Even with the Spitfire, the bf-109 and the fw-190 will keep making the law in the sky

Not really. Saburo Sakai has a reputation as an amazing pilot. I'd chalk this story up more to his skill than the plane he was in, although I'm sure the Zero's agility didn't hurt.

Agreed, his autobiography is fascinating

Agreed, his autobiography is fascinating

He wrote one? What have I been doing with my life? Next book on the list. Thanks, sir!

He wrote one? What have I been doing with my life? Next book on the list. Thanks, sir!

My pleasure, as I said fascinating read one of the more personal accounts I have read and a great insight to Japanese culture as well (During the war at least)...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Samurai-Military-History-Ibooks-Saburo/dp/0743412834

Gonna get this as well - thanks :)

There are some discrepancies between original S. Sakai story in Japanese version titled "Zero sen no shinjitsu", supposedly M. Caidin added something but nobody really could prove that as well. In practice often as recommended if not more is Winged Samurai: https://www.amazon.com/Winged-Samurai-Saburo-Fighter-Pilots/dp/091217305X

I also had a lot of fun reading not so long ago released Dan King book featuring 5 Japanese Navy pilots, mostly fighter pilots but also one B5N2 pilot: https://www.amazon.com/Last-Zero-Fighter-Firsthand-Accounts/dp/1468178806

You funded overbuffed K4 and D9 which are not representative of the real air combat 8/10 of cases. Some g14 (maybe even without mw50) and a8 would be more appropriate for realism.

Is it not true that the K-4 was more or less an effort at standardizing the late model G variants to ease production?

Actually does anyone know the true reasoning behind the K-4 and D-9 being chosen? People have said that it was because there was more information present at the time but I find that to be highly suspect as they were fairly rare aircraft and as far as I am aware there are not any flying examples of either.

On that, does anyone have any numbers on operational Spitfire IXc LFs that used this boost, its hard to tell if it was just a trial or actually used on this aircraft.

 

Feel free to start a new thread for this purpose if anyone has it.

This is a good source, I am sure you already know it ;)

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html

Might have to purchase this book....

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ei8_DSpPEaQC&pg=PA187&lpg=PA187&dq=spitfire+%2B25lb&source=bl&ots=IM1DEof-j0&sig=P8b4hEAl9YKnTyGp0iA5jwaqlVM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiB6suonP_QAhWFWBoKHfGmAsIQ6AEILzAD#v=onepage&q=spitfire%20%2B25lb&f=false

See 1943 Point No.9

Is it not true that the K-4 was more or less an effort at standardizing the late model G variants to ease production?

Actually does anyone know the true reasoning behind the K-4 and D-9 being chosen? People have said that it was because there was more information present at the time but I find that to be highly suspect as they were fairly rare aircraft and as far as I am aware there are not any flying examples of either.

Do we really have to make it all over the DCS history with same arguments and complains every time a new subforum/module is released? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Going a bit further, after that kind of arguments. Once I've been flying the Spitfire and knowing the beast, honestly, I don't feel behind anyone while flying her, and she lives up to any low to mid level combat. What a gorgeous machine, I now understand many things. About 25Lbs, well personally I have no special interest in burning my engine in 2 minutes rather than 5 :lol: :lol: :lol:.

S!

G10 is a decaf K4 after all.

Decaf? Both used the DB 605D with MW50 injection.

I agree with Sith that any mission maker can disable MW50 for the 109 any time he pleases in order to (crudely) simulate a less power variant of the 109.

Decaf? Both used the DB 605D with MW50 injection

S!

Personally I don't feel that the spitfire is at much of a disadvantage. In terms of speed, yes she's slower but she turns like nothing else and is formidable in a dog fight. The key is to try and have the initial energy advantage at the merge. The canons are also incredibly deadly and have much better ballistic than the 109's.

Yup, but G10 didn't match K4 performances.

S!

It has a slower top speed by about 20-25 km/h, but that's about it. OTOH its lighter a bit, so its a marginally better climber and turner and it has an easier to use 20mm cannon instead of the 30 mm elephant gun of the 109K.

It always amuses me when people are asking for G-14s though. Since at the typical DCS alttiudes (below 4000), its actually does better than the 109K in all but speed.

Bottomline, the differences are quite marginal. With MW, all of them had about 1800 HP at low altitudes (or if you compere later ones, all had 2000, with engine upgrades). In practical terms, you have two kind of 109s in the 1944 scenario, medium altitude ones, "109 L.F." if you like (G-6/G-14) and high altitude types (G-14/AS, G-10 and K-4) with the latter really having very similar power and performance curves and only really 'better' than the former group about 6000 m and above.

The K-4 is mostly just prettier and sleeker than the rest of them, but it's ain't that a big difference. Its also the heaviest of the bunch, not by much but for example compared to the G-14, its noticable.

IMO you would not want to fly against a G-14 instead of the K-4 in these altitudes in DCS.

I know the AI controlled Spitfire isn't a fair representation. But just for kicks I'd like everyone to try and beat the Spit AI with a D-9. I've probably done 20 engagements against it so far, and I've been shot down every time. It doesn't matter if I have a massive height and energy advantage. In less than a minute the AI Spitfire is glued on my six and closing. Seconds later I'm in pieces. Every time! :joystick:

 

So far all I've seen are Spitfire vs Bf 109K-4 videos.

 

How does the D-9 fare against the Spit online? Anyone? :)

Yeah....something is up with AI. I couldn't exit fight at all. Even 70 degree dive to 700kph, Spit AI stays on your tail with ease.

It has a slower top speed by about 20-25 km/h, but that's about it. OTOH its lighter a bit, so its a marginally better climber and turner and it has an easier to use 20mm cannon instead of the 30 mm elephant gun of the 109K.

 

It always amuses me when people are asking for G-14s though. Since at the typical DCS alttiudes (below 4000), its actually does better than the 109K in all but speed.

 

Bottomline, the differences are quite marginal. With MW, all of them had about 1800 HP at low altitudes (or if you compere later ones, all had 2000, with engine upgrades). In practical terms, you have two kind of 109s in the 1944 scenario, medium altitude ones, "109 L.F." if you like (G-6/G-14) and high altitude types (G-14/AS, G-10 and K-4) with the latter really having very similar power and performance curves and only really 'better' than the former group about 6000 m and above.

 

The K-4 is mostly just prettier and sleeker than the rest of them, but it's ain't that a big difference. Its also the heaviest of the bunch, not by much but for example compared to the G-14, its noticable.

 

IMO you would not want to fly against a G-14 instead of the K-4 in these altitudes in DCS.

The discussion about specific performance values is interesting as the DCS is putting a lot of attention to bringing a detail representation of real planes.

On the other hand while so much attention is being put into detailed modeling of the planes the environment, especially the MP one has almost nothing to do with reality. Hopefully this'll improve with the release of Normandy and intruduction of bombers.

It has a slower top speed by about 20-25 km/h, but that's about it. OTOH its lighter a bit, so its a marginally better climber and turner and it has an easier to use 20mm cannon instead of the 30 mm elephant gun of the 109K.

 

It always amuses me when people are asking for G-14s though. Since at the typical DCS alttiudes (below 4000), its actually does better than the 109K in all but speed........

 

 

.......IMO you would not want to fly against a G-14 instead of the K-4 in these altitudes in DCS.

For me that (slower) is good point for preferring to fight against a G-14 instead of a K4. Specially with the mustang. But valid to a lesser extent to the spit.

I cant help but think... spitfire is a failed design. its just too slow. If it was designed like somethin similar to a yak3 but with that 1700 hp engine... it would go ~590 kmh instead of 530 at ground level. It simply cannot compete with 40-50 kmh deficit against similar planes.

Yeah....something is up with AI. I couldn't exit fight at all. Even 70 degree dive to 700kph, Spit AI stays on your tail with ease.

Botd dont have spitfire FM yet . they are UFO atm

LOL

Tell that to the 109 pilots I have shot down online :lol:

Yes the lack of speed is frustrating and both the 109 and 190 can disengage if they have kept the speed advantage, however the second they lose it they are on the back foot unless they are allowed to regain speed.

Once (or perhaps if :rolleyes: ) VEAO get the XIV out of the hanger then we will also have a spit that can keep up :D

On that, does anyone have any numbers on operational Spitfire IXc LFs that used this boost, its hard to tell if it was just a trial or actually used on this aircraft.

 

Feel free to start a new thread for this purpose if anyone has it.

Can't believe you have asked this, loads of posts on a thread months back showing not just a trial (mission reports and other stuff). No time to find them at the moment, but will look later perhaps.

Happy landings,

56RAF_Talisman

What Krupi said. She seems pretty good to me. In a few tests I've had a much easier time killing the excellent 109 Ai and had good chances against some very very good 109 pilots. In non 1 on 1 situations its a bit different and the lack of speed hurts her a bit more but I think once people get more practice she'll be even deadlier.

The XIV will be nightmare fuel if it's ever released. Who knows maybe it'll happen in this lifetime... :P

What Krupi said. She seems pretty good to me. In a few tests I've had a much easier time killing the excellent 109 Ai and had good chances against some very very good 109 pilots. In non 1 on 1 situations its a bit different and the lack of speed hurts her a bit more but I think once people get more practice she'll be even deadlier.

 

The XIV will be nightmare fuel if it's ever released. Who knows maybe it'll happen in this lifetime... :P

As i ve already mentioned, the AI spitfire 9 doesnt have a spitfire 9 flgiht model ie spit Ai is a cheater/ufo(info from yoyo). if you want to compare the planes go to the multiplayer.

He has see "and had good chances against some very very good 109 pilots" :D