Author Topic: BF-209-II Request  (Read 1784 times)

Offline dirtdart

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1847
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #15 on: December 30, 2010, 08:44:24 AM »
This is absurd... THe Me209 was a propoganda stunt to try to steal the world speed records of the time.

It did.  It also ran a total loss cooling system and was unarmed.  The original fuselage is in a museum in Poland, or was as of a few years ago.  It would be neat to see them restore that one.  

The 209 never came to be as a fighter.  The Me309 was an attempt to replace the 109, but never saw production.  Had some pretty evolutionary stuff.  There is a large book called Willie Messerschmidt Aviation Designer (Something like that) that has some real good detailed information about Messerschmidt airplanes from his first to his last.  The only ones that saw "squadron" service that we don't have (primary airframes) are the 210/410 and the 323.  
If you are not GFC...you are wee!
Put on your boots boots boots...and parachutes..chutes...chutes.. .
Illigitimus non carborundum

Offline Mirage

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 375
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #16 on: December 30, 2010, 01:20:02 PM »
lanstukas never saw combat and yet we have them in aces high.  werbies and spit16 mostly saw combat on tv.  and the weird looking airplanes that came out of the con shooting lazers, I am almost positive those never saw combat in ww2 either.  and let's not forget the fat guy in the red suit on x-mas eve.
semp

well actually semp :)
santa flew a tempest
Kommando Nowotny

I/Jg-301Gelb Zehn |

Offline Crythos

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #17 on: December 30, 2010, 03:08:40 PM »
well actually semp :)
santa flew a tempest (Image removed from quote.)

Gold, pure Gold :)
"Tojo"

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #18 on: December 30, 2010, 03:11:15 PM »
spit16 mostly saw combat on tv.
Still pushing this lie?  Grow up.  Spitfire LF.Mk IXe/Spitfire Mk XVI saw a huge amount of combat.  Deal with it.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #19 on: December 30, 2010, 05:46:18 PM »
lanstukas never saw combat and yet we have them in aces high.  werbies and spit16 mostly saw combat on tv.  and the weird looking airplanes that came out of the con shooting lazers, I am almost positive those never saw combat in ww2 either.  and let's not forget the fat guy in the red suit on x-mas eve.

semp

Are you serious?

Lancasters did see combat, it was one of the main, if not main bomber for the RAF and as noted many times in other posts, the Spitfire Mk XIV did see a lot of service and recorded a number of kills as well.

How someone flies a particular plane in AH has no bearing on the service of the plane in real life.

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 Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2010, 05:47:15 PM »



And by the way: The picture in you first post isn't even showing a 209-II..

He's confusing the Me 209 with the Me 209-II thinking they're the same bird.

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 guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17341
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #21 on: December 30, 2010, 06:17:27 PM »
ack I said lanstukas, not lancasters. but I stand corrected on the fat guy.


semp
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20385
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #22 on: December 30, 2010, 07:33:25 PM »
lanstukas never saw combat and yet we have them in aces high.  werbies and spit16 mostly saw combat on tv.  and the weird looking airplanes that came out of the con shooting lazers, I am almost positive those never saw combat in ww2 either.  and let's not forget the fat guy in the red suit on x-mas eve.

semp

Semp you are clueless on the 16.  I posted just one squadron's kills in the general forums.  How many examples of the 16 in combat do you need?

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,303190.0.html

How long do you think the 190D9 was in combat just out of curiousity?
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #23 on: December 30, 2010, 09:00:08 PM »
This is unofficial but I believe it's accurate.

I believe HTC staff (Pyro or maybe HiTech himself) came out and explicitly stated it more than once. I've searched for it in the past and found the links, but search isn't working too well right now.

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17341
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #24 on: December 31, 2010, 12:38:26 AM »
Semp you are clueless on the 16.  I posted just one squadron's kills in the general forums.  How many examples of the 16 in combat do you need?

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,303190.0.html

How long do you think the 190D9 was in combat just out of curiousity?

not putting the 16 down.  but then again i bet lancasters shot down more airplanes than the spit16's ever did in the same amount of time.  spit16's may have been used for lots of missions but they came in so late in the war, that the german airforce was basically no more and most german pilots had very little training.  then again, most allied pilots that flew from december 1944 to end of war probably didnt see many axis fiters either.  I remember reading a book from one german ace that did survive the war and how he would look outside everyday and count 600-800 allied planes in the air and not a single german plane attacking them.

that's why I make a reference that spit16's mostly saw war on tv.  It's a joke.  You know joker from full metal jacket.  he was in vietnam, but he was a combat correspondent, and mostly saw combat on tv.  :salute

semp

 
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline LLogann

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4947
      • Candidz.com
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #25 on: December 31, 2010, 12:40:45 AM »
Why haven't you said Me?  One is an Me209, the other a Bf209.



The 262 wasn't a proposed succesor - it wa one. It did see action. The Me 209-II had only a few prototypes, was never in serial production and did never see any action in WWII. Every plane in AH was.

If you had actually read the stuff you linked you would know that the "speed racer" variant was not the Me 209-II but an entirely different, unique plane, whereas the 209-II was a evolution of the 109G series.
See Rule #4
Now I only pay because of my friends.

Offline LLogann

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4947
      • Candidz.com
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #26 on: December 31, 2010, 12:44:10 AM »
See Above............. The supposed production model was a Bf, not the Me.

He's confusing the Me 209 with the Me 209-II thinking they're the same bird.

ack-ack
See Rule #4
Now I only pay because of my friends.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #27 on: December 31, 2010, 12:44:37 AM »
guncrasher,

You do know that the Spitfire Mk XVI is a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe, right?  They have the same performance, same armament, same fuel endurance.  When speaking of the combat the Spitfire Mk XVI saw, in terms of AH, you really have to include the combat the Spitfire LF.Mk IXe saw as well.

In fact, the Spitfire Mk XVI in AH is actually a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe as its full throttle height is that of a Merlin 66, not the Merlin 266 which is a couple of thousand feet higher.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17341
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #28 on: December 31, 2010, 12:56:50 AM »
guncrasher,

You do know that the Spitfire Mk XVI is a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe, right?  They have the same performance, same armament, same fuel endurance.  When speaking of the combat the Spitfire Mk XVI saw, in terms of AH, you really have to include the combat the Spitfire LF.Mk IXe saw as well.

In fact, the Spitfire Mk XVI in AH is actually a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe as its full throttle height is that of a Merlin 66, not the Merlin 266 which is a couple of thousand feet higher.

or maybe its just a combat flight simulator game that in instances it doesnt come even close to real life(110 coudnt turn in real life like in ah, lancs couldnt dive bomb, planes with 1/2 a wing would not fly at full speed, etc...).  like I said it's a joke :bolt:.

semp
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20385
Re: BF-209-II Request
« Reply #29 on: December 31, 2010, 01:07:48 AM »
Semp it may be a joke, but folks who have little clue to the history tend to take comments like that and think there is a basis in truth to it.

Considering air to ground was far more more dangerous combat then air to air, what the 2 TAF pilots and the 9th AF guys could hardly be called watching TV.  Having known many real Spit drivers, and some who finished their war in 16s, I tend to be a bit protective.
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters