Author Topic: So, do you guys think a Fw190-D9 would be a perk or not? (Read 1880 times)

RAM · « **Reply #45 on:** January 30, 2001, 12:21:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by F4UDOA:
So when was the FW190D-9 built and shipped??
I do not know, I am only asking?? I think that is your answer.

August 1944. DING DING!!!!, fits into the planeset.

Said that, the F4U1-C was used ONLY in 1945..DING DING DING DOESNT FIT INTO THE PLANESET!!!!!!!
-----------------------------------------

Wmaker, the G10/R6 had 2x20mm cannons in wing gondolas...just as the G14/R6, the G6/R6, the G2/R6, the G1/R6...and I could follow ad nauseam.

The G10/R6 (once again) was the two 20mm gondola armed G10.

BTW "Warplanes of the luftwaffe" was first edited in 1994, as I said in my previous post. If instead of running to post how good is your book you took the time to read my post then you would have noticed it.

[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-30-2001).]

Karnak · « **Reply #46 on:** January 30, 2001, 12:48:00 PM »

F4UDOA,
We all know that the Spitfire MkXIV is going to be a perk, and it entered service before the P-51D.

The criteria is an overall judgement of how good the aircraft would be in the MA environment. If it is higher than the P-51D, its a perk (maybe it has to be higher than the F4U-1C).

------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother

Sisu
-Karnak

LJK Raubvogel · « **Reply #47 on:** January 30, 2001, 12:54:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by F4UDOA:

Is it late war design?
Ding, ding, Winner!
AH is currently in a no later than mid 1944 planeset. The NIK2, P-51D, P-47D30, BF109G-10 and F4U-1D/C are all early to Mid 1944 birds. Anything after that time starts to fall into the true late war design category.

So, since the Me-262 became operational in the summer of '44, it will not be perked?

------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps

[This message has been edited by LJK Raubvogel (edited 01-30-2001).]

Wmaker · « **Reply #48 on:** January 30, 2001, 12:56:00 PM »

RAM SAID:
"BTW "Warplanes of the luftwaffe" was first edited in 1994, as I said in my previous post. If instead of running to post how good is your book you took the time to read my post then you would have noticed it."

Hmm...well feel free to think so...The real reason for this is that english isn't my native language either and when you said "edited" it leads to edition...understand? SO I thought the book was published earlier and that it was the first "edited" version..ahh well I understand now that second edition is second printing...so it was just an english snafu. If you would have said "published in 1994" we would have avoided this hassle, my fault. I honestly mistook this book on some William Green's book. They came out first in the sixties...isn't that right? Never seen or let alone read one...I just thought your book was revised version of William Green's "Warplanes of the Luftwaffe" (I somewhere remember seeing a book called that with him as the author??" Anyways I noticed mistake (I even have the book myself DOH!) and started editing my message..few minutes too late obviously...but anyways thanks for understanding RAM

And I can see you hate it when you are wrong

[This message has been edited by Wmaker (edited 01-30-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Wmaker (edited 01-30-2001).]

Zigrat · « **Reply #49 on:** January 30, 2001, 01:28:00 PM »

i been paying for 2 weeks now santa

RAM · « **Reply #50 on:** January 30, 2001, 02:04:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wmaker:
And I can see you hate it when you are wrong

The luftwaffe album, by Joachim Dressel and Mandfred Griehl.

ISBN 1-86019-978-x

Page 52

"Bf109G10/R6: Fighter with MG151/20 nacelle-mounted armament and MW50 cannon"

So far I have brought here three different sources of information, all of them independent from each other.

You only brought one, and an evidently wrong one.

I hate it when people who has only one book thinks they are the eve of the universe.

You got a book. And one with errors. And you are wrong.

Wmaker · « **Reply #51 on:** January 30, 2001, 02:18:00 PM »

LOL RAM !!! I wasn't talking JUST about Bf 109G-10/R6...I think I mentioned something about G-6/U4 and G-10/U4 too...and RAM care to tell what the hell is MW 50 cannon!

F4UDOA · « **Reply #52 on:** January 30, 2001, 02:50:00 PM »

RAM,

The F4U-1C is a -1D with a different gun package. Hardly a late war fighter. If it weren't for the anomaly of the cannon damage multiplier in AH you wouldn't care.

Karnak and Raubvogel are more in the ballpark with performance that exceeds other A/C in the planeset. But what is the criteria?

I'm asking the question, what qualifies an A/C as a perk plane? Answer that question grasshopper and you will know if the Dora will be perked. Personally I don't think it has to be. Especially since I haven't seen one piece of test data that put it over 436MPH max speed.

I would luv to have a distraction to quiet all of the C-hog whining on these boards.

RAM · « **Reply #53 on:** January 30, 2001, 05:33:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wmaker:
LOL RAM !!! I wasn't talking JUST about Bf 109G-10/R6...I think I mentioned something about G-6/U4 and G-10/U4 too...and RAM care to tell what the hell is MW 50 cannon!

LOL...that was a typo -mine,not book's-

BTW the U4 is the Factory conversion Kit. The U4 were the planes that came from factory fitted with Mk108 cannons, the R5 were the ones fitted with it on the field.

Simple.

Naso · « **Reply #54 on:** January 31, 2001, 03:27:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by F4UDOA:
RAM,

The F4U-1C is a -1D with a different gun package. Hardly a late war fighter. If it weren't for the anomaly of the cannon damage multiplier in AH you wouldn't care.

Karnak and Raubvogel are more in the ballpark with performance that exceeds other A/C in the planeset. But what is the criteria?

I'm asking the question, what qualifies an A/C as a perk plane? Answer that question grasshopper and you will know if the Dora will be perked. Personally I don't think it has to be. Especially since I haven't seen one piece of test data that put it over 436MPH max speed.

I would luv to have a distraction to quiet all of the C-hog whining on these boards.

For What I understand the criteria is a judgement of HTC about the unbalancing role in MA.

And a push toward more use of many different models.

Or you prefer a MA filled only of F4U1-C, or what will be the next dweebplane ??

StSanta · « **Reply #55 on:** January 31, 2001, 04:37:00 AM »

Zigrat:

LOOK what you've DONE!

You've RUINED a PERFECTLY well placed point!

I shall have to fight you on the beaches for this!

Welcome back bud

------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"

"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch

Wmaker · « **Reply #56 on:** January 31, 2001, 06:22:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by RAM:
BTW the U4 is the Factory conversion Kit. The U4 were the planes that came from factory fitted with Mk108 cannons, the R5 were the ones fitted with it on the field.

Once more...U4 was the designation which tells that the particular G-10 has MK-108 engine-mounted cannon fitted in the factory...nothing more, nothing less.
When these aircraft rolled off the production line everything in Hitler's Germany wasn't going according to plan and these aircraft were fitted with weapons that time available for the factories to fit! WNF obviously had MK 108s because as I understand all G-10/U4s were produced by it.
Again...U4 means that particular aircraft has MK 108 as the engine mounted weapon...no belly gunpacks...
Yep...R5 was fitted in the field and it consisted of two MG 151/20s mounted in wing gondolas.
I still stand behind my statement and sources.

1Wmaker1
Lentolaivue 34

RAM · « **Reply #57 on:** January 31, 2001, 07:40:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wmaker:
Yep...R5 was fitted in the field and it consisted of two MG 151/20s mounted in wing gondolas.
I still stand behind my statement and sources.

1Wmaker1
Lentolaivue 34

No. You stand behind your statement and SOURCE

The day you bring another source here saying that the G10/R5 had wing gondolas I will stop laughing. (But I still will not believe it...note I have said FOUR (4) SOURCES of information on the R6-R5-U4 matter.

You only one. So yours is the books of the All-Mighty-And-Knowing-Gods, huh?

lol

Nashwan · « **Reply #58 on:** January 31, 2001, 02:03:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hans:
And the Typhoon is a peice of junk? BTW, its my favorite ride along with the La5-FN. Its a killer in Boom and Zoom, particularily with the seat jacked up and back so you can see better. Nice high deflection shooting with it.

Plus! This game's first perk fighter is the British Tempest.

Oh, yeah. The British sucketh big time in AH.

Hans.

The Typhoon will soon have it's rollrate decreased dramatically.

Whichever way you look at it, the Spitfire was one of the great planes of WW2, competitive with it's rivals from the begining to the end of the war.
It seems the only Spit to be freely available in AH will be the IX, which is outclassed by the D9, G10, P51 etc.
As to the British getting the first perk plane, I don't see that as a benifit. The Tempest is every way the contemporary of the D9 (though the Tempest was earlier). Would the Luftwaffles be rejoicing if the Tempest was coming unperked and the D9 had the "honour" of being the first perk plane?

mauser · « **Reply #59 on:** January 31, 2001, 04:29:00 PM »

Isn't the perk system there to allow planes that could unbalance the arena enter the arena at a limited rate? Since the Dora is contemporary to the p51D, 109G10 it shouldn't be perked. I don't think people would all flock to flying the Dora since there are planes with better characteristics (e.g. better/more cannons, higher speed, better turn, ground attack loadout, etc.). The way the arena looks now, I don't think the SpitXIV should be perked either. If it still has the same 2x20mm and 2x12.7mm with it's limited clip, it will probably be used by dedicated Spit lovers (and some converts). Reason being the tiff is still fast on the deck and has more cannon + ammunition. And the IX will still turn better (right?). As for the Tempest, isn't it a "fixed" Tiffie? i.e. better high alt-performance, faster at all alts, better and more cannon, and better wing? (correct me if I'm wrong.. haven't read about Tempest in a long time).

mauser