The 109 is too good

[GR00VYJERRY]

When I fly the 109 WITH mw50 I hardly every get shot down unless I am surprised and don’t see it coming or if I am playing with some friends and they are flying the 109 as well. Likewise, trying to shoot one down with any of the allied planes is quite a task. Best bet is to fly the mustang and hope to god the person flying the 109 doesn’t just want to turn into a rocket and climb into outer space. I love flying it for the same reasons i hate flying against it. I feel like it is too good but if that is the way the bird flew in real life then so be it. 

[amazingme]

7 hours ago, GR00VYJERRY said:

When I fly the 109 WITH mw50 I hardly every get shot down unless I am surprised and don’t see it coming or if I am playing with some friends and they are flying the 109 as well. Likewise, trying to shoot one down with any of the allied planes is quite a task. Best bet is to fly the mustang and hope to god the person flying the 109 doesn’t just want to turn into a rocket and climb into outer space. I love flying it for the same reasons i hate flying against it. I feel like it is too good but if that is the way the bird flew in real life then so be it. 

German engineering at its finest.

[GR00VYJERRY]

I guess so. Lol. Trust me I love flying the k4 with mw50 but damn it is a hard bird to beat in 1v1 situation. 

[Aluminum Donkey]

8 hours ago, GR00VYJERRY said:

When I fly the 109 WITH mw50 I hardly every get shot down unless I am surprised and don’t see it coming or if I am playing with some friends and they are flying the 109 as well. Likewise, trying to shoot one down with any of the allied planes is quite a task. Best bet is to fly the mustang and hope to god the person flying the 109 doesn’t just want to turn into a rocket and climb into outer space. I love flying it for the same reasons i hate flying against it. I feel like it is too good but if that is the way the bird flew in real life then so be it. 

 

The Kurfurst was a tough bitch to smack in real life too, especially a later version with 2,000 HP on tap at 2.0 ata supercharger pressure (not modelled in DCS.)

 

It had other-worldly flight performance for its day and could out-fly just about anything the Allies could throw at it. It probably also enjoyed certain "benefits" such as a short engine life at full power, and short range due to other-worldly fuel consumption

 

AD

[grafspee]

Fuel consumption was average for it's displacement. 

[LeCuvier]

If someone flying the Bf-109 doesn't feel challenged, try dogfighting against an I-16 one-on-one!

[Mr_sukebe]

Hence why the WW2 scenarios that I currently run have MW50 unavailable 

[Hummingbird]

Doesn't help that this beast of an airplane is matched up against a Spitfire IX instead of the XIV, the latter of which basically is the answer to the K4.

 

Hopefully at some point the Spitfire XIV hits DCS.

 

 

Edited March 2, 2021 by Hummingbird

[grafspee]

4 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

Doesn't help that this beast of an airplane is matched up against a Spitfire IX instead of the XIV, the latter of which basically is the answer to the K4.

 

Hopefully at some point the Spitfire XIV hits DCS.

 

I think that it was other way, K-4 was answer for MK XIV, first appeared something 43-44 iirc.

[Hummingbird]

55 minutes ago, grafspee said:

I think that it was other way, K-4 was answer for MK XIV, first appeared something 43-44 iirc.

 

Didn't mean it like that, only that it is basically the Allied version of the K4, they being very similar in most regards.

Edited March 2, 2021 by Hummingbird

[GR00VYJERRY]

10 hours ago, LeCuvier said:

If someone flying the Bf-109 doesn't feel challenged, try dogfighting against an I-16 one-on-one!

a 109 vs an i16 is stupid easy. Keep energy high and boom and zoom. Don’t get into a turn fight with it. The i16 will never be close enough to shoot. 

Edited March 2, 2021 by GR00VYJERRY

[msalama]

On 3/1/2021 at 9:02 AM, GR00VYJERRY said:

in real life then so be it

 

I know you said "so be it" and I've no idea of its modelling accuracy myself. But if I wanted it changed, I'd now gather as much hard evidence as possible, because claims without any will be ignored - and rightly so.

[grafspee]

On 3/2/2021 at 7:24 PM, Hummingbird said:

 

Didn't mean it like that, only that it is basically the Allied version of the K4, they being very similar in most regards.

 

The fun fact about griffon driven spitfires is that prop is rotating in opposite direction to Merlin driven spitfires, so at take off you apply left rudder for take off, I would like to experience this  Wonder how difficulty it would be to adjust for this

[greiffer]

I believe that the pilot makes the difference ....in a turn fight  mw50 cannot be used as much but the 109K4 can run away and reengage at will.

[GR00VYJERRY]

Any good bf109 pilots knows not to turn for to long and to keep speed high. 

[grafspee]

Oh pilot skill plays tremendous role here, When i compare 2 planes p-51 vs bf109 k4 i assume that pilots are at similar level.

But real combat is much much more complicated, thing like pilot burnout, fatigue, or many physicals or psychological factors may be involved.

So for simplification i assume that both pilots knows what they are doing.

K-4 has slight advantage in stall speed so with higher alt K-4 will gain over P-51 where IAS speeds are quite low.

 

[Mogster]

We need the Spit xiv to rumble with the Kurfurst. Best of all TFC has one 

 

The Tempest V would be awesome but the lack of flying examples appears to be make it less attractive.

[grafspee]

Spit MK XIV is one of the top on my wish list.

[Mogster]

Yes. It would be interesting to compare the Griffon Spitfire to the Mk IX we have. LH prop, extreme torque barely controlled by the same size tail...

[Hummingbird]

12 hours ago, Mogster said:

Yes. It would be interesting to compare the Griffon Spitfire to the Mk IX we have. LH prop, extreme torque barely controlled by the same size tail...

 

Mk.XIV featured a bigger tail for that purpose

 

 

[Mogster]

19 minutes ago, Hummingbird said:

 

Mk.XIV featured a bigger tail for that purpose

 

 

From side profiles the rudder was a bit wider. Didn’t the wholesale aero changes come with the mk22/24. They had a huge tail.

Edited March 8, 2021 by Mogster

[javelina1]

On 3/2/2021 at 1:55 AM, LeCuvier said:

If someone flying the Bf-109 doesn't feel challenged, try dogfighting against an I-16 one-on-one!

so true.  those little devils can be a handful.

Edited March 9, 2021 by javelina1

[Hummingbird]

8 hours ago, Mogster said:

From side profiles the rudder was a bit wider. Didn’t the wholesale aero changes come with the mk22/24. They had a huge tail.

 

 

As far as I know the Mk.XIV featured a bigger rudder from the get go, and it was increased even further in size for the Mk.22/24 as more and more power was squeezed from the Griffon.

[grafspee]

I think power or engine torque is not an issue here, mk21 looks like got smaller one then mk22 got bigger again, Looks like they weren't decided how they wanted griffon spits to fly.

What i noticed is that  upper rudder surface was reduced and lower part of rudder was extended in MK XVI , and it stay that way, looks more like shape change rather then size change until mkXIV e here size increase visible.

Mk 21 again back to similar size to MK XVI so definitely rudder size didn't go with power increase of the engine. 

 

Edited March 9, 2021 by grafspee

[Hummingbird]

I'm not sure the drawings there are totally to scale.

 

As far as I've been able to tell when comparing real life examples side by side the Mk.XIV ddefinitely had a bigger rudder than any previous marks, and for th Mk.22/24 it went even larger.

 

It was definitely a response to increased power though, something which I remember outlined in RAE reports.