some new additions

[Tank-Ace]

I would like to ask for the Me-410. Depending on the model added, guns available would range in size from 13mm all the way upto 50mm. It would also provide us with at more survivable, more flexible ground-attack fighter for the Luftwaffe. Something that might be able to compete with the tyhpoon, and P-47.

I would also like to ask for the Panzer III Ausf. J1 and Ausf L. The J had 50mm of armor, while the L had 70. Both used the same cannon (an automatic version was used on the Me-410). It would give us an EW tank to give the T-34 a run for its money, and the L would give us a tank that could be quite respectable in the LW arena under certian conditions.

The SdKfz 234/2 "Puma" and 234/4 would also be very nice additions. It was an german 8-rad armored car, the 234/2 using the same 50mm gun as the Panzer III and Me-410, and the 234/4 used a Pak 40 75mm gun. A bit slower than the M8, but with heavier firepower and armor. These would be very usefull for town defense and ambush situations.

Along with these, I would like to request HVAP rounds for the 50mm armed vehicles. It would increase peneration to 134mm at point blank range, but standard AP rounds would out-preform once past 700yd or so.

All of these use either the same gun, or a gun already existing in the game, which would simplify addition.

[Karnak]

The Me410 is unlikely to be significantly more survivable than the Bf110G-2, though it would have better offensive options.  I am not sure how much effect the BK50 would have on GVs.

Pyro did mention to me years ago that a concern about the Mosquito FB.Mk XVIII would be it standing outside of bomber defensive fire range and sniping them with the 57mm gun.  That may be an issue for the 50mm BK50 as well.

[Tank-Ace]

That was, infact, the main usage of the BK5. The BK 37 (also mounted on the Me-410, IIRC) could do either job, while the Bk 7 (75mm) mounted on the Ju-88P was used for both anit-shipping and anit-tank. I'm not sure if the BK 5 used AP rounds to attack tanks as well though.

[Karnak]

Yeah, I know it was an anti-bomber weapon, but that wouldn't stop people from shooting tanks with it.  The B-25H's 75mm is only HE and it kills tanks ok, so the BK50 might be a threat as well.  Maybe not though.

The standoff and shoot bombers is a different problem.


I am not sure how good for the game flying 57 and 75mm cannons with AP ammo would be if not pretty heavily controlled.

[Tank-Ace]

Well, concidering the Ju-88P only had 12 rounds, wallowed even at full speed, and only did around 250mph, I don't think the -88P would be to large of a threat.
 
I mean what is a realistic range for landing hits with a B-25H at? D1000? D800? By the nature of this type of aircraft, it has to fly low, strait, and slow, which means the tanker is thinking: oh, '88P over there *thrum thrum thrum* So, 1500yds? ....... BANG!!!"    While the '88 driver is thinking chit! chit! chit! as he tumbles to his death.

As for the Tsetse, I think it won't be added. Only 18 produced, and (if I have the story strait) it was even more prone to jamming than the BK series of aircraft cannons.

[Karnak]

As for the Tsetse, I think it won't be added. Only 18 produced, and (if I have the story strait) it was even more prone to jamming than the BK series of aircraft cannons.

27 produced, a hole 50% more than your number!    It did see heavy use, very heavy for the number built.

It wasn't really prone to jamming though.  Don't know where you read that.

As I said in another thread though, if it were added it would need to be perked at least as high as a Tiger I.


The difference that the Me410 with the BK50 or the Mossie XVIII have compared to the Ju88P and B-25H is that they are relatively fast and could run down bombers and kill them from outside of the bomber's tail gun range.  The B-25H and Ju88P wouldn't be able to do that effectively due to their poor top speeds.

[Tank-Ace]

Hell, just give the mossie 18 HE only and you're fine. B-25H had AP and was a respectable tank buster, but we still don't have AP for it in the game  .


That said however, the 37mm's on the 410 and '88 would be VERY deadly to tanks. Picture a faster, more manuverable, 4-gunned Il-2.

[Karnak]

The Mossie XVIII never carried HE, so that would be completely wrong.  B-25Hs sometimes carried a few AP rounds, but I have never heard of them ever being used on tanks, but the vast majority of the ammo they carried were HE.

[Tank-Ace]

Yes they mostly carried HE, but the point is they DID carry AP rounds.


And was the mossie XVIII built as a tank-buster? Because expierence on the eastern front had shown that there are more effective ways to kill tanks than with a straffer aircraft, or even an aircraft (i.e. the best weapon against a tank is another tank)

[Tank-Ace]

Anyway, I can't help but feel we've gotten off topic, and that this thread has turned into a PM more or less  .


So, any comments not relating to that damned Tsetse?

[Karnak]

We have, but let me answer your last question.  The Mosquito XVIII was ordered as the replacement for the Hurricane IId and intended to be a tank buster.  By the time it came into service the RAF had decided that guns were not the best option and that rockets, while being much less accurate, allowed for multi-role aircraft rather than dedicated attack aircraft.  That being the case, all Mosquito XVIIIs were given to Coastal Command where they were used against shipping and U-Boats.

[Tank-Ace]

damn we just can't stop, I  have another question.


Wouldn't HE have been more effective against unarmored merchant ships, and lightly armored U-boats?


So once again, any comments about the Me410, Panzer III, SdKfz 234 or the 50mm HVAP?

[Karnak]

The AP worked well as it could pierce the hull even through half a meter of water.

They originally intended the HE rockets to be used against ships and the solid, AP rockets to be used against tanks.  In the actual event they found that the AP rockets worked better against ships and the HE rockets worked better against tanks.  The AP rockets, when aimed correctly, would hit the water and then level out and run underwater until they hit the hull, piercing it below the waterline.



I think the Me410 would be a great addition, I voted for it over the B-29.  The Panzer III with the good gun would also be a nice addition.

[Tank-Ace]

Ok, gotcha.


And the internal bomb-bay would be nice. You wouldn't suffer so much of a preformance drop when you carry ordnance. The guns load would also be better suited for fighter-defense, as would the gun turrets.

Panzer III Ausf L just has something attractive about it. Maybe because its the first German tank to have a good gun and thick armor. It was small enough that it might be able to fit inside of the undestroyed barns. It would be a tight fit, but it might be able to do it. Woud be usefull for ambushes.

[Karnak]

I can vouch for the niceness of the bomb bay on a fighter.