Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-04-2010, 12:24 AM
Icewolf Icewolf is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 83
Default

the few requests I have are

1) please make realistic spitfire flight models and not what we have in IL2

the spitfire could not nor probably ever could out turn a 109 ,the leading edge slats gave the 109 a lower stall speed and the wing loading of a 109 is lower than a spitfire allowing for a smaller turn radius for the 109. Only pilot skill makes the difference(Len Deighton-- fighter .. a very good reference book)
if it wasn't for a small fuel load of the 109 the spitfires would have been toast in the Battle of Britain (Aviation history magazine)

2) please make the flight models mod proof allowing only official mods

3) have an effective checksum for online play

4)the British 20 mm cannon were unreliable and the pilots who had them wanted to go back to the 303's . what we have in Il2 is far from reality
  #2  
Old 02-04-2010, 12:31 AM
96th_Nightshifter 96th_Nightshifter is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 78
Default

So basically you are asking for a Spitfire that cannot out turn a 109 and to make sure it has no cannons?

Not hard to guess what side of the channel you will be flying from


The Spitfire shouldn't have cannons anyway, certainly not at the beginning of the BoB but to say it cannot out turn a 109?
  #3  
Old 02-04-2010, 02:11 AM
AndyJWest AndyJWest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
the British 20 mm cannon were unreliable and the pilots who had them wanted to go back to the 303's
When? They had reliability problems to start with, they solved them later in the war.

Any simplistic statement about 'X' outturning 'Y' without stating the conditions is practically meaningless.

The majority of RAF kills in the Battle of Britain were scored by Hurricanes...

Need I go on?
  #4  
Old 02-04-2010, 02:31 AM
Igo kyu's Avatar
Igo kyu Igo kyu is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 703
Default

I agree with the two posts immediately above mine.

Particularly the Spitfire had lower wing loading than the 109, just look at the wings, the wings of the Spitfire are much bigger, so for aircraft of more or less the same weight the loading is bound to be lower.

In "Luftwaffe Fighter Aces" by Mike Spick, on page 50 we have a table including many things, particularly:

Quote:
Wing loading Bf 109E-3 32lb/sq ft, Spitfire 1 24lb/sq ft.
  #5  
Old 02-04-2010, 10:20 PM
fireflyerz fireflyerz is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: All over the world...
Posts: 417
Default

Um , High and low wing loadings had bugger all to do with it, it was the spits ability to fly through most of the wing stall that gave its pilot the advantage at low and high speed and the cannon problems wernt fixed untill the feed and eject mechanisms were finally sorted out late 40\41, the 303 s were as a stop gap given an array of tips to make up for the lack of stopping power.
  #6  
Old 02-05-2010, 02:28 AM
Icewolf Icewolf is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 83
Default

  #7  
Old 02-05-2010, 02:54 AM
AndyJWest AndyJWest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,049
Default

OK, Icewolf. Which versions of the Spitfire and Bf 109 is Skip Holm talking about? Under what conditions? Were the ones he flew fitted with full military equipment? Were the engines downrated from military WEP standards? Were there restrictions put on the aircraft, due to them being rare warbirds?

Under some conditions, a good Bf 109 pilot might just outturn a Spitfire, but I'd be surprised if that many BoB engagements involved the sort of prolonged turning fights where this would be significant. And, as I've already pointed out, they were often engaged against Hurricanes anyway.

If you want a realistic BoB simulation, the restrictions on Bf-109 endurance caused by limited fuel are going to be a lot more significant than minor differences in best turn rate etc. If you don't want these restrictions to apply, then you aren't simulating the Battle of Britain at all, but some fictitious joust where everyone starts out under the same conditions - if you do that, you may as well make the planes all perform the same too.

Actually, a 'realistic' BoB simulation would need an AI Herman Goering to make idiotic tactical decisions, and ground anyone whe didn't obey them...
  #8  
Old 04-10-2010, 12:49 PM
imaca imaca is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Igo kyu View Post
I agree with the two posts immediately above mine.

Particularly the Spitfire had lower wing loading than the 109, just look at the wings, the wings of the Spitfire are much bigger, so for aircraft of more or less the same weight the loading is bound to be lower.

In "Luftwaffe Fighter Aces" by Mike Spick, on page 50 we have a table including many things, particularly:
I remember an old " Air Illustrated" magazine which had a report by the RAE (I think) on the 109E. They did comment that the 109E had a tighter turn at low speed than the spitfire (because of slats), but overall were less than impressed - the main problem (apart from the cramped cockpit) they found was poor control harmonization, particularly at high speed elevators (i think) becoming very heavy. The low speed turn advantage would have little practical value in combat - obviously no pilot wants to get into a low energy state and I think Luftwaffe pilots generally kept speed high (BnZ).
Another advantage for the Spit is its large wing root fairings - these lower drag when turning which confers a superior energy retention in turning manouvres - (the 109 has a very abrupt wing/fuselage join)
  #9  
Old 04-15-2010, 03:37 PM
zakkandrachoff's Avatar
zakkandrachoff zakkandrachoff is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: El Cazador, Buenos Aires
Posts: 423
Default

i think that will be great that the Bristol Beaufighter night fighter will be flyable and not the BlenheimIV. The Beau have 4 × 20 mm Hispano Mk III cannon (60 rpg) in nose and 6 × .303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine guns (outer starboard wing). and the BlenheimIV only have 4 x .303.

And will be a nice experience fly a night heavy fighter whit radar included whit a big operational range of combat.

"entered service with the Royal Air Force in July 1940. In the winter of 1940 - 1941 the Beaufighter was used as a night fighter"



"German bombers were relatively free from RAF fighters when attacking at night. The Beaufighter represented an ideal platform for this night fighter role. It was fast enough at 360-MPH to catch German bombers, it was heavily armed, and the observers position was an ideal spot to incorporate a radar operators controls. These night fighter versions were painted a matte black. On October 25, 1940 a Beaufighter recorded its first night victory. The Beaus utilized a transmitting antenna mounted on the nose, and receiving antennas mounted on the leading section of both wings."

__________________
my best: Bf-109; He 162; Hellcat; Schwalbe
Core2Quad 9400 2.66Ghz 45nm - 4x2gb ddr2 800 Kingston = 8GBRAM - XFX Radeon HD 5850 Black Edition 1Gb DDR5 765Mhz/1440steam/ 4.5Gbps- 1/2 Terabyte Wn D 32mb - Mother Assus P5QLE - P&C Silencer 750W - Sentey RJA246 LCD 4 coolers - DVD/RW 20x LG - LCD Samsung P2350n 23" - Edifier C2 2.1+1


waiting for: Il-2: Armée de l’Air; Continuation War; Battle for Moscow; Stalingrad; El Alamein; Sicily; The West Air Campaign; Berlin
ZakKandrachoff
  #10  
Old 04-21-2010, 11:36 PM
Xilon_x's Avatar
Xilon_x Xilon_x is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 715
Default

Ciao Oleg Maddox this is ultimate movie CORPO AEREO ITALIANO trasfer to belgium and prepare attak to ENGLAND.


ITALIAN PILOTS IN ENGLAND






Last edited by Xilon_x; 04-22-2010 at 09:49 PM.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.