Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: gatt on November 25, 2005, 03:16:09 PM
-
From "Bf 109 G/K, Field Conversion Kits (Rustsatze)", Harald Voght, 1998, Schiffer Publishing. Pag.55: Bf109K-4, Rustsatze IV: 2 wing gondolas each having an MG 151/20.
From: Bf109K-4, T. Poruba, A. Janda, 1997(?), JaPo Publishing. Pag.80: Rustsatze R4, two additional MG 151/20 (135rpg). Pag.23 (in Czech) Bf 109K-4/R6, diagram with wigpods mounted. Pag.36 (in Czech) Bf109K-4 armament, altenatively: 1xMG151-20 engine mounted.
Any other source to understand better the matter? Thanks for help.
-
with the K-4 it's not so much a question of whether the cannon pods could be mounted, because both 20mm and 30mm could, the question is, that late in the war, did pilots really want them? Being outnumbered as they were, the pilots preferred the maneuverability over the firepower. Certainly without them they could outclimb the allied fighters, but was a fairly even climb rate with them.
-
hey 109K-4 carried 500 Kg center rack bomb too:)
-
I can do without the gondies, but I'd like to have the 20mm spinner option back. I can hit watermelon throwin taters.
-
No K-4 ever had MG151 as motorkanone.
-
No one doubts that the K-4 had gondolas. Sources are already well established, a quick check of Caldwell's JG 26 is 'source' enough. However, pilots removed the gondolas. The K-4 wasn't hunting bombers and gondolas were detrimental to the pilots chances of survival.
I don't care anything about gondolas myself and I have no idea why HTC left them off as an option. Starting a new 'where's my gondolas thread' every couple of days may work to get them back, but some I how I doubt it.
ps...
Meyer is correct:
No K-4 ever had MG151 as motorkanone
-
I know the K-4 never had a 20mm spinner cannon, I just thought I'd mention I would like to have one since I cant hit anything with the 30mm. :)
-
The K4 gondola option were removed for the same reason as Bf109G6 30mm option was removed, because HTC asked about 109 armament and a few people made lots of noise about the supposed rarity of these things - for example like the 1500 "rare" Bf109G6 with 30mm cannon....
:rolleyes:
-
man the roll-eye effect is nerfed! :rolleyes:
btw how about a compromise?
Dont give 109K-4 a gondola/rocket/bomb and 109G-6 an 30mm cannon
Give 109G-6 and G-14 200 round 20mm nose cannon option
Give 109F-4 center rack bomb (250 gk)
-
The reason that LW pilots removed gondolas from brand new K-4s is not a reason not to give us the chance to mount them.
Let me dig some other sources and I'll be back again. This double standard becomes to make me nervous.
-
The 109K had definietely had the gondolas as option. I own the 109K-4 manual, it also lists the 20mm gondies as Rustsatz IV. Other Rustsatz include 21cm rocket launchers, bombs up to 500kg (as opposed to previous 250kg on 109g), droptank etc.
-
Originally posted by HT in the "What happend to LW" Thread.
People who tend to do reaserch on flight data tend to cheary pick the data.
Not that I care about the gondolas what so ever, I never used them on the G10 nor would I ever use them on the K4 or any other 109. However, I feel the "cherry picking" of data sometimes goes both ways.
-
Kurfürst, would you happen to know anything about mounting bombs on the wings. Do you have any information on mounting the ETC 50 on the wings instead of the rockets like the FW 190 was able to?
-
Never seen any bomb mounting on the 109 wings on any version. Droptank yes, it was produced in some numbers for long range Jabos of the 109G wielding 1x500kg on the centre + 2x300 liter DTs, or long range recce 109G-4 subtypes with 2x300liter underwing tanks.
So technically it could have been easily done (if each of the wings could carry 300 liter / ca250kg droptanks or 120kg gondalas) to carry 50kger bombs, why not, but it seems it was never done.
The answer is probably because they had something much better for soft targets, ie. the AB-250 (and AB-500) bomb dispensers, which would drop not 2-4 50kger, but as many as 96 smaller bomblets which covered a much larger area with lethal fragments than a few 50 kg bombs. There was also armor piercing HEAT bomblets instead of fragmentation.
I don't really play AH2, but I understand the AB bomb containers are missed completely, which is somewhat strange in view that the AB containers are the same thing as rocket launchers of the allied planes, ie. mid-war development instead of the usual free falling bombs. They should be included.
-
Lots of bomb armaments are missing from AH for all nations IMO.
I remember when the bouncing bombs were added in WB, damn how fun they were!
-
It's sure the the cannon pods could be mounted.
It's sure the pilots could mount or not them.
Let's us the same decision.
-
Originally posted by gatt
The reason that LW pilots removed gondolas from brand new K-4s is not a reason not to give us the chance to mount them.
Let me dig some other sources and I'll be back again. This double standard becomes to make me nervous.
Now wait a minute, aren't you the guy who is bellyaching about the use of drop tanks with less than full main tanks? See this thread. (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=164988)
Seriously, you want your option, but want to deny others their option! You should be nervous about double standards....
I agree that the gondolas should be an option. Almost no K-4s were flown in combat with them, but they could and the option existed. Likewise, it was very unusual for a fighter to carry a drop tank with less than full main tanks, but they could and the option existed....
You can't play on both sides of the net Gatt, pick a side and play there.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Is there a way to drop the gondolas to be lighter ?
no.
-
Originally posted by straffo
Is there a way to drop the gondolas to be lighter ?
no.
Strawman argument... Is there a way to drop rocket tubes or racks? No...
So, don't take them if you don't want the weight/aero penalty.
Taking added weapons always has penalty.
You can take a drop tank and 50% gas in a K-4. Do so if you wish, it's an option. What, that's not historical? So what, the MA is NOT an historical arena, and was never intended to be... Some guys will never get it, even if you hand it to them.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Sure, I pick the side of realism.
Were some K-4 delivered with gunpods: YES. Did many pilots remove them to be lighter? YES. You can do it in the AH2 hangar before you take off. This is what I call realism.
Did pilots on medium/long range mission carry 25-50% int. fuel plus drop tanks? NO. Can you do it in AH2? YES. Just to be light before a merge. This is what I call gamey.
-
Personally I stay away from droptanks both in the 109's and the 190's now a days.
109's don't suffer from the DT rack as much (after DT is gone) but still suffers some. I prefer using those extra 6mph at the deck rather then long range.
Always fly 100% internal in 109's and 190's no matter if I have DT or not.
The Gunpods definatly should be an option.
Then again, I see less 109's these days which I kind of like, when up against a K4 I know he has to be able to aim somewhat to get a kill, not just spray and pray dweebery like some other people (although it sometimes works in the K4 too).
-
[Edited a silly thing]
Widewing, no I dont take less than 75% and drop tank with my K-4. And I take always 75% or 100% with my C.205. Everything less I consider gamey.
Listening so many ppl calling the MA a gamey arena (so everything is allowed) makes me sad. Really.
-
Well Gatt you know I agree with you on about everything else that has been said here but, the MA IS a gamey arena.
it's quake in the air (although damn fun and it takes lots of skill).
That is why I am really longing for ToD.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Strawman argument... Is there a way to drop rocket tubes or racks? No...
The 210mm rocket tubes were jettisonable (irl).
-
Originally posted by gatt
Sure, I pick the side of realism.
Were some K-4 delivered with gunpods: YES. Did many pilots remove them to be lighter? YES. You can do it in the AH2 hangar before you take off. This is what I call realism.
Did pilots on medium/long range mission carry 25-50% int. fuel plus drop tanks? NO. Can you do it in AH2? YES. Just to be light before a merge. This is what I call gamey.
Then you should be right at home in TOD...Beyond that, you merely proved my point. You want realisim when it suits you. Believe me, if we had FULL (as in true-to-life) realism in the MA, 90% of the players would never get off the runway, or even ON a runway for that matter. How many people could even start the engines? A handful at best. You guys want just enough realism to give you an edge.
HTC is in the process of building an arena where historical accuracy is the goal. The MA will always be a free-for-all, with any legitimate load-out option being allowed. You are just going to have to deal with that.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Ah Wil, it was only a cry in the wind.
There are some unavoidable things that make the MA gamey.
What makes me really sad is that there are so many gamey things very easy to fix.
BTW: GIVE THE PODS TO THE K-4 !!! :mad:
-
Originally posted by Wilbus
Personally I stay away from droptanks both in the 109's and the 190's now a days.
Yeah, the drag penalty caused me to avoid drops on 109s and 190s...
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Then you should be right at home in TOD...Beyond that, you merely proved my point. You want realisim when it suits you. Believe me, if we had FULL (as in true-to-life) realism in the MA, 90% of the players would never get off the runway, or even ON a runway for that matter. How many people could even start the engines? A handful at best. You guys want just enough realism to give you an edge.
HTC is in the process of building an arena where historical accuracy is the goal. The MA will always be a free-for-all, with any legitimate load-out option being allowed. You are just going to have to deal with that.
My regards,
Widewing
Well, as far as edges are concerned, gamey options give them. Not realistic loadouts.
Really, its sad to see old respected hands like you Wide justify gamey things in the name of a gameish MA.
TOD? Whats TOD? Ah, I remember something 2 years ago. So far we have only the gamey MA.
-
And the fact that all planes suck gas twice as fast as in real disturb none?
-
Straffo,
the truth is that since our Main is gamey you have to accept it and play. You cant ask for a fix here or there (probably the worst). So, stop and play with what you have.
I hope this is not the official HTC word.
-
If K4 or any other 109 model could load up gondolas, it should be in the game. Especially since we used to have them, so bringing it back should be easy (I guess).
Unless it's a date problem, that is - like our spit 5 is supposed to be 1941 model, so cannon ammo is 60 rpg and not the later 120.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by gatt
Well, as far as edges are concerned, gamey options give them. Not realistic loadouts.
Really, its sad to see old respected hands like you Wide justify gamey things in the name of a gameish MA.
TOD? Whats TOD? Ah, I remember something 2 years ago. So far we have only the gamey MA.
I'm not trying to justify anything beyond common sense use of resources available to a pilot. Loading your aircraft to suit the mission is not gamey. You want enough gas to get you to and from a fight and not be caught overloaded. USAAF pilots in the ETO, PTO, SWPA and MTO didn't have to worry about being jumped on the climb-out. Missions often lasted more than 6 hours. In the MA we see 30 minutes as a fairly long sortie and with the enemy base within 35 miles (or less), the odds of running into enemy fighters on climb-out are high.
If we had the ability to fuel internal fuel tanks to a specific weight of gas (instead of in 25% increments), few would be using drop tanks in a manner we have been discussing. However, we are stuck with loading gas in an unrealistic manner. Often we have to load too much, and the alternative is too little or marginal at best.
TOD isn't far off... I expecting that it will be ready for beta testing by late January.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Hi,
have anyone sources that the K4 realy almost never got used with gunpods?? At least the 'schwere Gruppen' of the Reichsveteidigung (JG30x), which did use the 109G10/K4, still made intercepts in early 1945, but without gunpods this was pretty senceless.
The 30mm in the G6 is a must have, this gun was absolute common in the Reichsverteidigung, where Bombers was the main target.
To call 1500 a few is a joke, eh?? Thats +5% of all 109´s, so the FAF 109G2 skin also need to get replaced??
If the 30mm would get its bad hitprobability on fast moving targets, noone would use it in a dogfight anyway, but with the heatseaker like beahaviour i mostly did preffer the G6 + 30mm over the G2 in a dogfight.
(Grits, have you ever adjusted the convergence to max, when you did use the 30mm??)
Greetings, Knegel