Author Topic: Setup for Friday July 9-15 (Read 1804 times)

DJ111 · « **Reply #30 on:** July 08, 2004, 03:59:25 PM »

um..............nah

shortened it a bit, happy...............ya commie.

Squire · « **Reply #31 on:** July 08, 2004, 05:12:15 PM »

Ok, first, off, for the record. Its a fine setup, and I never advocated any changes to it. Nor do I now. G-10 vs Yak-9U, seems ok by me. Makes zero diff about what month in 44 its supposed to be. My original post was a response to the idea of the G-10 or the Yak-9U being taken out.

...seperate discussion now, just history stuff, for interest only:

"A book I have on the Luftwaffe has II./JG 52 flying the G-10 in February 1945 with a picture of Leutnant Heinz "ESAU" Ewald's G-10. The picture is dated Feb 25/44 in the corner. And yes, it's a G-10."

Thats Feb 45, not Feb 44. The 109G-14 wasnt even in service in Feb 44 and it preceded the 109G-10 by months. Its not hard to do some digging and find the info, and I wont argue it here any further.

II/JG52 Orbat info:

http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/biijg52.html

Mister Fork · « **Reply #32 on:** July 08, 2004, 08:10:23 PM »

Squire, did you miss this comment? "Jester, however, has a references October 44 entry date. It's a toss up really but I'm sticking with this setup. "

Yes, I understand there are references to a much later service date, but your data is the THIRD different service date I've seen... (sigh). On a side note: the link you referred to is a 'personal' site and the data on any 'personal' site is as subjective as a Michael Moore film... Not accurate, but a pretty good reference point.

Now, if you could answer when the P-51D entered service, then I'd be willing to scoop up that info... wait a minute... I've got an idea. See my next posting...

ergRTC · « **Reply #33 on:** July 08, 2004, 09:39:41 PM »

now thats a silly jab. You may not like his analysis of historical events, but that does not make the event fictitious.

I really dont see anyone screaming about removing the g10, so i would just leave it, I would just like this remembered the next time a pacific setup is not used because the axis dont have the ki84, or the p38 and f4u is excluded for gameplay. That is all.

Squire · « **Reply #34 on:** July 09, 2004, 01:10:02 AM »

No hard feelings Mr Fork, ya, I know there are more than a few places where the dates dont exactly mesh up. I posted that link just for info, I have sources in books on the October/Fall 44 date.

P-51D? Well, July 44 or later to be certain in the ETO. I dont have anything right in front of me. P-51B is Dec 43, thats an ez one. Intro dates can be a real pain in the rear end to nail down sometimes, no doubt about it. Ltr.

o0Stream140o · « **Reply #35 on:** July 09, 2004, 11:37:07 AM »

Just some info in the P-51D... and the russian front...

Quote

Another transition in aircraft occurred in May 1944, this time to P-51s. With no interruptions in combat missions possible during the summer months, the work became almost ceaseless. On 2 June 1944, 24 of our P-51s took off as part of the historical shuttle mission to Russia. 30 men comprising crew chiefs and armorers flew on B-17s that bombed enemy targets en route to the Soviet bases. In Russia, the squadron scored its first victories with the new aircraft. These victories were also the first scored by American pilots operating from Russian bases.

* Reference http://www.325thfg.org *

Maybe that will give you some narrowing down on the time frame for the 51

Squire · « **Reply #36 on:** July 09, 2004, 02:42:14 PM »

Anything that says they were D's though Stream? its the D model that is hard to nail down. I have gone through a few references since last night, and no definitive luck with a date. The 325th flew B/C models first, before gradually switching over, so it seems unlikey the first Mustangs they got were D models. Its odd, because of all the stuff written about the P-51 (tons), you would think it would be mentioned more often than it is.

DktrEvil · « **Reply #37 on:** July 09, 2004, 02:42:28 PM »

I know the requests and suggestions are based on the difference of opinions about what plane set is Historically accurate. This will always be debated so I request that HTC no longer publish what the new setup will be. Let CT'ers find out when they enter the arena.

Slash27 · « **Reply #38 on:** July 09, 2004, 02:45:36 PM »

so I request that HTC no longer publish what the new setup will be.

Not really HTCs thing. We are self governed, hence all the love:D

DktrEvil · « **Reply #39 on:** July 09, 2004, 02:57:11 PM »

Replace HTC with whoever sets up the arena's

ergRTC · « **Reply #40 on:** July 09, 2004, 03:03:00 PM »

nimrod? no, I would rather see the haggling. Besides, if they dont announce, we just ***** when it arrives, rather than before.

o0Stream140o · « **Reply #41 on:** July 09, 2004, 04:51:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
Anything that says they were D's though Stream? its the D model that is hard to nail down. I have gone through a few references since last night, and no definitive luck with a date. The 325th flew B/C models first, before gradually switching over, so it seems unlikey the first Mustangs they got were D models. Its odd, because of all the stuff written about the P-51 (tons), you would think it would be mentioned more often than it is.

Warloc... I have contact with one of the pilots that was on that Russian Shuttle mission... The emails I posted about the P-51 Ace, Arthur Fiedler was one of those pilots... I can ask him what 51's he flew... I know he flew the D.. I don't know if he flew the B or C models...

Halo · « **Reply #42 on:** July 09, 2004, 07:42:58 PM »

All in all, the Combat Theater operators deserve a lot of credit for getting matchups as well as they do with incomplete plane sets and historical operational information often difficult to pinpoint.

Some sources have no dates more specific than year, some focus on first aircraft operational, some on first squadron or other unit operational, some on first real combat impact.

Always takes some time too for enough new planes to begin to dominate the action.

Ultimately the scenario in Combat Theater can be reasonably close to or very remote from the actual matchups even by percentage extrapolation. Good thing CT has lots of ardent aviation enthusiasts to fine tune the scenarios.

CurtissP-6EHawk · « **Reply #43 on:** July 09, 2004, 08:04:40 PM »

Axis staff "gets" the G-10 but refuses to enable the F4U-4

We could use a few more allied CT Staff members. There should only be as many ACTIVE axis staff as allied staff and should be made to fly x number of time through out the week. If they dont have time to be a part of the CT comunity, then its time to replace them.

So I challange you CT players to whine like he11 or forever shut the F@#$ up!

DJ111 · « **Reply #44 on:** July 09, 2004, 09:35:52 PM »

Ahh! What happenmed to my sig!?!

Arlo did it, you commie!

ok, I'm good...... but Arlo is still a commie!