DCS WW2 fighter comparison

[tempestglen]

For a P47C, could easily dive from spitfireIX, extends far away,and zoom up out of spitfireIX shooting range, and fight back using enough energy advantage which is built up during high speed zoom period. And this happens at low altitude, 1 vs 1, boom&zoom, easily solve the spitfire@your 6. Does It sound impossible? Let 's read a funny story.

 

 

Please note that in 1943 April, the so called "USAAF ace Robert S. Johnson" had ZERO combat experience and merely passed allied standard 500-600 hours flying course(not the shooting score:D). After this famous P47C vs Spitfire IX match, he went to battlefield later and made quite a few mistakes such as losing his team mates, tried to join fw190 formation and flee away, very funny and bold P47 newbie. However, this newbie flied a P47C beat a experienced RAF pilot(A instructor) with 18lbs Spitfire IX who was assigend by RAF to teach the Americans how to air combat in Europe.

 

 

 

The following episode, found in Thunderbolt! by the World War II

USAAF ace Robert S. Johnson, is one of the best examples available of the use of energy tactics (diving extension/pitch-back) to defeat a doublesuperior opponent. The encounter described is a mock combat engagement over England between Johnson (P-47C) and an unidentified RAF pilot in a new Spitfire IX. The Spitfire had about a 25 percent better power loading and nearly a 25 percent lower wing loading. The Thunderbolt's only performance advantages were faster top speed, greater acceleration in a dive (because of the P-47's heavier weight and higher density), and better roll performance. (See the Appendix for a discussion of roll and acceleration performance.) Johnson, undoubtedly one of the greatest natural fighter pilots of all time, used his roll performance defensively to allow himself the chance to build an energy advantage in a diving extension.

We flew together in formation, and then I decided to see just what this airplane had to its credit.I opened the throttle full and the Thunderbolt forged ahead. A moment later exhaust smoke poured from the Spit as the pilot came after me. He couldn't make it; the big Jug had a definite speed advantage. I grinned happily; I'd heard so much about this airplane that I really wanted to show off the Thunderbolt to her pilot. The Jug kept pulling away from the Spitfire;suddenly I hauled back on the stick and lifted the nose. The Thunderbolt zoomed upward, soaring into the cloud-flecked sky. I looked out and back; the Spit was straining to match me, and barely able to hold his position.But my advantage was only the zoom—once in steady climb, he had me. I gaped as smoke poured from the exhausts and the Spitfire shot past me as if I were standing still. Could that plane climb! He tore upward in a climb I couldn't match in the Jug. Now it was his turn; the broad elliptical wings rolled, swung around, and the Spit screamed in, hell-bent on chewing me up.

This was going to be fun. I knew he could turn inside the heavy Thunderbolt;if I attempted to hold a tight turn the Spitfire would slip right inside me.I knew, also, that he could easily outclimb my fighter. I stayed out of those sucker traps. First rule in this kind of a fight: don't fight the way your opponent fights best. No sharp turns; don't climb; keep him at your own level.We were at 5,000 feet, the Spitfire skidding around hard and coming in on my tail. No use turning; he'd whip right inside me as if I were a truck loaded with cement, and snap out in firing position. Well, I had a few tricks, too. The P-47 was faster, and I threw the ship into a roll. Right here I had him. The Jug could outroll any plane in the air, bar none. With my speed, roll was my only advantage, and I made full use of the manner in which the Thunderbolt could whirl. I kicked the Jug into a wicked left roll, horizon spinning crazily, once,twice, into a third. As he turned to the left to follow, I tramped down on the right rudder, banged the stick over to the right. Around and around we went,left, right, left, right. I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me.I just refused to turn. Every time he tried to follow me in a roll, I flashed away to the opposite side, opening the gap between our two planes.Then I played the trump. The Spitfire was clawing wildly through the air,trying to follow me in a roll, when I dropped the nose. The Thunderbolthowled and ran for earth. Barely had the Spitfire started to follow—and I was along way ahead of him by now—when I jerked back on the stick and threw the Jug into a zoom climb. In a straight or turning climb, the British ship had the advantage. But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom. Before the Spit pilot knew what had happened, I was high above him, the Thunderbolt hammering around. And that was it—for in the next few moments the Spitfire flier was amazed to see a less maneuverable, slower-climbing Thunderbolt rushing straight at him, eight guns pointed ominously at his cockpit.

The faster high speed dive acceleration, the better high speed zoom(not sustained climb). So the Boom&Zoom ability is very important in WWII aircraft comparation. Robert S. Johnson is correct in P47 Boom/Zoom ability evaluation, but he forgot Tempest.

 

My interpretation is below:

 

Let P47C's energy(including both speed and altitude) is Ep.

Let Spitfire IX energy is Es.

 

1) At first, P47C and spitfireIX in formation. So, Ep=Es. Neither are full throttle.

 

 

Quote:

We flew together in formation, and then I decided to see just what this airplane had to its credit.

 

2) then P47C full throttle to a higher speed, sometime later, spitfire followed with full throttle. There is some distance between p47c and spit because p47 speed up earlier, and p47 has a somewhat higher speed due to higher Vmax. Whether the p47c dives slightly or not is not important because spit is chasing p47c at same altitude with a little lower speed.

 

Now, Ep>Es, only slightly difference. (20-30km/h slower?)

 

 

Quote:

I opened the throttle full and the Thunderbolt forged ahead. A moment later exhaust smoke poured from the Spit as the pilot came after me. He couldn't make it; the big Jug had a definite speed advantage.

 

3)

 

Quote:

The Jug kept pulling away from the Spitfire;

Ep>Es, 30-40km/h difference? what are their TAS now? perhaps 600km/h vs 570 km/h? You know it takes quite sometime to accelerate to Vmax in a level flight with full throttle.

 

4)

 

 

Quote:

suddenly I hauled back on the stick and lifted the nose. The Thunderbolt zoomed upward, soaring into the cloud-flecked sky. I looked out and back; the Spit was straining to match me, and barely able to hold his position.

Interesting is that Johnson begin to zoom from a medium speed(Below Vmax), and he found spitfire is in struggle to catch him. So we can say p47c outzoom spitfire: even spitfire could cut the conner, spit could not get closer to a zooming p47c.

 

At this stage, Ep>Es. still slightly advantage.

 

 

5) Turning point comes when both speed drops to sth. 300km/h? and below. Zoom period is finished. Continues low speed climb is here. Of course, spit9 outclimb p47c. Finnaly, spit9 fly ahead of and above of p47c and still keeping climb. Certainly, spitfire has opportunity of shooting at p47c at late period of zooming when distant is quite smaller.

 

Now p47c behind of and lower than spit, and spit begin to turn around in low speed, and try to ride on p47c's 6clock again.

 

This stage, spitfire pilot might grin happily. spit9 win! spitfireIX has both angle(before overshoot) and energy: Ep<Es. spitfire's somehow higher energy comes from its better climb rate(25 percent better power loading.)

 

6)

 

Quote:

This was going to be fun. I knew he could turn inside the heavy Thunderbolt;if I attempted to hold a tight turn the Spitfire would slip right inside me.I knew, also, that he could easily outclimb my fighter. I stayed out of those sucker traps. First rule in this kind of a fight: don't fight the way youropponent fights best. No sharp turns; don't climb; keep him at your own level.

Johnson is smart, no turn, no low speed climb with a spitfire, otherwise he'll lose.

 

The most important is that the spitfireIX has both angle and energy! and this is at low altitude, only 5000ft. spitfireIX is ready to get to firing position. This is a typical nightmare for those caught by a spitfire at low alt.

 

 

Quote:

We were at 5,000 feet, the Spitfire skidding around hard and coming in on my tail. No use turning; he'd whip right inside me as if I were a truck loaded with cement, and snap out in firing position.

Ep=Es, approximately.

 

7) P47c begin to barrel/scissors with better roll rate. But this could NOT establish energy advantage, just make spitfire not get into firing pisition.

 

Ep=Es, approximately. The distance between them is enlarging due to spitfire's lag in roll maneuver.

.

Quote:

Every time he tried to follow me in a roll, I flashed away to the opposite side, opening the gap between our two planes.

 

8 )Now big time comes, p47c begin to dive, this is the beginning of dive extend/pitch back tactic.

If spitfire follows, this will be the beginning of spitfire's failure regardless who is the pilot of spitfire. Even you are the best spitfire pilot in the world, if you dare to follow, you lose, your excellent skills could NOT avoid being out-energy by p47c.

 

 

Quote:

Then I played the trump. The Spitfire was clawing wildly through the air,trying to follow me in a roll, when I dropped the nose. The Thunderbolt howled and ran for earth.

Note that p47c begin to dive with roughly same energy with spitfireIX. Ep=Es.

 

Distant between them? Don't know. But it should be greater than the time before barrel/scissors.

 

9) The dive continues, speed higher and higher, p47c dive acceleration advantage show off. Even spitfireIX has same initial energy, p47c will establish energy advantage during dive. Of course, spitfire could not get closer to p47c, on the contrary, p47c is farer and farer away from spitfireIX.When they reach lowest point of the dive and begin level flight. P47c has more speed, same alt with spit.

 

So, Ep>>Es. and the distance is quite enough for the next maneuver----pitch back.

 

Quote:

when I dropped the nose. The Thunderbolt howled and ran for earth. Barely had the Spitfire started to follow—and I was a long way ahead of him by now

 

10) P47c begin to zoom. This is the second zoom. The first zoom earlier is from not-so-high speed, and p47c get caught by spit. This time is different because p47c zoom from HIGH SPEED after a dive. Spitfire could NOT get closer to p47c even spit could cut the corner, in such a high speed zoom. High Speed is p47c's "secret weapon".

 

Spitfire pilot probably wants to repeat the first zoom, catch p47c when both speed drops to low. But BEFORE that, p47c has already established energy advantage, and spitfire could never get close to p47c, leave alone "overshoot" p47c.

 

Ep>>>Es !

 

When p47c speed drops to low, at the same time, spitfire IX speed also drops to low. But P47c is quite higher than spitfire, and p47c's altitude is so high that p47c could turn back to spitIX. Amazing. With il2 FB experience we know that p47c should be 500m+ higher than spitfire, otherwise, p47c have no enough space to turn back and spitfire will shoot p47c down.

 

 

Quote:

when I jerked back on the stick and threw the Jug into a zoom climb. In a straight or turning climb, the British ship had theadvantage. But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom. Before the Spit pilot knew what had happened, I was high above him, the Thunderbolt hammering around. And that was it—for in the next few moments the Spitfire flier was amazed to see a less maneuverable, slower-climbing Thunderbolt rushing straight at him, eight guns pointed ominously at his cockpit.

 

 

Thus we know Shaw's opinion, P47C establish sufficient energy advantage over spitfireIX by "dive extend/pitch back" tactic.

 

Why? Spitfire is bleeding energy during high speed straight flight---dive and zoom. Spitfire pilot not stupid, he will NOT tight turn while P47c fly straight. Both of them straight fly, but P47c bleeds spitfireIX's energy in straight flight. That's the key. If you are bleeding energy in straight flight, you could do nothing. ACE pilot=rookie pilot during this period. All you should do is to think about how to avoid shot down in the next few minutes by a higher energy opponent.

Edited June 16, 2014 by tempestglen

[tempestglen]

Robert S. Johnson's story.

 

http://acepilots.com/usaaf_rsj.html

 

The RAF fliers helped orient them to combat in the ETO, and on one memorable day, Johnson out-maneuvered a Spitfire pilot,using the Thunderbolt's superior barrel-roll and diving capabilities to get behind the more agile Spitfire. Shortly, the Group moved over to Kings Cliffe airfield, and flew it first combat missions in mid-April, 1943.

Later that month(May 1943), he and several other pilots who had not completed the fighter pilot's gunnery requirement, went to Goxhill (a miserable place, full of coal dust) for gunnery instruction. They practiced shooting at a towed target sleeve, but he never "got the hang of it," achieving a high score (against the sleeve) of 4.5%, below the requirement of 5%. Thus, the second highest scoring ace of the ETO never actually qualified as a fighter pilot! (And the top ace, Gabreski, had almost washed out of flight training in 1941.)

But on May 14th, he received his baptism of fire, a "ramrod" (bomber escort) over Antwerp, which the Germans usually defended. Three 16-plane squadrons of the 56th went up that day, to help shepherd a force of about thirty B-17s. As they flew over the Dutch coast, heavy flak opened up, ripping into the bombers flying at lower altitude. Hub Zemke, leading the flight, plunged after some bandits, with Johnson and the other two members of the flight "glued to his tail." Eight more German planes came after Zemke's flight, and the four Thunderbolts turned to meet them head on. The antagonists flashed by each other, firing, and Johnson's guns stuck in the 'ON' position despite his repeated flicking of the arming switch. As he hammered on the trigger and switches, trying to shut off his guns, two Focke-Wulfs passed through his bullet stream and were damaged. When Johnson finally got his guns off, he was alone. He had been constantly warned against this exact predicament, a novice pilot alone and at low altitude to boot.

Looking for friendly aircraft, he spotted eight blunt-nosed fighters and sped towards them, in hopes of joining up. His recognition skills needed work, because they were FW-190s. He firewalled the throttle and headed the other way. Keeping maximum speed all the way across the Channel, he gratefully landed, only to have Hub Zemke chew him out for undisciplined flying. It hadn't been Johnson's intention, but this mission began his reputation in the Group as a 'wild flier.'

Why did Robert S. Johnson suceed? Because his flying style is "wild", high speed dive and zoom, as one of best dive a/c in WWII, P47 can easily engage and break away from luftwaffe.

 

While spitfire IX and bf109G were badly outdived by P47, the fw190 was another victim. P47C/D could dive away from fw190 from as low as 6000 feet (only 1800 m altitude) to the deck.

Edited June 16, 2014 by tempestglen

[alfredo_laredo]

YEAHH!!! Bring The P-47D to me!!! Zoom and Boom all the way!!

[tempestglen]

YEAHH!!! Bring The P-47D to me!!! Zoom and Boom all the way!!

 

Only if DCS models dive acceleration of various aircraft properly. If they (including third party) ignore the transonic aerodynamics and use simple propeller efficiency curve, I am quite doubt about the reproduce of high speed diving in histoty.

 

I strongly recommend we repeat the test carried in WWII in order to check dive aerodynamics in DCS, if a newbie P47C could not win an experiened 18lbs spitfire IX with "dive extand and pitch back" tactic, ie. to reproduce Johson's story. There must be some flaws in the game.

Edited June 16, 2014 by tempestglen

[Barrett_g]

I have yet to try the P-51 so I don't know (computer is too old to run it).... DCS was originally a modern jet sim.... Does it simulate the air over flight controls that generated by the prop?

 

Even when a prop plane is stalled and is hanging in the air (0mph indicated airspeed) it still has some degree of control because the prop is pushing air over its flight controls.

 

Most jets, when stalled and hanging in the air, has less control. When at 0mph there is no airflow over flight controls as any thrust is coming out the tailpipe behind them.

 

You can notice quite a big difference even in RC flight. Prop planes have more control at slower speeds compared to jets... You have to keep your speed up on jets.

[HellToupee]

Not posible to have dive modeled that wont have people complaining who have formed expectations from loose pilot accounts that dive = warp drive.

[gavagai]

Tempestglen,

 

The interesting point you bring up is how roll rate can be used to defeat a double-superior adversary, and pilots always describe the P-47 as being very pleasant and responsive in the roll axis (much better than the P-51, for example).

 

However, charts like this one below don't seem to support their opinions. Or am I reading it incorrectly? One thing that seems fishy is the 50lbs of stick force stipulation. Generating that force across your body repeatedly is no joke. Do we have any roll rate comparisons with, for example, 25lbs of force?

 

 

This is from the society of experimental test pilots:

 

MANEUVERING STABILITY stick forces/g at Vmax

FG-1--5 lbs/g (too light)

P-47--7.5 lbs/g (ideal)

F6F--12.5 lbs/g (barely acceptable)

P-51--over 20 lbs/g (excessive)

Edited June 16, 2014 by gavagai

[Krupi]

Does that show the griffen engine spit, I can't recall the impact it had on roll rates.

[Merlin-27]

Love that book. It's one of my prized possesions.

[Krupi]

What the pilots are referring to there I believe is not the roll rate but how comfortable it is to maintain the perspective roll, the 109 like P-51 was hard to control at high speeds while the 190 was easier on the pilots.

 

I have no idea how such things could be modelled in a sim :(

[Narushima]

Thing is that chart doesn't represent the actual roll capabilities of an aircraft.

 

Maximum rate of roll is not the only thing you should look at.

There's also roll inertia and wing twist. A plane might have a high roll rate, but it can't utilise it if it has high roll inertia, meaning it takes a while to start and finish that roll. Then there's wing twist, which reduces the roll rate even further at higher speeds.

 

None of those you can see on the chart. This way it's entirely possible for a P-47 to out-roll a Spitfire, because at higher speeds the spitfire would have problems with wing twisting.

 

EDIT: Almost forgot. Control cables also reduced roll rate due to elasticity.

 

Does that show the griffen engine spit, I can't recall the impact it had on roll rates.

 

Early ones had the same wings as the Spit IX.

Edited June 16, 2014 by Narushima

[Krupi]

Yes but the engine has an impact on the roll rate.

[RetroBurn]

I thought for sure that the Ubi and 1C forums laid a lot of these specs to rest years ago?

[gavagai]

What the pilots are referring to there I believe is not the roll rate but how comfortable it is to maintain the perspective roll, the 109 like P-51 was hard to control at high speeds while the 190 was easier on the pilots.

 

I have no idea how such things could be modelled in a sim :(

 

That's already included in DCS. You cannot fully deflect the stick in the P-51 at high speed.

[Pandacat]

I really enjoy reading all these discussions on how different AC compare to each other. I have also read that book about Johnson, back in my high school days. Speaking about nobody can outdive Jug, I can name a few. Both 109g10 and 190a8 under AI control can outdive Jug in IL-2 1946. Some of you may find it laughable, but that's a fact. I once bounced a flight of 109g10 from 29k down. Missed, but continued diving. My plane was already vibrating hard from high speed. But the 109 made a turn around and followed me into the dive and caught up from 1km away and shot me down. I was really stunned to see that. Also, some tactical question. So Johnson said he dove and extended away from spit. Then he yank the stick back to zoom up. Would it be more enege efficient to use trim to pitch nose up instead of yanking stick? From my experience of Il-2 or other sim, yanking stick into a zoom climb really kills a lot of energy. But the downside of using trim instead of stick is it is far slower to get your nose up. So which way would be the better of transitioning from boom dive into zoom climb?

[tempestglen]

I've read someone's test in il2 that 1945 Dora could exceed 1.0Mach from ceiling diving.

Ridiculous! No air compression/Mach limit at all.

Il2 dive FM's already outdated and suitable for low speed diving on east front.

 

It's dive acceleration not roll rate that helped Johnson to beat that ACE spitfire IX. P47 high roll rate just kept it from being locked on by spitfire, the dive acceleration build up energy advantage eventually.

Edited June 17, 2014 by tempestglen

[airdoc]

There is no way that the Dora can get above 950km/h during a dive in il2 1946 without the aircraft being torn apart in the current version (4.12.2). Maybe the test you are referring to was done on older versions.

[tempestglen]

There is no way that the Dora can get above 950km/h during a dive in il2 1946 without the aircraft being torn apart in the current version (4.12.2). Maybe the test you are referring to was done on older versions.

 

950km/h IAS or TAS?

 

If you dive from 11000 m, when you reach 900km/h IAS at 4000m altitude, you are near 1.0Mach(welcome Mig15!). And in il2, Dora isn't torn apart at 900km/h IAS. At 10000m altitude, sonic speed is 1080km/h, ff you can set Dora an initial speed of 620 IAS at 10000m in quick mission, I bet Dora will not be torn apart, however, you are at 1.0 Mach, welcome sonic Dora!

 

In 1943, allied test P51 could dive to 0.76Mach

 

Edited June 17, 2014 by tempestglen

[Kurfürst]

So, the line-up of 1944 late "match" is below:

 

25lbs Spitfire IX vs Bf109G6ASM/G14 Fw190A6A7A8 (majority vs majority, updated old planes)

 

21lbs Spitfire XIV vs Bf109K4 (minority vs minority, brand new type)

 

The problem is that isnát a late 1944 match... its a spring 1945 "match".

 

The +25 lbs Spit IXs were only used for trials by two Squadrons in 1944, and its somewhat doubtful if they see much if any combat. Some technical troubles like backfires were encountered, but were supposedly solved. In any case, those two Sqns were the only ones for 1944. A wider scale of operational use for ca. 25 Sqds of IXs from the 2nd TAF on the continent was stipulated at the end of 1944, but it took about mid-late February that the changeover actually took place. Again, some techical troubles with the engines occured, with engines stopping at take off and some lethal accidents.

 

So basically the vast majority of late 1944 IXs were running on +18, ie. 1943 levels of boost and performance. Ditto for Mark XIVs, they ran on +18 in late 1944, when they were gradually transferred to the continent, as the 2nd TAF did not have 150 grade fuel that was needed for higher boosts.

 

The K-4 was introduced in November 1944, with lower boost most of the time (1,75/1,8ata), and higher boost was approved for all Western 109K Wings in about March 1945, at the same time when bits of +21 boosted XIVs turn up.

 

So, for a late 1944 setup, for the most typical aircraft matches, you would need +18 lbs IXs (and XIV, if they would be modelled) and 1,8ata 109Ks, and 71" (or 75") P-51s. Doras I believe almost immediately switched to higher boost.

 

For 1945, you could have +25 IXs, +21 XIVs and 1,98ata 109Ks etc.

 

Of course there were such plane in late 1944, too, but probably just a few odd examples, that may or may have not have been in combat.

[otto]

950km/h IAS or TAS?

 

If you dive from 11000 m, when you reach 900km/h IAS at 4000m altitude, you are near 1.0Mach(welcome Mig15!). And in il2, Dora isn't torn apart at 900km/h IAS. At 10000m altitude, sonic speed is 1080km/h, ff you can set Dora an initial speed of 620 IAS at 10000m in quick mission, I bet Dora will not be torn apart, however, you are at 1.0 Mach, welcome sonic Dora!

 

In 1943, allied test P51 could dive to 0.76Mach

 

 

 

Just tried this in il2 1946 4.12.

Maximum dive speed b4 structure failure :

 

D9- aprox 990 TAS.

P-51- aprox 970 TAS.

P-47 -aprox 1010 TAS.

109k4 -aprox 950 TAS.

 

I only done one test . For more precision you would need a few tests to calculate an average.

[Krupi]

That's already included in DCS. You cannot fully deflect the stick in the P-51 at high speed.

 

I am talking about the strain/force it took to push the ailerons even that far, not the impossed limit due to airspeed. I don't know how you could model the actual force needed for each aircraft unless you had some sort of hydraulic stick setup ;)

[Narushima]

I really enjoy reading all these discussions on how different AC compare to each other. I have also read that book about Johnson, back in my high school days. Speaking about nobody can outdive Jug, I can name a few. Both 109g10 and 190a8 under AI control can outdive Jug in IL-2 1946. Some of you may find it laughable, but that's a fact. I once bounced a flight of 109g10 from 29k down. Missed, but continued diving. My plane was already vibrating hard from high speed. But the 109 made a turn around and followed me into the dive and caught up from 1km away and shot me down. I was really stunned to see that. Also, some tactical question. So Johnson said he dove and extended away from spit. Then he yank the stick back to zoom up. Would it be more enege efficient to use trim to pitch nose up instead of yanking stick? From my experience of Il-2 or other sim, yanking stick into a zoom climb really kills a lot of energy. But the downside of using trim instead of stick is it is far slower to get your nose up. So which way would be the better of transitioning from boom dive into zoom climb?

 

From my experience, Il-2 1946 FMs are really bad. A hurricane can zoom climb with a D-9. A spit 5 has no problems diving with an 190 A-5. Etc...

 

Best not to use that game to judge actual aircraft performance.

 

I believe DCS level of modelling will be the closest to the real thing.

Edited June 17, 2014 by Narushima

[NineLine]

Yes, DCS shouldnt be compared to anything but real world numbers. Discussion of IL2 or any other FM isnt really needed here.

 

From my experience, Il-2 1946 FMs are really bad. A hurricane can zoom climb with a D-9. A spit 5 has no problems diving with an 190 A-5. Etc...

 

Best not to use that game to judge actual aircraft performance.

 

I believe DCS level of modelling will be the closes to the real thing.

[tempestglen]

From my experience, Il-2 1946 FMs are really bad. A hurricane can zoom climb with a D-9. A spit 5 has no problems diving with an 190 A-5. Etc...

 

Best not to use that game to judge actual aircraft performance.

 

I believe DCS level of modelling will be the closest to the real thing.

 

Agree.

[tempestglen]

The problem is that isnát a late 1944 match... its a spring 1945 "match".

 

The +25 lbs Spit IXs were only used for trials by two Squadrons in 1944, and its somewhat doubtful if they see much if any combat. Some technical troubles like backfires were encountered, but were supposedly solved. In any case, those two Sqns were the only ones for 1944. A wider scale of operational use for ca. 25 Sqds of IXs from the 2nd TAF on the continent was stipulated at the end of 1944, but it took about mid-late February that the changeover actually took place. Again, some techical troubles with the engines occured, with engines stopping at take off and some lethal accidents.

 

So basically the vast majority of late 1944 IXs were running on +18, ie. 1943 levels of boost and performance. Ditto for Mark XIVs, they ran on +18 in late 1944, when they were gradually transferred to the continent, as the 2nd TAF did not have 150 grade fuel that was needed for higher boosts.

 

The K-4 was introduced in November 1944, with lower boost most of the time (1,75/1,8ata), and higher boost was approved for all Western 109K Wings in about March 1945, at the same time when bits of +21 boosted XIVs turn up.

 

So, for a late 1944 setup, for the most typical aircraft matches, you would need +18 lbs IXs (and XIV, if they would be modelled) and 1,8ata 109Ks, and 71" (or 75") P-51s. Doras I believe almost immediately switched to higher boost.

 

For 1945, you could have +25 IXs, +21 XIVs and 1,98ata 109Ks etc.

 

Of course there were such plane in late 1944, too, but probably just a few odd examples, that may or may have not have been in combat.

 

I know your site and williams' are "eye for eye".:D

 

18lbs Spit XIV came into service in Jan. 1944 and while 109K4 at Nov.

 

Is that fair to compare 18lbs Spit XIV with almost one year later's K4?

 

It's unfair to include 1944 Nov-Dec a/c just like 109K4 in "1944 scenario". When was K4 first combat? If an aircraft joined the army in 31st Dec 1944, you still regard it as 1944 plane? OK, "1944 scenario" itself not suitable. We all know from Jan to Oct 1944, there were no combat history of Dora/k4 in Luftwaffe while 25lbs IX and 21 lbs XIV (based in Britain)shot down a Ju88(plus many V1s) and 25lbs Mustang III shot down 14+ German planes.

 

Yes, VEAO team are modeling 21lbs bubble canopy CW Spitfire XIV.

 

 

When 109K4s came, that was very late 1944 and 1945 spring, so 21lbs Spit XIV, 11-13lbs Tempest MKV, and 25lbs Spit IX are their contemporaneous opponents.

 

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html

Edited June 20, 2014 by tempestglen