Please Uneuter the 109s

[Seagoon]

Hi Guys,

I used to fly the 109F and G6 quite a bit, but with the removal of the gondolas from the F and the 30mm from the G6, I don't anymore. I'm not going to argue the G6/U4 point, but what has happened to the F is in my mind a shame that needs to be addressed.

I've noticed that I seldom if ever see F's in the MA, which isn't surprising given the enormous difficulty of shooting down planes with only 1x20mm and 2x7.9s. Even Adolf Galland and other German Aces accepted that this armament was wholely inadequate, especially for bomber intercepts.

The fact is that the 109F-4/R6 did have underwing gondolas and that this variant was produced in numbers, adding it back would also bring the F variant back to the MA.

Either do that or please reduce the ENY on the F to about 50 to reflect its toothlessness.

- SEAGOON

[Bruno]

The fact is that the 109F-4/R6 did have underwing gondolas and that this variant was produced in numbers, adding it back would also bring the F variant back to the MA.

Please search the old debates on this. The 109F-4/R1 was the only Fritz with gondolas and it required a different wing. Only 240 /R1 a/c were produced and not all 240 carried gondolas.

Butch wrote in the original thread:

On the Friedrich Gondolas were only available on the F-4/R1 which featured different wings from previous versions, a Rüstsatz (R VII ; MG151/20 Gondolas) was made available for that variant only.

As for the G-6 only 181 G-6s were fitted with 3cm in '43. Add up all the G-6/U4s produced with MK108s you don't get to 15%:

G-6/U4
Produced 1943 : 181
01/1944 : 119
02/1944 : 51
03/1944 : 303
04/1944 : 404
05/1944 : 118
06/1944 : 144
07/1944 : 240
08/1944 : 49
09/1944 : 55
10/1944 : 14

None of the 109s are 'toothless' with their standard loadout of 1x 1 MG151/2cm...

[Seagoon]

109 F4/R

"The Bf 109 F-2 differed from the initial production model in having the engine-mounted 20 mm MG FF replaced by a 15 mm MG 151/15 which substantially increased fire power because of its higher velocity and better trajectory. However, there were conflicting opinions among the leading German fighter pilots concerning the armament of the Bf 109 F. Adolf Galland considered the reduced number of guns to be a retrogressive step, while Werner Molders favoured this light armament. Later, the Bf 109 F-1/R1 was to appear with a 20 mm MG 151/20 cannon mounted in a gondola under each wing, but while this improved the fighter's effectiveness as a bomber destroyer, it adversely affected the machines power of manoeuvre and reduced its potency fighter-versus-fighter combat."

Look, are we really disputing that there were any Gondola armed 109Fs?

In a game were as many have pointed out, more Ostwinds and 163s are destroyed in one evening than were produced during the entire war, to say that because 109F4/R1s they didn't represent a large part of the production they shouldn't be available just seems silly. Applying selective realism when it effectively removes an aircraft from the MA just doesn't strike me as sound.

But let the Grognards have their way and make the F a scenario aircraft, woo thank heavens we've safeguarded realism and made a 1941 aircraft all-but useless against the ever present '44-45 horde.

And yes, of course the experten can still get kills with it...

[Krusty]

Hell I think I got 3 kills in one just the other night. I don't think it's "neutered" at all!

AH is not only the MA. Keep that in mind. CT and AvA and SEA are all very very important parts of this game and HTC has acknowledged this. The 109F, while losing gondolas, now better fits in historical context -- not only against the Spit5 we now have but against other aircraft as well -- the 109F was not a great bomber killer.

I miss the gondola option, sure, but I realized in Malta that the gondolas SEVERELY hindered performance. 2 of us with gondolas could not even keep formation with the rest (which took no gondolas). We could not climb as fast nor fly as fast when level as our wing leaders.

So I miss the firepower, but honestly I'd never fly the F-4 with gondies now after experiencing how badly they performed with them. Want Gondies? Fly the G-2. It's only a few points higher in ENY rank.

[Bruno]

Look, are we really disputing that there were any Gondola armed 109Fs?

Why don't you try reading what I wrote rather then 'preaching'...

I wrote:

The 109F-4/R1 was the only Fritz with gondolas and it required a different wing. Only 240 /R1 a/c were produced and not all 240 carried gondolas.

HTC made there descision based on the facts presented. It has f'all to do with:

Grognards have their way and make the F a scenario aircraft

woo thank heavens we've safeguarded realism and made a 1941 aircraft all-but useless against the ever present '44-45 horde.

If we follow your logic then why doesn't HT just give every '41 aircraft stingers and laser guided weapons? The F-4 is some cases faster then the '43 G-6, its certainly more maneuverable ect...

It's competitive in the main, if you have issues with a single 2cm then practice.

[Glasses]

If they un neauter the 109s then the P-51 turdling can get no kills!!!!

[gatt]

Seagoon,

your pics, probably taken from Robert Michulec Me109 part 2, shows 109F-4s "belonging to I/JG52, the first unit equipped with such F-4s and the only one which tested them under front line conditions". After extensive trials, with a lot of problems, the under wing armament was declared satisfactory (about mid 1942).

However, under wing cannons were not introduced in the 109F as its production ceased during late 1942. Actually, during late 1942 (the 20mm gun pods) became one of the most widespread mods in the 109G-2.

During 1943 this type of armament achieved its greatest popularity  and was often installed in the 109G-6 (almost one third of the entire G-6 production).

Bruno knows very well how much I cried about the loss of the gun pods armed G-10. After a lot of digging and research I (like Michulec) couldnt find even a photo of a gun pods armed G-14  ... go figure. However late G-6 were (MW50 equipped) like the G-14s and probably still mounted gunpods, so our gunpods armed G-14 is probably ok.

Many authors state that gun pods have not been mounted on real G-14s, G-10s and K-4s, even if drawings and tech specifications about them exist.

[Wmaker]

Hi Gatt,

Yep, Prien & Rodeike mentions G-14 and G-10 wing guns being very rare. In the book there is one photograph of G-10 with wing cannons.

Personally I didn't like the fact that G-6 had it's 30mm cannon removed (Not that I ever used it until I had a slight problem with my CH Fighterstick buttons...now that the problem is solved I fly G-14 with 20mm aswell.). I think a better way would have been to make a tool for the CMs with which they could remove certain loadout options for scenarios/events. MA isn't historical anyway and after all it's a game and more loadout options make it more diverse. Most of us are interested in different technologies and weapons of WW2...to be able to "play" with them in the MA isn't a problem IMO. The MK-108 cannon hardly makes G-6 an unbalancing aircraft for example.

[gatt]

Wmaker,
I agree about both the scenario and MA arguments. Facts is that Rustsatz, Rustzustand and Umbausatz (mods) were so many and so poor documented that it'd be difficult to design/allow all of them in the MA hangar. Moreover, you'd allow every ATA type of aircraft (even the feared 1.98ATA K-4 and onlygodknowswhat Spitfire/P38/P47... version). Obviously, HTC chose the actual way of types modelling ....

[Wmaker]

Originally posted by gatt

Facts is that Rustsatz, Rustzustand and Umbausatz (mods) were so many and so poor documented that it'd be difficult to design/allow all of them in the MA hangar.

Yep Yep, I TOTALLY agree. What I meant was clear cases like the 30mm cannon for the G-6 should be allowed. For example I think it was correct to remove the 3x20mm loadout for the F-4.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Wmaker
Yep Yep, I TOTALLY agree. What I meant was clear cases like the 30mm cannon for the G-6 should be allowed. For example I think it was correct to remove the 3x20mm loadout for the F-4.

Actually I think it is perfectly clear that the 30mm for the Bf109G-6 should not be allowed.  It boggles my mind that you don't see that.

[Seagoon]

Hi Bruno,

Originally posted by Bruno
Why don't you try reading what I wrote rather then 'preaching'...

Was that really necessary?

If we follow your logic then why doesn't HT just give every '41 aircraft stingers and laser guided weapons?

Because no WW2 aircraft had stingers or laser guided weapons. Whereas at least several hundred 109Fs were operational during WW2 with gondolas.

By contrast Vought built only 200 F4U-1Cs and only a few of them saw action during WW2.

In the even more ridiculous category, OSTWIND production was a grand total of 43 and yet in the MA they are ubiquitous.

So to say that because there were only a few hundred operational BF109Fs with Gondolas in WW2 they needed to be removed, we have just necessarily made an incredibly strong argument for entirely removing the F4U-1C and the Ostwind from the roster as well.

It's competitive in the main, if you have issues with a single 2cm then practice. [/B]

I don't have the overall kill stats any longer, as the Inomminate link is no longer working, but are you willing to assert that the 109F4 K/D ratio is still up around 1.29 as it was in 2005? Personally, I barely if ever see an F4 in the MA at present. Few pilots have the skill to kill you with the single 20mm before you can outrun or outmaneuver them.

- SEAGOON

[Creton]

Look up my stats ,almost 75% of my kills are in the 109g2 with a single 20mm,to take a set of gondies ,does not help in the flight characteristics and really doesnt give that much more knock down power.109's should always be flown without gondies.I find that to continually post about gondies of which most 109 fliers,I mean people who are pretty devoted,dont take them any way.Also there's no reason a person cant land 8-10 and even more kills in any 109, with the exception of the 109E,in a single sortie.This has been acomplished many times over by myself as well as other fliers without vulching.You just got to get in tight with the enemy and not waste your "limited" ammo on those long range shots.I never shot over d400,and most times I'm alot closer than that.Currntly I have 941 kills this tour with 395 of those in the 109g2.So please dont insist that gondies make a great inpact on the lethality of the 109's.And since the last update the 109's are even more competitive in the main arena.

[Wmaker]

Originally posted by Karnak
Actually I think it is perfectly clear that the 30mm for the Bf109G-6 should not be allowed.  It boggles my mind that you don't see that.

LOL

[Krusty]

Originally posted by VIC

MesserDweeb!!!!

Oh, sorry, I mean....uh..


I agree with you on the point that Gondolas do not make or break the plane itself. Their absence will not negate the general capabilities of the aircraft.

However, you have to consider the types of flying styles. You CAN bnz a 109 with gondolas, and you will get better results than a 109 without gondolas (more ammo, more guns, a single hit now has 3x the damage landing on target, better chance for catastrophic damage, etc etc)

Also consider bomber busters. I use the 109s a lot for that. I don't like the 30mm much for bomber killing because it doesn't do jack most of the time**. However I will never go up against a bomber in a 109 without gondoals. It's a prerequisite. I've run into bombers in a non-gondy 109 too many times before and been able to do almost nothing with the single nose MG151/20.

So I agree that gondolas are not important to the lethality of 109s, but I must add that they *do* help when you have certain flight profiles in mind.

** = unless I really need the fast climb rate and high speed of the K-4 for a tail chase.