Jump to content

Fighting the Spitfire


Recommended Posts

Don't turn. Run away, climb and drop down on it. Rince and repeat. But don't turn. Never.

 

You can only turnfight with some less experienced pilots who don't fully turn. But that's the minority. Most of them just pull and they're away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It loses energy, only you lose more if you try to match the turn due to the higher wingload, and still won't go any close to it's turn.

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It loses energy, only you lose more if you try to match the turn due to the higher wingload, and still won't go any close to it's turn.

 

 

S!

 

exactly spit at 5 AOA will make the same turn as fw190 at 10 AOA but drag at 10 AOA is blowing sky high

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It loses energy, only you lose more if you try to match the turn due to the higher wingload, and still won't go any close to it's turn.

 

 

S!

Depending on the speed and alt, the K4 can turn better than the Spit, the 'secret' is to always use the vertical and the engine power.

 

Sent from my Redmi 5 using Tapatalk

Specs:

Asus Z97 PRO Gamer, i7 4790K@4.6GHz, 4x8GB Kingston @2400MHz 11-13-14-32, Titan X, Creative X-Fi, 128+2x250GB SSDs, VPC T50 Throttle + G940, MFG Crosswinds, TrackIR 5 w/ pro clip, JetSeat, Win10 Pro 64-bit, Oculus Rift, 27"@1920x1080

 

Settings:

2.1.x - Textures:High Terrain:High Civ.Traffic:Off Water:High VisRan:Low Heatblur:High Shadows:High Res:1920x1080 RoC:1024 MSAA:4x AF:16x HDR:OFF DefS: ON GCI: ON DoF:Off Lens: OFF C/G:390m Trees:1500m R:max Gamma: 1.5

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depending on the speed and alt, the K4 can turn better than the Spit, the 'secret' is to always use the vertical and the engine power.

 

Sent from my Redmi 5 using Tapatalk

Of course for every possible scenario we should check charts and everything, mine is just an general answer which I think it's what OP seek and I believe is better understandable.

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't try to do a sustained turn fight with a spit, ever, you will lose. The 109 is alot faster then the spit in level flight and shallow climb. Fighting in the 109 takes practice but once you know what you are doing you are untouchable in it.

 

An example senario, spit on your six. Really bad, if he has energy he can stay there for while before you pull away out of gun range. So what do you do? Well what is the spit worse at then the 109? Spit has slower dive speed and slower roll rate.

 

So split s, spiral dive, build your speed up. You should be slowly pulling away at this point but its slow, how you gona pull away faster? Level out, and then go into a very shallow climb. The 109 is way faster in level flight, slight climb is to get the spit to nose up a little (chasing you), he will slow down much faster that way. You will pull away fast.

 

How to kill a spit? You have to get altitude advantage and dive on him, getting him to turn to dodge so he cant climb up after you. You can follow a spitfire in a turn while you have more energy then him but you cant do it for long. To follow a spit in a turn you have to throttle back in your dive and use elevator trim to pull up behind him. But you lose your energy adantage so you only have one shot at him before you are defensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Don't try to do a sustained turn fight with a spit, ever, you will lose. The 109 is alot faster then the spit in level flight and shallow climb. Fighting in the 109 takes practice but once you know what you are doing you are untouchable in it.

 

An example senario, spit on your six. Really bad, if he has energy he can stay there for while before you pull away out of gun range. So what do you do? Well what is the spit worse at then the 109? Spit has slower dive speed and slower roll rate.

 

So split s, spiral dive, build your speed up. You should be slowly pulling away at this point but its slow, how you gona pull away faster? Level out, and then go into a very shallow climb. The 109 is way faster in level flight, slight climb is to get the spit to nose up a little (chasing you), he will slow down much faster that way. You will pull away fast.

 

 

Do these tactics have any hope of success against the AI? Or am I wasting my time? Can't seem to shake them in a 190 (D or A) and I try to follow this advice, diving low to gain speed advantage and then extending gradually. Always ends in my death!

------------

 

3080Ti, i5- 13600k 32GB  VIVE index, VKB peddals, HOTAS VPC MONGOOSE, WARTHOG throttle, BKicker,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do these tactics have any hope of success against the AI? Or am I wasting my time? Can't seem to shake them in a 190 (D or A) and I try to follow this advice, diving low to gain speed advantage and then extending gradually. Always ends in my death!

 

Does not work vs AI, AI don't obay the laws of physics. They can do things that are impossible. You should be able to extend away from the AI in a D9 but thats about it. If the AI is in a plane that turns tighter then you you generally cant beat them. I personally think that flying vs players is the only way to go, with the exception of AI bombers.

 

Try flying on the Burning skies server if your interested in PvP. Warbirds of prey server is a mix of AI and players, you try there to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does not work vs AI, AI don't obay the laws of physics. They can do things that are impossible. You should be able to extend away from the AI in a D9 but thats about it. If the AI is in a plane that turns tighter then you you generally cant beat them. I personally think that flying vs players is the only way to go, with the exception of AI bombers.

 

Try flying on the Burning skies server if your interested in PvP. Warbirds of prey server is a mix of AI and players, you try there to.

 

Unfortunately in VR I am not sure the performance is quite there yet. Also seems to be hard to find servers with many people where I'm at, and is sometimes frustrating to even find a server. At the moment I can see 'severs 3 players 3'! All players in different servers and none of which seem to be WW2...

The 190 is basically a no go in SP, because although I can get a kill in it, I can't escape anything it's a brick! I know AI can degrade performance but I don't understand why the pursuing AI can not be slowed or its shooting acurracy decreased some. Guess it would have a butterfly effect, but its very annoying, as it makes the whole thing a game of paper scissors stone, albeit with pretty much nothing being able to beat the spitfire, and pretty much everything able to kill the 190's.


Edited by Wolf8312

------------

 

3080Ti, i5- 13600k 32GB  VIVE index, VKB peddals, HOTAS VPC MONGOOSE, WARTHOG throttle, BKicker,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Wolf,

 

 

The burning skies server has been a bit hit and miss the last couple of days (unsure as to why) but it was up this evening and normally has 10-40 human players. Primetime being euro evening. It runs the Caucaus map so you may be missing it if your searching Normandy.

 

 

 

Not sure how VR handles the icon settings in there as its hard enough with a normal setup ;).

 

 

As for turning with Spits this is the one and only advantage it has so I would hope you wouldn't turn inside well.


Edited by No.119_Bruv (VK-B)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if spit is flown poorly bf-109 can turn inside but if you meet good spit pilot you cant. if spit is on tail he can very easy cut turn in even if he slower it will catch you in turn

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately in VR I am not sure the performance is quite there yet. Also seems to be hard to find servers with many people where I'm at, and is sometimes frustrating to even find a server. At the moment I can see 'severs 3 players 3'! All players in different servers and none of which seem to be WW2...

The 190 is basically a no go in SP, because although I can get a kill in it, I can't escape anything it's a brick! I know AI can degrade performance but I don't understand why the pursuing AI can not be slowed or its shooting acurracy decreased some. Guess it would have a butterfly effect, but its very annoying, as it makes the whole thing a game of paper scissors stone, albeit with pretty much nothing being able to beat the spitfire, and pretty much everything able to kill the 190's.

 

 

I don't know what time zone your in but you should be able to fly on burning skies when its populated. Its most popular on the weekend during European afternoon/evening time. But usually Americans start joining when the Europeans start leaving and it stays alive for a while. I seriously recommend trying multiplayer, it's a lot of fun.

 

 

 

Make sure you are running DCS Open Beta, it's the version everyone plays and make sure DCS is updated. Also as No.119_Bruv (VK-B) pointed out, Burning Skies uses the Caucauses map.

 

 

I highly recommend flying PvP, it's great fun. Even better flying with other people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depending on the speed and alt, the K4 can turn better than the Spit, the 'secret' is to always use the vertical and the engine power.

 

Sent from my Redmi 5 using Tapatalk

 

 

Which Spit?

 

 

You refer to the K4 but don't refer to which Spit with which you are referring.

 

 

Also, at what altitude? Design features make one superior over the other at different altitudes.

 

 

They both in general, have different jobs. So please be specific!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Haven't set up a home cockpit yet so only have historical exploits to suggest, I'll try these out when I get a proper set of controls to use my DCS modules.

Assuming the developers modelling is accurate, by all reports positive:

historically the BF109 with any Daimler engine version has the best performance in shallow climb of any WW2 fighter, I even have transcripts from British Ministry specifically warning 2,000hp Hawker Tempest pilots not to attempt following an Me109 into a slow climb. I believe this is the Daimler fluid supercharger coupling in action, working as a 2-speed but not having the stepped performance drop at a gear change altitude, Daimlers simply have a very subtle flat spot at about 3000 metres and like to run hot at low alt. This gives them a tractor like slow climb that other supercharger setups simply can't follow over distance.

Point being, any opportunity to extend a shallow climb will bleed more energy from a Spit than it will a 109, the longer or more frequently you can get him to follow you into one the better as aerial combat is, after all an energy game.

Thought I should add also, zoom climbs are different, most late war high powered fighters outdo the 109 in that arena. It excels at the tractor climb only, though was superior in all climbs earlier in the war.

 

Dive performance is the second area, mainly dive acceleration. This is pure airframe design and very specific. The cockpit is close to the front of the wings and the selected engine type is inverted inline specifically to reduce frontal mass and narrow the fuselage, so pilot view forward and down is exceptional and well beyond the Spit. It also has far less frontal mass than the Spit, so not only will he no longer be able to see you the instant you drop below his firing line (without moving his wings and nose out of the way first), but there is no other fighter which can match the initial dive acceleration of a 109, again British Ministry documentation warns Tempest pilots in 1944 not to dive with a 109 unless you have superior speed entering the dive, in which case by holding full throttle you will eventually overtake the 109 and zoom to a higher altitude, however at a dive beginning at the same speed the 109 gains more energy. At all times the Tempest pilots are warned to maintain a higher airspeed than a 109 during manoeuvres or else to break and return with a higher airspeed, or they run the risk of it outperforming the Tempest MkV in a critical manoeuvre.

And the punchline is the captured 109G2 used in RAF/BAM tests was boost restricted to 1.3ata due to piston holing issues until October 43 Daimler production, so it was like operating with 1350hp against 2000hp. All up RAF pilots commented that it was a far better stalker and hunter than a Spit, designed quite obviously to approach at speed and altitude and dive on enemy aircraft, then casually tractor its way back up to the stratosphere and they could basically do that just as well in 1940 that they could in 1945 and still in 1945 they could do a couple things better than any other type, due to that uniquely tiny frontal mass and tractor engine.

 

So I mean overall performance is equivalent Spit and Messer but they each have such different strengths that if you can exploit them repeatedly during an engagement you'll have to wind up with more energy than your opponent and at least swing chances regularly your way.

 

Just remember it's an energy game and piston fighters don't have any to begin with, so winning that battle will win the engagement.

 

Another historical piece of advice, paraphrasing from Marsielle upon piloting the 109 most effectively in combat: he said learning to handle the 109 at low speed will help you survive the longest. Count on losing all your flight energy, that's just combat. Now that said, Marsielle first became famous when his flight armourers mentioned in a magazine article that he shot down dozens of enemy aircraft routinely using only a handful of cannon rounds and less than a couple of hundred MG rounds. So I guess he could afford to hang on a wing virtually stalling and just shoot down a few enemy planes to make it interesting; hang on I found my figures I had laying around, shot down 6 SAAF No5 Sqn Kittyhawks (confirmed) using 10 rounds of 2cm and 180 rounds of 7.92mm in one sortie 5 June 42.

 

Hartmann straight up followed Boelcke dicta. Stalk the weakest link, dive from the sun, don't fire your guns. Just before you crash into him, try to empty the magazines. Climb to avoid the crash. Repeat as necessary. The way they say most pilots screw up shooting down enemy aircraft is by firing too soon. Under dicta it should be clinical, generally aiming for total surprise and ensuring a kill as early or immediate as possible in priority over any manoeuvring techniques. Of course referencing dictum or military training references does bring up the issue of how to surprise AI aircraft, obviously they have to model many human limitations for realism.

 

Interestingly under Luftwaffe advanced fighter training aces often mention no differentiation between aircraft, Allied or Axis so long as they were contemporary, they placed emphasis on human tactics and pilot experience; where British advanced combat training involved examining strengths and weaknesses between aircraft types. I would've expected that to be the other way around, but say Rall or any of the others will often remark no particular difference between a Mustang, Thunderbolt or late war Spit and Messer, all good planes they say, nothing particular about any, the Thunderbolt went down just like a Mustang, the Thunderbolt dive didn't particularly stand out, the Messer was good they say, the Focke Wulf was good, not so technical about the planes differences at all, more like it all about the pilot for them. I guess it's a combination and the pilot can do the technical part by gut instinct if he's very experienced perhaps.


Edited by vanir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haven't set up a home cockpit yet so only have historical exploits to suggest, I'll try these out when I get a proper set of controls to use my DCS modules.

Assuming the developers modelling is accurate, by all reports positive:

historically the BF109 with any Daimler engine version has the best performance in shallow climb of any WW2 fighter, I even have transcripts from British Ministry specifically warning 2,000hp Hawker Tempest pilots not to attempt following an Me109 into a slow climb. I believe this is the Daimler fluid supercharger coupling in action, working as a 2-speed but not having the stepped performance drop at a gear change altitude, Daimlers simply have a very subtle flat spot at about 3000 metres and like to run hot at low alt. This gives them a tractor like slow climb that other supercharger setups simply can't follow over distance.

Point being, any opportunity to extend a shallow climb will bleed more energy from a Spit than it will a 109, the longer or more frequently you can get him to follow you into one the better as aerial combat is, after all an energy game.

Thought I should add also, zoom climbs are different, most late war high powered fighters outdo the 109 in that arena. It excels at the tractor climb only, though was superior in all climbs earlier in the war.

 

Dive performance is the second area, mainly dive acceleration. This is pure airframe design and very specific. The cockpit is close to the front of the wings and the selected engine type is inverted inline specifically to reduce frontal mass and narrow the fuselage, so pilot view forward and down is exceptional and well beyond the Spit. It also has far less frontal mass than the Spit, so not only will he no longer be able to see you the instant you drop below his firing line (without moving his wings and nose out of the way first), but there is no other fighter which can match the initial dive acceleration of a 109, again British Ministry documentation warns Tempest pilots in 1944 not to dive with a 109 unless you have superior speed entering the dive, in which case by holding full throttle you will eventually overtake the 109 and zoom to a higher altitude, however at a dive beginning at the same speed the 109 gains more energy. At all times the Tempest pilots are warned to maintain a higher airspeed than a 109 during manoeuvres or else to break and return with a higher airspeed, or they run the risk of it outperforming the Tempest MkV in a critical manoeuvre.

And the punchline is the captured 109G2 used in RAF/BAM tests was boost restricted to 1.3ata due to piston holing issues until October 43 Daimler production, so it was like operating with 1350hp against 2000hp. All up RAF pilots commented that it was a far better stalker and hunter than a Spit, designed quite obviously to approach at speed and altitude and dive on enemy aircraft, then casually tractor its way back up to the stratosphere and they could basically do that just as well in 1940 that they could in 1945 and still in 1945 they could do a couple things better than any other type, due to that uniquely tiny frontal mass and tractor engine.

 

So I mean overall performance is equivalent Spit and Messer but they each have such different strengths that if you can exploit them repeatedly during an engagement you'll have to wind up with more energy than your opponent and at least swing chances regularly your way.

 

Just remember it's an energy game and piston fighters don't have any to begin with, so winning that battle will win the engagement.

 

Another historical piece of advice, paraphrasing from Marsielle upon piloting the 109 most effectively in combat: he said learning to handle the 109 at low speed will help you survive the longest. Count on losing all your flight energy, that's just combat. Now that said, Marsielle first became famous when his flight armourers mentioned in a magazine article that he shot down dozens of enemy aircraft routinely using only a handful of cannon rounds and less than a couple of hundred MG rounds. So I guess he could afford to hang on a wing virtually stalling and just shoot down a few enemy planes to make it interesting; I've got figures laying around somewhere, 20 2cm rounds and 180 7.92mm rounds for 12 confirmed SAAF Tomahawks IIRC, in one sortie. Slow speed handling, he stressed, and the 109 hates slow speed, it's like a brick at slow speed.

There is only one small detail missing, We dont have G2 or even G6 or G14 we have K4 and this is difrent world. Preformance jump from G6 to K4 is extremly big.

K4 use 2 x 13mm mgs instead 7.92 and 30mm instead 20mm cannon


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is only one small detail missing, We dont have G2 or even G6 or G14 we have K4 and this is difrent world. Preformance jump from G6 to K4 is extremly big.

K4 use 2 x 13mm mgs instead 7.92 and 30mm instead 20mm cannon

 

The performance strengths of the 109 remain the same as inherent to unique combination of design elements. The K4 has higher power settings and more thrust overall but is essentially a refined G6 and all but identical to a G10. It was really the design intention of the G series but they fell short and actually lost performance compared to the F4 due to extended difficulties with the 605A engine that were never really solved until October 1943. A G6 produced in November 43 is basically identical to a G14 in 44 except its engine will last a lot longer and build quality is higher, plus it can use straight B4 instead of C3/MW50 and the only thing missing is a 1-2 minute boosted power setting that often blows the engine on a first time use.

So really the primary difference between G6/G14 and a K4 in terms of pure flying qualities is pilot workload, an A motor often needs looking after and a D motor looks after you.

All out performance jump is big but that's when talking over boost at the special power setting on the K4, it's slightly more powerful and has an increase in thrust at the normal climb and cruise settings and those are at a higher altitude due to the larger supercharger casing, so it is more fuel efficient than an A motor and actually has 50km more range on the same tankage.

But it fights exactly the same way as an Emil. They all do.

 

 

 

 

In fact, because of the aeromechanical pilot management system installed from the F4 onwards this entire question is easier to answer for the Spit vs 109 rather than the other way around. With a fully equipped throttle quadrant the Spit pilot has much more that he can do in terms of engine management throughout the flight envelope, he has more direct control but using a simpler system, with little to no automation he has a much higher pilot workload to begin with. A K4 or FW190 pilot has a lower workload than any Allied fighter type due to the aeromechanical and kommandogeraet systems. But for bonus points the Allied ones do have more routinely direct management control of the engine. For example you can overspeed a Merlin a little just on full rich, throttle to the stop and adjust pitch for 3200rpm. It gives like a 100hp boost for a minute or two, then you should pull back to 3000rpm. It's a transport corps take off technique with heavy loads, works fine with any Allied fighter sporting a full throttle quadrant, Allisons are even stronger with better supercharger placement so you can actually play with the boost regulator and fuel types and pump hundreds of horsepower using ram air under 5000ft. A technique used by RAF and RAAF operators of the P40E.

But for the 109 it's all about its airframe qualities. You can only exploit those and basic aerial combat tactics like Boelcke dicta.


Edited by vanir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The performance strengths of the 109 remain the same as inherent to unique combination of design elements. The K4 has higher power settings and more thrust overall but is essentially a refined G6 and all but identical to a G10. It was really the design intention of the G series but they fell short and actually lost performance compared to the F4 due to extended difficulties with the 605A engine that were never really solved until October 1943. A G6 produced in November 43 is basically identical to a G14 in 44 except its engine will last a lot longer and build quality is higher, plus it can use straight B4 instead of C3/MW50 and the only thing missing is a 1-2 minute boosted power setting that often blows the engine on a first time use.

So really the primary difference between G6/G14 and a K4 in terms of pure flying qualities is pilot workload, an A motor often needs looking after and a D motor looks after you.

All out performance jump is big but that's when talking over boost at the special power setting on the K4, it's slightly more powerful and has an increase in thrust at the normal climb and cruise settings and those are at a higher altitude due to the larger supercharger casing, so it is more fuel efficient than an A motor and actually has 50km more range on the same tankage.

But it fights exactly the same way as an Emil. They all do.

 

K-4 incorporate full gear covers and retractable rear gear which improve drag too. K-4 is not identical to any G

Ofc it will fly similar, i didnt say that i will fly difrent. I was trying to say that K4 will be much faster then G2 or any other G version not mention much improved high alt preformance.

Where p-51 had good advantage over Gs at high alt, there is no longer case with K4

As far as ia know DCS uses 605D motor.

K4 will catch you in every climb shalow or vertical unless you have good speed advantage.


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well in service the undercarriage covers wound up removed or simply not installed on K4 in the field as shown by photographs. The tailwheel was often fixed down too so they were externally almost indistinguishable from a G10, on some airframes ID stampings had to be examined to tell the difference, whilst most are traced by werknummer production lists as opposed to any glaring difference in the airframe and equipment options.

 

A P51 doesn't have good high alt advantage over the G, which has a critical altitude of around 6000m depending on latitude and has plenty of thrust for vertical manoeuvres through to 7000m which is the Merlin 60/70 realm and with the 603 supercharger fitted in the G6/AS it had the same throttle altitude as the Merlin so they were both acting like sea level way up there and both drop off above the same throttle altitude. Mainly the Gustav experienced a performance loss overall, becoming heavy and sluggish compared to the F4 due to boost restriction necessary until the burnt crowns were solved late 43. This gave the 109G a bad report with Allied observers that has stuck postwar of falling behind contemporary Allied types that is mainly due to a problem with the engine rather than a model failure, it has better performance when the engine isn't broken, like after October 43 despite being exactly the same as six months earlier. An accurately simmed late G6 would surprise a lot of people with how good it is, Hartmann actually took one from his training squadron in preference to a new G14 in 44 to replace a broken mount and didn't switch to newer ones until the G10 was available. Yes it is a step up obviously but not as dramatic through most of the flight regime that popular opinion seems to believe. Now a mid-43 G6 yes it is underpowered for its own encumbered design so it is an extremely dramatic step to a K4 from that.

 

All out, a late production, good G6 is capable of about 670km/h, greatly reduced due to boost restriction during parts of 42 and most of 43, then C3/MW50 boosted in 44 with streamlined cowlings about 690km/h and the K4 can just squeak past 700, an Erla G10 cracks 710km/h no sweat and is faster than the K, but is lighter and more streamlined with the same engine so that's expected. The most glaring differences between a K4 and a G14/AS is a ten minute special boost instead of a 2 minute one, better fuel availability for B4 than C3 and it is more fuel efficient at cruise so has 50km more cruising range. If you fight just on military power there won't be a big difference between them or a late G6.


Edited by vanir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well in service the undercarriage covers wound up removed or simply not installed on K4 in the field as shown by photographs. The tailwheel was often fixed down too so they were externally almost indistinguishable from a G10, on some airframes ID stampings had to be examined to tell the difference, whilst most are traced by werknummer production lists as opposed to any glaring difference in the airframe and equipment options.

 

A P51 doesn't have good high alt advantage over the G, which has a critical altitude of around 6000m depending on latitude and has plenty of thrust for vertical manoeuvres through to 7000m which is the Merlin 60/70 realm and with the 603 supercharger fitted in the G6/AS it had the same throttle altitude as the Merlin so they were both acting like sea level way up there and both drop off above the same throttle altitude. Mainly the Gustav experienced a performance loss overall, becoming heavy and sluggish compared to the F4 due to boost restriction necessary until the burnt crowns were solved late 43. This gave the 109G a bad report with Allied observers that has stuck postwar of falling behind contemporary Allied types that is mainly due to a problem with the engine rather than a model failure, it has better performance when the engine isn't broken, like after October 43 despite being exactly the same as six months earlier. An accurately simmed late G6 would surprise a lot of people with how good it is, Hartmann actually took one from his training squadron in preference to a new G14 in 44 to replace a broken mount and didn't switch to newer ones until the G10 was available. Yes it is a step up obviously but not as dramatic through most of the flight regime that popular opinion seems to believe. Now a mid-43 G6 yes it is underpowered for its own encumbered design so it is an extremely dramatic step to a K4 from that.

 

All out, a late production, good G6 is capable of about 670km/h, greatly reduced due to boost restriction during parts of 42 and most of 43, then C3/MW50 boosted in 44 with streamlined cowlings about 690km/h and the K4 can just squeak past 700, an Erla G10 cracks 710km/h no sweat and is faster than the K, but is lighter and more streamlined with the same engine so that's expected. The most glaring differences between a K4 and a G14/AS is a ten minute special boost instead of a 2 minute one, better fuel availability for B4 than C3 and it is more fuel efficient at cruise so has 50km more cruising range. If you fight just on military power there won't be a big difference between them or a late G6.

 

P-51 crit alt is around 8km it has lot of power up to 10km, G at 10km not much left. P-51 has 2 stage intercooling this increase power a lot too. i think most of p-51 vs G happen between 8km and 10km or even higher.

Yes i saw missing covers on k-4 pictures but german airforce wasnt in good shape whne k-4 entered service.

But version in dcs have gear covers and retractable tail wheel and it takes advantage of it.


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know everyone calls it a 2-stage intercooler on the Merlin but really it's a water jacket between supercharger stages and a single intercooler after the 2nd stage.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/97039613@N00/4925920905/in/photostream/

 

you could call it inter stage cooler and after cooler too. Point was that bf109 has non


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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