Quote:
Originally Posted by droz
Pretty sure the 109E was considerably faster than the Spits in game IRL. Spit has maneuverability, 109 had speed.
|
nope, very wrong there. and you must be new to this and are showing yourself not to be very well informed, because you are taking incomplete facts which you dont seem to understand and which are only partially true, and then you try to generalize from them with the result that what you say completely looses its meaning. the 109 was not "considerably faster", you'r making it sound like the 109 was a magic Ferrari that was competing against a citroen 2cv in straight line speed.
for ex, the only reason a 109 (during BoB) could "get away" from a spitfire close behind it, is that the 109 could use the sudden dive maneuver to initially get a speed advantage into the dive because the hurricane/spitfire carburetors would be briefly cutting out due to the -ve G created. in a large melee with a number of other friendly/enemy planes around and people constantly engaging/disengaging their enemies this might be good enough to let him slip away in the fog of war, but if that same spitfire would stay on his tail in a sustained dive the spitfire would actually gradually catch up on him at high speed (with the 109 also becoming significantly less maneuverable with the high compression forces it was more subjected to then the spitfire).
further, with both planes starting at level flight and with the same speed, the BoB era 109 has a slight advantage in better initial acceleration compared to the spitfire when both planes stay at the same altitude, but then the spitfire matches the 109 very equally. obviously any difference in straight line speed during level flight was not some magic or effective 109 evasive maneuver
Quote:
Originally Posted by droz
Also, 109 is Fuel Injected. Not much sputter on a startup from that. Spit/Hurri early stuff was Carburated. you will see sputter on startup with that.
|
again an oversimplification which is not a relevant reply to the previous posters comment
if CoD is a simulation of real BoB era aircraft, you cant have one aircraft (the 109) be started, then accelerate immediately for takeoff and climb at full throttle to 3000 meters without having to be aware of engine stresses, when in comparison with a spitfire you need to carefully coax it into life, let engine temps rise for 5 min before even moderately increasing the throttle, then gently taxi during further warmup and finally takeoff when engine temp has finally reached the right levels and then climb away while making sure you are not using sustained full boost, and having to constantly carefully monitor and adjust mixture/temp/radiator/prop where with one small lapse of attention your engine blows up instantly
its not that these 2 aircraft should behave the same, each had its quirks and strength/weaknesses and this should be represented, but right now we have the 109 that can be flown unpunished way beyond its engine tolerance limits, and a spitfire engine which is much to sensitive (in addition to a number of spitfire FM performance errors)
request to black6: please have your testers compare engine startup procedures, engine tolerance to abuse and heat stress, and "cold" engine performances, then see how fast/easy it is with either aircraft to climb to 4000 meters altitude. there are some major problems here (109 to easy, spitfire to slow and engines to sensitive in comparison) which have been reported multiple times in bug report threads, and it significantly affects game play.