Quote:
Originally Posted by Pugo3
The game presently simulates only one combat option with these match ups, no exceptions: AI flies directly away to begin an endless series of b&z jousting head on passes. Yet combat accounts of dogfights between these aircraft include close in dogfights that lasted sometimes up to 15 minutes or more. It is amazing to me how vigorously and venomously some persons argue and resist this simple truth. The game would be enhanced, not degraded, by the simple addition of close in dogfighting being included as an option for all aircraft.
p3
|
They resist it because it exposes how far the game is from reality. Also the assumption that as the war went on dogfights became rarer is false: In Western Europe, classic Boom and Zoom was the domain of the Me-109s and P-38s, and this disappeared in 1944 as the FW-190A became 70% of the frontline force against equal speed opponents. (Except for the first zoom, the FW-190A was very poor on the vertical)
Just the fact that the armament of most WWII fighters is not centralized, and is pre-set for a definite firing convergence distance, says much about their supposed predilection for Boom and Zoom...
They boom and zoomed against slower opponents, because otherwise vs faster enemies it takes up too much time to gain a proper separation, and by 1944, on the Western Front, Boom and Zoom is increasingly rare as speeds get more equal, especially when the Germans gradually learn not to use the vertical against higher-flying Allies...
That is also why one German officer said "All the Aces sent to me from the Eastern Front got shot down on the Western Front": They had been used to enjoying the higher operating altitudes and comparably better dive and zoom characteristics of their Me-109s vs Russian types (whose trim tail gave it superior dive pull-out performance, even vs the P-51, if correctly trimmed, contrary to the usual lore), and all that had to change against the Allies, especially when using FW-190As...
Also, the idea 70% of kills did not see their opponent before being shot down is complete rubbish to anyone who has read more than a handful of combat accounts...
Gaston
P.S. "Red Fleet" 1943 quotes:
http://www.lonesentry.com/arti...an-combat-fw190.html (
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/t...bat-fw190.html)
Quote: -"The speed of the FW-190 is slightly higher than that of the Messerschmitt; it also has more powerful armament and is more maneuverable in horizontal flight."
-"the FW-190 will inevitably offer turning battle at a minimum speed."
-"By using your foot to hold the plane from falling into a tail spin you can turn the La-5 at an exceedingly low speed, thus keeping the FW from getting on your tail."
-"Coming out of a dive, made from 1,500 meters (4,650 ft) and at an angle of 40 to 45 degrees, the FW-190 falls an extra 200 meters (620 ft)."
-"Throughout the whole engagement with a FW-190, it is necessary to maintain the highest speed possible. The Lavochkin-5 will then have, when necessary, a good vertical maneuver, and consequently, the possibility of getting away from an enemy attack"
-"In fighting the FW-190 our La-5 should force the Germans to fight by using the vertical maneuver."
-"Since the FW-190 is so heavy and does not have a high-altitude engine, pilots do not like to fight in vertical maneuvers."
http://luthier.stormloader.com/SFTacticsIII.htm
"FW-190 will fly at 1,500-2,500 meters and Me-109G at 3,500-4,000 meters. They interact in the following manner:
FW-190 will attempt to close with our fighters hoping to get behind them and attack suddenly. If that maneuver is unsuccessful they will even attack head-on relying on their superb firepower. This will also break up our battle formations to allow Me-109Gs to attack our fighters as well. Me-109G will usually perform boom-n-zoom attacks using superior airspeed after their dive. FW-190 will commit to the fight even if our battle formation is not broken, preferring left turning fights. There has been cases of such turning fights lasting quite a long time, with multiple planes from both sides involved in each engagement."
-Squadron Leader Alan Deere, (Osprey Spit MkV aces 1941-45, Ch. 3, p. 2
: "Never had I seen the Hun stay and fight it out as these Focke-Wulf pilots were doing... In Me-109s the Hun tactic had always followed the same pattern- a quick pass and away, sound tactics against Spitfires and their SUPERIOR TURNING CIRCLE. Not so these 190 pilots: They were full of confidence... We lost eight to their one that day..."
Quote from Hurricane pilot John Weir: LINK "A Hurricane was built like a truck, it took a hell of a lot to knock it down. It was very manoeuvrable, much more manoeuvrable than a Spit, so you could, we could usually outturn a Messerschmitt. They'd, if they tried to turn with us they'd usually flip, go in, at least dive and they couldn't. A Spit was a higher wing loading..
The Hurricane was more manoeuvrable than the Spit and, and the Spit was probably, we (Hurricane pilots) could turn one way tighter than the Germans could on a, on a, on a Messerschmitt, but the Focke Wulf could turn the same as we could and, they kept on catching up, you know."
But what do these experienced combat veterans know...
G.