109g-10

[Xasthur]

Originally posted by Kweassa
a high-alt operations Gustav of 1944

Der Gross Schlag scenario highlighted this short-fall in the German planeset. It would surely be much easier to knock the appropriate speed off the K4 model, tighten the turn radius a tiny bit and change the load-out options and 'paste' that onto a a 'G10'.

Visual differences were minor.

It seems like such a small change that would please so many.

[JScore]

Excellent responses.  I believe Kweassa hit the nail on the head.  This G10 kick that I'm on kind of spawned from all of the P-39Q buzz, and the subsequent rants of what aircraft should be modeled next.  I have a problem when folks start clamoring for obscure or very early war aircraft that, aside from historical events, would be hangar queens in the MA.  At least with a G10 we would have an a/c that would get everyday use and provide a useful stop-gap between an overloaded and underpowered G14 and a dragracing monster armed with a jugs machine.  Heres for hoping.

[Lusche]

Originally posted by JScore
a useful stop-gap between an overloaded and underpowered G14

Underpowered? G-14?? OUR G-14??? One of the very best climbers and fastest accelerating planes in game?

 

[Major Biggles]

our G10 was modelled on the K4 pretty much. they just switched the names because it was just better that way. the g10 was all over the place in real life, so many different engines, armaments etc. HTC just wanted a standardised plane that didn't have data that conflicted on everything.

[Anaxogoras]

Lusche, at very high altitudes the G-14 of AH is underpowered: MW50 was only effective boost at lower altitudes.  For high altitude work the real Luftwaffe had the G6/AS and G14/AS, which both shared the DB605A powerplant coupled with the larger supercharger of the DB603.  These aircraft lacked the characteristic breach bulges of the G series.

[Lusche]

Originally posted by Anaxogoras
Lusche, at very high altitudes the G-14 of AH is underpowered: MW50 was only effective boost at lower altitudes.  For high altitude work the real Luftwaffe had the G6/AS and G14/AS, which both shared the DB605A powerplant coupled with the larger supercharger of the DB603.  These aircraft lacked the characteristic breach bulges of the G series.

Only because it has less power than some other variants at a specific altitude doesn't make it underpowered

[angelsandair]

ehh, i think we missing tanks, just my opinion

[JScore]

I wouldn't mind hearing from the "management" just what it would entail putting it back into the game.  In my nieve-coding-modeling-oversimplifying mind, since it was in the game at one time, one would think it wouldn't be that big of a deal putting it back in the hangar.

[Karnak]

The problem I have and had with the Bf109G-10 is that its service entry was actually after the service entry of the Bf109K-4.  As such, it doesn't fill any gaps.

What we actually need is a Bf109G-6/AS or Bf109G-14/AS.

[moot]

Wasn't the G10 a G14 field modified to match K4 standards?

[Xasthur]

Originally posted by Karnak
What we actually need is a Bf109G-6/AS or Bf109G-14/AS.

I'd be inclined to agree with you there. The Mk 108 cannon should be added to the G-6 load out options, too.

[Geary420]

Originally posted by Xasthur
The Mk 108 cannon should be added to the G-6 load out options, too.

+1, we used to have it, it was t3h shizzle.

[JScore]

Originally posted by Karnak
The problem I have and had with the Bf109G-10 is that its service entry was actually after the service entry of the Bf109K-4.  As such, it doesn't fill any gaps.

What we actually need is a Bf109G-6/AS or Bf109G-14/AS.

"The G-10 was an attempt to match the proven Bf 109 G-6/G-14 airframe with the new and more powerful DB 605D engine with minimal disruption of the production lines. Despite what the designation would suggest, it appeared in service after the G-14 and somewhat before the K-4 in November 1944. Early production G-10s used fuselages taken from the G-14 production lines, this was probably a source of confusion as many authors still believe many G-10 were based on recycled G-series fuselages. The most recognizable change was the standardized use of the "Erla-Haube" canopy, sometimes referred to (incorrectly) as the "Galland" hood. This canopy improved the pilot's view by reducing the number of support struts, which was often criticized before. The G-10 was produced in very substantial numbers, with some 2,600 G-10s produced until the war's end. The Bf 109 G-10, AS-engined G-5s, G-6s and G-14s as well as the K-4 saw a refinement of the bulges covering the breeches of the cowl mounted MG 131, these taking on a more elongated and streamlined form, barely discernible on the upper sides of the cowl panels, as the large engine supercharger required a redesign of the cowling."

[Kweassa]

The problem I have and had with the Bf109G-10 is that its service entry was actually after the service entry of the Bf109K-4. As such, it doesn't fill any gaps.

What we actually need is a Bf109G-6/AS or Bf109G-14/AS.

 It could work that way too.

 The Bf109G-14/AS (or /ASM; indicating that it is mounted with a DB605ASM engine) is quoted at 348 mph at seal level, and 423 mph at 25,000 ft. Although the G-10 is mounted with a DB605D, the performance is very comparable. Also, considering the K-4 tops out in max speed at 22k, the higher FTH is a clear indicator of the high-alt /AS engine.

 Therefore, I'd expect the Bf109G-14/AS could very closely stand in for the G-10 when required to do so - thus, it is a good choice.

[Anaxogoras]

If they let me put a MG-151 in the 109K-4 and pretend it's a G-10 I would be happy and shut up.