How Realistic Is The Simulation Mode?

[haitch40]

yeh talking about that i came to hate the p51 and the 109 because they r not agile enough for me when im choosing a plane agility is number 1 on my list. fire power 2nd and 3rd speed then comes armour

[mondo]

Originally Posted by haitch40

yeh talking about that i came to hate the p51 and the 109 because they r not agile enough for me when im choosing a plane agility is number 1 on my list. fire power 2nd and 3rd speed then comes armour

They are two of the most agile monoplanes of WW2! Both have good roll rates, good turning rates, some of the 109's have climbing abilities like nothing else and the P51 has excellent high speed control responses. Besides, blanked statements about a 109 are bad since there were so many different versions with different characteristics. Even a G2 is completely different from a G14.

Granted you can get better turners and rollers (although most 109's have superb low speed turning) but your looking at i153's or similar early war 'crap' planes unless you go for a 190 which has a better role rate than anything else.

[haitch40]

Originally Posted by mondo

They are two of the most agile monoplanes of WW2! Both have good roll rates, good turning rates, some of the 109's have climbing abilities like nothing else and the P51 has excellent high speed control responses. Besides, blanked statements about a 109 are bad since there were so many different versions with different characteristics. Even a G2 is completely different from a G14.

Granted you can get better turners and rollers (although most 109's have superb low speed turning) but your looking at i153's or similar early war 'crap' planes unless you go for a 190 which has a better role rate than anything else.

ok im not saying they r bad planes i just prefer planes like the spitfire and japanese planes apart from the zero