Fw190
 

Why is the FW190 so superior to every other fighter in the game? Is that historically accurate? Intentional (gameplay-wise)?

It's just as fast as anything out there, handles significantly better than everything airborne, and has a nice armament. I started playing the mod a few days ago and I already rock in it - and if someone else gets it, well, don't bother taking off to challenge him/her.

I can't imagine it being balanced. What's the story on it?

Thanks!

(EDIT: I just saw the planned features for .6 - I presume that the revisions to speed and turning radius for the planes will resolve this issue. Or, I hope so, anyway.)

Re: Fw190
 

its it FIXEd .6.

Re: Fw190
 

according to devs, the entire flight model was redone, so basically that means flying a plane is a lot harder and n00bs dont stand a chance

Re: Fw190
 

yup :D

and that coupled with the pilot class thing should mean that finally the pilots are in the planes and the non pilots are on the ground doing what they do best :D

Re: Fw190
 

Actually, I'd be the one to get up in the air to take it down. I'd choose a spitfire over the 190 ANY day.

Some people forget speed is the key sometimes and the 190 turns so hard it slows down way too much for my tastes.

Flight models have been changed in .6 drastically. It might need some fine tuning after we hear all the opinions of our fans of course. So we'll look forward to the input you guys have about it.

Re: Fw190
 

You would seriously take a Spit over a 190!!!

A normal pilot can shoot me down in a 190 when i'm in a Spit its so over powered the cannons kills in split seconds and it turns and climbs so 1337 its dam, hard to stop.

The only chance you have is to hit it fast from behind, but that rarely happens because you hardly get chance to take off.

Re: Fw190
 

It depends on the Spit model. The Bf109F was superior to the Spit MKII when it came out but the FW-190A almost sent a panic through the RAF. The Brits repsonded by putting a Merlin 45 engine in a Spit mkII and created the Spit MkV which was a good match to the Bf109F but the FW-190A was still a better fighter below 16,000ft.

The Spit in BF1942 is supposed to be a Spit MK XIV which should walk all over a FW-190A.

Re: Fw190
 

Weren't the later versions of the Spitfire one of the best fighters of that time? I would love to see different models of the Spit! And yes, the FW has a turning rate that not even a spaceship can beat!

Re: Fw190
 

I cant wait till the P-38 is fixed(I have no clue why they didnt give it the 20mm) and the FW190 is fixed... Then there will be dead german planes all over the battlefields...

Re: Fw190
 

A Spitfire Mk9, Mk 14, and Mk16 are better than a FW-190A or F, but a FW-190D would be a good matchup.

Re: Fw190
 

All late war planes were uber, the latest bf109 model went some 455mph as well did the fw190 and the spit late models.

Re: Fw190
 

The G and K models were fast but didnt turn well. Problem with the G models and K models were they had gained so much weight the wing loading was horrible but they were definately fast.

Re: Fw190
 

Its not all about how fast you can go, the Bf109K-4 and the FW190D9 (the two last produced of there types) were fast but didn't turn well but could outdive and out zoom climb most other planes. Probably the most deadly and fastest late war plane, certainly at low levels was the Hawker Tempest but again it had a slow roll and slow turn (relative to a spitfire XIV). The best turn fighters were mostly Russian;).

Re: Fw190
 

That went pretty wrong in FH 0.5 then...... :drink:

Do not forget about Japanese fighters though.....

Re: Fw190
 

The 190 owned everything in the sky except the late model spitfires. Do a google.

Re: Fw190
 

The 190 was alright. I've flowen it and I would definetly take a Spit any day over a 190. The 190 is WAY to easy to lose controll over and slam into somthing. Also I'd choose a BF-110 over a Spit. Call me crazy but im deadly in that plane. The proper rudder, pitch, and yaw controll can make the BF-110 the most bad-assed fighter in the game. Not to mention its extremely accurate and powerful MG's. It's like a B-25 without the added weight. I've shot down Spits in it without any problem because of its very tight turning radious. Then you get the pilots who think...he's on me so I'll out run him in my Spit. Well that dosen't go down well. Infact it goes down in flames...heh.

Re: Fw190
 

Historically correct you would be the one going down in flames.

Even the Hurricane outmatched the BF110, that was supposed to be a long range escort fighter. During the Battle of Brittain the BF110 failed miserably as fighters, and ended up flying defensive circles to protect each others ass, instead dogfighting the Hurricanes and protecting the bombers. The Spitfires were less common during that stage of the war and used more to fight german BF109 fighter sweeps that flew ahead of a bomber force, and BF109 fighters in general. Hurricanes were the ones to take on the bombers and their escorts. Obviously since Spitfires had a much better performance then Hurricanes, a BF110 would be even more outclassed.

After the germans realized the BF110 was not suited to be a fighter ( heavy losses among BF110 and the bombers they had to protect ) ) because of it's heavy and slow controls and therefore inability to dogfight smaller and more manouverable fighters, it was used as a light bomber and a night fighter for wich it was much better suited and did well.

The BF110 was not the only german aircraft to fail when faced by enemy fighter presence, the Stuka wasn't suited to operate in such area's neither, as wasn't the HE 111. and Do 17.

Re: Fw190
 

Whilst the Stuka failed in Britain, it succeeded in Russia.........so it was a great plane. The Stuka was also economical......Stuka rules:stallard::stallard:

Re: Fw190
 

But this being a game its not historicaly correct so what I said is what happens.

Re: Fw190
 

I think you have to take into account different models and load outs of the different planes. A FW190 F8 (1944) would probably fall prey to a Spit VB (1941) if it got in a 1 on 1 fight but an FW190A4 (1942) would have no problems shooting down the Spit VB. Also ordanance makes a big effect. If you take a 109k-4 with its default load out its a pretty mean dog fighter but bung a pair of 108 cannons under the wings and its a fast target for a pure interceptor like a Spit XIV or IXe (its main UK counterpart).

As for the 190 specfically, each model made supermarine quickly adapted a Spitfire for it culminating in the XIV. Lets also not forget Russian fighters, the Yak9's, 3's and La7's were formidable fighers. Also there was the Hawker Tempest, pound for pound was probably the deadliest WW2 fighter and could certainly go toe to toe with a FW190D9 and certainly at low levels would could out turn and fly faster than it. It only lacked roll. Also its not really the plane...its the pilot and the tactics that were used. Thats why the P38 did so well even when it was out matched by the Ki-84, its was used by experianced pilots with ultra sound tactics.

It didn't fail, Luftawaffe tactics failed combined with over confidence and thinking Radar was a silly toy for sailors.;)

The AM6 Zero was a neat plane but had poor wing loading, it would literally come apart without warning and it had a high stall speed despite its excellent low alt, slow speed performance. Whats needs to be put in FH in the 1944+ maps the a Ki-84 Frank which is an awsome plane and certainly a match for any US plane in the theatre.

Re: Fw190
 

its not hard to rock with the 190... its the tiger of the skies right now and unless u have flight lag u should be able to own with it.

Re: Fw190
 

Ironically, in late-Pacific maps with the F6 and the Corsair, the Zero should be completely outclassed in speed and firepower.

Re: Fw190
 

Corsair yes, but late Model 52 Zero had top speed of about 352mph and F6F Hellcat top speed was about 360mph.

Re: Fw190
 

The P-47 is a very underrated fighter, but I think that with its 8 .50cals, its ability to take a shitload of damage, and hold its speed in a dive, it was definately a formidible boom n' zoom fighter. Fighters were either boom 'n' zoom fighters (used energy tactics such as diving from above and swooping away to safety after taking shots) or turn 'n' burners (like the Spitfire or the Zero, they specialize and good turn and rollrates), so if you use the fighters strengths correctly, it'll just come down to piloting skill.

Re: Fw190
 

No it didn't, the P-51D outperformed most versions until the late war Dora models.

Re: Fw190
 

455mph?! No it didn't!

Re: Fw190
 

Noob?! I've been here longer than you! Who died and made you queen?

Re: Fw190
 

I don't gotta listen to you, i'm not gonna make one mega long post of omnislashing when I can make 3 seperate ones. Your lucky you got the Evil Monkey from Family Guy as an avator or I'd have no mercy on you (i'm a huge Family Guy fan).

Re: Fw190
 

Ok buddy, If I'm a n00b than you are a gay midget clown gangbanger and a reverse blumpkin pivot-man in a circlejerk.

Re: Fw190
 

Top speed isn't everything. At low speeds, the Zero out-turned almost anything else that was being fielded at the time, but it had almost no armor, poor acceleration, poor armament, and most importantly, poor climbing ability. All it could do against a Corsair or Hellcat was turn at low speeds, and drivers of the former would simply refuse to be drawn into that, and cut the Zero to ribbons while maintaining a high airspeed.

Re: Fw190
 

I'd like it if you would PM me if you wanna continue this flamewar instead of wasting posts.

Re: Fw190
 

Children, calm yourselves.

Re: Fw190
 

I am still on the sunny side of thirty, thank you very much.

And you ought to know better than to flame people constantly, Killor. I expect better of you.

Re: Fw190
 

HFS!!! KILLOR!!! How dare you tell them about our night together
:cry:

Re: Fw190
 

Well Im not on the sunny side of thirty, DONT MAKE ME HAVE TO PULL THIS THREAD OVER!

Vic, I agree that the Zero was obsolete and should have been replaced alot sooner.

The A6M5 Zero model 52 came out roughly the same time as the F6F-3 Hellcat and both were very closely matched in performance, Hellcat had advantage due to much more rugged construction. There wasnt that much of a speed difference and the model 52 had thicker wing skins and was sturdier to allow it to have a faster terminal dive speed. It was also the first Zero to carry self sealing tanks and armor but it was not uncommon for pilots to remove the armor and self sealing tanks for lighter weight and better performance. Also on earlier Zeros the airlerons would get stiff at over 200mph speeds. The model 52 addressed this problem and the problem didnt go away but was greatly diminished.

The point I was getting at was the earlier statement that said the Hellcat and Corsair had advantage due to speed and firepower. And I felt yes Corsair had advantage butthe Hellcat was not so superior. What gave the USN their great kill ratio was after Midway and especially after Guadalcanal the IJNAF was all but decimated. Theyu lost all their best pilots while the Allied pilots got better.

And I'd like to hear more about this "information" of Zero's breaking up in midair? The implication seems to be a design flaw and I have not k\heard of this. Zero's were an excellent aerobatic fighter and I have not heard of structural failures due to manuvering, diving excluded.

They were known to breakup if terminal dive velocity was exceeded but any aircraft will come apart if pushed too hard in a dive. And any aircraft will break up if structural integrity is compromised by enemy gunfire.

Re: Fw190
 

The P51D itself was relativly late war and the A series FW190 was just as good and progressed in development just as well as the P51 series and its certainly not true the P51D outperformed the FW190A's, especially the A8/9. Its was more down to pilots and tactics and German radar not being used correctly. Also by the time the FW190D9, F8, A8 and the late war 109'sG' and K's were about there engines would have an operational life of as little as 12 hours because of material quality and there boost systems.

Its a good plane but it was succesful cause pilots used sound tactics again but were talking Bf engine here. Its doesn't matter what flight model is given to the planes in FH you still won't be able to use the P47 as it was irl because you can't climb to 3000 meters in a wing and dive on planes from that height at 750kph in formation.

Theres records of US fighter pilots literally putting a a few 0.50 cal rounds (which individually are not that powerful compared to a 20mm round) into the wing roots of Zeros and them folding up during a turn. No design floor, just Zero's were joked about being made of paper due to there nature. Good early war fighter though.

The RAF did a Spit VB vs Zero test (which is available on the net) and they came to the same conclusion - don't get in a turn fight with a zero. It was noted that the Zero has a high stall speed though which means that a turn fighter could happen but the Spit pilot would need to approach his own stall speed before the zero would have to give up.

Re: Fw190
 

The fastest of all the Bf 109s was the K-14, fitted with the DB605L engine, this was reported to be capable of 455 mph made possible by an engine of 1,500 hp boosted to 2,000hp for short periods. Only two were ever used in combat due to their introduction in the final days of the war.

Bitch!

Re: Fw190
 

THATS IT MR. YOUR ON MY LIST. Oh yes I have a list...and your on it. (whips out little black notebook and makes rambling noises "...put killor to top of list...").

Re: Fw190
 

LOL N1 Mack Lee =Leeown3d

Re: Fw190
 

I think the P-47 was an exceptional fighter, just didnt have the range to go to Berlin and back. The P-47N would have been nasty as hell.

According to the Book about P-47's in Europe(written by Martin Caidin, name of book escapes me), Francis Gabrseski stated that in a mock dogfight between a P-47D with the paddle bladed prop and a Spitfire mK VB the Spit kept trying to out turn a P-47 which it can easily. But what teh Spit pilot didint know was that the P-47 was one of hte best rolling aircraft of WW2. The Spit would roll onto a wingtip and pull back on the stick only to see the P-47 coming straight at him. The Spit pilot thought the P-47 was out turning him. Also from take off to a climb to altitiude Gabreski said the P-47 came off the ground and started clawing skyward like a rocket and left the Spit behind. Gabreski also stated the paddle bladed props made the P-47 act as if an extra 1000hp was added to the engine. He said that was the single largest improvement that transformed the P-47 from a good fighter to a exfceptional fighter.

Add the legendary durability and the weight of fire of 8 x .50cal and few fighters could stand up to it. Its ruggedness and durability is one reason why it is one of my two referred ground attack aircraft. Typhoon being the other. Load the P-47 up with rockets and bombs and drop the 8 x .50al and add 4 x 20mm and I would have no need for a Typhoon.

Re: Fw190
 

The Typhoon had issues with its tail falling off in steep dives though (thats not to say it wasn't a tough plane or a bad one)....the Tempest would be my prefered choice there. Its bigger, faster, has a better roll, climb, zoom climb and can mix is up with FW190D9's and A8's and most likely win cause it could turn as well. Its 4 Hispano V 20mm cannons were probably the most damaging guns used in a fighter as well for rate of fire/damage capacity trade off, more so than the 0.50 cal anyway.

Re: Fw190
 

In my opinion the FW 190 was a good plane, but it didnt stand a chance against the numerous allied planes.
So yes, it is the tiger of the skies, but as the tigers, these were destroyed by quantity. I once read about 300 fighters(allied) flying in formation.....nothing can survive that....

Re: Fw190
 

300 fighters?

later in the war it was not uncommon to see 1000 bomber raids and 1500 fighters flying in formation together. Can you imagine the sight of 2500 planes flying overhead? And you in your littel FW-190 or Bf-109 had to dive through that mass AND escape enemy fighters.

Re: Fw190
 

puppyeyes:......This just shows how brave the interceptor pilots must have been....

Re: Fw190
 

if you are going for realistic characteristics of planes mondogenerator, then i hava a few surprises for you :naughty:

1. only the first version of the typhoon had the problem with its tail falling off
2. the typhoon could take more damage than the tempest (even the earlier versions)
3. the later versions (1B onwards) of the typhoon could out manouever pretty much anything in the skies, including both FW190's and tempests in the following aspects. it was: faster, has a quicker roll, climb, more powerfull more reliable engine and was smaller than the tempest. not sure how the tempest being a larger target and easily recognisable is a bonus.
4. the germans often mistook the typhoon for a 190 and so were not always prepared for it even if they had seen it approaching.

i could probably find more if i had more time but i dont so this will have to do.




*sigh* glad i got that out of my system. sorry if this came out offensively, it wasnt supposed to be. :barf:

back to the 190, i recon the best plane to take out the 190 is the B25 with 2 people in it. even with only me in it i found that its not too hard to take it out as long as you can surprise it and switch between pilot and gunner :smack:

Re: Fw190
 

mmm...are we talking about a typhoon here? No this is a FW 190 thread...and anyway, the typhoon was designed for ground assault, and the FW 190 was a fighter. The FW 190 could take more altitude then the Typhoon, it was also a bit quicker, with a bit larger cannons....

Re: Fw190
 

the Typhoon was not designed for ground attacks. It was simply an early failure as a fighter and proved to have alot of potential in the other role.

Re: Fw190
 

DON'T MAKE ME TURN THIS MCDONALDS AROUND!


The rule of thumb that we always went by in Air Warrior was "under 6 Gs over 300mph".

Re: Fw190
 

Thats if it didn't fall apart due to the shitty build quality (due to lack of nazi resources), and alot of its top speed would be using the nitrogen oxide boost as well.

PS- Eat me MG42Maniac.

Re: Fw190
 

Ok, where do I start. The Tempest was essential nothing more than a Typhoon refined, reengineered and the result of lesson learned. It had a new wing that was 5 inches thinner at the root which helped dramatically. The thin laminar wing also could house the Hispano MKV cannons completely which aided roll and general aerodynamics. The Typhoon B's top speed with its Napier Sabre I engine (@2200HP) was around 400Mph at 8000 ft and would start to get compression effects at 500mph in a dive resulting in nasty problems with skin coming off and tails disintergrating. Yes the tail was fixed but there were more problems caused by the Typhoons thick wing and general aerodynamic issues.

The Tempest with its Sabre IIB (pretty much the first factory built plane) and then MK IV could acheive upto 435 Mph in level flight (with there 2,420HP engine) and later with the Sabre MkVI could achieve an astonishing 477Mph (the Typhoon could only achieve this in a dive and 23 more Mph and it would start to break up very soon) in level flight compared to 400 at the same atl for the typhoon. So fast in level flight no other allied or axis piston powered plane could catch it and it could catch up with V1 flying bombs.

Also due to its refined aero dynamics and new wing (the bane of the Typhoon)could now travel 820 miles compared to the Typoons 600. Mainly down to reduced drag. Also the wing took on a shape similar to the P47 and Spitfires which also helped with turn and roll. Sydney Camm once commented "The Air Staff wouldn't buy anything that didn't look like a Spitfire." as He joked about why the new wing looked that way. The Typhoons wing was much like the Hurricanes. Thick and not condusive to high speed. Another notable feature about the wing that the total span with 13ft shorter than the Typhoon which further aided roll rate.

As for the engine. The early Napier Sabres were complex and broke often. The Typhoon was really the test bed for that engine which later was refined and bettered with the II and IIb which was housed in the Typhoon but as the Tempest took over as the priority they recieved the better IV (its first engine), V and IV Napier saber engines, Griffon engines (it actually never happened but that was the plan) and later the Bristol Centaurus engine which also was used in the Fury which was like Tempest on Steroids.

oh...as for size, the Tempest was 51 inches longer than the Typhoon. Not much compared with 13ft difference in the wingspan.

Dya want to start talking climb rates now? I don't think so, the Tempest had a massive climb rate compared to the Typhoon, again, due to the wing and extra engine power.

How dya like them cookies? The Typhoon was a great plane but the Tempest was a logical progression of it that refined and improved and was of the greatest piston powered planes of all time.

Sorry for the slight of topic but I had to say something to such comments. If yer gonna get technical back it up please.

Back on topic. I wouldn't want to be a FW190D9 or Me262 with Tempest anwhere near me