omg the meserchmitch i so easy to shoot with the spit i love it

[Richie]

Long wide curves.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AWoj...8&feature=plcp

[AbortedMan]

What's most amazing to me about this thread is not "why are you people feeding the troll"... but "How are you people feeding the troll?" I seriously can't understand a word this guy types...I'm amazed there are people here that can decipher the garbled mess enough to put together a reply.

...It took me all 3 of Raaaid's posts and a helluva lot of re-reading to figure out that the "3d effect" he was referring to was the depth of field effect.

For some reason, in my head I have a vision of Raaaid excitedly sitting at a computer in a mental hospital, paranoid and biting his nails because he managed to sneak into the doctor's office for the 100th time to use his computer and post on the banana forums before the big guys in white uniforms drag him off back to his cell after sedating him in his straitjacket.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Richie

Long wide curves.....

Salute

The documentary is riddled with inaccuracies... 55 seconds of firing for the Germans... No. For their MG's maybe, not for cannon. No mention of the mere 7 seconds of cannon ammunition, nor of the cannon's extremely low velocity or poor trajectory, absolutely the worst type of weapon to use for dogfight deflection shooting.

And the comments about "...long wide curves" are in relation to a 109 pilot escaping, as are all the comments about negative G.

I'll post again:

it must be noted in every case, that
all three foreign planes have significantly smaller turning circles and turning times.

People have a little trouble with reading it appears.

IN EVERY CASE

The German report says nothing about "long wide curves" or any other method. This is a guide which was issued to all of the 109 Staffel commanders.

The documentary relies entirely on anecdote and not factual, objective tests. As per the excerpt I posted above, there were tests done of the 109E vs Allied planes by the Germans, but also by the French, British, and Russian. Guess what? They all agreed, the 109E did not turn well, it was inferior to French, British and Soviet planes in that regard. Both the British and Soviet tests, indicated a turn time of approx. 25 seconds.

I can provide anecdotes and combat reports which suggest the Hurricane was faster than the 109E, the following details how a Hurricane pilot chased down and shot down a 109E:



Here's a link to another report where a Hurricane chased down a 109E

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...ler-7oct40.pdf

Does that mean the Hurricane was always faster than the 109E? No, they're just anecdotes of a situation which happened in combat.

The British did at least 4 separate different tests of the 109 vs Hurricanes and Spitfires, and all the tests were conclusive. At all speeds and in all types of turn contests, the Spitfires and Hurricanes were superior. Below one with Hurricane:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...ricane-109.pdf

Yes, the Germans liked their plane, it had definite advantages, but it also had weaknesses, and turn contests were often fatal.

Yes, any plane can outturn any plane given the most optimum circumstance, ie. full fuel on one, nearly empty on another, one with superior alt or E etc. But in a balanced situation, the 109E was not a good choice to turnfight in. Which is why the German pilots who knew the facts made their recommendations for 109E's not to turn fight.

This is a wonderful example of a wishful thinking thread made up by someone who obviously can't master the skill required to fight in the vertical and is letting his frustration get the better of him rather than working on improving his skills.

[Richie]

I don't really trust anybody. So I'll never be satisfied. You hear so many different stories from so many different sources you don't know witch one to take as truth. I guess fly one yourself is the only way. Anything an allied pilot does when he's flying a 109 the German pilot can do it better and the same with a Spitfire. Molders took a Spitfire for a test and didn't like it at all. He thought it flew like a civil aircraft. An American pilot took a 109 up and couldn't believe it he said his friend should have had 180 109 kills not 18.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Richie

Molders took a Spitfire for a test and didn't like it at all. He thought it flew like a civil aircraft.

Actually what he said:

"It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. The Hurricane is good-natured and turns well, but its performance is decidedly inferior to that of the Me 109. It has strong stick forces and is "lazy" on the ailerons.

The Spitfire is one class better. It handles well, is light on the controls, faultless in the turn and has a performance approaching that of the Bf 109. As a fighting aircraft, however, it is miserable. A sudden push forward on the stick will cause the Motor to cut; and because the propeller has only two pitch settings (take-off and cruise), in a rapidly changing air combat situation the motor is either overspeeding or else is not being used to the full."

Notice he refers to the two pitch propellor. This is because the captured aircraft did not have the later Constant speed, which performed much better. His comparison of 109E was against the worst version of the Spitfire.

[Richie]

All Allied aircraft are the whores of the Sunday History Channel as far as I'm concerned. I couldn't care less how great they are. I wouldn't be caught dead in one. Especially a Mustang.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Richie

All Allied aircraft are the whores of the Sunday History Channel as far as I'm concerned. I couldn't care less how great they are. I wouldn't be caught dead in one. Especially a Mustang.

Too bad you have that attitude.

All the fighter planes of the era were works of art as far as I'm concerned. You see one up close, sit in the cockpit, see the engine start up and feel the ground shake, you get a real feel for what a thrill it must have been to fly them.

All the old Aces I have talked to, from Germans like Franz Stigler or Canadians or Americans all get that gleam in their eye when they talk about flying the planes.

By the way, Franz Stigler thought the P-51 was hell of an aircraft, he flew a captured one during the war for evaluation purposes, and he flew nearly every German fighter including the 109, 190 and 262.

[Faustnik]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

By the way, Franz Stigler thought the P-51 was hell of an aircraft, he flew a captured one during the war for evaluation purposes, and he flew nearly every German fighter including the 109, 190 and 262.

People should read more books for Cpt. Brown. He flew more different aircraft than anyone.

[NaBkin]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

Salute

The documentary is riddled with inaccuracies... 55 seconds of firing for the Germans... No. For their MG's maybe, not for cannon. No mention of the mere 7 seconds of cannon ammunition, nor of the cannon's extremely low velocity or poor trajectory, absolutely the worst type of weapon to use for dogfight deflection shooting.

And the comments about "...long wide curves" are in relation to a 109 pilot escaping, as are all the comments about negative G.

I'll post again:



People have a little trouble with reading it appears.

IN EVERY CASE

The German report says nothing about "long wide curves" or any other method. This is a guide which was issued to all of the 109 Staffel commanders.

The documentary relies entirely on anecdote and not factual, objective tests. As per the excerpt I posted above, there were tests done of the 109E vs Allied planes by the Germans, but also by the French, British, and Russian. Guess what? They all agreed, the 109E did not turn well, it was inferior to French, British and Soviet planes in that regard. Both the British and Soviet tests, indicated a turn time of approx. 25 seconds.

I can provide anecdotes and combat reports which suggest the Hurricane was faster than the 109E, the following details how a Hurricane pilot chased down and shot down a 109E:



Here's a link to another report where a Hurricane chased down a 109E

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...ler-7oct40.pdf

Does that mean the Hurricane was always faster than the 109E? No, they're just anecdotes of a situation which happened in combat.

The British did at least 4 separate different tests of the 109 vs Hurricanes and Spitfires, and all the tests were conclusive. At all speeds and in all types of turn contests, the Spitfires and Hurricanes were superior. Below one with Hurricane:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...ricane-109.pdf

Yes, the Germans liked their plane, it had definite advantages, but it also had weaknesses, and turn contests were often fatal.

Yes, any plane can outturn any plane given the most optimum circumstance, ie. full fuel on one, nearly empty on another, one with superior alt or E etc. But in a balanced situation, the 109E was not a good choice to turnfight in. Which is why the German pilots who knew the facts made their recommendations for 109E's not to turn fight.

This is a wonderful example of a wishful thinking thread made up by someone who obviously can't master the skill required to fight in the vertical and is letting his frustration get the better of him rather than working on improving his skills.

So what do you personally think of the CLoD plane's perfomance? Which planes do you fly and do you think they are "historical correct" (if one can say so about a PC Sim).

I think it's common sense, that the 109 turns worse than most of the Red planes. It's well modeled in Clod I think.

But the problem I have with the game is that if I have a Spit on my 6 I have no chances to deal with her whatsoever. You can't outturn it, neither can you outclimb it fast enough (only if you are out of shooting range) nor dive away. It just sticks at your 6, only chance is that you are the better pilot and manage to make it loose you in wild maneuvres.

Every time i sit in a Spit or even in a Hurri I have a much better Kill ratio than in my 109. And that's the problem I have with Clod at the moment:
If you have two equally skilled pilots, the 109 almost every time looses. I have a good ratio if I fly with my squad mates, because then it's all about communication and discipline. But if I fly alone I feel like I sit in a defenisve-only plane. It's so much easier to fly the spit. And I'm just no sure if this was the case back then in 1940. And this is only early war, let alone 1944...

[raaaid]

climbing performance influences turning performance

i would out turn zeros in my spit 25lbs(il246) in a climbing spiral by spit superior climbing ability which in the end means better turning in an upwards spiral

edit:

playing this game i get the feeling british engineering is amazing and german one not so much, like oh yeah now i understand why the war was won and what car ill buy