Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Scrap on April 30, 2006, 10:00:06 PM
-
What version is it?
AS
R2/AS
U2/AS
U4/AS
-
AH2 109G-6 is a standard G-6 late.
109G-6/AS is a DB605A plus larger super charger of the DB603. It had a different cowling then the standard G-6.
R = Rüstsatz
109G-6/R2/AS is a Recce G-6/AS
U = Umbausatz
109G-6/U2/AS is a G-6/AS plus MW-50.
109G-6/U4/AS is a G-6/AS plus Mk108 3cm nose cannon.
-
Actually we have a early one, because of the canopy. I don't know what engine changes there were early on in the G-6 (the G-6 and later models were very confusing for me)
-
Actually we have a early one, because of the canopy. I don't know what engine changes there were early on in the G-6 (the G-6 and later models were very confusing for me)
That's correct they re-did the G-6 along with the other 109s. It's a 109G-6 with armored glass, instead of the armored plate head rest, and framed canopy.
All the G-6s had the same engine DB605A, same as the 109G-2.
-
The AH G-2, G-6 and G-14 seem to have been modeled with same output and altitude performance at military power. But AFAIK most of G-14s with the MW-50 were AS versions so that could be a better option than the DB 605AM version.
gripen
-
But AFAIK most of G-14s with the MW-50 were AS versions so that could be a better option than the DB 605AM version.
I argued for the G-14/AS as well. Since HTC decided to get rid of the old G-10 (actually just renamed it as the K-4). A G-14/AS would not have been quite as fast at lower altitudes as the current AH G-14 but it would have had a higher FTH and faster speed up high. As such it would have been usefull in scenarios, events and CT. The current AH G-14 is bets suited for the main arena where altitudes are genrally low.
The K-4 didn't see service until Oct. '44, the G-14 and G-14/AS in June / July '44.
-
Originally posted by gripen
The AH G-2, G-6 and G-14 seem to have been modeled with same output and altitude performance at military power. But AFAIK most of G-14s with the MW-50 were AS versions so that could be a better option than the DB 605AM version.
gripen
So you do play AH? Sorry, I've never seen you in-game, yet you seem to know how the 109's behave in here... Sorry, I was just wondering.
It doesn't matter whether you play or not, it's nice (hm, informative might be a better term) to read your posts anyway here in the Ac&V forum.
-
I have that problem too.
Everybody thinks I don't fly AH and absolutely not the 109....
Wonder what Gripen's handle is.....???
-
Well, there is no need to have a handle to observe the performance of the AH 109s because the graphs can be found from the AH main page.
When I used to play AH, I used the F-4 and the G-2 most of the time as those are (were?) easy and well behaving planes for a beginner like me (and for the FAF skin of the G-2). There was no G-14 back then.
gripen
-
What still puzzles me is that our G-14 has a very good climb performance up to 5.000mt togheter with a very poor horizontal acceleration .... :huh
IMO, obviously.