150 octane fuel

[pervert]

I want a Horten 229! 

[Lusche]

Lusche,
how many totalnewbs are flying the K4, as they do it with the pony or the spixteen?
How many K4s are doing kamikaze missions augering into the VHs?
The k4 is a great fighter aircraft, but stats cant show everything.

It is was it is. The stats show what is actually happening in the arena vs hypothetical "what if Clark Kent would..." And no matter what the reasons are, fact is that the K-4 does largely dominate the Allied fighters in the MA. It shoots them down much more than it's getting killed by them.
So the UK and US planes are in practice dominated by the K4.

It just like the F4U-4 is in theory the much better fighter than the Tempest, but in fact the Tempest is littering the MA landscape with F4U-4 wrecks, thus having the significantly higher perk price.




(By the way "How many K4s are doing kamikaze missions augering into the VHs?" - Just to be clear: the K/D I stated above is not just the overall K/D, but the specific plane vs plane K/D.)

[Debrody]

Sir,
you are missing my main point, the pilot factor. I "think" the K4-flying population is averagely better than the pony-f4u-spit-flying players.
Again, the K4 is a potent fighter aircraft, but it wont tolerate the mistakes like a spitfire or F4U. Or its just me being a newb.

[matt]

I want a Horten 229! 

(Image removed from quote.)

 

[Lusche]

Sir,
you are missing my main point, the pilot factor.

I'm not missing it, I am explicitely ignoring it.  

(The reason why I do so is laid out in my post above)

[bustr]

When the G10 and K4 entered the skys in 10\44 it was against allied fighters updated with 150 Grade. Not into a pre D-Day sky of 125&130 Grade fighters. Allied command being aware that Germany still had more powerful fighters to introduce over the continent pre D-Day, the upgrade to 150 Grade 11 months before the war ends and 3 months before the emergence of the G10 and K4 makes it an acceptable part of the arms race this game purports to represent.

The K4 met allied fighters burning 150 Grade which made the technological differences far narrower than in our LWMA where the K4 is competing against the same generation of aircraft burning 125 or 130 Grade. Especialy with the way we conduct flight operations in the LWMA most of the time below 15k where it's obvious the 150 Grade turned the K4 into an equal and not an unperked WEP monster.

So why do we have an unperked 10\44 WEP monster flying against it's 1944 Allied rivals down graded in performance by pre 7\44 125, 130 AvGas? The K4 performance in the LWMA especialy on the deck versus the spitXIV on 125 or 130 show cases why the Allies began the move to 150 Grade in 7\44 months before the introduction of the K4.

Or do we need a Post D-Day "Really Late  War" arena with only 109G6-14\K4, Fw190A8\D9, Ta152, 262, 163 versus Merlin66 spit, spit14, tempest, P51D, 38J\L, P47D-40\M burning 150 AvGas? And maybe a Meteor for grins and giggels.
----------------------------------------------

So what were the Allies over the ETO doing with all of this 150 Grade fuel for the last 11 months of the war, starting before the introduction of the K4?

Sea Level---------------------130 Grade--- 150 Grade 
SpitfireIX--------------------  335 mph----- 358 mph    +25 lb 
SpitfireXIV------------------  359 mph------ 366 mph    +21 lb 
Tempest V------------------- 372 mph------ 386 mph    +11 lb 
Mustang III (V-1650-3)----- 360 mph------ 390 mph    +25 lb 

Sea Level------------B4 Grade
BF109-K4 -----------368mph


-----------------------------------------------
Consumption of 150 Grade Fuel - Barrels

        UK consumption   North West Europe
    June 1944   184,000 (25,205 tons)
    July 1944   283,000 (38,767 tons)
    August 1944   218,000 (29,863 tons)
    September 1944   169,000 (23,150 tons)
    October 1944   183,000 (25,068 tons)
    November 1944   140,000 (19,178 tons)
    December 1944   193,000 (26,438 tons)
    January 1945   138,000 (18,904 tons)   of which 15,000 (2,054 tons)
    February 1945   148,000 (20,273 tons)   of which 17,000 (2,328 tons
    March 1945   201,000 (27,534 tons)   of which 52,000 (7,123 tons)
    April 1945   208,000 (28,493 tons)   of which 89,000 (12,191 tons)
    May 1945   49,000 (6,712 tons)   of which 32,000 (4,383 tons)

    UK = 8th AAF and ADGB. Northwest Europe = 2nd TAF.

    Other figures.

    August 1944   USAAF 182,000 (24,931 tons)   RAF 49,000 (6712 tons)
    October 1944 estimated   USAAF 225,000   RAF 45,000
    December 1944 issues   USAAF 133,000   RAF 0
    December 1944 exports   USAAF 8,000   RAF 88,000
    December 1944 issues on continent.   USAAF 0   RAF 13,000

    7.3 Barrels = 1 ton.

    Data from POWE 33/990 33/991 33/992 33/985

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/Consumption_150_Grade_fuel_Barrels.html

[Tracerfi]

I want a Horten 229! 

(Image removed from quote.)

+100 

[Debrody]

Bustr, good sir, once again...
if you cant completely pwn the whole luft army in a spit16 or an A-hog, you are doing something horribly wrong. If thats not enough for you, keep posting the same wall of text again and again, maybe you can find success.

Respectfully,
Debrődy the newb

[Ardy123]

Midway just wants the muppets to fly spits... hahah if we did.. then he'd follow up with a new set of whine based whishlists...

"I can't win" -> "It must be the plane"

hahahaha.... same old whine... same old stupid...

[Noir]

If the P51D had a perk octane option you'd have trouble getting me to fly something else 

[Karnak]

Debrody,

I think you are selling the Bf109K-4 pretty short.  Its only real shortcomings are the ballistics of the 30mm cannon and the short ammo clip.

The thing is truly a monster.

From my perspective as a Mossie driver:

Bf109K-4 = dead Mossie
P-51D = lots of perk points

[bustr]

Debrody,

The K4 emerged into a sky full of 150 octane burning fighters specificly because it's emergence and performance was predicted and planned for. The LWMA is about the Late WW2 Air War. What is the problem with introducing the K4's real 150 octane burning contemporaries into the MA? It would no longer be an unperked WEP monster but, have unperked equals in power.

Or, including the K4 have a new class of perked rides.

But, our K4 in the MA, is not flying against it's technologicaly enhanced contemporaries from post July 1944 like itself. It's flying against the Allied rides from pre 150 octane 1944 that the predicted emergance of K4 type technology could out perfrom the limitations of 125, 130 octanes used by the RAF and 8th AF. Our current SpitXIV on the deck against the K4 show cases what the Allies predictions presented if 150 octane was not being burned. Our SpitXIV on the deck is a dog but, with 150 Grade becomes an equal against the K4.

Debrody what are you afraind of? I thought it was all about the "Man" and not the machine with you? I'm concerned with the parity of the truth from the period. You don't seem to have much of a wall of debate to the that or the content of the 150 octane fuel report. If this game is about WW2 aviation technology and parity by era, the K4 is unperked in an arena of unperked fighters inferior to it. Not it's Oct\44 contemporaries it was forced to compete against and was destroyed by in the real WW2.

[Bruv119]

I agree   using  mid war planes against K4's is crazy!   

[pervert]

Bustr I would say its like that for a reason, it is the man not the plane, but if its the plane simply running away theres not a lot any man can do  , and lets be fair theres a lot of that in the MA already especially 51s would that be good for gameplay 

[Karnak]

Bustr I would say its like that for a reason, it is the man not the plane, but if its the plane simply running away theres not a lot any man can do  , and lets be fair theres a lot of that in the MA already especially 51s would that be good for gameplay 

Perhaps not, but why not at least run the Spitfire Mk XIV on 150 octane?  It is already controlled by a perk cost.  It is also hardly ever used due to its poor performance.  Perhaps 150 octane would boost its performance enough to get used more often.