He111 is HERE!!!!!!!!

[Wmaker]

A number of references, even pretty basic ones like squadron signal.

Oh, and to throw a wrench into your rebuttle, the PVC was a bomb rack that could be modified to carry torpedoes LIKE the ETC2000 could. Both the bomb racks could carry torpedoes. It was even retrofitted onto He-111P-4 marks to carry external large bombs.

So regardless of which bomb rack you want to claim is in the screenshots, they both could and did carry bombs as well.

EDIT: On the chance I'm mixing up my ETC and PVC in my head, let me summarize by saying: If it could carry torps, it also carried bombs. It was exclusive.

You aren't a source. Post sources.

As can be seen, the distance between the attachment arms is different between ETC2000 and the PVC-rack.

[Wmaker]

Actually, yes, PVC could carry bombs when different attachment points (than the ones used to carry the torpedo) were installed in the rack itself.

PVC rack:


Torpedo attachment set for the PVC rack:


http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/jg1history/jg1history_equipmant/Bombs/dropdevice/Abwurfanlagen.htm

Actually, they are. ETC2000 racks were used for large bombs, mines, or torpedoes as needed. They started use with the H-4 on the earliest models to even have external racks. These racks were rated for at least 2500kg each, and normally carried 1000kg bombs. Since the aerial torpedoes were only 765kg they actually weighed less than most things carried on this rack.

Haven't seen a single mention of ETC2000 being used for torpedos, though.

[Wmaker]

Some He111 specs from Kagero's He111 book:

[perdue3]

Lot of ownage in this thread of late.

Battle of Britain 2013 anyone?

[ROC]

Battle of Britain 2013 anyone?

 

[Devil 505]

 

Well get on the horn to HTC to upsate our 109E's and 110C's.

[Karnak]

Well get on the horn to HTC to upsate our 109E's and 110C's.

Bf109E is, once again, already updated.  No matter how many times you post as though it is not, it still is.

Bf110s and the Ju88 both need to be updated though.

[Devil 505]

Bf109E is, once again, already updated.  No matter how many times you post as though it is not, it still is.

Bf110s and the Ju88 both need to be updated though.

But that update is not up to the shape standards of the other 109s. Hense, it needs to be updated. This is not a AH1 vs. AH2 thing, but there are horrid shape issues with the Emil. Let's face it, with the He 111, the Luft guys need a new crusade. I think updating the 109E fits the bill. Adding the E-7 would be nice too.

[Tank-Ace]

Maybe an overhaul of the early Luftwaffe aircraft in general.

Update 109 E and F to current graphics standards, add the 109E-7 (would function as an E7, and a late E-4), update the 110C and Ju-88, and add any major load outs we're missing.

 With the new Hurricanes, He 111, Lancaster, we'd be pretty well set up.

[Karnak]

Maybe an overhaul of the early Luftwaffe aircraft in general.

Why just Luftwaffe?  Do the P-38s, P-47s, P-51s and Spitfires look up to the standard of the newer remodels?

That is the problem here.  You guys are so hyperfocused on German stuff that you don't even consider anything else.  The Spitfire Mk I is just as bad off, if not more so, than the Bf109E-4 is, yet nary a peep about that.  Instead you keep pretending that the Bf109E-4 is as bad off as the B-26 or Yak-9s because it isn't as good as the A6Ms or P-40s.

[skorpx1]

Maybe an overhaul of the early Luftwaffe aircraft in general.

Update 109 E and F to current graphics standards, add the 109E-7 (would function as an E7, and a late E-4), update the 110C and Ju-88, and add any major load outs we're missing.

 With the new Hurricanes, He 111, Lancaster, we'd be pretty well set up.

Such a heavy bias for German planes.


How about we bring some non-luftweenie planes up to date too? The 109's are all up to AH2 standards, which is fine, but what about that entire list I set out? I think we can bring the Yak's, A-20, Boston and F4F/FM2 up to current standards before we mess with the German planes that are already up to a more recent standard.

[Tank-Ace]

I never said the 109s were bad, I just implied they could be better.

 Personally, I don't give a damn what the spitfires and Yaks look like, since I never flew them, and probably never will.

[Karnak]

I never said the 109s were bad, I just implied they could be better.

 Personally, I don't give a damn what the spitfires and Yaks look like, since I never flew them, and probably never will.

Your bias blinds you and limits you.

[Tank-Ace]

Your bias blinds you and limits you.

No, I just really don't care what they look like.

We and MW Soviet aircraft are right up at the top of my priority list. No anti-soviet or -uk bias, it just doesn't really benefit me.

[Volron]

Such a heavy bias for German planes.


How about we bring some non-luftweenie planes up to date too? The 109's are all up to AH2 standards, which is fine, but what about that entire list I set out? I think we can bring the Yak's, A-20, Boston and F4F/FM2 up to current standards before we mess with the German planes that are already up to a more recent standard.

Well the Ju-88 is probably the one that should be updated in the German line, before the 110.  Either way, I will not complain about which ever plane they decide to update.