FW-190A vs Spitfire, Me-109G, P-47D in dogfights

[engarde]

some strong language in there, expect negative feedback.

this is another chop at a well worn topic, the die hards will hold fast to their bible of aircraft performance no matter the alternatives offered.

i like yeagers sum-uppance: the pilot, not the plane.

to a certain extent i believe this is entirely the deciding factor above a basic competance level.

[engarde]

and to add to that, generally, fighter pilots are reportedly rather shameless self promoters, so i account for just as much boasting as truth in reports.

[BadAim]

I am still not quite sure what your point is. Your superior knowledge of math has no effect on the way highly trained fighter pilots flew their planes 70 years ago. The math of war goes like this; Those who lived flew their planes well, those who died....not so much. Either way this obsession with statistics is fruitless, it's all bull when you encounter a superior pilot.

[Erkki]

His point is that he got proven wrong like 20 times at the Ubizoo, and now expects more respect here. Will receive none. Study Physics and History, man. Dont just cherrypick quotes.

[Davedog74]

they were there mate ,we werent,how can you criticise
your p.c isnt out to kill you
plum

[erco]

I'll not be too critical of Gaston's post- we're striving to (within certain limits) recreate reality with our computer simulations. It's not unreasonable to expect that a good simulator would be capable of recreating reality. Put another way, if it worked in real life, it oughta work that way in game.

However, there are many factors working against the creation of a good simulator, not the least of which is a lack of usable data. This is further compounded by the effect of pilot ability on performance.

Thus, while it is worthwhile and commendable to try and analyze all pertinent reports, and then compare them to the results in the simulator, we must remember that the FW190 WE fly exists as computer code in a program. We fly that airplane, and ingame pilots have found what tactics work well, with that 190.

Gaston, if it makes you feel any better, I got outmaneuvered in my 109, in the horizontal by a P-47 the other day

[Tempest123]

I'm pretty sure every pilot that flew these birds was way more qualified than some non-pilot simulator pilots some 60 years later. I know its confusing reading all the conflicting pilot reports (I would kill for a ride in one of the new Fw-190's from Flugwerk, as this seems to be the most mythical aircraft in terms of performance). All these variables depend on aircraft loadout, fuel, altitude (ex. density altitude at the time and season, field altitude of where the testing took place etc.) , possible damage from capture, fuel type etc., translation errors, unfamiliarity with the aircraft etc. Wayy too many factors. I can take one thing away from the quotes you stated: The Fw-190 (BMW) is a heavier low altitude fighter, and the 109 is a smaller lighter high-altitude fighter (which we all knew anyways). If Oleg took every pilot report of every plane the planes in IL2 would be a mess because its all qualitative information. Official flight tests, factory documents and talking with real pilots is the only way to get accurate information. I know your being facetious, but I would be careful about saying that these fellows were idiots . They were the real deal, and they get my respect.