Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Nath-BDP on October 27, 2000, 02:35:00 PM
-
This is from "Focke-Wulfe Ta 152: The Story of the Luftwaffe's late-war high-altitude fighter" by Deitmar Harmann.
On page 101 there is this picture with caption:
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/bs/Ta152h1.jpg)
The Werknummer is 150 168.
And on page 114 is the last part of the list of aircraft produced or canceled at Cottbus here I found the Werknummer for 'Green 9'.
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/bs/Cottbusproduction.jpg)
Note: it says last combat flight by Willi Reschke.
And on to the combat report on Pages 104-105:
"On 24 April 1945, during the Battle of Berlin, there were engagements with Yak9s. Once again the Stabbschwarm put up three pairs of fighters. These accompanied II Gruppe, which carried out low-level attacks against Russian positions. Since there was no contact with enemy aircraft, the Stabbschwarm was ordered to reconnoiter over Berlin. There was an encounter with Yak 9s in poor visibility. In the ensuing dogfight the Stabbschwarm lost Hptm. Hermann Stahl and his Ta 152. Four Yak9s were shot down, two by Obfw. Willi Reschke and two by Obfw. Walter Loos (Green 4). The dissarray in command of the last days of the war makes it impossible to date the last mission with certainty, but it was probably on 30 April 1945. On that day walter Loos shot down another Yak-9. The Ta 152 had shot down 10 enemy aircraft and lost 2. The last transfer of the Stabbschwarm was to Leck in Schleswig-Holstein. All remaining Ta 152s were handed over to the British. While other Ta 152s were scrapped, "Green 9" (WNr. 150 168) was spared and was flown to England in the bely of an Ar 232."
"This Ta 152 was last flown by Willi Reschke. The Ta 152, now designated Air Min 11, was tested by famous test pilot Eric Brown during a flight from Farnborough to Brize Norton...
... The chapter on the operational career of the Ta 152 ends with a sentence by Willi Reschke. "The Ta 152 (H-1 duh) was my life insurance in the last days of the war."
Ok so the Werknummer 150 168 aircraft was definatly in service by JG 301 in the closing weeks of April and Willi Reschke shot down 2 Yak 9s over Berlin in this aircraft on 24 April.
From "Luftwaffe Aircraft in Profile"
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/bs/Green91.jpg)
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/bs/Green9.jpg)
-
U Da Man!
-
Great stuff Nath.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
That's all you have to do. SHOW the info.
Now all you would need to dop is convince Pyro the info is good and wah-luh!
-Westy
p.s what did he shoot with. I don't see a single gun on that aircraft. And they didn't remove the armament from captured aircraft at the end of the war.
[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 10-27-2000).]
-
They must have removed the armament before this photo was taken at Farnbourough, but you can see a small hole in the wingroot leading edges--the Ta 152 had 2x 20mm in the wingroots and 1 Mk 108 in Motorkannon installation.
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
They must have removed the armament before this photo was taken at Farnbourough, but you can see a small hole in the wingroot leading edges--the Ta 152 had 2x 20mm in the wingroots and 1 Mk 108 in Motorkannon installation.
Can you prove your proof is really proof?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
- Jig
-
Go away.
-
Nice work, seriously (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Now you have convinced me that potentially the second to last Ta152, ever built (42 out of 43 if I remember right), saw action in the last nine days of the war, and it was a H1.
But did it have both MW50 and GM1?
Out of the very same book, on page 91, second column, second sentence.
"It is not known whether later Ta-152H-1's, with MW50 or GM1 power boost were flown in action, and former pilots are also unable to confirm this". When the author is referencing the "later" aircraft, he means the production aircraft and not the prototype aircraft.
Also lets look at the last deliveries of the Ta152's. From page 109, concerning delivered aircraft.
"Eighteen more Ta152H-O's were accepted in December 1944". <snip> "Twenty more Ta152H were accepted in January 1945 and the last three in February. After this production at Cottbus ended for good due to missing components and relocation measures."
Note he doesn't say if the last 23 delivered were either H-0's or H-1's, and lets not forget that only 43 total were built.
"Now on 16 January 1945 Neuhausen, was attacked by approximately forty Lightnings and Mustangs, destroying fourteen brand new Ta-152H and damaging another." These were the aircraft delivered in January that were waiting to be picked up by JG301. So of the 20 aircraft delivered in January, 14 were destroyed and another heavily damaged. So only 6 of these aircraft were actually delivered to the combat unit.
So giving you the benefit of the doubt, there were at best 9 Ta152-H1's that saw service with JG301. And this is unconfirmed.
Most likely only the last 3 aircraft delivered in February were H1's.
To support this notice that the only planes identified in the book as H1's in photo's were were werk #'s 167 (p.112), 168 (p.118), and 169 (p.116). And werk # 169, when captured was not in a flyable condition missing a propellor and other equipment(p.116).
All other captured 152's in the book are identified as H0's.
Also notice that the last delivery of 20 aircraft are werk numbers up thru 040, and then the last 3 jumped up to number 167-169, potentially indicating the point where the production switched from H0's to H1's. But that admittedly, is my own guess given the data available.
So in conclusion, I was wrong. I apologize. Congratulations on your research and digging thru these books.
Potentially up to 9, but most likely only 3, Ta152-H1's were delivered to JG/301. But at least one saw combat service during the last nine days of the war.
Now, my last question for you Nath and the rest of the Luftwaffe contingent. Under your own definition, does this meet either of the typical two conditions we look at in Aces High. "Produced in significant numbers?" and or "Did it ever see combat?".
I personally will accept you guys decision either way. But be careful, because whichever way you decide, I plan to remember for the future when you start debating this same issue for other aircraft.
So whats your answer?
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Well it saw combat, unlike the P51H.
-
Dont you think those bombed planes too "saw" some combat (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Originally posted by Vermillion:
I personally will accept you guys decision either way. But be careful, because whichever way you decide, I plan to remember for the future when you start debating this same issue for other aircraft.
So whats your answer?
Why do I get the feeling that Verm is stretched way up on his toes with a 12 pound sledge at full extension and just waiting to let the hammer drop?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
btw Verm just FYI the MW 50 and GM1 systems were 169 kg and the extra Fuel Injection system on the H-1 was 296 kg... H-0 was much lighter.
H-0 would be nice even without Mw50/gm1
-
P51H did fly in the Pacific theater in WWII.With 555 produced and in combat service,i think its a winner (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Dog out...
-
Sorry, the P51H never saw any combat in any war. -P51 in action.
-
In captain Eric Browns book Wings of The Luftwaffe,he stats that on his flight in the Ta 152 he was unable to test the boost systems for either GM-1 or WM50 do to the fact that they did not have eny on hand at their test establishment,In other words this aircraft "green 9" did have those systems on board.
Also some of my reference sources state that a total of around 170 Ta-152 were built ,I assume this was for all types,and if these aircraft were built and were in part interdicted do to combat prior to their arrival at their intended combat unit does this not qualify as combat?
Brady
-
"I personally will accept you guys decision either way."
Sorry Verm. I don't. The P-51H was deployed.
The P-51H counts in my book. Just as the DO-335 would count in my eyes. It never saw combat either but as far as I am aware it was under production - so what if the P-51H, F7F and F8F had the "deployed status" advantage over it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-Westy (feeling............... PERKY!)
-
brady said:
>...and if these aircraft were built and were in part interdicted do to combat prior to their arrival at their intended combat unit does this not qualify as combat?
> Brady
and Staga said:
> Dont you think those bombed planes too "saw" some combat
So use in a combat zone by at least one airframe, or damage or delay caused by enemy action make a plane a valid choice?
Soon a list of aircraft that fit that "rule set" :-)
------------------
M.C.202
Dino in Reno
-
This whole concept is based on "if it did not fly in combat (as I define combat) before the end of WWII, it does not belong in this game".
If you use the "must have historicaly flown combat", will you also live with the historic use ratio of types?
Out of all fighter action in late 1945, what was the % of Ta 152 flights? That would give, say 10 flights a year total for a Ta 152 to be split between all players in AH?
Over Germany, what % of flights were in the latest new and improved models in historic use? I hope you like flying a well used Bf109G or FW190.
How about living with the historic fuel and spare parts supply?
Once we leave history behind in ANY way, then the question of "game balance" is the most important issue.
Part of this is the FACT the the Allies held back on rushing new types to the front, as there was NO NEED to do so in real history.
Allowing the use of an aircraft that had less affect on the war than bad luck in the landing pattern did is BALANCED by allowing the use of mass produced aircraft that had been held back for historic reasons.
It's a games theory thing. That's why the U.S. does not have the A-Bomb as a standard load-out. Same reason the B-29 is not a mid '44 standard bird in the game. Or the B-36 as a mid '45 pick.
I would like to see early war birds, but if the "what if" stuff is allowed, it should work for all sides.
I would love to see a post Jan '45 "Uber Bird" area, with ALL the birds that had metal cut before the end of '45. But I don't think it would be anything but a game. Quake with real names. Nothing to do with WWII.
------------------
M.C.202
Dino in Reno
-
Brady, there were less than 50 production Ta152 of all makes and models produced, and around half of those were lost to landing accidents or ground attack by allied fighters. Ask Nath if you don't believe me. We can produce all the werk numbers even.
There were some additional prototypes, but even most of those were older 190 models adapted to test the new equipment. I would estimate maybe 30 all told without looking.
So even if you count prototypes, its around 75-80, and thats probably a little on the high side.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Birds that the O.K. to use by the standards set by others earler.
Ambrosini S.A. 207 Three used by Italy.
Reggiane 2005 48 built, used in combat
Macchi MC 206 Demolished by bombing
XB-40 Tested in combat
Meteor I and III Used in a combat zone, with losses in action
F7F used in a combat zone, losses due to shipping and training losses
P-51H used in a combat zone, losses due to shipping and training losses
Want more?
------------------
M.C.202
Dino in Reno
-
I see your point gentleman,and please correct me if I am wrong but is not the eventual/probable inclusion of the Ta-152H-1 only as a "Perk" plane and not as part of the normal plane set?
Really the Dora 9 would be a far more balanced choice for adoption,and would certainly meat your criteria.(although a couple of the Italian plane in the above list got me a drooling (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) )
Brady
-
Nath your right, the H0 would be nice to have as long as you kept it in its environment. Similar to both the P38 and P47 it would rock at higher altitudes, but suffer down low.
As I have said before, performancewise, I think you could actually add a H0 to the current planeset without it being a "perk", and It wouldn't be unbalancing either.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Brady said:
> I see your point gentleman,and please correct me if I am wrong but is not the
> eventual/probable inclusion of the Ta-152H-1 only as a "Perk" plane and not as part
> of the normal plane set?
Yep, but there was a rough protest of the P-51H as a perk set plane. My problem is
not adding the Ta 152 as a perk, but in wanting to add it, and keep out aircraft
that would even the field.
> Really the Dora 9 would be a far more balanced choice for adoption,and would certainly meat your criteria.
> (although a couple of the Italian plane in the above list got me a drooling )
> Brady
The Dora is a real choice for a '45 plane set. I would not find falt in that.
The small number built of some of the Italian birds is a real problem. I would love to see
some of them, but they were just not enough of them built. :-(
A dream arena would be for birds that did not get to fly in heavy use (or at all), rotating in six month sets.
P-40Q, Ta 154, F7F, Ta152, M.B.5, Vampire, P-80, He162, He 100, Go229, B-36,
B-35, S.A.I.403, S.A.I. S.S.4, Piaggio 109..... Early war, mid war,
late war, all of them and lots of fun.
------------------
M.C.202
Dino in Reno
[This message has been edited by M.C.202 (edited 10-28-2000).]
-
Yes it's the dream of the little boy in me,you know the one who is all kinds of excited to get off work and race home to hop in the "dream machine".I feel your pain Dino i would like to see some of the Italian planes u mentioned, the "Centauro" Is a favorite of mine.
I would also like to think that some of the other "exotic" planes would be available in the "Perk" plane set:
Ar 234
Me 163
He 162(i have a couple sources that say that they did fly them operationally)
Baka (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Brady
-
More later. this is turning into a really good discussion. But here's some info on TWO P-80A's the USAAF used in Italy 1944-45:
"Ser #'s 44-83028 and 44-83029 were shipped to the Mediterranean. They actually flew some operational sorties, but they never encountered any enemy aircraft. Both of them fortunately managed to survive their tour of duty in Europe, but one of them crashed on August 2, 1945 after returning to the USA. The other one ended its useful life as a pilotless drone."
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-Westy
-
The same old tired arguments... "here's why my plane should be in the game, and yours shouldn't... blah blah blah." Give it a rest Nath.
The P-51H and the Ta-152H are contemporaries (and the F8F for that matter)... they all went into production in early 1945. The only difference is that the Luftwaffe was *so* desparate that they sent aircraft immediately to groups for use in combat without familiarization training.
Accept the facts... these aircraft are all contemporaries, were all produced in relatively small numbers prior to the end of the war, and were all statistically insignificant as a percentage of the aircraft produced. They should either be modeled as contemporaries (because the community is interested in fulfilling some "what if?" dreams) regardless of which saw combat and which didn't; or, they should all be excluded as aircraft that don't meet the standard of being produced in numbers and not having any impact.
Anything else is bias of wanting "my planes" and the exclusion of "the other guy's planes" and nothing more.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
[This message has been edited by SnakeEyes (edited 10-28-2000).]
-
Sorry SnakeEyes, P51H never saw combat thus it shouldn't be in AH.
Maybe the US would have put the P51H into action if they knew that it would be under critasism by virtual Luftwaffes to be accepted into a game. : )
Btw the Ta 152 began production in late 44.
Would you like some of the REAL LW stuff that was produced but never saw action in WW2?
Ruhstall-Kramer X4(saw limited action against B17s and B24s in prototype stage)
Me 109K-14(debatable if it saw action or not)
He 177
He 162
blah, blah, blah...
-
I think your last comment sums up what I think about your opinion.
blah blah blah
All you are expressing is a bias of wanting "my planes" and the exclusion of "the other guy's planes." Period.
My prediction: If the Ta152 or similar aircraft are modeled, you can bet you'll be seeing P-51Hs, F8Fs, P-47Ms, etc., no matter how much you'd like to create a situation of relative inequity.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
Nope, I along with several other people beleive that having a plane that saw NO COMBAT in World War II in Aces High is ludacris.
-
just FYI Snakeeye, this thread was started to prove that there was a H-1 that saw combat because Verm said there wasn't, not about P51Hs.
-
so did it or not ?
...too tired to read all those tiny little alphabets... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Help me out hear people,their were other Ta-152 equipped units were their not?If memory serves they were assigned to some Me 262 units as defensive fighters to protect them while taking off and landing.
Also my reference books show between 150 and 170 of them were produced.
Also the He 177 saw a considerable amount of service in the west and the east,and the later a-5 variant was almost "BUG" free.
Another of my books states that the Ta-154 was used in combat by a couple different night fighter units in late 44.
Lastly numbers produced is really a relative figure.Signafant numbers for Japan would be a preproduction batch in the US.
Brady
-
A grand sum total of 3 did.
-
Thats 3 more than the P-51H. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
I'm having all kinds of problems connecting to the 'Net right now, apparently my ISP is doing maintenance... but hopefully this will get through:
See pages 105 and 114 of Dietmar Harmann's Ta-152 book. On page 105 it states that Green 9 (Work # 150 168) was last flown by Willi Reschke. While it doesn't state the work # earlier in the page it states that on April 24th Willi shot down 2 Yak-9s. It then states that, "This Ta 152 was last flown by Willi Reschke. The Ta 152 H-1, now designated Air Min 11, was tested by ... Eric Brown... " Moreover, it goes on to state that "the British Experts did not succeed in evaluating 150 168's performance with GM-1 and MW-50."
Based on that, I'd say that the H-1 did fly combat, and that it did indeed score at least 2 kills.
Of course, that is assuming that 150 168 really was an H-1. But it is certainly strong evidence.
You see Nath, some people actually can be intellectually honest.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
huh?
What did you just do? Write a summary of my original post?
WTG!
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 10-28-2000).]
-
Nah, just saw some pictures where you mentioned that the caption states it was an H-1. Didn't really read anything, as the scans were larger than 1024x768 (hate that). Kinda funny actually... in any event, I'd have to say I pretty much agree with you that it saw combat.
The later commentary seemed to imply that the H-1 mighta woulda coulda sorta flew combat... frankly, I think Harmann's info is pretty straightforward... it did. The only thing that would disprove this is information that 150 168 wasn't a Ta-152H1 (which might explain the failure to test the MW50 and GM1).
The other reason I didn't read the scans in detail is that I don't really care whether the aircraft saw combat or not... I want them all... Do335, F7F, P61, F8F, Ta152, P47M, P51H, Ar234, you name it... if the aircraft was developed during the era, that's really all that matters to me. Hell, the first P-51H production model flew on February 3, 1945... more than enough time to see combat if the US had followed the "holy toejam we gonna lose the war, send it to the front lines now" approach of the Luftwaffe. That's good enough for me, and I suspect it will be good enough for anyone at HTC who considers modeling these latewar a/c. And the same holds true for the following:
Do335 - 40 built, first prototype flew October 1943.
P-47M - 162 built (from memory), and these did see combat in the last two or three months of the war with the 56th FG.
F7F-1 - 34 built, delivery beginning April 1944. F7F-2N - 30 built, 1944. F7F-3 - 189 built prior to VJ-Day.
F8F-1 - 765 built out of original contract for 2,023. Production deliveries began February 1945. Began equipping VF-19 on May 21, 1945. On CVs on the way to Japan on VJ-Day.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
[This message has been edited by SnakeEyes (edited 10-29-2000).]
-
As I posted earlier, the Ta-152 "green 9" flown by Eric Brown was not tested with MW50 or GM-1 because hey did not have either on hand at the test establishment,it say's so in his book Wing of the Luftwaffe. in other words the plane had these systems on board,they just did not have the juice for them.
Brady
Are u sure their were not some serving with JV 44?
-
brady said:
> Yes it's the dream of the little boy in me,you know the one who is all kinds of
> excited to get off work and race home to hop in the "dream machine".I feel your pain Dino
> I would like to see some of the Italian planes u mentioned, the "Centauro" Is a favorite of mine.
> I would also like to think that some of the other "exotic" planes would be available in the "Perk" plane set:
Ar 234
Me 163
He 162(i have a couple sources that say that they did fly them operationally)
Baka
> Brady
Brady, I think that you and I, and Snakeyes and bunch of others would love a "what if" arena. Not as our regular meal, but as dessert.
How about a '41 to mid '43 game with all the early oddballs... I'd love to take an S.A.I.
S.S.4 or Piaggio P.119 up against bombers, or shipping for that matter. Or a S.A.I. 207 or
403 for some real high speed dive hit & run action, 580+mph in tests. Not bad for 750hp
in a 5,324 lb (loaded) wooden airplane :-)
The FIAT G55 is one that I feel is ok for full release, not uber but a style of it's own.
------------------
M.C.202
Dino in Reno
-
I, personally, am not a fan of early/mid-war oddballs... but I can respect the fact that others might want 'em.
I'm a latewar uberdweebie lover. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
Yes, yes ,yes to them all (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif),if your going to dream go all they way (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)!
I like the idea of early and late war their are some great planes and possibilities their.
I would love to see another plane added for Italy.
G.55
Z.1018
P.108B
Brady
-
Anyone have some scans of the Italian fighters being talked about? I'd love to see them!!
-Westy
-
Accept the facts... these aircraft are all contemporaries, were all produced in relatively small numbers prior to the end of the war, and were all statistically insignificant as a percentage of the aircraft produced. They should either be modeled as contemporaries (because the community is interested in fulfilling some "what if?" dreams) regardless of which saw combat and which didn't; or, they should all be excluded as aircraft that don't meet the standard of being produced in numbers and not having any impact.
Anything else is bias of wanting "my planes" and the exclusion of "the other guy's planes" and nothing more
Amen SnakeEyes!
Thats what I have been saying for a while now, and it just doesn't seem to get thru.
So Nath, your telling me that 3 aircraft that saw combat in the last couple of weeks DOES meet your criteria? You never answered me.
If so, I don't want to hear another -1C thread out of you or the Luftwaffe contingent ever again, and I want my Yak3 (vk107) at the same time as the Ta152.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
I did answer you.
and btw don't put me in the same class as the "LW contigent", I have never whined on this BBS about 1Cs or Nikis... they don't bother me--the only thing is that fighitng only nikis and 1cs is boring.
-
Arguing whether a late-war plane saw combat or not is irrevelant. Neither the P-51H nor the Ta-152H-1 had any statistical importance in the outcome of the war--but that isn't the point.
It is WAS the point, then the ONLY use for the Ta-152 would be to re-create the ONE time it saw combat. Which, of course, would be silly.
Using "whether it saw combat" is a good-natured but misguided criteria for adding a late-war plane, because it ignores the "what-if" factor. The REAL reason to add a late-war plane, is to be able to act out what would have happened had the war continued.
"What if" Germany had held out longer?
"What if" there was no A-bomb and Japan had to be invaded?
And here it becomes clear WHY whether a plane saw combat doesn't matter--they would be used to act out situations which never happened. Nobody wants to add the Ta-152 for the sole purpose of re-creating the bombing and strafing of their factories. People want to see how they would have performed had fate happened differently.
Likewise, the P-51H would be essential for any "what-if" scenario involving the Axis surviving longer than it did.
The real debate isn't whether any specific plane saw combat. It is whether you want to able to act out battles which never happened (but could have).
Personally I do.
We've already done the battle of Britain in AirWarrior and WarBirds soooooo many times; we've done Ploesti and Guadacanal and Iwo Jima and North Africa and Kursk and pretty much every other big air battle that ever happened. But, have we ever done "OPERATION OLYMPIC"?
This is the chance to do something truly new.
J_A_B
-
Bah, I think all you people should stop whinging about all this late war/post war/someone's sketch on the back of a studmuffin packet in 1944 rubbish.
Gimmie a Spitfire Mk I and I'll take the lot of you on in whatever you want to fly, and I'll be happy about it =)
------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>
-
punt
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
Sorry SnakeEyes, P51H never saw combat thus it shouldn't be in AH.
I have noticed that you have stated several times that the P-51H never saw combat. This is incorrect. On August 8, 12 and 14 1945, P-51H fighters attached to the VII Fighter Command were in action against Japan. In each instance, they were used as escorts for B-29 bombing missions over Japan. On only one of these missions did Japanese fighters attempt to reach the bombers. Three Ki-44 Tojos were clobbered by P-47Ns, also flying escort. The fact that no Japanese aircraft fell to the new Mustangs does not eliminate the fact that they were there, fully prepared to deal with any enemy activity.
Nonetheless, I also feel that the P-51H had a minimal effect on the war effort, and therefore, is probably not a good choice for this sim without some reasonable methodology of usage. In other words, this sim would soon boil down to Ta 152s vs the P-51H. No good for historical realism. Neglecting the historical accuracy will turn off many players.
Perhaps, HTC should consider 'rationing' late war fighters of marginal effect. In other words, allow no more that two or three in the arena at any given time. I would include the Ta 152H-1, P-51H, F7F-1, and He 162 as being within this category. Likewise,
the F4U-1C was a limited production aircraft (just 200 manufactured). Therefore the number available should reflect that fact. Likewise, if the P-47M ever makes this show, it too should only be available in very limited numbers.
While we're discussing possible inclusions in the 1.07, how can anyone rule out the P-47N? It was quickly becoming the primary long-range escort in the Pacific as the war wound down. With its 1,000+ mile combat radius, combined with very high speed, high altitude performance, it undoubtably was the best performing, 'high volume' fighter deployed by the USAAF during the war. Where is the F4U-4? Many more of these were in service than the F4U-1C. The F4U-4 was in high demand for CAP duty, where its excellent speed and climb were ideal for intercepting incoming suicide raids.
Other useful additions have been mentioned many times on this BBs. The Spitfire Mk.XIV, Ki-84, B-29A, B-25H, B-24H, P-61B, P-63A (in Russian colors), Yak-3, Ki-61 and its radial powered brother, the Ki-100. The Il-2, G4M, Bf 110 and 410, the Mosquito B.IV, P-40N, A-20G , A-26B, Me 262 and Ju 87 are all required to have a plane set that offers the kind of diversity that one comes to expect in a simulation of this kind. Compare the A-26B to the Arado 234. The Arado is much faster. However, it is virtually defenseless and must be considered rather weak wristed in bomb load. On the other hand, the A-26B was as fast as the best early-war fighters. It had a low level turning radius comparable to the P-47D. With as many as 16 (that's right, 6 in the nose and up to 10 more in underwing packs) forward firing .05 caliber MGs, and a bomb load up to 4,000 lbs internally with another 2,000 under the wings, it could deliver the goods. Not only did it offer devastating firepower, it was an order of magnitude more durable and reliable than the Arado 234. Where's the A-26B? God knows, Invaders flew more combat sorties in any given month than all combat sorties flown by every operational Arado combined during its entire deployment.
Here's a tip for those folks who never seem to have much opportunity to enjoy the high altitude preformance of their fighters. Use your heavy bombers at altitudes above 25,000 feet. There's an old saying, "where the bomber fly, the air war is fought." The higher the bombers fly, the worse the Japanese and Russian fighters perform. The best way to eliminate the low altitude performance of the N1K2, is make it come up to 28,000 feet to tackle the heavies. Up there, the George is a real pig. Never fight the way your enemy fights best.
I realize that including all of the above aircraft will require serious time and effort. However, wouldn't it be that much more enjoyable if all the major combat aircraft were represented? I think so.
My regards,
Widewing
[This message has been edited by Widewing (edited 03-12-2001).]
-
I can't figure out for the life of me who the heck really cares whether the Ta152 saw combat or not. It is so crappy under 20k it isn't even worth getting paid perk points to fly it. The AH version of the Ta152 certainly doesn't have the "maneuverabvility" that it was apparently known for against those Tempests.
fscott
-
Widewing, don't you realise that no-one will ever have to climb their N1K2-J to 28k to intercept stratobuffs™ in AH, because they can simply take a more suitable plane for the job(eg: 109)...
-
This kind of discution about my plane saw combat and not your is : childish or Brain bananaing (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) ("Branlette intellectuelle" en bon français (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)).
And I think that the HTC team as introduced the Perk Point to manage this kind of problem .
-
Ive flown Nikis at 28k and above, they perform extremly well much better than P51 at that alt in every way save top speep, at 28k it outaccelerates a P51, outclimbs it by a wide margin- every time a 51 tried utclimbing me in niki at 28k I closed the distance rapidly until the 51 was forced to dive away, and of course turn and all the niki ufo wonderments still work at 28k, so id say why bother with ta152 just fly a niki when u need 30k fighter. This is just from my experience as an all too frequent niki dweeb, tho im recovering now. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Ive flown Nikis at 28k and above, they perform extremly well much better than P51 at that alt in every way save top speep, at 28k it outaccelerates a P51, outclimbs it by a wide margin- every time a 51 tried utclimbing me in niki at 28k I closed the distance rapidly until the 51 was forced to dive away, and of course turn and all the niki ufo wonderments still work at 28k, so id say why bother with ta152 just fly a niki when u need 30k fighter. This is just from my experience as an all too frequent niki dweeb, tho im recovering now. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
If the N1K2 performs that well at this altitude, then it badly mis-modeled. 28K, it should have trouble beating a VW microbus in acceleration (with the parking brake set). (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
My regards,
Widewing
-
I want to say a few words to the above discussion. I find it funny that anyone wants to press a plane into AH action without looking at its effect on game balance.
In AH the plane should be charaterised by power class or develepment year.
i.e. as a mid '44 plane there would be the P51D, the FW190D9, the ME109G-10, the KI 84, the N1K1, the Spit XIV etc.
Now we with 1.06 HTC has added the '45 year birds TA152, Tempest and Ar234 as perkies.
And i as LW fan see np in adding in the P47M+N and the P51H.
It plays no rule if the plane scored any victories in WW2 or saw at least limeted action.
If we get i.e. an Axis jet fighter like the ME262, why not give the dedicaded Allied pilots the Gloster Meteor MK. I??
What drove me crazy before 1.06 was that i as LW pilot had to fight P51s and N1K1s with a FW190A8, were i knew that the LW actually had a power horse that played in the same class as the P51D and the N1K1.
Only if ur dedecicated country never developed a plane in such a "weight class" u have to live with it. i.e. u will never see an italian jet fighter cause (as far as i know) there never was one.
On the other hand, if u use arguments like "they must have taken part in combat", u must be consequent. Than u would also have to devide between european theatre and pacific, Axis and allies. In WW2 a N1K1 never fired at a FW, but they do in AH, this is not historicly right and ain't real, so u have to bann it.
But AH is a game and one aspect of a game is that u can pit planes vs. each other that never fired a shot at each ohter in WW2, and u can fly the "dreammachines" of all sides.
[This message has been edited by Naudet (edited 03-13-2001).]