Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Karnak on June 05, 2007, 08:53:30 PM
-
Quite some time ago I posted my suggestions for a complete Spitfire lineup for Aces High. That post lead to vigorous debate and lots of suggestions by well informed members of this board and was successful beyond my hopes. Of late I have noticed an increasing number of posts about the Mosquito, including some that had data I had not previously been able to obtain. In that light I feel it is time to post a suggested list of Mosquitoes for Aces High. This is not a complete list intended to cover the complete wartime service of the Mosquito though, as the Mosquito was not a core aircraft like the Spitfire was.
Mosquito B.Mk IV Series ii: (Merlin 21 at +12lbs boost) Day and night bomber. First production aircraft flew March, 1942. Four 250lb bombs or four 500lb bombs in bomb bay. Heavy flares for target marking carried in place of bombs on Pathfinder missions.
Note: This is the first offensive Mosquito. The B.Mk IV proved that de Haviland's claim that speed could act as a better defensive ploy than turrets and guns for bombers was correct.
Mosquito FB.Mk VI Series ii: (Merlin 25 at +18lbs boost) Day and night fighter-bomber/intruder/long range fighter. First production aircraft flew February, 1943. Four 20mm Hispano Mk II cannon and four .303 inch Browning machine guns in the nose. Two 250lb or 500lb bombs in the rear bomb bay and two 250lb or 500lb bombs on wing racks, or four 60lb rockets under each wing, or one mine or depth charge under each wing and combinations of drop tanks and offensive weapons.
Note: This is the Mosquito we have in Aces High now. I recommend the flame dampers be removed from the 3D model and the flight model as FB.VIs that were used in daylight operations were not equipped with flame dampers. Roughly 2/3rds of FB.Mk VIs had ejector stacks and 1/3rd had flame dampers.
Mosquito B.Mk XVI: (Merlin 72/73 or 76/77, counter rotating propellors) Day and night bomber. First production aircraft flew January, 1944. Four 500lb bombs in the bomb bay and two 500lb bombs on wing racks or one 4,000lb bomb in the bomb bay. Heavy flares for target marking carried in place of bombs on Pathfinder missions.
Note: The B.Mk XVI would most likely be a low end perk bomber due to its ability to fly faster than 400mph while carrying a 4,000lb bomb at 27,000ft.
Those three Mosquitoes would give us a basic lineup of Mosquitoes, an early bomber and late bomber and a fighter version that served from its introduction until well after WWII.
While I would like to imagine that ther 57mm Molins gun could be a perk ordnance option for the FB.Mk VI the fact is that the FB.Mk XVIIIs also had an additional 800lbs of armor, making it unlikely that this could be done.
The Mosquito F.Mk II would be nice to have as an early Mosquito fighter with lower performance and no bomb capablities. The F.Mk II also lacked the strengthened wing introduced with the FB.Mk VI.
It would also be nice to see a bull nosed night-fighter Mosquito such as the NF.Mk XIII, NF.Mk XIX or NF.Mk 30, but due to Aces High's daylight focus these are not really needed.
-
I for one would love to see these versions of the Mossie! My great-uncle was the CO of the very first Mosquito squadron in the RAF (105 Squadron. His name was Hughie Edwards VC).
:aok
-
NF's were used more and more during daylight in the later stages of the war, so can't see a reason why we couldn't have one.
NF.30 would be a blast.
Perking the B XVI would turn it into a hanger queen.
No defensive capabilities apart from speed, if caught no hope.
Flame dampers -
First batch FB VI - No rocket capabily, flame dampers fitted as standard at factory.
Second and subsequent batch FB VI - Rocket capability, flame dampers NOT fitted at factory.
So our current one is a kludge anyway.
But yes, remove them on the remodel.
-
Nice list.
NF 30 would be awesome.
If one of the mossies is to be perked, i think the B.35 would be better.
-
The performance I have for the NF.Mk 30 is as follows:
00,000ft: 338mph
13,500ft: 400mph
26,500ft: 424mph
The NF.Mk 30 was the best nightfighter of WWII flown by any nation.
-
Originally posted by breadroll
I for one would love to see these versions of the Mossie! My great-uncle was the CO of the very first Mosquito squadron in the RAF (105 Squadron. His name was Hughie Edwards VC).
:aok
Wow! That's some Great Uncle. When it comes to Blenheims and Mossies he's a bit of a legend to those who pay attention. Got a photo in one of my books of him boarding a Mossie as a matter of fact.
Great Uncle WingCo Hugh Edwards VC on the left and his navigator boarding a 105 Mossie in 1942
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Edwards.jpg)
-
I know this has been said but i'll say it again.
Perk loadout option for the mossie tse tse. I would love to have 25 rounds of the 75mm cannon. Also the stuka should get the big uns that Rudel used on the eastern front.
When ammo gets porked i've been practicing with the hurri 2d's cannon and its lethal. I would like to see a couple more options. If the argument is that the GV's wont like it, they don't like my 2 x 40mm, so one 75mm gun shouldnt be a problem eh ;)
More mossies! mossie mossie mossie oi oi oi!
-
The Tse-Tse would probably see some use, and as all other options, it's a relatively little job for HTC to add Mossies instead of completely new aircraft.
That said, it's not all true. Redoing the graphics is after all, quite a job....
Anyway, I really support the idea of the Mossie being raised to it's merit, it was after all close to being a stealth aircraft in it's time, with speed enough to extend from almost anything with a propeller.
I recall an encounter of 190's trying to catch Mossies in daylight over the North Sea, close to the Danish coast. The Mossies saw the thread, and won the run.
And as a support to that, an old P51 jock said: "Those Mosquitos were probably faster than my Mustang". Oh, to me, that is.
-
would love to see mossie bombers............. for me the question is should mossie bomber formations be enabled?
my view is yes but it was not one formed immediately
-
Yes, Hugh Edwards is a name I have seen repeatedly in my Mossie studies and always in a positive light.
-
Hell yes! I'd pay perks to buy a single 4k cookie!
If only to drop on GVs!!!! MUAHAHAHAHHA! (Hey, my perks I'll spend 'em how I want!)
-
Nothing to add from Karnaks post save the crew armor (for the love of god, please), and the CoG fix.
:aok
-
I was looking through my Mossie stuff and noticed mentioned of protected fuel tanks, which I took to mean self-sealing. Also mention of an extinguisher system for the engines in case of fire.
Would be nice to not have the Mossie be such a torch so fast. I've never seen anything to indicate it burned like they do in AH. We know the Zeke, for example, didn't have protected fuel tanks and did burn easily.
To have the Mossie burn like that doesn't seem to fit.
-
thanks dan ive been stating this over and over 9out of 10 deaths are from a fire in AH.
-
Originally posted by Souless
thanks dan ive been stating this over and over 9out of 10 deaths are from a fire in AH.
Came across it about 4 AM last night while wading through a book on the Mossie.
Then I remembered "Terror in the Starboard Seat" by Dave McCintosh and he writes specifically about an incident with an engine fire and hitting the extinguisher button that put out the fire so they could bring it in single engine.
Made me think of that photo of the toasted Mossie that was too close to the V-1 it shot down. It was blackened, but it didn't burn :)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/burntmossie.jpg)
-
Forgot to add "self sealing tanks please" which they had.
The Mossie was not a IJAAF a/c.
As its modelled now in AH it gives the same protection as an A6M2 Zero. I think not.
-
I would really love to see the mossie bloom in Aces High. It is a really attractive aircraft and a 2-engined beast of a plane. I think our current flight charecteristics of our AH2 mossie are a bit suspect as they dont really co-inside with many accounts.
as bruv said,
mossie mossie mossie, oi oi oi!
-
Guppy: I've got a book that lists that Mossie as having flown through a plume of cascading (and burning) petrol after it shot down a LW bomber at night, rather than a V1 (which would have more shrapnel damage then burn damage, I'd think!)
Fire: Maybe the fire is that incendiary rounds are imbedding in the wooden frame and setting that on fire. Keep in mind that the reason the Hindenburg went down so lightning fast was probably the paint on the outside of the skin. Paint, glues, adhesives, all the chemicals put into building a mossie, are almost all flamable. Once flame gets going it can rupture fuel lines, melt protective coatings, whatever.
Might be that HTC made it light up because of this, and just decided the best way was to make the fuel takes a little more vunerable. I NEVER see fire coming from the wings, wing roots, it's always the fuselage. That makes me think it's not a fuel tank issue (otherwise each fuel tank could catch on fire, and none ever do but the fuselage)
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Guppy: I've got a book that lists that Mossie as having flown through a plume of cascading (and burning) petrol after it shot down a LW bomber at night, rather than a V1 (which would have more shrapnel damage then burn damage, I'd think!)
Fire: Maybe the fire is that incendiary rounds are imbedding in the wooden frame and setting that on fire. Keep in mind that the reason the Hindenburg went down so lightning fast was probably the paint on the outside of the skin. Paint, glues, adhesives, all the chemicals put into building a mossie, are almost all flamable. Once flame gets going it can rupture fuel lines, melt protective coatings, whatever.
Might be that HTC made it light up because of this, and just decided the best way was to make the fuel takes a little more vunerable. I NEVER see fire coming from the wings, wing roots, it's always the fuselage. That makes me think it's not a fuel tank issue (otherwise each fuel tank could catch on fire, and none ever do but the fuselage)
The problem Krusty, is you never see any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise suggesting the Mossie burned like it does in AH. It wasn't considered a flying torch. Lots of accounts of Japanese birds doing that due to the lack of self sealing tanks, but the Mossie had those.
It lights up like a Zero. That doesn't seem to fit.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Guppy: I've got a book that lists that Mossie as having flown through a plume of cascading (and burning) petrol after it shot down a LW bomber at night, rather than a V1 (which would have more shrapnel damage then burn damage, I'd think!)
Fire: Maybe the fire is that incendiary rounds are imbedding in the wooden frame and setting that on fire. Keep in mind that the reason the Hindenburg went down so lightning fast was probably the paint on the outside of the skin. Paint, glues, adhesives, all the chemicals put into building a mossie, are almost all flamable. Once flame gets going it can rupture fuel lines, melt protective coatings, whatever.
Might be that HTC made it light up because of this, and just decided the best way was to make the fuel takes a little more vunerable. I NEVER see fire coming from the wings, wing roots, it's always the fuselage. That makes me think it's not a fuel tank issue (otherwise each fuel tank could catch on fire, and none ever do but the fuselage)
krusty the mossie wasnt a burner, far from it and very durable.
May I suggest to read some good material on what glue was used and how it was asembled.
Fire from materials was greatly factored in from dehavilland engineers.
-
It was interesting to read how they had to change the glues for use in the Far East. It also turned out the different glues used kept the mosquitos (insects) away from the Mosquitos:)
-
I agree it's too fragile, in more than one area. The entire thing needs to be scrapped and redone.
I guess I was just attempting to justify (after the fact) the way we have it. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't defending it!
P.S. funny thing about the mosquito scaring the mosquitos!
-
I remember setting a Mosquito alight by hitting in its wing (just outboard of the starboard engine) with a single ping from an F6F in a reversal shot.
-
Was there an FB version that carried the cookie? I'd rather have a high-speed plane that has SOME sort of forward armament. Even if it's only the .303s!
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
The problem Krusty, is you never see any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise suggesting the Mossie burned like it does in AH. It wasn't considered a flying torch. Lots of accounts of Japanese birds doing that due to the lack of self sealing tanks, but the Mossie had those.
It lights up like a Zero. That doesn't seem to fit.
My personal opinion of this dan is its modelled like the bombers damage model.:(
-
Only the bulged bomb bay versions could carry the 4k cookie - they were all bomber versions.
There was no need for a FB version to carry the cookie.
-
BTW, i see Souless and SpikesX have taken up using my avatar. If anyone else wants to, feel free :)
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
Perk loadout option for the mossie tse tse. I would love to have 25 rounds of the 75mm cannon. !
Bruv is that a typo. The Molins gun was of 57mm calibre.
Mossie fuel tanks outlined in red,
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-12/1114844/mossie03-1.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Hell yes! I'd pay perks to buy a single 4k cookie!
If only to drop on GVs!!!! MUAHAHAHAHHA! (Hey, my perks I'll spend 'em how I want!)
Imagine a HQ run with formations of mossies
-
163 vs mossie = mossie dead, I don't care how fast it is, the rocket is faster! :D
-
I don't know about that Krusty. It would still take a couple of minutes for the 163s to reach 27,000ft and a lot of ground can be covered at 416mph in two minutes. Also as that one Mossie vs Me262 photo and story I've posted shows, you can dodge successfully.
MiloMorai,
There is also a fuselage tank above the bomb bay/cannon bay.
-
Yes Karnak but someone mentioned flaming wings in AH.
-
I can't remember ever having a wing catch fire on my Mossie in AH. At least not visually.
It is always the fuselage.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Wow! That's some Great Uncle. When it comes to Blenheims and Mossies he's a bit of a legend to those who pay attention. Got a photo in one of my books of him boarding a Mossie as a matter of fact.
Great Uncle WingCo Hugh Edwards VC on the left and his navigator boarding a 105 Mossie in 1942
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Edwards.jpg)
Many thanks for the piccy!! I have seen this piccy in my copy of the Osprey Mossie Bomber book. I unfortunately never had the privelige of meeting him as he passed away when i was only 1 or 2 years old. He ultimately reached the rank of Air Commodore, was knighted, and was the Governor of Western Australia. Whenever I go to the Australian War Memorial and see his medals I always get a tear in my eye.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
163 vs mossie = mossie dead, I don't care how fast it is, the rocket is faster! :D
Depends... the B.35 was pressurised and could bomb from 40k... 40k at over 400mph takes some catching.
-
It would only have to avoid the rocket for a few minutes :D
-
"Imagine a HQ run with formations of mossies"
That is probably one reason why we do not have a bomber version in game.
I'd like to have a glass nose Mossie, though.
-C+
-
yea I meant 57mm touch of number dyslexiaeeeee
I used to be able to kill a column of tanks in one pass. Also deflection shots watching the bullet curl through the air to pop a tank in FA. Miss it...
-
A formation run, high up, 400 mph, and 4000 lbs per plane, droooool :p
-
How many mossies would it take with 4k cookies to kill HQ? What's current hardness for HQ in lbs?
-
We can have mossie bomber but NO FORMATIONS please:aok
-
Originally posted by 1K3
We can have mossie bomber but NO FORMATIONS please:aok
Why no formations? They did at times use formations and formations are a selectable option.
-
"They did at times use formations"
Really?
-C+
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Quite some time ago I posted my suggestions for a complete Spitfire lineup for Aces High. That post lead to vigorous debate and lots of suggestions by well informed members of this board and was successful beyond my hopes.
Mosquito FB.Mk VI Series ii: (Merlin 25 at +18lbs boost) Day and night fighter-bomber/intruder/long range fighter. First production aircraft flew February, 1943. Four 20mm Hispano Mk II cannon and four .303 inch Browning machine guns in the nose. Two 250lb or 500lb bombs in the rear bomb bay and two 250lb or 500lb bombs on wing racks, or four 60lb rockets under each wing, or one mine or depth charge under each wing and combinations of drop tanks and offensive weapons.
Note: This is the Mosquito we have in Aces High now.
This is interesting I cannot reach +18 boost with our version.I can get +9 and +14(wep) at sea level.
At 15000 ft I can get +9 and +16(wep)
Now this is getting interesting which i must ask is our version the
FB Mk VI HJ.679?
or FB Mk VI HX.809? I ask this because
The Mark VI had a strengthened wing for external loads and along with its standard fighter armament could carry two 250 lb bombs in the rear of the bomb bay and two 250 lb bombs under the wings, or eight wing-mounted rockets. Later up-engined versions could carry 500 lb bombs.
Now if it is the later can we assume this because it carries the 500 lb bomb ?
-
The gauges follow Merlin 21 parameters. The performance follows Merlin 25 with flame damper parameters. Essentially we have a Merlin 25 Mosquito Mk VI running at +18lbs boost on WEP.
-
that answers my question as to the +18 boost but not to what model we have modelled here I think we all need to now that first.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
The gauges follow Merlin 21 parameters. The performance follows Merlin 25 with flame damper parameters. Essentially we have a Merlin 25 Mosquito Mk VI running at +18lbs boost on WEP.
The performance does not follow merlin 25 perameters with flame dampeners at all.
where are u getting these statements from?
If its mark VI series II with the 500 lb in the bombay it most certainly is not modelled after the 21 merlins with dampeners.
please post these assumptions with data.
-
one mine or depth charge under each wing
I've seen this mentioned before in passing, but cant find any hard data for it. Can you point the way please?
Be nice to sow a minefield in front of a cv group.
-
Well, how about a B24 for that ?
-
Originally posted by Souless
The performance does not follow merlin 25 perameters with flame dampeners at all.
where are u getting these statements from?
If its mark VI series II with the 500 lb in the bombay it most certainly is not modelled after the 21 merlins with dampeners.
please post these assumptions with data.
Its speed matches the line labled as a Merlin 25 Mosquito with flame dampers on the chart I have in one of my books.
What makes you say it doesn't match the performance of a Merlin 25 Mossie with flame dampers?
-
Because Karnak if it is able to hold the 500 lb bomb that right there suggests its a later merlin 25.
Until we know exactly what model we are trying to figure out it is we can continue to debate the issue without end.
-
You assume it's any one model.
Look at all the other bastardized "generation 1" models this game has.
Don't expect to come to any conclusion. Look at the typhoon for example! Old 109s were mixed too. Old spits more so!
Don't expect it to be any "one" model. At the time that didn't seem to be HTCs criteria for coding aircraft into the game (no fault on their part, mind you, they just didn't focus on it like they do now).
-
Originally posted by Krusty
You assume it's any one model.
Look at all the other bastardized "generation 1" models this game has.
Don't expect to come to any conclusion. Look at the typhoon for example! Old 109s were mixed too. Old spits more so!
Don't expect it to be any "one" model. At the time that didn't seem to be HTCs criteria for coding aircraft into the game (no fault on their part, mind you, they just didn't focus on it like they do now).
I believe you have to have a base from which to make a standard krusty.
But there is a big difference from early merlin 25's and later merlin 25's.
But I digress at this point.
I have asked HTC to elaborate a bit on the issue to no avail.
-
The flight performance data and the weapons choices are not always from the same plane. See the old SpitIX for an example. Some strange version that had 50cals, bomb (or rockets?) and yet had the early 1942 flight performance.
I think it's incorrect to assume that they will match up, because they can be totally unrelated.
To ask which model we have, simply look at the flight performance. The weaponry is a side note. At least, that's what you have to do for "Generation 1" planes like the mossie.
-
Originally posted by Souless
Because Karnak if it is able to hold the 500 lb bomb that right there suggests its a later merlin 25.
Until we know exactly what model we are trying to figure out it is we can continue to debate the issue without end.
I don't see the conflict. It is a Merlin 25 Mossie VI with flame dampers.
Many such could cary 500lb bombs.
If it were a Merlin 21 Mossie it would top out at less than 320mph at sea level.
-
i see a great conflict later merlin 25's ran at +23 boost early ones +16
early ones held the 250lb bombs later ones the 500lber's.
You cant simply say its an FB Mk VI with flame dampeners.
As was mentioned earlier it is a "first generation bastardization"
if thats the case then it is a FB Mk VI with flame dampeners.
-
No point in arguing of the exact version. In the old game HTC was not very particular about their exact models and went for a some "representative" model to act as several at once. Hence the 1942 spit 9 with the loadout of a later spit 9.
These days HTC seems to produce a coherent and better defined versions. I'm sure that when the Mosquito undergo the revision to AHII standards, it will be modified accordingly (see 109s, spits and F4U examples).
In light of the topic of this thread, the argument needs to be what version of Mosquito VI should be modeled for a future lineup.
By the way, does anyone have the date in which DH switched the mossie VI merlins to 25s?
-
Souless,,
I've don't recall seen anything about Merlin 25s ever running at +16lbs boost. They are, as I recall, +18lbs boost or +23lbs boost on 150 octane. It has been a bit since I intesively studied this stuff though and I could be mixing up the Merlin 25 and Merlin 66 boost setting on 100 octane. This has nothing to do with 250 or 500lb bombs or flame dampers.
Only the early Mosquito VIs were limited to 250lb bombs and those, so far as I can tell, all had Merlin 21s or 23s and started the order process as B.Mk IVs or F.Mk IIs.
As to the flame dampers, after the initial runs they stopped putting flame dampers on as factory standard, but they were still put on Mosquito Mk VIs that were intended to operate at night. About 1/3rd had the dampers and the 2/3rd majority did not.
Bozon,
Right at the start. Some VIs came off the lines with Merlin 21s, some with Merlin 23s and some with Merlin 25s from the very beginning of production.
-
all my data comes from summer august 1943
-
Originally posted by Souless
all my data comes from summer august 1943
I mean, give us soem data. Something. There is a LOT of bad and misinformed stuff about the Mossie and I need to know where you are getting your info as it does not mesh with my best sources.
-
A.&A.E.E Boscomb Down
and
Dehaviland Aircraft Co.
I made a typo earlier I said plus 16 boost when it should have been +18
-
Originally posted by Furball
BTW, i see Souless and SpikesX have taken up using my avatar. If anyone else wants to, feel free :)
I join this cause. Free the Mossie and give us more of them! :)
-
Souless,
Here is how I understand it.
Series i: 250lb bombs, no rockets, Merlin 21, 23 or 25 engines with flame dampers.
Series ii: 250 or 500lb bombs, later rockets as well, some other detail changes, Merlin 25 engines some with, most without flame dampers.
+18lb boost vs +23lbs boost is just 100 octane vs 150 octane and minor engine mods in the same way the Spit LF.IX and XVI use Merlin 66s at +18lbs boost on 100 octane and +25lbs boost on 150 octane. Version of the Mossie isn't relevant other than having Merlin 25s.
-
I should also have mentioned that the Series i and Series ii entered service in 1943. The Series ii was only a month or two behind the Series i.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Souless,
Here is how I understand it.
Series i: 250lb bombs, no rockets, Merlin 21, 23 or 25 engines with flame dampers.
Series ii: 250 or 500lb bombs, later rockets as well, some other detail changes, Merlin 25 engines some with, most without flame dampers.
+18lb boost vs +23lbs boost is just 100 octane vs 150 octane and minor engine mods in the same way the Spit LF.IX and XVI use Merlin 66s at +18lbs boost on 100 octane and +25lbs boost on 150 octane. Version of the Mossie isn't relevant other than having Merlin 25s.
I agree thats how I understand it as well one thing I do want to point out concerning the version that I do believe is relevant.
Some versions had single ejector exhaust stubs while other versions had ducted saxaphone exhaust stubs.In all cases the single stubs performance was far better.
In any case I would take either just as long as they remove the exhaust dampener:aok
-
Hello again, gents.
Can someone suggest me some good reading about the Mossie? No rare books, please, it's already a pain to find the common ones, here in Italy... :(
Thanks. :)
-
Gianlupo,
is that technical or operational type books?
-
Technical, mostly, but I'd like to have even some info about Mossie's operations. Thank you. :)
-
Would think it would not be to much trouble to order from this place, http://www.crecy.co.uk/shop/product_info.php?products_id=87
A good list of books, http://www.mossie.org/books/Mosquito_books.php
Would suggest this book,
The Mosquito Manual (RAF Museum Series #6)
Author(s): Unknown
Publisher(s): Arms and Armour Press (UK), Hippocrene Books Inc. (USA)
ISBN: 0853683913 (UK), 0882544462 (USA)
Date Published: 1977
Format: Hardback, 351 pages.
Notes: Technical specs, no narrative. Reprinted in 1988 by Aston Publications, ISBN 0946627320.
Available from Amazon.co.uk or Amazon.com
-
Thank you very much, Milo, plenty of books to satisfy my thirst of knowledge! :)
-
Did you order any books Gian?
-
I will join the MA when we have better mossies. I guess I have a long time to wait.:mad:
I'm all for more mossies!:aok
-
IMHO the best book on the Mosquito is "Mosquito" by Sharp&Bowyer (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mosquito-C-Martin-Sharp/dp/0947554416).
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Souless,
Here is how I understand it.
Series i: 250lb bombs, no rockets, Merlin 21, 23 or 25 engines with flame dampers.
Series ii: 250 or 500lb bombs, later rockets as well, some other detail changes, Merlin 25 engines some with, most without flame dampers.
+18lb boost vs +23lbs boost is just 100 octane vs 150 octane and minor engine mods in the same way the Spit LF.IX and XVI use Merlin 66s at +18lbs boost on 100 octane and +25lbs boost on 150 octane. Version of the Mossie isn't relevant other than having Merlin 25s.
All batch 2 could carry rockets, and ALL were delivered minus flame dampers.
Flame dampers could be fitted at squadron level when/as required (night missions), much like clipped tips for the Spits.
All we need for the FB VI is the C of G fixed and the dampers removed, there's no night now anyway.
-
:aok :aok
Originally posted by Karnak
Yes, Hugh Edwards is a name I have seen repeatedly in my Mossie studies and always in a positive light.
True enough, but does anyone recall the name W/C Russell Bannock DSO, DFC and Bar (RCAF Ret'd) of 418 Squadron RCAF (http://www.ualberta.ca/EDMONTON/CONTRIB/airmuseum/aam418.html)?
:aok
-
I remember how disappointed I was that there was no glass-nosed Mossie when I started AH. We used to have a ball with them in WB, even used them as a sub for the Droopsnoot P-38J on occasion.
Theres definitely a sense of sphincter-puckery when you are cruising at 30,000 feet on a radar killing run and spot a 262 looking for you in a plane with no guns...
-
SAVE THE MOSSIE
-
You just have to have another type of mossie for escort :D
Or a P51...
-
Normal escorts for Mosquito VIs were P-51s or other Mosquito VIs.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Normal escorts for Mosquito VIs were P-51s or other Mosquito VIs.
The problem was that the mossie was faster than the escorts, especially when the 51s were carrying DT and required to fly economically.
-
Originally posted by bozon
The problem was that the mossie was faster than the escorts, especially when the 51s were carrying DT and required to fly economically.
You sure about that?
I remember seeing a 51 data sheet that had the 51 doing ~400mph with drop tanks with still enough range to escort the Mossies.
Mossies did not fly full time 'gung ho'.
-
MiloMorai,
That is at a higher altitude than Mosquito VIs operated. That said, I've never heard that P-51s had a problem escorting Mosquito VIs. Worst case I can see is the P-51s have to run at a higher setting than their normal cruise.
Spitfires on the other hand had a hard time escorting Mosquitoes. One Spitfire pilot told me that the dumbest mission he ever flew was escorting Mosquitoes. He said the Spitfires had to fly at full throttle to keep up with the Mosquitoes. He flew Mk Vs, Mk IXs and Mk XIVs, but I am not sure which he did the Mosquito escort mission in. I got the impression it was in a Mk IX.
-
mossie needs to be fixed ffs get er done HTC
-
OK, I don't remember where I read about other escort stories. I found only this one, but here it was a PR XVI model:
The Mosquito met the fighter escort as planned; but now heavily loaded with l,000 gallons of fuel, flew at a severe speed disadvantage. Geary attempted to maintain economical cruising speed but outpaced the P-51s and was forced to throttle-back to continue flying formation with them. The Mustangs had long-range drop tanks and were also fully loaded. Once involved with enemy action, they would jettison their tanks, and therefore, were attempting to conserve and obtain maximum range from their fuel supply. This exacerbated the problem. It was a very-long flight to the Polish border, and on three occasions Geary throttled-back and did not receive the mileage planned.
Its the second story on:
http://www.mossie.org/stories/Norman_Malayney_2.htm
-
i actually have read some stories of p51s having to use thier full maximum cruise setting as the mossies would be slowly slipping ahead of em. The mosquitos had to run on a lower rpm setting as to stay in tune with them but as soon as the drop tanks where of the pony could slide ahead. i for one think they mossie is underpowerd in ah2 and a few weeks ago i experienced the death stall bug thing it was quite anooying. I do think mossie formations would be pushing it alittle considering that that would require a completelty new plane. i think a little update is all thats in order
-
I'm having internet installed on tuesday.:) Can't wait to have some mossie fun, it's been almost 2 years.
-
<
> Thrila!!! We miss you, man!:(
-
evenhaim,
The Mosquito VI should not, of course, have formations.
The formation question only comes into it about the pure bomber versions like the IV, IX and XVI.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
evenhaim,
The Mosquito VI should not, of course, have formations.
The formation question only comes into it about the pure bomber versions like the IV, IX and XVI.
ya lol sorry shoulda cleared that up, meant that mossie bombers shouldny have formations enabled just my opnion i guess:aok
-
Fix it properly ffs
enough said
-
Mosquito in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZ-a8U1QWUw
-
Just recently I found something supporting HTC's climb rate for the Mossie.
It had always been higher than anything I'd seen data for. Much, much higher.
But in my meltdown "debate" with Viking I came across the tactical trials of the Mosquito VI's on http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/. The concusion was that it really wasn't useful in the pure fighter role, but at the end it had a foot note of the tests done after the fact on the Merlin 25 Mosquito VI:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito-VI-tactical.pdf
6. The climb has also improved considerable at full power so that the Mosquito can pull up from low level into cloud 2,000 ft. about it in less than 30 secnds from fast cruising. Near the ground the rate was approximatedly 3,800 ft. per minute in a steady climb.
It also mentions that it would outrun a Spitfire XII.
-
OK guys. Your dive bombing with a mossie, a 110, and A-20...ect and all of a sudden a 109 or spit is on you. You cant outturn it and you cant outrun it. Whats the plan?..............Thanks......... ...Rich
-
Bf110 or A-20, hot pilot **** or die.
Mosquito, dive and run, hot pilot **** or die.
Mossie dives VERY well and I've outrun many a Spit or Bf109 in AH.
If you read that tactical trial I linked you'll see that the Merlin 25 Mosquito FB.Mk VI was able to outrun a Spitfire Mk XII when the Mosquito was at 250mph and low level and the Spitfire had done a short dive if the Mosquito crew saw the Spitfire by 1000 yards out. The Mosquito would be able to accelerate to a speed faster than the Spitfire before the Spitfire gained effective firing range.
-
i just watched a documentry about the mosie on Tv got it on a dvd if anyone is intrsted i guess i could upload it to my website.if i can figure out how too
got some good origional footage on it
-
please, by all means :aok
-
This tv program was on the other night
mean machines of war
The Mosquito
i have shrunk the film down alot so people can see it it was over 800meg but now is about 130meg
click link to watch it
http://www.rogerdee.co.uk/films/mossie dvd - Movie 01.wmv
its about 45 minutes long including the adverts:lol
hope u enjoy
-
It just occurred to me, that if they're going to the trouble of updating the mossie's bugs then they'd probably updating the graphics and adding a few extra Marks?
Is that a reasonable expectation??
Tks for the link Roger.
Ciao
-
FTJR,
I'd be surprised if that were the case. Pleasantly surprised, but surprised.
My bet is the CoG issue is fixed.
-
Why wouldn't they do a graphic update? thats been SOP since version 2.
I'll be happy if they just give us the MKVI, fixed, with the AH2 graph update. Thats all I want, anything past that is gravy.
-
Squire,
I am sure they will eventually, but I don't think this is the patch for it.
I am hoping I'm wrong though. :p
-
Well, considering the time new version's taking.... I won't be surprised if we get a completely redone Mossie. :)
-
Originally posted by Gianlupo
Well, considering the time new version's taking.... I won't be surprised if we get a completely redone Mossie. :)
That would be as sweet as your avatar. :)
-
Lol, thanks! But say thank you to Sketch, he sent it to me. ;)
-
If anyone remembers the pic I posted that I was left by a relative who was in the Banff Strike Wing, of the Molins firing at a ship. That streaking shell in the bottom centre flying towards the target is good enough reason to have the MKXVIII. Slobber. As long as it was modeled well.
Anyway, here's one of my original and extremely rare pics depicting the above mentioned. The damage being done to this German ship is self evident. Bear in mind that there being so few Tsetse Mossies, not a great number of pictures of this type seem to be in circulation.
(http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/9664/norway13fu7.th.jpg) (http://img443.imageshack.us/my.php?image=norway13fu7.jpg)
-
Thanks for the picture. I'd love to see an FB.Mk XVIII too, but I don't think it'll happen.
I actually had a dream about the Mossie in AH yesterday. I dreamed the new version was released and the Mossie had some changes, its CoG bug was fixed, the flame dampers were gone and it topped out at 344mph at sea level, the graphic was slightly updated to show the exhaust stubsl. I hadn't tested the climb yet to see if it hit the 3,800fpm claimed by the RAF. It did still catch fire really easily though.
-
Your nuts I say!
:D
-
KD303 - can you PM me please?
Thanks.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Normal escorts for Mosquito VIs were P-51s or other Mosquito VIs.
The Banff and Dalachy Strike wings used the services of 315 Squadron RAF (Polish) Mustang IIIs from November 1944. Based at Peterhead, another local airfield, they used drop tanks and carried out long range escort duty to Norway.
I've always been lucky enough to have lived a few miles from some historic airbases, such as Banff and Dallachy as well as Lossiemouth (from where the Damnbusters flew their Tirpitz missions), Dyce where a Ju88 night fighter crew defected with the lichtenstein radar (a famous incident) and earlier Drem and Turnhouse from where Spitfires from both bases were responsible for bringing the first German aircraft down over British soil in WWII in 1939.