Friday Update, April 13, 2012

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by Martin77

Me 109 E:
"During what was later called the 'Battle of Britain', we flew the Messerschmitt Bf109E. The essential difference from the Spitfire Mark I flown at that time by the RAF was that the Spitfire was less manoeuvrable in the rolling plane. With its shorter wings (2 metres less wingspan) and its square-tipped wings, the Bf 109 was more manoeuvrable and slightly faster. (It is of interest that the English later on clipped the wings of the Spitfire.)
For us, the more experienced pilots, real manoeuvring only started when the slats were out. For this reason it is possible to find pilots from that period (1940) who will tell you that the Spitfire turned better than the Bf 109. That is not true. I myself had many dogfights with Spitfires and I could always out-turn them. This is how I shot down six of them."
- Erwin Leykauf, German fighter pilot, 33 victories. Source: Messerschmitt Bf109 ja Saksan Sotatalous by Hannu Valtonen; Hurricane & Messerschmitt, Chaz Bowyer and Armand Van Ishoven.

Me 109 E:
"Personally, I met RAF over Dunkirk. [During this] battle not a single Spitfire or Hurricane turned tighter than my plane. I found that the Bf 109 E was faster, possessed a higher rate of climb, but was somewhat less manouverable than the RAF fighters. Nevertheless, during the campaign, no Spitfire or Hurricane ever turned inside my plane, and after the war the RAF admitted the loss of 450 Hurricanes and Spitfires during the Battle of France." In the desert there were only a few Spitfires, and we were afraid of those because of their reputation from the Battle of Britain. But after we shot a couple of them down, our confusion was gone."
- Herbert Kaiser, German fighter ace. 68 victories.

"Unexperienced pilots hesitated to turn tight, bacause the plane shook violently when the slats deployed. I realised, though, that because of the slats the plane's stalling characteristics were much better than in comparable Allied planes that I got to fly. Even though you may doubt it, I knew it [Bf109] could manouver better in turnfight than LaGG, Yak or even Spitfire."
- Walter Wolfrum, German fighter ace. 137 victories.

Which along with the numerous quotes i have in books by RAF pilots (Al Deere, Brian Kingcombe, Johny Kent etc...), saying how they could out turn the 109 in the BoB goes to show only one thing.

That the planes were fairly even and that the better pilot could out turn a worse pilot irrespective of whether they were flying a spit or a 109.......

[Bewolf]

Let's just put it this way, those who got outmanoevered by their adversary didn't go home to tell the tale how they turned worse then the enemy.

[Buchon]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Let's just put it this way, those who got outmanoevered by their adversary didn't go home to tell the tale how they turned worse then the enemy.

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by fruitbat

Which along with the numerous quotes i have in books by RAF pilots (Al Deere, Brian Kingcombe, Johny Kent etc...), saying how they could out turn the 109 in the BoB goes to show only one thing.

That the planes were fairly even and that the better pilot could out turn a worse pilot irrespective of whether they were flying a spit or a 109.......

I agree... those pilots where young boys with one life alone, and could not make mistakes as we do continuously.

Yesterday I was playing ROF flying in a Fokker DrI: 1 vs 1 against one of my teammates (same plane) and he was always outturning me. Simply I was scared to pull the stick at full stroke... I was scared by the possible stall... my mate instead was braver or has more experience in that plane.

And I'm sure this is that happened in RL too... how many pilots did really used the full capabilities their planes?

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by 6S.Manu

Yesterday I was playing ROF flying in a Fokker DrI: 1 vs 1 against one of my teammates (same plane) and he was always outturning me. Simply I was scared to pull the stick at full stroke... I was scared by the possible stall... my mate instead was braver or has more experience in that plane.

And I'm sure this is that happened in RL too... how many pilots did really used the full capabilities their planes?

lol, so the sumtotal of your contribution in a debate exchanging information on 109 and spitfire performance is, "the brave one wins", "'cause you and your bestest friend did it that way" ?

your in the wrong department here, maybe google "fairytale forum" to go post that nonsense in

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by zapatista

lol, so the sumtotal of your contribution in a debate exchanging information on 109 and spitfire performance is, "the brave one wins", "'cause you and your bestest friend did it that way" ?

your in the wrong department here, maybe google "fairytale forum" to go post that nonsense in

Actually what manu said makes good sense, you have to be confident with your aircraft if you want to stand a chance, so yes....if you are flying evenly matched aircraft then the better or braver pilot has the edge.

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by taildraggernut

Actually what manu said makes good sense, you have to be confident with your aircraft if you want to stand a chance, so yes....if you are flying evenly matched aircraft then the better or braver pilot has the edge.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by taildraggernut

Actually what manu said makes good sense, you have to be confident with your aircraft if you want to stand a chance, so yes....if you are flying evenly matched aircraft then the better or braver pilot has the edge.

you are demonstrating a failure here to rationally compute simple facts

first we want to know what the actual BoB era performance was for these 3 planes. even if there will be slightly different perspectives on german or allied evaluations done, there will be some genral common ground.
second you can then look at how an experienced, expert, or novice pilot might handle that aircraft
third, you then asses how accurately these competing planes are modeled in CoD, to confirm/reject that what we have in the sim actually allows us to replicate the ww2 pilots experience as close as possible
fourth, and this is where you oddly seem to start off from and completely overlook the previous 3 points, you then want to see how we as armchair virtual pilots can master a specific plane with all its idiosyncrasies, so we have a change to use it strength correctly, and compete against other aircraft with a varied level of skilled pilots.

does that sequence ring any bells with you ?

if you still dont compute, the purpose of this discussion was to deal with step 1 and 2

i really dont care what side was "better" at this or that, we all know what the eventual outcome of the conflict was what i do care about, is being able to use historical tactics and maneuvers with specific planes in this sim, and be able to rely on the aircraft i am (virtually) flying being able to execute it. that is for me (and many others here) the "fun factor" of this sim, and why we keep pushing for it to be better and more accurate.

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by zapatista

you are demonstrating a failure here to rationally compute simple facts

first we want to know what the actual BoB era performance was for these 3 planes. even if there will be slightly different perspectives on german or allied evaluations done, there will be some genral common ground.
second you can then look at how an experienced, expert, or novice pilot might handle that aircraft
third, you then asses how accurately these competing planes are modeled in CoD, to confirm/reject that what we have in the sim actually allows us to replicate the ww2 pilots experience as close as possible
fourth, and this is where you oddly seem to start off from and completely overlook the previous 3 points, you then want to see how we as armchair virtual pilots can master a specific plane with all its idiosyncrasies, so we have a change to use it strength correctly, and compete against other aircraft with a varied level of skilled pilots.

does that sequence ring any bells with you ?

if you still dont compute, the purpose of this discussion was to deal with step 1 and 2

i really dont care what side was "better" at this or that, we all know what the eventual outcome of the conflict was what i do care about, is being able to use historical tactics and maneuvers in this sim and be able to rely on the aircraft i am (virtually) flying being able to execute it. that is for me (and many others here) the "fun factor" of this sim, and why we keep pushing for it to be better and more accurate.

you are demonstrating a total failure of charisma, it really doesn't hurt to be polite.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by taildraggernut

you are demonstrating a total failure of charisma, it really doesn't hurt to be polite.

just re-read your previous post and the context it was in (applauding manu's meaningless comment), my reply was tailored to the combined level of intellectual effort demonstrated

i promise to be gentle and bring flowers next time