please give us a 109 g6 with mw50

[Zigrat]

from what ive read the g6 started receiving db605 engines with methyl water injection in early winter 1944.. we really need this airplane, since right now the current axis planeset is very shortchanged until the d9/g10 appear (autumn 44). i think i read that the g6 w/mw50 produced 1800 hp (against the 2000 hp of the g10) and had a top speed of around 425 at alt.. (about halfway between the g2's around 400 and the g10 around 450)

also i have read that the 190 a8 DID have examples with mw50 installed, giving it 2000 hp (still much less than the 2250 in the dora) and this too would be a nice "interim" between the a5 and the d9.

right now, imo, the planeset is too skewed for the first 8 month or so of the 1944 planeset, which is a problem in rumbles and the like.

plz consider these additions.

[eddiek]

Right on, Ziggy!  
And Pyro, while yer at it, I have read that almost all Jugs in the ETO were treated to a "standard" engine upgrade, 72" MAP, giving it, what, 2800hp?    
I am all for implementing MW50 in the 109/190, as long as the Allied bird have whatever performance enhancing steps they received in real life.  Obviously I am a P47 advocate, and after reading that each and every Jug that entered service in the ETO was immediately brought up to theater/unit/squad standards of readiness for combat, I think it's only fair to all that all planes, not just Axis ones, be modeled close to what saw combat, not just what the factory put out the door.

Not hijacking yer thread, Ziggy, just expressing my opinion.  Nowhere have I been able to find a 109G10 specifications table listing the top speed as 450+mph, always it is listed as 426.  I seem to remember Pyro stating that our G10 has the K model engine in it.  So why not give lovers of other planes a little something special too?    

[ 07-18-2001: Message edited by: eddiek ]

[Pongo]

All of the above please.

[gripen]

Originally posted by eddiek:
Right on, Ziggy!  
And Pyro, while yer at it, I have read that almost all Jugs in the ETO were treated to a "standard" engine upgrade, 72" MAP, giving it, what, 2800hp?      

I quess that the Pilots of the 56th FG were really pissed when they had to downgrade from the P-47D to the unreliable P-47M. Designers of the Pratt and Whitney seem to have been quite unlogical when they redesigned whole engine for the R-2800 C series.
 

Gripen

[Seeker]

I believe there's evidence that our Spit IX is a very rare or non-existant "parts bin hybrid"; could we please have the Spit up engined (and it's low speed roll rate increased) to give we 1942 Spit pilots a fair chance with the 1944 109 types?

I don't know if it's possible, but I really would like to see the in-cockpit trim cut back to reflect the fact that not all axis were trimable in flight by the pilot, as it seems a bit "quakish" to have extra control surfaces avilable to the pilot.

[Nashwan]

Yes, we definately need a 1943 Spitfire, the LF IX, because the planeset is skewed against the RAF now, in any 1943 scenarios for example.
We also need a Spitfire XIV for 1944 scenarios, to go up against the 190D9 and 109G10/K4 that the axis have.

[eddiek]

gripen, I doubt the pilots of the 56th were any more pissed than the Japanese pilots who flew the N1K2 and had to contend with continual engine problems and frequent failures of the landing gear.  Can't you imagine all the AH N1K2 pilots'reaction when their engine fails just as they are about to pull the trigger on a victim?  Or how ticked off they would be if the gear collapsed when they tried to land their kill(s)?  
Given that AH models each aircraft to perform "perfectly", problems such as engine failures, landing gear failures, ground loop tendencies, gun jams, etc., this so called unreliability you speak of would be a non-issue.  
Like Seeker said, some of our planes are parts bin hybrids, the Ki-61 being the perfect example.  Pyro pointed out that HTC had a time deciding what to call the Ki-61, as it had features of several models.  All I am stating is that if a bird such as the G10 had the 109K engine installed in some of them, and ya model the plane that way in AH and still call it a G10, ya ought to look into other planes' histories and give them a little something extra too.

[Toad]

Parry!

Riposte!

Touche!

Nice thread guys and handled with decency. I like reading threads like this one.

 

[gripen]

Originally posted by eddiek:
gripen, I doubt the pilots of the 56th were any more pissed than the Japanese pilots who flew the N1K2 and had to contend with continual engine problems and frequent failures of the landing gear.

Eddiek,
The Pilots of the N1K2 got a huge performance upgrade if compared their earlier planes (say A6M, Ki-43 or what ever) and unreliable plane. The Pilots of the 56th FG got no performance improvement over their previous P-47D (if we believe those 72" 2800hp in the standard P-47D claims) but they got unreliable plane. I'm pretty sure they were more pissed than those Japanese pilots.  
And still I wonder why on earth the Pratt and Whitney made a complete redesign for the R-2800 C series if that 2800hp could be reliably reached with a R-2800 B series engine???  

Gripen

[Lephturn]

Gripen what are you talking about?

The later model 2800 was exactly what the front line guys had already been flying.  The same engine with an MP boost.  Likely a few other changes, but that was the main part.  We are not talking about a "re-design" here... we're talking about them up-tuning the engine because the found it was so tough they could run it at higher boost than they originally thought possible.  I believe the C was just basically the incorporation of the performance mods they had already been installing in the field successfully on the D model 47's.

And I have NEVER heard of the RR-2800 being unreliable in any of it's forms.  That engine is known as one of the most reliable and toughest in the entire war.  Anybody have evidence either way about the 47-M?  Gripen you must be confused.

Lephturn

[ 07-19-2001: Message edited by: Lephturn ]

[Zigrat]

wow talk about thread hijacking

[eddiek]

thanks, gripen!  

I ain't gonna argue yer point....have read anecdotal stuff concerning the 56th's M-model Jugs, so I have no qualms about yer statement.  I have no idea why the P&W engineers "redesigned" the R-2800....my point was, and still is, if we get one plane with a higher performance engine and thus performance than is commonly found when you look at it's specs, others should be given the same treatment.  Shoot, I would be more than happy to have the higher HP engine in any of the Jugs we currently have, it doesn't have to be an M model.  
What I have said is probably clear as mud, I know.    I am not the best when it comes to getting my point across in a clear concise manner, but I try.
I guess it all comes down to this:
If one plane is modeled to perform at a higher level than what you find when you look at specs for that plane, then all AH planes need to be modeled that way too.  If the the vast majority of a particular plane came with engine A, and you instead model it with engine B of higher output, in all fairness, all planes ought to be modeled accordingly.  Model them according to how they were setup for combat.  One person I corresponded with said that the P47 in particular underwent upgrades almost from the time one left the factory door til it was delivered to a squadron and sent into combat.  Republic and P&W field techs guided the crewchiefs in these upgrades, told them what to do to make them more survivable in combat,because, as he aptly put it, "without the mods, you didn't have a chance.  Your life expectancy dropped off the chart if your plane had not been set up to fight."

PS:  No disrespect intended, Pyro.......I drooled when I walked past yer office that morning and saw all the aviation books on that shelf.       I wish I had access to all that information myself!

[ 07-19-2001: Message edited by: eddiek ]

[Karnak]

Zigrat,

I thought that the Bf109G-6/U3 (the Bf109G-6 with MW50) entered service in mid-to-late 1943.

[whels]

Zig,
i all for the MW50, G1, and water injection for all planes that used them, on 1 condition.  that Pyro and HT actually like RL
where planes that had it had tanks of it which had a limited amount, and when they ran out, they had no more available till the
landed and rearmed/refueled, not like in AH
where u just let the  engine cool and  got wep again. if they want to keep the wep like now, then haave a key map like SHIFT P for the special wep like G1, MW50 or what ever, but once u run out no more till u replane or refuel.

id love to have the field mod made to the mustang III, higher boost and higher oct fuel, 450 mph at 3k alt  

whels
 

Originally posted by Zigrat:
from what ive read the g6 started receiving db605 engines with methyl water injection in early winter 1944.. we really need this airplane, since right now the current axis planeset is very shortchanged until the d9/g10 appear (autumn 44). i think i read that the g6 w/mw50 produced 1800 hp (against the 2000 hp of the g10) and had a top speed of around 425 at alt.. (about halfway between the g2's around 400 and the g10 around 450)

also i have read that the 190 a8 DID have examples with mw50 installed, giving it 2000 hp (still much less than the 2250 in the dora) and this too would be a nice "interim" between the a5 and the d9.

right now, imo, the planeset is too skewed for the first 8 month or so of the 1944 planeset, which is a problem in rumbles and the like.

plz consider these additions.

[gripen]

Lephturn,
Please check your sources. The B series R-2800 (P-47B,C and D) is different if compared to the C series R-2800, there is no interchangeable parts between these engines. In addition the P-47M had different turbo and carburator than earlier models. And about overall reliability of the R-2800, look for the ignition problems above 25k. Also look for what happened in the 62nd FS (56th FG) at 4th March 1945 (several pilots died for engine related problems of the P-47M). Due to engine problems the P-47M did not enter combat before March 1945 despite it had been around since January.

Eddiek,
Yes, I believe that some Jugs as well as Mustangs, F4Us, FW-190s, ME-109s or what ever were hot rodded somewhat in the units. But claiming that the 2800hp P-47D was standard... well, if it had been then the USAF would have cancelled whole P-47M program. I wonder why these modified Jugs were not used for the V-1 hunt if they existed?

But there are some other mythical planes too, like the FW-190A with MW-50 or the FW-190D with GM-1 or the Yak-3 with VK-107 or the Spitfire 21. I ques these were about as rare as the 2800hp P-47D.

Overall I think that it's wise to stay on official ratings because these hot rod ratings seems to be endles and poorly documented swamp (as seen on these discussions).

I want early planes like the Re. 2000 or Hurricane or I-153 or Fokker D.21 or CR.42 or Gladiator for historical combats. I think there is allready too much those late war monsters. Bi-planes, oh yes!

Gripen