Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Motherland on June 14, 2008, 11:51:16 PM
-
1; WGr. 21cm rockets on the Bf.109G2.
(http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t5/AK_Comrade/109G1rockets.jpg)
2; Mk108 30mm cannon for the Bf.109G6. This 109G6/U4 R6 was photographed in the summer of 1943, which I believe matches up with the production period of our G6.
(http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t5/AK_Comrade/109G6U4R6.jpg)
-
We have an early Bf109G-6, hence the lack of a 30mm option. The 30mm cannon was carried by very few Bf109G-6s. If you want a Bf109G with the 30mm cannon, take the G-14.
-
IIRC, the 109G6 had a tater a long time ago
-
IIRC, the 109G6 had a tater a long time ago
+1 I also believe to be correct.
-
The G6 we had before the 109 updates was a late model with a galland hood, I believe. This was before we got the G14. The 109G6 was given the 30mm option to be competitive.
Definitely, a LOT of G-6s had the Mk.108, and 1/3 of them had this gun, but that's counting the many many later models of G-6. What we have here is the early style with the early canopy, and the early weapons package to go with it. This way we can have a 109G in a 1943 scenario use without having the un-representative 30mm gun option.
Now that we have 200 rds for the nose gun, too, there's not much to complain about on the G-6!
P.S. I thought the G-2 already had WGr 21s
-
IIRC, the 109G6 had a tater a long time ago
Yes, but when the Bf109s were redone that option was removed as it is inappropriate to the version of Bf109G-6 we have. Just like the Spitfire Mk IX lost its .50 cal option.
-
Here we go again with the argument that it's better to have less aircraft variety instead of more. :uhoh
-
P.S. I thought the G-2 already had WGr 21s
Nope. Only gondolas for the G2.
In case you guys haven't noticed, the Bf.109G6/U4 R6 pictured is an early model with the old heavily framed style canopy and a short rudder, not a late model.
According to (link) (http://www.heinzknokewebsite.com/My-Site/The_planes.htm), "On July 28, 1943 Heinz Knoke uses a brand new aircraft with a gun of 30mm firing in the axis. It's a Bf 109 G-6/U4.".... I don't remember when the G6 was first put in to use, but July is pretty early.
-
We have an early Bf109G-6, hence the lack of a 30mm option. The 30mm cannon was carried by very few Bf109G-6s. If you want a Bf109G with the 30mm cannon, take the G-14.
Do you have any historical evidence to support the assertion that few 109G-6s had the Mk 108? Prien and Rodeike state unequivocally in their definitive book "Bf 109 F, G & K series" that many 109G-6s had the Mk108 starting in summer of 43.
-
Do you have any historical evidence to support the assertion that few 109G-6s had the Mk 108? Prien and Rodeike state unequivocally in their definitive book "Bf 109 F, G & K series" that many 109G-6s had the Mk108 starting in summer of 43.
Few early Bf109G-6s. About one third carried it, but not of the early ones. Very few of those carried it at all.
So, as I understand it, HTC did not give it as an option so as to prevent the 30mm cannon from being common in setups where it should be almost non-existent. Perhaps they'll add it later as a perk option for the Bf109G-6 so that it can be controlled.
-
Or add a G6/AS.
-
If that were true, why did they not take out the 3 gun package from the La when they remodeled it?
I don't think, especially with the 200 round 20mm option we have now for the G6, that the 30mm on it will become all that common. IMO, and the opinions of other Messerschmitt sticks, in my squad at least, the 20mm is preferable to the 30mm for fighters, and the R6 package for buffs. I mainly want the 30mm for high altitude mid war scenarios where the G14 is not available and the R6 package just degrades performance too much.
-
Or add a G6/AS.
I second that.
-
If that were true, why did they not take out the 3 gun package from the La when they remodeled it?
I don't think, especially with the 200 round 20mm option we have now for the G6, that the 30mm on it will become all that common. IMO, and the opinions of other Messerschmitt sticks, in my squad at least, the 20mm is preferable to the 30mm for fighters, and the R6 package for buffs. I mainly want the 30mm for high altitude mid war scenarios where the G14 is not available and the R6 package just degrades performance too much.
That's interesting, I'd rather have the 3x20mm for buffs and 30mm with no gondolas for fighters.
-
Motherland, he's right. VERY few (we're talking about 5% or less?) early model 109Gs had these Mk103 hub guns.
Somebody went through and posted the production numbers several times over the years. Look for the 109 remodeling discussion thread (might also be mixed in the spit remodeling discussion thread!).
1/3 of the TOTAL had it, but by and far the vast majority of them were later models, unlike the version HTC modeled in AH.
P.S. LA7s have nothing to do with it ;)
-
P.S. LA7s have nothing to do with it ;)
No, they have everything to do with it because they prove a double standard. Let me spell it out. If the La-7 has different weapon loadouts to represent early and later versions, then the same should go for other aircraft where applicable.
-
Not so. Consider:
The 109K-4 was introduced into the game as a G-10 with a 20mm option and gondolas. It was a K-4 in every way performance-wise, and the only reason it was called the G-10 is to add 2 planes into the game at once, because there wasn't much of a representative lineup.
This was a way of beefing up the planeset and the options when there were still only a few of them.
You'll notice that as the planeset is flushed out, the inaccuracies are remedied.
Further, consider:
The VVS planeset has been stagnating for a while. We've just received 2 USAF aircraft used in large numbers by the VVS (P-39s) but on the whole you have LA5/7 and Yak9T/U. That's really only 2 planes with 2 variants each.
As soon as we start getting early yags, laggs, migs, whatever, and as soon as the planeset can hold its own, the 3-gun option will probably be revisited.
P.S. Don't discount it as a perked ord option, like the c-hog is intended to be. They may have left it in for a reason.
-
AHs G-6 has features that suggest it being from early production (high antenna mast and the lack of D/F) and it also has glass armor in place of the steel armor which suggests that it's a mid production aircraft. Most of the later production aircraft had the Revi 16B gunsight while the early production aircraft had the gunsight that is on AH G-6 right now, the Revi C/12D. Although many G-6s that were produced as late as mid-44 still had the C/12D sight and the same canopy that is featured in AH (can be seen in many G-6s that went to Finland, for example). Glass armor was added as a number of players (me included) wished its inclusion as we saw the preview shots that featured the steel armor.
Copy-pasting D/F-loop antenna's 3d-model from G-14 to G-6 and clipping its radio mast a bit would essentially make it an accurate representation of a mid-production G-6. Of course one could argue that changing the Glass armor back to steel armor would then make it an accurate early-production plane, but I have to ask...what purpose exactly would that serve? Right now we have a nice selection of all the major mass-produced canopy-variations which adds nice variety. G-6 was the most produced variant of the BF 109. Why should it be only restricted to depict the earliest model possible? Saying that 30mm gets abused in events doesn't really fly as long as we have P-51s with 4 .50s and 3xB-20 La-7s for example. There should rather be efforts for adding tools for CMs to define the available loadouts in events than for removal of loadouts that actually saw a lot of use. Lets think about a re-run of The Ruhr-scenario for example without the MK-108 option. By late summer of '43 the cannons were available. Again, there were plenty of G-6s flying with 30mm cannons AND featuring the exact same canopy that AH's G-6 already has (Canopy is the only feature that changed in production that matters AH-wise.). So, as it really isn't in HTC's interest to add 5 different G-6 subvariants they chose the one we have now. Weather it has the shorter antenna mast/d/f-loop or not shouldn't really matter...hell, it doesn't have a pitot tube either and since last version it started having a retractable tail wheel!
I think the reason why the MK-108 was removed in the first place was because Wotan suggested it when pyro asked about the 109-load outs and pyro went ahead with it. I disagree with the decision for the above reasons. Since it is removed I doubt it will be re-introduced anytime soon unfortunately.