Inaccurate performance data for BOB fighters in COD comparing to RL data

[Rickusty]

Fiat G.50 HAS NOT the overboost function - WEP (it was called "+100" and added 100 mmHg for the engine)
Engine power could be increased, for a short period of time, to 960 HP at 3.000 m.
The engine should be then running at 890 mmHg pressure.
In the game, manifold pressure at max throttle is 710 mmHg... A lot less than what it could achieve.

As it is now, the plane feels so underpowered.
It certainly wasn't. Power to weight ratio was 0,35 HP-KG... way better than Hurricane I for example (0,24 HP-KG).
I certainly doesn't feel like that in the game.

Whenever you start to make a shallow climb with a G.50, it stalls.
It wasn't fast, but... it could outclimb an Hurricane 1 so...

And it can just reach 350 km/h at sea level. IRL it could master about 40 km/h more.

[Kwiatek]

Originally Posted by Rickusty

Power to weight ratio was 0,35 HP-KG... way better than Hurricane I for example (0,24 HP-KG).
I certainly doesn't feel like that in the game.

Whenever you start to make a shallow climb with a G.50, it stalls.
It wasn't fast, but... it could outclimb an Hurricane 1 so...

And it can just reach 350 km/h at sea level. IRL it could master about 40 km/h more.

Hurricane Mk1 with MErlin III, CSP and aditional armour ( pilot armoured seat, fuel tanks and armoured windshield) had take off weight 3061 kg. With 100 octan fuel - power at 6 1/2 lbs was 1030 HP and at +12 lbs was 1310 HP so power to weight ratio was - 0.33 HP/Kg ( +6 1/2lbs) and 0.42 HP/kg ( +12 lbs).

Im not wonder that G50 had also wrong power settings in COD. Such problems have near all COD planes.

You could post here reliable data for G-50 also. Maby developers will be interesting in these.