rel4y

The DCS K-4 was slower (570kph at deck) one year ago and also less maneuverable. The usual suspects where whining back than as well if not more. Nothing would change with a G-14, nothing at all. These threads would still pop up on a monthly basis. In other sims (not saying names here, but BoB) the 109 can disengage at will too and noone is crying about it, because a spit with E advantage is hard to beat and the lower wingloading Spits outperform the 109 at high alt. Not even going into high speed maneuverability of the Mustang. These threads are seriously counter productive for this community..

Awesome! Thanks BIGNEWY!

Sooo any info on the thrust down angle of the DCS K-4? Yo-Yo, pretty please?! :sorcerer:

That leaves us with the data from eg Rechlin archives, which is actually one of the best there is concerning german ac. I was there twice last year, very interesting and a nice place at that.

I agree with you, it fits the German contemporaries. I was just thrown of by the fact you made it sound like it was standard equipment from summer 44 when 99% of all Mustangs could only be modified for it starting December 44.

Don't ever post graphs from spitfireperformance without questioning them. What he didn't tell you is that this is calculated data for an ac with cannon gondolas and predicted engine performance. This is not from a flight test. There are several real life flight tests which I am referring to.

Like I said around 570-575 at deck. The DCS K4 until Feb 2016 did around 570 at deck. Up until 4k it was a heavier and less maneuverable G-14/U4.

Well, as we all know we had a heavier and less maneuverable G-14/U4 until February or March of last year.. This is such a stupid thing to ask for. I still dont get it. The thing did 570 kph at deck, a G-14 does the same or more and has 250 shots of MG151 awesome to spread. Please, for Gods sake gimme that G-14 and make it stop! These stupid discussions return on a monthly basis and nothing will change. Only effect is potential new players reading this bs will be scared off and no new people will turn up on the servers.

The Technical Orders for the Mustang concerning G-suits are dated November and December 1944. Maybe some operational trials were done before that timepoint, but most certainly no widespread operational use. There was no way to aquire the necessary valves (eg M-2) and ducting via supply lines without a technical order and official part number.

I had the same thoughts. :D First get some separation then fly a turn and gradually tighten it to the point his angle becomes to large and he can't follow you. Then quickly reverse and either get him into scissors or shoot after him while climbing. Play the angles there, it's called an energy trap. But be careful to keep your energy up.

In the last Grudge Match all players exept David (6-2) were either negative or even with their scores. Concerning the other players, Allies had Solty (P-51) being even and for the Axis Defaultface (109) was even, all others were negative. I didnt see an axis dominance there at all, just a fight for their life by all contenders. I think the match was really exciting and David as I had expected led the scoreboard. If it wasnt for him I am not sure the axis would have won that fight. ;)

Is this the same bug we classified as a sound bug here? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=176949 Because I feel I cant score hits and dont see tracers when this happens to me, which would elevate this "sound bug" to more severe levels.

The only thing that actually has always bothered me is the antenna ball hexagon when looking back. That's just too low poly and reminds me of 90s quake engine 3D.

Hey Phil! Glad to see the SoW team in DCS now. Usually these charts are with ram effect taken into consideration. Try diving into it and see what you can actually sustain. Good effort btw!

I may have found something a few days ago that could possibly be related to the whole trim discussion. In construction documents I saw that the wings chord line is angled 1°42' (1.7°) upwards in comparison to the fuselage main axis (109 G-10). To that the wing beam is angled forward by the same amount so it is again orthogonal to the fuselage main axis. The motor (part# 8-209.710) is angled 88°58'14'' to the Rumpfstirnwand which is often falsely called firewall. That translates to an upward angle of ~ 1.03° to the fuselage main axis. I looked this up after the MK 108 discussion, which has an initial elevation of -0.069 in DCS, which is downwards if I interpret correctly. So the engine is angled about 1° upwards compared to the fuselage main axis but about 0.67° downwards to the wing chord line. The 109 F apparently has an motor angle of 43' (0.7167°) to the fuselage main axis and ~ 1° to the wing chord line. Do you have the same data Yo-Yo?

That was the most intense grudge match so for. But then again I am a WWII nut. Good flying by all pilots and congratulations to the red team.

Luftwaffe win 47-43

RAF 36 LW 39 :D

The AI has a completely different flight model than the player aircraft though. The AI flight model is stored in the same file as where one can set the weapon load out and convergence, while the player FM is a series of large container files in a folder structure. All AI do exactly the same maneuvers, they try to outturn you and once you get on their tail they go vertical. The by far hardest AI is the spitfire, as its energy retention in tight turns is godlike. I agree with you on the damage model, but let us hope this problem soon is history.

DB601A? That's the engine of 109Es. Think you got something mixed up.. In case you mean DB605A.. Yeah, if looking at the early/mid 44 versions like the ASM, then that's pretty much the same engine as the DB605D. The DB605ASM G6/G14 models with 1800hp output were btw the ones encountered over Normandy by the allies.

I wonder how the allies won the ground war? If Wittmann really took out half the 7th British armored division alone.. Could the allied tanks really have been this bad? Maybe it helped that 70% of all German troops were bleeding out on the eastern front and that the troop numerical superiority and industrial capacity of pretty much the whole world vs little tiny axis powers was not even worth the comparison? Many allied sim pilots burn their E like is a sport and then wonder why they get completely obliterated. After a head-on the usual spit standard is a high G level turn. Immelman or Chandelle for energy conservation? No thanks. Another all time favorite is reversing right in front of german gun sights. Watch t4t and then tell me the mustang is no match. The guy never gives you angles. The spit has superior roll rate than the 109 at all speed ranges, never seen one use it yet.

Might be correct that its angled slightly downwards. 40m higher v0 doesnt translate to 40m difference at 500m, more to ~30m. Still enough. But since the v0 is right in respect to the sources we have, it doesnt really matter. Correct loadout for 44 would be either only M-Brandgranatpatrone or mix of M-Granatpatrone (with or without tracer) and Brandgranatpatrone. Yo-Yo has already confirmed they are looking into fixing this.

The brain has an oxygen reserve of ~4-6 seconds. So in the first seconds you can take a very high G load and wont black out. Afterwards there should be a rather rapid onset of the GLOC. For slow onset Gs cardiovascular reflexes increase G tolerance by about 1 G, but only after more than 10 seconds.

The SC 250 and SC 500 had the 25/A/B/C fuze type as seen in the diagram below. This is the general purpose type electric land fuze. Starting mid 1943 only type C was used, so in late war scenarios only this type is of importance. Type C differs to type B only in temperature sensitivity, as the latter had increased fuze arm times at below -20°C. The C type is temperature stable up to -50°C. The explanation of the differences can be seen in the second picture which is a development flow chart of the fuzes. There are two relevant factors in fuze settings to arming, dropping and exploding the bomb. First there is the arming delay and second there is the firing delay. The fuze has two settings, Zündstellung I & Zündstellung II which have to be ground adjusted for the Bf 109 or FW 190. You can only set the fuze to either Zündstellung I or Zündstellung II on the ground, there is no changing it in the air. It is set by a small screw, which can be seen in the following photograph. Zündstellung I means that by setting the ZSK 244 to m.V. in either waagerecht or sturz the firing delay is set to 0.08 s. Zündstellung II sets the m.V. firing delay for both waagerecht or sturz to 14 s. For both Zündstellung I & II the o.V setting in waagerecht or sturz has no firing delay. These are the delay timings after which an armed and impacted bomb will detonate. Type 25B and C differ to some extend in fuze arming delay times, but are mostly similiar. The only difference being Zündstellung I waagerecht o.V. & m.V. which can be read with pretty good accuracy from the fourth picture below. As can be seen in the third picture the arming times for Zündstellung I & II are the same. But due to the nature of the wiring only either m.V. or Vz. timings can be used exclusively. Now to the arming delay of the 25C fuze: Zündstellung I waagerecht o.V. 3 -6 s (second number read from the graph of picture four) waagerecht m.V. 5.6 -11.6 s (second number read from the graph of picture four) senkrecht o.V. 1.9 - 3.5 s senkrecht m.V. 1.9 - 3.6 s Zündstellung II waagerecht o.V. 3 -6 s (second number read from the graph of picture four) waagerecht m.V. 0.8 -1.5 s senkrecht o.V. 1.9 - 3.5 s senkrecht m.V. 0.4 - 0.7 s Before the first number the fuze is 0% armed, the second number is the 100% arm time. If it impacts before the first timepoint it will not detonate. In between this time there is a partial arming window, so some bombs may detonate. So in essence Zündstellung I is the "high altitude" fuze setting while Zündstellung II is the "low altitude" fuze setting. The Bf 109 and FW 190 are neither level bombers, so Zündstellung II could be used in the sim as a standard. This allows either o.V. without delay or m.V. for a firing delay of 14 s. Then the Zündstellung II arming delays need to be programmed for each setting as shown above. These are the original descriptions of the fuzes. As a little bonus: I noticed on Burning Skies a SC 250 bomb doesnt kill the ships. Take a look at the following. :music_whistling:

I have to correct myself on the MK108 dispersion. I initially thought the dispersion (aircraft mounted) was 1.5 MOA at 100 m but it is actually 1.5 ‰ at 100 m. 1.5 MOA at 100 m = 1.5 * sin (1/60)° * 100 m = 4.36 cm 1.5 ‰ at 100 m = 0.0015 * 100 m = 15 cm So the dispersion is higher than I thought initially. So obviously that percentage is not valid anymore and the actual percentage is 29%. Which strengthens the points established during the discussion that a higher v0 would not really benefit in a better trajectory, but predominantly in improved time of flight.