Updated Ordnance System

[Ack-Ack]

I've always thought a perked ordnance system that Pyro described a few years ago was a great idea who's time has come.  This way I could lug 2,000 pound bombs on my P-38 and maybe even a 3,000 pounder for the occasional attack sortie.  The Corsair guys would be able to lug a 2,000 pound bomb on the centerline with two 1,000 pounders under each wing.

ack-ack

[LCADolby]

I always thought that the 190F8 had the ability to carry 2 large bombs on the wings, but I've never seen a photo of it doing so. 

[Butcher]

I always thought that the 190F8 had the ability to carry 2 large bombs on the wings, but I've never seen a photo of it doing so. 

No, 190F's only carried 50kg's on the wings, it did not carry anything larger, not even a 500kg centerline with 50kg's on the wings.

190G's only carried a pair of 250kg bombs on the wings, nothing centerline. If you want a centerline bomb you get no wing bombs.

Only time F/G models carried bombs centerline and wings is when they are only 50kg.

[Karnak]

I'd have to dig into it, but I am can't recall ever reading about a Mossie VI carrying rockets under the wings and bombs in the bomb bay.  I recall seeing rockets or rockets plus a long range tank in the bomb bay or two 500lb bombs in the bomb bay or two 500lb bombs in the bomb bay and a 500lb bomb under each wing or a 500lb bomb under each wing and a long range tank in the bomb bay.

For the Mossie XVI I have not heard of it carrying the 'cookie' and underwing 500lb bombs at the same time.

I'd need to dig deeper before I could say anything for sure though.

[Tank-Ace]

No, 190F's only carried 50kg's on the wings, it did not carry anything larger, not even a 500kg centerline with 50kg's on the wings.

190G's only carried a pair of 250kg bombs on the wings, nothing centerline. If you want a centerline bomb you get no wing bombs.

Only time F/G models carried bombs centerline and wings is when they are only 50kg.

Not sure about the 500kg center +50kgs on the wings Butch. At the very least, they could carry 4 50's plus a 250kg. Minimum.



Either way, point is that we need to expand ordnacne options, particularly for planes like the 190F8 that had a wide range of weapons that it used.

[Babalonian]

Because certain ordnance options weren't carried in combination with eachother, and this would allow us to represent that.

For example, all evidence we've seen so far indicates the 190F-8 flew with a clean centerline if there was more than 500kg (combined) on the wings, or when wing DT's were used.

F4U-1D's, IIRC, didn't carry rockets if the 2000lb bombs were carried, even though they did not occupy the same position.

300L wing drop-tanks for the A-5/U8 is another good one. They removed the outboard cannons on the /U8, and then put the drop tanks on it. This would allow us to represent that model without requiring us to move the WGr 21's and wing tanks over to the gun selection column in a layout similar to that of the 110G.

We could also move the bombs on the 110 over to the centerline position, and get them off of the gun selection column this way. Doesn't affect the way the 110 is loaded per se, just it up a bit.


Basically, it would simply provide greater flexibility for representation of various ordnance combinations while maintaining the historical representation of the aircraft.

Very well put Tank-Ace, not so much increased restriction is desired, but some increased flexibility/options would be attractive.  Greater reward for those who go the extra effort would also be an attractive reward.  As others have mentioned, many things currently being destroyed with 1k bombs by the freighter-full in the LWMA can be done with a single 250lb bomb.  But the reward for doing so does not seem to outweigh or be attractive enough to diswade you from selecting a 1k bomb for the next radar dropping sortie you launch.

[Butcher]

Not sure about the 500kg center +50kgs on the wings Butch. At the very least, they could carry 4 50's plus a 250kg. Minimum.

I showed the ords list for the 190F and G models. None carried a 250kg centerline with 4x50s.

[bustr]

Babs,

If players were "dissuaded" from using the 1000lb bomb as the default ordnance for everything. How long with lesser bombs would it take to capture feilds, stop GV attacks, or drop a CV?

The ability to hump 1000 pounder bombs and jettison to fight if bounced on the way, is far more attractive than being forced into medium bombers. Even though 10-12 boxes of B26 as the core of NOE missons a long time ago guaranteed a closed down airfeild with few losses. When is the last time anyone put up a mission with B26 that they could get more than 2-4 pilots? Especially if they included the 51D with 2-1000lb bombs.

It's not like we fly real distances with 2-1000lb bombs. Depending on the perspective, game play is more attractive showing up with 12 - P51D and 24,000lb of bombs than 12 - B26 boxes and 144,000lb of bombs to flatten an airfeild. You cannot furball with the B26, CAP the field to vulch, or runStang home when your nerve is weak. It dosen't fill your perk bank towards flying 262, and landing bomber score is just not as sexy as "WooWoo landed 3 kills in a P51D of Boy Geroge's Heros".

I'm not sure perking ord can force players to fly aircraft they don't feel safe in. Human nature would be to cry in here about the big bad Hitech meanie and the stuck up cadre of forum HTC woowoo kissers, then up P51D with 2-500lb bombs. In the end it's whatever HTC sees as a viable choice to keep the doors open and the light bill paid.

Been a long time since GETSOME's epic 20 - B26 boxes and 20 - P38 NOE raids. He could make a greek sailor blush when he screamed on channel, which unfortunatly was almost all the time. But, he rolled bases long before Dogfite and his vTards knew the game existed. He understood what to use a medium bomber for. Fast lightening raids delivering large amounts of ordnance quickly from medium to low atltitudes. Gotta wonder if unperking the Lancaster really contributed to the demise of the medium bomber in the MA. I see it flown in that roll all the time. Maybe the A26 should be introduced to compete with the P51D as a medium bomber vulching machine? Then perk 1000lb bombs for fighters.......

[Babalonian]

Babs,

If players were "dissuaded" from using the 1000lb bomb as the default ordnance for everything. How long with lesser bombs would it take to capture feilds, stop GV attacks, or drop a CV?

The ability to hump 1000 pounder bombs and jettison to fight if bounced on the way, is far more attractive than being forced into medium bombers. Even though 10-12 boxes of B26 as the core of NOE missons a long time ago guaranteed a closed down airfeild with few losses. When is the last time anyone put up a mission with B26 that they could get more than 2-4 pilots? Especially if they included the 51D with 2-1000lb bombs.

It's not like we fly real distances with 2-1000lb bombs. Depending on the perspective, game play is more attractive showing up with 12 - P51D and 24,000lb of bombs than 12 - B26 boxes and 144,000lb of bombs to flatten an airfeild. You cannot furball with the B26, CAP the field to vulch, or runStang home when your nerve is weak. It dosen't fill your perk bank towards flying 262, and landing bomber score is just not as sexy as "WooWoo landed 3 kills in a P51D of Boy Geroge's Heros".

I'm not sure perking ord can force players to fly aircraft they don't feel safe in. Human nature would be to cry in here about the big bad Hitech meanie and the stuck up cadre of forum HTC woowoo kissers, then up P51D with 2-500lb bombs. In the end it's whatever HTC sees as a viable choice to keep the doors open and the light bill paid.

Been a long time since GETSOME's epic 20 - B26 boxes and 20 - P38 NOE raids. He could make a greek sailor blush when he screamed on channel, which unfortunatly was almost all the time. But, he rolled bases long before Dogfite and his vTards knew the game existed. He understood what to use a medium bomber for. Fast lightening raids delivering large amounts of ordnance quickly from medium to low atltitudes. Gotta wonder if unperking the Lancaster really contributed to the demise of the medium bomber in the MA. I see it flown in that roll all the time. Maybe the A26 should be introduced to compete with the P51D as a medium bomber vulching machine? Then perk 1000lb bombs for fighters.......

I'm not asking for it to prevent or restrict you from taking the 1,000lb bombs on your mission to bomb the closest standing enemy radar tower if that's what you want to use, I'm asking for it to promote the use of smaller bombs on targets that they are perfectly suited for destroying.

Currently the ENY system I already believe does take into account the size of the ordnance you dropped on a target when calculating up your score/perk-reward, but it is just not enough to diswade the next five radars from being dropped in the game with 1,000lb bombs when a 500lber is already overkill and a single 250lber dropped nicely will net the attacker the same results with greater gain...  Is the incentive/gain maybe just not enough?  Perhaps some new multiplier is needed?

[kvuo75]

I'm not asking for it to prevent or restrict you from taking the 1,000lb bombs on your mission to bomb the closest standing enemy radar tower if that's what you want to use, I'm asking for it to promote the use of smaller bombs on targets that they are perfectly suited for destroying.

Currently the ENY system I already believe does take into account the size of the ordnance you dropped on a target when calculating up your score/perk-reward, but it is just not enough to diswade the next five radars from being dropped in the game with 1,000lb bombs when a 500lber is already overkill and a single 250lber dropped nicely will net the attacker the same results with greater gain...  Is the incentive/gain maybe just not enough?  Perhaps some new multiplier is needed?

i'm pretty sure the eny system doesn't give a crap about the size of the bomb, but more to the point, isn't the performance penalty enough?  a pony hefting 2x1000 is a dog.

[Tank-Ace]

I showed the ords list for the 190F and G models. None carried a 250kg centerline with 4x50s.

I guarantee I've seen a 190 loaded with the centerline bomb, and the 4 wing racks. One would think that those would be removed when not in use, due to the not inconsiderable drag caused.


Also, you posted a list of loadouts carried by the 190F-8 and G. So what?


P-51 loadouts:

2x 1000lb bombs
2x 1000lb boms and 6 HVAR rockets
2x 500lb bombs and 4 honey-cured hams
1x Christmas Tree and asstd. ornaments
32x 1lb dumbbells.

There, I posted a list. Doesn't mean it nessicarily has anything to do with reality though, see what I mean?


Not that I think you're lying or intentionally misleading us, but photos seem to suggest your list is at least incomplete, and your list is not the difinitive source of information that we must adhere to.

Also, not sure if it saw combat or anything, but I have seen photos of the 190F-8 lugging a torp. IIRC, that wasn't on your list, and neither was the SC 1000.

[Krusty]

i'm all for historical loadouts, and removing UNhistorical ones. However I am a fan of mixing and matching. For example this semi-heated debate about centerline bomb with wing bombs. OPERATIONALLY they had different needs. Operationally you either had lots of small eggs for soft targets or you took 1/2 eggs a long distance needing DTs. However, if the need arose there was no such limitation on taking 3 bombs a short distance.

They didn't fly the same mission profile WE do in this game. So as long as it's historically accurate in each part, I have no problem mixing and matching. The key is they have to be realistic before you mix and match.

I.e. no mustang 10 rockets from Korea, and so forth.

As a P.S. There's a reason they built the F-8 but no G-8 with the FW190. The two lines diverged early on for ground attack and long-range. However by the time of the F-8 both roles had reconverged so the same airframes were able to perform both duties as needed. They simply planned on using F-8s to do it all. The same mounting points and racks that the 190G had, the 109F could also carry, by the time of 1944's F-8 variant.


P.P.S:



FYI the 79 gal DT weighs 474 lbs already. The bomb weigh almost half. It's not a matter of being overloaded. You'd weigh LESS with all-bombs, than with DTs in the mix. You're just mixing up necessity with capability.

[Krusty]

No, 190F's only carried 50kg's on the wings, it did not carry anything larger, not even a 500kg centerline with 50kg's on the wings.

190G's only carried a pair of 250kg bombs on the wings, nothing centerline. If you want a centerline bomb you get no wing bombs.

Only time F/G models carried bombs centerline and wings is when they are only 50kg.

Not exactly. See my previous post, but specifically:



There was no structural limits dictating why you don't see that setup much. They just needed smaller loads for most sorties, but it was a perfectly valid setup, as seen on these F-3s taking off for a sortie.

EDIT: Cowl bulge... They may be F-8s. Caption said F-3s. Either way.

[SmokinLoon]

I'd have to dig into it, but I am can't recall ever reading about a Mossie VI carrying rockets under the wings and bombs in the bomb bay.  I recall seeing rockets or rockets plus a long range tank in the bomb bay or two 500lb bombs in the bomb bay or two 500lb bombs in the bomb bay and a 500lb bomb under each wing or a 500lb bomb under each wing and a long range tank in the bomb bay.

For the Mossie XVI I have not heard of it carrying the 'cookie' and underwing 500lb bombs at the same time.

I'd need to dig deeper before I could say anything for sure though.

That would make sense regarding the Mossi B 16.  The 4000 lb cookie and the 2/500 lb bombs would be for 2 very different targets.  I'm almost thinking it should be the 4000 lb cookie OR the 500 lb bombs, not a mix.  Good point on the Mossi FB 6 too, the target type would be 2 very different things for the rockets and bombs.   

[Megalodon]

190F-8trop  4 50 and 1 sc500




I like the perk ords idea. I could have my gondies on the 109f-4