MG151/20 for the K4

[Zacherof]

They uses them in RL why not here!

[gyrene81]

you're talking about the gondolas right?

[Zacherof]

Not neccasarily. I'm talking about when there was a lack of MK-108's that mg151/20's were installed.

[Butcher]

you're talking about the gondolas right?

There is a discussion in the Aircraft forum, we all know there were 20mm hub cannons for the 109K4, it should be added into Aces high (not gondolas).

[Tank-Ace]

I'd say that if the coding for the old G-10 still exists, we should bring it back along with giving the K4 its 20mm. It seems as if late G-10's were essentially slightly lighter K4's with an Mg 151/20 hub cannon as standard. That means that we did, technically, have a G-10 in the game, even if it was based off the existing K4 (I think).


And even if the coding has been deleted, we should still add the G-10. We're already dropping the Mg 151/20 into the nose, why not duplicate the code, remove the Mk 108, and give us a G-10. It would make things easier to manage for special events where there were both G-10's and K4's. That way, if the event needs 30mm armed K4's, it can disable the Mg 151 for the K4, and still have G-10's.

[Karnak]

I'd say that if the coding for the old G-10 still exists, we should bring it back along with giving the K4 its 20mm. It seems as if late G-10's were essentially slightly lighter K4's with an Mg 151/20 hub cannon as standard. That means that we did, technically, have a G-10 in the game, even if it was based off the existing K4 (I think).


And even if the coding has been deleted, we should still add the G-10. We're already dropping the Mg 151/20 into the nose, why not duplicate the code, remove the Mk 108, and give us a G-10. It would make things easier to manage for special events where there were both G-10's and K4's. That way, if the event needs 30mm armed K4's, it can disable the Mg 151 for the K4, and still have G-10's.

The old G-10 was a K-4.  There was no flight model change when the Bf109s were  redone and it was relabeled a Bf109K-4.  The only change was taking away the 20mm options.  AH has never had a Bf109G-10 flight model.

[Tank-Ace]

We're there any aerodynamic differences between late G-10, and K4's? Cause they use the same engine?

I haven't been able to find any, save for the cowl bumps on planes rebuilt from G-6 and - 14 airframes.

[Karnak]

We're there any aerodynamic differences between late G-10, and K4's? Cause they use the same engine?

I haven't been able to find any, save for the cowl bumps on planes rebuilt from G-6 and - 14 airframes.

Per GScholz in the other thread the main gear would not be fully enclosed and the tail wheel would not retract.  Mind you, he says that is true of most K-4s as well and that it would reduce the top speed to 425-430mph, which is right about where the G-10's should be expected to be.  The AH K-4, and old, labeled as a G-10 but was really a K-4, 'G-10' does 452mph which means it has enclosed main gear and a retracting tail wheel, something the G-10 never did have I think.

[Tank-Ace]

I can't imagine it would be all that difficult to lock the tail wheel down, and remove the gear doors. I mean the gear is already modeled for drag (when down), as is the tail wheel.

Seems pretty quick, in a relative sense.

[Babalonian]

You guys msut have really selective hearing in regards to the K4, that long thread in the the other forum has stated the facts on this a couple of times.

-Less than the first dozen K4s had 20mm hubs installed at the factory, likely for a presentation or publicity stunt to some bigwigs.  These were probabley replaced at the depot level before being issued to combat units, as no evidence of a K4 with a 20mm hub is known in combat or beyond first few produced at the factory.

-Some K4s were shipped from the factory to depots with 20mm gondies, and are well documented to having them immediatley removed.  Again, no evidence of a K4 with 20mm gondies equiped is known in combat.



...OT: Want to really think about something amazing?... The K4 prominently being post-depot and field-unit modeled, but the 190A8 is factory-fresh and has disregarded anything beyond the factory dates into its modeling (options to exlude reinforced armor, the cowl MGs, or the upgraded "egg"/engine - all more common at various times in the field than not - but in HTCs defense it was a real mix-n-match, where the K4 is kinda standardised).  Anywho, I'd personaly rather see an A-9, another mid and early A-series, and a few more F/Gs (and maybe another D) 190s before another late-war 109, but that is both my preference and thought on the most-lacking choices that would be nice additions to the planeset.

[Wmaker]

You guys msut have really selective hearing in regards to the K4, that long thread in the the other forum has stated the facts on this a couple of times.

-Less than the first dozen K4s had 20mm hubs installed at the factory, likely for a presentation or publicity stunt to some bigwigs.  These were probabley replaced at the depot level before being issued to combat units, as no evidence of a K4 with a 20mm hub is known in combat or beyond first few produced at the factory.

Oh really? Then why didn't you post a source right away where you got your info that only first dozen had 20mm as a motor cannon?

Do you actually have a source or are you just adding noise to the thread?

...OT: Want to really think about something amazing?... The K4 prominently being post-depot and field-unit modeled, but the 190A8 is factory-fresh and has disregarded anything beyond the factory dates into its modeling (options to exlude reinforced armor, the cowl MGs, or the upgraded "egg"/engine - all more common at various times in the field than not - but in HTCs defense it was a real mix-n-match, where the K4 is kinda standardised).  Anywho, I'd personaly rather see an A-9, another mid and early A-series, and a few more F/Gs (and maybe another D) 190s before another late-war 109, but that is both my preference and thought on the most-lacking choices that would be nice additions to the planeset.

Is it really that hard to try to keep these threads on topic?

[Zoney]

Is it really that hard to try to keep these threads on topic?

I like turtles.

[Denniss]

One may also ask the other way round, is there any evidence for 20mm-hub K-4s in combat?
Gondies were always an option for the K-4, just like any other G-series fighter so why not include them as option?

[Zacherof]

One may also ask the other way round, is there any evidence for 20mm-hub K-4s in combat?
Gondies were always an option for the K-4, just like any other G-series fighter so why not include them as option?

I would like that.

I'd say that if the coding for the old G-10 still exists, we should bring it back along with giving the K4 its 20mm. It seems as if late G-10's were essentially slightly lighter K4's with an Mg 151/20 hub cannon as standard. That means that we did, technically, have a G-10 in the game, even if it was based off the existing K4 (I think).


And even if the coding has been deleted, we should still add the G-10. We're already dropping the Mg 151/20 into the nose, why not duplicate the code, remove the Mk 108, and give us a G-10. It would make things easier to manage for special events where there were both G-10's and K4's. That way, if the event needs 30mm armed K4's, it can disable the Mg 151 for the K4, and still have G-10's.

Are you asking for it only to have the mg151? or have the same package as the G14?
cause thge way im reading it you want to do away with the mk108. idk maybe its time for bed

[gyrene81]

There is a discussion in the Aircraft forum, we all know there were 20mm hub cannons for the 109K4, it should be added into Aces high (not gondolas).

uh huh...that's not exactly the whole picture. try not skewing things just because you think it's a brilliant idea...