Inaccurate Loadout on F6F-5?

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by Krusty
Then there was that P38 with 12x50cal and a cannon or two in the mix.  

hmmm...now I'm starting to see Humble's side of the argument


Some of the ordnance load outs for certains planes in AH is inaccurate.  The P-38L was able to carry up to 4,000 pounds of ordnance, in AH it's just limited to 2,000 pounds of bombs and 10 HVAR rockets.


ack-ack

[Krusty]

Yes, but how likely was it to load 2x2000lb-ers onto a p38? It'd probably be way heavy.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Krusty
Yes, but how likely was it to load 2x2000lb-ers onto a p38? It'd probably be way heavy.

A lot lighter than the A-20G, which hauled 4k of bombs on the same horsepower.

My regards,

Widewing

[Noir]

earliest types of world's first guided missiles

Ok I wil need to plug my 2nd joy to control the missile while flying

and we would need flares

The 12x303 Hurri2B would be nice indeed, looking at the crappy performance of the AH2 hurri2C compared to the AH1 hurri2C (wich is ok with me cause the hurri2C was heavy, meant to engage bombers and ground targets)

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by Krusty
Yes, but how likely was it to load 2x2000lb-ers onto a p38? It'd probably be way heavy.

It was actually quite common for a P-38L.  P-38Ls were often used for level bombing missions and that is when they'd load up with the 4,000 pounds of ordnance.  They'd fly to the target with a P-38 Droop-Snoot leading the flight and when the Droop-Snoot dropped it's payload, the rest of the P-38Ls would drop theirs.


ack-ack

[Debonair]

I read about that in Hub Zemke's book. 2000# bomb weighs about the same as the 310 gallon drop tanks P-38s & P-47s used.

[Puke ver. 2]

Originally posted by Kweassa
So we should be able to get the;

* twin 20mm gunpods for the Fw190As, making it a 6x20mm fighter..

* experimental MK103 armament for 190s and 109s

* earliest types of world's first guided missiles

 .. and etc, etc ?

I have no clue about those types.  The F6F-5 came standard in that you could pull out two 50-cals and replace it with a 20mm cannon without bolting anything external onto the airframe.  However, tactics dictated that this was not necessary.  

If this is a similar case for that which you speak of, then I think your examples should be allowed too.  However, I'm not sure about your *experimental* loads though.  Don't confuse the issue because this wasn't experimental on the Hellcat but rather was built into each and every F6F-5 at the factory, though tactics deemed the use of it unnecessary in the field.  Had the Hellcat had to fight something similar to a B-17 or B-24, you probably would've seen it a whole lot more.  High rate of fire with incendiary rounds was preferred because all it took was just one bullet and your target was a flying torch.  Just ask "One shot McWhorter."  Or was it two shots?

[Kweassa]

If actual usage numbers (which is severely limited insofar as to consider it "unrepresantative") shouldn't obstruct a certain type of armament from appearing in the game...

 ... then why should actual status of the armament, experimental or not, be any different?


 The point is, the line has to be drawn somewhere.

 The 109s and 190s had almost every combination of armament available to the Luftwaffe, categorized and made available for use as official Umrustsatz and Rustsatz modification kits and yet, in the game, only the most represantative forms of such armament variations are allowed. The 20mm gunpods, the MK108 30mm cannon, and the WGr21 A2A rocket.

 I'm not unhappy with how it is, because having any other type of armament available in the game, would depart a certain amount of realism from the real game. Ofcourse, AH isn't WW2 per se, but IMO it needs a certain level of represantativeness when it comes to depicting WW2 aircraft. Departing from that standard calls out for abuse only, and I've seen it happening in IL2/FB.

 I do understand why people would ask such a thing, but IMO, they shouldn't.

[humble]

Originally posted by Puke ver. 2
I have no clue about those types.  The F6F-5 came standard in that you could pull out two 50-cals and replace it with a 20mm cannon without bolting anything external onto the airframe.  However, tactics dictated that this was not necessary.  

If this is a similar case for that which you speak of, then I think your examples should be allowed too.  However, I'm not sure about your *experimental* loads though.  Don't confuse the issue because this wasn't experimental on the Hellcat but rather was built into each and every F6F-5 at the factory, though tactics deemed the use of it unnecessary in the field.  Had the Hellcat had to fight something similar to a B-17 or B-24, you probably would've seen it a whole lot more.  High rate of fire with incendiary rounds was preferred because all it took was just one bullet and your target was a flying torch.  Just ask "One shot McWhorter."  Or was it two shots?

I have no arguement either way on this, but your dead on, the F6F came predesigned with the 2 x 20mm option preengineered. It wasnt a modification or an "add on package". It was a standard loadout from an engineering perspective.

I'd actually rather see some consideration given to the F7F. To me it's an anomaly in that its a 1942 design that was cleared for operational deployment in May of 1944 or thereabouts. This goes to the core arguement in the game....is it a historical simulation or a WW2 era air combat simulation? Under the 1st arguement only planes that engaged in actual combat would be "eligible" {that would include the meteor btw}....under the second arguement any plane that was declared operational would be fair game if it hit a certain cut off date.

The germans, British and russians all have varients of their "latest & greatest" Ta-152,109K4-Tempest spitXVI(?)-1945la-7. On the otherhand the USAAF and USNAF chose not to deploy any "late war" fighters (with exception of the N&M jugs). The F7F is the one US "late war" plane that was clearly deployable. It would certainly be inappropriate in TOD or scenarios. Truthfully like any "late war" US Iron it might be overly unbalancing since no other nation had anything even close in total performance.

[frank3]

Originally posted by Kweassa
So we should be able to get the;

* twin 20mm gunpods for the Fw190As, making it a 6x20mm fighter..

* experimental MK103 armament for 190s and 109s

* earliest types of world's first guided missiles

 .. and etc, etc ?

Disney bombs!

[Squire]

If you guys are looking for some "absolute fairness formula" you will never find it.

Its a subjective call by HTC for gameplay reasons, thats it. Never mind the advanced calculus on how many were produced vs X Y Z x the GNP of the country - the months to the end of the war divided by deployment rate. It has nothing to do with it, and never has.

Some a/c have certain extras because they want them in there, and some are excluded, because...they dont want them in there. Same reason we have some a/c and not others.

"Fair" isnt a factor.