Author Topic: JU-87D Conversion  (Read 1723 times)

Offline ToeTag

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1113
JU-87D Conversion
« on: August 12, 2009, 11:28:33 AM »
We have a JU-87D in the game why in the heck do we not have the 37mm option in the hanger?  These versions of the 87D were converted to carry the 37 mm flak.  If that is insufficent then why dont we have the G variant.  Great bird that can easily kill any tank in the game.  It is an equal to the IL-2 at tank busting.  Both guns have the same capacity to penetrate 110 mm of armor.  Secondly, if these guns can penetrate that much armor why is it so hard to blow tanks up.  Side shots should mean fairly easy kills since these rounds were more effective @ 90 degrees than at an angle.  Is the modeling off?
They call it "common sense", then why is it so uncommon?

Offline DaveJ

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 697
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #1 on: August 12, 2009, 11:29:14 AM »
  It is an equal to the IL-2 at tank busting. 

Why not just fly the IL-2, then?
~DaveyJ~
Jokers Jokers


Noseart

Offline ToeTag

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1113
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2009, 11:35:04 AM »
Visibility stinks in il2 (I dont fly in f3 mode)
87 is a smaller target
87 is better in slow flight (less tree/ground augers)
87 has a better rate of climb
It would be a simple addition to the game (if added to the D model)
They call it "common sense", then why is it so uncommon?

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23864
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2009, 12:17:36 PM »
87 is a smaller target
87 is better in slow flight (less tree/ground augers)


The Ju 87 is not really a smaller target. Wingspan 15m with wing area 33.6mē. length 11m  Il-2 has wingspan 14,6m, wing area 38mē, length 11.65m




And furthermore, the 87 is a much move vulnerabe target than a Il-2

I also doubt the 87G has that better flight performance at low level. Power/mass ratio isn't any better than the il-2m3

« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 12:25:20 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Shuffler

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26804
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #4 on: August 12, 2009, 12:22:26 PM »

The Ju 87 is not really a smaller target. Wingspan 15m with wing area 33.6mē. length 11m  Il-2 has wingspan 14,6m, wing area 38mē, length 11.65m

And furthermore, the 87 is a much move vulnerabe target than a Il-2



On top of that now add the weight of the 37mm and shells.
80th FS "Headhunters"

S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning In A Bottle)

Offline Yenny

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1331
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #5 on: August 12, 2009, 12:51:55 PM »
Why not just fly the IL-2, then?

Historically the JU-87s destroy a tons of tank on the eastern front.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans-Ulrich_Rudel

"According to official Luftwaffe figures, Rudel flew some 2,530 combat missions (a world record)[Notes 2], during which he destroyed almost 2,000 ground targets (among them 519 tanks, 70 assault craft/landing boats, 150 self-propelled guns, 4 armored trains, and 800 other vehicles; as well as 9 planes (2 Il-2's and 7 fighters). He also sank a battleship, two cruisers and a destroyer. He was never shot down by another pilot, only by anti-aircraft artillery. He was shot down or forced to land 32 times, several times behind enemy lines."

Mostly in Stuka
E .· ` ' / ·. F
Your tears fuel me.
Noobing since tour 96
Ze LuftVhiners Alliance - 'Don't Focke Wulf Us!'

Offline BillyD

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 827
      • Das Army of Muppets
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #6 on: August 12, 2009, 12:56:48 PM »
The 87G is a badass. This one has been well covered in the wishlist category of the BBS IIRC. HTC has got to know we want it by now.

along w/

Yak3

He111

Beaufighter

B29 wit teh n00k

Bf109 G 10

P61

etc etc


LOL!  :x
*ARMY OF MUPPETS
*K$
*Hot Soup Mafia
*@#$@#  YO COUCH CREW

Offline waystin2

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10093
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #7 on: August 12, 2009, 01:12:05 PM »
CO for the Pigs On The Wing
& The nicest guy in Aces High!

Offline usvi

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 994
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #8 on: August 12, 2009, 01:15:22 PM »

See you guys in the wishlist. :D
"Come with me and I will show you where the Iron Crosses grow." -Unteroffizer/Feldwebel Rolf Steiner

~POTW-Second Wing~
http://www.pigsonthewing.org/index.php

Offline ToeTag

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1113
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #9 on: August 12, 2009, 01:25:13 PM »
ok ju87 had better wing loading than il-2

-Wing loading is more critical in turning than power / mass
-power to mass is for climb ratios

When flying at low alts and slowly it would handle better, maybe not by much, but when close to the ground it may be enough to keep you alive.  

I was wrong about rate of climb based on stats but I think the posted numbers are incorrect based on the games modeling.

In game I get about 1000 ft / minute. (87)
Posted results are 750 ft / min for D and G models (factual)
il-2 about 2000 ft / min (never see this in game - this is for the 23mm version not 37mm with 120 rounds)

Origional post is not for a wish but for a discussion based on why do we not have 37mm for the D model currently in the game?  Especially since it played a major role in the war.


The Ju 87 is not really a smaller target. Wingspan 15m with wing area 33.6mē. length 11m  Il-2 has wingspan 14,6m, wing area 38mē, length 11.65m

(Image removed from quote.)


And furthermore, the 87 is a much move vulnerabe target than a Il-2

I also doubt the 87G has that better flight performance at low level. Power/mass ratio isn't any better than the il-2m3



um im looking at more wing area on both tail and main wing. 

the converted D and then the G were up armored versions.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 01:30:59 PM by ToeTag »
They call it "common sense", then why is it so uncommon?

Offline sirvlad

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 410
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #10 on: August 12, 2009, 01:26:17 PM »
This has been asked many times and we never do get a official answer.I`d sure like to see it!

Offline Ponyace

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 272
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #11 on: August 12, 2009, 02:03:44 PM »
Only reason I want it is for a 'Kursk' Scenario.
Gatore
Formerly "Ponyace"

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #12 on: August 12, 2009, 02:13:59 PM »
Visibility stinks in il2 (I dont fly in f3 mode)
87 is a smaller target
87 is better in slow flight (less tree/ground augers)
87 has a better rate of climb
It would be a simple addition to the game (if added to the D model)

You are going to be sorely disappointed if you think the Ju87G-1/G-2 will maneuver the as the current D-3 version we have, especially at low speeds.  And if you can't kill a tank with the current IL2, you're not going to suddenly become a experten GV killer in a G-1.


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline ToeTag

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1113
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #13 on: August 12, 2009, 03:20:50 PM »
I love how people slowly get off topic.

I can kill tanks in the hurri IID as well as the IL-2
-I never mentioned that I had a problem in doing so

It is an equal to the IL-2 at tank busting.  Both guns have the same capacity to penetrate 110 mm of armor.  Secondly, if these guns can penetrate that much armor why is it so hard to blow tanks up.  Side shots should mean fairly easy kills since these rounds were more effective @ 90 degrees than at an angle.  Is the modeling off?

What I meant by hard is that if your at 90 degrees to the armor, then 110 mm of penatrating power should easily penetrate 51 mm of armor.  Should only take one or two shots not the 5 it normally takes.  In  other words if you hit the tank with rounds things should break more often at a minimum.  At best they shold blow up.

Secondly the 87D and G are closley matched in weight when loaded out.  Of couse they are going to fly similarly.  The only time they will not is when the D is empty (no ord).  At this point I will be heading home anyway. They are tank busters.  If ord is out at a base then the 37 mm would be nice to have on the D model as an option.  It will out perform the hurri IID's "S" gun in armor penetration.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 03:37:56 PM by ToeTag »
They call it "common sense", then why is it so uncommon?

Offline RufusLeaking

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1056
Re: JU-87D Conversion
« Reply #14 on: August 12, 2009, 04:13:58 PM »
"According to official Luftwaffe figures, Rudel flew some 2,530 combat missions (a world record)[Notes 2], during which he destroyed almost 2,000 ground targets (among them 519 tanks, 70 assault craft/landing boats, 150 self-propelled guns, 4 armored trains, and 800 other vehicles; as well as 9 planes (2 Il-2's and 7 fighters). He also sank a battleship, two cruisers and a destroyer. He was never shot down by another pilot, only by anti-aircraft artillery. He was shot down or forced to land 32 times, several times behind enemy lines."
Read his book, Stuka Pilot, as a kid. 

Grudgingly, I have to admit the goose stepping Nazi had brass.
GameID: RufLeak
Claim Jumpers