Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtPappy
I have to say that the tests on the Spitfires are fairly consistent, though the tests on the Bf 109's are not; mainly the G's.
It seems as though the RAF pilots and tests state that the 109's turning is very inferior to even that of a P-51B or even D mustang. The Germans state otherwise.
I believe the speed figures seem accurate though.
There's a LOT of good data considering Allied aircraft though, here: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
It really does look like the best resource I've ever found online concerning the performance of mainly British and US aircraft types.
Let me tell you, the figures are very very different from BoP values. But I think I'll be happy if at least the Spitfire XVI's roll rate was fixed.
EDIT: Btw, Wildar, did you show these figures and charts to the devs, or at least post it in the 'Suggestion to Devs' thread? I think if you got a nice, wide JPEG displayed in there, it would catch their attention.  |
Yes I know about that site, a lot of interesting info there. The 1940 Spits engine dive problem and its tactical disadvantage was not that emphasised in some of those tests, which kind of reminds me of the testing done on the Bradley IFV. Ever heard of the book "Pentagon Wars", about testing and test report altering on account of political/financial reasons? Very interesting read that is.
On the Me 109 the thin light wings reportedly presented an issue in tight horizontal turning, as you probably know. German pilots were reportedly told in training to avoid putting too much pressure on them, meaning really tight horizontal turns, because they might be ripped off as a result. In 1940 there generally was no way a pilot of any aircraft could judge for sure if he was overstressing the airframe. This in a way is reflected by many of the German aces that avoided horizontal turning battles. But if you were really brave, or just very experienced and capable, you could of course ignore this and then you would have a tighter turning circle in a Me 109 E than in a Spitfire Mk. I/II. Therefore to horizontally turn a Me 109 to the limit of what its wings would stand, depends on the willingness of the (test) pilot to take a risk and on his piloting ability. A pilot who has flown 500 combat missions in a Me 109 has a better feel for its tolerances than a test pilot that has flown it maybe 10 times at most, if even that. And who would not - in combat - make use of his performance advantages (i.e. Me 109 E diving) and avoid unpleasant performance aspect areas (i.e. Me 109 E wings ripped off when overstressed in a tight horizontal turn)? If horizontal turning always won the day, the airforces of the world would still be flying biplanes. Now that would be a sight!
I generally agree with your conclusion on performance differences between the real life aircraft and the BOP aircraft. If you think the BOP Spitfire can be improved, here a another interesting item: the BOP Ar-234 bomber actually outperforms the BOP Me 262 A1a fighter. One friend of mine tested the BOP B-17 vs. the BOP Me 262 A1a and he could also outmanoeuver the BOP Me 262 A1a in it. The world beating Me 262 A1a is the worst aircraft in BOP in every area - except top speed and climb rate - of all that I tested. The BOP Spitfire Mk. XVI can even outdive the BOP Me 262 A1a.
So the BOP Spitfire’s roll rate is one thing, but the performance in BOP of the German and US aircraft vis-a-vis the RAFx2 is another. In many ways BOP online turns into RAF vs RAF, or Royal Air Force versus Red Air Force, since the other nationality aircraft perform that badly in BOP when compared to those of the RAFx2. I have also done some "BOP firepower impact" and "BOP hit probability" tests and the results again are kind of disappointing in the same areas, but I will not publish these until all tests are finished and when I come round to putting them in a nice format.
So yes, there is a gap between historical aircraft performance and BOP aircraft performance, with the German and US aircraft getting the short end of the stick generally. I might take your advice on that other thread, but it is safe to say that some of the developers probably already have taken a peek at these three new PDF's and they choose not to respond, which is their privilege of course. In the end, it is their game and they can make it exactly the way they want it.