Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: SmokinLoon on February 21, 2013, 09:44:31 AM
-
WOOO HOOO!!!!!! :aok
So far, it appears as if it an early H version with seven 8mm MG's for defense. The 8/250kg (550 lb) bombs and 32/50kg (110 lbs) bombs are obvious load outs, I'm sure there will be others.
-
Finally! :)
-
My initial sentiment on this would have given me instant PNG status.
-
:rock
Outstanding.
-
My initial sentiment on this would have given me instant PNG status.
Like
-
finally! this is good for scenarios
-
:x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
YES!
-
I don't fly bombers but :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
-
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/he111/he111_5.jpg)
Is it just me, or am I able to see through the plane entirely through that lower station aft of the bomb bay?
-
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/he111/he111_5.jpg)
Is it just me, or am I able to see through the plane entirely through that lower station aft of the bomb bay?
Just you. I'm seeing reflection off the windows.
-
I wonder which H version we're getting? There were quite a lot of them.
Now, I expect all of you guys who have been pushing for the He111 to use it as your primary bomber. Not many Ju88s, B-26s or Lancasters allowed, got it?
-
It's about time. :aok
-
I don't fly bombers but :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
Everyone should get shot down in this at lease once Latrobe. Kinda like eating at McDonalds. :airplane:
This aircraft was sorely needed in FSO and Scenario setups.
The Original Sexy.
Such a beautiful aircraft. Talk about one generation removed from WWI...
"Go stand back there with that machine gun". No thankee.
-
I wonder which H version we're getting? There were quite a lot of them.
Now, I expect all of you guys who have been pushing for the He111 to use it as your primary bomber. Not many Ju88s, B-26s or Lancasters allowed, got it?
After the "newness" wears off over the first month or two, I see the He111 getting used just as much of not more than the B25's, and perhaps only slightly behind the B26's. Time will tell.
-
Beautiful.
Also I'd like to comment on one New Hurricane which was relieased in the last update. What a beautiful jobwas done on the interior of that plane. Lst night I almost got shot down twice because I was staring and reading all the copit details. The new lancs and the 111 looked to be of the same level of quality. I, for one, really appreciate the level of detail HTC is going to on the new models.
Really spectacular. :aok :salute
-
At this point the plane-set is being filled out for scenarios. Anything that is likely to be used regularly in the MA is already available.
-
Heinkel it is then.
Color profile of the default markings:
http://www.asisbiz.com/il2/He-111/He-111H-KG55.1-(G1+BH)/images/0-Heinkel-He-111H-1.KG55-(G1+BH)-shot-down-Dorset-1940-0B.jpg (http://www.asisbiz.com/il2/He-111/He-111H-KG55.1-(G1+BH)/images/0-Heinkel-He-111H-1.KG55-(G1+BH)-shot-down-Dorset-1940-0B.jpg)
While not my first choice, it is good to see a new aircraft and a true work horse of WWII added.
-
Anything that is likely to be used regularly in the MA is already available.
Nope.
-
Thx HTC :cheers:
-
Very cool and sorely needed for scenarios/special events/AVA etc. Thanks HTC!
-
:aok
-
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff252/DropkickYankees/rudelFINALLY.jpg)
Looks amazing. :rock
-
W00t! Another new airplane! Thanks, HTC!!! :)
<returns to drawing board, to revise BoB setup for FSO...>
-
I would love to see a Ju188A-1 added. That would give the Germans pretty good coverage of bombers. He111H-1(?), Ju887D-3 and Ju88A-4 for early war, Ju188A-1 for mid war and Ar234B for late war.
Do217 would also work in place of the Ju188, but I personally think the Ju188 is a much better plane.
-
Nope.
I can think of 6-8 planes right off the top of my head that the arcade gamers would gravitate towards if they were to be added to the AH plane set list. They'd hurl themselves on these planes like a flies to a cow pie.
Lets hope HTC continues to update graphics on the original AH planes (B26, SBD, etc), and also continues to keep adding aircraft that are obviously missing in the current plane set. The Il-4 (DB-3) or Tu-2, and Ki-43 Oscar come to mind right away, as does the D520, Beaufighter, Ki-100, Wellington, and a real Brewster Buffalo variant (F2A-3).
I'm really glad HTC is finally adding the He111. This is a good thing in more ways than one! :aok
-
No pilot-operated nose machine guns?
Thank God.....Cobia can't use it as a fighter
-
I wonder if they're going to model the bombs from the bomb bay specifically for the He111?
Brits during the 1940s wondered about the "tail drop" method -- which was required for the He111 because there wasn't room between the solid-span wing beams to drop a bomb horizontally -- and ran some tests against RAF bombers at the time. They doubted it could be as accurate as horizontally dropped bombs... Well interestingly enough, the flip around wasn't much of a factor, BUT when in the nose-down orientation they then proceeded with made them fly much faster and with much less variation as they reached terminal velocty much quicker than bombs dropped "flat"...
Interesting fact. I wonder if HTC will model it this way.
-
WTG HTC :aok now all that is needed to round out this update is the "oscar" and the beaufighter :noid
-
Long overdue. :aok
-
WTG HTC :aok now all that is needed to round out this update is the "oscar" and the beaufighter :noid
Naaahh.... They did Lancaster... They added He111, to round it out (rule of 3) they need to redo the Boston! (or Ju88)
Make it an all-bomber update!
-
Naaahh.... They did Lancaster... They added He111, to round it out (rule of 3) they need to redo the Boston! (or Ju88)
Make it an all-bomber update!
I'm betting on the yak-9/T as the other Re-do for this release. :aok
-
I wonder which H version we're getting? There were quite a lot of them.
Now, I expect all of you guys who have been pushing for the He111 to use it as your primary bomber. Not many Ju88s, B-26s or Lancasters allowed, got it?
I and I think many others asked for it primarily for scenarios/FSOs.
Maybe one to beaufighter fans.
-
Hrm.... Disturbing issues arrise from looking at the screenshots. It appears we have a bit of a hybrid on our hands.
Just 2 quick summaries of engine and gun differences between early 111H variants, and then why it's a problem.
Engines:
H-1 had 1010 hp engines
H-2 had 1100 hp engines
H-3 had 1200 hp engines
H-4 had (I think) 1300 hp engines
H-5 had 1300 then later 1340 hp engines
Armament:
H-2 introduced beam window guns, though they had a limited firing arc. mostly for rear angle shots from the sides where dorsal gunner couldn't see well. Beam gunner was added to crew (more weight). Many later removed these and the gunner to save weight.
H-3 introduced MG15 to front of ventral gondola, though there are many many many pictures of H-3s and later models with no gun here. It was often removed and the solid forward gondola fairing was used. It would only have glass here when the gun was present.
H-4 introduced method to replace one side internal bomb bay with a fuel tank, keeping other side for half bomb load. Also first version to introduce external bomb racks for large bombs which could not fit into the restrictive airframe. Only about 150 of this variant built, but it set the standard for most later marks.
H-5 was almost identical to H-4 but seldom (if ever) carried internal ords. It could carry 1 or 2 torpedoes externally, or a drop tank and a large bomb. It could carry 1 asymmetrical SC1000 bomb (2000lbs), and in rare cases (?) one SC2500 bomb (about 5000lbs, technically the rack could lift this, not sure if it was ever dropped in combat). Airframe empty weight also increased and landing gear had to be beefed up. H-1 weighed 6300kg empty, H-5 was 6950 kg empty.
Why it's an issue:
So technically we have the torps from the H-5, and that's understandable since we don't need 2 variants just to have torps on one of them. But what parts were mixed to give us this hybrid? What version do we have?
Just before the BOB, HALF of the He-111 fleet was He-111P models with some 500 Ps in service. These were flying with around 1000 to 1100 hp engines and limited external bombloads. The He-111H-4 added exernal bombloads to the H line, but more importantly it had much higher engine output than the H-2s and H-3s (and Ps) that were common during the BOB. H-4s only began production in 1940 and stopped in 1941, and the small numbers (150 give or take) aren't what flew and fought in the BOB. Representatively speaking.
So, do we have an H-2's performance with H-4 external racks just to add on torps and to add usefulness? Or do we have an H-4/H-5 which really has nothing to do with the Heinkels that fought in the Battle of Britain? Let's face it, the BOB is what this plane is needed for most.
It's really great to finally have the He-111, but sadly we may have the wrong variant.
-
It would be nice to know what engines it is modeled with. The He111H-2 seems like the one we need, enginewise. It would be a shame to get 1300 or 1340hp engines, giving it performance significantly above that of the models that fought in the Battle of Britain. It would basically be another Ju88A-4 in that case, a bomber from 1941 or later being used as a stand in for the 1940 Battle of Britain, but facing off with 1940 Hurricane Mk I and Spitfire Mk I fighters.
You can't imagine the Battle of Britain being run with Hurricane Mk IIs, Spitfire Mk Vs and Bf109Fs can you? Yet that is what we have in the Ju88A-4, but hopefully not the He111H.
-
It's really great to finally have the He-111, but sadly we may have the wrong variant.
I think you could find fault in someone finding a cure for cancer. "Hey! Cancer is gone but the drug trials state I have a 0.0001% chance of developing rectal cysts. No point in curing it at all now!"
Although, sadly, I do agree with this point.
Let's face it, the BOB is what this plane is needed for most.
-
Hmm, in some of my previous posts, I said that for a whole tour (a new tour, not the middle of a current tour), I will ONLY fly the He-111 for that tour. :joystick: I will be logging in more often to make good on that. :x As for being intercepted?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP08RMumatI
:D
-
I think you could find fault in someone finding a cure for cancer. "Hey! Cancer is gone but the drug trials state I have a 0.0001% chance of developing rectal cysts. No point in curing it at all now!"
Although, sadly, I do agree with this point.
You agree with me, that it is most needed for BOB, and yet you ignore the possibility that this variant we're getting might be post-BOB performance specs?
:confused: :headscratch:
You have a funny kind of reading comprehension, or you just post to insult without actually reading the content of what you're being snarky about? Which is it? Do we need the BOB variant (you agree with my concerns) or we don't (you disagree with my post)? You can't have it both ways. It's the heart of the matter for the Heinkel: Battle of Britain.
-
You agree with me, that it is most needed for BOB, and yet you ignore the possibility that this variant we're getting might be post-BOB performance specs?
:confused: :headscratch:
You have a funny kind of reading comprehension, or you just post to insult without actually reading the content of what you're being snarky about? Which is it? Do we need the BOB variant (you agree with my concerns) or we don't (you disagree with my post)? You can't have it both ways. It's the heart of the matter for the Heinkel: Battle of Britain.
Thats not what he said at all, he said you're a negative nancy but ion this case you are a correct negative nancy. Talk about a reading and comprension fail. Is it posisble wre could get a 2nd variant so we can have a pure breed BOB version and a version that is usable in the LWA.
-
and a version that is usable in the LWA.
No such version was ever made of the He111.
-
No such version was ever made of the He111.
LOL I bet you this; the later versions with the larger bomb load WILL be a cv killer.
-
Coming to a Friday Squad Ops BoB setup near you... ;)
-
Thats not what he said at all, he said you're a negative nancy but ion this case you are a correct negative nancy. Talk about a reading and comprension fail. Is it posisble wre could get a 2nd variant so we can have a pure breed BOB version and a version that is usable in the LWA.
Uhm... No. He quoted the one part he agreed with, that it was needed for BOB. He disagreed with everything else I typed by dismissing me as (as you put it) a "negative nancy" -- which is wrong.
If they gave us a He111 for the BOB but modeled it after the He-111A, we'd have the same problem. An He-111 is not just an "He-111" -- there were so many different performance variations, bombload capabilities, and differing levels of survivability and combat efficiency.
It's vital we get the RIGHT version, otherwise it's useless to us for the most important role it has in the BOB.
Yes it IS possible we will get multiple variants, though I doubt it. The default skin chosen was one shot down during the Battle of Britain, so CLEARLY it was intended to be the BOB-era plane. Yet the hybrid nature calls into question whether it will fit for this intended role or not.
These are important questions to ask before it's finalized. If they finalize it they almost never revisit the flight model.
P.S. Reading fail on Nath's part, on the front page news article itself: "We are looking to forward to seeing future Battle of Britain and other special events using this iconic Luftwaffe bomber."
It's VERY important if they got the later engine power from the H-4 or H-5 put on an earlier model H-2/H-3. It would be like modeling a Spit1 for explicit use in BOB but giving it a Spit5 engine.
-
LOL I bet you this; the later versions with the larger bomb load WILL be a cv killer.
Still slow, still inadequately defended.
No, you would be able to use it in the LWA, but it would never be a good choice. You can use the G4M1 in the LWA, I do at times, but that doesn't make it "usable in the LWA".
Also, what larger bomb load are you speaking of? How large?
-
Coming to a Friday Squad Ops BoB setup near you... ;)
When is the next one? :headscratch:
-
Volron, it won't be an FSO setup until they actually release it :t
Right now it's just a screenshot. Be patient :aok
-
Finally, about time! :aok
(Thank you HTCs!!!)
-
Volron, it won't be an FSO setup until they actually release it :t
Right now it's just a screenshot. Be patient :aok
But it is so hard to contain myself! :x
-
Looks like they modeled the bombs in the bay in the vertical position too, neat!
After the "newness" wears off over the first month or two, I see the He111 getting used just as much of not more than the B25's, and perhaps only slightly behind the B26's. Time will tell.
That's just the LWA, I think it will be quite popular in the EW and of cource scenarios/AvA/FSOs.
W00t! Another new airplane! Thanks, HTC!!! :)
<returns to drawing board, to revise BoB setup for FSO...>
NONONONONONOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Been _YEARS_ waiting for this and the next BoB scenario. :devil
-
Let them bug test it in the FSO before committing to a scenario with it... :noid
-
I think you could find fault in someone finding a cure for cancer. "Hey! Cancer is gone but the drug trials state I have a 0.0001% chance of developing rectal cysts. No point in curing it at all now!"
:rofl
-
Let them bug test it in the FSO before committing to a scenario with it... :noid
Pfft, hell no. :P And I think we'll get an H-4 hybrid with the faster engines since we seems to have the heavier (and external) loadouts. (that or multiple HE111s, but it would be sad if they put an early-war plane in this game (which features late war birds predominantley in the MA gameplay) with only some of the earliest examples produced rather than also some of the also-numerous but upgraded models.
I wonder if they're going to model the bombs from the bomb bay specifically for the He111?
Brits during the 1940s wondered about the "tail drop" method -- which was required for the He111 because there wasn't room between the solid-span wing beams to drop a bomb horizontally -- and ran some tests against RAF bombers at the time. They doubted it could be as accurate as horizontally dropped bombs... Well interestingly enough, the flip around wasn't much of a factor, BUT when in the nose-down orientation they then proceeded with made them fly much faster and with much less variation as they reached terminal velocty much quicker than bombs dropped "flat"...
Interesting fact. I wonder if HTC will model it this way.
Because the other bombs already in the game, conventionaly horizontaly dropped bombs, aren't curently modeled to be lazer-accurate whith proper technique? :headscratch: :devil
-
Pfft, hell no. :P And I think we'll get an H-4 hybrid with the faster engines since we seems to have the heavier (and external) loadouts. (that or multiple HE111s, but it would be sad if they put an early-war plane in this game (which features late war birds predominantley in the MA gameplay) with only some of the earliest examples produced rather than also some of the also-numerous but upgraded models.
Because the other bombs already in the game, conventionaly horizontaly dropped bombs, aren't curently modeled to be lazer-accurate whith proper technique? :headscratch: :devil
If we get an H-4 I would hope it does not get used in any Battle of Britain setting.
Personally, if I were to do a Battle of Britain setting with the current planeset in AH it would only have three airplanes in it, the Hurricane Mk I, Spitfire Mk I and Bf109E-4.
-
edit: in reply to babs:
If you watch your bombs drop from the bombsight you'll notice they already have random dispersal built into them. They aren't laser accurate, at all. Most times you'll hit your target with blast radius rather than direct hit. Ju88 external bombs scatter rather excessively if you watch them.
I'm just wondering if the AH bombs are hard-coded to drop a certain way, or if the very nature of these bombs falling "nose down" will have AH's bomb code compute the new drop rate automatically (on the fly, if you will). Will HTC need to recode these new bombs, or it is already taken care of with current code?
-
Still slow, still inadequately defended.
No, you would be able to use it in the LWA, but it would never be a good choice. You can use the G4M1 in the LWA, I do at times, but that doesn't make it "usable in the LWA".
Also, what larger bomb load are you speaking of? How large?
THe H-5 variant with the 2k mentione din Krankys write up.
EDIT: Alspo not everyone has to milkrun in a fast bomber. I even take up the Dauntless to bomb a carrier from time to time. Ive done strat raids in 88's
-
I see we got a pretty crappy version of the He-111. It looks nice though. It'll probably get most of its use in the EWA.
-
OK, time for me to hedge my excitement for a little moment to chew over reality.
Now would be the time to think/harp/reveal/pow-wow over possible ways to increase survivability in the LWMA for torpedo planes. Since something similar was implemented with the auto-puffy AAA this last and recent patch, maybe a similar feature could be implemented with the 20/40mm stuff and planes laden with torps? IE: 1) if below 1k altitude and less than 250mph and passing within the formation of ships, AAA won't fire if a friendly ship is also in the LoS of fire from that gun position. 2) if below 1k or 2k altitude and an enemy (friendly to the CV) is within 1k distance of your torpedo plane, AAA disengages. As is, the sturdy and solid TBM is paper mache - elaboration on the likelyhood of success flying a Ki-67, Ju-88, Kate and now the He-111 in the MAs is beyond a waste of breath.
And clouds... as awesome as the He111 already looks, throwing in more clouds (these nice new ones, hopefully can get worked out) would look even awesome-er and add some medium to provide cover if pilots choose to fly behind them or through them.
Flying the He111 through the crystal and constantly sunfilled skies of the LWMA, running on the deck with torpedoes strapped onto your He111 through ack designed to be dense and lethal enough to hedge NOE B-24s or diving Lancstukas, etc. - will be challenging.
-
I see we got a pretty crappy version of the He-111.
Not so sure about "crappy" version of it. We need HTC to chime in with what variant it really is. There was a wide difference between He-111H-1 and He-111H-5, but all they label it as is "He-111H" -- which doesn't help. The H line went up to He-111H-22 later in the war, where these bombers air-launched V-1 buzz bombs.
Clearly we don't have the H-22 version, but for the sake of BOB use it would be nice to have HTC give us one that represents the BOB time frame.
-
You have to remember the flak box's size is determined by Speed, Distance and G's so if your in a bomber moving sklowly you flak box should be pretty large.
-
A beautiful plane, I have a model of it on my desk. Thanks htc
-
Speed wasn't the only consideration... During the attack on the Bismark, the Swordfish torpedo bombers were flying so slow that the guns had a hard time targetting them. The bombers' speed was below that of the minimum lead targetting for the guns, so the guns were shooting for faster planes and missing.
I think size of target is also an issue. Altitude as well. While it's good to narrow the box on level bombers in formation, a TBM at sea level would be a tougher target. Not only does the water make it hard to see how far off your hits are (for gun crews) and adjust, but the low level was often hard to aim at due to minimal gun depression angles. If a ship was listing even only slightly there was a chance one entire side of the ship was undefended. There were many times in WW2 when the torp bombers attacked a ship from one side because it was listing the other way, and got away with it. This is how the IJA finished off the Prince of Wales, if I recall. POW was only listing some 11.5 degrees, and the 5" guns couldn't aim at attackers at all from that side.
I think some kind of consideration for torpedo bombers would be warranted, and wise.
-
edit: in reply to babs:
If you watch your bombs drop from the bombsight you'll notice they already have random dispersal built into them. They aren't laser accurate, at all. Most times you'll hit your target with blast radius rather than direct hit. Ju88 external bombs scatter rather excessively if you watch them.
I'm just wondering if the AH bombs are hard-coded to drop a certain way, or if the very nature of these bombs falling "nose down" will have AH's bomb code compute the new drop rate automatically (on the fly, if you will). Will HTC need to recode these new bombs, or it is already taken care of with current code?
I've noted the randomness (and it seems to actualy impact larger bombs more, such as the Ju88s 500kgs or even 1k/2ks dropped from US buffs) I may completely miss with one these days), but it doesn't get close to making you "miss" your target, even at over 30k altitude, if you use proper technique (consistent speed, heading, good calibration, no turning, etc.). And I'm talking direct hits. You know your lead bombers bomb will hit the target and the two others in your formation will inflict blast radius damage if not direct hits - this is nothing new. As long as I can remember, hanger-busting regulars preffer 500lb bombs used in salvos of three for 2500lb targets over three 1000lb bombs in a single salvo, why? Because of the nature of flying in formation, but also the nature of dropping bombs in formation in this game (with the constant guarentee that 1/3 will hit direct and 2/3 will inflict partial "splash" damage).
In short, if you knew before the randomness was implimented (or increased more recently, may be a more accurate statement) with 2500lb targets in mind, and that single 1k bombs dropped wasn't a guarentee anyway, so you prefered salvoing 3 500lb bombs instead - the change was minute to unobserved.
Knowing that it will be 50kg bombs, and that the smaller the bombs the less they are effected by the code to give some randomness, I again ask Krusty - will it really matter or even be noticable within the game and the current accuracy achievable with them?
-
THe H-5 variant with the 2k mentione din Krankys write up.
EDIT: Alspo not everyone has to milkrun in a fast bomber. I even take up the Dauntless to bomb a carrier from time to time. Ive done strat raids in 88's
I LOVE strat raids in the 88s... I only WISH it had external fuel tanks (in supliment of the external ords) or a varient with greater range. *looks to see what map is up on the MAs* REALLY WISH.
I see we got a pretty crappy version of the He-111. It looks nice though. It'll probably get most of its use in the EWA.
So then, mr. knows better, what's your crappy suggestion, instead hmmm?.... :devil :ahand
You have to remember the flak box's size is determined by Speed, Distance and G's so if your in a bomber moving sklowly you flak box should be pretty large.
I thought it was vice versa, slower speed, less distance, low Gs = smaller and more lethal "flak box"?
Speed wasn't the only consideration... During the attack on the Bismark, the Swordfish torpedo bombers were flying so slow that the guns had a hard time targetting them. The bombers' speed was below that of the minimum lead targetting for the guns, so the guns were shooting for faster planes and missing.
I think size of target is also an issue. Altitude as well. While it's good to narrow the box on level bombers in formation, a TBM at sea level would be a tougher target. Not only does the water make it hard to see how far off your hits are (for gun crews) and adjust, but the low level was often hard to aim at due to minimal gun depression angles. If a ship was listing even only slightly there was a chance one entire side of the ship was undefended. There were many times in WW2 when the torp bombers attacked a ship from one side because it was listing the other way, and got away with it. This is how the IJA finished off the Prince of Wales, if I recall. POW was only listing some 11.5 degrees, and the 5" guns couldn't aim at attackers at all from that side.
I think some kind of consideration for torpedo bombers would be warranted, and wise.
Implimenting a traverse speed is a good idea that would likely help torpedo planes attackng enemy CVs. But it shouldn't be an exploit so IE: that a 500+ MPH 262 (or particularly Arado 234s) has a cake walk picking planes landing or taking off from the CV.
Good thoughts about the hitboxes, I'm chewing on it. The problem Im thinking of out the gate and as you listed - how to work around that auto-AAA has no problem seeing a target being masked by water spray where manned gunners do (except 5" guns, which seriously should see a "nerf" given in comparison to 88-gunners who have to actually work for it... shoot ballpark where all the auto-AAA tracers are going - bingo!)....
think think think....
-
Not so sure about "crappy" version of it. We need HTC to chime in with what variant it really is. There was a wide difference between He-111H-1 and He-111H-5, but all they label it as is "He-111H" -- which doesn't help. The H line went up to He-111H-22 later in the war, where these bombers air-launched V-1 buzz bombs.
Clearly we don't have the H-22 version, but for the sake of BOB use it would be nice to have HTC give us one that represents the BOB time frame.
With what looks like 6x MG34's as defense, and a smaller bomb load i'd say it isn't exactly stellar in performance. The single gun protruding out of the rear of the cockpit and the two out of the sides don't really seem all too threatening to someone that knows what they're doing. A single FM2 could probably bring down a formation of 111's with two, maybe 3 passes. My guess is that its an He-111H1 or H2.
-
With what looks like 6x MG34's as defense, and a smaller bomb load i'd say it isn't exactly stellar in performance. The single gun protruding out of the rear of the cockpit and the two out of the sides don't really seem all too threatening to someone that knows what they're doing. A single FM2 could probably bring down a formation of 111's with two, maybe 3 passes. My guess is that its an He-111H1 or H2.
Imagine
An aircraft from 1944 bringing down an aircraft from 1940 with ease
just imagine
who was expecting the He 111 to be an uber bomber?
-
After the "newness" wears off over the first month or two, I see the He111 getting used just as much of not more than the B25's, and perhaps only slightly behind the B26's. Time will tell.
Lol - new definition of "Delusion" added to the DSM.
-
You guys may not think it would get much use.
But the Troll Patrol will beg to differ :devil
HE-111 Sweep anybody?
-
Imagine
An aircraft from 1944 bringing down an aircraft from 1940 with ease
just imagine
who was expecting the He 111 to be an uber bomber?
The He-111 will be used a lot in the first week or two that its in game, especially in the LWA. Even a Spit 5 could bring that thing down with ease. If it were a different model of the 111, like the H-10, maybe it'd be a lot more dangerous to the attackers in the MA's.
-
My guess is that its an He-111H1 or H2.
And yet it has external hardpoints only instituted in the H4, and toprs only used on the H5.
Question is: Did they just give us an H5 from 1941 and are telling us to use a faster plane for BOB? Or did they give us the BOB variant and are giving us torps as a freebie?
-
Question is: Did they just give us an H5 from 1941 and are telling us to use a faster plane for BOB? Or did they give us the BOB variant and are giving us torps as a freebie?
I hope its the second one. though with the external racks(loaded) and the older engines it maybe a real dog to get into the air.
-
Knowing that it will be 50kg bombs, and that the smaller the bombs the less they are effected by the code to give some randomness, I again ask Krusty - will it really matter or even be noticable within the game and the current accuracy achievable with them?
To answer the second part first:
For the same reason we want accurate ballistics for various different guns. For the same reason firing bullets down range has gravity-assistance vs firing guns flat and level. It matters because they fell differently. They fell faster, and more accurately. Same as a bullet tumbling downward vs a bullet fired downward.
To answer the first part:
It wasn't just 50kg. The He111 had 2 vertical bays, with 4 racks each left and right (total 8). These bays could be modularized to hold different sized bombs, ranging from 250kg down to 50kg. In the case of 50kg, you could fit 4 of them into one rack on a smaller sub-rack inside the vertical storage container.
So it's not just the 50kg, but in this case includes the larger bombs as well.
-
And yet it has external hardpoints only instituted in the H4, and toprs only used on the H5.
Question is: Did they just give us an H5 from 1941 and are telling us to use a faster plane for BOB? Or did they give us the BOB variant and are giving us torps as a freebie?
Wasn't the He-111 H-6 the one that was outfitted to carry two LT F5b torpedoes while the H-5 was outfitted with the ETC 2000 external bomb racks to allow it to carry the SC 2500 bomb externally since an extra fuel tank was added to the internal bomb bay? I know the H-5 was intended to be a long range torpedo bomber but I don't think it was ever used in that role, instead torpedo carrying duties went to the H-6.
ack-ack
-
Well, I was focusing more on the variants immediately around the BOB. The H6 is known for the torpedoes, yes, but they were first introduced in the H5. Hence the feature is at least up to H5, if not H6.
So, yes, but I was trying to focus on the earlier marks. It is intended to be one.
-
hey always need another target :rock
-
What a joke, another useless hangar queen, you guys will be all excited about it and use it for a couple weeks then back to the usual toys once you realise getting killed easily just like in the JU88 isn't so much fun after all. Oh but it does look nice, and maybe there a scenario a few times a year where it can be used. Great.
How about AH concentrate on completing all the existing plane set to AH2 before releasing any new hangar queens!
Update the Yak already it's only been 10 years and still waiting. :cry
<S>...-Gixer
-
What a joke, another useless hangar queen, you guys will be all excited about it and use it for a couple weeks then back to the usual toys once you realise getting killed easily just like in the JU88 isn't so much fun after all. Oh but it does look nice, and maybe there a scenario a few times a year where it can be used. Great.
How about AH concentrate on completing all the existing plane set to AH2 before releasing any new hangar queens!
Update the Yak already it's only been 10 years and still waiting. :cry
<S>...-Gixer
Yes, update the Yak that was already given/intorduced to the game for years before giving us a plane that has been asked for since the game released. :huh
We have nothing to compare or supliment the He111 in the game, yet we have two yak models, clearly this is a self-centered desire ultimatley fulfilled and not a longstanding community wishlist item....
:rolleyes: :ahand
-
clearly this is a self-centered desire ultimatley fulfilled and not a longstanding community wishlist item....
:rolleyes: :ahand
:bhead
You can't be serious. I'd much rather have all of the AH1 standard planes brought up to AH3 standards over having hangar queens introduced as well.
Maybe adding the Yak-3 along with those visual updates too...
-
" all of the AH1 standard planes brought up to AH3 standards "
Stop there before another one of you bandwagoners repeat that line and you'll answer your own gripe/complaint.
The models currently in this game that are still modeled in an AH1 standard, are:
?
-
Add a new plane, people complain about not updating the old planes. Update an old plane, people complain about not adding new planes.
Maybe they should both add new planes and update old planes?
*Looks at the last two updates on the front page*
-
The He-111 will be used a lot in the first week or two that its in game, especially in the LWA. Even a Spit 5 could bring that thing down with ease. If it were a different model of the 111, like the H-10, maybe it'd be a lot more dangerous to the attackers in the MA's.
The primary reason for the He-111H being added is to fill much needed gaps in early ETO scenarios for the Luftwaffe bombers and not just for MA use. The fact that the HE-111H will plug a glaring hole in early ETO scenarios (i.e. BoB) is a good reason alone to add it. There is more to this game than just the main arenas.
ack-ack
-
" all of the AH1 standard planes brought up to AH3 standards "
Stop there before another one of you bandwagoners repeat that line and you'll answer your own gripe/complaint.
The models currently in this game that are still modeled in an AH1 standard, are:
?
Yaks
A-20
Boston III
TBM
B5N
D3A
F4F
FM2
T-34's look to be outdated.
Ju-88
B-26
Ki-67
SBD-5
Ar-234
Both 110's
Both C2's
Ki-61
Me-163
There's the entire list of planes that need to be updated. That's 21 planes total, and we have about 100-ish planes in game? That's nearly 25% of all planes still at AH1 standards.
-
Looks to be pre-H6. No MG/FF in the nose.
-
Looks to be pre-H6. No MG/FF in the nose.
MG/FF in the nose was a field mod only, not standard.
-
There's the entire list of planes that need to be updated. That's 21 planes total, and we have about 100-ish planes in game? That's nearly 25% of all planes still at AH1 standards.
Not arguing with your list, just noting that we have over 100 planes, GVs, and boats in this game. That would make it 20% more than 25%.
-
Gyaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!
Make it teh H-22!!!!!!!!!
Air-dropped V-1s!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeeeeeeeeeeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhggggggggggggggggg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
He-111 footage! pwning a spittys tail!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5syqnsce7Rc
Youtube: "Dark Blue Sky Angelis" to find the video.
The movie is actually "Dark Blue World" about Czechoslovak pilots.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Blue_World
And this one is good too:
http://vimeo.com/31202906
"The German" at vimeo.com
-
scorpx1,
The T-34/76 was among the first three AH2.0 units and the T-34/85 came later.
You also left the Tempest Mk V off of your list.
-
We have nothing to compare or supliment the He111 in the game, yet we have two yak models, clearly this is a self-centered desire ultimatley fulfilled and not a longstanding community wishlist item....
Then what about the 205 or any number of other planes as just listed, why was IL2 updated instead of Yak? If HT had put together a plan to update 3 pre existing aircraft for ever 1 new plane then entire set would of been completed years ago. Instead we get 3 hangar queens for every plane that is updated.
Not saying don't bring in new toys, just give updating entire AH1 plane set priority compared to every new fighter,buff,gv etc..
Did we really need the Storch compared to updating the 205?
<S>...-Gixer
-
Gixer, they havent stopped updating the old stuff. Didn't you see the lancaster screenshots just before the He111 screenshots?
They're not stopping the update of old ones to add new ones. They're doing both, and far more quickly than they used to update planes. They can afford to add a new (much needed) plane once in a while.
-
Look how many years it's been since AH2 was released. Just stating that priority should of been given to updating all existing AH1 planes to AH2 before releasing new planes,buffs,gv's if 3 AH1 planes had been updated for every 1 new toy then entire set would of been completed years ago. Then HT could start focusing on the more important stuff like a Storch.
<S>...-Gixer
-
The primary reason for the He-111H being added is to fill much needed gaps in early ETO scenarios for the Luftwaffe bombers and not just for MA use. The fact that the HE-111H will plug a glaring hole in early ETO scenarios (i.e. BoB) is a good reason alone to add it. There is more to this game than just the main arenas.
ack-ack
And how often in a year is the BoB played out in early ETO scenarios? LW MA love it or hate it is where all the planes get most of their use, and the HE-111 won't be any more popular than the JU88 after a few weeks. Just like the ME410, everyone all excited to see the 410 but once they realised it wasn't the uber gun platform for easy kills they thought it would be, was quickly discarded after a few weeks.
Of course you probably don't care since you already have 3 versions of the updated P38 :D
<S>...-Gixer
-
Look how many years it's been since AH2 was released. Just stating that priority should of been given to updating all existing AH1 planes to AH2 before releasing new planes,buffs,gv's if 3 AH1 planes had been updated for every 1 new toy then entire set would of been completed years ago. Then HT could start focusing on the more important stuff like a Storch.
<S>...-Gixer
No it would not, you would be demanding that the early AH2 Models like the T34 and KI84 be updated to the new AH2 standards shown in the Lanc and Hurri. I have already seen people complain about these older AH2 ones.
The storch introduced a new aspect to the combat. I still see them buzzing around tank battles spotting both on Vox and with smoke.
-
GIxer, in ANY ww2 flight sim BOB is a big draw. Even with our way-too-fast Ju88 bombers, the BOB scenario is one of the all-time favorite scenarios for Aces High regulars. It is the most anticipated and the most enjoyed for a large number of players.
Even if the He111H doesn't get too much MA use (I predict mostly it will see torp duty), it is necessary, and even VITAL to many scenarios and FSO setups. It WILL benefit the game, even if you personally won't fly it much.
-
Thank you for the He 111, HTC!!! :x
-
sweet more slow lumbering cannon fodder
-
Gixer,
Almost all of the old models have been updated now. I have been tracking them for a long time now and the heavy majority of models are updated.
In addition, your idea of updating three oold models for the cost of adding one new model doesn't hold water. The graphics work to add the He111 is approximately the same as the graphics work to update the Ki-67. The increased workload for adding a new model is in non-graphical work that the artists aren't involved with.
-
scorpx1,
The T-34/76 was among the first three AH2.0 units and the T-34/85 came later.
You also left the Tempest Mk V off of your list.
Totally forgot about the Tempest, but as for the T-34's they look like AH1 standards to me. Maybe its the fact that they're pretty much parallelograms with octagonal turrets. :lol
-
Almost all of the old models have been updated now.
How long has it been since AH2 10 years? There shouldn't be any AH1 set still around is my point give the time frame. And there wouldn't be if focused has been placed on that instead of pleasing the Air Quake community with new toys which often end up as Hangar Queens.
Anyway, I know my argument is against the tide of popular opinion and has been for years, enjoy the new toy and I will certainly enjoy shooting them down for a couple weeks just like the 410
<S>...-Gixer
-
Gixer, don't forget that some 3 to 5 years (at least it felt that long) were "lost" due to "Combat Tour" -- and we reaped the hand-me-downs in general gameplay and features, but this slowed/stopped updating the old planes IMO.
It hasn't been 10 years since AH2 was released, but I can't recall the date. Who's got that AH version history link?
-
It hasn't been 10 years since AH2 was released, but I can't recall the date.
AH II finally went live in tour 53, June 2004
-
First requests for He-111 in Aces High: 1999
:rofl :aok
-
First requests for He-111 in Aces High: 1999
:rofl :aok
How much BBS type stuff was lost when the transfer was made? I recall reading somewhere that not all of it came through. :headscratch:
-
AH II finally went live in tour 53, June 2004
Well since I only had time for a guess and go by memory being out by only 1 year and 3 months wasn't bad. Thanks for the correction.
<S>...-Gixer
-
I wonder if they're going to model the bombs from the bomb bay specifically for the He111?
Brits during the 1940s wondered about the "tail drop" method -- which was required for the He111 because there wasn't room between the solid-span wing beams to drop a bomb horizontally -- and ran some tests against RAF bombers at the time. They doubted it could be as accurate as horizontally dropped bombs... Well interestingly enough, the flip around wasn't much of a factor, BUT when in the nose-down orientation they then proceeded with made them fly much faster and with much less variation as they reached terminal velocty much quicker than bombs dropped "flat"...
Interesting fact. I wonder if HTC will model it this way.
Gee, I sure hope so!
:noid
-
How much BBS type stuff was lost when the transfer was made? I recall reading somewhere that not all of it came through. :headscratch:
Looks like they imported much of it, archives and whatnot...
You still find a lot of old posts even today when you search. Most go back to 1999, which if I recall is when the beta started for AH, and so I'm guessing that's around when the forums went up (?).
-
Really hope we have a BOB HE-111 coming !
-
ehhh :bolt:
-
There is more to this game than just the main arenas.
Thank you.
- oldman
-
Yaks
A-20
Boston III
TBM
B5N
D3A
F4F
FM2
T-34's look to be outdated.
Ju-88
B-26
Ki-67
SBD-5
Ar-234
Both 110's
Both C2's
Ki-61
Me-163
There's the entire list of planes that need to be updated. That's 21 planes total, and we have about 100-ish planes in game? That's nearly 25% of all planes still at AH1 standards.
I do not know the specifics, but it seems to be your list could be divided in to 2 groups. Original AH and then maybe a "AH Mk II", both generation 1 planes I'm assuming. Look at the A20 cockpit, then look at the Yak cockpit. The A20 has some "3D" boxes and flight controls while the Yaks do not. There are others as well. Sure, they both are obviously very early AH and both could use an update no doubt. Someone mentioned that if the rudder peddle move then they are "AH2" or have been "updated" at least once, if not they are original AH.
HTC only has so many resources and to apply towards upgrading/updating aircraft. The most recent is the Lancaster. Previously it was the Hurricanes. Before that it was the P40's. Give them time, they will get things done. So far, the IL-2, Me262, F6F, Typhoon, P40's, Hurricanes, and (I'm sure I'm missing a few) have all been updated to the latest and greatest graphics. I believe the P51's, Spitfires, and P47's have the updated cockpits. So in short I say this: give them time, they're doing just fine. :aok
Oh, and the T34/85 was added just after I started playing AH in early 2008. :aok
To those who are wondering which of the He111 "H" variants we're getting... after digging a wee bit I think we're getting the H-2 variant with the 5/MG15's. Also, by looking at the picture of the bombs falling from the He111 it appears as if HTC did in fact model the upside down bomb suspension in the bomb bay. If in fact it is the H2 variant, it will have the Jumo 211 A-3 engines w/ 1,100 hp. We'll have to wait and see once the new version arrives as to what, if any, new ordnance we'll get along with it.
-
But what if it's not an H-2? It could be an H-2 with torps thrown on, or it could be an H-5/H-6 (as previously mentioned) because that's the performance data they had.
That's why waiting to see isn't the best tactic. I'd love it if somebody from HTC would chime in on this.
-
Fantastic :)
My Typhoon will enjoy shooting down said German plane :)
I hope it burns well :)
-
Looks like they imported much of it, archives and whatnot...
You still find a lot of old posts even today when you search. Most go back to 1999, which if I recall is when the beta started for AH, and so I'm guessing that's around when the forums went up (?).
If 99 is when it all began, then would that mean that the He-111 has been wished for before Aces High's official release? :D I would not be surprised if the Beau and/or A-26 have been wished for as much, if not more. :lol Now I'm kind of curious if they have been... :headscratch:
I am not too sure if she'll will be a BoB variant. I am curious to which version of the H had the most production numbers. :headscratch: Someone is bound to have quick access to that information. It may well be that variant we are getting. At least this is what I am hoping for over a Hybrid. I wouldn't want to see a F4F-3/4 again. I believe there are other planes that are hybrids in a similar manner as well? Of this, I am not sure. :headscratch:
When it comes down to it, I am still damn glad to see her finally added, Hybrid or no. :x
-
And yet it has external hardpoints only instituted in the H4,
The only external hardpoints that I can see in the screenshots are for the torps.
----------------------------
Considering it has the extra defensive guns (and I'm sure the BoB-use was taken into consideration) it looks like H-3 to me (with torps as extra).
-
The only external hardpoints that I can see in the screenshots are for the torps.
----------------------------
Considering it has the extra defensive guns (and I'm sure the BoB-use was taken into consideration) it looks like H-3 to me.
Those are the hardpoints. They didn't show up until the H-4, and that was a small production batch. H-5s and H-6s are where those hardpoints became common.
There's no doubt we have some kind of hybrid that combines earlier weapons setup with later external hardpoints. Question is what bits were mixed and matched with what other bits.
I know BOB use was intended from the description and the default skin. The problem is there are a number of variants and if they give us another up-engined version it's too fast when used in the BOB.
-
Those are the hardpoints.
Hard points for the torps aren't the same hard points that are used for the external bombs.
-
The default skins seems to be H-1:
(http://www.asisbiz.com/il2/He-111/He-111H-KG55.1-(G1+BH)/images/1-Heinkel-He-111H-1.KG55-(G1+BH)-shot-down-Dorset-25th-Sep-1940-02.jpg)
Heinkel He 111H Geschwaderstab KG55 coded G1+BH and based in France during the Battle of Britain 1940 and was shot down after a raid on the Bristol Factory and crash-landed Studland near Dorset England Sep 25 1940.
Heinkel He 111 H-1 coded Gl+BH (White B) W. Nr 6305 of 1./KG 55. The aircraft in typical Finish of RLM 70/71165. Of special Interest is the crests personal insignia of 'prancing bull' painted on the port side just ahead of the aircraft's letter code. The alrcraft's Individual white letter 'B' was repeated in black on lower surface of the wing’s, outboard of the crosses. This He 111H was shot down by RAF fighters during a Luftwaffe air raid on the Bristol Aircraft Company's plant at Filton on 25th September 1940, and crashed at Westhill Farm, Studland near Swanage in Dorset. Of the crew of five, four were captured, including the pilot Fw. Fritz Jürgens and navigator Hptm. Karl Köthke. The flight engineer, Uffz Josef Altrichter, was severely injured and succumbed to his wounds.
http://asisbiz.com/il2/He-111/He-111H-KG55.1-(G1+BH).html (http://asisbiz.com/il2/He-111/He-111H-KG55.1-(G1+BH).html)
-
The default skins seems to be H-1:
(http://www.asisbiz.com/il2/He-111/He-111H-KG55.1-(G1+BH)/images/1-Heinkel-He-111H-1.KG55-(G1+BH)-shot-down-Dorset-25th-Sep-1940-02.jpg)
Heinkel He 111H Geschwaderstab KG55 coded G1+BH and based in France during the Battle of Britain 1940 and was shot down after a raid on the Bristol Factory and crash-landed Studland near Dorset England Sep 25 1940.
Heinkel He 111 H-1 coded Gl+BH (White B) W. Nr 6305 of 1./KG 55. The aircraft in typical Finish of RLM 70/71165. Of special Interest is the crests personal insignia of 'prancing bull' painted on the port side just ahead of the aircraft's letter code. The alrcraft's Individual white letter 'B' was repeated in black on lower surface of the wing’s, outboard of the crosses. This He 111H was shot down by RAF fighters during a Luftwaffe air raid on the Bristol Aircraft Company's plant at Filton on 25th September 1940, and crashed at Westhill Farm, Studland near Swanage in Dorset. Of the crew of five, four were captured, including the pilot Fw. Fritz Jürgens and navigator Hptm. Karl Köthke. The flight engineer, Uffz Josef Altrichter, was severely injured and succumbed to his wounds.
http://asisbiz.com/il2/He-111/He-111H-KG55.1-(G1+BH).html (http://asisbiz.com/il2/He-111/He-111H-KG55.1-(G1+BH).html)
Doesn't really mean anything, the default 190A5 skin is an A4 if I remember correctly
-
Doesn't really mean anything,
Yep, that is why I said that the default skin is a H-1 instead of saying that the variant coming to AH is absolutely, positively a H-1.
-
Hard points for the torps aren't the same hard points that are used for the external bombs.
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.
You may be thinking of the PVC1006 rack, which also was sometimes used for bombs, but the ETC2000 was used for bombs as well. In fact, sometimes one rack was used on the left, and the other type on the right, when carrying the same bombs on each! Even up to the H-6 this was done (sometimes). Then on later H6s both were switched over to ETC2000 (which is what you see when torpedoes are used) and the PVC was phased out.
-
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.
You may be thinking of the PVC1006 rack, which also was sometimes used for bombs, but the ETC2000 was used for bombs as well. In fact, sometimes one rack was used on the left, and the other type on the right, when carrying the same bombs on each! Even up to the H-6 this was done (sometimes). Then on later H6s both were switched over to ETC2000 (which is what you see when torpedoes are used) and the PVC was phased out.
And what is your source?
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/He111_hardpoints_zps8637b205.jpg)
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/He111_hardpoints2_zpsbe48b84f.jpg)
-
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.
-
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.
-
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:
(http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/jg1history/jg1history_equipmant/Bombs/dropdevice/b_3.jpg)
Torpedo attachment set for the PVC rack:
(http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/jg1history/jg1history_equipmant/Bombs/dropdevice/b_2.jpg)
http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/jg1history/jg1history_equipmant/Bombs/dropdevice/Abwurfanlagen.htm (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.
-
Some He111 specs from Kagero's He111 book:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/He111specs_zps33b8c23d.jpg)
-
Lot of ownage in this thread of late.
Battle of Britain 2013 anyone?
-
Battle of Britain 2013 anyone?
:angel:
-
:angel:
Well get on the horn to HTC to upsate our 109E's and 110C's.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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. :)
-
If anyone is going to update anything, it NEEDS to be the B26. I feel like I'm playing Minecraft when I fly that thing.
-
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.
You focus advocating for what you personally want and you limit yourself to those things. I advocate what I think would be best for the game, obviously my opinions have a bias, everybody's do, but I try to look at it from other's perspectives.
I try everything and I have spent tours in nothing but Bf109s and Fw190s.
If anyone is going to update anything, it NEEDS to be the B26. I feel like I'm playing Minecraft when I fly that thing.
Agreed. The B-26 and C.20Xs should be at the top of the list.
-
I never said the 109s were bad, I just implied they could be better.
-In a later post you said that you don't care about what the Yaks look like because it doesn't benefit you.
Personally, I don't give a damn what the spitfires and Yaks look like, since I never flew them, and probably never will.
What does and doesn't benefit you and only you doesn't matter. Its what benefits the entire community you greedy fool. You only want the 109's updated because you'll enjoy it more than some other people. What you want only caters to YOUR needs - not the communities.
Before you post stupid crap like that try thinking about someone other than yourself.
-
If anyone is going to update anything, it NEEDS to be the B26. I feel like I'm playing Minecraft when I fly that thing.
:rofl
-
Are you blind? I advocate things like the Yak-7s, and -1s whenever I see a thread for them. I fully support a mig-3. Earlier Yak-9s would be great.
The visual model doesn't affect how it dies, and I don't have to look at its cockpit while flying, so I don't care on a personal level. If you tell me about a major model of spitfire we're missing, that can't be reasonably filled in for by a current model, I'll support that too.
And I don't care if you've binged on luft iron. I've learned the Yaks and Spits well enough to fight them. I just never really flew them like I did the 109, or P-51.
-
Are you blind? I advocate things like the Yak-7s, and -1s whenever I see a thread for them. I fully support a mig-3. Earlier Yak-9s would be great.
The visual model doesn't affect how it dies, and I don't have to look at its cockpit while flying, so I don't care on a personal level. If you tell me about a major model of spitfire we're missing, that can't be reasonably filled in for by a current model, I'll support that too.
And I don't care if you've binged on luft iron. I've learned the Yaks and Spits well enough to fight them. I just never really flew them like I did the 109, or P-51.
Just because you don't fly the plane doesn't mean other people don't. BTW have you even played the game online recently?
-
What does and doesn't benefit you and only you doesn't matter. Its what benefits the entire community you greedy fool. You only want the 109's updated because you'll enjoy it more than some other people. What you want only caters to YOUR needs - not the communities.
Before you post stupid crap like that try thinking about someone other than yourself.
And? It burns just as well with octagons as it does with curves. Eye candy doesn't benefit the community per se. Notice I proposed we actually benefit the community by adding to the load outs when we update the graphics.
You wanna suggest a Yak 9D with the update, fine. If not, you can go choke.
-
And? It burns just as well with octagons as it does with curves. Eye candy doesn't benefit the community per se. Notice I proposed we actually benefit the community by adding to the load outs when we update the graphics.
You wanna suggest a Yak 9D with the update, fine. If not, you can go choke.
Who said I wanted a strictly visual update with the Yaks? Iv'e been asking for the Yak-3 + Graphic updates for the Yaks for a while now. Same with other people. As for your remark that iv'e placed in red, that is an idiotic thing to say. Why do you think HTC has been updating the P-40's, Lancs and Stukas? To benefit the community and responding to what the masses want. Not to what a few people want when a plane is already up to decent standards.
-
There is a fundamental difference between AH1 and AH2 plane shapes when it comes to skinning them. AH1 plane art was originally created on 256 by 256 resolution tiles. Because this made detail very blurry HTC's artists overlayed small patches of higher detail where needed, i.e. for noseart. Also they duplicated areas wherever they could, for instance the left and right wings are sometimes the same part on the skin but mirrored. They also stretched large areas of the skin to save space, usually the top and bottom of the fuselage are stretched horizontally. When skinning these old shapes the tiles are now skinned in 1024 res tiles but the stretching, mirroring and patching issues still remain. There are also many bugs, distorted textures etc. that you don't get on AH2 shapes all of which makes them a pain to skin.
AH2 shapes are built on a single 1024 (or 2048) res tile and have few or none of the above issues. This means there are few schemes you can't do because of shape issues and the skins turns out looking a lot better. The later AH2 shapes are more detailed (higher poly count etc.) than the earlier ones but they are all way better in this regard than the AH1 ones. While there are shape errors on some 109s and Spits they are minor compared to the issues on the AH1 shapes, so I can't see those being redone until all the AH1 shapes have been brought up to scratch.
In general HTC seem to have upgraded the more popular MA rides to AH2 standards first, which makes sense as more players will benefit from the improvements more of the time. Sometimes they are redone to add a new variant (Ju-87G-2 etc.) and of the remaining AH1 shapes the Yak is the one that would offer the most choice of new variants.
-
WOOO HOOO!!!!!! :aok
So far, it appears as if it an early H version with seven 8mm MG's for defense. The 8/250kg (550 lb) bombs and 32/50kg (110 lbs) bombs are obvious load outs, I'm sure there will be others.
wow smoke your like an excited puppy peeing all over himself. :salute :x :cheers:
-
Tank-Ace,
Your bias is in your casual dismissal of any other concerns and your persistent requests for only Luftwaffe/Wehrmacht stuff.
Devil 505 keeps mentioning the Bf109E-4 as though it is in urgent need of updating from AH1 to AH2. In this thread he implied that it needs to be redone along with the Bf110C-4 for a proper BoB setting to happen. I looked at it last night and while it certainly is lower polygon count than the newer stuff it is not nearly as bad as he represents, probably better than the Spitfire Mk I, Spitfire Mk V and Seafire Mk II shapes. He also left out the need to update the Ju88A-4.
-
Who said I wanted a strictly visual update with the Yaks? Iv'e been asking for the Yak-3 + Graphic updates for the Yaks for a while now. Same with other people. As for your remark that iv'e placed in red, that is an idiotic thing to say. Why do you think HTC has been updating the P-40's, Lancs and Stukas? To benefit the community and responding to what the masses want. Not to what a few people want when a plane is already up to decent standards.
As soon as you said yak-3, you killed your argument. Closest comparison I can think of would be asking for a graphics update and the 109G-10.
Doesn't fill gaps, its just two things you want.
-
As soon as you said yak-3, you killed your argument. Closest comparison I can think of would be asking for a graphics update and the 109G-10.
Doesn't fill gaps, its just two things you want.
I don't know how much more ignorance your bias can bring you.
-
I don't know how much more ignorance your bias can bring you.
Performance is damn close to the Yak-9U. The difference is really like that between the K-4 and the G-10.
We don't need a Yak-3, we need a Yak-7, a Yak-1, earlier Yak-9s. We need MIGs, we need an Lagg-3.
You want the Yak-3 because its a semi-valid excuse to get another LW main area bird.
-
Performance is damn close to the Yak-9U. The difference is really like that between the K-4 and the G-10.
We don't need a Yak-3, we need a Yak-7, a Yak-1, earlier Yak-9s. We need MIGs, we need an Lagg-3.
You want the Yak-3 because its a semi-valid excuse to get another LW main area bird.
You're preaching the same thing to me with the G10 buddy.
-
You're preaching the same thing to me with the G10 buddy.
Be more specific, which part of my post are you referring to?
-
I for one am glad the He111 has finally been added. A truly beautiful aircraft. It was the workhorse of the Luftwaffe during the early years of WWII.
-
Tank, Skorp
(http://community.us.playstation.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/76023iA69AD4A2FF47E2A0/image-size/original?v=mpbl-1&px=-1)
-
Tank-Ace,
Your bias is in your casual dismissal of any other concerns and your persistent requests for only Luftwaffe/Wehrmacht stuff.
Just saw this, thought it warranted a response.
If the choice is between new EW/MW Russian aircraft and updated graphics on the German stuff, I'd pick the new RU birds.
If its a choice between new Allied stuff and new German stuff, it'll come down to the specific aircraft. Although I will admittedly search harder for info, and argue more convincingly if its the German bird that's a higher priority.
But the proposed choices in this argument are updated Yaks and a Yak-3, and updated 109s, and let's say the Ju 88, along with the 109E-7 and any major load outs we're missing, if we're already going to be fiddling with the aircraft.
The latter is clearly of higher value overall.
-
Its what benefits the entire community you greedy fool.
Yeah Tank-Ace. You tell him Skorp! :D
-
Naaahh.... They did Lancaster... They added He111, to round it out (rule of 3) they need to redo the Boston! (or Ju88)
Make it an all-bomber update!
The Lancaster was originally added in the same patch that added the Ju88. The Lancaster is updated and the He111 is added. Seems the Lancaster is implicitly tied to early war German medium bombers at HTC...
-
I for one am glad the He111 has finally been added. A truly beautiful aircraft. It was the workhorse of the Luftwaffe during the early years of WWII.
I'm glad it's being added as well, if only to stop the fanboys from spamming every other aircraft request thread with it :devil
-
I'm glad it's being added as well, if only to stop the fanboys from spamming every other aircraft request thread with it :devil
Aww... It is okay to be jealous. :neener:
-
I was reading in Montgomery's book " Normandy to the Baltic" that the "Gloster Meteor" was on active duty towards the end of war :old:
Dolby will be pleased we have another German plane :old:
-
Dolby will be pleased we have another German plane :old:
:aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok
I have put on order a special He111 for you that is loaded with an extensive assortment of high quality pies.
-
:aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok
I have put on order a special He111 for you that is loaded with an extensive assortment of high quality pies.
so am I just need more beer now
-
Dolby :rofl
-
moin
hope we will get the V1 rocket as a loadout option :-).
cu christian
-
moin
hope we will get the V1 rocket as a loadout option :-).
cu christian
Extremely unlikely. I can think of few things that would be as abused as that.
-
Does Chris not realise the Typhoon is awesome and owned the 111 when ever they met :old:
I am going to shoot Dolby down and have off with his stock of pies :old:
I might leave him one pie and a bottle of real ale, its the Geneva Convention section 2 paragraph 5 i believe :old:
-
I am going to shoot Dolby down and have off with his stock of pies :old:
I might leave him one pie and a bottle of real ale, its the Geneva Convention section 2 paragraph 5 i believe :old:
Very thoughtful, IPA?
-
Way cool!!!!
-
It's the 2 weeks that are gonna get me... :bhead
-
Do you guys think the He111H will be more survivable or less survivable than the G4M1?
I am thinking that it will be less survivable. While it will be tougher, it can't effectively shoot back from any angle. At least the G4M1 has some punch against fighters approaching from the rear.
-
Do you guys think the He111H will be more survivable or less survivable than the G4M1?
I am thinking that it will be less survivable. While it will be tougher, it can't effectively shoot back from any angle. At least the G4M1 has some punch against fighters approaching from the rear.
I think they're just about equal. That rear 20mm is nothing too bad if you can get above/below it. The He-111 would probably be seen more than the G4M in the long run though.
-
Similar. Ultimately, I believe it will see more use than the G4M based on ordnance alone. Time will tell, it is hard to speculate really. We wont know how they will hold up to enemy fire until the new version of AH is released. Even though I knew the G4M was known to be a "weak plane" in the real deal, I never would have guessed it would have been as fragile as it is in AH.
-
Similar. Ultimately, I believe it will see more use than the G4M based on ordnance alone. Time will tell, it is hard to speculate really. We wont know how they will hold up to enemy fire until the new version of AH is released. Even though I knew the G4M was known to be a "weak plane" in the real deal, I never would have guessed it would have been as fragile as it is in AH.
This. Not to mention they were flying fire bombs. A single .50 cal put in the general area of the engine would light it up, provided it sparked. G4M's are less durable than the He-111 and by that fact alone, the He-111 will see more action.
Its not too hard to speculate when you put the facts together. The He-111 will see some massive use in the first week or two but after that it'll be seen as much as the SBD or B5N/D3A.
-
Fragile is an understatement. A fart in the wind will set your Betty on fire. The Betty has Range, Climb and a heavier sting from tail. The Heinkel appears to have better overall coverage, better ords and is probably a bit tougher. Just gotta watch the PW's though.
-
Its not too hard to speculate when you put the facts together. The He-111 will see some massive use in the first week or two but after that it'll be seen as much as the SBD or B5N/D3A.
Both of which are seen quite a lot in AvA, scenarios, snapshots, and FSOs, not to mention EW and MW arenas.
As AckAck said, the MA is not everything that's out there.
- oldman (some may say it isn't even close to the best thing out there)
-
This. Not to mention they were flying fire bombs. A single .50 cal put in the general area of the engine would light it up, provided it sparked. G4M's are less durable than the He-111 and by that fact alone, the He-111 will see more action.
The IJN demanded insane range for a twin engined bomber. Mitsubishi wanted to go to four engines so they could provide armor and self sealing tanks, but the IJN wouldn't hear of it. In order to get the demanded range they had to actually do a wet wing for the G4M, where the skin of the wing is also the fuel tank, and of course they couldn't do self sealing tanks.
The problem I see in the He111 is that its tail, the easiest and most popular attack point for fighters against bombers, is completely undefended.
-
Both of which are seen quite a lot in AvA, scenarios, snapshots, and FSOs, not to mention EW and MW arenas.
As AckAck said, the MA is not everything that's out there.
- oldman (some may say it isn't even close to the best thing out there)
FSO/SE/AvA are obvious exceptions to the use of the He-111. I'm talking MA action only, sure the He-111 is a huge factor in the SE/FSO and sometimes the AvA spectrum, but what it boils down to is how much use it gets in the MA.
(I imply MA as the EWA, MWA, LWA.)
The IJN demanded insane range for a twin engined bomber. Mitsubishi wanted to go to four engines so they could provide armor and self sealing tanks, but the IJN wouldn't hear of it. In order to get the demanded range they had to actually do a wet wing for the G4M, where the skin of the wing is also the fuel tank, and of course they couldn't do self sealing tanks.
The problem I see in the He111 is that its tail, the easiest and most popular attack point for fighters against bombers, is completely undefended.
Glass nose + poor defense = bad day if cannons or even .50 cals are used. Frontal attacks will be just as fatal as rear-end attacks. If I were in the He-111 and I were taking damage from the rear, i'd try to turn myself so I can get my belly guns exposed. Rear end attacks are more dangerous if you can get the belly guns up to the attacker, but its unlikely for it to happen.
-
FSO/SE/AvA are obvious exceptions to the use of the He-111. I'm talking MA action only, sure the He-111 is a huge factor in the SE/FSO and sometimes the AvA spectrum, but what it boils down to is how much use it gets in the MA.
(I imply MA as the EWA, MWA, LWA.)
Honestly, who cares what usage it gets in the LW arena? On the main page, it alludes that the main reason for the He-111 is to plug a hole in the scenario/FSO plane set, which it does.
ack-ack
-
The IJN demanded insane range for a twin engined bomber. Mitsubishi wanted to go to four engines so they could provide armor and self sealing tanks, but the IJN wouldn't hear of it. In order to get the demanded range they had to actually do a wet wing for the G4M, where the skin of the wing is also the fuel tank, and of course they couldn't do self sealing tanks.
The problem I see in the He111 is that its tail, the easiest and most popular attack point for fighters against bombers, is completely undefended.
Much like the Ju-88? I'm thinking its going to be relegated to the suicide torpedo role against CVs off shore in the MA for the most part.
-
Honestly, who cares what usage it gets in the LW arena?
I do :)
-
Honestly, who cares what usage it gets in the LW arena?
A lot more people than you would think.
-
Wmaker's posts quite conventiently bypass the one major fact of the matter....
He claimed you can't carry bombs on the same rack torpedoes used. I got my rack names mixed up at first (I admit that) but I was quite right that the SAME RACK that carried torpedoes was widely used to carry bombs.
He then posts 3 screenfuls of info that simply proved he was wrong, only he doesn't admit that.
The only external hardpoints that I can see in the screenshots are for the torps.
Hard points for the torps aren't the same hard points that are used for the external bombs.
Actually, they are.[...]
My error was mixing up the name ETC2000 with PVC1006. His error was trying to pick a fight (and yes that's what his leading questions were trying to do) when he didn't know what he was talking about. I can even dig up a quote about Heinkels in North Africa that had the PVC (I know the proper name now) bomb rack but couldn't use their torpedoes because they didn't have the arm stops for them, so instead used bombs. The exact same rack. Torps OR bombs, switched out depending on what mission was needed.
Much like the Ju-88? I'm thinking its going to be relegated to the suicide torpedo role against CVs off shore in the MA for the most part.
The side guns on the He-111 could actually fold back somewhat flush. The problem is you only had a very tiny window to see through, so when they were aimed rearward you could barely see out the window. Theoretically with the dorsal gun, the side guns that can point backwards pretty far, and the ventral gondola, the He-111 should have better coverage of fire towards the aft. I know our Ju88 has this big dead zone to either side and along the middle plane. You have to jump up and down to cover the same target and it can be distracting. Theoretically the He-111 has better coverage but might be harder to shoot back with.
-
Post your credible references to support your position then. That's how peer-review works.
-
I love this plane, I will fly it often I think.
Purely because it would be fun to bust GV's in it.
-
Karnak, I wouldn't say that the He 111's rear is completely undefended. It has two MGs covering the rear; the one on top has the vertstab in the way of dead center, but the MG in the ventral gondola does not, and seems to cover at least a couple of degrees above horizontal as well.
You can just see the business end of that MG in this screenshot:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/he111/he111_5.jpg)
-
His error was trying to pick a fight (and yes that's what his leading questions were trying to do) when he didn't know what he was talking about.
You truly are an amazing piece of work. Considering the countless and countless times when you've talked nothing and nothing but nonsense, you have the nerve to spout out the above.
The reason I initially thought PVC wouldn't carry bombs were the differing distance between the carrying arms compared to ETC2000. Then I found out that there is a separate kit to fit different carrying arms for the torpedo. I admitted I was wrong in this very thread. You just slip from the thread quietly just like in the MK!08 vs. MGFF case..
There is a very very good reason why HT christened a BS-scale with your name! :lol
-
Post your credible references to support your position then. That's how peer-review works.
1nil to shida :old:
Whats IPA Dolby?
by the way your fantastic :banana:
-
All new stuff welcome...........
I agree that a separate H1 version should be available for a defined BoB role.......... after that its apretty versatile ac with loads of options re load outs..........
IMO if you want to see some real use in the MA HTC should add the He111 H20 R1 & R2 variants (7 troops & supplies??) ........... which would also serve very well in any future Stalingrad scenario.......... (He 111H's were modified to carry wounded troops out and suppliesin to the Cauldron)
and yeah.........More Yaks........... including the Yak 3.... cos I want it
-
The IJN demanded insane range for a twin engined bomber. Mitsubishi wanted to go to four engines so they could provide armor and self sealing tanks, but the IJN wouldn't hear of it. In order to get the demanded range they had to actually do a wet wing for the G4M, where the skin of the wing is also the fuel tank, and of course they couldn't do self sealing tanks.
The problem I see in the He111 is that its tail, the easiest and most popular attack point for fighters against bombers, is completely undefended.
It remains to be seen if the dorsal and ventral guns can pivot far enough to cover the dead six of the He111. Obviously, the dorsal turret has that pesky vertical stabilizer in the way, but the ventral gun just may have a shot higher than parallel with the fuselage.
On that note, I'm very surprised the B25 top turret did not have the capability to pivot lower than it can in AH. I've done a lot of digging to try and find a source showing the firing angles but have found nothing. My flight instructor was a B25 pilot at the very tail end of WWII and also during the Korean Conflict and he couldn't remember if the top turret could fire lower than parallel or not.
-
Extremely unlikely. I can think of few things that would be as abused as that.
why not, it did see use in wwII and use your fantasi how it will be usable in the main. maybe like the old ship gunnery option.
cu christian
-
All new stuff welcome...........
I agree that a separate H1 version should be available for a defined BoB role..........
After looking around the internet, it looks like H1 to H4 versions at least participated in the BoB, and possibly the H5. The following says these versions including the H5 were in the BoB, and "the Blitz", which is just after the BoB. So if someone has more specific dates, that'd be nice.
H-1
The H-1 was similar to the H-0. One hundred and thirty six had been produced by the outbreak of war in 1939, and the type would see service in the campaigns of 1939 and 1940.
H-2
Five hundred and two H-2s were built during 1939. It differed from the H-1 in the choice of engine, using a 1,100hp Jumo 211A-3 to replace the A-1 of the H-1. During the production run three extra MG 15s were added, two beam guns, one on each side, just above the ventral gondola, and one forward firing MG 15 in the ventral gondola. A fifth crewman was added to man the beam guns.
H-3
The H-3 saw another increase in engine power, this time to 1,200hp with the Jumo D-1. More guns were again added, this time a second MG 15 in the upper nose. The front gondola gun was sometimes replaced by a 20mm cannon, used as an anti-shipping weapon. The H-3 also armour added to protect the crew positions. Five hundred and four H-3s were produced - 182 by Heinkel, 196 by Arado at Brandenburg, 126 by ATG at Leipzig.
H-4
The H-4 was the first of the H series to use external bomb racks. The port bomb bay was replaced by an extra fuel tank, while the starboard bomb bay remained available for bombs. However, most weapons were now carried on either PVC 1006 or ETC 2000 external bomb racks, which allowed the aircraft to carry a wider variety of heavier bombs. The payload remained at 4,400lbs on the 150 H-4s. Early aircraft were powered by the Jumo 211D-1, later replaced by the 1,400hp Jumo 211F-1.
H-5
The five hundred H-5s saw an increase in the variety of bombs that could be carried. As well as the 4,400lb combinations used by earlier models, the H-5 could also carry a single SC 2500 bomb (2500kg/ 5511lbs) or two 1686lb torpedoes. The H-1 to H-5 were the main variants of the He 111 used during the Battle of Britain and the Blitz.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_he111H.html (http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_he111H.html)
One thing it says about the H4 with external bomb rack is that the port-left bomb bay had a fuel tank put in it.
In the graphic bombs are coming out of the left bomb bay, so that would indicate that it wasn't an H4:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/he111/he111_5.jpg)
So is it possible that HTC is going to release two versions, an H1-3 for BoB, and a subsequent H4-5 or greater for torpedos?
Inquiring minds want to know... :)
-
why not, it did see use in wwII and use your fantasi how it will be usable in the main. maybe like the old ship gunnery option.
cu christian
If the V1 would be modeled even remeotely realistic, you wouldn't be able to hit anything with it in AH. The V1 had even trouble to hit Geater London, which would be a sector sized target in AH.
-
If the V1 would be modeled even remeotely realistic, you wouldn't be able to hit anything with it in AH. The V1 had even trouble to hit Geater London, which would be a sector sized target in AH.
The reason why the V1 had troubles hitting Greater London was due more to the BDA reporting of double agents than the inaccuracies of the V1 itself.
-
The reason why the V1 had troubles hitting Greater London was due more to the BDA reporting of double agents than the inaccuracies of the V1 itself.
I think you are underestimating the inherent inaccuracy of the He111 / V1 combination :)
-
I do :)
But is this statistical meaningful?
HiTech :)
-
But is this statistical meaningful?
HiTech :)
:lol
I'm 100% of myself, so... yes :P
-
why not, it did see use in wwII and use your fantasi how it will be usable in the main. maybe like the old ship gunnery option.
cu christian
The only way it would be used in the MA would be as a direct fire rocket, fired while diving towards the target.
-
It remains to be seen if the dorsal and ventral guns can pivot far enough to cover the dead six of the He111. Obviously, the dorsal turret has that pesky vertical stabilizer in the way, but the ventral gun just may have a shot higher than parallel with the fuselage.
On that note, I'm very surprised the B25 top turret did not have the capability to pivot lower than it can in AH. I've done a lot of digging to try and find a source showing the firing angles but have found nothing. My flight instructor was a B25 pilot at the very tail end of WWII and also during the Korean Conflict and he couldn't remember if the top turret could fire lower than parallel or not.
They cant shoot lower than parallel, newer or older designs. You can see the physical stops (bulky boxyish looking) in the turret which the guns were affixed to.
(http://home.mchsi.com/~anderson.kevin/pics/b25h_top_turret.jpg)
(http://www.warbirdphotographs.com/AirExpo/B25-TopTurret-2.jpg)
-
The only way it would be used in the MA would be as a direct fire rocket, fired while diving towards the target.
moin
technickaly it should be posible to click on the map to set an aim point and if your bomber get in range you can fire the rocket and the rocket will fly to the aim point you have set on the map. the hit acuracy would be nearly the same as the original. If i remember the alt 8inch gunnery, lol i mostly hit nothing hehe.
cu christian
-
Hehe!
I'm 100% of myself, so... yes Neener! Neener!
Pie chart or it didn't happen :D
-
Dagnabbit, I want to try flying a He-111 already!
-
Pie chart or it didn't happen :D
Yes
Where is Lusche when you need him :old:
Probably polishing his riding crop :old:
-
my misses just asked me why there is a thread titled 'Hell is HERE!'
-
Where is Lusche when you need him
Probably polishing his riding crop
I had to look that up. How dare you using words unknown to me! :old:
-
I thought Hermann Goring carried a riding crop everywhere with him in the war. Or was it a Toblerone? :old:
-
I thought Hermann Goring carried a riding crop everywhere with him in the war. Or was it a Toblerone? :old:
No no, it was cylindrical. :old:
-
That was just the container with a time lock on it. No self control! :old:
-
I thought it contained those little chocolate mint disc thingys one often finds at a posh restaurant with the bill :old:
-
You truly are an amazing piece of work. Considering the countless and countless times when you've talked nothing and nothing but nonsense, you have the nerve to spout out the above.
The reason I initially thought PVC wouldn't carry bombs were the differing distance between the carrying arms compared to ETC2000. Then I found out that there is a separate kit to fit different carrying arms for the torpedo. I admitted I was wrong in this very thread. You just slip from the thread quietly just like in the MK!08 vs. MGFF case..
There is a very very good reason why HT christened a BS-scale with your name! :lol
No, you glossed over it. You didn't admit anything. You found out only AFTER trying to pick a fight. Then you pretended you were simply stating the facts, which you learned only after looking the info up AFTER your initial posts stirring trouble up.
Quite literally, you didn't know the answer when you started the fight. You literally didn't know what you were talking about. Once you did, you failed to admit this. You admit it only in a back-handed way, trying to avoid blame.
Oh, and P.S. The "krusty scale" is an un-earned thing that only a handful of people harp about. The topic at the time was historic bomber cruising speeds during combat vs what we have in AH (full throttle). I was correct at the time but HT didn't want to hear anymore so he chose to poke fun at me. He wasn't even participating much in the thread. I took the hint and backed off, but frankly it wasn't a criticism I deserved.
-
No, you glossed over it. You didn't admit anything.
Yeah because every time you are wrong you're the first to admit it :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
but frankly it wasn't a criticism I deserved.
To be fair your 6,000 other inaccuracies per year have made up for it.
-
Yeah because every time you are wrong you're the first to admit it :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
To be fair your 6,000 other inaccuracies per year have made up for it.
Coming from you, somebody that enjoys trolling threads just to bait me, and makes up things just for the sake of being argumentative in previous posts, this means absolutely nothing nrshida.
Your word on my accuracy means nothing.
-
Coming from you, somebody that enjoys trolling threads just to bait me, and makes up things just for the sake of being argumentative in previous posts, this means absolutely nothing nrshida.
I wouldn't call it trolling so much as exploiting an endless source of comedy.
What's your point berating Wmaker over this point? It isn't to find the truth or discuss what was what about the He-111. You're just trying to get even with him because he corrects you a lot (and rightly so), and everyone can see it.
Everything you accuse other people of doing you do yourself, including insulting and making attacks on other players and I don't remember the last time YOU admitted you were wrong.
Your word on my accuracy means nothing.
I don't care, how about everybody else's word then? :rofl :rofl
Don't you find it a little strange that you seem to always be the victim Krusty, the one who does no wrong and always gets attacked? If it was just me you might have a case. Didn't you just the other day try to explain to Mace, a trained Naval aviator what a trim tab was? Was he just trolling you too then with his response?
:lol What a maroon.
-
No, you glossed over it. You didn't admit anything. You found out only AFTER trying to pick a fight. Then you pretended you were simply stating the facts, which you learned only after looking the info up AFTER your initial posts stirring trouble up.
Said it right here:
Actually, yes, PVC could carry bombs when different attachment points (than the ones used to carry the torpedo) were installed in the rack itself.
I didn't pick any fight to begin with. I was frustrated that you can't give sources properly but that's what you do. I didn't see any bomb racks so I asked what racks you meant. Wasn't picking any fights. But you really aren't worth communicating anyway.
Oh, and P.S. The "krusty scale" is an un-earned thing that only a handful of people harp about. The topic at the time was historic bomber cruising speeds during combat vs what we have in AH (full throttle). I was correct at the time but HT didn't want to hear anymore so he chose to poke fun at me. He wasn't even participating much in the thread. I took the hint and backed off, but frankly it wasn't a criticism I deserved.
:lol
Originally, no. It had nothing to do with bomber cruising speeds. :) One would think you'd atleast get this one correct. :lol
It had to do with elevator authority of the 262 after a change was made to it. You claimed that the elevator authority was reduced at 200 to 350mph to which Hitech commented that no change had been made to the control forces at below 320mph...and of course then made that particular very fitting comment. Hitech has referred to it after that but that's when the scale was introduced. :) And yes, you completely deserved it. :)
One would think you'd remember considering it was in a thread you started yourself: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,248753.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,248753.0.html)
Here's your post from that thread:
I'm specifically talking about a range from ... say... 200 to 350mph. Where you're in a furball but not really slowing down to stall out. You have a target, he's about to break away from you. You can't follow the target, but you can pull hard on the stick, get your nose into his flight path, lob some 30mm, and land hits. Now you can't do that "nose skid" (whatever the term for it is).
Accelerated stall may not be the proper term. It's that mush-thing that the P-38 also does where you can pitch the nose up and still maintain your previous direction momentarily as you skid along your previous path.
I was not able to do this against the offline drones last night. Tried a number of times. Climbed to 15k and dove vertically straight down, and could not rip the wingtips of either. Could not get past 6Gs on the meter, it seemed.
Not stating things as clearly as I wanted to, yes. BS? No. Definitely can feel a difference trying to take potshots at drones and definitely feel a difference at top-speed high-Gs (although the latter isn't really going to affect ability to get kills like the former will)
To which Hitech replied:
Bigger BS Meter alert I would say in the order of 85 KRUSTYs.
Nothing has changed below 320 MPH, and at that speed you will be in a black out before you could stall the plane. So as my original post said, Nothing has changed in the range where you could perform an Accelerated Stall.
P.S. Btw, if someone wants a laugh, search hitech's posts with the search word krusty. :lol
P.P.S Sorry to the guys that would rather have this thread to be more about He111....but sometimes.... <sigh>
-
(http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=382&d=1214037416)
-
Wmaker,
Looking at the chart you provided only the H1 has the reduced HP,I see no listing for the H2 but from the H3 to H6 they all have the same engines. The difference in speeds is almost not worth mentioning and the H4 is only 5KM faster than the reduced HP H1.
Honestly I dont see what the fuss is all about,not saying that you{Wmaker} are causing a fuss but some people just cant be happy with anything.. :rolleyes:
Seems if we get a H4 model then it wont be too fast for BoB and the fastest the H6 is only 15KM faster than the H1.
Of course I'm biased.... I tend to fly the german planes... :devil
:salute
-
Wmaker,
Looking at the chart you provided only the H1 has the reduced HP,I see no listing for the H2 but from the H3 to H6 they all have the same engines. The difference in speeds is almost not worth mentioning and the H4 is only 5KM faster than the reduced HP H1.
Yeh, I understand what you mean and I've had similar thoughts. OTOH, +12mph can have significant impact (especially with these early war aircraft) in situations where the time available for the interception is limited due to the tactical situation before and during the engagement.
Anyway, weather the top speed will be 410km/h or 430km/h, it'll be significant improvement to the BoB gameplay IMO.
Here's a quick and dirty estimate where the He111 speed could fall into based on that data I posted:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/genchar2t_zpsb9f6155b.jpg)
Also, one thing that affects the overall situation is the fact that Hurricane got a fairly significant speed boost below its engine's critical altitude with the recent re-model but also lost that 'kink' that almost looks like a second supercharger gear which the real Hurricane Mk.I never had.
Hurricane speed chart before the re-model:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/genchart_zps889e8779.png)
-
Yeh, I understand what you mean and I've had similar thoughts. OTOH, +12mph can have significant impact (especially with these early war aircraft) in situations where the time available for the interception is limited due to the tactical situation before and during the engagement.
Anyway, weather the top speed will be 410km/h or 430km/h, it'll be significant improvement to the BoB gameplay IMO.
Here's a quick and dirty estimate where the He111 speed could fall into based on that data I posted:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/genchar2t_zpsb9f6155b.jpg)
Also, one thing that affects the overall situation is the fact that Hurricane got a fairly significant speed boost below its engine's critical altitude with the recent re-model but also lost that 'kink' that almost looks like a second supercharger gear which the real Hurricane Mk.I never had.
Hurricane speed chart before the re-model:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/genchart_zps889e8779.png)
Our Ju88 has WEP? :noid :D
-
Our Ju88 has WEP? :noid :D
Sure it does, ask the 3 gunners to breath out fast and you will get a .1 MHP boost for 3 secs every 6 secs. Sadly the gunners get puffed after 30secs of this and they pass out for 1 min.
-
Sure it does, ask the 3 gunners to breath out fast and you will get a .1 MHP boost for 3 secs every 6 secs. Sadly the gunners get puffed after 30secs of this and they pass out for 1 min.
Oh? I thought the 88's WEP involved the crew having a dump before taking off. :headscratch:
-
Yeh, I understand what you mean and I've had similar thoughts. OTOH, +12mph can have significant impact (especially with these early war aircraft) in situations where the time available for the interception is limited due to the tactical situation before and during the engagement.
Anyway, weather the top speed will be 410km/h or 430km/h, it'll be significant improvement to the BoB gameplay IMO.
Here's a quick and dirty estimate where the He111 speed could fall into based on that data I posted:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/genchar2t_zpsb9f6155b.jpg)
Also, one thing that affects the overall situation is the fact that Hurricane got a fairly significant speed boost below its engine's critical altitude with the recent re-model but also lost that 'kink' that almost looks like a second supercharger gear which the real Hurricane Mk.I never had.
Hurricane speed chart before the re-model:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/genchart_zps889e8779.png)
The Jumo 211 engine had a two-speed supercharger, so the speed curve would be notched like on the Ju 87D (same engine).
The speed curve should in fact be very similar to that of the Ju 87:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=62&p2=76&pw=0>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
-
The Jumo 211 engine had a two-speed supercharger, so the speed curve would be notched like on the Ju 87D (same engine).
The speed curve should in fact be very similar to that of the Ju 87:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=62&p2=76&pw=0>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
Yeh you are correct regarding the He111, I just quickly drew it based on that single speed point (410-430km/h@6000m) as the bombers in the scenario fly at altitudes where the performance at the lower gear rarely matters, shouldn't have continued the lines to sea level at all, my bad.
Here's the only He111 speed curve (Soviet intelligence) I have off hand:
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/Aircraft-evaluation-25_zps1f792fe6.jpg)
Ahh, found another from the depths of my HD! :)
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/Aircraft-evaluation-26_zps97ce9373.jpg)
I must say I'm a bit puzzled regarding those speed curves for AH since both the Ju88A-4 and Ju87D-3 used Jumo 211J (two-stage supercharger, infinitely variable AFAIK). That would mean that Ju-88 curve is correct and considering that Ju-87D-3 has the same engine, its speed curve should have a similar shape as far as I know.
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=30&p2=76&pw=0>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
-
(http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=382&d=1214037416)
I hope the services are open, i need a cuppa after this reading..
-
Ok, so the HE 111 is finally here!
There was concern expressed in this post that we would be getting a hybrid. Well, that was basically agreed on. Where the argument came in was would this version do for the BoB scenario?
whats the outcome? Anyone conducted any tests yet? I know I have flown the Heinkel offline and it seems slow (Think I got her up to 231) however there are some large bombs with her as well as the 20mm cannons.
Will she do for the scenario or is it a post BoB varient we've got?
-
Anyone conducted any tests yet?
Quick sustained climb test for a first impression
50% fuel, 1x1800kg bomb.
Climb to
5k ~6mins
10k ~12mins
15K ~20mins
20k ~31mins with climbrate quickly diminishing. 38 minutes of fuel left upon reaching that altitude.
-
now what ? :headscratch:
-
For BoB tests use 100% fuel, eight 250kg bombs and the default machine gun only armament.
I don't have my system set up right now so I can't do flight tests.
-
Great addition. We don't need the most greatestfastestbiggestgunzhoa ndrun aircraft......we have enough for the first person shooter community in this game already.
He111....one of the most beautiful bombers in my opinion. It was THEE early war workhorse for the Luftwaffe and they made more then 152 of them :aok
-
What are all of its available ordnance packages? :pray
-
Ordnance:
32x 50kg
8x 250kg
2x 500kg + 835lt bomb bay tank
1x 1000kg + 835lt bomb bay tank
2x 1000kg
1x 1800kg
Gun Packages:
6x 7.9mm
5x 7.9mm 1x 20mm (2 of these packages. Cannon either in the nose of the Ventral)
4x 7.9mm 2x 20mm
-
What are all of its available ordnance packages? :pray
32x50kg
8x250kg
2x500kg + bomb bay tank
1x1000kg + bomb bay tank
2x1000kg
1x1800kg
2x Torpedo
bay tank adds 1/2 hour at FB 2.0 for a total endurance @SL of 2.7h
-
They added the rather rare and field-mod nose 20mm option? Why?
Seems to pander a bit to the "I want" crowd despite past HTC policies.
-
They added the rather rare and field-mod nose 20mm option? Why?
Seems to pander a bit to the "I want" crowd despite past HTC policies.
Pony B is now not the only field modded plane in the game :)
-
Pony B is now not the only field modded plane in the game :)
Malcolm hood isn't quite a field mod. Doesn't count.
-
Love how the bombs tumble out tail first. :aok and flying her around with all that glass in the nose is just plain fun :airplane:
-
I swear I just read this.
A mod in the field isn't a field mod.
:D
-
That's a link directly up to the post I just made, but changing the words I said....
:confused:
-
I swear I just read this.
:D
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Malcolm hood isn't quite a field mod. Doesn't count.
LOL Thanks for the laugh, just like the B-25c gun package wasn't a field mod either. HTC has a VERY loose rule about field mods and bend it when it whenever they want.
-
LOL Thanks for the laugh, just like the B-25c gun package wasn't a field mod either. HTC has a VERY loose rule about field mods and bend it when it whenever they want.
werd.
-
LOL Thanks for the laugh, just like the B-25c gun package wasn't a field mod either. HTC has a VERY loose rule about field mods and bend it when it whenever they want.
You seem to not really know the story behind the Malcolm Hood. It was NAA engineers that designed it. It wasn't just a spitfire canopy bolted on. It was a custom built part that NAA issued to replace canopies at the depot level. It actually took a lot of effort to install.
From: http://www.mustangsmustangs.us/thehangar/index.php?PHPSESSID=sfvdf5rtbq58jkso2shkdfcq30&topic=846.msg3649#msg3649
The history of the Malcolm hood on the P-51 is full of misconceptions. First, it is not an adaption of a (much smaller) Spitfire hood. They are totally different airplanes, with different dimensions and cross sections. The blown hood was merely inspired by that produced for the Spitfire. RAF test records indicate that the engineering work for the blown Mustang hood was done in the UK by North American Aviation engineers (i.e., it was an NAA engineered design, not a British one, thus factory approved and "official" as opposed to some cobbled up field mod.) Once a prototype was tested (on a Mustang I), production was turned over to Malcolm Ltd. to refine it for production, and produce the kits. The engineering required a lot of internal airframe modifications, and the stresses and aerodynamics were all considered. The Malcolm hood kit took about 135 manhours to install. It wasn't simply an unbolt the old one and bolt on the new one affair. Kits were issued at both depot and squadron levels. New canopy side rails had to built up, the runners for the canopy installed, the internal structure for supporting the hood rails had to be added, the hand cranking mechanism had to be installed and a new jettison mechanism fitted.
And your commentary from the B-25 corner....
Per Joe Baugher:
The idea of modifying the B-25 as a "strafer" seems to have originated with NAA field service representative Jack Fox and Major Paul I. "Pappy" Gunn of the 3rd Bombardment Group. Fox and Gunn satisfied General Kenney that this was an idea worth trying, and the General gave them authorization to proceed.
B-25C serial number 41-12437 was chosen for the initial tests. Since in a low-level, high-speed attack the bombs would be released by the pilot, there was no need for a bombardier. Consequently, the bombardier position was removed and replaced with a package of four fixed 0.50-inch machine guns with 500 rpg and aimed directly forward. The guns protruded from a metal plate that replaced the flat bomb-aiming panel. In addition, four more fixed 0.50-inch machine guns were installed in individual external blisters, two on each side of the fuselage. Blast protection from the fuselage blister guns was achieved by using blast tubes on the gun barrels and by mounting large sheet metal plates on the fuselage sides that covered the entire blast area. The plane was appropriately named "Pappy's Folly". In the first tests, the fuselage guns were found to be too far forward for the center of gravity, and were later moved further aft.
Trials were sufficiently impressive for General Kenney to order more strafer conversions. By the end of February 1943, twelve strafers were completed by the Eagle Farms operation in Australia and assigned to the 90th Squadron.
(... snip out a combat encounter ...)
The strafer concept was so successful that by September 1943, 175 B-25Cs and Ds had been converted for low-level strafing by the depot at Townsville, Australia. By that time, five squadrons had been so equipped.
These were ordered from a high ranking General, assembled at factories and then shipped to squadrons for use.
So, you're implying something inaccurate on both accounts.
-
Ordnance:
32x 50kg
8x 250kg
2x 500kg + 835lt bomb bay tank
1x 1000kg + 835lt bomb bay tank
2x 1000kg
1x 1800kg
Gun Packages:
6x 7.9mm
5x 7.9mm 1x 20mm (2 of these packages. Cannon either in the nose of the Ventral)
4x 7.9mm 2x 20mm
That's... pretty dang flexible, sweet!
I wonder if we can request a 4x 250kg + 835lt tank loadout?
Pony B is now not the only field modded plane in the game :)
Please give the 190s some of THAT lovin'!!!!
-
I forgot the 2x torps as well.
So yes, very flexible. But the question remains
Will she do for the BoB scenario or not? I know Lusches post shows she climbs like a elephant that is carrying a house stuck in wet concrete, but is that consistant with BoB speed as well?
-
well the gondola 20mm is as good as useless in the gondola, giving you the FOV of a tank driver position
-
They added the rather rare and field-mod nose 20mm option? Why?
Seems to pander a bit to the "I want" crowd despite past HTC policies.
MG-FF in glass nose of the He111 is just another Rüstsatz. It's not some one-off field mod done by a certain unit. It is a factory produced kit and that's the reason why the installations all look the same for example when looking at the photos. Rüstsatzes could be at times installed at the factory and there are several sources mentioning that H-6 variants left the factory with the MG-FF cannon in the nose (there were also H-6s which had the machine gun).
Considering how much photographic evidence of its use can be found, it definately deserved to be included.
-
Will she do for the BoB scenario or not?
Will work just fine.
-
These were ordered from a high ranking General, assembled at factories and then shipped to squadrons for use.
So, you're implying something inaccurate on both accounts.
As usual you mix part truth with part wishful thinking.
With regard to P-51 hood, it was indeed designed by NAA engineers but it was a purpose built field modification package to be installed at the depot or forward area, hence a "Field Mod".
In regard to your position on the B-25 you are once again mixing fact with your opinion. The gunship concept was indeed driven by Gen. Kenny and working with NAA reps in the field, they modified the B-25C's to do the job. The B-25c gun package with 4 guns in the nose was NEVER built in a factory. The early cheek gun packages were developed in the field and eventually brought back to the states for further evaluation. The early gun packs were NEVER installed at either the Los Angeles or Kansas City plant. All B-25C's were either modified in the field or in Australia for the 5th AF. I have done more than enough research to know I can back this up with HTC. I have more then enough evidence about the delivery of B-25's to prove my point.
-
Is it me or are the pilot / copilot of the HE111 extremely bummed out? :rofl Somebody get these guys some Zoloft
(http://i1331.photobucket.com/albums/w593/Username71/ahss2_zps2e5ca94e.png)
-
With regard to P-51 hood, it was indeed designed by NAA engineers but it was a purpose built field modification package to be installed at the depot or forward area, hence a "Field Mod".
That isn't what people mean when they say "field mod". They mean stuff designed and implemented by the guys at the field. Things like the B-17s with 20mm cannons in the tail.
Under your definition every Rüstsatzes kit would be considered a field modification. Clipping or unclipping the wings of a Spitfire, or changing its guns on a 'universal' wing would also be a field mod by your definition.
The entire Sherman VC 'Firefly' would be a field mod.
-
Is it me or are the pilot / copilot of the HE111 extremely bummed out? :rofl Somebody get these guys some Zoloft
(http://i1331.photobucket.com/albums/w593/Username71/ahss2_zps2e5ca94e.png)
Gunning ain't easy, man :/
(http://media.moddb.com/images/members/1/301/300594/sad_gunner.png)
-
Baumer, you are the one twisting things here... Field mods at a depot level aren't field mods. Did you know that B-29s had to undergo over 50 "modifications" after leaving factories before they were even allowed to be distributed to squadrons? These are not "field mods." They are systematic changes done at a level above some average Joe in a squadron taking things into his own hands. Field mods are akin to P-38s carrying 6x50cal, or IL2s that had the aft fuselage carved out and a gunner stuck there when none was supposed to be there.
Wmaker, key words there are H-6. For an H-3 yes a MG/FF in the nose was a field mod. If they have given us an He-111 with torpedoes and an He-111 with a nose 20mm MG/FF gun, has anybody checked the specs on the engine power? It seems like they gave us a version very much post-dating the BOB which it was intended for in the first place. Given that the bombload includes a large selection of over-sized bombs up to and including the 1600kg, it seems like all the indicators point to a post-BOB H-6 model that shouldn't ever be used in the BOB scenario.
Now that I think about it, the fuel tanks in the bomb bays are signature of the H-5 and H-6 models. First introduced in the H-4, which was a short run leading up to the H-5 and mostly didn't see service in the BOB. It also had engines with between 140-200hp more (per engine) than the H-3 carried.
It seems HTC gave us an entirely inappropriate model for the BOB.
-
That isn't what people mean when they say "field mod". They mean stuff designed and implemented by the guys at the field. Things like the B-17s with 20mm cannons in the tail.
Under your definition every Rüstsatzes kit would be considered a field modification. Clipping or unclipping the wings of a Spitfire, or changing its guns on a 'universal' wing would also be a field mod by your definition.
The entire Sherman VC 'Firefly' would be a field mod.
Per numerous discussions with HTC that is correct, they should not be allowed, and HTC has used that argument to defend not allowing certain Rüstsatzes kits in the past.
All I am trying to say is that HTC has a lot of leeway in how they choose to implement their own rules. And they use that wiggle room when it suits their purposes, being generous in some aspects and not in others.
-
A rutsatz does not a field mod make, HOWEVER, there are some that are rutsatz kits which NEVER saw use or service. Those would be a field mod.
Don't spin it Baumer. B-25 strafers and Malcolm Hoods are not field mods. Nor are 20mm gondolas on a Bf109.
-
Who cares if the 20mm were a field modification....
stay behind it and you don't have to worry about it....
-
Baumer, you are the one twisting things here... Field mods at a depot level aren't field mods. Did you know that B-29s had to undergo over 50 "modifications" after leaving factories before they were even allowed to be distributed to squadrons? These are not "field mods." They are systematic changes done at a level above some average Joe in a squadron taking things into his own hands. Field mods are akin to P-38s carrying 6x50cal, or IL2s that had the aft fuselage carved out and a gunner stuck there when none was supposed to be there.
Wmaker, key words there are H-6. For an H-3 yes a MG/FF in the nose was a field mod. If they have given us an He-111 with torpedoes and an He-111 with a nose 20mm MG/FF gun, has anybody checked the specs on the engine power? It seems like they gave us a version very much post-dating the BOB which it was intended for in the first place. Given that the bombload includes a large selection of over-sized bombs up to and including the 1600kg, it seems like all the indicators point to a post-BOB H-6 model that shouldn't ever be used in the BOB scenario.
Now that I think about it, the fuel tanks in the bomb bays are signature of the H-5 and H-6 models. First introduced in the H-4, which was a short run leading up to the H-5 and mostly didn't see service in the BOB. It also had engines with between 140-200hp more (per engine) than the H-3 carried.
It seems HTC gave us an entirely inappropriate model for the BOB.
Is it possible we got a plane that will work for BOB far better than anything else we have substituted, and also be possibly worthwhile for use in the MA?
-
Is it possible we got a plane that will work for BOB far better than anything else we have substituted, and also be possibly worthwhile for use in the MA?
No. There isn't any He111 suited to the MA.
-
If you make the scenario rules for the BoB, Heinkels can only have MG's.
Then you essentially have a BoB Heinkel.
Plus the Bombload is lovely.
-
If you make the scenario rules for the BoB, Heinkels can only have MG's.
Then you essentially have a BoB Heinkel.
What is the speed of a BoB He111 and what is the speed of the He111 in AH?
That is the major issue with the Ju88A-4 in that setting. It is significantly faster than the BoB era Ju88A-5.
-
A-1 was the BOB era Ju88. Not A-5. :)
-
Wmaker, key words there are H-6. For an H-3 yes a MG/FF in the nose was a field mod.
You initially said that the nose 20mm was a field mod, period. Now you are starting backpedal again. I don't recall seeing H-3s with 20 mm in the nose, a photo of one would go a along way determining wheather it is a factory kit or something that was fabricated in the field. So can you post a pic? Not that it matters as HTC hasn't specified which H AH models, and as has been noted, it has features from several H sub variants. Nothing wrong in having the cannon which H-6 had, something that can be disabled from the host settings for BoB-scenario.
As far as the speed, I'll wait for HTCs performance charts.
-
IIRC there were both Ju 88A-1 and A-5s in the BoB. The A-5 was an interim model, basically an A-1 but with the longer span outer wings from the A-4. In mid 1941 the A-4 also added more powerful engines, plus better guns and armour protection.
-
The biggest surprise to me so far is the OBJ rating of the He 111. It's 10, almost same as the B-24 (9). :rofl
-
should it be lower ?
-
should it be lower ?
Yea, with carrying less ords at much lower speeds, lower altitude and much less able to defend itself than the B-24 it should absolutely have a lower OBJ, maybe 2 like B-29? ;)
-
1000Kg bombs can ruin a town though. I got 9000+ damage from 1 run on 1 town.
-
The HE-111 in AH2 is Jumo powered not Daimler powered. Its top speed is in the mid 200's. So its catchable by Spit 1's and Hurri 1's
unlike our 88s
-
OBj works the same way for bombing as ENY does for (air) combat: The lower your bomber's OBJ is, the less perks you get for destroying the same target.
So the bigger the bombload is you are carrying and the higher the OBJ, the more perks you can get out of a single sortie.
To show the theoretical perk gaining capabilities of the formation bombers in AH, I simply multiplied the OBJ rating with the max amount of actual explosive power a bomber can carry:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/bpf_zpse3028fef.jpg)
The higher the resulting "BPF", the more perks you can theoretically get from a single sortie (for example town miling)
Of course, in reality this theoretical value is very much influenced practically by a bombers survival rating.
As you can see, the BPF of the He 111 is already very low, and if you then factor in the much lower chance the Heinkel has to making it's way to it's targets (and back) compared to a B-24 or B-17...
Or mabye the best comparison is He-111 vs B-26. Both carry about the same amount of ords (8x250kg vs 8x500lbs), but in comparison the B-26 climbs like a rocket and runs like a sports car while carrying a substantial defensive punch. But He 111 OBJ is 10, B-26 OBJ is 18.
You actually get punished in terms of perks for taking the 'worse' plane. It's almost as if the P-39 had a lower ENY than the Spit 16 ;)
-
Krusty.
I don't know if you are right or wrong with your observations you share in this game.
I do know I appreciate your attention and passion and your efforts to help this game stay historically correct.
:salute Thank you
Krusty is my friend :)
-
Climb profiles in comparison: B-26, Ju-88, He-111 at about same bombload and fuel endurance (MIL at SL):
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/CPcomp_zpsce3cadae.jpg)
-
I'd say the He111H will be just fine for BoB-events...
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=126&p2=30&pw=0>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
-
I thought the in game chart I looked at last night had it at about 260-265mph at best altitude.
I may have misread it.
-
The tail end comes off the He-111 as easy as the 410, that's for sure.
-
The He-111 also has a placard limit of 2.7G. The wings come off at 4G and that's when it's lightly loaded.
-
If we only had a working, populated EW arena. The 32x50kg is a great loadout for City attacks, but it doesn't makes much sense to do that if you are the only player on your country... :old:
-
Is it possible we got a plane that will work for BOB far better than anything else we have substituted, and also be possibly worthwhile for use in the MA?
I too am VERY happy with the He 111 that we got, the point I was trying to make is that HTC has a very liberal policy about what constitutes a factory aircraft. They will move the "factory" line as they see fit to get most out of a particular model.
What I personally disagree with is the propensity for HTC to adopt depot level changes for allied aircraft, but hold many axis aircraft to much tougher standards. This situation is brought about in significant part by the major differences in how the aircraft delivery and supply structures varied from the axis and allied sides. For example there was a very clear process within the Army Air Force from acceptance to delivery at the combat squadron level. This involved many organizations and places where aircraft were stored, aggregated, and depoted, until they were assigned final destinations. This lead to a situation where, in general, there were relatively few changes to most aircraft once they reached their combat assignment. On the other hand both of the major axis air forces had a much more direct approach to aircraft delivery (in some cases the combat pilots would actually pick them up at the factory) and much more modification happened at the squadron level.
I am very pleased with the Heinkel and the options it has in game.
-
Originally I tried to keep things fairly tight on loadouts because that could have a big effect on special events. The CM's couldn't restrict loadouts in events back then. They can now so it's not as big of an issue. I'm not sure what's meant by the axis being held to a tougher standard.
-
How to Furball with the He111:
1.- Choose the 2 - 20mm option.
2.- Take 25% fuel and a gunner. He sits in the nose then forward gondola as rounds run out.
3.- What you do with the bombs is your business. I'd get rid of them first thing.
4.- Find other planes to attack. Saddle up and yell "shoot" to your gunner as you reflexively pull your trigger.
This might make an interesting duel in the DA if the He111 were enabled. Team He111 duels anyone.... :D
-
HTC needs to double check the OBJ scores of a LOT of aircraft, imo. First, the score of 10 should be applied to "catch all" planes like the P51D. Have 10 be the standard as it is now, but have the OBJ score a bit more dynamic. The plane that still boggles my mind is the Ju88. A players ears FEWER perks points in a Ju88 than if he was in a B17.
More should go in to the OBJ score than just ordnance, and on some aircraft it does. The Ar234's do not really carry much ord (3300lbs), but it has the speed to get in and get out without being touched.
I think there is too big of a gap between the B5N and Boston, and the Lancaster and B24 crowd. Also, I think it would be wise to apply a perk price to the Lancster, B24, and B17. Even if the cost is minimal I believe it to be warranted thanks to the amount of destruction they cause, the defensive armament they present, and the speed in which they can do it in.
-
The CM's couldn't restrict loadouts in events back then. They can now so it's not as big of an issue. I'm not sure what's meant by the axis being held to a tougher standard.
Great! Can we have the Bomb and the Gondolas back on the 109F4?
Please,
-
More should go in to the OBJ score than just ordnance,
And sometimes it's not even that. See my notes above. He-111 has the loadout of the B-26, but a OBJ much lower, on par with the B-24. I really have no idea why :headscratch:
-
Pyro I'd be happy to discuss this further with you when you've got time.
-
And sometimes it's not even that. See my notes above. He-111 has the loadout of the B-26, but a OBJ much lower, on par with the B-24. I really have no idea why :headscratch:
It was a mistake. I changed it now plus a few others.
-
Pyro I'd be happy to discuss this further with you when you've got time.
Shoot me a list.
-
It was a mistake. I changed it now plus a few others.
Updated and slightly corrected version of the "BPF" list (as explained in my earlier post above)
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/BPFv2_zps05ee28dc.jpg)
Mossie at OBJ 20 now makes it a perked perk-farmer now. But it's high speed and quick climb should ensure perks are rarely lost on quick town milking missions...
-
You initially said that the nose 20mm was a field mod, period. Now you are starting backpedal again.
Backpedal, like you? When you started a fight when you didn't know what you were talking about, vis-a-vis torp racks on the Heinkel? You backpedaled awfully fast on that one.
No, no backpedalling at all. The He-111 in this game is intended explicitly for the BOB and the concerns have always been that we don't have a BOB appropriate version. H-6 would not be appropriate. H-3 would.
If you call that backpedalling you're either a complete troll (possible, at the rate you're going) or you don't understand what the term even means.
-
Backpedal, like you? When you started a fight when you didn't know what you were talking about, vis-a-vis torp racks on the Heinkel? You backpedaled awfully fast on that one.
No, no backpedalling at all. The He-111 in this game is intended explicitly for the BOB and the concerns have always been that we don't have a BOB appropriate version. H-6 would not be appropriate. H-3 would.
If you call that backpedalling you're either a complete troll (possible, at the rate you're going) or you don't understand what the term even means.
Did you read Pyro's posts in this thread?
Someone should have pulled it out in time....oh well...
...as he didn't we ended with you...too bad...
-
Basic page layout set up for filling in with info and images http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/index.php/He_111H
Log in is same as your forum ID
-
Updated and slightly corrected version of the "BPF" list (as explained in my earlier post above)
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/BPFv2_zps05ee28dc.jpg)
Mossie at OBJ 20 now makes it a perked perk-farmer now. But it's high speed and quick climb should ensure perks are rarely lost on quick town milking missions...
G4M1 and Ki-67 Are both 40 OBJ? That doesn't seem right. G4Ms are sitting ducks at any altitude, while 67s can easily run you out of gas with their speed.
edit: OBJ is not ENY. Doh!
-
If we only had a working, populated EW arena. The 32x50kg is a great loadout for City attacks, but it doesn't makes much sense to do that if you are the only player on your country... :old:
I always liked EW but you are correct no one is ever there. I liked it because it linited the plane types where the ME109F-4 was the most non perked uber plane there. Now with the HE-111 it would be even better in EW. HTC did a great job on the HE-111 thanks guys.
-
G4M1 and Ki-67 Are both 40 OBJ? That doesn't seem right. G4Ms are sitting ducks at any altitude, while 67s can easily run you out of gas with their speed.
OBJ is based on bombload whereas the speed and guns of the Ki-67 should affect its ENY.
-
OBJ is based on bombload
But not exclusively, else the Arado would have a higher OBJ than it has.
And in my opinion OBJ should be modified by other factors than just plain bombload, a sdifferent planes have also different chances to get to their target and earn their bomber perks in the first place.
B-26 and He 111 both carry about the same load, but the B-26 has much better chances to fight it's way to the target than the He 111.
-
Is there any reason not to take the (2) 20mm gun package?
What's better for the Lanc, 50s or the 303s in the tail?
-
preference.....more ammo with the 303's or the firepower of .50 cal.
-
One .50 has about the hitting power of three .303s, and holds its energy much better. That said, the .303s allow you to fire without waiting for a good shot because of the silly amount of ammo they have. 2500 rounds per gun is more than any other aircraft gun has in the game.
-
Is there any reason not to take the (2) 20mm gun package?
No.
-
No.
Maybe. Weight. If a person wants to make the He111 as light as possible by taking the least amount of weight as possible, there is a lighter gun package and it *does* add up in the climb rate. If the goal is to get to 10k ASAP and the chance of interception is minimal and maybe there is even escort, then I'd very much consider taking the lightest gun package. YMMV. :)
-
Maybe. Weight. If a person wants to make the He111 as light as possible by taking the least amount of weight as possible, there is a lighter gun package and it *does* add up in the climb rate. If the goal is to get to 10k ASAP and the chance of interception is minimal and maybe there is even escort, then I'd very much consider taking the lightest gun package. YMMV. :)
The difference is negligible. The gain is so small and the climb rate is so low to begin with that it gives no tactical advantage at all.
For example the difference in time to get to 10k in the 8x250kg / 50 % fuel loadout is a whopping 5 seconds between the lightest and the heaviest gun loadout. 11:35 to 11:40, both times from SL to 10k, watch starting at the moment the plane begins to roll.
Even between the different fuel loadouts the differences are (compared to some other bombers) relatively small:
Altitude after 20 minutes of climb:
8x250kg, 50% - 14.8k
8x250kg, 100% - 12.5k
-
Just tried the He 111 on the strats in EW, City went down from 100% to 81% :)
As I said, it would be a great strats bomber there if there only was any significant gampleay in that arena :old:
-
Appropriate face for being killed by AA fire....
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/dorsal_zpsf6c08aea.jpg)
:D
-
Haven't seen many HE111's around vs the usual numbers of Lanc,B17s and B24's over past 24 hours, don't tell me the LW buff so many having be asking for, for years didn't last in the MA past the first weekend. Just to be retired as another hangar queen and once a month at most FSO special.
<S>...-Gixer
-
Haven't seen many HE111's around vs the usual numbers of Lanc,B17s and B24's over past 24 hours, don't tell me the LW buff so many having be asking for, for years didn't last in the MA past the first weekend. Just to be retired as another hangar queen and once a month at most FSO special.
<S>...-Gixer
Since its release its all ive flown :old:
-
Haven't seen many HE111's around vs the usual numbers of Lanc,B17s and B24's over past 24 hours, don't tell me the LW buff so many having be asking for, for years didn't last in the MA past the first weekend. Just to be retired as another hangar queen and once a month at most FSO special.
<S>...-Gixer
I doubt anybody thought it would be a mainstay in the LWMA. It'll get used a bit, but comparing it to the B-17G, B-24J and Lancaster Mk III is absurd. Those are all vastly superior aircraft in just about every way.
-
Haven't seen many HE111's around vs the usual numbers of Lanc,B17s and B24's over past 24 hours, don't tell me the LW buff so many having be asking for, for years didn't last in the MA past the first weekend. Just to be retired as another hangar queen and once a month at most FSO special.
<S>...-Gixer
*sigh* Don't be such a Debbie Downer. You automatically assume that just because the He111 has X trait that it is going to be a hanger queen. Other than a slower than typical top speed (260-ish TAS), and a below average rear gun defensive capability, it climbs well enough and carries enough ordnance to be rather versatile. Plus, you automatically assume that when the He111 goes up it wont have any escorts with it. ;)
-
Think we need a definition of "hangar queen" first ;)
-
I think its the opposite of "dweeb ride". A dweeb ride is anything better than your plane and a hangar queen is anything worse. :)
-
:lol
-
:lol
-
moin
i love the he 111 because i never need to use a allied bomber any more to bomb the strats if the strats out of range of my ju 88. the load out and range are realy good for strat attacks i think. sure this bomber need some taktikaly thinking to rach the target, but it will not be a hangar queen i think. maybe it will be used more often than a ju88, maybe.
im still not sure which load out is better for strta attacks, just tried the 32bombs for the city center, normaly salvo 2 must be enouth to kill a city square so 16 city buildings could be killed, thast realy good i think.
but sadly HTC dong give me my V1 rocket under the wing :cry
cu christian
-
sure this bomber need some taktikaly thinking to rach the target,
That's a nice way to put it.
Attacking strats in the He 111 in late war doesn't require much 'tactical thinking' - it just depends on one thing: Someone attempts to intercept you or not. The Heinkel is so slow climbing, slow and has such a bad service ceiling that anybody can up in time and intercept you at will. And the defensive armament is so weak that you are basically a free kill. You really have to hope that nobody is looking at the strats ... for a long time.
-
isent it the same with lancasters?
-
isent it the same with lancasters?
No. The lancasters have a much better defensive armament for example. Quad .303 with 10,000 rounds instead of single MG's in various stations with 750 rds makes a world off a difference. It's also significantly faster and can even climb faster to altitude.
And of course the Lanc carries three times as much.
The Heinkel is simply worse in every aspect.
-
lancaster devesiv is bade sure maybe the heinkels must be worser too but theirvor it does not have so a big blind spot. and the he can turn very well in formation so the posibility of a HO isn t bad. just killed a 262 in tha way.
and if the charts are right the he climps better and is only 15 miles slower, so in comparacion its not so much bad as everyone thinks.
cu
-
I doubt anybody thought it would be a mainstay in the LWMA. It'll get used a bit, but comparing it to the B-17G, B-24J and Lancaster Mk III is absurd. Those are all vastly superior aircraft in just about every way.
You miss the point, I wasn't comparing it to those bombers, just saying like the JU88 buff guys will always go for the B17etc even after years of crying for the HE111, once they get it they use it for a weekend in the MA and then quickly go back to bigger bombers with more guns and payload.
Hence the HE111 for MA will become a hangar queen. Just like the JU88, how many times do you see a JU88 (not being used to attack CV) compared to the other main buffs?
Like the 410 people voted for it cause they thought it would be some uber gun platform, once realised it wasn't and they easily get shot down in it, they quickly go back to uber rides.
As for Buffs and Forgetting that HE111 would have escort, you mean escort by a horde? As escorting buff pilots these days is a complete waste of time, last two occasions I have taken the effort to escort a buff they have both bailed once bombs dropped as they didn't want to take the time to rtb, they already had their points and damage done..
Last night watched a Lanc dive bomb a city, guess he couldn't be bothered working out the new wind variation.
<S>...-Gixer
-
Last night watched a Lanc dive bomb a city, guess he couldn't be bothered working out the new wind variation.
Not something that can be worked out. As HiTech posted in this very thread, it is a bug in the bomb sight code. It will be fixed for the next version and the bomb sights will work again.
-
Out of curiosity, what do you experts attribute the greater popularity of the B-17 and B-24, or even the Lancaster vs the B-26?
I mean personally, I find the effectivness of the B-26 to be higher in two situations: Hit and run, and quick strike sorties. Yeah, the others have a higher potential celing of game-impact, but they seem to be rarely used to potential.
Is it just that thought of carrying a big load to the target?
-
Is it just that thought of carrying a big load to the target?
With no doubt.
Especially unexperienced players are magnetically attracted to the biggest bomb load they can get, And as the B-29 is perked, their choice is the Lancaster.
Needles to say that the huge amount of 'bang' is mostly wasted in mass carpet drops. For most 'tactical' attacks much less lbs are actually necessary if you just try a bit for precision. The B-26 is great for that kind of sorties.
-
For most 'tactical' attacks much less lbs are actually necessary if you just try a bit for precision. The B-26 is great for that kind of sorties.
Exactly. In my opinion, a pair of B-26's are more effective than a B-24, even used to potential.
They're just more flexible, can cover ground faster, and with a pair, you could theoretically white flag the town in one pass.
-
Since the He-111 is such a "popular" ride, why not a variant that would make its introduction less of a wasted effort?
(http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo208/jag888/He-111para_zps484ec599.png) (http://s376.photobucket.com/user/jag888/media/He-111para_zps484ec599.png.html)
(http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo208/jag888/He-111para-drop_zps79cc322d.png)
These should be He-111H-20/R11s, but the lack of a 13mm dorsal turret make that assumption suspect.
Both pictures can be seen, right?
-
Since the He-111 is such a "popular" ride
I'd guess HTC were quite aware how little usage this plane would see in the LW arena when they created it... :old:
-
2 of us took the 111 for a spin yesterday :old:
-
The addition of the He-111 was never about adding another super monster ride to the MA. I don't think ANY of its advocates thought it would be the most used bomber in the MA.
Read the thread again. What most of us wanted, including myself, was a hole filler. This is THE most Iconic german bomber, arguably THE most Iconic german plane! The contenders for that title are the 111, 109 or Stuka. We wanted this plane because it deserves to be here. The last BoB scenario proved that! Heck, I have a patch from the 2006 scenario with the 111 on it because it is that Iconic!
This plane fills so many gaps it is unbelievable. It would be the equivelant of having the british plane set without the Lancaster!
As I said, we never expected to see this plane everywhere, but we did expect to see it used in almost every ETO scenario played out. And in that role, I believe it has succeeded. Ironically, I do believe that more 88's were shot down during the BoB scenario than 111s. Sturdy little plane!
-
The addition of the He-111 was never about adding another super monster ride to the MA. I don't think ANY of its advocates thought it would be the most used bomber in the MA.
Read the thread again. What most of us wanted, including myself, was a hole filler. This is THE most Iconic german bomber, arguably THE most Iconic german plane! The contenders for that title are the 111, 109 or Stuka. We wanted this plane because it deserves to be here. The last BoB scenario proved that! Heck, I have a patch from the 2006 scenario with the 111 on it because it is that Iconic!
This plane fills so many gaps it is unbelievable. It would be the equivelant of having the british plane set without the Lancaster!
As I said, we never expected to see this plane everywhere, but we did expect to see it used in almost every ETO scenario played out. And in that role, I believe it has succeeded. Ironically, I do believe that more 88's were shot down during the BoB scenario than 111s. Sturdy little plane!
There was already an early war German bomber, the 88 (which is, in fact, far more famous AND relevant than an already obsolete converted airliner) the hole exists in the middle to late war German bomber where there is nothing but a perked jet bomber.
A paratrooper option or variant would at least give it some use while providing an axis transport alternative.
I'd guess HTC were quite aware how little usage this plane would see in the LW arena when they created it... :old:
One would assume, it is still curious it was included when there is no Ju-188, Do-217 or He-177 in game.
-
I use the He111's often enough. They are my #1 favorite to take after cv's. The 2 x 1000 kg bombs (X 3) is nice. Torps are a good option, too. It is nice not having to pull way back on the throttle to get under 200 TAS. :D
No, it isn't going to win any races except maybe a climbing race to 10k, but it has its merits. ;) Obviously, it has a much better chance of making it home with a fighter escort (as it should be). :D
-
There was already an early war German bomber, the 88 (which is, in fact, far more famous AND relevant than an already obsolete converted airliner) the hole exists in the middle to late war German bomber where there is nothing but a perked jet bomber.
Not to Brits and Yanks it isn't. In addition the 1941 Ju88A-4 has consistently demonstrated that Hurricane and Spitfire Mk Is are incapable of significantly hindering it.
A paratrooper option or variant would at least give it some use while providing an axis transport alternative.
Being faster and tougher than the C-47 it would make base captures easier, which HTC may not want.
One would assume, it is still curious it was included when there is no Ju-188, Do-217 or He-177 in game.
One can ask that about a great many things, and conversely if the Ju188 had been added instead one could ask why the Ju188 is in the game when the He111 is not. And that is just limiting it to asking about German aircraft. Have you checked out the Russian bomber set?
-
The 111 surprised me a bit. I was expecting a plane that would fall apart when you looked at it funny and could hardly do damage to a town. What we got is a plane that most people foolishly feel comfortable sitting 400 yards off it's 6 while it's opening up with all it's guns. It's also a great perk farmer.
I think the addition of paratroopers would be a nice touch and give the plane a little more diversity (thought the option of drones would have to go).
-
It's also a great perk farmer.
It has about the same bombload and the about same OBJ as the B-26, which means that you will get the same number of perks if you are bombing the same things. But the B-26 can do it faster, with much less risk of dying before ever getting to target. And of course the 26 can more easily getting additional perks by shooting down enemy fighters...
-
It has about the same bombload and the about same OBJ as the B-26, which means that you will get the same number of perks if you are bombing the same things. But the B-26 can do it faster, with much less risk of dying before ever getting to target. And of course the 26 can more easily getting additional perks by shooting down enemy fighters...
Yeah but the B-26 is ugly. :uhoh
-
Since the He-111 is such a "popular" ride, why not a variant that would make its introduction less of a wasted effort?
Don't fly it?
-
He111 was needed for special events. The MA has all the latest like the Me410....oh....that used in large numbers?
MA is gameland so all the latest and greatest can shoot and run. I call it Air Quake on steroids.
Why I rarely if ever play in the MA. Not a first person shooter game player.
-
I'd rather see a German transport plane equal to the C-47 added to the plane set rather than the HE-111 pulling double duty mainly because of the very reason Karnak stated above. And it would be nice to have something from the Axis side used solely for transport just to add some variety to the choices we have to fulfill that role in the game.
-
The MA has all the latest like the Me410....oh....that used in large numbers?
Compared to the He 111? Yes, absolutely. :P
In this years fighter usage (K+D) the 410 has established itself right in the middle of the field (#34 out of 71), right among planes like Ta-152, Me 262, P-51B or Yak-9U and way ahead of planes like the La-5.
-
He111 was needed for special events. The MA has all the latest like the Me410....oh....that used in large numbers?
MA is gameland so all the latest and greatest can shoot and run. I call it Air Quake on steroids.
Why I rarely if ever play in the MA. Not a first person shooter game player.
Perfect statement. MA is X-box land. Can't even remember the last time I went in there. Spit vs. Spit, Pony vs. Pony is just plain retarded, but that's what the X-boxers like.
-
Perfect statement. MA is X-box land. Can't even remember the last time I went in there. Spit vs. Spit, Pony vs. Pony is just plain retarded, but that's what the X-boxers like.
Wow, what a snobbish comment. Shall we all bow to your greatness?
-
Unless ALL YOU WANT TO DO IS VULCH THE NEAREST BASE, armed troop transports are an awesome idea!
*Unarmed c47 defenseless milk-running flights = NOT FUN!
*Armed 111 troop plane = FUN!
STRATEGIC STUFF:
*Especially on far trips, like trying to capture a base deep within enemy territory, armed troop transport is a must! Rare anyone bring a c47 on any distance trip!!!
* And the BOTH FRONT 20MM's WOULD BE ABLE TO HELP FINISH OFF TOWNS! (after the place has been de-acked.)
If carrying troops, I'm guessing we could only up as a single?
Maybe both the C47 and the He-111 should be able to be formations?
If could load two of the three 111's with bombs, and one with troops... would be neat also!
ACES LOW: VULCH, DRAG TO ACK, RAM AND HO!!! Dooo ooorr diiie! aces? NEIN!
Armed 111 troop transports AND fuel burn 1x... I'll never say the above line again! :salute
-
Unless ALL YOU WANT TO DO IS VULCH THE NEAREST BASE, armed troop transports are an awesome idea!
*Unarmed c47 defenseless milk-running flights = NOT FUN!
*Armed 111 troop plane = FUN!
STRATEGIC STUFF:
*Especially on far trips, like trying to capture a base deep within enemy territory, armed troop transport is a must! Rare anyone bring a c47 on any distance trip!!!
* And the BOTH FRONT 20MM's WOULD BE ABLE TO HELP FINISH OFF TOWNS! (after the place has been de-acked.)
If carrying troops, I'm guessing we could only up as a single?
Maybe both the C47 and the He-111 should be able to be formations? Then the required amount of troops would be 30. If the capacity for a troop carrier increases, then the requirement for base capture increases also.
If could load two of the three 111's with bombs, and one with troops... would be neat also! Would be the main thing used, Just like p51s p38s and p47s are now. Or lancstukas.
ACES LOW: VULCH, DRAG TO ACK, RAM AND HO!!! Dooo ooorr diiie! aces? NEIN!
Armed 111 troop transports AND fuel burn 1x... I'll never say the above line again! :salute
-
Wow, what a snobbish comment. Shall we all bow to your greatness?
Lighten up dude.
-
He111 was needed for special events.
This probably more than any other reason is why we have the 111. I do like to strap some torps under it now and then though! :aok
Nutz
-
The c47 would need some advantage of its own... or probly no one would ever use it again...
-
The c47 would need some advantage of its own... or probly no one would ever use it again...
the c-47 is faster at lower alt and has a longer range than the he-111...
-
nvm
-
the c-47 is faster at lower alt and has a longer range than the he-111...
What have you been smoking??? Whatever it is please step away..... :D
-
What have you been smoking??? Whatever it is please step away..... :D
With WEP, C47 is faster at lower alt:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=126&p2=4&pw=2>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
-
With WEP, C47 is faster at lower alt:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=126&p2=4&pw=2>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
Which for its role means it is functionally slower. MIL speed = transit time. WEP is for chasing or running away, and neither plane will do either with any expectation of success.
Functionally, the He111 is faster.
-
What have you been smoking??? Whatever it is please step away..... :D
:uhoh bite me, :neener: it was late and sea level speeds i found for the he-111 were 176mph/186mph didn't notice that was for the daimler benz engines.
-
:uhoh bite me, :neener: it was late and sea level speeds i found for the he-111 were 176mph/186mph didn't notice that was for the daimler benz engines.
No problem, trust me I won't hold anything against anyone with regards to posting incorrect/incomplete info. It happens to us all. :D After awhile, much of it blurs together. Was it the Spit 8 or Spit 9 that is faster/slower at 10k? ;)
Another thing... when ever those charts are read be sure and pay attention to the WEIGHT of the aircraft as it is measured. In many cases the typical weight of the aircraft in AH and how it is displayed on the chart are 2 different things.
While I have yet to test it, I'd put money on the He111 at 500 ft level flight, WEP and no WEP, if they both are free of cargo and the time of flight time is similar.
-
BOING BOING BOING BOING
Someone got way too excited over another thread. ;)
-
Not to Brits and Yanks it isn't.
According to whom? Anyone with a knowledge of the war as a whole knows the Ju-88 was the LWs workhorse and the iconic German bomber of the war performing many different roles, those who care to read a bit more know that the He-111 was obsolete and the only reason it was kept in production past 1941 was the persistent delay of the He-177.
Such a statement is tantamount to calling the Wellington as the iconic plane of RAF Bomber Command... nevermind those silly Lancs!
In addition the 1941 Ju88A-4 has consistently demonstrated that Hurricane and Spitfire Mk Is are incapable of significantly hindering it.
Which has to do with the way bomber speeds are depicted in game, not with an specific plane in game, the A4 was little faster and some sources even say slower than the A1s and A5s of the early BoB.
Being faster and tougher than the C-47 it would make base captures easier, which HTC may not want.
1. There is not much of a speed difference on the deck where they would operate.
2. True, so? The Germans still used them as such.
3. Speculation.
One can ask that about a great many things, and conversely if the Ju188 had been added instead one could ask why the Ju188 is in the game when the He111 is not. And that is just limiting it to asking about German aircraft. Have you checked out the Russian bomber set?
I rather have the Do-217 or He-177 than the Ju-188 since we already have the 88. If any of the others is added the answer is simple, there was already an early war bomber in game, and no middle or late bombers.
Re. Russian bombers that is exactly my point, instead of having HT spend time and resources in designing a completely new German aircraft to fill a mission, it would be better to just make a quick version of an existing aircraft to fill that mission so HT can use its time and resources to make... Russian bombers or Ohka bombs or whatever they wish.
-
Looks like Karnak has met his match with Jag88 :D
-
According to whom? Anyone with a knowledge of the war as a whole knows the Ju-88 was the LWs workhorse and the iconic German bomber of the war performing many different roles, those who care to read a bit more know that the He-111 was obsolete and the only reason it was kept in production past 1941 was the persistent delay of the He-177.
When speaking of iconic or famous we're talking about what people who don't know anything about the war might recognize. Obviously to aficionados the Ju88 is more important and I am sure that is why HTC added it first.
-
While I have yet to test it, I'd put money on the He111 at 500 ft level flight, WEP and no WEP, if they both are free of cargo and the time of flight time is similar.
i'll have to dink around with them in the ta when i get home tonight.
According to whom? Anyone with a knowledge of the war as a whole knows the Ju-88 was the LWs workhorse and the iconic German bomber of the war performing many different roles, those who care to read a bit more know that the He-111 was obsolete and the only reason it was kept in production past 1941 was the persistent delay of the He-177.
Such a statement is tantamount to calling the Wellington as the iconic plane of RAF Bomber Command... nevermind those silly Lancs!
the he-111, do-17z are iconic bombers of the luftwaffe. from the spanish civil war to the battle of britain and beyond they were used whether it was on the front lines early in the war or as transports later in the war. they are just as iconic as the 109, 190 or ju-88 to history buffs.
they weren't as useful by 1942 and no longer played significant roles by then but, they had their 15 minutes of fame until they were replaced by more capable equipment, just like everything else.
-
Also, Wellington is one of the iconic bombers of WWII. Hampden? Not so much.
-
When speaking of iconic or famous we're talking about what people who don't know anything about the war might recognize. Obviously to aficionados the Ju88 is more important and I am sure that is why HTC added it first.
Oh! If your argument is that clueless people think the He-111 was the iconic LW bomber of the war then... I fully agree!
Also, Wellington is one of the iconic bombers of WWII. Hampden? Not so much.
Same argument here. ONE of the early war bombers, not THE iconic WW2 LW bomber which is what was being said here, the He-111 made the backbone of the LW KG force early in the war when it was already obsolete and being replaced in service by the Ju-88, Do-217 and soon (supposedly) in the production line by the He-177.
Want a RAF parallel?
It is as if the RAF had the Manchester or Halifax added first, and then the "iconic" Wellington, and no Lancaster... A lineup of early war bombers with no middle or late war aircraft.
Oh, and then Do-17z is as iconic as the Whitley. The what?
Exactly.
-
Oh! If your argument is that clueless people think the He-111 was the iconic LW bomber of the war then... I fully agree!
Same argument here. ONE of the early war bombers, not THE iconic WW2 LW bomber which is what was being said here, the He-111 made the backbone of the LW KG force early in the war when it was already obsolete and being replaced in service by the Ju-88, Do-217 and soon (supposedly) in the production line by the He-177.
Want a RAF parallel?
It is as if the RAF had the Manchester or Halifax added first, and then the "iconic" Wellington, and no Lancaster... A lineup of early war bombers with no middle or late war aircraft.
Oh, and then Do-17z is as iconic as the Whitley. The what?
Exactly.
Oh the vitriol.
Are you not happy that the 111 was modeled or that it's not modeled to be a troop transport? Would adding the drunk option satisfy? What then? :D
-
Oh the vitriol.
Are you not happy that the 111 was modeled or that it's not modeled to be a troop transport? Would adding the drunk option satisfy? What then? :D
SINCE the He-111 was added instead of a mid to late war bomber with the consequent little MA use, AND currently there is no axis drunk dispenser, with a little effort the addition of a He-111H-20/R1 version would BOTH give new life to an underused airframe and fill a void in the game.
It certainly beats waiting for HT to design a whole new para-dropper when there are still many aircraft waiting introduction to the game with a justifiable higher priority.
Clear enough?
...and a He-177A5 for the LW!
-
we need a german drunk dispenser in the main arenas...why exactly?
-
Clear enough?
Don't bunch your panties at me, Jagareta. This ain't no pizzing contest, afaik. You can
state your likes, dislikes, preferences and disappointments like a grown up and blind-swinging
the whole thread isn't really going to accomplish much of anything.
Now, what is the mid or late Luft-bomber you thought would serve this game and community
better (main and event) and why?
-
we need a german drunk dispenser in the main arenas...why exactly?
To dispense German drunks, man.
-
Looks like Karnak has met his match with Jag88 :D
Jag88: know that the 'the force' is strong with this one! It will bail him out, at your expense, without question, denying your much deserved glory, everytime!
shhhhhhh, the force = rule#4 shhhh!!!
-
The He 111's were a blast to fly in the recent Battle of Britain 2013 scenario.
The mighty armada:
(http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201309_BattleOfBritain2013/pics/frame2/001-kg53-SNAG-0000.jpg)
That fought its way through some tough times, with help from our little friends:
(http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201309_BattleOfBritain2013/pics/frame4/011-moreAttacks-SNAG-0018.jpg)
To hit targets:
(http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201309_BattleOfBritain2013/pics/frame2/020-bombsAway-SNAG-0034.jpg)
-
To dispense German drunks, man.
:rofl :lol :neener:
it's sad some of these guys can't handle a reasonable argument, ya know?
Oh! If your argument is that clueless people think the He-111 was the iconic LW bomber of the war then... I fully agree!
that is a very erroneous opinion...it may be true for you but, not everyone else.
-
fuel burn 1x...
With the fuel burn rate set to 1 in the MA will only result in players flying around with unrealistic fuel loads of 25%. You would think that after this has been explained to you countless times, you'd understand why the fuel burn rate is set how it is in the MA.
ack-ack
-
:rofl :lol :neener:
it's sad some of these guys can't handle a reasonable argument, ya know?
Hehe, yeah, asking for aircraft that saw service in WW2 is unreasonable, right? :rofl
that is a very erroneous opinion...it may be true for you but, not everyone else.
Well now! Suddenly you talk for everyone else?!?!? :rofl
I was only agreeing with Karnak in that people with little knowledge of WW2 would consider such planes as iconic when the fact is they played a significant role only at the beginning since they were obsolescent if not already obsolete. But whatever makes you happy man, if you think they were the cutting edge of the LW in WW2, fine. There are worst things to fantasize about I guess.
Don't bunch your panties at me, Jagareta. This ain't no pizzing contest, afaik. You can
state your likes, dislikes, preferences and disappointments like a grown up and blind-swinging
the whole thread isn't really going to accomplish much of anything.
Now, what is the mid or late Luft-bomber you thought would serve this game and community
better (main and event) and why?
Funny, if the attitude bothers you why didnt you check yours at the door?
-
Funny, if the attitude bothers you why didnt you check yours at the door?
I gave you advice. You're not winning this thread. ;)
I did miss your answer to a reasonable question, though.
-
Hehe, yeah, asking for aircraft that saw service in WW2 is unreasonable, right? :rofl
Well now! Suddenly you talk for everyone else?!?!? :rofl
I was only agreeing with Karnak in that people with little knowledge of WW2 would consider such planes as iconic when the fact is they played a significant role only at the beginning since they were obsolescent if not already obsolete. But whatever makes you happy man, if you think they were the cutting edge of the LW in WW2, fine. There are worst things to fantasize about I guess.
i speak for the "clueless" people who view one iconic piece of history as important as the next...who do you speak for? for you, "iconic" appears to equal "useful", which is an erroneous association. there were quite a few planes that you would not consider useful but they ended up being used to great success by someone and they became iconic aircraft.
-
I was only agreeing with Karnak in that people with little knowledge of WW2 would consider such planes as iconic when the fact is they played a significant role only at the beginning since they were obsolescent if not already obsolete. But whatever makes you happy man, if you think they were the cutting edge of the LW in WW2, fine. There are worst things to fantasize about I guess.
You have a remarkable ability to read minds, combined with an overconfidence in your own knowledge. No one said the 111 was cutting edge; the comment was simply that it was "iconic," in a way that the Ju88 was not. Reasonable people can differ on this; my own view is that the Stuka is probably the most "iconic" of German bombers. While the 88 may have served longer into the war than the 111, the Luftwaffe simply did not field waves of bombers after 1942. The 111 and 88 both served during the only time that the Luftwaffe had an appreciable offensive bomber force. Films and photos of the time, at least in my experience, featured the 111 more than the 88; people exposed to these images might consider the 111 as "iconic."
- oldman
-
Want a RAF parallel?
It is as if the RAF had the Manchester or Halifax added first, and then the "iconic" Wellington, and no Lancaster... A lineup of early war bombers with no middle or late war aircraft.
Oh, and then Do-17z is as iconic as the Whitley. The what?
Exactly.
Erm, you're responding to the guy (me) who has probably advocated the Wellington's addition to AH more than anybody else. The Wellington is one of the biggest missing holes in the British planeset and was a major contributor to the British war effort in the air through 1943 at the least. The first 1000 plane raid was mostly Wellingtons.
I don't think the Manchester is a good idea for AH for the same reasons the He177A-1 isn't a good idea. Halifax isn't a good idea because its capabilities and performance are so extremely similar to the Lancaster that I consider it a waste of developer effort to add it.
Whitley and Do-17Z? Well, maybe someday, but I don't think either should be added soon. Nor Hampden or Blenheim. The B5N2 is actually a surprisingly good stand in for the Battle.
In terms of land based bombers I would probably rank them something like thus in priority:
1) Tu-2
2) SM.79-II
3) Wellington B.Mk III (others advocate for the B.Mk X)
4) Do217E/Ju188A/He177A-5 (pick one)
5) Il-4
6) B-25J
7) Mosquito B.Mk IV
8) and beyond: whatever.
3 and 4 were hard to rank, but what decided it was my recollection of facing Hurricane Mk Is and Boston Mk IIIs while flying the Bf109E-4 in a Norway scenario. The damned Boston Mk IIIs ran me down and forced me to turn allowing the Hurricane Mk Is to catch up when I was trying to egress after expending my ammo. The fact is that the Boston Mk III's performance is so high it is nearly impossible to intercept in 1940 and 1941 Axis fighters whereas the 250mph Wellington would be very interceptable, but tough enough, armed enough and carrying enough to make the RAF player have a shot at accomplishing something as well.
-
For me, priority of bombers is:
B6N (Most-produced Japanese torpedo bomber, taking over for the early-war B5N)
D4Y (Most-produced Japanese dive bomber, taking over for early-war D3A)
Pe-2 (Most-produced Soviet attack plane other than Il-2, for Eastern Front)
TBD (Important for Battle of Coral Sea and Midway)
Beaufighter (Multi-role, would add a lot of flavor to events)
-
2- Threads should remain on topic, do not "hijack" topics.
111 with troops please! :)
-
2- Threads should remain on topic, do not "hijack" topics.
111 with troops please! :)
No. Thank you for your time, and have a nice day :aok.
-
For me, priority of bombers is:
B6N (Most-produced Japanese torpedo bomber, taking over for the early-war B5N)
D4Y (Most-produced Japanese dive bomber, taking over for early-war D3A)
Pe-2 (Most-produced Soviet attack plane other than Il-2, for Eastern Front)
TBD (Important for Battle of Coral Sea and Midway)
Beaufighter (Multi-role, would add a lot of flavor to events)
Bomb-Jockey. ;)
-
For me, priority of bombers is:
B6N (Most-produced Japanese torpedo bomber, taking over for the early-war B5N)
D4Y (Most-produced Japanese dive bomber, taking over for early-war D3A)
Pe-2 (Most-produced Soviet attack plane other than Il-2, for Eastern Front)
TBD (Important for Battle of Coral Sea and Midway)
Beaufighter (Multi-role, would add a lot of flavor to events)
Yes please! :x
-
I gave you advice. You're not winning this thread. ;)
I did miss your answer to a reasonable question, though.
Had you taken your own advice I would have given you a reasonable answer, but in the context of your answer that was not pointless.
i speak for the "clueless" people who view one iconic piece of history as important as the next...who do you speak for? for you, "iconic" appears to equal "useful", which is an erroneous association. there were quite a few planes that you would not consider useful but they ended up being used to great success by someone and they became iconic aircraft.
Heh, that is the difference, I only speak for myself and do not pretend to speak for others while accusing other people of doing the same. That level of "reasoning" is likely also steared you towards conjuring some imaginary confusion, better luck next time.
You have a remarkable ability to read minds, combined with an overconfidence in your own knowledge. No one said the 111 was cutting edge; the comment was simply that it was "iconic," in a way that the Ju88 was not. Reasonable people can differ on this; my own view is that the Stuka is probably the most "iconic" of German bombers. While the 88 may have served longer into the war than the 111, the Luftwaffe simply did not field waves of bombers after 1942. The 111 and 88 both served during the only time that the Luftwaffe had an appreciable offensive bomber force. Films and photos of the time, at least in my experience, featured the 111 more than the 88; people exposed to these images might consider the 111 as "iconic."
- oldman
So, same point as Karnak, people with little knowledge of the war would consider the He-111 as the iconic bomber, I agree, only ignorance or lack of knowledge can drive you to such conclusion when the Ju-88 was produced in three times the number while seeing front line service in far more roles until the very end of the war.
As to the fielding of German bombers the Soviets would likely disagree, and we could mention Steinbock just for fun where Ju-88/188s made the backbone of the bombing force.
And I agree Re the Stuka, even if its vulnerability forbade its use in the west, it kept on fighting in the east to the point that the last LW aircraft shown in a WW2 German newsreel shows a G attacking Russian tanks in Prussia.
-
Had you taken your own advice I would have given you a reasonable answer, but in the context of your answer that was not pointless.
You were already in blind-swing hissy mode versus the thread when I got your attention.
Now that I have it you're focused but still just mad.
So, once again, the mid or late Luft-bomber you would have rather seen modeled and why?
(Or was that never really part of your argument, after-all?) :D
-
You were already in blind-swing hissy mode versus the thread when I got your attention.
Now that I have it you're focused but still just mad.
So, once again, the mid or late Luft-bomber you would have rather seen modeled and why?
(Or was that never really part of your argument, after-all?) :D
Oh, I see, so I responded something to someone else and you felt included... I cant help you there
No, it was never part of the argument BECAUSE THE HE-111 IS ALREADY HERE and there is no point in arguing any aircraft vs He-111 at this point. In any case, in the whishlist section I detailed the reasons and data supporting the inclusion of the He-177, including a scan of the LW performance data for the aircraft. The Do.217 would also be an improvement with its higher speed, slightly better offensive/defensive capabilities and speed while not competing with the Ju-88 to retain its TB mission. I could repeat the data here but why bother, HT wont model a German bomber shortly after introducing a He-111, which is why its introduction was rather annoying.
My point here was infusing some life in the He-111 by adding a para option, nothing revolutionary or game breaking, just a means to fill a hole and improve the return on the time and effort investing in modelling the hangar queen.
-
I was very happy for the introduction of the He 111. It's a mainstay of the Battle of Britain, which is a major scenario event. My main interest in the addition of planes is for special events, where there have been gaps, but HTC is doing a great job filling them (B-25, P-39, G4M, Ki-43, He 111, and Yak 7b in recent years). Also, the extra variants of P-40's and Hurricane II's is nice.
Top of my list in order of priority including fighters is:
Yak-1 or LaGG-3 (For Eastern Front mid-war, where there is otherwise large gap for Soviets; Yak-1 was more produced)
B6N (Most-produced Japanese torpedo bomber, taking over for the early-war B5N)
D4Y (Most-produced Japanese dive bomber, taking over for early-war D3A)
Pe-2 (Most-produced Soviet attack plane other than Il-2, for Eastern Front)
TBD (Important for Battle of Coral Sea and Midway)
Beaufighter (Multi-role, would add a lot of flavor to events)
-
Erm, you're responding to the guy (me) who has probably advocated the Wellington's addition to AH more than anybody else. The Wellington is one of the biggest missing holes in the British planeset and was a major contributor to the British war effort in the air through 1943 at the least. The first 1000 plane raid was mostly Wellingtons.
Excellent!
Since the mid-war Lanc is already in game the early war Wellington would be a great addition, with the German side on the other hand there are now 2 early war bombers and a perk one, see the difference?
I don't think the Manchester is a good idea for AH for the same reasons the He177A-1 isn't a good idea. Halifax isn't a good idea because its capabilities and performance are so extremely similar to the Lancaster that I consider it a waste of developer effort to add it.
I agree, partially. The Manchester worked in the end and could have served but the Lanc was already a better option, I was just pointing out that adding it would just put more early birds when there are holes in the lineup...
Whitley and Do-17Z? Well, maybe someday, but I don't think either should be added soon. Nor Hampden or Blenheim. The B5N2 is actually a surprisingly good stand in for the Battle.
Very low priority
In terms of land based bombers I would probably rank them something like thus in priority:
1) Tu-2
2) SM.79-II
3) Wellington B.Mk III (others advocate for the B.Mk X)
4) Do217E/Ju188A/He177A-5 (pick one)
5) Il-4
6) B-25J
7) Mosquito B.Mk IV
8) and beyond: whatever.
3 and 4 were hard to rank, but what decided it was my recollection of facing Hurricane Mk Is and Boston Mk IIIs while flying the Bf109E-4 in a Norway scenario. The damned Boston Mk IIIs ran me down and forced me to turn allowing the Hurricane Mk Is to catch up when I was trying to egress after expending my ammo. The fact is that the Boston Mk III's performance is so high it is nearly impossible to intercept in 1940 and 1941 Axis fighters whereas the 250mph Wellington would be very interceptable, but tough enough, armed enough and carrying enough to make the RAF player have a shot at accomplishing something as well.
I more or less agree with your list with one caveat, the LW still has no mid/late war bomber, a Do-217M (or a Ju-188, but it would kill the Ju-88 as a TB adn we already have a Junkers) would have fixed that nicely with the He-177 entering later on since its entrance would likely kill the usage of the midwar LW bomber. Which is why I found the He-111 so annoying, its introduction will delay the implementation of ANY LW bomber for a good while. Sure, it adds to the variety of aircraft in scenarios, but unless you are playing Guernica the Ju-88 was there and fits the bill, the speed issue in scenarios should be addressed by limiting bomber formations to cruise speed and not max speed.
-
He-111 is my favourite plane. I love her with that big glass nose and the massive wings. I was really annoyed when I first played AH (An old offline copy of AH1 that my uncle gave me) and I could fly a 88 but not a 111. i even ended up trying IL2 simply for that plane. Every time we got a new addition I was disappointed that it was not the 111. Then when it made it onto the front page, I was over the moon!
I am one of those people that think that the 111 is one of the most Iconic planes of WW2. P-51, Spitfire, Lancaster, B-17, 111, Stuka are all the top planes people think of when the topic of WW2 planes is raised. Jees, just go and do a google search for Luftwaffe planes and one of the first images is a 111. So much for not Iconic. Maybe not the most useful, but most iconic.
I have been a massive advocator for the addition of the 111. I don't play very much but when I do I will almost always do at lease one 111 run against a target. My squaddies had a good laugh at me when I asked about the best loadout for range, they asked why and I said I was going to the enemy strats (Which had retreated) with my 111's. I made it, lost both drones, but landed back at home with a kill as well.
You say that HTC won't add another german bomber so soon. Well, they have to add one country! I'm sure we have had recent spells where the US has had 2 planes added one after another, I see no reason why the Luftwaffe can not be in the same position. But I do feel that a dedicated LW transport is now needed. We should have to choose between the quicker, unarmed C-47 or the slower, armed JU-52.
As has been said many times before, the 111 was added to fill a gap in the Scenario planeset. You yourself said it was the backbone of the early LW. So how come in the early scenarios we didn't have it? it filled a gap, even though it was always going to be hanger queen. But some people like the challenges that an EW plane has in the LW. If HT are only going to now add planes that won't be hanger queens, I'm going to leave this game as soon as they make that announcement. My favourite rides are the 111, 109E, Spit1 and Hurri 1. They don't give me an option to experiment with anymore EW planes, then my fun is gone.
To be honest though, I would probably have supported your wish if it wasn't for the fact that you have come across as such a tool. You clearly have some issues and have been irrational to anyone making a response. Next time you come up with a good wish, leave the attitude at the door and people might support it.
-
In any case, in the whishlist section I detailed the reasons and data supporting the inclusion of the He-177, including a scan of the LW performance data for the aircraft. The Do.217 would also be an improvement with its higher speed, slightly better offensive/defensive capabilities and speed while not competing with the Ju-88 to retain its TB mission. I could repeat the data here but why bother, HT wont model a German bomber shortly after introducing a He-111, which is why its introduction was rather annoying.
Then you freely admit that anything you deem productive in this thread is a waste of your and everyone else's time? Pity.
I was actually hoping you'd transition from petulance to productive. By the way, all sources I've seen on the 177 appear to
indicate that, historically, it never managed to make it to impressive status. The Do.217 would be a nice addition. But I'm still
not seeing a crisis over the 111 being modeled first. My regrets that it annoys you so.
-
Excellent!
Since the mid-war Lanc is already in game the early war Wellington would be a great addition, with the German side on the other hand there are now 2 early war bombers and a perk one, see the difference?
I agree, partially. The Manchester worked in the end and could have served but the Lanc was already a better option, I was just pointing out that adding it would just put more early birds when there are holes in the lineup...
Very low priority
I more or less agree with your list with one caveat, the LW still has no mid/late war bomber, a Do-217M (or a Ju-188, but it would kill the Ju-88 as a TB adn we already have a Junkers) would have fixed that nicely with the He-177 entering later on since its entrance would likely kill the usage of the midwar LW bomber. Which is why I found the He-111 so annoying, its introduction will delay the implementation of ANY LW bomber for a good while. Sure, it adds to the variety of aircraft in scenarios, but unless you are playing Guernica the Ju-88 was there and fits the bill, the speed issue in scenarios should be addressed by limiting bomber formations to cruise speed and not max speed.
An improvement. I applaud such and will step off your toes now. :salute :D
-
My favourite rides are the 111, 109E, Spit1 and Hurri 1.
I hope that you got to fly in the Battle of Britain 2013 scenario.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk9V66e88eI (best at 720p resolution)
-
Excellent!
Since the mid-war Lanc is already in game the early war Wellington would be a great addition, with the German side on the other hand there are now 2 early war bombers and a perk one, see the difference?
The Luftwaffe had no significant sustained bombing efforts after 1942 and the production numbers of its later bombers are consequently low. The Do217, Ju188 and He177 are MA fodder for players who won't fly anything other than German aircraft. The Luftwaffe situation is not comparable to the USAAF or RAF being without the B-17/B-24 and Lancaster. See the difference?
I agree, partially. The Manchester worked in the end and could have served but the Lanc was already a better option, I was just pointing out that adding it would just put more early birds when there are holes in the lineup...
Manchester never worked and was rapidly withdrawn from service with the RAF suggesting that Avro build Halifaxes instead.
I more or less agree with your list with one caveat, the LW still has no mid/late war bomber, a Do-217M (or a Ju-188, but it would kill the Ju-88 as a TB adn we already have a Junkers) would have fixed that nicely with the He-177 entering later on since its entrance would likely kill the usage of the midwar LW bomber. Which is why I found the He-111 so annoying, its introduction will delay the implementation of ANY LW bomber for a good while. Sure, it adds to the variety of aircraft in scenarios, but unless you are playing Guernica the Ju-88 was there and fits the bill, the speed issue in scenarios should be addressed by limiting bomber formations to cruise speed and not max speed.
As noted above a mid war bomber for the Germans is really just MA fodder for the subset of players who refuse to fly anything that isn't German. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be added, but it does significantly reduce its priority.
-
Heh, that is the difference, I only speak for myself and do not pretend to speak for others while accusing other people of doing the same. That level of "reasoning" is likely also steared you towards conjuring some imaginary confusion, better luck next time.
So, same point as Karnak, people with little knowledge of the war would consider the He-111 as the iconic bomber, I agree, only ignorance or lack of knowledge can drive you to such conclusion when the Ju-88 was produced in three times the number while seeing front line service in far more roles until the very end of the war.
:rofl you are funny in a pathetic sort of way. maybe you didn't play in the dirt enough as a kid or something. again, you should stop using the word iconic since you're clearly looking for useful to you.
the ju-88 could have been produced in twice the numbers as the bf-109 and that still would not have made it as much of an iconic war time image as the he-111, p-40, b-17, bf-109, a6m zero, p-51 or the spitfire.
even movie studios from the 60s were more aware of what iconic was...
(http://www.cedmagic.com/v-title-database/bean/battle-of-britain-21.jpg)
-
Perfect statement. MA is X-box land. Can't even remember the last time I went in there. Spit vs. Spit, Pony vs. Pony is just plain retarded, but that's what the X-boxers like.
Nice to see the good old AvA spirit is still well and alive...
-
I myself would like to see an Axis vs. Allied arena in the MA style.
I know it isn't going to work in game, but the realism would increase at least for me.
I know I'm one of a few that would appreciate that. Two counties only, point system adjusted etc.
I don't see as well as I used to. I need an Icon to help with targeting.
I know this is not possible, but would increase immersion for me.
Shooting down B17s and spitfires in a Jug is not my cup of tea.
-
I myself would like to see an Axis vs. Allied arena in the MA style.
I know it isn't going to work in game, but the realism would increase at least for me.
I know I'm one of a few that would appreciate that. Two counties only, point system adjusted etc.
I don't see as well as I used to. I need an Icon to help with targeting.
I know this is not possible, but would increase immersion for me.
Shooting down B17s and spitfires in a Jug is not my cup of tea.
Plus plus plus.
-
I hope that you got to fly in the Battle of Britain 2013 scenario.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk9V66e88eI (best at 720p resolution)
Flew with BaldEagl in 92 Squad. We were the first to spot your massive raid in Frame 3. What a shock that was! I think you flew with a good squaddie of mine, Beefcake. Was a pleasure to cross guns with your 111's. I learnt to go for the 88's first. They go down easier lol
-
I myself would like to see an Axis vs. Allied arena in the MA style.
I know it isn't going to work in game, but the realism would increase at least for me.
I know I'm one of a few that would appreciate that. Two counties only, point system adjusted etc.
I don't see as well as I used to. I need an Icon to help with targeting.
I know this is not possible, but would increase immersion for me.
Shooting down B17s and spitfires in a Jug is not my cup of tea.
I'll admit that the He177A-5 would make that markedly more viable. M26 Pershing as well.
-
Flew with BaldEagl in 92 Squad. We were the first to spot your massive raid in Frame 3. What a shock that was! I think you flew with a good squaddie of mine, Beefcake. Was a pleasure to cross guns with your 111's. I learnt to go for the 88's first. They go down easier lol
Excellent! You guys did an admirable job.
Indeed, Beefcake was one of the "go to" guys in the group.
-
the mega thread about the he-177...
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,345695.0.html
-
I myself would like to see an Axis vs. Allied arena in the MA style.
I know it isn't going to work in game, but the realism would increase at least for me.
I know I'm one of a few that would appreciate that. Two counties only, point system adjusted etc.
I don't see as well as I used to. I need an Icon to help with targeting.
I know this is not possible, but would increase immersion for me.
Shooting down B17s and spitfires in a Jug is not my cup of tea.
This :pray
-
This :pray
Great idea. :aok
Only problem is 90% of the pilots would be flying on the same side in spits and ponies. :frown:
-
I hope that you got to fly in the Battle of Britain 2013 scenario.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk9V66e88eI (best at 720p resolution)
I was happy when HTC gave us the HE-111 because when I think of German bombers in WWII it is the HE-111 that comes to mind. The HE-111 is iconic and not a supper bomber but it fills a place in the game it richly deserves. Nice video by the way I enjoyed it. :aok
-
I myself would like to see an Axis vs. Allied arena in the MA style.
I know it isn't going to work in game, but the realism would increase at least for me.
I know I'm one of a few that would appreciate that. Two counties only, point system adjusted etc.
I don't see as well as I used to. I need an Icon to help with targeting.
I know this is not possible, but would increase immersion for me.
Shooting down B17s and spitfires in a Jug is not my cup of tea.
Posted a thread for this in the Wishlist forum:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,355380.0.html
Great idea. :aok
Only problem is 90% of the pilots would be flying on the same side in spits and ponies. :frown:
90% don't fly Spits and Ponies now, so I doubt that would be true, but it would favor the Allies quite a bit. I'd fly Axis in such an arena, mostly Japanese.
-
90% don't fly Spits and Ponies now, so I doubt that would be true, but it would favor the Allies quite a bit. I'd fly Axis in such an arena, mostly Japanese.
I didn't mean the figure to be taken litterally...more to suggest the Allies would be favored.
I would fly Axis and Japanese as well. :aok
-
90% don't fly Spits and Ponies now, so I doubt that would be true, but it would favor the Allies quite a bit. I'd fly Axis in such an arena, mostly Japanese.
This years fighter usage numbers: Axis 35% Allied 65%
bomber usage numbers: Axis 15% Allies 85%
GV usage numbers: Axis 57% Allies 43%
-
This years fighter usage numbers: Axis 35% Allied 65%
bomber usage numbers: Axis 15% Allies 85%
GV usage numbers: Axis 57% Allies 43%
Yup. That is why, despite being an RAF buff, I'd fly Japanese stuff in such a setting. Also why I advocated the H8K2, He177A-5, B7A2 and M26 be added in the wishlist post.
-
I know our squad would fly the lowest numbered side. Axis or Allied makes no difference to us.
It's the fight that counts after all. I like to win of course, but I've noticed in my flight sim
career, fighting uphill is a great teacher. There are many things that can be done by the COs' of squads etc.
COs' could meet before a new tour and sides can be balanced. I'm in for that.
Really...with a little work and input from those who would be interested in a MA style A vs. A
the sky is actually the limit. It would take participation not only in the arena but between COs.
You'll find the guys in TFC don't care about the latest greatest, fastest biggest gunz.
I'm sure there are more then just a few squads and players who feel the same way.
Sorry.....didn't mean to hijack the thread.
-
This years fighter usage numbers: Axis 35% Allied 65%
bomber usage numbers: Axis 15% Allies 85%
GV usage numbers: Axis 57% Allies 43%
That's in the MA, and it figures. This proposed arena hopefully will differ.
May even keep the first person shooters in the MA, matter of fact I'm almost sure of it.
Plane sets seem to have an influence on that. Also flying Axis or Allied in these events
really isn't a big deal to most of the participants.
I'm hoping this will attract FSO and Scenario participants to an arena which is similar to those events.
Most of us who only participate in FSO and Scenarios hardly, if ever show up in the MA.
-
That's in the MA, and it figures. This proposed arena hopefully will differ.
There are chances it could be even worse, because players would be 'forced' to make a choice - all Axis or all Allies. Bombers for example: A huge part of the meagre 15% usage is made up by player flying usually Allied bombers and only occasionally an Axis bomber. The would be a god chance most of them would then shift to the Allied side.
There would be a lot of tweaks necessary, from gameplay changes to a heap of added planes to some very serious ENY/perk restrictions to create something resembling our sandbox open MA in AvA version
-
Most of us who only participate in FSO and Scenarios hardly, if ever show up in the MA.
About two or three years ago I made a quick analysis showing that most SEA & FSO participants were quite active in the MA. I think I will take a deeper look into it in the next few days.
On the other hand, Scenarios (the biggest events in AH) generally drew only an attendance 3-8% of all MA pilots in a given tour.
This is not meant as a stetement for or against an additional AvAMA :old:
-
About two or three years ago I made a quick analysis showing that most SEA & FSO participants were quite active in the MA. I think I will take a deeper look into it in the next few days.
On the other hand, Scenarios (the biggest events in AH) generally drew only an attendance 3-8% of all MA pilots in a given tour.
This is not meant as a stetement for or against an additional AvAMA :old:
Your input is appreciated by me Snailman. I'm depending on those who truly wish to be involved set a standard (not low)
on side balancing. Maps would dictate the planes available for both sides etc. Will take work. The guys in the AvA now
have a handful, just trying to get more involved in a good idea that will require more input from the players then it does
when one enters the MA. This will require good people who want the historic matchup and the fight that ensues.
More then likely a thought more then reality.
-
To be honest though, I would probably have supported your wish if it wasn't for the fact that you have come across as such a tool. You clearly have some issues and have been irrational to anyone making a response. Next time you come up with a good wish, leave the attitude at the door and people might support it.
So, you agree with the idea but out of spite you wont support it? And you dare to call me a tool? Oh the irony...
Then you freely admit that anything you deem productive in this thread is a waste of your and everyone else's time? Pity.
I was actually hoping you'd transition from petulance to productive. By the way, all sources I've seen on the 177 appear to
indicate that, historically, it never managed to make it to impressive status. The Do.217 would be a nice addition. But I'm still
not seeing a crisis over the 111 being modeled first. My regrets that it annoys you so.
*Sigh*
This is why I asked before if it was clear enough, you are a bit lost. The point was to add a para version of the He-111, the rest was chat.
The Luftwaffe had no significant sustained bombing efforts after 1942 and the production numbers of its later bombers are consequently low.
The Russian and even the Maltese would likely disagree. Production was low because the Do-217 and He-111 were on low rate production waiting to be replaced by the He-177, which failed to materialize in time. Same for the 188, it was a stop gap until the failed Ju-288 was introduced, so it and the vainilla Ju-88 remained on production... for the lowly figure of 10.000 units, add fighter and other variants and you get 15.000.
The Do217, Ju188 and He177 are MA fodder for players who won't fly anything other than German aircraft. The Luftwaffe situation is not comparable to the USAAF or RAF being without the B-17/B-24 and Lancaster. See the difference?
You missed the point.
Manchester never worked and was rapidly withdrawn from service with the RAF suggesting that Avro build Halifaxes instead.
As noted above a mid war bomber for the Germans is really just MA fodder for the subset of players who refuse to fly anything that isn't German. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be added, but it does significantly reduce its priority.
Just, no.
the ju-88 could have been produced in twice the numbers as the bf-109 and that still would not have made it as much of an iconic war time image as the he-111, p-40, b-17, bf-109, a6m zero, p-51 or the spitfire.
even movie studios from the 60s were more aware of what iconic was...
(http://www.cedmagic.com/v-title-database/bean/battle-of-britain-21.jpg)
Hehe, man you are a blast! Now you are bringing Hollywood and its movies a "proof"? Lol! Could you be any sillier? And Im sure the election of the He-111 had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with the fact the He-111 family was still alive back then in Spain as the CASA 2.111. I bet you didnt even find anything odd with the "Bf-109s"! :aok
But this actually reinforces my point, to think that the He-111 is THE iconic bomber of the LW you clearly need to have a "movie knowledge" of WW2 and avoid books like the plague!
Here, my contribution to your knowledge of WW2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIg_rCMe5Ik
"Awesome" movie...
-
Hehe, man you are a blast! Now you are bringing Hollywood and its movies a "proof"? Lol! Whats next Pearl Harbour? Could you be any sillier?
actually no, you top the cake on silly...and that can be proven by the crap you have posted in this discussion.
The Russian and even the Maltese would likely disagree. Production was low because the Do-217 and He-111 were on low rate production waiting to be replaced by the He-177, which failed to materialize in time. Same for the 188, it was a stop gap until the failed Ju-288 was introduced, so it and the vainilla Ju-88 remained on production... for the lowly figure of 10.000 units, add fighter and other variants and you get 15.000.
you need to stop using wikipedia as your source. the why and wherefore of luftwaffe bomber development and production are all well documented and "waiting for new versions" was not in the equation.
-
Icon n. a person or thing regarded as a symbol of a belief, nation, community, or cultural movement
The Battle of Britain was the most culturally significant strategic bombing campaign in the West undertaken by the Luftwaffe during the Second World War. Barbarossa in the East.
The He 111 played a significant role in both and its easily recognizable, graceful shape makes it iconic of both campaigns (especially the BoB) and as either campaign is largely iconic the cultural perception of German strategic bombing anywhere in the world, the He 111 can certainly be considered 'an' or even 'the' iconic bomber of the Luftwaffe.
Was it the most relevant in a material sense? Not really. But that doesn't have anything to do with iconography. Trying to prove that it wasn't doesn't do anything but make you look like a pedant.
-
hey i still fly my 111 in the MA it is a great perk farmer :devil and fun to fly
-
Icon n. a person or thing regarded as a symbol of a belief, nation, community, or cultural movement
The Battle of Britain was the most culturally significant strategic bombing campaign in the West undertaken by the Luftwaffe during the Second World War. Barbarossa in the East.
The He 111 played a significant role in both and its easily recognizable, graceful shape makes it iconic of both campaigns (especially the BoB) and as either campaign is largely iconic the cultural perception of German strategic bombing anywhere in the world, the He 111 can certainly be considered 'an' or even 'the' iconic bomber of the Luftwaffe.
Was it the most relevant in a material sense? Not really. But that doesn't have anything to do with iconography. Trying to prove that it wasn't doesn't do anything but make you look like a pedant.
Example: Spitfire Mk I was the iconic British fighter of the Battle of Britain. Hurricane Mk I was actually the workhorse fighter that got the job done, 2/3rds of RAF fighter command was Hurricanes and 66-75% of RAF kills were by the Hurricane, yet it is the Spitfire that is the icon.
-
Example: Spitfire Mk I was the iconic British fighter of the Battle of Britain. Hurricane Mk I was actually the workhorse fighter that got the job done, 2/3rds of RAF fighter command was Hurricanes and 66-75% of RAF kills were by the Hurricane, yet it is the Spitfire that is the icon.
Of course the Hurricane looking like it got its face run over by a fully loaded brewery wagon might have something to do with that.
I mean the Spitfire actually LOOKS like a fighter.
-
So, you agree with the idea but out of spite you wont support it? And you dare to call me a tool? Oh the irony...
Pretty much, yea.
Of course the Hurricane looking like it got its face run over by a fully loaded brewery wagon might have something to do with that.
I mean the Spitfire actually LOOKS like a fighter.
This helps enforce the idea that the 111 is the iconic german bomber.
Was it the most effective? No.
Was it the most produced, not sure probably not.
Is it the best looking? Heck yea!
Is it most easily recognisable? You bet!
Why? Because she looks nice!!!!
-
Of course the Hurricane looking like it got its face run over by a fully loaded brewery wagon might have something to do with that.
I mean the Spitfire actually LOOKS like a fighter.
Twas a little more complex than that. In 1938 the Hurricane, for British schoolboys, was the fighter of fighters. According to R.R.S. Tuck the pilots in the RAF had propagated myths about it being a killer, a plane you had to constantly watch or it might kill you (myths he felt certain had actually killed pilots taking one for their first flight) when in actuality it was quite docile and one of its strengths was being such a stable gun platform. By 1940 the sleek lines and high performance of the Spitfire had overcome that, but the Hurricane had its day in the sun, just there wasn't a war on when it did.
-
actually no, you top the cake on silly...and that can be proven by the crap you have posted in this discussion.
you need to stop using wikipedia as your source. the why and wherefore of luftwaffe bomber development and production are all well documented and "waiting for new versions" was not in the equation.
Yeah, wikipedia, right. You were the guy posting movie posters, right?
Example: Spitfire Mk I was the iconic British fighter of the Battle of Britain. Hurricane Mk I was actually the workhorse fighter that got the job done, 2/3rds of RAF fighter command was Hurricanes and 66-75% of RAF kills were by the Hurricane, yet it is the Spitfire that is the icon.
Take the Spit out of the BoB, now you have a force of slower and inferior fighters that would have been unable to match and contain the Bf-109s like the Spits did while other Hurris went after the bombers... which is the main factor of why they had the higher kill count, a slow bomber is a far easier target than a fighter.
Do you think the RAF would have won the BoB without the Spit? They would have certainly have at the very least suffered higher loses with the LW suffering less as well, even the Bf-110s would have been a tough proposition for the Hurri, if they kept fast.
Pretty much, yea.
:rofl
-
Take the Spit out of the BoB, now you have a force of slower and inferior fighters that would have been unable to match and contain the Bf-109s like the Spits did while other Hurris went after the bombers... which is the main factor of why they had the higher kill count, a slow bomber is a far easier target than a fighter.
Do you think the RAF would have won the BoB without the Spit? They would have certainly have at the very least suffered higher loses with the LW suffering less as well, even the Bf-110s would have been a tough proposition for the Hurri, if they kept fast.
In nature, of which the human race is a subset, and warfare a more deeply nested subset, all things are in balance or moving towards a balance. Had the R.A.F. not had the Spitfire it would have been something else because it was necessary to destroy the bombers in order to survive, and Great Britain certainly had the expertise, resources and motivation to provide the tools to accomplish this.
-
Example: Spitfire Mk I was the iconic British fighter of the Battle of Britain. Hurricane Mk I was actually the workhorse fighter that got the job done, 2/3rds of RAF fighter command was Hurricanes and 66-75% of RAF kills were by the Hurricane, yet it is the Spitfire that is the icon.
Very well put.
Starting with the Spanish Civil War, in my opinion nothing says nazi bomber like an he 111. It represents cutting edge technology of the thirties, the remilitarization of Germany, aspirations of conquest and domination, and brutal narcissistic pageantry that held the rest of the world in lethal contempt. In the end it became as outmoded as the ideas and leadership of the nation that built it. And while as aesthetically complete a distillation of violence as beauty as the Hugo Boss uniforms of the German millitary, it also shared the unfortunate feature of being a very dangerous thing to be in by 1944.
-
Starting with the Spanish Civil War, in my opinion nothing says nazi bomber like an he 111. It represents cutting edge technology of the thirties, the remilitarization of Germany, aspirations of conquest and domination, and brutal narcissistic pageantry that held the rest of the world in lethal contempt. In the end it became as outmoded as the ideas and leadership of the nation that built it. And while as aesthetically complete a distillation of violence as beauty as the Hugo Boss uniforms of the German millitary, it also shared the unfortunate feature of being a very dangerous thing to be in by 1944.
Poetry...
-
Poetry...
Really! Good job Pembquist!
- oldman
-
Very well put.
Starting with the Spanish Civil War, in my opinion nothing says nazi bomber like an he 111. It represents cutting edge technology of the thirties, the remilitarization of Germany, aspirations of conquest and domination, and brutal narcissistic pageantry that held the rest of the world in lethal contempt. In the end it became as outmoded as the ideas and leadership of the nation that built it. And while as aesthetically complete a distillation of violence as beauty as the Hugo Boss uniforms of the German millitary, it also shared the unfortunate feature of being a very dangerous thing to be in by 1944.
:aok, or as you would say; Very well put.
-
Radar was priceless.
50 miles of water at the shortest distance, besides any distance inland.
The battle was over England, land so they had homefield advantage.
Luft fighters were mostly chained to the bombers.
Droptanks invented yet by either side.
And by some claims, Germany's code machine was already hacked. It had fewer wheels than uboats btw.
Any technological differeneces between spits and huris becomes negligible when compared to all of the listed advantages that both had over the luft, which were superior in in real life. Luft had all the aces even during this early battle.
-
Radar was priceless.
50 miles of water at the shortest distance, besides any distance inland.
The battle was over England, land so they had homefield advantage.
Luft fighters were mostly chained to the bombers.
Droptanks invented yet by either side.
And by some claims, Germany's code machine was already hacked. It had fewer wheels than uboats btw.
Any technological differeneces between spits and huris becomes negligible when compared to all of the listed advantages that both had over the luft, which were superior in in real life. Luft had all the aces even during this early battle.
once again little johnny goes...
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rzvPrUtIIMI/UPWqs_FPNYI/AAAAAAAAFQ4/8C9r1CGSN1Y/s1600/thomastankcrash%5B1%5D.jpg)
with utter nonsense as usual...
-
and once again, personal attacks...
-
Droptanks invented yet by either side.
You made that claim in another thread and it was shown you were incorrect. Drop tanks were first used in the Spanish Civil War and the Luftwaffe started to use drop tanks as early at 1940. Do some research Schlowy before you make outlandish and unsupported claims like drop tanks weren't invented and the Spitfire Mk XVI never saw combat.
ack-ack
-
Get a source, and that one line in Wikipedia isn't getting it.
-
Any technological differeneces between spits and huris becomes negligible when compared to all of the listed advantages that both had over the luft, which were superior in in real life. Luft had all the aces even during this early battle.
Luftwhining at its finest. Also very disrespectful to the many brave pilots of the R.A.F. who fought with skill and courage DEFENDING their country against a savage and evil aggressor.
-
naaaw, no bias on your part, and you just insulted a whole nation btw.
-
naaaw, no bias on your part, and you just insulted a whole nation btw.
In that period and rightly so. Despite your delusions, there was no nobility about what the Nazis did or wanted to do. None whatsoever. Individuals might have done brave and noble things in difficult situations but within the context of a nation's endeavours this was a woefully shameful movement and a malignant philosophy which had to be eradicated at all costs.
But do continue to entertain us all with your glowing fantasy idolatry over the whole Nazi entity including the miraculous German engineering which was superior to everything else and continue to suggest that they were simply unlucky and persecuted.
-
Get a source, and that one line in Wikipedia isn't getting it.
(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/1801361664/hC727D679/)
Auxiliary ‘drop’ fuel tanks weren’t secret. They were common to most American fighters both Navy and Army in the early to mid 1930′s. Nor were they unknown around the world, as the Germans demonstrated in them in Spain early in 1939 (and forgot them for the Battle of Britain in 1940). They were also standard for the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) and were responsible — along with “long of lean” fuel control techniques — for the A6M3 Zero’s incredible range in 1941.
http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/37362.html (http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/37362.html)
The first Luftwaffe aircraft to have drop tanks were, the Heinkel 51 and the Henschel 123. To increase the range the “manufacturers added drop tanks.” The He-51B structure was strengthened, including twin-wire bracing of the landing gear, and a provision for a 50-liter drop tank beneath the fuselage was added.
http://weaponsandwarfare.com/?p=2456 (http://weaponsandwarfare.com/?p=2456)
Mitsubishi A5M ("Claude"). In this aircraft, Japan developed the world's first monoplane shipboard fighter. It was flown in prototype on February 4, 1935, and entered service in 1937, flying extensively in the Sino-Japanese War and in the early days of World War II itself. By the time production ended, 1,094 Claudes had been produced, including a two-seat trainer version, which prepared many pilots for the successor to the Claude, the great Zero.
The A5M variant was a single-seat carrier-based fighter, and the A5M4-K was a two-seat fighter trainer. The aircraft featured all-metal construction with fabric-covered control surfaces and (on later models) one Nakajima Kotobuki 41 nine-cylinder air-cooled radial, rated at 710 horsepower for takeoff. Later models of the aircraft had a wingspan of 36 feet 1 3/16 inches and a fuselage length of 24 feet 9 27/32 inches. Top speed in later models was 270 miles per hour at 9,845 feet, with a service ceiling of 32,150 feet and a range of 746 miles. Typical armament consisted of two fuselage-mounted 7.7-mm machine guns, or two fuselage-mounted 20-mm cannon, or one engine-mounted 20-mm cannon. The aircraft could carry two 66-pound bombs or one 35.2-gallon drop tank.
http://www.fofweb.com/History/MainPrintPage.asp?iPin=WWII0011&DataType=WorldHistory&WinType=Free (http://www.fofweb.com/History/MainPrintPage.asp?iPin=WWII0011&DataType=WorldHistory&WinType=Free)
in case it didn't register the first time...
(http://stoptalk.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/shhh2.jpg)
-
Get a source, and that one line in Wikipedia isn't getting it.
Picture of a A5M "Claude" taken in 1938. Notice the drop tank?
(http://www.wwiivehicles.com/japan/aircraft/fighter/mitsubishi-a5m-claude-fighter/mitsubishi-a5m-type-96-fighter-claude-01.png)
ack-ack
-
Please....correct me if I am wrong. At the start of the BoB wasn't the RAF outnumbered in the vicinity of 4 to 1?
Ya....I saw that in the movie Battle of Britain but I also remember reading that somewhere. I'm going through
my Library seeking additional info.
Oh forgot! Thee book on the BoB is the book Battle of Britain then and now. Large book with great info, even daily losses
from both sides (documented loses, plane #, squadron, Pilot etc.)
-
naaaw, no bias on your part, and you just insulted a whole nation btw.
You do that every single time you mention the British. I have, quite literally, never seen you mention anything British without tossing insults at them. Take the post you just made wherein you claimed the Germans were superior and had all of the aces despite the fact that many British pilots, and pilots from British allied nations, aced during the Battle of Britain.
Taking just the Bf109E-4 and Spitfire Mk Ia, most of us recognize that both had advantages over the other, the Spit doing better at this, the Bf109 better at that and so on resulting in what was probably the most equal match up of disparate fighters in WWII. You, on the other hand, seem to take that as an insult to the Germans and take it as self evident that the Bf109E-4 was simply superior to the Spitfire Mk Ia. You seem to carry a massive chip on your shoulder about the British.
-
Heinz Knoke flying a Me 109 E4s with II/JG 52 over England in May 1941 talking of spitfires:
The bastards can make such infernally tight turns; there seems to be no way of nailing them.
-Heinz Knoke, I flew for the Führer, pg. 32
:)
-
I think the true beauty (and tragedy) of that era of aerial combat was the pure analog control of a monstrous machine by an individual pitted against another under the same conditions. National policies and affiliations mean nothing for those few brief moments of exhilaration and terror. If we cannot, at this late stage, come to appreciate all the different aircraft and the men and women who engaged in aerial combat in that period of history then something is very wrong.
-
naaaw, no bias on your part, and you just insulted a whole nation btw.
Sadly you are the insult to an entire nation. If we rewarded cluelessness with medals, you'd have the Knights Cross with diamonds and swords.
-
Sadly you are the insult to an entire nation. If we rewarded cluelessness with medals, you'd have the Knights Cross with diamonds and swords.
you guys give him too much credit. there is sufficient evidence to argue his IQ struggles to achieve a double digit number.
he might qualify for the double twinkie with plastic wrap...
(http://www.thespreadit.com/pics/Twinkies.jpg)
-
Mmmm... Twinkies... Golden Sponge Cake with Creamy Filling. Iconic Snack Classics modeled at net wt 3 oz.
Source in photo above.
-
FVW online. Irrational response in 3 .... 2 .... 1?
-
FVW online. Irrational response in 3 .... 2 .... 1?
:furious dammit, coffee all over myself and the desk...caught me off guard again. :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Luftwhining at its finest. Also very disrespectful to the many brave pilots of the R.A.F. who fought with skill and courage DEFENDING their country against a savage and evil aggressor.
Evil Empire? Lets see, an Austrian Prince (Ferdinand) gets killed by a Serbian, and this justifies England and France taking all of Germany's colonies and SHRINKING Germany's homeland? England was famous for 'stealing' land from the whole world by the way. Germany was still WITHIN ITS PRE-WW1 BORDERS WHEN ENGLAND DECLARED WAR IN WW2. Oh, and USSR, under Stalin, took the other half of Poland, which they had no territorial claims to, yet not a word from England or France, they only declared war on Germany not Russia. And after ww2, England and FRANCE lost their power, most of the world declared INDEPENDENCE from England. USA already had in 1775 and it took until 1783 to get England off the continent - check USA hero's on USA money, most of them fought England.
Heinz Knoke flying a Me 109 E4s with II/JG 52 over England in May 1941 talking of spitfires:
The bastards can make such infernally tight turns; there seems to be no way of nailing them.
-Heinz Knoke, I flew for the Führer, pg. 32
:)
Well maybe Knoke was going much faster than his target and interpreted it wrong, speculative informantion.
In our game the spit DOES EVERYTHING BETTER, SPEED, CLIMB, ROLL, etc etc... why doesn't Knoke mention any of those?
Oh and when it became an altitude contest, the 109E's were coming in higher by like 2 or 3k.
Radar was priceless.
50 miles of water at the shortest distance, besides any distance inland.
The battle was over England, land so they had homefield advantage.
Luft fighters were mostly chained to the bombers.
Droptanks invented yet by either side.
And by some claims, Germany's code machine was already hacked. It had fewer wheels than uboats btw.
Any technological differeneces between spits and huris becomes negligible when compared to all of the listed advantages that both had over the luft, which were superior in in real life. Luft had all the aces even during this early battle.
Ok ok, fuel tanks were invented, I still don't see them on any 'modern fighter' at the time of early 1940, Battle for Britain...
NO MENTION OF THE REST OF THE LIST? A PAGE AGO, IT WAS 'SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE OF THE SPIT OVER THE HURI THAT SAVED ENGLAND???
Do you think the RAF would have won the BoB without the Spit?
-
You made that claim in another thread and it was shown you were incorrect. Drop tanks were first used in the Spanish Civil War and the Luftwaffe started to use drop tanks as early at 1940. Do some research Schlowy before you make outlandish and unsupported claims like drop tanks weren't invented and the Spitfire Mk XVI never saw combat.
ack-ack
I'm still waiting for your research, or anyone elses, in that thread. No facts yet, at best an 'air to air' encounter by accident but not on purpose.
Twinkie (Irene, he's been posting twinkies all over this board), didn't even see this coming, not just one response post, but two!
-
Evil Empire? Lets see, an Austrian Prince (Ferdinand) gets killed by a Serbian, and this justifies England and France taking all of Germany's colonies and SHRINKING Germany's homeland?
No, Germany's invading Belgium and France did that.
As to their colonies, the whole colonial system was abhorrent and everybody's colonies should have been freed.
-
ooooh!!! i love alternative history!!!
Evil Empire? Lets see, an Austrian Prince (Ferdinand) gets killed by a Serbian, and this justifies England and France taking all of Germany's colonies and SHRINKING Germany's homeland? England was famous for 'stealing' land from the whole world by the way. Germany was still WITHIN ITS PRE-WW1 BORDERS WHEN ENGLAND DECLARED WAR IN WW2. Oh, and USSR, under Stalin, took the other half of Poland, which they had no territorial claims to, yet not a word from England or France, they only declared war on Germany not Russia. And after ww2, England and FRANCE lost their power, most of the world declared INDEPENDENCE from England. USA already had in 1775 and it took until 1783 to get England off the continent - check USA hero's on USA money, most of them fought England.
(http://imageshack.com/a/img837/4404/1wl.gif)
Well maybe Knoke was going much faster than his target and interpreted it wrong, speculative informantion.
In our game the spit DOES EVERYTHING BETTER, SPEED, CLIMB, ROLL, etc etc... why doesn't Knoke mention any of those?
Oh and when it became an altitude contest, the 109E's were coming in higher by like 2 or 3k.
seriously? better work on that reading comprehension problem there ace. Spitfire MK1 numpty...
Heinz Knoke flying a Me 109 E4s with II/JG 52 over England in May 1941 talking of spitfires:
Ok ok, fuel tanks were invented, I still don't see them on any 'modern fighter' at the time of early 1940, Battle for Britain...
NO MENTION OF THE REST OF THE LIST? A PAGE AGO, IT WAS 'SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE OF THE SPIT OVER THE HURI THAT SAVED ENGLAND???
the spits and hurricanes didn't need drop tanks, they needed the speed to get to altitude and intercept incoming luftwaffe aircraft. and the luftwaffe was short sighted (a typical attribute due to the nazi command structure) about the needs of the fighters over britain. 109s sometimes carried drop tanks in africa and the mediterranean.
-
Whatever Karnak, you are an extreme pro-English nationalist, and you try to bend 'right' to be on their side.
Germany went through Belgium to get to France, and later England, and you know it.
Since when did England EVER respect another countries borders?
Brief history:
England and France entered a war with Germany (ww1), SUPPOSIVELY, because a Serbian killed an Austrian Prince, REALLY IT WAS TO GRAB MORE LAND, England and France had meat-grinded the front line IN VAIN, and so then England and France LIE and USA comes in and Germany Surrenders. Then England and France DEMAND PAYMENT, and steal parts of Germany's home country AND take all colonies, AND make them pay 'reparations' TAX for 15 years sending the WHOLE WORLD INTO ECONOMIC DEPRESION (1929) until Hitler said "NO MORE!" in the 30's. In the meantime, FRANCE builds a wall to keep the Germans away in Eastern France. So before France's Maginot Line was completed, northeast France, Germany went around the side through Belgium AND Luxembourg.
So keep lieing Karnak, and try to make this about me, its about you and your trying to JUSTIFY England and France stealing land and enslaving other countries - which England and France were doing, from 'colonizing' Ireland (closest neighbor), to Africa to Asia and to the Americas. Your nationalist expanding nation was countered by Japan doing the same thing.
And only till Germany And Hitler did the English era of enslaving this world, end.
How do you like USA's 4th of July Holiday Karnak? ITS ABOUT KICKING YOUR ENSLAVING COUNTRY OFF THE CONTINENT! :aok
-
:rofl
-
Hey, Twinkie (Irene)
uhh, the luft being in Africa and Mediterranean WAS AFTER the battle of Britain... Duh! Luft had drop tanks by then :D
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/United_States_one_dollar_bill,_obverse.jpg/1280px-United_States_one_dollar_bill,_obverse.jpg)
-
ONE DOLLAH TO MAKE YOU HOLLAH!!!
This thread has been very entertaining. I predict a moderator's presence very soon. :rofl
So.... about the '111. :D
oh... and btw.... GOD SAVE THE QUEEN AND MAY BISMARK CHOKE ON FRENCH FRIES AND POLISH SAUSAGE!!! oh wait....
-
Seriously Schlowy, how poorly trained were German pilots and/or backward aviation technology that a spitfire with engine problems shoots down a bf 109.
S/L Colin Gray, with No. 81 Squadron flying Spitfire IXs in North Africa:
We were just taking off from Paddington for a diversionary sweep when the airfield was attacked without any warning whatsoever by a gaggle of bomb-carrying Focke Wulf 190s. Half a dozen of us were airborne, but the rest were still on the runway when the bombs fell, but fortunately they did not do any serious damage. I was about to land back again with a duff engine, but when I saw the bombs fall I immediately set off in hot pursuit of the invaders. I did not have much hope of catching them as the 190s had the legs on us at ground level and they had a head start from their dive, not to mention my duff engine. I chased them up the Beja road towards Tabarka, but the further we went the further they got ahead, so I eventually gave up the attempt and turned back for home. Just as I completed my turn I saw another aircraft coming towards me at high speed, and as he flashed past I recognized a 109G2. He also obviously recognized me as hostile because he immediately pulled into a screaming left-hand turn and attempted to dogfight. This was a big mistake because there was no way a 109 could turn inside a Spitfire. It took only a few minutes to get on his tail and a short burst with cannon and machine-guns produced much smoke, glycol, and large chunks falling off. The pilot immediately pulled up and bailed out, but we were still close to the ground, and although his parachute appeared to stream, it did not open before the poor beggar hit the ground. Almost at the same time I heard a yell over the R/T from Paul Hagger announcing that he too had also just knocked down another 109. (Uffz. Gottfried Saam & Flg. Karl Ruppman of II./JG 53 killed)
Group Captain Colin Gray DSO, DFC, Spitfire Patrol, p. 111.
-
Hey, Twinkie (Irene)
uhh, the luft being in Africa and Mediterranean WAS AFTER the battle of Britain... Duh! Luft had drop tanks by then :D
you really need to work on that low IQ ace. never said anything about before or after battle of britain. what i did say was 109s sometimes carried drop tanks in africa and the mediterranean. i can be more specific if you wish, but i fear your disability may hinder your ability to understand anything.
-
Evil Empire? Lets see, an Austrian Prince (Ferdinand) gets killed by a Serbian, and this justifies England and France taking all of Germany's colonies and SHRINKING Germany's homeland? England was famous for 'stealing' land from the whole world by the way. Germany was still WITHIN ITS PRE-WW1 BORDERS WHEN ENGLAND DECLARED WAR IN WW2. Oh, and USSR, under Stalin, took the other half of Poland, which they had no territorial claims to, yet not a word from England or France, they only declared war on Germany not Russia. And after ww2, England and FRANCE lost their power, most of the world declared INDEPENDENCE from England. USA already had in 1775 and it took until 1783 to get England off the continent - check USA hero's on USA money, most of them fought England.
Ah I see, a died in the wool Brit-bashing racist with half an education and a quarter of a clue. There have been many Empires in human history, it's what those countries did with those empires that is the measure of good and evil. The British Empire spread industrialization, healthcare, civilization and most importantly democracy to the world. Yes independence was granted to most colonies after the war and a good many of those chose to remain in the commonwealth and maintain the templates of government and administration set down by the British.
Then there's the Nazi Empire, which didn't last so long but did spread beyond its own borders quite violently when they had enough military power. Let's examine their philosophy by way of contrast shall we: enslavement, forced labour, racial extermination, extermination of the mentally ill, the disabled, eugenics, a hierarchical power system promoting the most cruel and ruthless, with nothing to keep it in check. A nation convinced they were superior by a bunch of contriving viscous bullboys preying on what Jonathan Meades described as the 'tragically obedient' German people (of the time).
The funniest part in all of this, Schlowy, is how you fantasize you'd be a noble fighter pilot under this regime. With your intellect you'd be lucky if they let you dig roads.
-
The funniest part in all of this, Schlowy, is how you fantasies you'd be a noble fighter pilot under this regime. With your intellect you'd be lucky if they let you dig roads.
dammit shida, do i have to start watching out for your posts too? :furious now i have to clean coffee off my desk again, almost choked on it.... :rofl :lol :rofl :lol :rofl :lol
-
The funniest part in all of this, Schlowy, is how you fantasize you'd be a noble fighter pilot under this regime. With your intellect you'd be lucky if they let you dig roads.
I'd be surprised, that if schlowy was around in the 1930s, that upon walking into a careers office he wouldn't accidentally sign up himself up to the nancy party.
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/a19d43a5f657f50198f44ebd79113094/tumblr_mtyspmlwms1qe2u0ko1_500.jpg)
-
Whatever Karnak, you are an extreme pro-English nationalist, and you try to bend 'right' to be on their side.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/gallery/no/john-cleese-no.gif)
-
Whatever Karnak, you are an extreme pro-English nationalist, and you try to bend 'right' to be on their side.
Germany went through Belgium to get to France, and later England, and you know it.
Since when did England EVER respect another countries borders?
Brief history:
England and France entered a war with Germany (ww1), SUPPOSIVELY, because a Serbian killed an Austrian Prince, REALLY IT WAS TO GRAB MORE LAND, England and France had meat-grinded the front line IN VAIN, and so then England and France LIE and USA comes in and Germany Surrenders.
A rather gross misrepresentation of what happened. Germany was no victim, nor was the United Kingdom as both were itching for a fight. Germany because they wanted their place in the sun and the UK because they felt their naval superiority was being challenged and that put their empire and nation at risk. The assassination of the Archduke was an excuse by Germany and the treaty the UK had guaranteeing Belgian neutrality was used as an excuse by the UK. Are you familiar with the "Dear Nicky, Dear Willy" letters?
Then England and France DEMAND PAYMENT
Yup, that was a catastrophic error on their part and was flat out wrong. They ought to have listened to Woodrow Wilson.
and steal parts of Germany's home country AND take all colonies,
Took the German colonies, yes. As I said earlier though, they ought to have freed them, and their own colonies. As to stealing parts of Germany, that is how things were back then. I don't see you protesting the German's having taking Alsace-Lorrainne from France in 1871. That isn't to justify it, but rather to point out how silly you look for singling out the French and British for that kind of thing.
AND make them pay 'reparations' TAX for 15 years sending the WHOLE WORLD INTO ECONOMIC DEPRESION (1929)
What? You think the absurdly unjust reperations caused the crash of '29? Go talk to some economists. Seriously.
until Hitler said "NO MORE!" in the 30's. In the meantime, FRANCE builds a wall to keep the Germans away in Eastern France. So before France's Maginot Line was completed, northeast France, Germany went around the side through Belgium AND Luxembourg.
What justified Germany attacking Poland? France and the UK both made it quite clear that if Germany attacked Poland they would be forced to declare war on Germany.
So keep lieing Karnak, and try to make this about me, its about you and your trying to JUSTIFY England and France stealing land and enslaving other countries - which England and France were doing, from 'colonizing' Ireland (closest neighbor), to Africa to Asia and to the Americas. Your nationalist expanding nation was countered by Japan doing the same thing.
And only till Germany And Hitler did the English era of enslaving this world, end.
Erm, you're giving credit to Hitler for a completely unintended consequence of WWII. Pax Britannia was dealt its mortal blow by WWII but that was certainly not Hitler's intention. Hitler liked the British and considered them fellow Germanics. The collapse of colonialism was a very good thing, but to credit Germany and/or Japan with that is absurd as they were both intent on setting up their own colonial systems, WWII being the result.
How do you like USA's 4th of July Holiday Karnak? ITS ABOUT KICKING YOUR ENSLAVING COUNTRY OFF THE CONTINENT! :aok
I like the 4th of July quite well, thank you. The British refused us our seats in Parliament so we took appropriate action. I quite agree with Thomas Jefferson that government exists at the consent of the governed. Mohandas Gandhi was also correct in his actions against British rule. That doesn't mean I have to hate the British though, just like WWII doesn't mean I have to hate the Germans and Japanese or the Cold War doesn't mean I have to hate the Russians or Islamic terrorism doesn't mean I have to hate muslims. I find hate to be a destructive and limiting emotion.
You have some pretty serious delusions about my view of the British.
Another thing that you don't seem to understand is that all of the bad stuff the British did does not make OK the bad stuff that the Germans did. You are awfully fond of "defending" the German record by bringing up British evils. That isn't actually a defense, but rather an effort to distract attention away from the indefensible German actions. The fact that the British were on the right side in WWII seems to cause you a lot of anguish.
-
Ah I see, a died in the wool Brit-bashing racist with half an education and a quarter of a clue. There have been many Empires in human history, it's what those countries did with those empires that is the measure of good and evil. The British Empire spread industrialization, healthcare, civilization and most importantly democracy to the world. Yes independence was granted to most colonies after the war and a good many of those chose to remain in the commonwealth and maintain the templates of government and administration set down by the British.
Then there's the Nazi Empire, which didn't last so long but did spread beyond its own borders quite violently when they had enough military power. Let's examine their philosophy by way of contrast shall we: enslavement, forced labour, racial extermination, extermination of the mentally ill, the disabled, eugenics, a hierarchical power system promoting the most cruel and ruthless, with nothing to keep it in check. A nation convinced they were superior by a bunch of contriving viscous bullboys preying on what Jonathan Meades described as the 'tragically obedient' German people (of the time).
The funniest part in all of this, Schlowy, is how you fantasize you'd be a noble fighter pilot under this regime. With your intellect you'd be lucky if they let you dig roads.
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
5/5 for accuracy and comedy.
-
SUPPOSIVELY
ahahahahahaha
-
SUPPOSIVELY
ahahahahahaha
He could mean "SUPPOSITORY", as that would more closely describe the origin of his arguments and where his head is.
"Supposively" does make it plainly clear how "stupive" he really is, though.
-
Ah I see, a died in the wool Brit-bashing racist with half an education and a quarter of a clue. There have been many Empires in human history, it's what those countries did with those empires that is the measure of good and evil. The British Empire spread industrialization, healthcare, civilization and most importantly democracy to the world. Yes independence was granted to most colonies after the war and a good many of those chose to remain in the commonwealth and maintain the templates of government and administration set down by the British.
Then there's the Nazi Empire, which didn't last so long but did spread beyond its own borders quite violently when they had enough military power. Let's examine their philosophy by way of contrast shall we: enslavement, forced labour, racial extermination, extermination of the mentally ill, the disabled, eugenics, a hierarchical power system promoting the most cruel and ruthless, with nothing to keep it in check. A nation convinced they were superior by a bunch of contriving viscous bullboys preying on what Jonathan Meades described as the 'tragically obedient' German people (of the time).
The funniest part in all of this, Schlowy, is how you fantasize you'd be a noble fighter pilot under this regime. With your intellect you'd be lucky if they let you dig roads.
No excuse for conquest of others. The brits thought they were civilizing savages when they explored the world, but really it was just pretentiousness. Hell, for a while England was arguably the most unjust an tyrannical nation on the face of the earth.
-
No excuse for conquest of others. The brits thought they were civilizing savages when they explored the world, but really it was just pretentiousness. Hell, for a while England was arguably the most unjust an tyrannical nation on the face of the earth.
Said of any empire. Rome and so forth.
-
No excuse for conquest of others. The brits thought they were civilizing savages when they explored the world, but really it was just pretentiousness. Hell, for a while England was arguably the most unjust an tyrannical nation on the face of the earth.
My wife is Indian (south Asia, not Native American) and my co-worker is Kenyan. I was just discussing this a bit with him. He pretty much sees colonialism as having been a very bad thing, but that being the case the British did better and left things better than the others did.
-
Are you familiar with the "Dear Nicky, Dear Willy" letters?
Heh. Heh. He said Willie.
(http://www.cinemablend.com/images/sections/25657/Beavis___Butthead_25657.jpg)
-
No excuse for conquest of others. The brits thought they were civilizing savages when they explored the world, but really it was just pretentiousness. Hell, for a while England was arguably the most unjust an tyrannical nation on the face of the earth.
the same can be said about the catholic church across the entire planet, yet there has never been any reparation.
you don't live in the u.s. do you? want to talk about the years 1619 to 1887?
-
(http://cdn.head-fi.org/8/8a/8aad2dbf_Derailment.jpeg)
-
...enslavement, forced labour, racial extermination, extermination of the mentally ill, the disabled, eugenics, a hierarchical power system promoting the most cruel and ruthless, with nothing to keep it in check. A nation convinced they were superior ...
When you started listing those dubious qualities a picture of Redcoats in Africa, America and the Far-East immediately formed in my mind. The British Empire was a blight upon the world back in the day. Even the English term "concentration camp" was first used to describe camps operated by the British in South Africa during the Second Boer War. Allegedly conceived as a form of humanitarian aid to the families whose farms had been destroyed in the fighting, the camps were used to confine and control large numbers of civilians as part of a scorched earth tactic.
Rule Britannia dum-dum-di-dum-di-do! :rock
-
Absolutely true. It's a shame for the Germans that they didn't try it about 80 years before or we would have been helping them and have thought it all a jolly good idea. IT wasn't untill we started losing control of our Empire that we decided to be hypocrits and human rightsy.
-
Said of any empire. Rome and so forth.
Yes, but then Shida isn't trying to build up and justify the Roman's conquests just to respond to a troll.
the same can be said about the catholic church across the entire planet, yet there has never been any reparation.
you don't live in the u.s. do you? want to talk about the years 1619 to 1887?
See above.
-
Yes, but then Shida isn't trying to build up and justify the Roman's conquests just to respond to a troll.
See above.
i guess the hypocrisy of your statement didn't sink in...manifest destiny.
assuming you're a by gawd dyed in the wool red white and blue uhmericun...
-
i guess the hypocrisy of your statement didn't sink in...manifest destiny.
assuming you're a by gawd dyed in the wool red white and blue uhmericun...
Nope
-
Well, I'm not going to get involved in the xenophobia here, but I do have to give FVW my vote for Master Troll.
Honestly, the rest of you need to step back for a moment.
- oldman
-
just think of how many of those piece a junks id ove shoot down already with my trusty ta152 or niki :cheers:
-
What justified Germany attacking Poland? France and the UK both made it quite clear that if Germany attacked Poland they would be forced to declare war on Germany.
You claim to know about ww2 but no idea whats the Danzig Corridor? etc, etc? :headscratch:
THE TERM IS 'TERRITORIAL CLAIMS'
pre ww1
(http://users.humboldt.edu/ogayle/Map_Europe_alliances_1914.png)
after ww1
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/01/19/article-1348555-0CD3D91F000005DC-90_634x426.jpg)
Europe 1950
(http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/walter.sargent/public.www/web%20104/50s-cold-war-map.jpg)
long after ww2, all of eastern Europe was part of the soviet uninion, now independent states.
(http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/2000/2000.jpg)
Its not that I don't like English, I just don't like any place (or individuals) that points at Germany and says 'the bad guys' - they had rights too.
-
Thank you Joseph Goebbels :aok
-
Thank you Joseph Goebbels :aok
Hey Dan, good to see you. :salute
-
Its not that I don't like English, I just don't like any place (or individuals) that points at Germany and says 'the bad guys' - they had rights too.
The right to slaughter an entire people?
-
When you started listing those dubious qualities a picture of Redcoats in Africa, America and the Far-East immediately formed in my mind. The British Empire was a blight upon the world back in the day. Even the English term "concentration camp" was first used to describe camps operated by the British in South Africa during the Second Boer War. Allegedly conceived as a form of humanitarian aid to the families whose farms had been destroyed in the fighting, the camps were used to confine and control large numbers of civilians as part of a scorched earth tactic.
Rule Britannia dum-dum-di-dum-di-do! :rock
Yes in many ways you are right and I do not support Empire building and colonialism either (including the present one), I'm just saying that in the context of history and especially in contrast to the Nazi Empire (short lived as it was) the British Empire probably did more net good than bad - in the long run, and the British Empire was sacrificed battling evil in the arguable last ethical war in living history. This was their finest hour.
Its not that I don't like English,
Don't worry Schlowy, it's not that we don't like you either. I want you to bear this in mind when we hunt you down and make your life a misery in the MA with Spixteens :ahand
I just don't like any place (or individuals) that points at Germany and says 'the bad guys' - they had rights too.
Germany and Nazi Germany are two different things. Yes the Nazis had rights, they had the right to get royally kicked in the bollocks as many times as it took to make them rethink the errors of their ways.
-
I do think Germany got a crap deal at the end of WWI. WWII as well for that matter. Soviets should never have been in on the conferences, given they had about as much blood on their hands as the Nazis, but that's neither here nor there.
Anyway, I do think they had some legitimate grounds for military action, had they been unable to get their land back diplomatically. Unfortunately they were looking for an excuse to fight, and found one.
-
I do think Germany got a crap deal at the end of WWI. WWII as well for that matter. Soviets should never have been in on the conferences, given they had about as much blood on their hands as the Nazis, but that's neither here nor there.
Anyway, I do think they had some legitimate grounds for military action, had they been unable to get their land back diplomatically. Unfortunately they were looking for an excuse to fight, and found one.
Tank-Ace, you can hate the Brits. You can insult Brits and you can call the Spitfire the plane of retards. That's entirely up to you and your choice including the consequences of such action.
What you cannot do, and what I and others will not stand by and allow people like you and Schlowy to do, is to re-image history depicting the Nazis as hard done-to innocents justified in their actions, noble and merely trying to get their land back. They were not, and any serious student of history and political-social development knows this without dispute.
The danger of letting your kind of misguided opinions stick on a forum like this should be obvious to everyone.
YOU are differentiated from Schlowy at this moment only by your intelligence. Do not waste it.
-
Tank-Ace, you can hate the Brits. You can insult Brits and you can call the Spitfire the plane of retards. That's entirely up to you and your choice including the consequences of such action.
What you cannot do, and what I and others will not stand by and allow people like you and Schlowy to do, is to re-image history depicting the Nazis as hard done-to innocents justified in their actions, noble and merely trying to get their land back. They were not, and any serious student of history and political-social development knows this without dispute.
The danger of letting your kind of misguided opinions stick on a forum like this should be obvious to everyone.
YOU are differentiated from Schlowy at this moment only by your intelligence. Do not waste it.
QFT :aok
-
Thank you Joseph Goebbels :aok
Thank you Winston Churchill :aok
-
Thank you Winston Churchill :aok
No, thank you Helmut Steinkopf, road digger extraordinaire.
-
I find Franz's post refreshing to read and everyone else should too. Allow me to explain...
Historically, the Nazi Party were megalomaniacal but contained a few very intelligent individuals. Franz post reminds me of the fact that members of the current Nazi Party are still hungry for power but have absolutely no capability to acquire it when lacking a basic high school diploma. For this reason, I find his posts that lack insight and objectivity oddly comforting.
-
You claim to know about ww2 but no idea whats the Danzig Corridor? etc, etc? :headscratch:
THE TERM IS 'TERRITORIAL CLAIMS'
pre ww1
(http://users.humboldt.edu/ogayle/Map_Europe_alliances_1914.png)
after ww1
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/01/19/article-1348555-0CD3D91F000005DC-90_634x426.jpg)
Europe 1950
(http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/walter.sargent/public.www/web%20104/50s-cold-war-map.jpg)
long after ww2, all of eastern Europe was part of the soviet uninion, now independent states.
(http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/2000/2000.jpg)
Its not that I don't like English, I just don't like any place (or individuals) that points at Germany and says 'the bad guys' - they had rights too.
By that "logic" Egypt is justified in attacking Israel as they owned that territory after defeating the Hittites. Mexico should, if it gets the required might, attack the United States to reclaim Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Who's territorial claims have precedence? The only way to resolve these things without endless wars over territory is to base ownership off of what the people living in a territory want. Territorial claims based on historical ownership are always pushed by rogues and scoundrels looking to gain power or distract their populace from their failed internal policies. Currently China is quite taken with making such claims. Argentina likes to make that claim about the Falkland Islands as a distraction from internal woes.
The fact is that the Germans were the bad guys in WWII. As were the Japanese and Italians. Does that make the Soviets, Americans, French, British and Chinese out to be pure as the driven snow? Of course not. All sides committed atrocities, but the Germans and Japanese on the Axis side did so with particular gusto and the Soviets on the Allied side were brutal to both their own people and non-Russians. Germany having rights does not abrogate Poland having rights and Germany's rights do not include the systematic extermination of peoples her government doesn't like. Germany's rights that were being abridged were the right to self defense and being impoverished by unjust levies that pretended they were responsible for WWI when Germany was no more responsible for WWI than were Russia, France or Great Britain.
-
By that "logic" Egypt is justified in attacking Israel as they owned that territory after defeating the Hittites. Mexico should, if it gets the required might, attack the United States to reclaim Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Who's territorial claims have precedence? The only way to resolve these things without endless wars over territory is to base ownership off of what the people living in a territory want. Territorial claims based on historical ownership are always pushed by rogues and scoundrels looking to gain power or distract their populace from their failed internal policies. Currently China is quite taken with making such claims. Argentina likes to make that claim about the Falkland Islands as a distraction from internal woes.
The fact is that the Germans were the bad guys in WWII. As were the Japanese and Italians. Does that make the Soviets, Americans, French, British and Chinese out to be pure as the driven snow? Of course not. All sides committed atrocities, but the Germans and Japanese on the Axis side did so with particular gusto and the Soviets on the Allied side were brutal to both their own people and non-Russians. Germany having rights does not abrogate Poland having rights and Germany's rights do not include the systematic extermination of peoples her government doesn't like. Germany's rights that were being abridged were the right to self defense and being impoverished by unjust levies that pretended they were responsible for WWI when Germany was no more responsible for WWI than were Russia, France or Great Britain.
Karnak, I have watched your debates with interest. There is only thing I would disagree on so far, and please, with me mentioning it don't put put me in the same camp as Goebbels Jr over here.
It was the Nazis who destroyed Germany. Not the Germans themselves. The majority of the men on the front line or in the air or under the sea were not evil, unlike the men in power. I would simply ask that when you say 'Germans were the bad guys' you mean 'Nazis were the bad guys'
<S>
-
Karnak, I have watched your debates with interest. There is only thing I would disagree on so far, and please, with me mentioning it don't put put me in the same camp as Goebbels Jr over here.
It was the Nazis who destroyed Germany. Not the Germans themselves. The majority of the men on the front line or in the air or under the sea were not evil, unlike the men in power. I would simply ask that when you say 'Germans were the bad guys' you mean 'Nazis were the bad guys'
<S>
I see what you are saying and agree there were Germans, Japanese and Italians, even within their armed forces, who were not complicit with the actions taken by their nations.
-
You claim to know about ww2 but no idea whats the Danzig Corridor? etc, etc? :headscratch:
THE TERM IS 'TERRITORIAL CLAIMS'
Its not that I don't like English, I just don't like any place (or individuals) that points at Germany and says 'the bad guys' - they had rights too.
(http://www.edadrian.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/hand.spicoli.jpg)
ya know, a primary education is all that's needed to get a person's iq above that of apes and it's free. your version of history is a clear indicator that you wasted the opportunity.
world war 1 and 2 germany were "the bad guys" genius, just as much if not more than imperial japan or stalinist russia. their rights ended when they sent armies out of their borders to wage war on neighboring countries. whatever was left to them when the wars ended, is all that was deserved.
-
(http://www.edadrian.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/hand.spicoli.jpg)
ya know, a primary education is all that's needed to get a person's iq above that of apes and it's free. your version of history is a clear indicator that you wasted the opportunity.
world war 1 and 2 germany were "the bad guys" genius, just as much if not more than imperial japan or stalinist russia. their rights ended when they sent armies out of their borders to wage war on neighboring countries. whatever was left to them when the wars ended, is all that was deserved.
Germany wasn't the bad guy in WWI anymore than any other nation was. The entire war was a catastrophic mix of stupidity, greed, nationalism, ethnic thinking, power seeking, secret treaties and lies.
-
Germany wasn't the bad guy in WWI anymore than any other nation was. The entire war was a catastrophic mix of stupidity, greed, nationalism, ethnic thinking, power seeking, secret treaties and lies.
the government had a choice when ferdinand was assassinated. they chose to do what they had been considering for years prior to the event and sent armies out to conquer, not defend, that makes them the bad guys.
we wouldn't even be discussing this stuff in a discussion about the he-111 if it weren't for the mouth breathing basement dweller fvw. irritating.
-
the government had a choice when ferdinand was assassinated. they chose to do what they had been considering for years prior to the event and sent armies out to conquer, not defend, that makes them the bad guys.
The UK was also itching for a fight. The fact that Germany jumped first doesn't mean the UK wasn't also looking to jump. The whole Dreadnought race wasn't sustainable and they needed to "put Germany in its place" so to speak.
-
The UK was also itching for a fight. The fact that Germany jumped first doesn't mean the UK wasn't also looking to jump. The whole Dreadnought race wasn't sustainable and they needed to "put Germany in its place" so to speak.
true and if the uk had jumped first, they probably would not have gotten as much international backing as they did. but again (if everything purported is to be believed), they made a choice to pursue a course of action that they knew would start a war they thought they could win. weren't the germans the first ones to deploy lethal chemical weapons in ww1?
-
https://vimeo.com/29598334
-
https://vimeo.com/29598334
Blackadder is classic.
-
https://vimeo.com/29598334
Pretty much my understanding. You can fault the Germans for moving first except that you have to consider that they were facing the prospect of a two front war and their Schlieffen plan dictated that the only way they could win was to move in the time afforded by the allies mobilization. If you haven't read "the guns of August" I highly recommend that you do. (By "you" I don't mean anyone in particular.)
-
https://vimeo.com/29598334
wtf is that? must be some bbc sitcom, never seen it. isn't that hugh laurie and rowan atkinson?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackadder
-
wtf is that? must be some bbc sitcom, never seen it. isn't that hugh laurie and rowan atkinson?
Yup. This is Season / Series 4. Well worth a watch.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackadder
:lol ok, a simple yes would have sufficed whale muncher... :neener:
-
I highly recommend that series though. :aok
-
The 1st series was a little off though. The best bit of the 4th series is the flying corps episode :) "back in time for tea and medals"
-
Stepping back from socio-political arguments a moment... What is really fascinating was that Germany didn't exist prior to unification in 1871. What is now Germany was a series of individual kingdoms, dukedoms, city states and princedoms. Back in 1914 I guess that to a lot of older people, calling them "German" would have been as much an insult as calling a Canadian, "American". Each of the "princely states" as they are referred to in the catalogues have their own monetary systems and weights and measures. Germany was only 43 years old at the outbreak of WW1.
In case people are wondering I am a numismatist (a coin collector for the benefit of FVW). I have several coins of pre-unification, including a Prussian victory thaler for the Franco-Prussian war.
-
For all intents and purposes Pre-Weimar Germany was "Greater Prussia", having been unified under the Prussian Kaiser by the shrewd political maneuverings and military aggression of Otto von Bismarck.
-
For all intents and purposes Pre-Weimar Germany was "Greater Prussia", having been unified under the Prussian Kaiser by the shrewd political maneuverings and military aggression of Otto von Bismarck.
My favorite quote of Otto's is "there are two things the public should never see: the making of sausage and the making of laws." Germany owes a lot to Otto Von Bismark.
-
I once worked for a pork products factory... put me off for a while.
-
I get the feeling FVW had put gyrene81's back up. Do remember that he is a troll, expressly stated as much. Don't take your anger at him out on a whole country.
-
I get the feeling FVW had put gyrene81's back up. Do remember that he is a troll, expressly stated as much. Don't take your anger at him out on a whole country.
:neener: :lol never happened bud. life is too short for retardnet mouth breathers to garner anything more than flaming ire.
-
moin
back to topic
i like the he 111 ;), i realy try to use it as much as posible, but my ju88 is mostly my first choice for taktikal attacks.
cu christian
-
:neener: :lol never happened bud. life is too short for retardnet mouth breathers to garner anything more than flaming ire.
Hey, you're the one letting Schlowy's troll-shade work you up. You could probably take a lesson, something about life being too short.
-
Hey, you're the one letting Schlowy's troll-shade work you up. You could probably take a lesson, something about life being too short.
what on earth makes you think i get worked up? someone cutting me off at 70mph in heavy traffic gets me worked up, retardnet stupid is just fun flame bait. are the trees getting in the way of the forest for you or something?
-
What you cannot do, and what I and others will not stand by and allow people like you and Schlowy to do, is to re-image history depicting the Nazis as hard done-to innocents justified in their actions, noble and merely trying to get their land back. They were not, and any serious student of history and political-social development knows this without dispute.
The danger of letting your kind of misguided opinions stick on a forum like this should be obvious to everyone.
YOU are differentiated from Schlowy at this moment only by your intelligence. Do not waste it.
Since you somehow misinterpreted my post (simply stating that Germany DID have some cause for war, and then promptly abused it to start conquering) as a defense of Nazi-ism, and you're not usually that stupid, I'd say Schlowy got you pretty worked up for a bit.
More than that, you equate me to Schlowy, which isn't just a casual insult in the context.
-
Since you somehow misinterpreted my post (simply stating that Germany DID have some cause for war, and then promptly abused it to start conquering) as a defense of Nazi-ism, and you're not usually that stupid, I'd say Schlowy got you pretty worked up for a bit.
It'd take a lot more than what Schlowy's got to get me 'worked up'. Someone's been needing to say some of these things for a long time to clear the air around here.
I did not misinterpret your post. I strongly disagreed with it and most especially it's Nazi sympathetic undertone. Bollocks did the Nazis simply want their land back. Their systematic persecution of the Jews (German citizens by the way) already started way before then. If that wasn't the biggest alarm bell in the last one hundred years I don't know what is. The Nazis were a bunch of vicious, depraved, megalomaniacs and if you have any sympathy for them at all you need your melon inspected kid.
More than that, you equate me to Schlowy, which isn't just a casual insult in the context.
Then distance yourself from him and his behaviour. You are young, arrogant, self-important and biased. This doesn't distinguish you very much much in the present society. The only reason I condescend to communicate with you from time to time is you show occasional signs of brightness. Think young man, think for yourself, and then think some more and some more again. Oh, and do some reading too and I'm not talking about the internet.
-
It'd take a lot more than what Schlowy's got to get me 'worked up'. Someone's been needing to say some of these things for a long time to clear the air around here.
I did not misinterpret your post. I strongly disagreed with it and most especially it's Nazi sympathetic undertone. Bollocks did the Nazis simply want their land back. Their systematic persecution of the Jews (German citizens by the way) already started way before then. If that wasn't the biggest alarm bell in the last one hundred years I don't know what is. The Nazis were a bunch of vicious, depraved, megalomaniacs and if you have any sympathy for them at all you need your melon inspected kid.
Then distance yourself from him and his behaviour. You are young, arrogant, self-important and biased. This doesn't distinguish you very much much in the present society. The only reason I condescend to communicate with you from time to time is you show occasional signs of brightness. Think young man, think for yourself, and then think some more and some more again. Oh, and do some reading too and I'm not talking about the internet.
Very wise advice.
-
It'd take a lot more than what Schlowy's got to get me 'worked up'. Someone's been needing to say some of these things for a long time to clear the air around here.
I did not misinterpret your post. I strongly disagreed with it and most especially it's Nazi sympathetic undertone. Bollocks did the Nazis simply want their land back. Their systematic persecution of the Jews (German citizens by the way) already started way before then. If that wasn't the biggest alarm bell in the last one hundred years I don't know what is. The Nazis were a bunch of vicious, depraved, megalomaniacs and if you have any sympathy for them at all you need your melon inspected kid.
Your post shows you did in fact misinterpret my comment. I have no sympathy whatsoever for the Nazi's, and I'd thank you kindly to stop implying as much. Nazi Germany is not the same as Germany, and you need to remember it.
All I said was that GERMANY (not the Nazi party, not Nazi Germany, not Hitler, Himmler, Goering, Skorzeny, or anyone else) had some land unfairly taken from them at the end of WWI, and that this would be a valid cause for war. I then go on to say they were already looking for an excuse to go to war (with the world, or at least all of Europe), and used it as an excuse to do so.
I've had the opportunity to speak with a few survivors of the holocaust some years ago. If one tenth of what they say is true, I could never have any sympathy for them. But one of them (a very kind Hungarian man, whose name unfortunately now escapes me), saw it in himself to forgive the Germans, and taught in Germany for many years. A Holocaust survivor is able to separate Germany and the Nazis, but you yourself are not? Pathetic.
Then distance yourself from him and his behaviour. You are young, arrogant, self-important and biased. This doesn't distinguish you very much much in the present society. The only reason I condescend to communicate with you from time to time is you show occasional signs of brightness. Think young man, think for yourself, and then think some more and some more again. Oh, and do some reading too and I'm not talking about the internet.
Ha! Me arrogant, and self-important? Biased? You "condescend" to communicate with me? "occasional signs of brightness"? I think you may need to take a good look in the mirror.
And if you think yourself in such a position to be so condescending when you speak to me, I'd rather you didn't.
-
i get the feeling Nrshida got Tank-Ace's back up... :lol
(http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/random-hilarious-funny-wtf-4r-17.jpg?w=500&h=375)
-
All I said was that GERMANY ... had some land unfairly taken from them at the end of WWI, and that this would be a valid cause for war. I then go on to say they were already looking for an excuse to go to war (with the world, or at least all of Europe), and used it as an excuse to do so.
I don't know what all the yelling is about so I'm not being sarcastic or condescending when I ask what are you talking about? What I mean is what was unfair? And why wouldn't Germany still have a "valid cause for war" today based on territory lost in WWI.
What does "valid cause for war" mean?
What Territory are you speaking of? Poland? Alsace-Lorraine?
I
-
What I mean is what was unfair?
Some people just couldn't get used to the "hey, you lost the war" concept.
That changed in 1945. Big time.
- oldman
-
I don't know what all the yelling is about so I'm not being sarcastic or condescending when I ask what are you talking about? What I mean is what was unfair? And why wouldn't Germany still have a "valid cause for war" today based on territory lost in WWI.
What does "valid cause for war" mean?
What Territory are you speaking of? Poland? Alsace-Lorraine?
I
It's unfair in that the land didn't even go to the real Victors of the war. Instead it was parceled out to some new nations that hadn't existed for more than a century and a quarter, or hadn't ever existed before.
Really it was just the Allies (or more accurately England and France) trying to put Germany in what they saw as it's place.
Specifically the areas of Cheb in the Sudetenland(Wilson even recommended giving this to Germany), West Prussia, and Memelland.
Thought the Sudetenland and Memelland issues were settled bloodlessly, they weren't until right before the war.
And perhaps valid isn't the best term, as I only mean it in the sense that it COULD be an actual cause for war. Rather I more mean understandable, or reasonable.
Oh, and sorry gyrene81, I read Shida's comment, and thought it was from you. My apologies sir.
-
Nazi Germany is not the same as Germany, and you need to remember it.
Errr yes, thank you Captain Obvious. If you look back you will notice my comments were confined to Germany of that period.
What you need to remember is that the German nation and the Nazis of that period are not as easily divisible as you have decided to think.
I have no sympathy whatsoever for the Nazi's, and I'd thank you kindly to stop implying as much.
Good to have on record.
Now that you say it I don't know what I was thinking, I believe you 100%. Must have been your idolisation of the Nazi-German equipment and implication that it is superior right across the board, your apparent misty-eyed view of the noble German Volk exclusively fighting with courage skill and justification and your consistent vitriolic opinion toward the British. Yup I was completely pulling that out of my hat :)
All I said was that GERMANY (not the Nazi party, not Nazi Germany, not Hitler, Himmler, Goering, Skorzeny, or anyone else) had some land unfairly taken from them at the end of WWI, and that this would be a valid cause for war. I then go on to say they were already looking for an excuse to go to war (with the world, or at least all of Europe), and used it as an excuse to do so.
Interesting list. Interesting that you put Skorzeny up there with that lot. :lol
Hmmm, well that's what happens when you start a war and lose a war. What alternative do you suggest, a reward system for distance invaded? Of course the victors are going to take measure to deter further action from the aggressor.
A Holocaust survivor is able to separate Germany and the Nazis, but you yourself are not? Pathetic.
Refer to my second point above.
Ha! Me arrogant, and self-important? Biased?
Here's some quotes from your recent rant about the Spitfire Mark XVI:-
Unless I encounter a pack of them, they're usually not a problem.
Arrogance.
I can fly harder aircraft.
Self-importance.
I refuse to fly it. It is the plane of tards and the unskilled.
Bias.
I'd recommend everyone look up at least the last three tours of Tank-Ace's score, in game name Jager. There would be the critical 'undue claims' component necessary for arrogance.
I notice you disengaged from that Spitfire Mark XVI discussion pretty damn quickly. Now that you've had a good while to think about it, Ace, do you have a riposte?
And if you think yourself in such a position to be so condescending when you speak to me, I'd rather you didn't.
If you're going to trot out your ill-formed idolatry around here then you can expect to have your comfort zone trampled on pretty comprehensively. But you are right this really is like debating with a tomato. In future I'll just move you over to the merchant-banker column and take the piss out of you instead. :banana:
-
(http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/javelin4.jpg)
ack-ack
-
i like the heinkel :-)
and now i want my v1 rocket under it...........
cu
-
I did a bomber run last night in He-111s, first I missed the VH, then I missed it again! More practice for me!
The V1 Rocket, yes please!
Troops and supply loads, also yes please!
:salute
-
The V-1 was not a rocket...
-
I did a bomber run last night in He-111s, first I missed the VH, then I missed it again! More practice for me!
How did you miss? He111 ought to be one of the easiest bombers to hit the target with.
-
moin
oh, sorry, cruismissel ;-)
cu
-
The V-1 was not a rocket...
ok, rocket propelled flying bomb. the v-2 was a rocket...
-
ok, rocket propelled flying bomb
Not rocket propelled either :P
-
How would it be aimed? Through the same.bombsight?
-
How would it be aimed? Through the same.bombsight?
yes...exactly...the bomb sight would help steer it.
(http://cdn.meme.li/i/kq8r8.jpg)
-
Not rocket propelled either :P
rocket assisted launch... :neener:
see if numpty believes the bomb sight.
-
rocket assisted launch... :neener:
The launch was assisted by a Walther catapult and the V-1's engine was a pulsejet. No rockets here, move along! :old:
-
Thinking that controlling it would have to be one of two ways...
1) we use arrow keys for up/down and left/right(rudder), so auto airlerons, controlled from bombsight F6 view?
2) have it like a gunner station, view from front of the v1, with same controls to fly as moving a gun.
-
The launch was assisted by a Walther catapult and the V-1's engine was a pulsejet. No rockets here, move along! :old:
bite me... :devil
-
Maybe the Fritz X on the He 111? ;)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Fritz_X_side.jpg/300px-Fritz_X_side.jpg)
-
jep
im not sure if it were used on heinkels, but the heinkel devinetly need some cool stuff to get more used :-)
cu christian