Author Topic: WGr 21  (Read 3064 times)

Offline Xasthur

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2728
WGr 21
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2008, 07:46:38 PM »
I don't think they were jettisoned very often at all in real life... perhaps that's why...

Actually, if you could jettison them and there was no penalty for doing so how many people would just up Gustavs and hammer into a furball, set salvo to 1 and get six kills from D1.0k? Lobbing rockets into furballs would be irresistible for some, I think.

If there is no penalty for taking the rockets as there would be no drag (as I assume the detach point was where the support beams for the tubes attached to the wing), it would be a normal Gustav after the tubes were jettisoned and everyone would take them, lob the rockets hoping for some freebies, ditch the tubes and then carry on as usual.

Disadvantages outweigh the advantages, unfortunately.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2008, 07:54:17 PM by Xasthur »
Raw Prawns
Australia

"Beaufighter Operator Support Services"

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
WGr 21
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2008, 08:16:15 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Anaxogoras
Explain?

Without a doubt they should be jettisonable.

Because they would always be jetisoned in AH whereas in reality they would only be jetisoned in an emergency.


From your posts it seems you don't give a damn about proper use or how things were, you just want absolutely maximized German equippment.  Try reading some history books and growing up a bit.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
WGr 21
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2008, 08:58:46 PM »
Karnak, we simulate emergency scenarios every time we fly in this game.  In fact, we seek out emergency scenarios.  In some other flight sim created by Pyro and HT air-to-air rockets did not create drag after they were fired (at least, in the 1.x and 2.x versions), but you did not see people abusing them simply because they are so hard to aim at anything except bombers.

Why read history books if we don't respect what they tell us?

Quote
From your posts it seems you don't give a damn about proper use or how things were, you just want absolutely maximized German equippment. Try reading some history books and growing up a bit.


No, the point is that there is inherent bias towards allied aircraft in AH just because the game is made in the United States (He111 is one of the last?).  For this reason, extra criticism and advocacy is needed sometimes to make sure things are as they should be.

One can easily make the same immaturity accusation against you for the naive assumption that there is no inherent bias, but I like to shy away form that kind of rhetoric because I am so well read and mature.:lol

Seriously, let's not let things get nasty.  If you have a point to make, then argue about its merits instead of making ad hominem attacks.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2008, 09:21:06 PM by Anaxogoras »
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline TUXC

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 257
WGr 21
« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2008, 09:06:33 PM »
I believe that the tubes jettison, but the supports are left on the wing.

From another thread:
Quote
Originally posted by TUXC
Found this on another forum. Has links to several 190A-5/A-6 manuals:
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/other-mechanical-systems-tech/fw-190-manual-5046.html

"In an emergency, the launching tubes can be released by severing the carrier struts with explosive charges. To fire charges, activate toggle switch. . . To prevent accidental actuation of the toggle switch, it is held in the safe position by a spring-loaded plate."


pp32-34 are on the rockets (translated to English)
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/other-mechanical-systems-tech/33563d1157723088-fw-190-manual-fw-190.pdf

this one (in German) is also on the rockets
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/other-mechanical-systems-tech/40653d1173737340-fw-190-manual-fw-190-part-8-c.pdf
Tuxc123

JG11

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
WGr 21
« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2008, 09:24:08 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Anaxogoras
No, the point is that there is inherent bias towards allied aircraft in AH just because the game is made in the United States (He111 is one of the last?).  For this reason, extra criticism and advocacy is needed sometimes to make sure things are as they should be.

One can easily make the same immaturity accusation against you for the naive assumption that there is no inherent bias, but I like to shy away form the kind of rhetoric because I am so well read and mature.:lol

Seriously, let's not let things get nasty.  If you have a point to make, then argue about its merits instead of making ad hominem attacks.

If you were a fan of Russian, Italian or Japanese aircraft I could see your bias comment.  As a fan of German aircraft, no.  You have the second largest set in the game.  I like British aircraft and there are lots of those too.  I have been involved in this game for a long time now and have seen these accusations over and over.  Is the game perfect, no, but it is pretty good.  And there are plenty of things out there that could be seen as "bias" against other sets, such as the P-51's poor handling, the Mosquito being saddled with speed reducing dampers and the Ki-61 turning like a P-47 when it should turn like a FM-2.

He111 will be useful for scenarios and the Early War Arena only.  Given your focus on the most potent of German stuff I am surprised you even care about the He111.  Personally, given we have the Ju88A-4, I'd much rather see a Ju188A-2, Do217E or He177A-5 as the next German bomber.  Something useful in mid and late war settings.

I would also like to see a Bf109G-6/AS or Bf109G-14/AS added to give the German set something to engage with at B-17 altitudes before the Bf109K-4 comes into it in October of 1944.

But take your blinders off and look at the big picture for a bit.  We need Russian and Japanese aircraft badly.  Compared to the US, UK and German sets they are incomplete and anemic.  You see problems with the German set, but think about fighting the Americans using a 1937 dive bomber and a 1938 torpedo bomber because nothing more modern has been modeled.  The US dive bomber and torpedo bombers are from 1943, FYI.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16333
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
WGr 21
« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2008, 09:35:27 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Anaxogoras
No, the point is that there is inherent bias towards allied aircraft in AH just because the game is made in the United States (He111 is one of the last?).  For this reason, extra criticism and advocacy is needed sometimes to make sure things are as they should be.

You're making things nasty yourself by saying just that, when in fact there isn't any such bias, which you'd know if you'd been around long enough or had read up on the past threads before coming out and saying that.

Saying that sorta stuff will ruin it for those of us looking forward to (e.g.) german stuff, because there's a real trend in whining about it, whether it's too little, or undermodeled, or whatever.
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline hubsonfire

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8658
WGr 21
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2008, 10:17:54 PM »
The only definitive bias is on the part of the players. Using how Warbirds modelled drag on ordnance (or opted not to) as proof of bias in AH is really a stretch, no matter which country you claim.

Conspiracy theories aside, I wonder if HT would consider allowing us to jettison the tubes if they carried a perk cost once the perked ordnance system is introduced. That would at least encourage retaining the tubes, while still allowing us to drop them in a pinch. Anyway, just a thought.
mook
++Blue Knights++

Proper punctuation and capitalization go a long way towards people paying attention to your posts.  -Stoney
I was wondering why I get ignored so often.  -Hitech

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
WGr 21
« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2008, 10:33:30 PM »
Also, all rocket launching systems in AH leave draggy mountings behind after being used.  The WGr 21, tube rockets on US fighters and the rails on the Typhoon and Mosquito are particularly bad dragwise.

Don't act like this is a bias against German stuff.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
WGr 21
« Reply #23 on: February 11, 2008, 12:52:18 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Anaxogoras
No, the point is that there is inherent bias towards allied aircraft in AH just because the game is made in the United States (He111 is one of the last?).


As they say on Wikipedia, "citation needed".

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
WGr 21
« Reply #24 on: February 11, 2008, 01:49:52 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
Because they would always be jetisoned in AH whereas in reality they would only be jetisoned in an emergency.


From your posts it seems you don't give a damn about proper use or how things were, you just want absolutely maximized German equippment.  Try reading some history books and growing up a bit.


Says the guy who wants every mossie variant the RAF ever thought of modelled.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
WGr 21
« Reply #25 on: February 11, 2008, 01:54:53 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by MORAY37
Says the guy who wants every mossie variant the RAF ever thought of modelled.

Really?  When have I ever asked for that?

Oh, that's right, I haven't.  You're performing an ad homme attack to try to discredit me.

Well, you're full of bull****.  I have suggested that two additional Mosquitoes be added, the B.IV and B.XVI (perked).  Believed me you that there were far, far more versions of the Mosquito than three.


EDIT:

While we're at it, I'll also mention that I advocated for the Spitfire Mk V to be changed to an early Mk Vb with lower boost and half the cannon ammo because it would fit into the Spitfire progression better than the one we had at the time.  Yes, a Spitfire fan advocated to get one of them seriously gutted.  I also asked for the Mk IX to have the option to take the .50 cals, wing bombs or rockets removed because no Merlin 61 Spit ever had them.

My point is that I want things to be accurate.  I don't care whose hardware it was.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2008, 02:02:37 AM by Karnak »
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
WGr 21
« Reply #26 on: February 11, 2008, 02:36:02 AM »
Looks like the veils of politeness have been removed.

I've seen HT and Pyro develop their product since 1996 at least...

Quote
Given your focus on the most potent of German stuff I am surprised you even care about the He111


I'd love to see a complete BoB set.  I'm in favor of everything else that makes for a well-rounded planeset, but sort of biased toward seeing the 109 set complete (I've been waiting for 10+ years).  Regardless, the A6m3, Ki43, He111 and Do117 are probably needed before my beloved 109 series.  The russian types are needed too; LaG3, Mig1-3, etc.

We get the American lineup before anything else-- yes save the P-39....panic!!!!! Is that really what represents WW2?



Quote
You're making things nasty yourself by saying just that, when in fact there isn't any such bias, which you'd know if you'd been around long enough or had read up on the past threads before coming out and saying that.


Again, I've probably been watching HT and Pyro's developments for a much longer time than you've been posting at the AH boards.  In their previous  flight sim (even the earlist versions) their was bias toward allied aircraft.  Heck, the Yak series didn't even exist in the wb lineup until the company was bought out by iEN (as hideous as they are).

Quote
As they say on Wikipedia, "citation needed".


It's called 'sociology.'  Bias always exists for the victor when recounting history.  If this were a flight simulation created by russians I assure you that every russian aircraft would be included in the planeset before the Tempest or P-47N (which I love to fly, shhhhh!)
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16333
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
WGr 21
« Reply #27 on: February 11, 2008, 12:16:29 PM »
Do everyone a favor and can the bias BS.
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline Stang

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6121
WGr 21
« Reply #28 on: February 11, 2008, 01:18:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Anaxogoras

It's called 'sociology.'  Bias always exists for the victor when recounting history.  If this were a flight simulation created by russians I assure you that every russian aircraft would be included in the planeset before the Tempest or P-47N (which I love to fly, shhhhh!)
:lol

If you're going to make the bias argument, at least pick the side that lost to give your bull**** any relevance.

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
WGr 21
« Reply #29 on: February 11, 2008, 02:04:39 PM »
Haha, stang you're right.  I should have chosen Japan or... Romania!:lol

Quote
Do everyone a favor and can the bias BS.


But the above is not a reasoned argument.  It's just a proverbial fist-pounding on the table.
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!