If there was a plane designed "for fast flying", that was the spitfire, not certainly the FW 190. The FW 190 was designed as a complete day fighter and not to execute a single attack tactic, just like the spitfire was not design to be the ultimate turn fighter and nothing else. In fact FW performances were, overall, better than the coeval counterparts, including both the instantaneous and sustained turn rate across a wide range of speeds. The spitfire mk V, of course, retained a substantial advantage in sustained turn rate at low speed, but lagged behind at high speed (>350km/h) and low altitude. This is, of course, not the case in game. Secondly, even at low speed, the real limit to turn fight was not the plane itself, but the pilot. A 4G prolonged turn fight is extremely demanding even on a trained pilot, without proper equipment. Equipment that no spitfire had until late in the war. Again, this is not the case in game, where pilots are able to sustain 7G like it's nothing and even 10/12 for brief periods. No plane, Zero and Spitfire included, was intentionally designed to perform at such high accelerations, but was instead a by-product of other design choices (elliptical wing of the spitfire to maximize lift efficiency and the extreme lightweight of the Zero to maximize its range). It's not an opinion. The spitfire elliptical wing, the streamlined canopy and cowling, the huge effort to create a good streamlined cooling system and the lightweight materials selected were intended choices to minimize drag thus maximizing the speed of the aircraft. The result, as a matter of fact, was among the fastest planes when it entered service. On the other end, the FW, as stated by Tank himself, was never intended to have such an extreme emphasis on speed, but rather to be a stable, easy to fly platform, being able to absorb a reasonable amount of damage and operate under the harsh conditions of a prolonged war and field maintenance. The BMW 801 mounted on the FW could output 600HP more than the Merlin 45 mounted on the Spitfire V. There's absolute no doubt that the Spitfire was better suited to achieve an higher top speed and this is why the Mk 9 design could easily compete with the FW in term of speed, even if it still mounts a 400HP less powerful engine. Elliptical wings does not offer any significative advantage in terms of tight turns. The best shape for this is indeed the rectangular one (used by everyone else, just saying) as it offers the most surface area with the same wingspan. It also suffer for a significative disadvantage in tight cornering, as the tip of the wing tends to stall before the root, easily resulting in a flat spin. A disadvantage that can easily be corrected introducing a washout, but nevertheless a disadvantage. The only advantage of elliptical wings is the lower drag coefficient at set CL compared to the rectangular ones, resulting in a lower parasitic drag. But, again, this is not some fancy opinion: Mitchell himself, being a race airplane designer, stated that the he designed the spitfire for speed and ease to use. Again: no one on earth ever intentionally designed a plane to perform manoeuvres that no pilot can endure I'm just stating facts, not claims. I read a lot of books, but unlike you, I also understood their content. The point you completely miss is that the design focus of a plane has nothing to do with the performances of other planes. The Spitfire MK II and V, thus being slower than the FW, were still designed with a prominent focus on speed. The CR 42 Falco, being even slower than a Spitfire, was designed with an even greater focus on speed, to the point that it is still today, the fastest biplane ever built. Accidentally, some of the features that favours speed, such as a low weight, also improve cornering performances. On the other hand, the FW 190, despite faster than the Spitfire MK V, was not designed for speed, as you wrongly believe. It was designed for stability, sturdiness and ergonomic. Accidentally, many of the features that favours stability and sturdiness, such as an heavier wing load, also decrease turning performances, at least at low speed. Despite that, the FW was still able to have a better sustained turn rate at high speed, due to the sheer power of its engine. and this is very much about the FW flight model since the in game model does not have any of the features the FW has IRL. Cope
If there was a plane designed "for fast flying", that was the spitfire, not certainly the FW 190. The FW 190 was designed as a complete day fighter and not to execute a single attack tactic, just like the spitfire was not design to be the ultimate turn fighter and nothing else. In fact FW performances were, overall, better than the coeval counterparts, including both the instantaneous and sustained turn rate across a wide range of speeds. The spitfire mk V, of course, retained a substantial advantage in sustained turn rate at low speed, but lagged behind at high speed (>350km/h) and low altitude. This is, of course, not the case in game. Secondly, even at low speed, the real limit to turn fight was not the plane itself, but the pilot. A 4G prolonged turn fight is extremely demanding even on a trained pilot, without proper equipment. Equipment that no spitfire had until late in the war. Again, this is not the case in game, where pilots are able to sustain 7G like it's nothing and even 10/12 for brief periods. No plane, Zero and Spitfire included, was intentionally designed to perform at such high accelerations, but was instead a by-product of other design choices (elliptical wing of the spitfire to maximize lift efficiency and the extreme lightweight of the Zero to maximize its range). It's not an opinion. The spitfire elliptical wing, the streamlined canopy and cowling, the huge effort to create a good streamlined cooling system and the lightweight materials selected were intended choices to minimize drag thus maximizing the speed of the aircraft. The result, as a matter of fact, was among the fastest planes when it entered service. On the other end, the FW, as stated by Tank himself, was never intended to have such an extreme emphasis on speed, but rather to be a stable, easy to fly platform, being able to absorb a reasonable amount of damage and operate under the harsh conditions of a prolonged war and field maintenance. The BMW 801 mounted on the FW could output 600HP more than the Merlin 45 mounted on the Spitfire V. There's absolute no doubt that the Spitfire was better suited to achieve an higher top speed and this is why the Mk 9 design could easily compete with the FW in term of speed, even if it still mounts a 400HP less powerful engine. Elliptical wings does not offer any significative advantage in terms of tight turns. The best shape for this is indeed the rectangular one (used by everyone else, just saying) as it offers the most surface area with the same wingspan. It also suffer for a significative disadvantage in tight cornering, as the tip of the wing tends to stall before the root, easily resulting in a flat spin. A disadvantage that can easily be corrected introducing a washout, but nevertheless a disadvantage. The only advantage of elliptical wings is the lower drag coefficient at set CL compared to the rectangular ones, resulting in a lower parasitic drag. But, again, this is not some fancy opinion: Mitchell himself, being a race airplane designer, stated that the he designed the spitfire for speed and ease to use. Again: no one on earth ever intentionally designed a plane to perform manoeuvres that no pilot can endure I'm just stating facts, not claims. I read a lot of books, but unlike you, I also understood their content. The point you completely miss is that the design focus of a plane has nothing to do with the performances of other planes. The Spitfire MK II and V, thus being slower than the FW, were still designed with a prominent focus on speed. The CR 42 Falco, being even slower than a Spitfire, was designed with an even greater focus on speed, to the point that it is still today, the fastest biplane ever built. Accidentally, some of the features that favours speed, such as a low weight, also improve cornering performances. On the other hand, the FW 190, despite faster than the Spitfire MK V, was not designed for speed, as you wrongly believe. It was designed for stability, sturdiness and ergonomic. Accidentally, many of the features that favours stability and sturdiness, such as an heavier wing load, also decrease turning performances, at least at low speed. Despite that, the FW was still able to have a better sustained turn rate at high speed, due to the sheer power of its engine. and this is very much about the FW flight model since the in game model does not have any of the features the FW has IRL. Cope
And yet, the fact remains that the Spitfire, regardless of design intentions, was easily capable of outturning a FW, or a 109 for that matter, and both British and German pilots shaped their tactics according to this fact. Having read accounts from German and British pilots who flew or flew against the Spitfire- including historian, pilot, and General of Fighters Adolf Galland, I’d say that regardless of it’s performance in War Thunder or in real life, in a straight turn fight the Spitfire would still win. On an unrelated note, this guy gives me The_6th_Army vibes.
spitfires were insanely fast in the real world, the later ones were so fast that they were literally used to chase down Arado jets and take down rocket bombs
"This plane completely beats everything at low speed" >Gets clapped "My theory is still right" "I didn't see you do anything impressive" Bro you can't choose both 😭 >
Glitched should have picked the I225 so that the lil dawg thinks "oh this plane I reverse it a lot cuz it compresses" they'll find themselves getting handled and their Longnose 190 being unable to pull up below 200 IAS
@CobraBoi he is also a hacker, he uses arcade flight model on his planes while flying on realistic mode, that's why he is apparently so good with energy. One of the greatest pilots of this game (Deviss) proven Defyn to be a cheater when he lost 20/0 on P63 King Kobra duel after Defyn told him in a video that Deviss kinda shitter 👺
0:20 there is your answer. He only flies it in Ground Realistic Battles, where planes don't have icons over them and do not appear on the radar. Of course a Spitfire or Yak or anything that doesn't see you and doesn't know exactly where you are aren't going to turn towards you the most efficient way. Add to that that in GRB most players are trying to bomb stuff and are trying stay away from the enemy spawns to avoid flak, so if you are going for plane kills purposefully it's surprisingly easy to rack up kills. Next thing you know, the Fw-190 D-9 becomes the best turnfighter of WW2.
Remember that Erich Hartmann was not a good dogfighter, only a good surprise attacker, that’s how the FW can “outturn” spitfires in Tank RB, because they don’t even know they’re being attacked before it’s too late. It’s like me saying the Tornado is the best dogfighter in Ground RB because I shoot down unsuspecting MiG’s and F-16s
I'm not sure what's worse, the amount of sharpness you have set, defyn's mic quality, the Dora x flaps man himself, or the fact that overlaying this with any other music would turn it into an epic montage Either way I'm near crying and I accidently hit subscribe :3
@@Gl1tchman no dawg I love these pinkish hue post FX, I'd like to know how to make the game look clear without clouds burning my eyes, I'd like to set some greenish blue hue, thanks in advance
@@kingghidorah8106 my post is just desaturated in game with a bit of sharpness, and 2 more options in reshade, that being a bonus lut pack and magic bloom.
>anime pfp >Renamed(insert random phone number) nickname >big ego >mains D9 >sucks at it anyway Kinda similar to a certain someone named after a german army tbh
Lmaooooo good stuff man. Man’s is correct, the Dora should win that fight, but not with his idea of dropping the landing flaps and showing you a trick he learned lmao. There is just about 0 times you should ever turn with a spit in any 190, let alone the Dora. Love the ego boi duels 😂 o7 man!
Oh with the ability to extend of course D-9 should win, however his entire argument was that the 190 has amazing low speed performance and "by using landing flaps it can out turn spitfires".
@@Gl1tchman I’ve flown the D-12 a ton, and I would say it does have amazing low speed turning performance, but not against a spit lmao. There’s very few instances where you’d out turn a spit in the way he’s saying, and it almost always involves some vertical element to make use of the extra ponies under the cowl. But man this dude was ON one something thinking he’s just scissor you and end up on your six cause “lAnDiNg FlApS” lol like when he ripped them at the merge 😂😭
@@galvaniclegend917 I'm not even gonna lie. I suck at dogfighting. I learned that lesson the hard way a few times. Never turnfight a spit. And even though I still make the mistake, never...ever...just jump onto a rando's tail before you know that there are no Yak-9's or Spits of any kind anywhere near you. You will get deleted and break your keyboard in frustration.
@@Gl1tchman it does have good low speed HANDLING but not in the sense it would wobble and fall apart but rather have smooth corrections and precision tuning, it ain't a good low speed fighter like the Spitfire or the J2M2 or even the I225 which wobbles a lot but I've managed to out fight stuff unexpectedly, probably not very good players, probably i225 is a true stall monster.
i can perhaps accept a 152H beating a spitfire in a low-speed duel with the excessive and prolonged use of landing flaps but goodness to think that a 190 can ever compete with a spitfire in a prolonged battle like this is peak clown ego
was about to ask the french yak 3 costs but the video entertains me a lot that made me forgot to ask. Anyway, great vid and I'm hoping for the yak 3 answers in the future, have a good day.
The next thing the guy is gonna do is probably read a lot of German revisionist books and claiming himself to be a [insert pop culture celebrity] of the Fw 190
I’ve never played the spitfires or the Doras, but I did some flight model testing and I think the LF MK 9 only begins loosing to the P51 H5 in a sustained turn at 600 kmph+ which is incidentally the max speed of the LF MK9 (at sea level). And iirc the P51 H5 turns better than the Doras.
0:53, correct me if im wrong, but he could've won here?? Spit has come out of a turn, has dropped energy and has dropped altitude, 190 already has better energy retention, 190 could just fly straight up, maybe in a steep spiral, stall out the spit, pop flaps and kill him? Even if the spit eveades the 190 is now behind and above him so he controls the fight
Dogfighting is a learned skill like most things, i myself have a lot to learn and made quite a few mistakes in these fights. There's no shame in being worse than someone unless you're trying to brag. 🤷♂
@@Gl1tchman I do learn from someone in my squad he used to be one of the top pilots in Warthunder at one point and when I fight him it’s obvious he is… I changed him to a fight in the Phantom Gr.1 he took the same plane and I lost the only thing different about are planes was mine was a little more completed his was new…
Yeah, just because the gamemode is called "realistic" that doesn't mean it quite is. Last i checked pilots IRL couldn't sustain 9G turns and planes couldn't sustain 13G pulls.
@@PanzerSteinn If you put a BF-109 K4, with Max Mods Max Crew etc up Against one The Mk XIVe Spittty with max crew mods etc and both pilots were equal in skill, the Spitfire would still win.
Average war thunder player thinking their p47 can outturn a zero without using flaps or cutting throttle but instead going vertical in front of the enemy loosing all energy
how on earth do you play air RB this long and not realize that any turnfight a 190 wins against a spitfire is due to either team tactics or huge mistakes by the spitfire pilot. 190s aren't bad, but there's only so much you can do with that thing in the maneuverability department.
god I love when people that don't play British planes think they can easily wipe the floor. nah man as long as the hispanos are fully modified your going to lose
I get chatting shit and ending up in an ego duel. Been in both your shoes and his. And eating humble pie sucks, so I get that too. But I don't get not being a normal person and just admitting that you ran into someone better than you and being decent about it. The double down is fatherless behavior.
FW190 is just a German P-47. It is great in straight line and dive speed, nothing else. Climb is terrible, handling is awful, absolute brick. The Spitfire is very maneuverable while remaining fast and has very good acceleration and climb rate. It is not for nothing that many said Spitfire won the war : best fighter of the Second World War.
@@Gl1tchman 60% of WT players win 2 "dogfight" and think they are the best player on the game. So I am not surprised. But the guy here basically saw the stat and sad that grand targets are like air targets. And that was an impressive argument.....
