) there comes the point, where suddenly the ata pressure decreases slightly the more i increase the prop pitch......is that the point where i should stop increasing the pp?

is it advisable to maintain the highest possible ata pressure all the time?


meaning in combat situation, i mainly fly with full throttle and only adjust the pp.through change of the prop pitch, the pressure changes as well, ....
so if i maintain 1,325ata with full throttle...would that be the way to go????

Seems there is some weirds thing there (I am back on topic :spit)

I did some lazy cubans eight among some spits deck (clnt' see them) at a 450/480 kph average and as soon as one see me and took my 6 (cldn't see him before he was there) I was unable to pass 415.

I guess there is the suc*** cheat back on server (the one that pull you backward once your in the visor of those aces).

Dav I will answer later I just feel disgusted for now.

~S

If you fly a Spitfire IIa then you dont need a cheat. This plane IS a cheat.
Again. All serverhosters please ban this developers joke from the servers until either the other planes their performance raised or this ones is lowered.

Winger

OMG.

The one aircrat that is properly modeled and you all take the pi**.

And you think I have an agenda?

LOL.

the problem is, if it is properly modeled it has no place amongst every thing else that is improperly modeled. would you rather they get rid of all the undermodeled planes and both sides just use the IIa? Wake up ElAurens!!!

Craig

"The first recorded Mk II being shot down was with 611 Squadron on September 11th 1940. "

The Spit II shouldn't be the representative aircraft for the RAF in BOB servers. It was a late entry and most of those produced weren't used during the BOB.

So will you start a similar thread when the rotol props + 100 octane fuel are added? tbh mate I've not been flying COD purely because I got fed up with too many times there were 109's parked over the airfield vulching and frankly, after warming up an engine I couldn't be arsed with it so went to fly RoF instead. I imagine that this was mainly down to the imbalance toward LW due to the missing Rotol Spits and LW desperately seeking opponents perhaps? It's no surprise that servers put in the IIa once LW got am even better aircraft.

JG53Frankie had it right in the first page - wrong planes and bad FM's to start.

109E1 & E4 vs
Rotol Spit I and Hurricane I, get the FM's right from the off and you have a game to build from, starting with the AI for them.

When the day comes that I can escape a 109 with a tight steep climbing turn, particularly to the left, and that he can escape me by pushing the nose hard down (I would expect him to pull away due to weight too), then I will be much happier. Real pilots on both sides admitted this. I would really like to see Allied and Axis fliers unite and come to some concensus with 1C over getting these models right - not to balance the online game - instead of the constant bickering because they suddenly find things a lot harder than they used to.

PS, Winger - Pupo162 is a 109 bumlicker, always has been so you're well out of line, particularly with the insult.

Theres an Elephant in this room.
The plain fact is this
The Mk1a should have the rotol prop
Instead spitty flyers have to put up with that godawful 1st gear/ 5th gear prop.
Or fly the Hurricane
As present FM the Mk1a is 30mph slower and doesnt climb as well as the rotol Hurricane
But the Hurricane roll rate is terrible 360* roll takes 2 secs longer than the spitfire,and the spitfire rolls slower than the me109 anyway.

So with slower top speed, poorer climb,slower dive, inferior roll rate, poorer guns, lots less amunition and that infernal neg g cutout combined with the 109`s easier controlability in turns is it any surprise red players want to fly the Mk1I on the servers ? Especially since the blueboys have some new toys.
But the MkII is 60 mph faster than the Mk1a.

So what is really needed is a MK1a with a rotol prop.

The speeds I quote are from a very quick test in mission. straight and level @ 6500 ft

Mk1a 230mph

Rotol Hurri 260mph

MkII 290mph.

This admittedly quick test is obviously not entirely accurate, but feel about right from my time playing online.

+1

i want the flight models as accurate as possible.
...even if it would result in a disadvantage for me.

i think in real life,...the battle of britain had pretty equal oponents on both sides.all i have read states that it was mainly the skill of the pilot that effected the outcome of a fight.so give us the proper performances for all planes please

Well said Osprey.

BTW long before the game was even released our lads decided to fly the Hurricane, as it was the aircraft that really won the Battle of Britain.

When I'm online the only aircraft you see me in will be the Rotol Hurricane, at least until we get a flyable Gladiator or CR 42. I would like to pop over to one of the evaluation units and nick one of the Tomahawks that were destined for France though...

I am sry Osp but all of the above are myth hence wrong. It has been discussed and explained all over and over - not by me but by historians.

Regarding weights, do you really think that a modern design such as was the 109 was heavier than a tube and framework Hurri or an heavy riveted with a thousands of bulkheads Spit ?

That's were we hve to understand how braves and well commanded was the BoB RAF's men. The odds were clearly in favor of the brutal Hitler's regime but they have prevailed.

We hve the chance to re-enact those glory days for our own pleasures without any fear of blood, sweet and tears being shed. I wonder why some still have to turn history upside down.

As there is no diff btw a blue player and a red player If you want to fly the better fighter in the fray of that very specific times that's plain simple SWITCH to BLUE !

PS: As I ave said alrdy IMHO the only good FM btw the Hurri, 109 and spits are the Hurri and the 109. That wld be a non-sense to start modifying both their FM to fit that of the surreal Spits

CloD is now attracting more on-line players which is welcomed by all.

The one positive I see from the introduction of the Mk2 Spit is that it created controversy and highlighted the problems of the underperfoming ac. Its a shame that it ends up being divisive but in a way that may help to get this issue resolved.

I really hope that the Russian forums are having this same argument and that Luthier and his team are considering a fix as a priority.

We now have a title that works reasonably well in SP, attracting more players on MP but well and truly stuffed with undermodelled (or incorrectly) modelled ac.

How difficult would it be to at least add the correct prop to a Mk1a and get that out in the next official patch?

This is wrong. pls see the above.

To reach max perfs you need to fight hard on your aircraft ctrls and eng management. It might take some time to be pro-efficient but that the way it is [was :rolleyes:] and I find that great.

To all of you guys. I know the FM´s of Spit Ia and hurri are just as messed as the one of the 109. My only concern is that the spit IIa outclasses the 109 to a degree that makes flying for the blue team totally pointleass except when you are a masochistic person that likes to get banged.
I know people online that do VERY well in their hurricane against the 109. I mean fighting a good hurri pilot in a 109 on even energylevels is a real challenge for a good 109 pilot. Each side has its strengths wich, when used properly, lead you to a victory.
I also admit that the spit Ia is too slow but the Spit IIa just makes it totally pointless. So i dont say nerf it or anything. I just say use a planecombo that actually works well in multiplayer. Nothing else,

Winger

PS: And to 1C i say: Please fix those 109s, spitfire Is and were all good.

Why? Both are capable of 350. The Spit is mph, the Messer is km/h. what's the problem? :grin:

Who is experienced in on-line flying may not say sincerely that Spit IIa is an identical category with any of the other airplanes. Because of this, it should be ignored on the serious servers. :rolleyes:

Wrong, it was in sercive during all of the BOB and made of 40% of the Spitfires at the end of the BOB.


JD
AKA_MattE

This may be true in your version of history, but the idea that the 109 was a superior aircraft to the Spitfire is not true, they were very evenly matched during the BOB.

The lamest part of this discussion is not the fact that the Spit II is overmodeld, (which it is) It is that some on this thread think this is a great opportunity to talk out of their a$$ in terms of the performance differences of these aircraft and whether the Spit II should be part of this time frame (which it should). Hence the ONGOING SpitfireUFO vs. Luffiewiner argument continues.

How about just shut up and fly.


JD
AKA_MattE

Actually it isn't, the other aircraft are undermodeled. This is the problem.

Just to clarify.

With that you pretty much agree to what i say. Since the Spit IIa we have in game totally outclasses the 109 we have in game the only true solution is to leave it out.

Winger

Yeah here it goes again : the great gentlemen with the fine sense of history and impeccable sciences knowledge thinking that the glory of the past are their own property and insulting who the hell are not lined with their miserable wisdom.

Seems we have seen that alrdy :evil:::(:-x

By the way "Superior" is not a term I wld hve use. That tells a lot...

Yes, Tomcat exactly what you are doing, nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black.

Winger, I am not saying it should be in the plane set, I am saying that peoples personal agendas about whether the Spit II was in the BOB or that the 109 was better than the Spitfire during the BOB is not what should be discussed, does it belong in the servers with its present FM is the question. I see Bliss has already changed his server.

JD
AKA_MattE

Who said that the Spitt II isn't the part of BOB? This is bad for a joke. Unambiguously one of the best airplanes of the BOB era. No doubt. It enters service in July, in same month than E-7... wait... what? Do we have E-7? No... oh xxxx.
Anyway, we talk about server planesets, not BOB history.

Something to try, A relative Performance test On line.

Start On line with a mate. Spit II and 109E4 Level flight close formation at 250Kmh in the weeds. Then Go max power (non WEP non Boost Cutout) at the same time. Keep it going until you max out. Control Eng temps as required with the Rad/s. You might be surprised just how close you still are at the end point. The 109 driver will need to control prop pitch/RPM actively (2300rpm seems to be a good value) and what IAS you both end up with.

Then do the same in a climb test. Start out the same in close formation on the deck, reset altimeters so both of you are using the same setting. In the climb Spit climb at 160MPH, E4 at 250Kmh as these are the respective best ROC speeds for each aircraft. Post results here.

Hi. I made a small test, straight flying, sea level.
Spit IIa top speed without boost: 280 mph (450.6 km/h), with boost (no time limit) 310 mph (498.9 km/h)
109 E-4 top speed with 1.32 ata: 430 km/h, with (afterburner) 1.42 ata (1 min limit) 440 km/h*
109 E-3 top speed with 1.35 ata: 430 km/h, with (afterburner) 1.45 ata (1 min limit) 450 km/h* (E3 is faster :rolleyes:)

I don't understand why would it necessary to do the test without a boost, when i flew more than half hour (Spit IIa, full throttle, half open radiator, sea level) without an any kind of trouble.

Please open this page, look at the first chart:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html
E-1 should reach the 300 mph (482.8 km/h) on sea level. The E-3 were being built with stronger engine already. DB 601 Aa (+72HP) instead DB 601 A-1.
This according to you surprisingly nearly?

*
Another thing: Please look at this chart:
The "start und notleistung" (call it "afterburner" in CloD) increase the performance with 200 PS (this considerable plus 20% performance the reason of the time limitation), but in CloD it causes only 3% speed acceleration. Compared to Spitfire: Boost causes 10.7% acceleration (30 mph). I do not know the correct values of the Merlin engines, but looking at the proportions... well... what do you think?
http://www.enginehistory.org/German/DB/Chart01.jpg
(source: www.enginehistory.org)

VO101_Tom made a good point. So far while playing online, I took Bliss´s advice for high alt combat to an experiment and flew around at +4000m altitude. My results were inconclusive since it was hard to find any opposition in shape of Spit IIs or 109 E-4s over ENgland and France. After having askedd people why they fly mostly between sea level and 2000m, they answered that there is nothing interesting up there and therefore it was so darn hard to find any opposition at high altitude. People said, when they wanna bomb ships, they can do that from "relatively" low altitude and when they just look for trouble they gonna strafe planes landing or taking off at the opposing airfields.

My suggestion, in order to drag more people into a historic correct and realistic altitude to observe how Spit II vs 109 performs at high altitude, I would say, remove the ships and add large bomber streams between France and England at 4000 to 6000m so that people find their targets up their. Whenever you wanna seek a dogfight you can protect your own bombers or hunt the enemy bombers. Alternatively, one can still bomb the enemy airfields, but the high alt. "pulks of bombers" (somewhere between 10 and 20 in numbers) should be the more tempting targets.
This would be an idea to focus dogfights higher in the skies, where the aformentiond handling of energy gets more important, even for the plane with a bit less overall speed performance.

Good thing if the bombers flying high. But the AFB's low protection would be important. Would not be worth it then to fly low above the other coast.

Fellas, everyone talks about flying high, these FM's dont perform anywhere near they should at 7k, its no fun flying up there at present..

I would like any planes that flew BoB in the planeset, what i dont want is Any AC that has a massive advantage over the other wether it would be Blue or Red..

forget about whiners and flyboys or whatever the rubbish forum language is everyone uses, if the 109 had that much of an advantage then all the Red pilots would be complaining...on that note a lot of Red pilots are complaining about the Spit2 just like the Blue pilots..

The servers have changed thats for sure, its nearly always one sided now..

Im not sure people like flying ages in the current maps that dont really have missions to get into a dogfight (Spit2) so they just fly Blue, maybe the bases should be put back a bit on both sides to deter vulchers, get it back to Mk1's and Hurris and get rid of that Mk2!... what happening now isnt working..

I don't give a hoot what any historian thinks. I care what pilots who fought have said from their accounts. I have lost count of the number of well known pilots who specifically state how they would make a steep climbing turn and watch the 109 stall out. Gunther Rall even said it himself, that you simply couldn't follow them if they made that move. But tbh you've discounted yourself in this discussion already by telling us that the Hurricane Rotol and 109 have good flight models.

I hve learn (the hard way) one thing with the time : the less options you hve, the more aggressively you act.

Draw your own conclusion and stop the insults. Thx in advance

Hi. The memories from an technical history viewpoint unfortunately inaccurate sources. Subjective, and unknown circumstances of the situations. I read on more test results, that 5% the measurement margin of error. It is very much. Imagine how large an the margin of error, if they give an opinion based on feelings only? A couple of counterexamples that what you wrote:

"Me 109 E:
"When put into a full throttle climb at low air speeds, the airplane climbed at a very steep angle, and our fighters used to have difficulty in keeping their sights on the enemy even when at such a height that their rates of climb were comparible. This steep climb at low air speed was one of the standard evasion maneuvres used by the German pilots."
- RAF Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough handling trials,Bf.109E Wn: 1304. M.B. Morgan and R. Smelt of the RAE, 1944.
edit: The rear airplane is in a disadvantage always. It would be necessary to pull the airplane above a critical AoA to be able to shoot. If he try, he will stall. This is an old, well-known manoeuvre anyway. Works with identical machines in 1v1 combat too. In fact, does not mean it altogether that the first plane is better

Me 109 E:
"In personally facing the RAF in the air over the Dunkirk encirclement, I found that the Bf 109 E was faster, possessed a higher rate of climb, but was somewhat less manouverable than the RAF fighters."
- Herbert Kaiser, German fighter ace. 68 victories. Source:The Great Book of WW2 Airplanes, page 470.

Me 109 E-4:
"I took a performance climb at 1,15 ATA and 2300 RPM (30 minute limit). A climb speed of 250 kph gave an average rate of climb of 2145 ft/min. Bearing in mind the maximum boost limit of 1,35 ATA the "all out" climb must be impressive."
- Charlie Brown, RAF Flying Instructor, test flight of restored Me 109 E-4 WN 3579. Source: Warbirds Journal issue 50.

source: "Climbing in combat" part of the "Messerschmitt 109 - myths, facts and the view from the cockpit" webpage

Mate even without all this documentation...If we are wrong now with the FM's here in CloD then every ww2 sim Ive ever played had it wrong too which is highly unlikely

Jaaaammmmzzz

Don't give us the stick to be beaten !!!

The Spit has been porked since long (CFS ?). But not in the way those guys says.... In the other direction : fantasy, mystification (did I say Spitification ?), complaisance : the ride to outfight everything without any effort (even the hard thing to swivel your head bckward to get a look of what's going on there has been taken away with laaarge mirror and tiny rear fuselage).

Before those time, no one wld hve given a pony or a Fw for Spit... Funny isn't it?

Frankly it's sad to see such poor lobbying on such a mythical [no "S" !!!] ride.

~S~ TC

No offence m8 but i have no clue what any of that means apart from the rear visibility bit

Just flew online and bounced a spit IIa. I shot away the complete right elevator. Even in this condition, it could easily outturn in a vert fight my E4... :grin:

Do you decide how authentic an original report is based on the programming of a game? Should happen reverse for this in a normal case??? I do not dare to ask it, which simulators you thought of... :grin:

I did not say that the Spitfire aircraft is worse than the 109. What I have written to the contemporary memoir should be treated with caution. I maintain my assertion that the pilots' reports are inaccurate. There are many reasons why the performance of their machines being estimated incorrectly. If he wins, he feels it is likely that his plane was better. Later, you will be reading this everywhere. If he loses ... Well, he does not write books. The German pilot who survived the fighting, wrote the same thing like the English, but from his own standpoint. Now who is right?

If someone makes a simulator, the most accurate documentations the various test reports and manuals. This must be the primary source. If they are shaken some legends... that not the fault of the facts ;)

I read earlier an interview with Kozhedub, it is an interesting detail:
- Reporter: What do you consider to have been the best fighter airplane–regardless of nationality–of World War II?
- Kozhedub: The La-7. I hope you understand why.

...And Oleg made it! \o/
(Here is the whole interview)

Lol, I know what your trying to say but your miles away from what I mean..

You've just stated it yourself, we can only go by what we read, the Devs can only go by what Data they have as every bit of info wrote by pilots is like you've said a bit biased..

Every ww2 Sim I have played, cfs3,ww2ol,il2 and now this have a 109 & spit...now every developer has modelled the spit to turn better and retain 'E' better.. the 109 to dive better and climb better etc etc

That is my point, regardless on what we think, it's been like this since ww2 sims have graced us with their presence yes?

I don't know what's right, who's right, what's accurate and what's false... I go by what I see have read myself and what sim developers have implemented into the games I've played..those basic strengths and weaknesses have always been the same..

So if for some reason now were saying the spit was a better in the dive, the climb and the turn...oh and top speed too then all those diff Devs had it wrong then?

That was all I meant by my comment, thought that was obvious too :)

The Prop pitch is relative to the angle btw the blade and the propeller disc. The more angle the more propulsive force you generate at each blade revolution. But the more torque your engine has to deliver.

Think of a screw'thread. If the pitch is 1mm per each revolution the screw will travel for 1mm at each revolution in the direction of its main axis . If the thread is 1.25mm then 1 rev = 1.25mm travel distance.

In maths, angles are counted positively counterclockwise. [http://www.sosmath.com/trig/Trig1/trig1/trig1.html]

Engineer being what they are, they hve designed here an instrument that looks like a clock but is not. You have to read on the trigonometric way with the pitch increasing when the dial travel counterclockwise. ;) Hence Increasing the blade angle means increasing the pitch on gauge with the dial traveling from right to the left.

Respectively, decreasing the blade angle means decreasing the pitch with the dial moving clockwise ;)

Yes it's weird. Sometime teh worst thing to do is to ask some engineers :grin:

It depends of your alt.

But if you look at the ata gauge you'll see that the dial hop to a larger value (around 0.2 ata more) signaling that the compressor blows compressed air to the eng.

With the new ata value you can then slightly increase the pitch (counterclockwise) to use the extra power available for building speed.


he he that is Lowering the pitch (clockwise - remember the positive way is the other one from the right to left))

You might be overreving your engine. I hve to see that.

No. Eng put on strain = raise in temp with an increased risk of failure or a lower time available at full power once the fight begin.

Perso I like to begin a fight with a cold engine and for such Cruise at low power (low ata) and high blade angle. The 109 has a very good cruise speed thx to a better aero efficient design. Cruise speed is in the range of a low 350 to a high 400kph TAS for the E model

YES !

However playing with the throttle is of great help in a fight. Hence I am ctly handling both command unless I am B&Zing with both value only slightly moving around the 1.32/10h values just like you.

~S!

Ok, we misunderstood each other. I thought we are talking about Spit IIa :grin:

~S~

Lol I was :)

Right up until the Early Spit-V and the 109-f4 then the Spits started to get the edge so that whole BnZ tactic with the dive speed, climb speed and turn radius (at speed) fell down to the introduction of the FW-190

I know this is just a rough sketch if you like but you get my meaning..

In a nutshell the Spit2a should not have that much of an advantage over the 109-e4 that we see in game presently irrespective to FM's, right or wrong, documentation etc...Im talking about what we have in game right now

Do not know if this video was posted before but hope it can bring some faith in Emil back.

4 vs. 4 it should not be as bad as 1 vs. 1.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emYem...layer_embedded


PS. I know that it is easier to say so than to do it but I think the idea should be not to outperform or outfly the Spit2 but to kill it using E4's superior and deadly firepower on the 1st or 2nd pass. Of cause not 1 vs. 1.

thx tomcat for your answer.

Seems to be that most people are not douche bags and dont fly the Spit IIa. Just for you information 5./JG27 Server is currently hosting an Adlertag Mission without the 109Emil 4 or the Spit IIa... has been for some time.

I fly repka 2 mostly because it usually has the most people on and the map isn't rediculously big for the aount of players. I'de prefer a full real server but the english channel map is huge for the amount of people playing.

I'm not stating this for all servers but repka 2 is full of spit 2as. I just played on it 10 minutes ago and almost everyone on red was a 2a.

What does this mean?

Scully (my wingman) and I were patroling at 400 KM when he noticed 2 dots approaching from our 6 oclock low. We had plenty of distance so we engaged afterburner and tried to climb away. when afterburner ran out we pulled a slight banking left to check 6. the two dots were closing in. (Crap 2a).. The only idea left was to attempt a drag and bag. My wingman turned (to bait the spit) and dove to our 2 Oclock while I climbed. The lead spit took the bait and followed in the dive (usually a fatal mistake in a spit). I quickly inverted and dove in persuit ignoring the 2nd for my wingmans sake while also assuming I had him beat in the dive.

What happened?

My wingman quickly reached 700 KPH hoping to get distance since the dive started with a negative g dive. I also hoped to gain on the spit in the high speed dive and clear my wingmans tail while the spit was focussed on said wingman and said wingman was outdiving the spit. Unfortunately the spits outdove both of us. The lead spit outran me and killed my wingman while the second spit cought up to me and disabled my controls. Keep in mind this was a prolonged dive from 400 KM. There was lots of room between all planes and the dive lasted a good 30 seconds before shots were fired. The sky was angry that day my friend, this was no girly dive. Wings were creaking.

To add insult to injury. I bailed, parachute didn't deploy, and i supermaned into the side of the red mountain airfield. This part I actually enjoyed.

Hehe.

Conclusion,
There is no tactic to kill spit 2a unless you have a large altitute advantage and he doesnt see you.

Or hes a poor shot and you give him lots of time behind a friendlies tail.

I'm all for realism guys but atleast limit the amount of them. whats the actual combat statistic? 40 percent?
Gollum.;)

This is assuming you get a first pass. You can only bring guns to bear on it if you have suprise and large altitude advantage, or superior numbers (however this means some unfortunate pilot has the job of being the dancing monkey) And im sorry for forgetting this but theres also luck. With a 4 vs 4 you may be correct though. More chances of lining up shots with superior fire power since there will be dancing monkeys involved. If 4 spits are on the tail of 4 109s, its possible that 3 of those 109s are chasing 3 of those spits and firepower may come into play since the 109s can do more damge.

The real question though is, is the current FM and numbers of the 2a historacally correct compared to the 109 E4. At this point I dont think so. I dont know enough about the FM but most are saying that it is either overmodeled or the 109 is undermodeled. There is also the question of numbers. Did the RAF have 100 percent of their squadrens outfitted with these? allowing everyone to chose one on a server says they did. I dont mind not getting an e4 and being forced to fly and 3 or 1 if thats how it goes. Ide rather that then having everyone dominate in a superior plane. Plane restrictions is the only way to deal with this. If the next german plane is better than the 2a, restrict the crap out of it historically. Thats the fair way to do it in my opinion. At least you only have to watch out for a a few of them instead of all of them. Just an opinion though.

I just wan't realism. I'm willing to take a disadvantage if it is historical but I don't think 100 percent of the fighters the e4 faced were 2a. I'm not saying they should be banned. Just saying they should have the FMs proper and in proper numbers so it's not a massacre up there.

in the last few flights i took. the only kills i got were sneak attacks from above. all other engagements were futile. (see superman story above)

hehe. Gnight all

Gollum

About the historical numbers:

Spitfire MK II : 750 produced(from June 1940), entry in service in August 1940with the 611th Squadron.

Messerschmitt 109E-4: 250 produced(from May 1940)
Messerschmitt 109E-4B: 211 produced(from Aug 1940)

A good number of E-3 were refitted in field as E-4s.
The E-4 make his aparition in high numbers after August 1940. Before , bulk of operations(and losses)was supported by the E-1s.

If the intention was to reproduced the battle after historical numbers :

July
-No Spitfire MK II, very few E-4s. A lot of E-1s and a few E-3s.
August
-Some Spitfires MK II, some more E-4 , still a lot of E-1s , few E-3s.
September
-More Spitfire MK II, More E-4s, a little less E-1s and very few E-3. A dozen of E-7s.
October
-Near all Spitfire MK II and E-4s and some more E-7s, still a good number of E-1s. any E-3.
Novembrer
-Spitfires MK II, E-4s and E-7s, very few E-1s, any E-3.

Some interesting numbers their Danelov. Imagine trying to sort that out on MP servers for historical accuracy- it would be impossible.

Leaving the Mk2 out isn't the problem for many Spit jockeys wether for performance or historical reasons. Being left with a Mk1 with two speed prop and a Hurricane that outpaces it also fails on historical/performance correctness. But, it's a 'fair play' compromise for MP untill the FM's are tweaked.

You might either look for a historically orientated layout or for a fair orientated layout. Choose one of the two, the first gives the comfort of neglecting any long discussions. ;)

I hve been fighting the Spit IIa in a 109 at low alt
I hve been invoved in tight turn fight with a Spit Ia in a nimble G50
I hve seen myself B&Zing a Spit Ia in a hurri (mistaken it for a 109)
I have been chased at high alt by a climbing Spit in my 109E3

I can tell you one thing : in none of the above case did I felt like fighting a real plane.

Everything I did was matched on an oddly manner only by the strange FM of the thing.

You can tell what ever you like but this has nothing in common with a spit or a real plane. Hence its only presence would be the ground of thousands speculations and debates.

TC I don't understand any of that mate apart from what you were in and what you fought...please explain again?

Are you saying the Spit doesn't feel like a plane or something like that?

~S~

A lot of this fair play argument is all to do with altitude and many players tendency to engage at low alt.

If you read the Autobiographies of many of the Pilots who flew the Spits, during and after the BoB, you get a better sense of what each of these ac were capable of.

Discipline was a key factor for pilots on both sides. In many accounts, Spit Pilots would see the BFs above them. If the numbers were evenly matched and the BF pilots thought they had no elemenent of suprise they would refrain from dropping down to engage. The BF Pilot knew where and under what circumstances he had the edge....at Altitude or by suprise and were disciplined to engage when they had the advantage of both.

The BFs currently modelled have better engine performance than the Spit Mk2 at 18K+. Most of the ac have problems with FM and that is where the argument lies.

If one day CloD goes Eastern Front with Yaks.......?

I watched Klem and Stryker (Klem will know the player? ) engage in a mock combat (BF v Spit2) at around 20K, Co E, to assess both. They seemed evenly matched but maybe Klem will give his conclusions. Even with Ventrillo comms I had real problems keeping eyes on both because of the separation as they were split-assing at very high speeds.

Yes. It seems to be to a lesser extent than in the old Il2 but it still have very debatable E losses. Hence the tight turn and so on.

In a few word If you love the historical Spitfire, ban the thing we hve in game !

If CoD devs wants that we have an easy mount for young players, none here wld be against that idea (my guess) but they hve to call it a NoobFire or a paint it in a special color (Light green - a GreenFire ?) that we don't feel lost or disappointed by what is alrdy a remarkable game.

What a load of BS.

JD
AKA_MattE

We had two in il2:1946 one called the la7 and another the spit mk9 +25lb :-P ;)

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

Some interesting gen at the above link. Some will have already seen, but it is food for thought me thinks.

Happy landings,

Not sure about that. I haven't flown a spitfire and even if you do you'd probably not go all out like in a fight that may cost you your life. So we can only rely on some basic numbers.

Regarding the balance issue there is no solution though. There is NO balance. That was the point of the war. I listed all the variables (at least a good amount of them) and all of these aren't anything we could fix in the game.

So for true dogfighting on even ground add support for flying in the same planes against each other. And by support I mean don't take out all the planes or screw the FM but actually give dogfighters a way to fly against an equal opponent - aside from their own skill.

For co-op and all the other realism servers you can just add the planes the server admins want. Also the community can eventually come up with some great dynamic campaign stuff that either:
- goes the route of realism and does that
- or a little fiction and fairness and actually gives the "losing" side opportunities to fly with better planes / ammo to make the game more fun


And seeing how this thread progressed that far I seriously think it's time to think about solutions to the underlying problem. And tuning the FM is NOT a solution I believe.

Lol you guys are getting rusty. :eek:I would hve though those tables wld hve come much before.

Pls if you are serious enough take some time to read the SPit&Blabla.com curves. It does not depict anything serious (especially those ones).

Thx in advance

I am sure you have good intention but if you think that the Spit won the BoB take some time to read the sorties ratio and the kill ratio (it was a galvanizing symbol for the ppl of UK) . Then hev a look at the aggressive campaign fought by the RAF with real MkIIa/b in the late 40/ early 41 period, and come back to us.

The devs just should fix those d@mn FMs of all planes and finish the discussions :)

True, but that would not keep TomcaViP from complaining about the Spitfire. He will not be happy until it is made totally useless.

Lol. Pls be sure that this is not my goal. I do like the spit and hve flown her in sims extensively when we where lucky enough that she was modeled honestly.

I would be please to trade my rusty and smoky Hurri for a Brand new SPit ! ;)

Will shut my mouth as here is so much TC entries lately that I wonder if I am not modded myself !

No mate, read my post again please.

What I am saying is that ALL discussions about compared performance are close to useless. Warplanes were not meant to be balanced and as such you will ALWAYS find people bickering about the in game performance.

Now, what I said was they need to fix the FM if it's flawed (and yes it feels weird but not just on the spit) but that has nothing to do with the core issue here. Which is people complaining about getting their butt set on fire by imbalanced planes.

The only way to fix that issue is to give dogfight servers a way of having pilots fly the same plane against each other. That way they can't blame it on the plane or the FM but only on their skills. This is the only way to solve this ongoing discussion.

And please don't say the spitfire sucked so much after göring's stupid order that the 109s had to fly in formation with bombers e.g. Most opposed that stupidity and many 109s were lost and couldn't do a thing. I don't really care for the numbers to be honest since, and then again, I mentioned this in my post, I already said it depends on so many variables:
-For example the service status of the planes
-combat experience of the pilots
-formation they had to fly in (e.g. line formation for the brits)
-stupid orders they were under, like görings bomber escort insanity
-the fact that the germans had to fly over to the UK and only had about 10minutes fuel for combat
-the fear of getting shot down over enemy territory or the channel
-being rested or not
-being stationed far from home
-having good food or not
-etc.
There are SO many factors that contribute to the war - we shouldn't mix up the results of the war with flying characteristics.

Fact is also that home pilots are:
-rested
-well fed
-have no fear of dieing
-always have a respawn button
-know all the performance stats
-know all the weaknesses of their enemies
-get unlimited training hours
-have perfect equiment at home
-got years to practice tactics
-etc.

We CANNOT simply come up with numbers of the war. We also cannot expect to neglect all the psychological effects the war did that affected the numbers. We can only try to come up with great flight models and let the dog fighters fight on equal footings and adjust co-op scenarios WITHOUT taking them too serious.

It's pointless to try and re-create the war. It will never work, never be balanced, ever. Machine performance wasn't the only thing that decided it. Maybe I'm totally wrong and just a complete tard but that's what I wanted to say :-P in fact I don't give a damn what plane is better if they have a decent FM that I can enjoy. For those who cry about imbalanced planes there won't ever be a real solution. In my opinion at least.

Just make up a server with the proposed planeset and see if ppl will like it or not.

I for my part see two kinds of people writing here in this thread:

- Those who don't want to have the things changed either because they are happy that all planes except the Spit 2a are underpowered. They are in favour of having the Spit 2a everywhere where it is like a 1942 plane in a 1940 year war. My guess is, Madfish, that you belong to this group, or you did not read the thread or you just don't have a clue what the thread is about.

- Those who recognize that the FMs are flawed creating an unhistoric imbalance. Madfish: Take note: unhistoric imbalance. Because in case you might have missed it the thread is not about historic imbalance.

The cause for this thread is because all planes except the Spit 2a are underpowered considering historic values. There is nothing to discuss here.

So just fix the FM to give all planes historic performance and basta.

My disagreement is with the SpitMk1 v The Hurricane as currently modelled. Their relative performce and specs are reversed for the time period, Im in the group above but think it merits discussion.

Leave the Mk2 out by all means but at least have the performance of the remaining Allied fighters suited to their roles and corrected relative to the BFs as currently modelled! In other words - fix the two that are wrong initially.

My disagreements goes: I just want ALL aircraft have their correct historic performance. If this is achieved the relative performance of each plane will be correct automatically. This includes the Hurricanes, the Spit 1, the Spit 1a (that should have CS), the Fiat G50 and the 109s. I don't know about the twin engine planes and the stuka.

Two points here:

1. The performance numbers of most of the aircraft in the sim are simply wrong and need to be fixed. We all can agree on that. (I hope).

2. Historical combat outcomes can never be acheived in combat flight simulation. I have taken part in a couple of online campaigns that were very well crafted to simulate the war in North Africa, and the campaign over New Guinea. Correct plane sets as far as possible, correct bases as far as possible, correct numbers of available types, supply issues, etc... And not one time did the historic outcome from WW2 happen. Why? Because we are human beings and we adapt to the mistakes made in the past. We know what each side did correctly or incorrectly in the real deal, and we will not follow blindly the tactics that led to failure. We are not historic re-inactors. We are competetive and we want to win, regardles of what we say here.

So please stop using how the real campaign over England (or any other theatre) played out as justification for aircraft performance. It has nothing to do with it.

very well said !

After reading the comments about the Hurri, Spit I,Ia and the 109's and flying in MP the 109's have the advantage in speed, turning , climbing and fire power.
the IIa is the only Brit plane that fly's like it should but still not the fire power.

And for some reason the groups that fly the 109's do not like the IIa on servers because thy do not have all the advantage.

The 109 pilots say thy do not get in a turning fight with the hurri and Spit I,Ia.
But thy do and out turn the Hurri and Spit I,Ia because of the speed thy can get in the turns.
The 109 pilots also know thy can out climb the Hurri and Spit I,Ia be cause of the speed.
The IIa flys like it should and takes away the big advantage from the 109 pilots and thy do not like that.

I think your playing the wrong game m8

He's playing the right and best game, Razor is just casting his opinion like everyone else, I prefer to hear them all even if I don't necessarily agree. Thats why we have a forum - to debate issues and gameplay, but you know that anyway Jamz.

Mind you, someone logged onto ATAG last night, spent a while then announced.....'to hell with this I'm going back to ROF'........lol!

Agreed..

I leave it here then... #109 top speed# nothing to do with moaning because things have got harder lmao

cheers

Dam,, i said I wasn't going to discuss this sorry topic anymore... shouldn't have lowered myself to such tripe accusations

Enjoy the Video;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utjYPACrMGo

:roll: :-?

That video proves nothing.

Well maybe that some guys manage their energy better than others and that a lucky hit can stop any plane.

Its always like that. But that also doesnt change the fact that the Spit II can do whatever it wants iwth a 109 since its outperforming it by lengths in any discipline and doesnt belong to the servers with the current FMs. Thank god ATAG guys got it and there is none now. Much better playing there. Sadly the Repka guys dont get it.

Winger

Simply FALSE!
Spit I and Ia have better turning ability than the 109 109 is faster and better climber

Hurricane is almost as fast and better turner. Climb is also very close. Takes ages for a good 109 pilot to outfly a decent height advantage against a good hurri pilot.

Italian G50 does everything worse than any other plane.

Spit IIa does everything better than every other plane in game.

These are the unadorned facts my friend. And i am SURE that EVERY CloD pilot that has somewhat decent exxperience will agree on all those points with me.

Winger

looking at the picture it even seems that the spit outrolls the 109 ...

+1

Did you notice that he didn't allow his spitfire to go into -G cutout once during the who video? Either that great flying or the 109 pilot was't using manuvers to take advantages of his opponents weaknesses.


The 109 pilot did enter a number of spins during the fight, thats either running out of energy, bad flying or a last ditch effort! (I'm guilty of those three things myself so you could call me an expert ;) )

Cheers!

my 2 pennies worth:

Im not an "ace" at this by any means, but i usually fly the hurri rotol on atag server

I tried the spit 2 when they had it and it was like changing the difficulty to easy so i stopped flying it, almost felt like i was cheating (and felt sorry for the little 109's).

I also tried flying against it, but not flying the 109 alot, was pointless

I think if they can bring in the e7 and make it a match for the spit2 (dont know if this is accurate historically or not) then you could have different "eras" of the BoB, late and early with different scenarios, i,e bombing convoys, then airfeilds and later cities for example.

That wld be the worst thing to do. Leveling those great FM to that of the relaxed ones that hve the Spits wld kill what CoD had tried to achieved : a fair simulation of a very special part of history

agreed. The 109 was loosing control all the time and didnt use his rolling ability and negative G capability.

The Sopit on the other hand had plenty of chances to put tons of lead into the 109 but simply wasnt abel to steady his sights long enough.

I have met guys online that would have shot that 109 into 1000 pieces within the first minute of the clip:)

Winger

all i can say about this debate is.......we need historical correct flight models for all the planes.as close to reality as possible!thats all we need.
this game is called a flight SIM.
so there should not be made the attempt to even sides for gameplay in my opinion.

if we have realistic performing aircrafts,then i will begin to serious fly online.and then i will happily fight spitsII with my E4,even if my plane is still inferior.
but until this problem is solved, ill stay offline most of the time.

An E-7 was nothing else as an E-4 able to carry a droptank.

Assuming that all CoD 109s are using the same DB601Aa engine, there should almost be no difference in performance between E-1,E-3and E-4 . The E-1 was some very few kg lighter..........
A 109 with differnet performance would be a Bf109E-4/N, but these planes ware rare!
To my knowlage only one fightergroup was equipted with it, and perhaps some additonal among the other groups for some special aces. but even that is doubtfull as it needed different fuel than the other 109s.


From the beginning, to have an E-3 in game was a strangr decission.......E-1 and E-4 ( with their -/B variants) should have made it IMO. But thats already a very dead horse.
same category as the ita
ian planes, the heardbreaker Spit and the german Minelayer.......

I put this video up to show that the IIa has no great advantage over the 109's like some would like to make some think.

But the 109 had/has the advantage over the I,Ia and hurri. That is why the Brits made the IIa to take away that advantage as in the sim.

I'm not going to flame anyone that thinks other wise. Whats the point of that?

If you fly MP and what to fly the IIa or not join a server that has the plane or not.

flyer01

well the spitII has every possible advantage.its faster,it turns better,it climbs better it even outdives the bf.

You obviously have no clue what youre talking about - sorry.
Winger

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1316372425

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1316372472

Like I sayed if you want to fly the IIa on MP join a server that has that plane if not don't.

That was on the ATAG full real servers and at least 20 of those were bombers...
And i never said the 109 had no chances against Spit Is or hurris.

To me it looks like you dont want to get it.
Again: The planeset spit Is and hurris against 109s stands for interestiung fights fo both sides.
Spit IIa against whatever stands for slaughterhouse with blue cattle.

That other shot you made was obviously made on one of the repka servers. I mean comeon. On this server everyone can make kills that can aim well. There is permanently anyone fighting against anyone and there also is someone getting into a fight catching somebody by surprise. Someone with a good aim and strong weapon can make kills en masse there.
A good shooter in a spit could make just as many kills with the right belting.

Winger

I didnt start this thread because one server introduced the spit IIa after that patch... They all did. Thank god the only (and up to now best) full real server with people on it (ATAG) now has taken it out and both sides have fun there i believe.

Winger

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c2...5-24_00006.jpg

Well to be honest about that pic sir, we would have to know how long you were flying on the server, wouldn't we?

And your score proves nothing about the Spit IIa, and mostly says something about your skills and the lack therof of your opponents.

:cool:

Congratulations...

And that wasnt the last of them either...stupidly easy to rack up kills in that thing

My point is and as I've said hundreds of time, the stats mean nothing in this game currently, I posted this on the back end of what Winger posted above..

Makes me laugh on the futile attempts of people trying to justify why this plane should be in the servers or not.....still

I think the stats show some tendencies and as such are valid.

It is still fact that all planes except the spit 2a are undermodelled. This does not make the Spit 2a overmodelled but we need historic performance for ALL aircraft. What's there to discuss about?

At last..

I really didnt think it was that hard for everyone to understand as to why were having a discussion here..but it seems we keep going backwards and the whole ''yea but i just shot down 2 Spit2's with my 109'' comes up OR ''I just got owned by a 109 in my Spit2 so whats the problem?''

Its nothing to do with Pilot Skill, nothing to do with Stats..its to do with FM's that are not modeled correctly

Give me strength..

It really doesn't matter if it a n isle map and people just cant wait to fly into a furball, rinse and repeat..leave it in them servers, after all they are stupidly easy to fly and are great fun..but for big map mission based FR servers leave them out because they are 'not fair'.. not fair being 2 words that i hope just sums it up really

How can this be? Sure, you're not listening when they said, that the Spit II is actually not a good aircraft. Then sitting into and shoot down nearly forty aircraft. Great. And then what about the reds? http://www.pumaszallas.hu/forum/imag...ies/motz_7.gif

Nice points anyway ;)

One day, I tried the same test, but with Spit Ia. I collected 7-8 points and one KIA (chute did not open), but there was no time to continue. All I've done, I didn't pushed on zero meters below the dogfights, climb when I did not see anyone, and (who neurasthenic do not read further) i left the target, when another 109 appears... :rolleyes: