Bf109K-4 with cannon pods: sources (part II)

[gatt]

Here is another source:

Flying Guns World War II, by A.G.Williams and E.Gustin, Airlife 2003. Pag.269. Bf109K-4: optional two MG151-20 cannon in wings with 100rpg.

From previous post:

Bf 109 G/K, Field Conversion Kits (Rustsatze), by Harald Voght, Schiffer Publishing 1988. Pag.55. Bf109K-4. Rustsatze IV: 2 wing gondolas each having an MG 151/20.

Bf109K-4, by T. Poruba, A. Janda, 1997, JaPo Publishing 1977. Pag.80: Rustsatze R4, two additional MG 151/20 (135rpg). Pag.23 (in Czech). Bf 109K-4/R6: diagram with wigpods mounted. Pag.36 (in Czech) Bf109K-4 armament, altenatively: 1xMG151-20 engine mounted.

Please lets keep this thread civil.

[Larry]

HTC needs to put the MG151s on the K4 and back on the F4 and give them back some bombs. Just becuase most pilots didnt use them dosent mean you should take them away from us. They were available to them why cant they be available to us?

[Bruno]

Why is it necessary to have a new thread every 2 days over gondolas on the K-4? If HT is going to add them he would have made his mind up after the first 3 or 4 threads.

[gatt]

Bruno, AFAIK this is the 2nd thread about the subject. I opened a new thread cuz the 1st one degenerated in personal attacks and OT posts, very far from the subject of the original post. I guess PYRO and HiTech dont read dozens of silly replies.

So, with a new source, I opened a new thread. Help me to keep it polite.

[tikky]

hey how about HTC add 4x 20mm hispanos on spitfires Vc, VIII, and IX

These fighters have the capability to carry 4 cannons, but they did not use them (except the spit Vc in afrika), the same reason why HTC did not add gondolas for 109K...

PS most gondolas showed up on 109Gs in large numbers, not Fs an Ks.

[Larry]

Originally posted by tikky
hey how about HTC add 4x 20mm hispanos on spitfires Vc, VIII, and IX

These fighters have the capability to carry 4 cannons, but they did not use them (except the spit Vc in afrika), the same reason why HTC did not add gondolas for 109K...

PS most gondolas showed up on 109Gs in large numbers, not Fs an Ks.

Did the spits come out of the factory with the 4 20mms? Well the 109s came out with the wing mounted MG151s, and if you didnt want them you could remove them. Thats why they should model them becuase they came on them. Just because some pilots took them off doesnt mean HTC should jsut take them out all together.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Larry
Did the spits come out of the factory with the 4 20mms?  

Yes.

[Larry]

Then give us our gondies and bombs and the spitdweebs can have thier hurrispits.

[Bruno]

Originally posted by gatt
Bruno, AFAIK this is the 2nd thread about the subject. I opened a new thread cuz the 1st one degenerated in personal attacks and OT posts, very far from the subject of the original post. I guess PYRO and HiTech dont read dozens of silly replies.

So, with a new source, I opened a new thread. Help me to keep it polite.

There were multiple whine threads in the General Discussion section of the forum right after the patch, there was one in the bug section. There's at least 4 threads in this section including the original where Pyro asked about load outs.

HTC reads the threads in this section the forum (so they have said).

Your first post didn't generate into 'personal attacks'. Widewing rightly contrasted your opinion in regards to gondolas with your post about fuel load outs in the General Discussion section. A personal attack is not pointing out hypocrisy and inconsistencies in your positions.

As I said in your other thread:

No one doubts that the K-4 had gondolas. Sources are already well established, a quick check of Caldwell's JG 26 is 'source' enough. However, pilots removed the gondolas. The K-4 wasn't hunting bombers and gondolas were detrimental to the pilots chances of survival.

I don't care anything about gondolas myself and I have no idea why HTC left them off as an option. Starting a new 'where's my gondolas thread' every couple of days may work to get them back, but some how I doubt it.

[gatt]

You can easily see how well Widewing contrasted the fuel-gaming argument. I respect Widewing but his arguments are weak.

As far as you are concerned, its clear you (and others) cannot keep this thread polite. If you cannot bring some good solid argument about the topic then stay away from the thread.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Larry
Then give us our gondies and bombs and the spitdweebs can have thier hurrispits.

I don't want the four cannon to be available on Spits.  They were practically never used in combat.

Just the same as the Bf109F-4 and Bf109K-4.

[Squire]

I think one way to get around the problem of making "rarer" armament options available is to perk them. Its not that hard to code. Limit it to only options used in the war, but for a price, if you want a 109K-4 with gondolas, or a Spit VIII with 4 20mm,  ok (and you get the extra weight and drag too).  

I would make them pricey though, to avoid over use (thats why perked a/c exist). I guess thats fair, and at least it gets rid of all the debate about it. You could have the options to be able to be turned on or off depending on the arena in use.

[Bruno]

As far as you are concerned, its clear you (and others) cannot keep this thread polite.

Please provide a quote of my 'impoliteness'...

'Impoliteness' isn't when some dissagrees with you.

You can easily see how well Widewing contrasted the fuel-gaming argument. I respect Widewing but his arguments are weak.

That maybe so but what you claimed was that the other thread:

degenerated in personal attacks and OT posts

Please quote the 'personal attacks' from the other thread.

A personal attack is not someone pointing out your own inconsistant positions.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by gatt
I respect Widewing but his arguments are weak.

I have the greatest respect for you as well, but I believe that a non-historical arena should not have historical values selectively applied. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander too. That is why I agree that gondolas should be an option on any aircraft able to have them installed. Moreover, if a player wants to take 50% gas and a drop tank in their 109, be my guest. I don't think that this is gamey within the environment, it is a legitimate option. Perhaps very few, if any, did this in the real world, but this isn't the real world. No one should be denied any load-out within the scope of what's available in the hanger. For a historical game like TOD, your argument is correct and I agree with it within that context.

My regards,

Widewing

[Guppy35]

Purely for my own education as I don't know the answer.

How common was gondola use by 109s?  I went through all my 109 books looking for photo evidence of front line units with gondolas.

The only place I seemed to find them showing up consistantly was in the MTO with JG27 or 53 on their G6s.  Were these for hunting Allied bombers or for dogfighting?

I'd think it was for bomber hunting but not for dogfighting as the performance penalty would have offset the advantage of the more cannon.

Again, like the Spit Vc, just because it could carry 4 cannon, doesn't mean it makes sense for the game.  

Personally I don't care if a 109 driver has gondolas.  I figure unless I don't see him, that he's going to be easier to kill with the added weight and performance penalty from the gondolas.  And if he's a good 109 stick, he's not going to need em to kill me anyway

My feeling is folks are just desperate for the hitting power to make things go pop faster and that the argument that historically they could carry the gondolas is just a cover for wanting to make it easier to kill in a definately non historic fashion in the MA.

So I guess the other question becomes, would Erich Hartmann have chosen to take gondolas or not, since the 109 fans are all would be Erich Hartmann's anyway

This would be Johnnie Johnson would never want a 4 cannon Spit V in a dogfight.