LW VS VVS PLANES at 4.10

[_1SMV_Gitano]

Originally Posted by Tempest123

-And the fact that Allied pilots where on rotation much more often.

Indeed. And many of them went to training units to pass their experience. AFAIK only few experienced LW pilots went to command training units, like Herman Graf.

[Ernst]

I tested more two aircraft. The rough P-47 made the "crank" at ~9.0G. Since i am doing the experiments there is some room of error, maybe in future someone ll can do some autopilot tests and compare this kind of info.

I tested the 109 but cannot pull more than ~7.0G. The elevator is so heavy at high speeds that is impossible to go beyond the sevice G, maybe this is an advantage because the pilot can pull back back the stick with no worry. I did not used the trim in 109 to "cheat" the turn.

I overstressed the aircrafts i tested quite a lot but not passed 10Gs. I did not observed any structural damage or penalty except that weird sound. How much must i overstress my plane to have problems? What kind of problems? This is a question to TD guys.

p.s.: if somenone break the 109 by Gs deserves be proclamed a Saint. Because is a miracle.

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Ernst

I overstressed the aircrafts i tested quite a lot but not passed 10Gs. I did not observed any structural damage or penalty except that weird sound. How much must i overstress my plane to have problems? What kind of problems? This is a question to TD guys.

Ernst, according to the documentation for 4.10 each aircraft possesses an in service and ultimate load limit. The ultimate load limit is the G loading at which the aircraft will structurally fail completely. Every time you exceed the in service limit your ultimate load limit is progressively lowered. Carrying external stores lowers these two limits until they are jettisoned. The other thing to try would be to apply both heavy elevator and some aileron at the same time during a pullout, thus creating an asymmetrical load - I haven't tried this myself but I would be interested to see if this has an effect.

[LoBiSoMeM]

The first time I flew in 4.10 I jump into a P-51 to test the corrected FM, online.

Got two 109s in turn fights and play with a FW in my tail.

It's just a matter of time to some weak blue pilots start to cry. But yesterday I had a hard time with a good FW pilot chasing me. Now the P-51 is a good match to the FW, before the plane had SERIOUS issues about stability. The changes in FM just let the P-51 more stable and more reliable, two things that usually ruins the day of a pilot if lack.

The P-51 isn't "better" now, is NORMAL. The FW don't have this kind of problem, the 109 don't enter in crazy spins, so, don't need to be fixed.

The p-51 isn't a Spitifre now. TD just "improved" the P-51 from a potential air coffin to a fast plane, because of the corrected lenght in FM.

[Ernst]

But the 109 characteristics guarantee a nice flying and a very gentle stall. The deployment of slats guarantee to the pilot a warning when the aircraft is about to stall. The P-51 was known for some high speed spin characteristics due to the laminar flow wing. Do not known because i do not fly too much P-51 in IL-2 but i do not think that simple remove that charateristic is the right thing to do only because the allies players wants a "better" P-51 to match the German counterparts.

Dou you fly FW? To me FW is just like or worse the older P-51. Focke Wulf had no acelleration and it have to. My only only complain is: give FW its accelaration. FW acelleration was very good. Initial acceleration was quite the same than spitfire, but the medium range and top end was much better.

Acctualy FW accelerates like a truck. When you lose some energy you cannot rebuild it fast.

If you see the video above the pilot states that there is no way a p-51 could turn fight a 109 in medium to low range of speed. Then i ask, based on what do you state that the new p-51 are correct?

The old P-51 was not an air coffin, it was to you because you tried to turn fight in it. The old was very fast and impossible to pursuit in any fighter. The good P-51 pilot remained untouched.

I pursuited the p-51s many times and no way i could catch it, even in Doras. The ones i destroyed are flying low and turning a lot.

[rakinroll]

I am flying FW-190 Anton 8 and Bf-109 Gustav 6 Erla for years. I only can say that those fighters, especially Anton 8, should be better according to history. But i am not complaining about it. Becuase it forced me to be better and better with tactics. However, lack of cannon power and weak damage modelling of German fighters still makes me feel crazy. As i wrote in my video pages, i like to fight Oleg.

Even so, i am very appreciated to Oleg and his team for this "greatest" simulation.

Happy New Year Oleg and all community.

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by rakinroll

lack of cannon power and weak damage modelling of German fighters

Lolwat.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by Ernst

The P-51 was known for some high speed spin characteristics due to the laminar flow wing.

(...)

If you see the video above the pilot states that there is no way a p-51 could turn fight a 109 in medium to low range of speed. Then i ask, based on what do you state that the new p-51 are correct?

The old P-51 was not an air coffin, it was to you because you tried to turn fight in it. The old was very fast and impossible to pursuit in any fighter. The good P-51 pilot remained untouched.

I pursuited the p-51s many times and no way i could catch it, even in Doras. The ones i destroyed are flying low and turning a lot.

First, the P-51 wasn't know for some "high speed spin characteristics" in real life, sorry. It's always some point people trying to impinge to this aircraft in basis of IL-2 model. The P-51 was know as one of the better WWII aircrafts, stable, reliable. And the loss of control in high speed maneuvers still there, but in HIGH SPEEDS AND AGREESIVE MANEUVERS, as any other aircraft, and in P-51 - because os laminar airflow wing, or other model factor - is more intense than other aircraft in IL-2.

What we don't have more are medium-low speed crazy stalls/spins.

Regards turn fighting in P-51, I got two 109s in the initial turn. The P-51 now is stable an as in real life can turn great initialy, but in IL-2 and real life can't sustain energy in slow turning against an 109. So, the P-51 isn't a Spitfire, but it CAN TURN FIGHT A DORA OR ANTON, for example, without enter in a crazy spin.

[ElAurens]

As to "single bullet" damage to wings not being a factor for "red" planes, I guess you don't fly Yaks much huh?

One hit to the wing and you are combat ineffective.

All this Blue vs. Red whining is just a smokescreen by the whiners on both sides. It isn't about historic performance, it's about the points online.

Be sure.

[Ernst]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

First, the P-51 wasn't know for some "high speed spin characteristics" in real life, sorry. It's always some point people trying to impinge to this aircraft in basis of IL-2 model. The P-51 was know as one of the better WWII aircrafts, stable, reliable. And the loss of control in high speed maneuvers still there, but in HIGH SPEEDS AND AGREESIVE MANEUVERS, as any other aircraft, and in P-51 - because os laminar airflow wing, or other model factor - is more intense than other aircraft in IL-2.

What we don't have more are medium-low speed crazy stalls/spins.

Regards turn fighting in P-51, I got two 109s in the initial turn. The P-51 now is stable an as in real life can turn great initialy, but in IL-2 and real life can't sustain energy in slow turning against an 109. So, the P-51 isn't a Spitfire, but it CAN TURN FIGHT A DORA OR ANTON, for example, without enter in a crazy spin.

The flying envelope for the P-51