Jump to content

Spitfire VS Axis


McPetterson
 Share

Recommended Posts

+1

 

However like you said the truth is nuanced.... yes there was a much more likely encounter with a18lb spitfire, but then again the luftwaffe had to deal with a utter swarm of allied aircraft... That isn't exactly represented, so the question becomes where does one draw the line?

 

Well... kinda. Truth is that after the immediate invasion period full Wing (3x squadron) sized formations were the exception, with many more missions flown in Squadron, Flight or even Section strength, the Allies advantage being the ability to be present in some measure over a vast area, rather than saturating smaller region with a huge density of a/c . It was sometimes the case that in small localised engagements, the Luftwaffe actually outnumbered the RAF formations they encountered.

 

For example, at 1315 on July 2th, 1944 a section of 4 Spitfire IXs from 442 Sqn engaged a formation of ~40 Fw 190s at 20,000ft near St. Lo.

 

And this was not an isolated incident, a similar event occurred to section of 412 squadron on the 19 November 1944: http://acesofww2.com/can/aces/charron.htm

 

Again, nuance.

 

We will forever struggle with a truly prototypical foe - too many virtual pilots with too many virtual hours, the search for balance for servers/missions where in reality a chance encounter could see you seriously overwhelmed or beautifully dominant.

 

For what it's worth, would I like to see a 25lb Mk.IX in DCS? Sure. But I'd like to see it with a prototypical Map - Western Germany 1945 would be perfect for it and the K-4.

 

Right now, with Normandy, the 18lb is perfect. What we are missing is the 109G-6 or -14 and the Fw 190A-8, though things are halfway in hand in those regards at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well maybe everyone in WWII wasn't a lone wolf and people worked together and had wingmen and tactics? Just saying.

 

+1

fights during WW2 were completly difrent than those in VR

fight during WW2 is basicly battle between whole nations behind the pilot there were thousands of other ppl involved in this air battle

Ind DCS air battle is in most caces plane vs plane and player vs player that's it

in DCS we get perfectly maintained plane every plane is brand new we fly over and over the same mission every one knows where is everything on map. a lot of VR pilots probably had over thousand hours in his favourite plane.

it is whole difrent story.

it is just wierd to compare WW2 warfare to DCS DCS give us only small chunk of it

why so much pain about planes dont fit map period

why we just play some alter reality scenario where were k-4s over normandy that will be simpler

25lbs mkIX definetly would help no question about it.


Edited by grafspee

Windows 11, I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

 

Can't reproduce this stage of the conflict anyway, unless you force MP slots in favor of the Allies to the tune of 5/1 or something. And then add fuel shortages etcetera for the Axis? DAAAAAMN, how come no-one's participating anymore?

 

Can't do it, period. Makes for a great framework for a great sim aiming for an authentic experience of sorts, but simulating it? You've gotta be kidding.

 

EDIT: typo


Edited by msalama

The DCS Mi-8MTV2. The best aviational BBW experience you could ever dream of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watch this video and pay attention. Tactics can overcome aircraft limitations. I don't want balance in DCS to sooth the common ego I want realism.

 

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy and I've had both.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an early 44 aircraft Vs a late 44 aircraft, indeed.

 

 

DCS is a flight simulation, not a balanced arcade, and it never was otherwise. The problem is with numbers, yes, German aircraft (109 especially) have better performance and if people don't cut using only them to balance teams online that's a problem. But I don't think that's anything to do with ED who only gave us an accurate simulation. Once we have the Fw190A8 lets hope servers get a better balance in aircraft types, maybe limiting available 109s in missions.

 

 

FYI ED chose nothing at all, it was Luthier from RRG studios (the responsible also for a well known franchise simulator failure) and his Kickstarter who decided those models were meant to be produced. ED just took over the project after he bailed out and made honour to the failed kickstarter continuing what was projected, flawed or not, as that was what the people pledged for, Normandy map included which is not strictly related to the models we have or were first thought.

 

 

 

 

Anyhow, no, Spitfire is the better turning aircraft by far in DCS WWII planeset so watch what you're doing, what controls do you have and it's settings or something because that's not what we have.

 

 

S!

 

 

problem with limiting aircraft or completely banning aircraft from servers is the modular thing dcs is...unlike in other sims where you buy a package of aircraft and a map with contemporary ground units, here in dcs we buy single modules. so limiting slots or completely banning aircraft in multiplayer will result in some people being unable to fly on that server.

 

also, limiting slots on the 109 once we have the 190A8 will not work for many guys...a 109 and a 190 are completely different aircraft, and while some love both, there are guys who love the one but dont like the other at all...

now once we have another 109 variant, thats another story. and yeah, limiting certain variants of an aircraft types can then be very immersive even, and add a great deal to historical based missions, and yeah, balance as well...but i think up until we have another 109 variant available in dcs, limiting or even banning the only 109 we have isnt a perfect solution.

 

 

 

the MkIX was in service before the K4, but that doesnt mean its inferiour at all...it has a slower top speed, but thats its only disadvantage.

 

it turns much better, its energy retention is better, it accelerates better, its climbs just as good, it prop hangs much better, has better armament, better visiblity, no stickforces and way better rudder authority...

 

 

the only advantage the 109 has is its top speed. at this speed though, the stickforces will prevent any successfull offensive manouver as long as your oponent has the slightest clue of your presence, so it can pretty much only be used to run away.

 

 

 

i would love to see a spitXIV as well as early variants, and i would also love to see early 109 models, as they add to our dcs experience. but even as it stands right now, between the spit and the 109, there is no need to balance anything really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

problem with limiting aircraft or completely banning aircraft from servers is the modular thing dcs is...unlike in other sims where you buy a package of aircraft and a map with contemporary ground units, here in dcs we buy single modules. so limiting slots or completely banning aircraft in multiplayer will result in some people being unable to fly on that server.

 

also, limiting slots on the 109 once we have the 190A8 will not work for many guys...a 109 and a 190 are completely different aircraft, and while some love both, there are guys who love the one but dont like the other at all...

now once we have another 109 variant, thats another story. and yeah, limiting certain variants of an aircraft types can then be very immersive even, and add a great deal to historical based missions, and yeah, balance as well...but i think up until we have another 109 variant available in dcs, limiting or even banning the only 109 we have isnt a perfect solution.

 

 

 

the MkIX was in service before the K4, but that doesnt mean its inferiour at all...it has a slower top speed, but thats its only disadvantage.

 

it turns much better, its energy retention is better, it accelerates better, its climbs just as good, it prop hangs much better, has better armament, better visiblity, no stickforces and way better rudder authority...

 

 

the only advantage the 109 has is its top speed. at this speed though, the stickforces will prevent any successfull offensive manouver as long as your oponent has the slightest clue of your presence, so it can pretty much only be used to run away.

 

 

 

i would love to see a spitXIV as well as early variants, and i would also love to see early 109 models, as they add to our dcs experience. but even as it stands right now, between the spit and the 109, there is no need to balance anything really.

 

I think that you should read one of the earlier posts in this thread which covers the.current stats and which aircraft are performing better in the BS server, which rather disproves your view.

 

I’ve made it much simpler on the server missions that I have created, which is to remove availability of MW50. We can wait for a G6, but this can be done now.

System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse.

Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the bs stats support my argument completely. blue was leading by a couple of hundred kills, if u took away the best player from each side, from 1st january to the end of februrary.

 

 

 

 

 

removing mw50 from the k4 doesnt make it a g6 at all...


Edited by birdstrike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the bs stats support my argument completely. blue was leading by a couple of hundred kills, if u took away the best player from each side, from 1st january to the end of februrary.

 

removing mw50 from the k4 doesnt make it a g6 at all...

 

Err... What, you can't just remove stats/players and then claim things are okay.... That is just utterly ridiculous.

 

No one likes to use the dreaded word 'balance' but what we have now is neither historically correct or even remotely fair/balance... I can only hope that we get a G6 soon.

Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit

Project IX Cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err... What, you can't just remove stats/players and then claim things are okay.... That is just utterly ridiculous.

 

No one likes to use the dreaded word 'balance' but what we have now is neither historically correct or even remotely fair/balance... I can only hope that we get a G6 soon.

 

 

well first of all...if the first player on the red side has 6times the kills of the second one, we can assume that its not the aircraft that matters in between the two, especially since they are flying the same one.

 

 

 

and if this one guy turns around the stats with his 748kills completely(which were i think like 1/3 of the total kills on the german side), and therefore made the red side lead by a few kills within those two months, to then claim the spit is no match, thats utter ridiculous...if it wasnt for this 1 guy, the blue side would have been leading by a few hundred kills with their "inferiour" spitfire that is no match for that "uber" K4...

 

 

 

and its a bold statement to claim that its not even remotely fair/balanced now, when you havent been flying for over a year because of a dead gpu, as you said a couple of days ago in another thread.

 

 

+1

Especially considering I haven't been flying for a year or more thanks to a dead GPU and unwillingness to spend far more for a new one than I have before mad.gif

 

 

things changed quite a bit within this time.

 

 

 

about the g6 i agree...


Edited by birdstrike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well first of all...if the first player on the red side has 6times the kills of the second one, we can assume that its not the aircraft that matters in between the two, especially if they are flying the same one.

 

 

 

and if this one guy turns around the stats with his 748kills completely(which were i think like 1/3 of the total kills on the german side), and therefore made the red side lead by a few kills within those two months, and then claim the spit is no match, thats utter ridiculous...if it wasnt for this 1 guy, the blue side would have been leading by a few hundred kills with their "inferiour" spitfire that is no match for that "uber" K4...

 

 

 

its a bold statement to claim that its not even remotely fair/balanced now, when you havent been flying for over a year because of a dead gpu, as you said a couple of days ago in another thread.

things changed quite a bit within this time.

 

 

 

about the g6 i agree...

 

That's also how i see it.

When i was flying in mp i used most times a 109 without mw50.

 

When i posted videos as proof of my kills the responses were:

 

"This video only proves the p51 is worse than 109 without mw50 boost"

even if there were two p51s vs one ( me) in some fights .So now what : Are two p51s flown as a team worse than a 109 with no boost ?

 

or another response:

"mw50 boost doesn't matter because in a dogfight you don't need it anyway"

 

It's just ridiculous .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Outside of some exact date on someone's realism timeline I, for one, would fully support the fact that a Spitfire XIV should be included in this timeline. There were plenty at the time.

What some are saying is that not only should we be restricted to an exact date and an exact place, we also must be restricted to only specific battle areas or squadrons while ignoring others.

I am glad my simulated world has a wider scope.

Then again, My Spitfire IX is fine.

Bring on the Mosquito.

Win 10 pro 64 bit. Intel i7 4790 4 Ghz running at 4.6. Asus z97 pro wifi main board, 32 gig 2400 ddr3 gold ram, 50 inch 4K UHD and HDR TV for monitor. H80 cpu cooler. 8 other cooling fans in full tower server case. Soundblaster ZX sound card. EVGA 1080 TI FTW3. TM Hotas Wartog. TM T.16000M MFG Crosswinds Pedals. Trackir 5.

"Everyone should fly a Spitfire at least once" John S. Blyth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if you were to limit pilot slots with a 4 or 5 to 1 advantage for the Allies you won't get close to any realism. By the end of WWII the German pilots were just kids with very few hours. I saw it mentioned a few times already, but keep in mind that it was more or less a meat grinder for the Luftwaffe, and that coming across even just an average pilot was the exception, not the norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Outside of some exact date on someone's realism timeline I, for one, would fully support the fact that a Spitfire XIV should be included in this timeline. There were plenty at the time.

What some are saying is that not only should we be restricted to an exact date and an exact place, we also must be restricted to only specific battle areas or squadrons while ignoring others.

I am glad my simulated world has a wider scope.

Then again, My Spitfire IX is fine.

Bring on the Mosquito.

 

 

:thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spitfire_IX_RAE_Level_Speed.jpgNot even close to these speeds LOL! So are we in a true 18lbs or modified 18 to 12 lbs and is it a Merlin 61 or 66 engine Now the data table was an F but again that was a Merlin 61 engine.

 

 

I will run this test Tomorrow: TABLE I

All-out level speeds

Corrected to 7000 lb. = 95% T.O. Wt.

Radiator flaps in minimum drag position

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/ma648.html

21000 +18.0 TAS 411 IAS 306 -5.75 -7.5 +1 FS Gear

 

 

Video best I got was 270 which is 30mps short IAS so needs some work, 25lbs or not even the 18lbs is off by 30 common hard enough fighting 109K4s, but to be off by 30MPH IAS!!! Please run your own tests and post video.

 

 

 

https://youtu.be/Gtx3KFFYJEA


Edited by king1hw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Video best I got was 270 which is 30mps short IAS so needs some work, 25lbs or not even the 18lbs is off by 30 common hard enough fighting 109K4s, but to be off by 30MPH IAS!!! Please run your own tests and post video.

 

 

CAS IAS TAS those are involved here. It is hard to compare those speeds between planes

becouse IAS and CAS will differ much from plane to plane. mean that for example at the same TAS p-40 and spit kmIX will have difrent IAS

https://i.imgur.com/F1ouUjU.png as you can see on this screen shoot those are all merlins 66 with very difrent top speeds

question is do we have in dcs spit with merlin 66 with SU injection pump or with bendix carburetor

im reading dcs manual trying to extract exact version looks like we have versio nwith bendix carb


Edited by grafspee

Windows 11, I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bs543speed.jpg

this graph look much closer to our version

so we are looking around 335 TAS at sea level and 407 at 22k

but again BS 543 and 551 were MKVs converted to MKIX it could impact top speeds


Edited by grafspee

Windows 11, I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jl165speed.jpg

this is another MKIX with 66 which cant got past 390 even with 25lbs boost

i cant immagine how hard was it to gather consisten data about MKIX


Edited by grafspee

Windows 11, I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks, just a short post to correct the misconceptions I have read on the forums from time to time that the DCS Spitfire is a 1944 aircraft. This is wrong.

 

The DCS Spitfire version we have is an early 1943 version (March 43 to be exact). Well researched history books about the Spitfire will inform the reader of this fact, as will DCS

literature on the topic at the link below (see page 22/23):

 

https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/411920/manuals/DCS_Spitfire_IX_Flight_Manual_EN.pdf?t=1509665976

 

Later on in 1944, the Spitfire Mk IX LF, Merlin 66 engine, was given 50 calibre guns to replace the .303 and a gyroscopic gunsight, but we do not have that version in DCS.

 

Please keep in mind for discussion on this thread that our Spitfire in DCS entered operational service in MARCH 1943.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman


Edited by 56RAF_Talisman

56RAF_Talisman

 

Spitfire! 'That's no aircraft, that's a bleedin' angel'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and we know for certain that spit MKIX went through numerous aerodynamic improvment to bump up top speed

so i set up map with 0 wind 20 celcius at sea

p-51 managed to make 360 ground speed at 20500ft knots (p51 IAS was 302mph) 67inHg/3000rpm

spit did 336 GS knots at 20500 (spit IAS was 285mph)

bf109 k4 365 GS KTS (490kph IAS)(i have samll doubts that 1.8ATA +MW50 bf109 would be faster then p-51 at 20500ft 2.0 ATA sure)

fw190 354 GS KTS at 1.73 ATA and 365 GS KTS at 2.0 ATA mw50(this number is not too accurate becouse fw190 pitch up/down very strong even with small change of speed so it was hard to maintain level flight)

resports about MK IX vs bf109g state that above 20k spit was superior below 20k was enought

i did test spit mkIX in il2 game too results are almot identical. 2 sim game developer did the same mistake hmm something stinks here. OFC you have to be ball centred perfectly to reach top speed. All my test ale done that i keep top speed for a 60seconds to reach top speed it take 1-2 minutes in perfect level flight

Spit bank a little becouse i had to let my hand off the stic to make a screen shoot

sYPeLeg.jpg


Edited by grafspee

Windows 11, I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have yet to hit 280 indicated. What is your nose trim set and again 280 is not 306 so the difference is even a later spit then should have made the game REALLY LOL now that is even worse enjoy the data keep it coming. Maybe we could see at least to the correct version i am looking at would be at least a better fight. PS if the server only has the A8 Germans will not fly it and even if they gave aus a G6 same outcome. Between the planes you mentioned 20 MPH would still help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have yet to hit 280 indicated. What is your nose trim set and again 280 is not 306 so the difference is even a later spit then should have made the game REALLY LOL now that is even worse enjoy the data keep it coming. Maybe we could see at least to the correct version i am looking at would be at least a better fight. PS if the server only has the A8 Germans will not fly it and even if they gave aus a G6 same outcome. Between the planes you mentioned 20 MPH would still help.

 

but from where you took this 306 read my post again even p-51 cant reach 306 MPH at 20500ft at 67/3000 rpm so you expect that spit should be faster then p-51 ?? which is complet BS becouse p-51 was much faster then MKIX

we should compare ground speed or TAS becouse IAS is dependent on calibation i dont know how ED modeled this thing. do we see CAS or IAS on those gages

so its 242 kts ias after conversion 278.5 mph or 448 km/h bf-109 did 485-490kph IAS its about 40kph slower thn bf109 by doing 306 mph IAS in DCS spit would be the fastes Warbird in game. So chart which you took this data apply not to DCS spitfire version

Spitfire in il2 fly a little faster but its difrent spit version

G9agZz6.jpg

ddsXQFP.jpg


Edited by grafspee

Windows 11, I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks, just a short post to correct the misconceptions I have read on the forums from time to time that the DCS Spitfire is a 1944 aircraft. This is wrong.

 

The DCS Spitfire version we have is an early 1943 version (March 43 to be exact). Well researched history books about the Spitfire will inform the reader of this fact, as will DCS

literature on the topic at the link below (see page 22/23):

 

https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/411920/manuals/DCS_Spitfire_IX_Flight_Manual_EN.pdf?t=1509665976

 

Later on in 1944, the Spitfire Mk IX LF, Merlin 66 engine, was given 50 calibre guns to replace the .303 and a gyroscopic gunsight, but we do not have that version in DCS.

 

Please keep in mind for discussion on this thread that our Spitfire in DCS entered operational service in MARCH 1943.

 

Happy landings,

 

 

 

Talisman

 

 

I don't see why the year is relevant.

 

I would be more than happy with a 109 f4 .Considering the DCS 109 is the best turning 109

in any sim it would be very very interesting to fly the f4 .And i'm not the only one who wants it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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