Jump to content

I'm Afraid To Buy The FW 190 Dora


BuzzU

Recommended Posts

Right now i prefer the Bf-109 AND Spitfire, both are great and challenging at first, but i found it realy rewarding to master them :)

 

but in the end it comes down to personal opinions, as always :D

 

regards,

RR

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

"There's nothing to be gained by second guessing yourself.

You can't remake the past, so look ahead... or risk being left behind."

 

Noli Timere Messorem

"No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always been there first, and is waiting for it."

Terry Pratchett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That surprises me. I keep reading the Dora is a challenge to fly which is part of the appeal to me.

 

Not sure how the FM differs between DCS and IL2? I flew the K4 a lot in IL2 and it was easy, but that's probably more IL2 than what the real plane feels like.

 

Damn! I still want the Dora. I need to get over this flying American planes only. I always fly German in IL2.

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 2c:

 

The Spit is a (much) easier plane to take-off and land in than the Bf-109.

 

But the Bf-109 is a far more easier plane to fight in.

 

This is mainly because with the Spit, you have to keep the speed above 180 MPH to avoid your engine blowing out at any major (i.e. combat-level) boost. This leads to the paradoxical situation of sometimes needing to throttling down while climbing (anticipating speed dropping or even coming near stall at the apex; whether or not this is need/advisable/avoidable is another discussion) and then throttling up again when diving (but wait till IAS > 180!). This adds a massive dimension of complexity/task-loading in combat!

 

The Bf-109, but contrast, is faaaaaar easier to manage in combat: keep your RPM's to more than 2600 and you have no problems for duration of a dogfight (typically < 30 mins), knowing that when you really, really, really, need some extra, you can go to 2800 (no more than 10 mins). The mental workload of this engine management is so much less than the spit's, it is like night and day, and in this respect the Bf-109 comes across like a highly-automated smart car from 2018 compared to a 1930's Le Mans F1 racing car.

 

It comes down to: in combat, it is easier to track and manage RPM than it is to track and manage speed, especially when the critical threshold is so high (180 mph)!

 

With the Bf-109, I can spend all my time looking out of the cockpit, while with the Spit I am always glancing at my airspeed (and also engine temps for good measure!). And in things like a climb after a 109 trying to pull a yo-yo on me or a steep turn, I always have a nervous eye on the MPH so as to be ready to chop the throttle the moment in nears 180.

 

Now, the above discusses the relative merits of the aircraft in terms of pilot workload while fighting. In terms of the physical combat capabilities of the two aircraft, I could not summarize better than this:

 

So, the Spit takes quite a bit more skill and mental tasking to fight in, and, furthermore in most parts of the combat regime is either at a distinct disadvantage or equal with the 109, and even in the few cases where it has the edge over the 109 (e.g. high speed turns), it takes a good pilot to pull it off.

 

But here's the rub: more and more, I find myself drawn to the Spit, precisely because it is such a handful and is forced to struggle for its win! I love it! Hopping back behind the 109 stick after a few hours in the Spit feels like half the challenge has been taken out of the equation. It's like I have all this extra mental space that I don't know what to do with during the dogfight. I love both a/c (and the Mustang), and, in the hands of a capable pilot, both the Spit and 109 are deadly --- I would not be able to put money on or the other. But I do know that when I take out a 109 in the Spit, the thrill of achievement and glowing satisfaction is sooooooo much higher than the other way around .... especially if I pull it of without having blown an engine!

 

So, if you want the pride and thrill of the greater challenge while flying and fighting, the Spit is the ride for you, IMHO.


Edited by Bearfoot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your post Bearfoot. To be honest I had no intention of ever buying the Spit. Personal reasons.

 

I love the P-51 and I have it to fly anytime I feel like it. For some odd reason, I want to actually fight in a different plane. It's between the Dora and K4. I have convinced myself that i'm not actually killing American pilots. Everybody gets to go home when the fight is over. So, if I want to role play a German pilot nobody gets hurt.

 

Do you happen to own the Dora? You didn't mention it, so i'm thinking you don't. I've read enough threads on the comparison and it seems the K4 is more popular. The only thing I don't like about it is the view out of it. I have a hard enough time finding the planes to have a lousy view added to the mix.

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your post Bearfoot. To be honest I had no intention of ever buying the Spit. Personal reasons.

 

I love the P-51 and I have it to fly anytime I feel like it. For some odd reason, I want to actually fight in a different plane. It's between the Dora and K4. I have convinced myself that i'm not actually killing American pilots. Everybody gets to go home when the fight is over. So, if I want to role play a German pilot nobody gets hurt.

 

Do you happen to own the Dora? You didn't mention it, so i'm thinking you don't. I've read enough threads on the comparison and it seems the K4 is more popular. The only thing I don't like about it is the view out of it. I have a hard enough time finding the planes to have a lousy view added to the mix.

 

Yep, I have the Dora (FWIW: I love helos and WW2 warbirds far more than jets!).

 

Here is the strange thing. Before I got the Dora, the FW-190 was my favorite Luftwaffe fighter. Maybe the my favorite WW2 Western Front fighter. Loved its lines.

 

But strangely, once I got the Dora and flew around in it for a while, found it ... a little less enrapturing. Don't know why. I quickly got over the initial difficulties in taking off (for me, probably the trickiest take-off of all the DCS WW2 birds), so that was not it. I found that, even once in the air and in combat, I just did not enjoy it that much. It felt sluggish and, if not quite underpowered then at least more "built for comfort rather than speed", compared to the 109K (the "K" here is important!). I remember reading once that the Bf-109 was likened to a superb thoroughbred and the Fw-190 was likened to a solid cavalry horse, and I think that the comparison is apt. It takes greater skill to fly and fight well in the 109, but once you get there, it is easier do well than with the 190. Or, to quote what was said in the great reddit thread: the 109 is difficult to learn, but easy to master. At the end of the day, I found the 109K more compelling to both fly and fight it. My flight hours speak for themselves: I really have not touched the 190D in a couple of years after trying to get into soon after I got it (and I got it and the 109K the same time). I still think the Dora looks so much nicer than either the 109 or the Spit or, for that matter, the Mustang: I think this every time one whizzes by my as I crank around to try and get on its six!

 

Why are you against the Spit, might I ask? I think it pushes all the buttons you want pushed, is not just capable but a legendary aircraft, and you will not have to worry about shooting down pixels with USAAF pixel patterns! Right now, I think in DCS it is the most interesting WW2 combat aircraft to fly from both a challenge as well as achievement aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not much into turn fighters. It's too easy to get picked off while i'm turning in circles from an energy fighter diving down on me, pick me off, and zoom back up.

 

What sort of energy fighter is the Spit? Can it do it as well as the K4?

 

It's not important about why I won't buy the Spit. it happened a long time ago and I should be over it by now. I suppose if I can fly a german plane I can fly a British one too.

 

So, which is the better dogfighter and dogfighting doesn't mean just turning to me. That's fine 1 on 1, but not when lots of planes are involved. Energy and turning. What plane works better? Leave out the challenge of flying it. Any plane can be learned.

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not much into turn fighters. It's too easy to get picked off while i'm turning in circles from an energy fighter diving down on me, pick me off, and zoom back up.

 

What sort of energy fighter is the Spit? Can it do it as well as the K4?

 

It's not important about why I won't buy the Spit. it happened a long time ago and I should be over it by now. I suppose if I can fly a german plane I can fly a British one too.

 

So, which is the better dogfighter and dogfighting doesn't mean just turning to me. That's fine 1 on 1, but not when lots of planes are involved. Energy and turning. What plane works better? Leave out the challenge of flying it. Any plane can be learned.

 

The Reddit post to which I linked earlier summarizes this more lucidly and accurately than I have ever seen anywhere else. You should probably read it even if you have no interest in getting either the K4 or the Spit.

 

Yes, dogfighting is not just turning. "Which plane works better" has, as I'm sure you know, only one accurate if unsatisfactory answer, "it depends"! Yes, any plane can be learned, but: (a) some planes are easier to learn than others; (b) some planes are more fun to learn than others; © some planes are more fun and/or easier to fly after you learn them, regardless of how easy/difficult they are to learn. Just like your A-10C question, the issue is not the initial investment in learning, but what you do with the a/c after you learn: does it "fit" who you are?

 

Having said all that, the Bf-109K right now probably holds the clear edge across most parts of the combat flight regime as the Reddit post describes. But that does not mean: (a) a good pilot in a Spit cannot give a good pilot in a Bf-109K a shellacking; (b) you will necessarily find the Bf-109K a better fit for your style and temperament than the Spit; © you will necessarily enjoy the Bf-109K more than the Spit!

 

The Reddit post says that the Bf-109K is "difficult to learn, easy to master". The Spit, on the other hand, is "easy to learn, difficult to master". If it is the bigger/better challenge you are looking for, the Spit is your ride. If it is the bigger/better gun you are looking for (both figuratively and literally), the Messers is your ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BuzzU,

 

in the end, you will own them all :) It's a question of where to start and not where to finish imho.

 

The Fw-190 is a difficult airframe for the first 20-50 take-offs, depending on how fast you pick it up. Elsewhere, I think it is very easy to fly and operate in comparison to your beloved Mustang.

 

Landing the Bf-109 is also difficult...LoL ...none is actually easy as a beginner and if it was it would be plain WRONG !

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have thousands of hours flying WW2 planes in IL2, but those were never hard to take off and land. I'm not sure if IL2 was too easy, or DCS is too hard to the real planes? I had a hard time with the P-51 landing until I figured out to leave a bit of throttle on during landing. It was always easy to take off in, but I guess it is for everybody.

 

I bought Normandy with the Assets just now. Now my decision is the Spit or K4? The K4 in realistic missions should be vastly outnumbered in Normandy. That has more appeal to me than having an advantage in servers now.

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh even with your concerns, i would still buy and fly it in SP as your are missing out on a beautifully modeled aircraft.

 

I'm sure at some point i'll buy them all. Even if I don't plan on it. ;)

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, I have the Dora (FWIW: I love helos and WW2 warbirds far more than jets!).

 

Here is the strange thing. Before I got the Dora, the FW-190 was my favorite Luftwaffe fighter. Maybe the my favorite WW2 Western Front fighter. Loved its lines.

 

But strangely, once I got the Dora and flew around in it for a while, found it ... a little less enrapturing. Don't know why. I quickly got over the initial difficulties in taking off (for me, probably the trickiest take-off of all the DCS WW2 birds), so that was not it. I found that, even once in the air and in combat, I just did not enjoy it that much. It felt sluggish and, if not quite underpowered then at least more "built for comfort rather than speed", compared to the 109K (the "K" here is important!). I remember reading once that the Bf-109 was likened to a superb thoroughbred and the Fw-190 was likened to a solid cavalry horse, and I think that the comparison is apt. It takes greater skill to fly and fight well in the 109, but once you get there, it is easier do well than with the 190. Or, to quote what was said in the great reddit thread: the 109 is difficult to learn, but easy to master. At the end of the day, I found the 109K more compelling to both fly and fight it. My flight hours speak for themselves: I really have not touched the 190D in a couple of years after trying to get into soon after I got it (and I got it and the 109K the same time). I still think the Dora looks so much nicer than either the 109 or the Spit or, for that matter, the Mustang: I think this every time one whizzes by my as I crank around to try and get on its six!

 

You know, since you said about enjoying the challenge an mental exercise envolved in flying the Spit and 109, that might be the reason you're less than satisfied by the Dora. Just the throttle movement to control the RPM, and everything else, mixture, prop pitch, induction pressure, controlled by the management unit based on the RPM. A buddy of mine loves flying the Dora, more than the Mustang, because he doesn't have to control the pitch and inhg. I on the other hand get a massive thrill each of the few times I'm able to get her into the air. I don't even try to land yet.

 

By the way, I'm of the opinion that take offs and landings will be VERY different in the new Normandy map. The airfields will be grass and dirt, so we shouldn't have nearly as much of a tendency to bounce as on a paves runway.

When all else fails, READ THE INSTRUCTIONS!

 

i-7 8700K Coffee Lake 5 GHz OC CPU, 32GB Corsair 3200 RAM, GTX1080 Ti 11Gb VRAM. Controls - Thrustmaster Warthog H.O.T.A.S., Saitek Pro rudder pedals, TrackIR 5, Oculus Rift S, Rift CV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure i'd count on the landings being easier in Normandy. They use a special process of mixing some kind of mixture with the dirt that really hardens it up. They do that to dirt roads here in the mountains that get a lot of traffic. It's as hard as asphalt and lasts as long too.

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If done properly, any grass field will make it more easy to track straight. Not saying " by itself", I say more easy. Slowing down should also happen by itself more than on asphalt, vice versa

you need more runway to gain speed.

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, I'm of the opinion that take offs and landings will be VERY different in the new Normandy map. The airfields will be grass and dirt, so we shouldn't have nearly as much of a tendency to bounce as on a paves runway.

 

I have not noticed any significant difference in takeoff or landing in the Normandy pre alpha.

Truly superior pilots are those that use their superior judgment to avoid those situations where they might have to use their superior skills.

 

If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

 

"If at first you don't succeed, Carrier Landings are not for you!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If done properly, any grass field will make it more easy to track straight. Not saying " by itself", I say more easy. Slowing down should also happen by itself more than on asphalt, vice versa

you need more runway to gain speed.

 

I agree, but does Normandy have grass runways?

 

edit.......I found this. It seems they used some sort of steel mesh in the runways.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Landing_Ground

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, since you said about enjoying the challenge an mental exercise envolved in flying the Spit and 109, that might be the reason you're less than satisfied by the Dora. Just the throttle movement to control the RPM, and everything else, mixture, prop pitch, induction pressure, controlled by the management unit based on the RPM. A buddy of mine loves flying the Dora, more than the Mustang, because he doesn't have to control the pitch and inhg. I on the other hand get a massive thrill each of the few times I'm able to get her into the air. I don't even try to land yet.

 

That would make sense ... except that the 109K is really --- in practice --- as hands-off management as the Dora. You can override the RPM/pitch, but I've not found it terribly useful to do so. So from an engine management perspective, flying the K is mostly just throttle management like the Dora. The 109E3 (and before): now that was a handful! But also so many generations older so as to be, in WW2 technological pace terms, a different era. No, I think I like the 109K over the Dora because it flies better and it take more to fly her --- a racing horse rather than a cavalry horse. Though, I agree that take-off's in the FW-190 are the most challenging of all the DCS warbirds.


Edited by Bearfoot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I might buy the K4 instead. That way i'll have a plane for both sides. I didn't want to buy both German planes and had to choose one.

 

I almost took the Dora, but looking over the long nose changed my mind.

 

I'm reading the K4 manual now. Nothing is set in stone until I click on the Buy button.

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I might buy the K4 instead. That way i'll have a plane for both sides. I didn't want to buy both German planes and had to choose one.

 

I almost took the Dora, but looking over the long nose changed my mind.

 

I'm reading the K4 manual now. Nothing is set in stone until I click on the Buy button.

 

The K4 is the favorite for multiplayer airquake. The Dora is the plane for actual WW2 combat.

 

The view over the nose is not the Dora's fault. DCS does not model the refraction of light.

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The K4 is the favorite for multiplayer airquake. The Dora is the plane for actual WW2 combat.

 

The view over the nose is not the Dora's fault. DCS does not model the refraction of light.

 

The K4 doesn't have to be used for just air quake. It wasn't in WW2. Why is the Dora more for actual combat than the K4?

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

By the way, I'm of the opinion that take offs and landings will be VERY different in the new Normandy map. The airfields will be grass and dirt, so we shouldn't have nearly as much of a tendency to bounce as on a paves runway.

 

This is a common misconception, and is I have to say completely wrong. Bouncing is not caused by the hardness of the airstrip or anything like that. The "bounce" people experience is the combination of piloting error and ground effect, and is the result of increasing lift pressure on the wings. Nothing to do with the landing gear or the hardness of the concrete.

 

With that said it should be 'somewhat' easier to land on a dirt strip, with a taildragger, compared to a concrete runway. That has to do with wheel tracking, and transverse friction on the wheels. Not sure how detailed the modeling of that is in DCS though.

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I can agree with that. Take a basketball and bounce it on a hard surface. Now take the same ball and bounce it on grass or soft dirt.

 

Of course, the bounce is a fault of the pilot, but the tires bouncing on a surface adds to the bounce.

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...