Author Topic: K4 or G14, what's your choice? (Read 2386 times)

Wilbus · « **on:** November 17, 2005, 03:29:28 PM »

Rarely do this but as I haven't had much time to fly lately, just got back after a month AH leave (it was needed!), I'd like to know peoples opinions on the G14 vs K4 issue.

Actually, throw in the G6 aswell for comparison.

I have only flown a single sorite in the G14 so far but can't say I liked it, it felt heavier then other 109's and while faster then the G6 still not fast enough to surive the MA environment.

The K4 I love just as much as I loved the G10 and consider it to be the same plane.
After flying it more I don't think there is any difference at all, possibly more maneuverable but it may be an illusion (or wishfull thinking). I think it has lost a few MPH at the deck aswell and the DT rack now also affects performance by a few MPH.

So, why would anyone chose a G14 over the K4 in the MA? Or why do you (if you do) do it?

It's not for speed, that's for sure. Or climbrate, the G6 (no wep) outclimbs the G14 if I remember correct.

EDIT: I understand some people chose the G14 thanks to either 20mm hub cannon option, or more likely, gondolas.

As I never use either, nor did on the old G10, this is no reason for me to chose a G14 but please tell me if you use it

Treize69 · « **Reply #1 on:** November 17, 2005, 03:51:30 PM »

Fighter vs Fighter, K4. Faster, better climb. 30mm, but no gondies.

Buff hunting, G14. Good climb and speed, but has option to carry gondolas.

Karnak · « **Reply #2 on:** November 17, 2005, 03:55:37 PM »

G-14 seems more manuverable to me, but it could be wishful thinking.

Shouldn't it have the same engine as the G-6, but with much more power for only very slight weight gain from the MW50 installation?

KurfÃ¼rst · « **Reply #3 on:** November 17, 2005, 04:41:55 PM »

Correct, Karnak.

Weight diffo between the G-6, G-14 and K-4 was not considerable. G-6 weighted between 3150-3200, the G-14 ca3250-3120kg, the K-4 3362 kg... the biggest diffo being from the MK 108.

Why no gondies option on the 109K? It was standard kit.... like on Gustavs.

1K3 · « **Reply #4 on:** November 17, 2005, 04:54:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kurfürst
Why no gondies option on the 109K? It was standard kit.... like on Gustavs.

didnt all combat ready 109Ks removed gondolas option?

(off topic but) Galland was right, 109s should've beeen halted on the assembly lines years ago!

Bruno · « **Reply #5 on:** November 17, 2005, 04:58:12 PM »

If you flew the G-6 (like I did during my last AH tour / subscription):

My Kill Numbers (offered only as evidence that I flew it)

then you will enjoy the G-14. In AH1 though the low speed handling was much better on all the 109s. I flew the AH2 betas and the first tour after AH2 went gold. I have only few hours flying in the main since the latest release and enjoy the G-14 a lot but the G-6 is still my favorite 109. Hopefully, in the next few weeks I will get some time to actually play with all of them.

So far the K-4 is just like the old G-10 and I have no reason not to like. Its just that I am an 'anti-wonderwaffe' and chose to fly 'representative planes'. There were G-6 12000 were produced and 5000 or so G-14s.

The G-14 has a few issues which Pyro said he would take a look out. See this thread

Once that get addressed and the Max ammo capacity for the center MG151/2cm gets upped to 200 rounds they will be close to perfect. They just miss the historic cockpits.

wrag · « **Reply #6 on:** November 17, 2005, 06:40:29 PM »

AHHHH.......... thank you Wilbus!!!

Someone else has noticed the loss in speed on the K4 vs the G10!!!

I noticed that in a G10 I could catch a OTD running pony even packing gonds when we both started out about co-E, but the K4 doesn't seem to be able to do this. Is the pony just a tad faster after the last patch? Or is the K4 a tad slower then the G10? Perhaps a little of both?

Also seems like the high speed stuff that used to be ok on the 109s above 5k is not quite the same. Used to be able to just barely exceed 500mph above 5k and didn't seem to stiffin up much, handled pretty good in fact, but now????

Hate that 30mm!!! any tips on aimming that thar tatter gun Wilbus ???

TimRas · « **Reply #7 on:** November 18, 2005, 12:22:56 AM »

I have previously tested G-10 deck speed (500ft, 100%fuel, clean), and i did the same for the K-4 the day it was introduced. Speed is exactly the same, 369mph. DT rack should have some effect though.

Placebo effect is strong here

Shane · « **Reply #8 on:** November 18, 2005, 02:29:58 AM »

i thought the k4 felt "heavy" and i can't hit crap with the spuds.

g14... hmmm, i dunno... i prefer the 20mm, but the speed seems slower and heavier...

and whyyyyy did they take away my 109f4 gondies!!

KurfÃ¼rst · « **Reply #9 on:** November 18, 2005, 04:03:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by 1K3
didnt all combat ready 109Ks removed gondolas option?

No, the opposite, all 109Ks had the option of adding gondolas. If they are modelled without the possibility to mount gondolas, it's incorrect. Pyro should fix it.

PS : If you read JG 26 War Diary of Caldwell, he notes that JG 26's 109K did came to the unit with gondola weapons.

KurfÃ¼rst · « **Reply #10 on:** November 18, 2005, 04:05:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by TimRas
I have previously tested G-10 deck speed (500ft, 100%fuel, clean), and i did the same for the K-4 the day it was introduced. Speed is exactly the same, 369mph. DT rack should have some effect though.

Placebo effect is strong here

This seems to be correct for the lower powered 1.8ata version. At 1.98ata, operationally tested in Jan-February 1945, cleared in February 1945 and introduced to at least 4 Wings of 109K units, max speed at SL was 377mph.

Charge · « **Reply #11 on:** November 18, 2005, 06:03:32 AM »

"So, why would anyone chose a G14 over the K4 in the MA? Or why do you (if you do) do it?"

BECAUSE, it puts more hair on me chest -and in the process removes some of it from me head...

But who cares? Me wifey tells me I'm beautiful anyway.

-C+

Ghosth · « **Reply #12 on:** November 18, 2005, 07:16:46 AM »

K4, but it doesn't matter a whole lot cause I suck in LW planes anyway.

Its just that I'm SO tired of spits everywhere. I have to fly LW a bit just to even the score so to speak.

Wilbus · « **Reply #13 on:** November 18, 2005, 11:50:10 AM »

Well TimRas it may very well be an illusion (just like the imagined better turnradius) but I can't escape from or run down enemy planes the way I could before. The Spit XVI is very very close when it comes to speed in combat. Not sure how fast it is on the deck yet but it seems very very close, when I fly it or when I fight it I can usually keep up on 109's for a long time.

The G14 seems l alot heavier to me too Shane.

Good Ghosth! Finally you have crossed over to the Dark side!

Bruno · « **Reply #14 on:** November 18, 2005, 03:07:01 PM »

If you guys are taking the DTs and/or Gondolas (G-14) drag is modeled differently on external stores and hard points on the new models. I haven't done any speed tests on any of the 109s with a DT or DT rack / gondolas etc... I tested them all clean 100% fuel and a single center hub cannon. I will post the speeds later, the only real issue I found (or at least was concerned enough to post about) was with the G-14 and Pyro said he would look at that.

I am not sure I feel the same heaviness as you all, but prior to the latest release I haven't flown AH much in years.

FYI:

I never flew the 109s with Gondolas so the issue with the K-4 not having that option (or F-4 for that matter) doesn't concern me much. However, Kurfürst is correct in the K-4 definitely had the option and JG26 for example received their K-4s with the gondolas. However, most removed them...

The F-4 is different and the F-4/R1 had a different wing then the 'standard' F-4s. Very few of these were produced.

The G-6 is still fun to fly and once the G-14 gets straightened out it should be as well.