View Single Post
  #69  
Old 10-19-2012, 08:03 AM
Robo.'s Avatar
Robo. Robo. is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurfürst View Post
The 109s main problems is that

a) appearantly it lacks any armor protection
b) it's some 40 km/h slower on the deck than it should be
c) handling esp. stall characteristics are quite unforgiving against the real thing's rather stable nature
d) way too quick overheating since the last patch
e) the Sound Radar Exploit on the Red side.

High altitude problems seem to effect all planes.
Hi Kurfurst, there is more:

f) wing too fragile (one cannon hit from another Emil = wing off)
g) Erhoehte Notleistung exploit (you can fly at 1.45ata all day)
h) wrong engine modelled with the FTH of A-1 and ata of Aa.
i) top ceiling too low (not problem of all planes, 100octane Hurricane is OK)

As for the others:

Quote:
a) appearantly it lacks any armor protection
We don't know this for sure, the headrest armour is not represented in the 3d model, otherwise I find the amounts of coolant leaks and fueltank fires pretty much OK and consistent with their position in the 3d model. If you shoot with .303s, there is usually dozens of hits on the target. I agree that RAF fuel tanks should burn easier but that's not an issue with the 109. I find the 109s DM very reasonable now and consistent with the coolant leaks and fires described by RAF attackers in their combat reports. It is also about how lucky you are, sometimes you score plenty of hits and there is nothing visible, just like in real life where 109 returned to base with 30+ holes. Sometimes one bullet can take ou out. Same thing happens when you shoot at RAF with .303s except there is never a fuel fire from the wing tanks.

Quote:
b) it's some 40 km/h slower on the deck than it should be
We can get 470-475kph IAS which is 25-30kph slower. Still not spot on but not as bad, considering that all aicraft are slower than they should be. Now they seem to be equally slower. Perhaps this has something to do with the atmosphere modelled in the game, I don't know.

Quote:
c) handling esp. stall characteristics are quite unforgiving against the real thing's rather stable nature
I love the 109 and I fly it a lot and I never had a problem with the stall. I only stall it when I make a mistake, e.g. too much foot in a maneuveur or silly stuff like high speed stall because I am greedy to get guns on that breaking fella and do too much adjustment in a short time. The slats now work almost perfectly, the 109 is nice and stable. You need to be careful in slow speed maneuveurs but she behaves well. I see lots of 109s stalling but I don't know what they're doing wrong, maybe too fast with the throttle, wrong rudder control or wrong RPM. I don't see good pilots on Repka 4 stalling at all.

Quote:
d) way too quick overheating since the last patch
I am flying the 109 at full power, both rads open, no issues. I am aware that you could do 1,35ata @ 2400U/min with slightly closed water rad in real life but considering the overheating is a bit on the aggresive side for everything (been like that since day one for RAF btw, it's relatively new for the 109), it's good enough I guess. The only weird thing on 109 is inconsistency of temperatures throughout the subvariants.

Quote:
e) the Sound Radar Exploit on the Red side.
Some players do have it, some players don't. This is an old problem since Il-2, where some players actually fiddled with the conf.ini so they could hear the engines behind them. I personally can't hear the 109 unless he shot me already and is passing over my head (that is usually slightly too late ). I fly with canopy open at low alts because of better SA. I now pay by extra drag for this comfort. It is not right of course and should be fixed for good. But that's not something that is wrong with the 109.
__________________
Bobika.
Reply With Quote