Fw 190F-8/U1

[Tank-Ace]

That's not what you are trying to argue. Read up.

Thats a bit unclear. Do you mean that I'm not trying to argue that the F8 should be able to carry 3 250kg bombs, or that I'm not trying to argue based on the P-51 having a historically incorrect loadout combination?

[Butcher]

Thats a bit unclear. Do you mean that I'm not trying to argue that the F8 should be able to carry 3 250kg bombs, or that I'm not trying to argue based on the P-51 having a historically incorrect loadout combination?

The F8 would not have 3 bombs loaded - that is what this thread is about the Fw190 F8..........P51 thread is a whole new subject and different thread. It would seem to me if the Germans COULD of added that extra bomb - why didn't they? I see NO F8 or G model loaded with 3x 250kgs.

Possibly the airframe couldn't handle it? Maybe performance was so degraded it was unwise to do so? Still not one photo shows an F8 or G model loaded with 3 eggs.

From what I see with the F8 model there are 2x 250kgs or 2x S 250s or 2x 300L Drop Tanks.

Whether this is accurate I don't know, so far 2 manuals say this out of 5 which I haven't gone through each one entirely to say otherwise.

[Tank-Ace]

And so? If the P-51 could have carried 2 1000lb bombs and 6 HVAR rockets, but didn't , and yet carries both simultaneously in the game, then we have a precedent to let the 190F8 carry 3 250kg bombs, so long as it could have carried 3 bombs.


That or we need to go through the game and remove any kinda sketchy loadout combinations. Its entirely unfair to let the P-51 carry two things it never carried simultaneously, but then to deny that capablity to the 190F8.

[Butcher]

And so? If the P-51 could have carried 2 1000lb bombs and 6 HVAR rockets, but didn't , and yet carries both simultaneously in the game, then we have a precedent to let the 190F8 carry 3 250kg bombs, so long as it could have carried 3 bombs.


That or we need to go through the game and remove any kinda sketchy loadout combinations. Its entirely unfair to let the P-51 carry two things it never carried simultaneously, but then to deny that capablity to the 190F8.

So basically you want the 190F to have an incorrect loadout because the P51D has an incorrect loadout as well? Why not just add nukes to since B29s had them.

[Tank-Ace]

Just saying, either fix the damn thing, or give the other countrys a good mid-weight attacker. Personally, I'd rather see the P-51 fixed, and the two wing bombs given to the 190F8.

[Butcher]

Just saying, either fix the damn thing, or give the other countrys a good mid-weight attacker. Personally, I'd rather see the P-51 fixed, and the two wing bombs given to the 190F8.

I wrote a few threads on it over the years, recent one was few months ago - check "perked weapons" whining about it won't get it fixed, I cannot find proof 51s didn't carry the ords - the few photos available don't tell much.

[Krusty]

I have to agree: Adding a historically false loadout just to perpetuate some false ideal that all nations have to have the same loadout is stupid to the max.

[Butcher]

I have to agree: Adding a historically false loadout just to perpetuate some false ideal that all nations have to have the same loadout is stupid to the max.

I don't recall seeing a direct thread asking to either perk or move the 51 loadout of having rockets and 1k bombs, its been discussed but nothing more.

[Krusty]

No, the threads with the P-51 were conclusive. Hitech chimed in saying he wasn't going to limit the combinations as long as the historic loads were authentic. So on the P-51 he said he wasn't going to remove that pairing of ord.

That doesn't mean we should intentionally introduce other false loadouts. Especially since the 190G was intended to be a long range bomber to replace Ju-87R-2s and hit single undefended targets at long distances. Already the F-series has excellent range in-game, and this is just a fake argument to try and get some similar inequity included for the Germans.

There's no point in adding it, if that's the motivation.

[Charge]

There is even a picture of SC250s in wings and SC500 under belly in F8.

We should have wingmounted SC250s and if there are no restrictions of combining armaments a 2x250+1x500 loadout becomes a fact.  

-C+

[Tank-Ace]

Either way, I want to see the wing-mounted 250kg bombs.


However, I'm can't find that picture I was looking for, and I can't find any others with all 3 bomb racks loaded. I can find one where all three racks are present, but no solid evidence for all 3 bombs being carried simultaneously.

[STEELE]

Either way, I want to see the wing-mounted 250kg bombs.


However, I'm can't find that picture I was looking for, and I can't find any others with all 3 bomb racks loaded. I can find one where all three racks are present, but no solid evidence for all 3 bombs being carried simultaneously.

good enuf.  Mustangs with bombs/ rockets & all that jazz

[Krusty]

If they add it I hope they do it as a package deal, one option that is 2 bombs outboard, centerline DT, and another option that is the reverse. You shouldn't be able to load 3 bombs. It wasn't used at all, that I can remember.

[Tank-Ace]

Well thats all fine and dandy, but if it depends on how HTC does it. I mean if they want to do it like they did with the P-51, I'm not going to complain, but I would rather see the P-51 changed.

[Butcher]

Well thats all fine and dandy, but if it depends on how HTC does it. I mean if they want to do it like they did with the P-51, I'm not going to complain, but I would rather see the P-51 changed.

It won't be done like the 51, the 51 won't touched either until it gets updated again - which makes sense, there are 500 other projects to work on.

Correcting a unhistorical loadout isn't a major issue.