New Canopy

[ONTOS]

I would like to see the erla haube canopy for the 109,s (where applicable). The P-51 B has the malcholm bubble instead of the original birdcage type,so why can't the 109's have a better view canopy ?

[gyrene81]

i take it you have looked closely at the canopies on the 109s and know exactly when the earla haube canopy was put into production as well as which 109s were produced with it...

[jeffdn]

I would like to see the erla haube canopy for the 109,s (where applicable). The P-51 B has the malcholm bubble instead of the original birdcage type,so why can't the 109's have a better view canopy ?

They are there already. The G-14 and K-4 both have it.

[ONTOS]

Yes , the K-4 and g14 have them. I have a copy the of Sept, 2012, Aviation History magazine and at the top of page 27,there are four 109G-6's and it mentioned that the one in the foreground is sporting an erla hood. From what I have researched, other 109's had them also.

[Karnak]

Yes , the K-4 and g14 have them. I have a copy the of Sept, 2012, Aviation History magazine and at the top of page 27,there are four 109G-6's and it mentioned that the one in the foreground is sporting an erla hood. From what I have researched, other 109's had them also.

Our G-6 is supposed to represent an early G-6 and those did not have it.

[gyrene81]

Yes , the K-4 and g14 have them. I have a copy the of Sept, 2012, Aviation History magazine and at the top of page 27,there are four 109G-6's and it mentioned that the one in the foreground is sporting an erla hood. From what I have researched, other 109's had them also.

your sept. 2012 copy of aviation history is lacking information...dates are needed.

[ONTOS]

I apologise for my ignorance.

[SmokinLoon]

I apologise for my ignorance.

Ignorance is not the correct word.  You were just over-generalizing and there are people that surf these forums that sit and wait to pounce on anyone who says the wrong thing, or rather not a 100% correct statement.

You're not incorrect, but as others have stated there is a reason the 109G-6 in AH is modeled the way it is.   

[gyrene81]

I apologise for my ignorance.

you're not ignorant at all...the source you used was just lacking the full information. always look around for further information and if you can't find any, just state that and if there is any to be had, someone will share it.



there are 1 or 2 other people on these boards who post a lot of ignorant crap...more than their fair share of it.

[mthrockmor]

Ignorance is not the correct word.  You were just over-generalizing and there are people that surf these forums that sit and wait to pounce on anyone who says the wrong thing, or rather not a 100% correct statement.

You're not incorrect, but as others have stated there is a reason the 109G-6 in AH is modeled the way it is.   

Shilo, we have in our midst many 'airplane geeks' who love the details, and love to debate details. Don't take offense and don't stop asking questions like this. I've considered myself very informed on aircraft from WW2 and constantly learn new things. And you can't learn more if you don't ask, or engage. They love to jump in, add detailed info, debate, etc and in that debate it sometimes turns to mock and ridicule, no worries. All good stuff. Just like sitting in the O-club, messhall or in the field cut'n BS with the troops. Just how it rolls...

Good stuff! 

boo

[ONTOS]

I thank you gentlemen for your comments . Next time I'll do more research.