More Ponies !

[Die Hard]

A Plane in real life and aces high isn't only defined by its engine power and its guns.

And who has ever made that claim? Get on topic and stop arguing over these irrelevancies. The only difference between an early-1944 and late-1944 P-51D that affects AH game play is engine power. HTC does not need to model a new aircraft. There are no bulges or Galland armor or Erla hoods or wheel-well bulges or anything ... just 150 octane gas and invisible (to us players) changes in the engine. The only art work they would have to do is bring back the birdcage B-Pony to represent the 1943 version.

They could even add these versions as options in the hangar instead of separate planes if the game code allows for it.

[Noir]

And who has ever made that claim? Get on topic and stop arguing over these irrelevancies

I extended your way of thinking over the 109G series (maybe too much I agree) which are WAY more complicated than just engine and guns...

On the topic the new P51 variants you propose are ok with me, put it on top of the "easy to add variants" pile with the F6F-3.

Just for the input the spitfire flew before and after the war so it sounds logical we have more variants of it, whatever icon the plane is.

[Die Hard]

Time frame is what matters: In service in 1943 and 1944 we have the Spit IX (in service since 1942), VIII, XIV and XVI; and we also lack late-1944/1945 150 octane versions of the Merlin Spits. In service in 1943 and 1944 we have the 109G-2 (in service since 1942), G-6, G-14 and K-4. The P-51's modeled in AH are as anachronistic compared to the 109K-4 as the 109-G6 would be to the Spit XIV.

[Brentlo]

The P-51's modeled in AH are as anachronistic compared to the 109K-4 as the 109-G6 would be to the Spit XIV.

Anybody that can use "anachronistic" in a well thought out sentence has my vote!  Good argument.

We are supposed to only write at an eighth grade level at work when corresponding via email.  I should visit
these boards more often, so I don't get dumbed up to bad.

When did 150 octane get introduced?  Was it available to all Western Allied ac or just a few modified ones?
You see where I am going here?  If the 51 gets it would all late model Western ac want it? 

Thanx

[1Boner]

Anybody that can use "anachronistic" in a well thought out sentence has my vote!  Good argument.

We are supposed to only write at an eighth grade level at work when corresponding via email.  I should visit
these boards more often, so I don't get dumbed up to bad.

When did 150 octane get introduced?  Was it available to all Western Allied ac or just a few modified ones?
You see where I am going here?  If the 51 gets it would all late model Western ac want it? 

Thanx

Lmao!!

Perk the 150 octane fuel!!

I don't think aircraft that weren't designed with 150 octane fuel in mind would fare too well in the long run, or at all without modifications.

It would be like putting racing fuel in my stock Northstar engine. Boom!!

[RoGenT]

IN 

[Karnak]

There are substantial differences in the handling and performance of the Bf109G-2, Bf109G-6 and Bf109G-14, more than the differences between the P-51B and P-51D.

[eddiek]

Lmao!!

Perk the 150 octane fuel!!

I don't think aircraft that weren't designed with 150 octane fuel in mind would fare too well in the long run, or at all without modifications.

It would be like putting racing fuel in my stock Northstar engine. Boom!!

If you put racing fuel (not alcohol) in your stock Northstar engine, it wouldn't tear it up or cause it to go BOOM!  You, however, might do it if you kept your foot to the floor and dogged the heck out of it.

There are substantial differences in the handling and performance of the Bf109G-2, Bf109G-6 and Bf109G-14, more than the differences between the P-51B and P-51D.

Not substantial enough to request a 109G-6ASM or whatever moniker you want to insert.  Seriously, reading the "Wishlist" section usually calls for the addition of some LW bird we already have, with a special engine or power booster in it.  Nothing wrong with wanting, but the justifications get downright ridiculous IMO.
Would it be within reasonable expectations for non-LW fans to want "150 octane fuel" with the upgraded performance?  Yup, if it was representative of what the USAAF aircraft flew with during the war. 
I'm all for new aircraft being added, for whatever country.  Heck, I've been waiting 8 years now for HTC to model the P-47M, it ain't happened yet, but I'm still waiting.
If ya don't agree with someone's thoughts on needing or wanting a certain plane, just disagree and leave it at that.  Why ridicule or belittle them?
Just my thoughts..........

[Krusty]

Agreed. Diehard's off his rocker on this one.

Oh, and please note the Mustangs didn't start showing up in numbers until early 1944, so your claims of having a 1943 version are baffling.

Also, "optional 6-guns on P-51C"???

Bs and Cs are identical. They were just made at different plants, each with their own designation.

Facetious request.

[Anaxogoras]

Not substantial enough to request a 109G-6ASM or whatever moniker you want to insert.

You picked the wrong plane to pick on.  There were around twice as many 109G-6s with the DB 605ASM than there were La-7s with 3x20mm.  The aircraft is needed for one of the most popular historical setups, i.e. Big Week in '44.

[Karnak]

Not substantial enough to request a 109G-6ASM or whatever moniker you want to insert.

They are absolutely substantial enough to justify the Bf109G-6AS or Bf109G-14AS (or just changing the Bf209G-14 to a Bf109G-14AS).  Why are they that substantial?  Because the Bf109K-4 is too late and the Bf109G-6 and Bf109G-14 as gasping for breath at the altitudes they need to fight against US bombers and their escorts.  There are massive performance differences between the two at those altitudes.

[Motherland]

I think some people in this thread need to consider that the 109 G series was by far the most produced variant of the Bf.109, and from 1942 until 1945 well over 12,000 had been built (compare this to 15,000 Mustangs). And unlike most aircraft, hundreds of un-denoted changes were made throughout it's production (a late G-6 was very different from the originals, despite still being called a G-6!). If anything... we don't have enough of the G-series! Particularly the -6!


Though I do think an Allison Pony would be interesting, much more of the planeset needs to be fleshed out first.

edit; 12,000 was not the total production for the G series ,
 that's the total production of the G-6 in particular. I can't find the specific number for the entire G series, but IIRC it's somewhere close to 2/3's of the entire 109 production of about 33,000. It was a pretty significant aircraft, believe it or not...

[Saurdaukar]

Not in terms of Aces High game play they don't. We are discussing internet cartoon planes here, not the real thing. Get with the program already.

Who is discussing the real thing? 

I hate to fall back upon such a simple argument, but if you think that engine performance and armament are the only differences in the Gustav lineup, you're just not familiar enough with the airplane to draw an assessment of any value.  Sorry.

Beyond that, I'm confused as to why you are taking such a hard line stance (read: attitude) with people who appear to be supportive of your idea. 

[Baumer]

Not that I'm a big pony fan, but the Mustang I was used in squadron strength by the RAF in August of 1942. Doing research on the Dieppe raid, I found 2 RCAF squadrons that used the Mustang Mk I during the raid, scoring the first Mustang kills of the war.

http://rcaf.com/squadrons/400series/414squadron.php

I think an early Mustang would be a good addition for the reasons others have posted; it would allow for much better aircraft sets in early war events.

However, I think there are many other aircraft that should be higher on the priority list.

[eddiek]

I'm not "picking" on any particular aircraft. I do however think it's a bit much to expect HTC to model each and every subtle variation of any aircraft, regardless of the differences in oil cooler size, main gear size, bulges, etc.
Gaps in the planeset are there for all countries, not just the Axis rides.  Expecting one side to make do with what we have now, but stating a need for additional planes for the other side gets old after a while (well, like 8, going on 9 years now).