Jump to content

DCS WW2 fighter comparison


Recommended Posts

A couple of graphs I made showing tops speeds and climb rate at altitude for the upcoming DCS prop fighters.

 

The fighters are running at performance levels that I assume is what will be modelled in DCS. I might be wrong, so don't take it as gospel. The only thing certain is the P-51, and even that might change if ED decides to model it with 150 octane fuel. All of the fighters represented here could be upgraded in a similar fashion.

 

I made these graphs through researching historical graphs (with some alterations to compensate for compressibility error or drag increase due to external bomb racks). They're not 100% accurate, and they never will be, because no 2 aircraft were ever the same.

 

jRY3DnL.png

 

2dGojbX.png


Edited by Narushima
  • Like 1

FW 190 Dora performance charts:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=128354

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 298
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Shouldn't the 109 k4 outclimb the spit mk 9 and the fw 109 d9?

 

I always known that k4 outclimbs spit 9 and spit mk14 outclimbs 109 k4. Might be wrong .

 

Depends on what version of Spit 9 and K-4 you're comparing.

 

Could also be that the K-4 is using the thin blade propeller on the climbing chart that I've found, but I haven't found any other chart with of a 1.8 ata MW-50 K-4.

FW 190 Dora performance charts:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=128354

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the results in your chart are for high speed propeller. Western Front 109s used propellers optimized for speed.

Eastern Front 109s received propellers optimized for climb/acceleration .

Forgot about this :) .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the climb and acceleration schedule?

 

What do you mean?

 

Acceleration between these planes would be pretty easy to figure out. Just look at the climb graph. The climb graph is basically a graph of acceleration in the vertical plane.

 

That's for low speeds, for higher speeds (400-500 km/h and up), where drag becomes more of a factor, you'd cross reference it with the speed graph.

FW 190 Dora performance charts:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=128354

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what temperature are you assuming and is that y axis pressure altitude or density altitude?

 

You can't be sure that any of that is the same for these data plots.

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

thanks for posting this.

 

The Spit seems seriously underpowered compared to the rest.

Do we know what boost level will the Mk IX have? +18 or +25?

Does the +25 make any meaningful difference?

The three best things in life are a good landing, a good orgasm, and a good bowel movement. The night carrier landing is one of the few opportunities in life to experience all three at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for posting this.

 

The Spit seems seriously underpowered compared to the rest.

Do we know what boost level will the Mk IX have? +18 or +25?

Does the +25 make any meaningful difference?

 

Did you look at the climb-rate graph?

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

yay for a new debate about x plane is better than y plane.....

Do you think that getting 9 women pregnant will get you a baby in 1 month?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Mobo: Asus P8P67 deluxe Monitor: Lg 22'' 1920*1080

CPU: i7 2600k@ 4.8Ghz +Zalman CNPS9900 max

Keyboard: Logitech G15

GPU:GTX 980 Strix Mouse: Sidewinder X8

PSU: Corsair TX750w Gaming Devices: Saytek X52, TrackIr5

RAM: Mushkin 2x4gb ddr3 9-9-9-24 @1600mhz

Case: 690 SSD: Intel X25m 80gb

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just assumed that they're doing the +18lb one because they already have this engine modelled with the P-51. All they have to do is tweak the supercharger a bit and change the cooling arrangement.

 

Yeah, +25 would make it more competitive, but it will still be the weakest plane of them all, simply because by 1944 spit 9 was obsolete. It was not suited for the high speed combat that has evolved ever since planes like the FW 190 and F6F demonstrated the superiority of BnZ combat.

 

Now if we had the Spit XIV then things would be different, but alas, this is what RRG decided to model.

FW 190 Dora performance charts:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=128354

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it seems as if we 'll have both the Mk.IX done by ED and MkXIV (done by VEAO). :)

The three best things in life are a good landing, a good orgasm, and a good bowel movement. The night carrier landing is one of the few opportunities in life to experience all three at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you look at the climb-rate graph?

 

Yes, you 're right that it has an excellent climb rate, but i don't think that this can compensate very well for the 60-70 km/h difference in max speed.

 

This speed difference means that if the spit ends on a 109 or 190's six, all the enemy has to do is start a dive until max speed and then level off flying straight. The spit will never be able to catch them. At a 60 km/h velocity difference, the enemy gains about 1 km of distance per minute.

 

Agreed, the Mk. IX will still be a good adversary for the german planes under certain circumstances, but it will probably need an energy advantage or an element of surprise.

 

by the way, thanks for the boost info SithSpawn.


Edited by airdoc

The three best things in life are a good landing, a good orgasm, and a good bowel movement. The night carrier landing is one of the few opportunities in life to experience all three at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if we're going to use this as an excuse to wish for upgrades, then I want a P-47M!:pilotfly:

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

Yes, you 're right that it has an excellent climb rate, but i don't think that this can compensate very well for the 60-70 km/h difference in max speed.

 

This speed difference means that if the spit ends on a 109 or 190's six, all the enemy has to do is start a dive until max speed and then level off flying straight. The spit will never be able to catch them. At a 60 km/h velocity difference, the enemy gains about 1 km of distance per minute.

 

Agreed, the Mk. IX will still be a good adversary for the german planes under certain circumstances, but it will probably need an energy advantage or an element of surprise.

 

by the way, thanks for the boost info SithSpawn.

 

 

That's exactly what the Germans did... They dove for speed to escape and then re-engaged.

 

P-47's entered the theater. It was soon realized the P-47 worked well as a high altitude boom and zoom fighter. They would dive on the Germans.... And what did the Germans do? They dove to escape....like they did against the Spits... Unfortunately for them.... No one out dives a heavy brick like a P-47!

 

So the Germans had to change up their tactics!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if we're going to use this as an excuse to wish for upgrades, then I want a P-47M!:pilotfly:

 

Add me to the P-47M list.... As well as an "N" and a Razorback too! DCS can make quite a lot of money off of me with very little work on their part! Just a few changes here and there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean?

 

Acceleration between these planes would be pretty easy to figure out. Just look at the climb graph. The climb graph is basically a graph of acceleration in the vertical plane.

 

Really? It doesn't tell me squat about how fast I can go from one mach number to another in level flight. I don't even know what speed the 'best climb' is at.

 

That's for low speeds, for higher speeds (400-500 km/h and up), where drag becomes more of a factor, you'd cross reference it with the speed graph.

 

What am I cross referencing? What's the maximum speed criterion? In modern jets it's definitely not 0g acceleration for example.

 

What's the climbing technique?

 

Without all these details, the charts are about as useful as maximum speed comparisons between an F-16 and a MiG-29 from wikipedia.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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