Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: wrag on November 27, 2006, 03:40:29 AM
-
The 109's are porked AGAIN. Or at least they were last I flew.
A K4 can't catch a pony D OTD. Used to but now it can't.
May try one more time to get the G14 replaced with a G10 or a G10 added.
The 2 are NOT the same plane although several try to claim such.
The G10 is the plane the K4 later became with a top speed right at 428. Also it was reported as being able to climb to 20K in 6 minutes. And should hold E very well. At a site I found on the net the final version of the G10 is reported as able to do 450 Plus.
The G14 was known as the Super Bulge with a top speed of 408. Which BTW I can't get out of our G14. This with NO DT and only the 20mm nose cannon. Also it is reported as being a GROUND attack model. And bleeds E terribly! I want a LW ground attack i'll fly a 110 or a f8.
Look at the figures for the G10 and the G14 here.
http://www.adlertag.de/mainindex.htm
The lines of the 2 planes are VERY different. G10 is smooth, G14 is like a very heavy person pushing out of their girdle.
Thus IMHO there is a BIG hole in the LW plane set!
I TRUELY HATE the 30mm in it's present configuration.
And the K4 here.
http://www.adlertag.de/mainindex.htm
Please note the speed for the G10 listed at the top of the page.
And I know Martin Cardin is not consider the greatest authority but in his book on the 109 the G14 is clamed to be a GROUND SUPPORT aircraft, AND in some cases carried 5 20mm!!! The hub cannon and 2 under wing gondales under each wing.
Also in his book the K4 when they 1st came out had a hub mounted 20mm!!!!!!!
I confess I would be VERY happy if the K4 was given that option.
I thank You for your time.
-
rubbish.
sorry wrag, but no.
109s are uber, 109F and G6 owns anything.
the problem is that the P-fifty-runs are already going 500mph as they pass you. they plan to shoot-miss-run-run-run-run-climb-shoot-miss-run all day.
just ignore them they go away.
-
:cry
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
rubbish.
sorry wrag, but no.
109s are uber, 109F and G6 owns anything.
the problem is that the P-fifty-runs are already going 500mph as they pass you. they plan to shoot-miss-run-run-run-run-climb-shoot-miss-run all day.
just ignore them they go away.
Sorry Bat but NO .... I chased a P50 run for over 5 minutes OTD and could NOT catch it! Couldn't close, couldn't reduce the distance between us.
AND you really think the f and g6 are uber???????????????????
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM....... .................... who you flyin against????
-
the 109F is an amazing plane. i adore it.
-
^^^what he said^^^
the g2 in late war is usually a fun plane too ...
I would not say they are uber but more in line with the other planes and still need more "talent" to survive in than most. the cannons still require you to be up close for any effect unlike other cannons or most multi mg setup allied ac
why waste your time chasin someone who'd rather run away than fight you when all you have to do is turn around & find someone who will
-
Originally posted by wrag
The 109's are porked AGAIN. Or at least they were last I flew.
A K4 can't catch a pony D OTD. Used to but now it can't.
May try one more time to get the G14 replaced with a G10 or a G10 added.
The 2 are NOT the same plane although several try to claim such.
The G10 is the plane the K4 later became with a top speed right at 428. Also it was reported as being able to climb to 20K in 6 minutes. And should hold E very well. At a site I found on the net the final version of the G10 is reported as able to do 450 Plus.
The G14 was known as the Super Bulge with a top speed of 408. Which BTW I can't get out of our G14. This with NO DT and only the 20mm nose cannon. Also it is reported as being a GROUND attack model. And bleeds E terribly! I want a LW ground attack i'll fly a 110 or a f8.
Look at the figures for the G10 and the G14 here.
http://www.adlertag.de/mainindex.htm
The lines of the 2 planes are VERY different. G10 is smooth, G14 is like a very heavy person pushing out of their girdle.
Thus IMHO there is a BIG hole in the LW plane set!
I TRUELY HATE the 30mm in it's present configuration.
And the K4 here.
http://www.adlertag.de/mainindex.htm
Please note the speed for the G10 listed at the top of the page.
And I know Martin Cardin is not consider the greatest authority but in his book on the 109 the G14 is clamed to be a GROUND SUPPORT aircraft, AND in some cases carried 5 20mm!!! The hub cannon and 2 under wing gondales under each wing.
Also in his book the K4 when they 1st came out had a hub mounted 20mm!!!!!!!
I confess I would be VERY happy if the K4 was given that option.
I thank You for your time.
wrag at what alts were these numbers taken?
-
I was under the impression that our G14 was effectively just a G6 with methanol and a 30mm?
And wasnt the only difference between the G10 of old and the K4 the weapons available?
-
I fly the K4 almost exclusively,and find it to be a great competitor against any plane in the game,especially the american planes.P-51 and Hogs have a far better zoom climb than a K4 ,but once they bleed their E ,the fight quickly shifts to the 109's favor.
I've dueled lots of ponies versus 109's and very seldom lose to a pony unless I'm cheeried or vulched.Most who fly the 109 just dont employee the flaps and work for the angle enough.In a sustained turn,no ,a 109 wount turn with a pony,but by manipualting angles versus their turn ,yes you can get easily.
Once the speed drops down below 150,the pony lacks the power to pull the nose high and hang,whereas the 109 will do it with ease.
As far as the 30mm "tater" gun,I find it very accurate and deadly,the hardest shot to hit with it thopugh ,for me anyway is a dead six shot at over 400,it is best used at snapshots and deflections.
If the pony has any amount of speed over the k4 in the intial pass,it will be nea impossible to catch it,but if their E states are close to same at the merge,then catching a pony in a k4 is easy,k4 will out accelerate the pony from equal speeds.
I've posted nearly 40 films in the Training section and near all are in 109's.
Her are a couple of short fights with ponies.
http://www.badcompanysquad.com/creton/p51vs109.ahf
These are my opinions of the 109's
-
We still have the old G-10. All they did to it was remove the 20mm gun option and call it a K-4. Guess Pyro got tired of people whining for the K. The G-14 is a late-war G-6 with the Erla hood and water injection.
The K-4 and 51D have equal top speed on the deck, so if you're both already at top speed you're not going to catch the Pony until he runs out of WEP.
-
As folks have said, we have ALWAYS had a K-4. It was always K-4 speed/climb/weight and general data. They just "called it a G10" and added a 20mm option in the nose, and gondolas. That was their way of adding 2 planes with half the work.
Real G10s were nowhere near as fast as the K4. Even the highest of the high-end G10s didn't match the K4. If you want a G10 you'll get something closer to the G14 than the K4. I'm happy with the G14. It only lacks top speed over the K4, it's better than the G6. A nice medium.
-
Also:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/858_1164648751_speed1.jpg)
The top speed differs only 3mph on the deck. No way to catch him. The 109K4's speed grows over the P51D steadily as the alt climbs, but on the deck they're nearly the same. Go up so much as even a few K and you should be able to catch them.
-
109f is the shiznits it just plain pawnz. ya stuff runs away from it ya stuff out turns it ya a couple can outclimb it. how ever its ballanced package in the hands a of a skilled simmer well nuff said. shhh before its nmy gets adjusted.
-
IIRC the 109s had the same elevator authority up or down. One of the fighter aces at the time the 109 was being put into action insisted that it be so and got what he isisted. IMHO ours do not. There are manuvers that the 109 should be able to do, but since AHII was implemented the elevator down authority has been much poorer then in AHI..................
Krusty >>> If you look at the sites and look at the K4 you will see it was derived from a G10 AND the G10 shown at the top of that chart shows a top speed equal to the K4.
Further a couple of test pilots? recently flew a G10 against a pony D. They reported the G10 could OUT TURN the pony. The story is in this link
http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/store/viewissue.asp?issueid=gerf
You may have to purchase the book to read the article. It also has articles on other LW aircraft. Interestingly the F6F was compared to a 190. The results are interesting.
One of the pilots that do the tests, I think, is now deceased?
I've also noticed the LW ammo SEEMS to be lacking a mine shell? I've gotten GOOD hits up close with 190s and 109s and it SEEMS like I do more damage with six 50 cals then with 2 13s and 4 20s ???
Maybe it me? Maybe it's my system? Maybe it's my connect. Then again maybe what I'm talkin about is what is happening? The LW ammo has done poorly for about the last 3 months maybe more.
BTW can anyone get the G14 to do 408 flying straight and level? Don't take it much above 16k as that was it's best operating alt according to reports. Maybe I should have tried it at higher alts, but I didn't.
I LOVED the 109s of AH! Used to fly em almost exclusively! Until the K4 came out that is. IMHO the 109f4 should have the gondola option ADDED! And the K4 should have the single 20mm option added.
As to hitting with the 30mm. Maybe I've got POOR luck? Didn't the folks at AH say they added in a LUCK factor? Testing it for Combat Tour? Not sure but seems like no matter what angle or deflection I can watch the round go WIDE and miss the target. The 30mm leaves the barrel and goes on a wild tangent to some strange place for me. And I usually aim at the cockpit.
Poor luck? I used to catch on fire, get popped by puffy ack, have parts just SEEM to fall off? Regularly!
So if LUCK has been added, I am VERY tired of having POOR luck.
-
Nothing like CT "LUCK" has been added.
-
Originally posted by wrag
Sorry Bat but NO .... I chased a P50 run for over 5 minutes OTD and could NOT catch it! Couldn't close, couldn't reduce the distance between us.
AND you really think the f and g6 are uber???????????????????
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM....... .................... who you flyin against????
hehe probably a good point, but at the same time i have memories of fighting much better pilots treating my spit5 like a flying target when they get in a 109F. as for the rest of the 109s, i don't know about realism, but for this game they are totaly dominant in the right hands.
S! sir i respect a good opposing opinion, i just think it comes down to the fact that I don't bother chasing anything beyond 2.5 seperation,. I would prefer to go towards the other cons and risk getting picked off by the one im chasing than spend five minutes ragging my engine and fuel after some guy that just WILL NOT turn untill he has the space to climb 6000ft above you..
-
30mm? when i was on my old system with a 15 inch monitor, I couldnt hit squat with it...now im on new system with 19 inch monitor...smacking stuff at a decent rate....my skills didnt change, but my system did.
just wondering what you flying on? it may be a factor?
my old>Pent 4, 512 Sdram, Ti 4200 card
new>dual core athalon 64 4200, 2 gig DDR, Geforce 6600 (pro or ultra...something there)
monitors both LCD, just old one 15 in and new 19 in.
-
30mm in AH requires a certain amount of natural ability, a whole hell of a lot of practice, and some luck. Dead 6 shots were always hardest for me. I don't know if things have changed since the summer, but the 109's were FAR superior to what we used to have after the flap deployment speed was raised. I was thoroughly beating the snot out of everything short of a hurricane fighting under 170mph.
I'd hazard a guess and say the problem is you, not the e-planes.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Nothing like CT "LUCK" has been added.
I thank you for your response Sir.
I am wondering if during the last 2 patch's an E retention problem occured?
Seen it before. Some planes retain too much E and some planes don't retain enough after a patch. Usually intails a patch to fix the patch LOL
If it is it's probably only enough to make a 10 mph difference? And to hold the for maybe 1 to 2 seconds too long bleeding off E for each MPH?
-
Originally posted by killnu
30mm? when i was on my old system with a 15 inch monitor, I couldnt hit squat with it...now im on new system with 19 inch monitor...smacking stuff at a decent rate....my skills didnt change, but my system did.
just wondering what you flying on? it may be a factor?
my old>Pent 4, 512 Sdram, Ti 4200 card
new>dual core athalon 64 4200, 2 gig DDR, Geforce 6600 (pro or ultra...something there)
monitors both LCD, just old one 15 in and new 19 in.
AMD Dual core 64 4200+
2 gig DDR system memory
ATI x1600 vid card with 512 mem
Win XP
Monitor is a 19 each Samsung CRT
-
hmm guess that not it...hehe.
-
the secret for dead 6 shots is setting the convergence to 200....try it, it works with wing cannons also (like the spit)
-
Here's some indisputable facts about the AH2 P-51D and Bf 109K-4. These have been exhaustively tested and retested... There's no doubt about the figures.
Max speed at sea level, 25% fuel, full magazines.
P-51D: 367 mph
109K-4: 368 mph
Now, let's look at variations in load out. You are flying fully armed 109K-4 with about 50% of internal fuel remaining. You run into a P-51D with 25% fuel and only 1/3 of his ammo remaining. He elects to avoid an engagement. He dives for the deck with you chasing. You both level off at abut 50 feet doing around 450 mph.
You will never catch him until he runs out of WEP.
Why? Simple really, a P-51D with 25% gas and 1/3 ammo can maintain 368 mph, and with a little less gas or ammo and it'll do 369 mph. Reducing weight reduces induced drag, reducing induced drag increases speed.
Another factor: The P-51D retains speed better than the 109K-4. Again, this has been tested and verified. Due to its greater mass and lower total drag, the P-51D will bleed down from 450 mph to 368 mph considerably slower than the lighter, draggier 109K-4. What this means is that in between 450 mph and 368 mph, the Mustang will actually be pulling away from the 109 because the 109 is bleeding off speed faster.
In sum, you will have to chase the Mustang long enough to run it out of WEP. Even then, it will take about 45 second for the P-51D to bleed down to its 355 to 356 mph MIL power speed. So after nearly 6 minutes of chase, you have a 12 mph advantage. However, more time is needed to close to gun range. That could take a few minutes more. Meanwhile, the Mustang's WEP is recharging. So, after 9 or 10 minutes of chasing the P-51, you are probably looking at a low fuel condition and if you have exhausted your WEP, the Mustang will walk away yet again.
Keep all of the above in mind when chasing P-51s. If you're not closing on them at a significant rate, don't waste your time. Instead, go find a target that isn't so fast.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Me and Saww dove on a pony, I was in an F4U-1 and Saww was in a 109-k4. As we leveled out on the water, I was amazed to find I was catching Saww and the pony. I never overcame saww tho as I was just underneath him when it all seemed to just stand still. We both did close within 600 of the pony from an initial 800 merge and I was llighting him up and unbelievably, Saww popped a tater out there to 600 and tore him in half! Only 2 to 3 minutes of chase and I completely stayed with them though!
-
Me and Saww dove on a pony...etc
ganger :D
-
I forgot to post the test data relating to what I was speaking about above.
Fuel load 25%, zero fuel burn. Full magazines. Time to bleed speed from 450 TAS down to 368 mph TAS at 50 feet ASL. Time recorded in Minutes:Seconds.tenths of seconds.
P-51D: 3:25.85
109K-4: 2:20.10
When the 109K-4 has slowed to its max sustainable speed, the P-51D is still doing 376 mph...Pulling away. After 3 minutes, 25 seconds speeds are equalized, but the gap is considerably wider and will not even begin to close for another 65 seconds.
Skyrock, the F4U-1A is just about as fast on the deck as the P-51 at 366 mph with full ammo and 25% gas. But if you shoot out just 20% of your ammo it'll do 367 mph. Shoot out more than 50% and it's a dead heat with the 109K-4 (also 25 % gas) at 368 mph. If the 109 is fuel heavy, your F4U-1A may actually pull away. The new Hog is plenty fast down low. It will max out between 417 and 420 mph at 20,000 feet, depending upon weight of gas and ammo. 419 mph with 25% fuel and 100% ammo @ 20k. Fast enough to play with the speed demons in the Late War Arenas, all of which it will turn circles around if the fight gets slow. It's a very able fighter.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Here's some indisputable facts about the AH2 P-51D and Bf 109K-4. These have been exhaustively tested and retested... There's no doubt about the figures.
Max speed at sea level, 25% fuel, full magazines.
P-51D: 367 mph
109K-4: 368 mph
Now, let's look at variations in load out. You are flying fully armed 109K-4 with about 50% of internal fuel remaining. You run into a P-51D with 25% fuel and only 1/3 of his ammo remaining. He elects to avoid an engagement. He dives for the deck with you chasing. You both level off at abut 50 feet doing around 450 mph.
You will never catch him until he runs out of WEP.
Why? Simple really, a P-51D with 25% gas and 1/3 ammo can maintain 368 mph, and with a little less gas or ammo and it'll do 369 mph. Reducing weight reduces induced drag, reducing induced drag increases speed.
Another factor: The P-51D retains speed better than the 109K-4. Again, this has been tested and verified. Due to its greater mass and lower total drag, the P-51D will bleed down from 450 mph to 368 mph considerably slower than the lighter, draggier 109K-4. What this means is that in between 450 mph and 368 mph, the Mustang will actually be pulling away from the 109 because the 109 is bleeding off speed faster.
In sum, you will have to chase the Mustang long enough to run it out of WEP. Even then, it will take about 45 second for the P-51D to bleed down to its 355 to 356 mph MIL power speed. So after nearly 6 minutes of chase, you have a 12 mph advantage. However, more time is needed to close to gun range. That could take a few minutes more. Meanwhile, the Mustang's WEP is recharging. So, after 9 or 10 minutes of chasing the P-51, you are probably looking at a low fuel condition and if you have exhausted your WEP, the Mustang will walk away yet again.
Keep all of the above in mind when chasing P-51s. If you're not closing on them at a significant rate, don't waste your time. Instead, go find a target that isn't so fast.
My regards,
Widewing
I started co-alt and co-e with the pony.
Pony dove and I dove. Chased the pony for better then a sector from one base all the way to his base OTD.
Only time I actually closed was when the pony climbed. Which only happened once. I was on wep the whole time. I still had wep when I broke off due to field ack.
I've run down MANY ponys with a 109k4! Only time i've ever had problems like I did in this case AH got patched for too much E retention in some planes!
-
Originally posted by wrag
I started co-alt and co-e with the pony.
Pony dove and I dove. Chased the pony for better then a sector from one base all the way to his base OTD.
Only time I actually closed was when the pony climbed. Which only happened once. I was on wep the whole time. I still had wep when I broke off due to field ack.
I've run down MANY ponys with a 109k4! Only time i've ever had problems like I did in this case AH got patched for too much E retention in some planes!
Running down a P-51 with a 109K-4 isn't difficult if you have a speed advantage from the outset. If you don't, you won't...
E retention is a function of physics. The heavier aircraft has greater potential energy. If that aircraft also has less total drag, it will retain E even better. Keeping those facts in mind, the P-51 weighs a ton more than the 109k and its total drag is less than that of the 109K. Therefore, the Mustang WILL ALWAYS retain E better than the 109K. Even if the drag model is tweeked here and there, it does not remove that ton of mass.
My testing of the P-51 and 109K show that E retention of these two is very much what it should be. There are some planes that on the surface appear to have issues with too much or too little E retention. Neither the P-51 or the 109K-4 are those in question. Hitech has been discussing this with us in this thread (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=192682). You will have to go to page 2 to find the specific posts.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Took up a G6 tonite just to see what the fuss was about. Had two 1 v 1 fights. First against a Ki-84, second against an LA7. Both tried to use the vertical and the stall buzzer was on for me the entire fight. Got inside the turns of the Ki-84 and the La, killed em both.
Was kind of a fun little beast. Still partial to the Emil though :)
-
The 109's need to be fixed
-
Originally posted by Jager
The 109's need to be fixed
care to explain what you think is broken?
-
So let me get this right.
One (1) P-51-D Escapes you and 109s are now broke.
Or...
Would it be more likely that you just misjudged his E a little and he had just enough to evade?
Think I'll go with the second.
Jager said
The 109's need to be fixed
Don't mean to single out Jager here but.
What we got here folks is luftwhiner creep. Now the campaign starts with source links and data sheets . All to the tune of HTC is allied bias .
I can now see why HT doesn't like to mess with the flight models.
What I think is going on is.. People have gotten used to the new FM an have changed tactics when fighting the 109.
Of course I'm a noob dweeb so what do I know .
Bronk
-
not being able to land hits with 30mm and the plane being "broke" are two different things.
I personally dont see anything wrong with the 109s the way they are now....I dont know squat about the numbers/charts/data...I just know how they fly/perform in game....109K4 can be very dominate in any fight, but that all depends on the pilot. I say the K4 because that is what i fly mostly, but I also enjoy the other ones on occasion. G2 prolly my second favorite 109, and that one def has its advantages as well.
-
I can see it now, back in WW2. The pilot returns from a fight that didn't work out the way he wanted.
"My plane is broken. It didn't do what I wanted it to do! The other guy got away!" :)
What I don't get is why folks seem to believe their chosen ride should outperform anything else regardless of the pilot in the other plane or the situation.
The real fighter pilots had to do the best they could with what they flew. Think of all those P40 drivers that went up against superior planes and survived and even excelled.
They didn't get to choose what they flew. They went out and used whatever positive attributes of the plane they had and didn't fight to the other guys strengths.
None of us have flown real WW2 combat that I'm aware of. You can find a number somewhere that tells you what you want to believe your cartoon plane should do.
Relax, go have fun :)
Tis the joy of being a 38G dweeb. Having flown it almost exclusively, I now have a pretty good idea what it can do and what I'm capable of making it do in AH. If I turn fight with a Zeke or a Hurri, I'll more then likely die. So I don't turnfight em.
I sure don't run from a fight in it and I sure don't worry about it if I'm in with LA7s, Spit 16s or any other better performing bird.
It's much more fun to relax, have at it, and let my pretend WW2 pilot enjoy flying his pretend WW2 plane.
And yeah the 109s seem fine to me. Good fun to fly em now and then :)
-
Originally posted by killnu
not being able to land hits with 30mm and the plane being "broke" are two different things.
I personally dont see anything wrong with the 109s the way they are now....I dont know squat about the numbers/charts/data...I just know how they fly/perform in game....109K4 can be very dominate in any fight, but that all depends on the pilot. I say the K4 because that is what i fly mostly, but I also enjoy the other ones on occasion. G2 prolly my second favorite 109, and that one def has its advantages as well.
Speaking as one being on the receiving end of a killnu tater...
Yup the 109 k4 can be very dominate. :p
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
And yeah the 109s seem fine to me.
Not saing they are or are not. I'd like to know how you know though. You dont have any kills in one the last two tours but maybe you did fly them? In any case, I'd be interested to know how you came to that conclusion :lol
-
Originally posted by BugsBunny
Not saing they are or are not. I'd like to know how you know though. You dont have any kills in one the last two tours but maybe you did fly them? In any case, I'd be interested to know how you came to that conclusion :lol
I still have my late son's account for nostalgia's sake. When I'm not feeling real talkative and just feel like flying, I go up and about that way. I was up late last night cause I couldn't sleep and was tooling around in a 109G6 just to see what the fuss was about.
As I mentioned previously I had two good 1 v 1s. First against a Ki-84 and second against an LA7. Won em both. 109G6 seemed to handle fine. And as a 38G dweeb the view from the cockpit wasn't that much different :)
Corky's a 38 Dweeb. My son used to fly just about anything, so I carry on the cause for him under his account.
As I also mentioned, I like Emil's better :)
-
Originally posted by killnu
not being able to land hits with 30mm and the plane being "broke" are two different things.
I personally dont see anything wrong with the 109s the way they are now....I dont know squat about the numbers/charts/data...I just know how they fly/perform in game....109K4 can be very dominate in any fight, but that all depends on the pilot. I say the K4 because that is what i fly mostly, but I also enjoy the other ones on occasion. G2 prolly my second favorite 109, and that one def has its advantages as well.
Where do I say the 109s are BROKE?
Wanna reread my post?
I'm asking for a G10 to be added as I consider the G14 VERY INFERIOR to the G10.
Some claim they are the same plane. They are NOT. The G10 is at least 20mph faster then the G14. The G10 has MUCH cleaner lines, the G14 was called the UBER BUEL due to all the BULGES it had. The BULGES interfere with the E retention and create DRAG. The G14 bleeds E badly! Fly a K4 and cut throttle and see how long it takes to slow down and then do the same with the G14. There is a difference. If you bother to read my post you will also see that the G14 in most cases is refered to as a GROUND SUPPORT aircraft! And while carrying out this role it was NOT unkown for the G14 to carry bombs, rockets, and as many as 5 20mm cannons!!!
Further the G10 was reported to climb to 20K in 6 minutes! Our G14 can't!
Further I am unable to get our G14 to do 408 mph, which was it's reported top speed. I've tried without DT or underwing gondolas.
I am further asking that the F4 be given underwing gondolas. It used to have them and now does not.
The 30mm, yes I'm complaining about it. Yes I've gotten some hits at distances greater then 400 yds. BUT that was purely by accident. Fired 3 times once high, once medium, and once low, at a niki that just HAPPENED to fly into one of the areas i fired at just in time to run into a shot. But when I saddle up and fire from anything vaguely close to the 6 oclock position I watch the round go anywhere but to the target. This even at under 100 yds. When I fire a deflections shot at anything over 100 yds the round goes somewhere wierd, over 50% of the time misses, and I nearly ram the target. And once or twice at under 100 yards the round still went wierd and missed.
I'm also requesting that E retention on some planes be checked. As they now SEEM to hold E for a very long time. Longer then they used to IIRC.
Someone SEEMS to be trying to say I'm calling the situation ALLIED BIAS. I fail to see where that is the case. I stated that a problem with some planes retaining too much E after a patch has OCCURED before.
IMHO allot of ASSUMING is going on here without actually reading what was posted or the links posted!
ASSUME bellybutton of U and ME??????????????????????
Read the post please! Read the links please!
-
Someone's POSTS look really FUNNAY to me. I just CANT figure OUT why.
-
The 109's need to be fixed
by Jager...which def implies they are broke.
Now then wrag...please show me where I said anything about you stating that?
not being able to land hits with 30mm and the plane being "broke" are two different things.
I didnt. That post was more in response to another poster...which seemed to get Jagers post and your mixed together.
What were you saying about assuming?
edit...the G14 is not same as G10...HTC has stated in a much older thread now, that the K4 is same as G10(minus loadout options). Whoever told you otherwise was mistaken.
-
Wrag, you got it mixed up man. The G14 is an entirely new plane. The "old G10" was renamed the "new K4". THOSE planes are identical.
Historically G10s were not the same. They ranged in performance and speed from "barely better than a G14" to significantly better. Even the BEST of the G10s (and mind you this is a small percentage) still does not perform as well as the K-4 series. We always had a K-4 performance in Aces High, since the 109 was introduced, but it was simply called the G10. They knew this, but back in the opening days of the game they wanted to offer a 20mm hub gun on the 109.
If you want a new G10 added it would be somewhere between a G14 and a K4 right now. The general performance wouldn't be that different. Big whoop, so a G14 doees 4600FPM climb, rather than 4800FPM climb*. It's still one of the fastest damn climbers in the game. When I'm flying a G14 the only differences I notice are the top speed and the weapons package. The other minor differences don't really affect the outcome of my sorties.
* numbers made up, but you get the idea
-
sorry guys for not getting in depth. I think you should have the choice of weapons ex. have a 20mm nose instead of the 30mm we have now. BESIDES, i didn't say anything was "broke" either :O :) :O
-
Originally posted by Jager
sorry guys for not getting in depth. I think you should have the choice of weapons ex. have a 20mm nose instead of the 30mm we have now. BESIDES, i didn't say anything was "broke" either :O :) :O
OT:
When i say my car needs to be fixed. It implies that something is broke and needs to be "FIXED".
What you are looking for is a modification. I'd like my car to have a twin turbo mod but that aint happening either. :p :cool:
Bronk
-
lol thanx for the english class :aok I like the 109's to be modifed to have correct armanment
-
Originally posted by Jager
I think you should have the choice of weapons ex. have a 20mm nose instead of the 30mm we have now.
Ummm is that modifying to to the correct armarment...or.....
I WANT .... I WANT... I WANT whine?
Cuz if it's the I WANT whine.. I'll take my Mk XII spit now please .
:p
Bronk
-
Went wandering about in a G-14 for a bit yesterday. Again held my own in a couple of good fights. I did die in it, but I didn't feel bad as it was 2 190s and a K4 with alt that mugged me. Got one of em to auger before I died.
Gotta admit that the 'clank' from the slats deploying was a bit disconcerting at first. Couldn't figure out what that heck it was :)
Then I went up in the G2 into a horde that was working on a base. Got into a turn fight with a Spit 8 and was doing fine until I got picked by a D9 blowing through.
Having never flown a real 109 I can't say if they were exactly right or not, but in terms of competing in the AH arenas, the 109s seemed to do what they need to and then some.
-
worry not... JoLLY has it all under control!
seriously though, i flew for about 6 months back in aw3d and really loved the 109 back then. i didnt give it much of a go in AHII until just this past week. some of you have IMO a ridiculous amount of technical knowledge about the real aircraft. it's great but most of the info is beyond me. could someone give me a quick break down between the ingame versions of the 109? i've flown every one so far, and seem to like the F, the g2, and the g6 the most. the hardest trouble i'm having is actually getting the kill. I've busted up tons of planes so far, but I always end up getting picked or outrun b4 they go down. i'm sure using the underwing 20mm pck would help but would also hurt performance.
any suggestions, things i should know, etc. etc?
i have converg set at 275 for all models.
-
Originally posted by killnu
by Jager...which def implies they are broke.
Now then wrag...please show me where I said anything about you stating that?
I didnt. That post was more in response to another poster...which seemed to get Jagers post and your mixed together.
What were you saying about assuming?
edit...the G14 is not same as G10...HTC has stated in a much older thread now, that the K4 is same as G10(minus loadout options). Whoever told you otherwise was mistaken.
I'm fully aware of what has been stated. I'm showing, if you follow the links posted that it ain't necassarialy<<< spelling> so. Perhaps when the G14 we have was modeled it was. But the current preformance IMHO doesn't SEEM to match what was reported for the G10.
Th information posted on the link and the books i've read say the G10 and the G14 were NOT the same planes. Repeatedly the G14 is refered to as the SLOWER ground support aircraft.
HEY IMHO the G14 is correctly modeled. Bleeds E like no other 109 LOL. With all the bulges n such it well should.
So if anyone things I'm claiming anything is broke or wrong I must say NOPE not saying that at all.
IMHO the G6 and the G14 are very nearly the same plane.
I've repeatedly said I can NOT get our G14 to do 408 mph in level flight wep on. Can you? It's reported online and in the book I have 408 was top speed.
The G10 i'm requesting IS NOT our old G10. Although towards the end of G10 production it is reported it was doing very nearly the same speed as the K4.
I guess what I really want is a 20mm hub cannon option added. The K4 when it 1st came out had the 20mm hub cannon. After trials the 30mm was what it came equiped with.
I really DON'T understand why the 20mm gonds were removed form the F4? Enough of those were produced that IMHO it should be an option.
So for anyone THINKING I am saying the 109s are broken or wrong NOPE not what I'm saying at all.
The LW ammo may need some tweaking though. The 20mm sure son't seem to hit very hard. Least not on my FE.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Also:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/858_1164648751_speed1.jpg)
The top speed differs only 3mph on the deck. No way to catch him. The 109K4's speed grows over the P51D steadily as the alt climbs, but on the deck they're nearly the same. Go up so much as even a few K and you should be able to catch them.
At least give a nod to Dok Gonzo's site http://www.gonzoville.com/charts/ (http://www.gonzoville.com/charts/) where those charts came from. He and his contributors put a lot of work into collecting the data going into that site.
That said, I think those charts and databases were compiled over two version releases ago, so any changes made to the plane set since then would not be indicated. And, although they are a great resource, and I refer to them often, they were compiled by human beings in trials, not taken from attributes in the game code, AFAIK. So, some degree of error is going to be present.
Actually, I don't think ANY AHII websites are really current right now. Sodas, Hammer's, Dok's, probably not even THIS site's data on planesets..... which is a shame. But, that kind of detail in a game has always been a labor of love... so where's the love?!
-
wrag....the 109K4 is modeled after the old G10, minus the 20mm option and gunpods iirc. The G14 is an add on so to speak from the previous 109 selection. It is very similar to the G6...it has 30mm option and better wep. Dont believe anyone in this thread is trying to tell you the G14 is the old G10.
the books i've read say the G10 and the G14 were NOT the same planes
agreed
the G6 and the G14 are very nearly the same plane
agreed
towards the end of G10 production it is reported it was doing very nearly the same speed as the K4.
what we had(G10)and now got(K4).
-
Seriously perk the k4 killnU is a monster in it. Who needs to run anyway?
-
Originally posted by wrag
Further a couple of test pilots? recently flew a G10 against a pony D. They reported the G10 could OUT TURN the pony. The story is in this link
http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/store/viewissue.asp?issueid=gerf
You may have to purchase the book to read the article. It also has articles on other LW aircraft. Interestingly the F6F was compared to a 190. The results are interesting.
Cool! I ordered a copy just now. Thanks for the recommendation.
-
Originally posted by wrag
So for anyone THINKING I am saying the 109s are broken or wrong NOPE not what I'm saying at all.
Originally posted by wrag
The 109's are porked AGAIN.
Originally posted by wrag
The G14 was known as the Super Bulge with a top speed of 408. Which BTW I can't get out of our G14.
Originally posted by wrag
There are manuvers that the 109 should be able to do, but since AHII was implemented the elevator down authority has been much poorer then in AHI.
Originally posted by wrag
I've also noticed the LW ammo SEEMS to be lacking a mine shell?
Originally posted by wrag
The LW ammo has done poorly for about the last 3 months maybe more.
Originally posted by wrag
Further I am unable to get our G14 to do 408 mph, which was it's reported top speed.
Originally posted by wrag
When I fire a deflections shot at anything over 100 yds the round goes somewhere wierd
Originally posted by wrag
I'm also requesting that E retention on some planes be checked
Originally posted by wrag
So for anyone THINKING I am saying the 109s are broken or wrong NOPE not what I'm saying at all.
The LW ammo may need some tweaking though. The 20mm sure son't seem to hit very hard. Least not on my FE.
-
Hub :rofl :rofl
-
LOL Hub, just waiting for someone to put those together.
Just wait for the semantic dancing....
ie...."saying it's porked is NOT saying it's broken" ;)
-
Originally posted by wetrat
30mm in AH requires a certain amount of natural ability, a whole hell of a lot of practice, and some luck. Dead 6 shots were always hardest for me. I don't know if things have changed since the summer, but the 109's were FAR superior to what we used to have after the flap deployment speed was raised. I was thoroughly beating the snot out of everything short of a hurricane fighting under 170mph.
I'd hazard a guess and say the problem is you, not the e-planes.
-
KillnU..............
If my understanding is correct we've always had a K4. The G10 was basically a K4 but was called a G10 for the 20mm hub and underwing gondola options.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Porked and BROKE are 2 different things.
I also said IMHO the G14 is correctly modeled.
Selective reposting?
-
Originally posted by zorstorer
LOL Hub, just waiting for someone to put those together.
Just wait for the semantic dancing....
ie...."saying it's porked is NOT saying it's broken" ;)
So to you porked and broken are the same?
Care to Define the terms as you see them?
HMM where does the term porked come from?
Little note of interest where did the term PUNK come from? And what was it's original meaning? I bring it up because many don't seem to know. IIRC it was once a very serious insult.
I'm thinkin porked has become such a idiom in that it has changed from it's original meaning.
Ahh well don't really matter I guess.
-
How about bringing back the 109G-10?
109G-10 would be a nice filler gap between the performance of 109G-14 and 109K-4.
109G-14 had max speed of 408 mph
109G-10 had max speed of 428 mph
109K-4 had max speed of 452 mph
(http://www.transportmodels.co.uk/images/08157.jpg)
-
Does our Bf 109G-14 have the wood tail? And What engine did we get?
-
A little advice from an old 109 driver:
When chasing P-51's, Tiffies, Doras and LaLas never dive below 5k. Let the Pony dive to the deck, but you level out above 5k. Nothing un-perked is faster than a 109-K4 above 5k, and you will overtake the Pony much faster and be in a superior position for attack (high 6).
-
OMG! Proof that the 109 is porked! See, IK3 posted it right there! It's even on the side of the plane!!!
FYI: Porked is a civilized way of saying f***ed. People can't go around swearing all the time, especially on BBS forums. "Porked" is a relatively recent word with no roots [EDIT: to pork something might literally mean to prepare it in the way one prepares pork meat, or to add pork meat to it, neither of which is remotely related to the common game-related use here] , other than it sounds like the F word, and sometimes folks use "porking" as a synonym with f***ing.
So by saying "it's porked" you're saying "it's f***ed", which means (naturally) it's broken.
Don't go all semantic on us, now. Porked means messed up, broken, "something's wrong", etc and so forth.
-
I'd like to see the 30mm available on the G6 again. I don't think the G14 is antwhere near as versatile as the old G6 was. I'm either in the F, G2, G6 or K4.
-
In what way, Storch? The G14 has the old G6's canopy. It has the old G6's guns packages. It also has a bit more speed than the old G6, climbs and accelerates a helluva lot faster, and turns with an almost identical turn radius... So it's got all the benefits of the old G6, but with more speed.
What's not to love?
-
Originally posted by zorstorer
Just wait for the semantic dancing....
ie...."saying it's porked is NOT saying it's broken" ;)
Originally posted by wrag
Porked and BROKE are 2 different things.
I also said IMHO the G14 is correctly modeled.
Selective reposting?
Originally posted by wrag
The G14 was known as the Super Bulge with a top speed of 408. Which BTW I can't get out of our G14.
Originally posted by wrag
Further I am unable to get our G14 to do 408 mph, which was it's reported top speed.
I guess when you maintain that the G14 is correctly modelled, but not as fast as it's supposed to be, that I got confused. So, as you say, there is nothing wrong with any of the 109s, and this thread can die, correct?
-
I may be wrong here krusty but the old G6 was a heck of a turner compared to the G14. I only flew the G14 a few times when it was introduced and found it to be sluggish and unresponsive when compared to the G6 which I was in almost daily. perhaps I should revisit it in the near future but that ws my initial impression when the comparisson was fresh.
-
Well, going by the handy dandy comparison page:
http://www.gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php?p1=109g6&p2=109g14
It's pretty close. G6 tuns a little tighter without flaps, but with flaps they're only 8 feet apart from each other.
-
Isn't that the "new G6" in the charts?
I also felt the old G6 was a marginally better performer, but being a lackluster 109 pilot on a good day, can't say that with any certainty. I like the newer models, overall, far more than the old.
Oh, and the changes the FM, drag tables, ground effects, etc have undergone are probably factoring in here as well.
-
the "old" 109s flopped around because of bugs in the airflow code. Bring it under 250mph and it tip stalled like crazy (same with the "old" 190s). So that's not a valid comparison anymore, since the airflow recoding. Everything flies better after that patch.
EDIT: For the record the old G6 was the worst of all the 109s, in my opinion. It was sluggish in turns to say the best, and the G2 was faster than it, turned far far tighter than it, and had more 20mm ammo than it. Even the old K-4 seemed to turn better than the G-6. The G-6 was the lemon of the group, in my mind. (this amongst all the "old" 109s)
-
On the contrary Krusty, the opinions are valid only because the models are changed. We couldn't very well have a discussion on the differences if there weren't any differences, could we?
-
Originally posted by storch
I may be wrong here krusty but the old G6 was a heck of a turner compared to the G14. I only flew the G14 a few times when it was introduced and found it to be sluggish and unresponsive when compared to the G6 which I was in almost daily. perhaps I should revisit it in the near future but that ws my initial impression when the comparisson was fresh.
The G-14 is just a G-6 with MW-50. The G-14 is mentioned in Mtt meetings minutes as the official name of the G-6/MW50 designation which was used internally by Mtt for G-6 equipped with the MW-50 system previously used on the recce G-6/R2 variant. The G-14 was the evolution of G-6 with DB605AM with MW-50. The G-14 will be a bit heavier then the G-6 and with out WEP will be only a few mph faster then the G-6. FTH for the G-14 is 16400FT.
The G-10 was the evolution of G-6 coupled with DB605D and MW-50 and supercharger of the DB603. The G-10 was to be an interim aiorcraft while the K-4 came online. However, problems with the DB605D lead to both the K-4 and G-10 entering service about the same time. Some sources say the G-10 was 'made from old G-6 airframes' but this isn't necessarily correct. It is true some of the first airframes used for the G-10 were from G-6 as they were available, or from airframes planned for mounting the DB605AM (G-14) in case no DB605AM were available. This is why the twin data plate can be found on some G-10s. Some G-10s were fitted with the cowling from the G-6/As / G-14/AS leading to the confusing designation G-10/AS found in some sources.
A couple of folks, including myself, tested the G-14 when it first came out and there were problems. I posted them in the bug forum and Pyro fixed them in a later patch. See Here: FTH G-14 (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=164744)
The G-14/U4 should hit about 410- 415 mph. The last time I tested it in AH I could only get 404 mph at FTH. It seemed to me that the 404 moh is the FTH speed with gondolas but thats what I get with it clean in AH. Still a bit slow but not as bad as when it was first released.
I argued (alone mind you) that the HTC shouldn't drop the G-10 but just fix its FM to match a real life G-10 (428 mph at FTH). The old G-10 was always a K-4 with 2cm option, Pyro said exactly that a while back. A correctly modeled G-10 could have stood in for a G-14/AS (June/July service date as opposed to October with the G-10/K-4) with a G-6 / G-14 / G-10 / K-4 combo it would have filled all the holes in the 109 plane set for ToD. The G-14 isn't a high altitude plane and once the 8 TH AF CT comes around it will be a marginal bomber interceptor and its performance above 16400ft will be well behind the allied fighters. Above 16400ft its just marginally faster then the current G-6. That means there is a huge whole from Feb '43 (G-14 above FTH performance wise) and Oct '44 (K-4). The wholes in the 109 plane set are no greater then the wholes in the rest of the plane set.
That said I have no other criticisms of the 109s.
-
The 109G10 we had here was nice, but it wasn't actually representative of the real 109G10. From my reading of all the 109 threads, I think the real issues with 109s are the flap deployment speeds, availability of gondolas on certain models, and engine boost on the K4.
IMHO:
1. 20mm gondolas option should be available on the F4. From my reading this was the F-4/R6, and although it was limited to bomber interceptor roles, it was available.
2. 20mm gondolas should NOT be available for the K4. I can't find any pictures of them actually being carried (you can for the F4/R6), and if someone can show me a set on a K4, I'll happily concede the point.
3. The K4 should have the 1.98ata boost / 2,000 hp engine power on WEP. There are plenty of docs out there to show that it was the top-end K4 variant, even though it used a more scarce fuel which was in short supply (along with everything else) at that point in the war.
4. Flap deployment speeds on all the 109s should be looked at and the flight model adjusted. There are a number of sources out there for this data, so it shouldn't be too difficult to figure out a more reasonable flap deployment number.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Bruno, I'm curious...
If the G10 and the K4 came out at about the same time, what hole would it fill?
It wouldn't fill the timeline hole between the G14 and the K4, because by the time the G10 shows up the K4 is already out (and we already have that). It might fill a performance gap, but the performance isn't that different. 20mph is nice, yes, but given what we have I "could live with" what we've got.
-
run your 109K4 at 80% throttle and fill that speed void left by the G-10.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
OMG! Proof that the 109 is porked! See, IK3 posted it right there! It's even on the side of the plane!!!
FYI: Porked is a civilized way of saying f***ed. People can't go around swearing all the time, especially on BBS forums. "Porked" is a relatively recent word with no roots [EDIT: to pork something might literally mean to prepare it in the way one prepares pork meat, or to add pork meat to it, neither of which is remotely related to the common game-related use here] , other than it sounds like the F word, and sometimes folks use "porking" as a synonym with f***ing.
So by saying "it's porked" you're saying "it's f***ed", which means (naturally) it's broken.
Don't go all semantic on us, now. Porked means messed up, broken, "something's wrong", etc and so forth.
IIRC Porked comes from the famous, or perhaps infamous, PORK BARREL projects put out by our guvmint. In that what you get is what they said you would get, sorta, but it's NOT quite what was expected. Something doesn't seem quite right. The results are not what many believed it would or should be. One is left trying to figure out if one actually got what they THOUGHT they were paying for, yet there is LITTLE that can be done about it. So the saying it's porked does not always mean it's BROKEN. Or at least it didn't until many started making it mean that.
Words are interesting things, in that they actually are intended to have a meaning. They were intended to express ideas, to comunicate, etc...
Sadly many come to that and say there "just words".
BTW IIRC Semantic refers to the manner the word is pronounced, and it's place within the structure of a sentence. Both of which can change the meaning of the word to such a degree it can come across as meaning the opposite of it's intended, or original use. I'm sure we all have run into such statements. Good morning pronounced different ways can mean sooo much. Knew a gal that was a MASTER, or should I say MISTRESS, of such. She could cut you to shreads with the most innocent sounding words. Words that were usually used in greeting she could take and make into an I hate you, and wish you were dead, frase.
So when I say porked I am using the meaning I understand, and NOT the meaing you have put forth.
I've come to believe if anyone wants to communicate on a BBS they better get their word definitions worked out frist.
Tried that a few times but keep getting the there "just words" BS.
The Declaration of Independence are just words I guess. The Preamble to the Bill of Rights are just words I guess. Or at least to some that is probably true. To me they have meaning. Very important meaning. (geeez can't even spell this morning, better get myself some coffee)
BTW anyone come up with the original meaning of the word punk? Want some help with it? IIRC it originated within the prison system. It's meaning has changed considerably. I supposed through over use, or misuse? Or a really fast talking individual worked very hard and with great fear after having used it on the wrong person. A person that actually knew what it meant.
-
Originally posted by wrag
So when I say porked I am using the meaning I understand, and NOT the meaing you have put forth.
And you are using the wrong meaning for the word. I don't care if you dated somebody once that could twist any word into an insult. That's beside the point. Hell, even I can do that, friend. See? I just did it. That's nothing new.
When something is porked, nerfed, f**ked, broken, most people know what you mean. You can't say "this is f**ked, but by that I mean it's perfectly fine". Nor can you say the same about "porked". There are meanings in place already for these words and you cannot redefine them on your own.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Bruno, I'm curious...
If the G10 and the K4 came out at about the same time, what hole would it fill?
It wouldn't fill the timeline hole between the G14 and the K4, because by the time the G10 shows up the K4 is already out (and we already have that). It might fill a performance gap, but the performance isn't that different. 20mph is nice, yes, but given what we have I "could live with" what we've got.
The LW were looking for a way to increase 109 performance. In March '44 they introduced the the G-/AS (DB605A with DB603 supercharger). The larger supercharger gave better high altitude performance. For lower alitutdes MW-50 provided the added boost thus the G-14 and G-14/AS.
The K-4 was to be fitted with the DB605D - an improvement over the DB605A. The K-4 airframe was and required new tooling to ramp up production. As Butch pointed out to you in a previous thread the K-4 and G-6 didn't habve the same airframe. While K-4 production was brought up to speed they hoped to get the DB605D into the G-10 and in service while the work for the K-4 was underway. The DB605D had more power then the DB605A plus MW-50 and the DB603 supercharger. There were problems with the DB605D that delayed its introduction. Once it was ready K-4 production was underway thus the G-10 and K-4 entered service in October '44 with the same engine but slightly different airframes and performance.
As I wrote above the G-14 was the evolution of G-6 with DB605A with MW-50 (DB605AM.
The G-10 was the evolution of G-6 coupled with DB605D with MW-50 and supercharger of the DB603.
The K-4 was a new version all together but power by the DB605D with MW-50 and supercharger of the DB603.
run your 109K4 at 80% throttle and fill that speed void left by the G-10.
Wow you are clever...
In the CT unless HTC builds in an option to force '80%' throttle no one would do that. Thus either the LW will have a much better performing plane early or the K-4 will only enter into that tour very late while the higher altitude performance gap between the G-14 and the allied fighters is unbalanced. From June till October the LW in the west had better high altitude performing aircraft for RVT duty the the early G-6 and G-14 as modeled in AH. These were the G-6/AS and G-14/AS - with similar performance (at altitude - below FTH these would be slower) to 'real life' G-10 numbers.
-
Originally posted by Bruno
Wow you are clever...
thanks :)
you are smart too, maybe we can be friends and play scrabble together?
-
Okay, I get that part, Bruno. But the G10 and the K4 ended up entering service at the same time, so it wouldn't fill the gap in the upcoming CT. To fill the gap it would have to come out well before the G10 or K4, and perform better than the G14. So the G10 wouldn't be an ideal gap filler at all.
Maybe the thought holds for another variant, but doesn't seem to add up for the G10 in my head :confused:
-
Originally posted by Pawz
Seriously perk the k4 killnU is a monster in it. Who needs to run anyway?
KU is my ***** :cool:
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Okay, I get that part, Bruno. But the G10 and the K4 ended up entering service at the same time, so it wouldn't fill the gap in the upcoming CT. To fill the gap it would have to come out well before the G10 or K4, and perform better than the G14. So the G10 wouldn't be an ideal gap filler at all.
Maybe the thought holds for another variant, but doesn't seem to add up for the G10 in my head :confused:
Yes it would - since we don't have a G-6/AS and G-14/AS the G-10 could fill that gap (substitute for...) since all three have similar performance at altitude - 420-428 mph.
Above 16400 the G-14 is almost exactly like the old the G-6 late we had in AH. That means the speed difference between the G-10 (G-6/AS - G-14/AS) at say 22k feet is upwards of 30 mph...
The G-14 is my favorite plane in AH or in any other that has it. Next to the G-6 the G-14 was the second most produced Bf 109. Its a great plane. However, in an event, scenario, or CT tour designed around bomber interception and higher altitude combat its performance above 164000 is very lacking.
Since the first CT will be 8th AF verses LW then the G-14 wil most likely be the standard mid-range 109 (G-6 for the opening and the K-4 near the end of the tour). IMHO it would have been better if the G-10 was kept and its performance adjusted to reflect 420-428 mph. It could have substituted for the G-14/AS and made a much more competitive mid-range 109 - between the G-6 or G-14 and the K-4.
-
Well now that they're taking more care with the variants they add, I don't think that adding a G10 and having it sub as a G14/AS or G6/AS would be appropriate. We ran into problems with the "K4" model of the G10 we used to have. We don't want to substitute.
It might be more prudent to lobby for the G14/AS, rather than the G10. This, also, showed up before the G10, unless I'm mistaken, and if they were putting it into the timeline of a Combat Tour, they wouldn't have to fudge dates or substitute variants like they'd have to do with the G10.
CT is going to be under scrutiny, and if folks come in saying "Why do you introduce a G10 way way before it ever flew?" and the answer is "to sub for the G14AS" then that begs the question "Well... why didn't you just add the G14AS to begin with?". That sort of thing.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Well now that they're taking more care with the variants they add, I don't think that adding a G10 and having it sub as a G14/AS or G6/AS would be appropriate. We ran into problems with the "K4" model of the G10 we used to have. We don't want to substitute.
It might be more prudent to lobby for the G14/AS, rather than the G10. This, also, showed up before the G10, unless I'm mistaken, and if they were putting it into the timeline of a Combat Tour, they wouldn't have to fudge dates or substitute variants like they'd have to do with the G10.
CT is going to be under scrutiny, and if folks come in saying "Why do you introduce a G10 way way before it ever flew?" and the answer is "to sub for the G14AS" then that begs the question "Well... why didn't you just add the G14AS to begin with?". That sort of thing.
You wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a G-14 and G-10 in performance. They could have used the same model as the K-4 for the G-10 and just did FM tweak. Adding a G-14/AS would mean doing a new model and FM.
Besides look at the allied plane set. There will be many 'substitutions' to get it to work. I bet they even shove the P-47N in there.
There's a much greater difference in the P-47D-11 and early (pre-upgraded) P-47C then the G-10 and G-14/AS.
Then there's no A-4, no A-6 or A-7 etc...
The G-10 could have easily be used in place of a G-14.
-
KU is my *****
where you been man? been awhile....hope to see you up sometime.
-
Originally posted by Ball
thanks :)
you are smart too, maybe we can be friends and play scrabble together?
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :huh
-
Originally posted by Krusty
And you are using the wrong meaning for the word. I don't care if you dated somebody once that could twist any word into an insult. That's beside the point. Hell, even I can do that, friend. See? I just did it. That's nothing new.
When something is porked, nerfed, f**ked, broken, most people know what you mean. You can't say "this is f**ked, but by that I mean it's perfectly fine". Nor can you say the same about "porked". There are meanings in place already for these words and you cannot redefine them on your own.
And I am of the opinion that it is YOU that are using the word wrong.
Perhaps the meaning you claim to be in place/correct is the NEWER meaning?
I've understood the meaning of porked to be different then your meaning for a very long time now.
So I disagree with you VERY much on this Krusty. And I'm of the opinion that the redefining has occured since I understood the meaning of the word. So I can make my claim and if you disagree that is your right.
What is your definition of the word punk?
-
This is just retarded guys.
-
He's done this before, as well, on these forums.
He tries to donn an air of know-it-all by redirecting meanings of current words to archaeic meanings. You know what? Pencil comes from the same root word as noodle. Doesn't mean that it MEANS noodle. Roots of a word are not the meaning of a word. They can provide insight into HOW a word's meaning evolves, but you can't just go look up meanings for words that were used in the past and hope that they mean the same now.
It doesn't work that way, I'm sorry, it just doesn't.
I'm done arguing with wrag on this matter. He's wrong and he doesn't stand in a position capable of showing me otherwise.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
OMG! Proof that the 109 is porked! See, IK3 posted it right there! It's even on the side of the plane!!!
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Krusty
He's done this before, as well, on these forums.
He tries to donn an air of know-it-all by redirecting meanings of current words to archaeic meanings. You know what? Pencil comes from the same root word as noodle. Doesn't mean that it MEANS noodle. Roots of a word are not the meaning of a word. They can provide insight into HOW a word's meaning evolves, but you can't just go look up meanings for words that were used in the past and hope that they mean the same now.
It doesn't work that way, I'm sorry, it just doesn't.
I'm done arguing with wrag on this matter. He's wrong and he doesn't stand in a position capable of showing me otherwise.
know-it-all? :rofl
Me?
I think not.
So you object to the fact that I'm old and still think words mean what they used to? Archaeic is it now? Wasn't all that long ago the word meant to many what I thought it meant. Or at least it did in the older crowd.
It's just possible someone in the younger crowd heard the word used, didn't ask what was meant by it's use, but just THOUGHT they understood what it meant.
How did we get to pencils?
It doesn't work that way?????????????? What a word means is pretty much what it means. What we are refering to here IMHO is the use of porked as an idiom/slang. Still trying to figure out where you got the food preperation thingy................
As to being wrong? Hmmmm so you are now the worlds authority on the meaning of words? Or are you trying to MAKE the word mean what you want it to?
I noticed you dodged giving your definition of the word punk............... was a time IIRC using that word to refer to another could get you in some real trouble. Now I see it and hear it all over the place. Guess the meaning of that word changed too.
Fool is another word I see and hear much more frequently. Guess the meaning of that word has changed considerably as well.
So you are done arguing with wrag??? AND now you say I am wrong and the matter is settled because you say it is so?????????????????????????????????????? Who are YOU Sir?