Aircraft and Vehicle Service Dates - get ur pencils out

[Masherbrum]

Awesome.  This is about 6th thread where the "Iwo Jima Mustangs" come up.   Nice hijack thorsim!

[thorsim]

how is being specific a highjack in a thread about specific dates for aircraft introduction ???

my point about the mustang is that we should not treat planes differently and what is good for the mustang re: model and the date that is chosen to allow it's use should be the same for all other types where the first model of a type is not modeled ...

this is probably brought up so often because it is an "issue" worth discussing and sorting out.

your post is clearly a good example of why this is called the AH boards ...

Awesome.  This is about 6th thread where the "Iwo Jima Mustangs" come up.   Nice hijack thorsim!

[Guppy35]

how is being specific a highjack in a thread about specific dates for aircraft introduction ???

my point about the mustang is that we should not treat planes differently and what is good for the mustang re: model and the date that is chosen to allow it's use should be the same for all other types where the first model of a type is not modeled ...

this is probably brought up so often because it is an "issue" worth discussing and sorting out.

your post is clearly a good example of why this is called the AH boards ...

OK so your issue with the Mustang is the rocket rails?  Outside of the MA I don't ever recall anyone using them.  The last scenario to use Mustangs allowed the pilots the option to take a B or a D since both were still flying together in the ETO Fighter Groups and didn't use rockets at all.

Based on this you are suggesting the intro date for the AH P51D is May 45?    So to have the May 44 intro date for the 51D you'd only allow it if it was the D-5 with no fin fillet?  Considering they're all cartoons anyway, that's just silly.

[thorsim]

no i don't care when you allow it, just approach all the other introductions of all the other aircraft the same ...

quit pretending there are not several other significant advantages to the block 25 pony in the game and the first D that was introduced on the date you want to use, that sir is just as obviously disingenuous as the specific id being left off the thing in the first place.

all you guys crying about the accuracy that provide you with advantage and then in the same thread totally ignoring something so wrong because it would make things a little more difficult is a real problem when trying to balance the game, or the events in the game.  just treat all the planes fairly, because that is fair.

it is really just that simple.

OK so your issue with the Mustang is the rocket rails?  Outside of the MA I don't ever recall anyone using them.  The last scenario to use Mustangs allowed the pilots the option to take a B or a D since both were still flying together in the ETO Fighter Groups and didn't use rockets at all.

Based on this you are suggesting the intro date for the AH P51D is May 45?    So to have the May 44 intro date for the 51D you'd only allow it if it was the D-5 with no fin fillet?  Considering they're all cartoons anyway, that's just silly.

[thorsim]

Clearly Allied intel knew of the D9 coming and the word had spread as there are Allied combat reports claiming to have run into long nosed 190s in early 44 and through the summer of 44.  I seem to recall that Green corrected that claim at some point.

did he give a reason for his confusion along with the correction, i would be interested in that ...

BTW my copy is ©1975 ...

[Guppy35]

did he give a reason for his confusion along with the correction, i would be interested in that ...

BTW my copy is ©1975 ...

I don't recall where I read it, but in essence that date has been dismissed as a mistake.

[Guppy35]

no i don't care when you allow it, just approach all the other introductions of all the other aircraft the same ...

quit pretending there are not several other significant advantages to the block 25 pony in the game and the first D that was introduced on the date you want to use, that sir is just as obviously disingenuous as the specific id being left off the thing in the first place.

all you guys crying about the accuracy that provide you with advantage and then in the same thread totally ignoring something so wrong because it would make things a little more difficult is a real problem when trying to balance the game, or the events in the game.  just treat all the planes fairly, because that is fair.

it is really just that simple.

This guy talking to you doesn't fly the 51D or the 38L for that matter.  I'm not looking for an advantage.  I'd be curious as to what you think the significant advantages of the D-25 were btw outside of the ability to have the zero length rocket rails?  The fin fillet was retrofitted to D-5s and was there from the D-10 on in production.  The tail warning radar system was retrofitted to, and wasn't of much use.   I don't recall our 51D having it in AH.  Fuel tankage is the same.   Can't tell if the dash over the instrument panal is the D-25 version in the game.  K-14 gunsight was retrofitted to earlier D models.

Please explain the significant advantages of the D-25

[thorsim]

well firstly since they don't model the reason for the fillet that the USAAF felt strongly enough about to retrofit the entire fleet it is not an accurate representation of the airframe delivered in 43 ...

second AH does not model field mods or retrofits (for good reason) and even if they did they would not accurately represent the aircraft at the date of it's introduction would it?

after all the first p-51Ds were not even bubble canopy airframes.

to be clear i am not suggesting that the A8 or A9, or g14 be available when the first 190A or 109G was introduced which is what you are arguing for currently with the pony.  what i am saying is that the first model of a type in the game be available when the first model in TRW was appropriate for the situation represented in the game or the event.  

so currently for example the Fw190A5 should represent the A3 or the A1 or A2 if it those planes were in the battle or time period represented in the game, just like you are suggesting the 1945 model P-51D in the game represent the early model P-51Ds when they are appropriate.  

i don't see the problem with equity such as i have described here.  

BTW "you" is intended to be colloquial not specific, sorry if it confused you ...  

This guy talking to you doesn't fly the 51D or the 38L for that matter.  I'm not looking for an advantage.  I'd be curious as to what you think the significant advantages of the D-25 were btw outside of the ability to have the zero length rocket rails?  The fin fillet was retrofitted to D-5s and was there from the D-10 on in production.  The tail warning radar system was retrofitted to, and wasn't of much use.   I don't recall our 51D having it in AH.  Fuel tankage is the same.   Can't tell if the dash over the instrument panal is the D-25 version in the game.  K-14 gunsight was retrofitted to earlier D models.

Please explain the significant advantages of the D-25

[thorsim]

I don't recall where I read it, but in essence that date has been dismissed as a mistake.

weird they did not address it in a book that was reprinted for 18 years with the error, if it was a mistake ...

i always thought Green got his dates from allied encounters with the long noses AARs from allied pilots who were encountering an operational testing groups the germans used that so often results in the confusion in these discussions ... 

i just thought it was a semantic issue about what the Luftwaffe considered "fully operational" as in the case with the 262.

[Guppy35]

well firstly since they don't model the reason for the fillet that the USAAF felt strongly enough about to retrofit the entire fleet it is not an accurate representation of the airframe delivered in 43 ...

second AH does not model field mods or retrofits (for good reason) and even if they did they would not accurately represent the aircraft at the date of it's introduction would it?

after all the first p-51Ds were not even bubble canopy airframes.

to be clear i am not suggesting that the A8 or A9, or g14 be available when the first 190A or 109G was introduced which is what you are arguing for currently with the pony.  what i am saying is that the first model of a type in the game be available when the first model in TRW was appropriate for the situation represented in the game or the event.  

so currently for example the Fw190A5 should represent the A3 or the A1 or A2 if it those planes were in the battle or time period represented in the game, just like you are suggesting the 1945 model P-51D in the game represent the early model P-51Ds when they are appropriate.  

i don't see the problem with equity such as i have described here.  

BTW "you" is intended to be colloquial not specific, sorry if it confused you ...  

The 51D prototype was a B model modified with a bubble canopy.  All D models had that canopy.  Depending on whether it was a Dallas or Inglewood built 51D the canopy had slight differences in shape, your comment that the D model started out without the bubble canopy is inaccurate.  The P51B was first used in December 43 and did not have the Malcom hood.  Those started to show up in late February, early March on some of the Group or Squadron leader birds.  If you are suggesting the fin fillet is a significant change, then you are  reaching in terms of your definition of significant.

In terms of the 190s, for scenario use, if the A5 is the earliest 190 we have, then it would represent the early 190s.

If I find the stuff on Green's D9 mistake I'll post it.  Examples of Allied claims of D9s prior to them being in service.  The 56th FG claimed 3 D9s on June 8, 1944.  The 370th FG claimed 6 D9s on June 20, 1944.  Clearly the word was out of a new 190 in the works and folks started seeing them.

Of course there were claims for 109Fs too in the summer of 44, so folks aircraft recognition in the heat of the fight wasn't always right.

[thorsim]

no i was relying on green again if there was never a D without a bubble canopy then i was misled by Mr. Green again ...

i agree the vertical stab adjustment did not do much and the lateral stability "problem" was never "solved" in the 51 however it is not represented very prominently in the games so it seems HTC consider it was solved and that imo constitutes a significant change when compared to the handling problems represented in other airframes in the game.

the difference in the airframes is more pronounced between the A and D 190s than it is in the F and G 109s and like i said there are order of battle for JGs being operational with the D9 in sept 44 so a few months for operational testing does not seem unlikely ...

one must remember that the USAAF claims were film documented inmost cases so a "new" 190 in combat would have been well reviewed by intel,  or one must assume it would.  

but thanks for the input,  the powers that be just need to look at the "operational testing" done by the Luftwaffe and decide if it was significantly different than the dissemination of information from the first combat operators of the allied types to the squadrons that received the respective airframes later.

otherwise there is some confusion caused by kills by and deaths of aircraft that were "not yet operational" ...

just need to find an equitable way to handle this all, and it's not easy to do so everyone is justifiably satisfied.

The 51D prototype was a B model modified with a bubble canopy.  All D models had that canopy.  Depending on whether it was a Dallas or Inglewood built 51D the canopy had slight differences in shape, your comment that the D model started out without the bubble canopy is inaccurate.  The P51B was first used in December 43 and did not have the Malcom hood.  Those started to show up in late February, early March on some of the Group or Squadron leader birds.  If you are suggesting the fin fillet is a significant change, then you are  reaching in terms of your definition of significant.

In terms of the 190s, for scenario use, if the A5 is the earliest 190 we have, then it would represent the early 190s.

If I find the stuff on Green's D9 mistake I'll post it.  Examples of Allied claims of D9s prior to them being in service.  The 56th FG claimed 3 D9s on June 8, 1944.  The 370th FG claimed 6 D9s on June 20, 1944.  Clearly the word was out of a new 190 in the works and folks started seeing them.

Of course there were claims for 109Fs too in the summer of 44, so folks aircraft recognition in the heat of the fight wasn't always right.

[Karnak]

Performance is what really matters to me, in terms of if an aircraft in AH is an appropriate stand in.  P-51D Block 25 running on 100 octane fuel is a very reasonable stand in for a P-51D Block 5 running on 100 octane.  Their performance would be all but identical, and that slight difference would be due to the slight lateral stability improvement of the fillet.   Using a Bf109G-14 in place of a Bf109G-6 would not be appropriate as the Bf109G-14's performance is far higher than the Bf109G-6's and thus such a substitution would greatly alter the balance of the opposing forces in the scenario.

The worst stand in that I recall in AH was a Med. Theater scenario's use of the Typhoon as a stand in for the Beaufighter.  Even the Mosquito, which wasn't in the game at the time, would have been, in my mind, inappropriate for the scenario.

I think using our Spitfire LF.Mk VIII as a stand in for the Spitfire LF.Mk IXc is appropriate as the performance of the two aircraft is very similar, being much closer than the Spitfire F.Mk IX's.

[BnZs]

Um, the LW arena is not the '44 arena...it encompasses to the very end of the war. So the exact intro date of the P-51D modeled is abit of a moot point.

You can make the P-51D do a very flat spin in AHII btw. And a nice wingover for that matter. Since most Ponies are in the MA are flown at 300-500mph IAS instead of on the ragged edge, it doesn't make much difference.

The A-5 IS used to represent the earliest 190s in scenarios. Unfortunately, its top speed IS rather 190 A-4'ish....

[Saxman]

Um, the LW arena is not the '44 arena...it encompasses to the very end of the war. So the exact intro date of the P-51D modeled is abit of a moot point.

You can make the P-51D do a very flat spin in AHII btw. And a nice wingover for that matter. Since most Ponies are in the MA are flown at 300-500mph IAS instead of on the ragged edge, it doesn't make much difference.

The A-5 IS used to represent the earliest 190s in scenarios. Unfortunately, its top speed IS rather 190 A-4'ish....

It DOES matter a bit for aircraft that straddle the periods, though.

The F4U-1A first appeared in 1943, making her a Mid War bird. However the version we have is from much later in the production run more appropriate for 1944, which makes her Late War.

[Masherbrum]

no i was relying on green again if there was never a D without a bubble canopy then i was misled by Mr. Green again ...

i agree the vertical stab adjustment did not do much and the lateral stability "problem" was never "solved" in the 51 however it is not represented very prominently in the games so it seems HTC consider it was solved and that imo constitutes a significant change when compared to the handling problems represented in other airframes in the game.

the difference in the airframes is more pronounced between the A and D 190s than it is in the F and G 109s and like i said there are order of battle for JGs being operational with the D9 in sept 44 so a few months for operational testing does not seem unlikely ...

one must remember that the USAAF claims were film documented inmost cases so a "new" 190 in combat would have been well reviewed by intel,  or one must assume it would.  

but thanks for the input,  the powers that be just need to look at the "operational testing" done by the Luftwaffe and decide if it was significantly different than the dissemination of information from the first combat operators of the allied types to the squadrons that received the respective airframes later.

otherwise there is some confusion caused by kills by and deaths of aircraft that were "not yet operational" ...

just need to find an equitable way to handle this all, and it's not easy to do so everyone is justifiably satisfied.

The Ki-61 in the Spring of 1942, Lt. Umekawa was on a test flight and stumbled onto the Doolittle Raiders Mission.   He pursued one of the 25's and had to break off because of lack of fuel and the Machine Guns were acting up and not yet finalized.   

Again, you nit pick the "never was" and try to bend fact with your delusion filled rationale.   Welcome to my Ignore List, so other people can waste their time talking to a tap dancer. 

I predicted your "equitable way to handle this all" on Page 1.   You delivered.