Originally posted by Karnak:
In what context does it need droptanks? The Bf109E is hardly going to see service in the MA, and in the service it will see I doubt that droptanks will be used in anything other than extremely rare circumstances.
What scenario do we want a Bf109E with droptanks for?
You are not forcing CMs to develop anything new in order to force a no-DT flight. CMs can destroy/rebuild structures at will. Destroy one fuel depot in the field where the 109s are going out from, and they can't load more than 100% fuel. Nothing new needed.
109E7s would be nice for East Front scenarios (the Emil was used up to very late '42 in Russia), and for Mediterranean scenarios (where the E-7 had a lot to say too).
I hope you are talking in your own name when you say you wont fly a E-7 in the Main. I would take my rides in the Emil happily. And in the MA the ability to carry DT is quite important, even more with the already handicapped range the emil has , and the fuel multiplier of the MA. Deny this plane a DT, and THEN you indeed would see even less Emils in the MA.
Said in short words:
-An E-7 is good for both scenarios and MA.
-An E-4 only for scenarios 'cause has no range to speak of in the MA.
-An E-4 can take the role of the E-4 only in scenarios.
-An E-7 can take the role of both the E-7 and E-4 in scenarios.
Other than the Drop tank, the planes are identical. To vote for a E-4 and not for a E-7 is simply not intelligent because with that plane you are in fact modelling TWO for the price of one.
[ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]