Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Hristo on July 20, 2000, 07:49:00 PM
-
Was it common practice to delete MGs in 190 variants ? What variants were those ?
If so, can we have this option in AH, pls ?
------------------
Stoickov
JG54 "Grünherz"
-
The only ones I know of that it was common on where the Sturm versions. They often deleted and faired over the troughs for the mgs. They still had the feed chute humps however.
-
And the ground attack planes (F and G versions) also had cowling MGs deleted and external cannons werent fitted.
other than that I dont know.
-
F and G models came from the factory with no cowl guns. AFAIK removal of the cowl guns was not done on A model aircraft.
-
Funked,
I, like Pongo, thought that A-8/A-9 had the MGs removed some times.
Focke Wulf Fw 190 IN ACTION on page 38 has a photograph of Willi Maximowitz's Fw 190A-8/R2 with no cowl MG visible, but the positions were not faired over.
Focke Wulf Fw 190 Aces of the Western Front has the same ( ? ) plane with MG ports faired over though. This how ever is an 'Osprey style' artistic side plate, so accuracy on details might not be the best?
//fats
-
If you've got photos of an A model with no cowl guns, then it happened. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
There was precisely one A-9 built AFAIK.
-
Hmmm...
I'm quite sure that almost all A's had their cowl MG in place. So did the F versions, only outer wing position MG FF's and later MG 151/20's were removed.
On the other hand G versions had only armament of 2 wingroot MG 151/20's, they didn't have cowl MG's.
So I think there should be no option to drop those cowl MG's in any version since they were very rare modification.
------------------
jochen Jagdflieger JG 2 'Richthofen' Aces High
jochen Geschwaderkommodore (on leave) Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) Warbirds
Thanks for the Fw 190A-5 HTC!
Ladysmith wants you forthwith to come to her relief
Burn your briefs you leave for France tonight
Carefully cut the straps of the booby-traps and set the captives free
But don't shoot 'til you see her big blue eyes
-
Funked,
I have a book called 'Six Months to Oblivion' which has some stats for squads during the later parts of war. For example in May '45 according to the book 6 Jagdgeschwader had mixed equipment which contained also A-9s along with Bf 109G-14, Bf 109G-10, Bf 109K-4, Fw 190A-8 and Fw 190D-9.
The book fails to quote where exactly the information is from, but I guess if it is accurate at all the JGs weren't sharing that single A-9. Perhaps the figures are from some sort of plan to equip the squads which never was realized.
//fats
-
--- Jochen: ---
there should be no option to drop those cowl MG's in any version since they were very rare modification
--- end ---
IMO a wrong conclusion even if it was _never_ done in real life - though we know it was.
I recon the removal of the cowl MGs was dictated by the environment the Fw 190s operated in: real life WWII. If they ( perhaps the pilot of the a/c in question? ) found the MGs useless, he might have them removed.
Same principle applies to a simulated Fw 190. Let the pilot make the decission wether to include MGs or not, if they are found useless in the environment of operations: 86 them.
To highlight the point and IMO the fault of your way of reasoning think of some other plane, say P-47. In WWII it flew x% of sorties with out any external storage. Should the AH P-47s be forced to confine to these limits? No. Because the fact that the P-47s had bombs loaded was dictated by the environment they flew in WWII, and so it will be in AH. I am surprised if we have same % of sorties with out external storages in AH as there was in WWII, but I see no reason why there should be though.
Wether the MGs were removed or not from a given plane is independent from something like production capabilities or such - infact it is totally the opposite it would have freed the MG 131 for some other use and their ammo if needed.
As far as rare modifications and their inclusion in AH: F4u-1C. I am willing to bet that Fw 190As with no cowl MGs encountered more enemy planes and downed more enemy planes than F4u-1C in WWII. Be the measurement total/number of planes, total/sorties or just pure totals.
//fats
-
I find the following areas lacking in respect to the Spitfire Mk IX:
1. Powerplant. I feel the Merlin 61 lacks power. Replace with a Merlin 66, with basta modifications.
2. Armament. 2 Hispano cannon are inadequate. I want 4, or possibly 6 to be fitted, with an increased ammunition capacity of 150rpg.
3. Rear vision. The rearward vision is too restrictive. A teardrop canopy should be fitted to rectify this problem.
4. Rate of roll. The rate of roll is too slow. I suggest the wingtips be removed and spring-tab ailerons fitted to provide more effective roll control.
5. Tailplane and fin. Both should be replaced with units of larger surface area to improve handling and stability.
This work is to be carried out under the authority of fats' logic.
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 07-21-2000).]
-
ROFL juzz (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
mx22
-
Juzz,
Ho hum. All your mods are actually such that require more unlike removing cowl MGs or just not loading any ammunition for them, so it's apples to oranges.
//fats
-
Want no cowl guns? Type .ord 1 2 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
Ask the the historicaly accurate removal of cowl guns be included in the game and the RAF lobby doenst ask that the historically equally accurate removal of the wing to 303s be included in the game..no they ask for a whole new aircraft.
jolly fair wot!
-
Common: P-47 carries bombs, rockets.
Common: P-47 doesn't carry bombs, rockets.
Common: Removal of outer cannon on Fw 190A.
Rare: Removal of cowl machineguns on Fw 190A.
How does that old Sesame Street song go?
"One of things is not like the others..."
-
Juzz,
Quote me a sources which state that removal of cowl MGs was rare. Doesn't matter really though as long as we have F4u-1C flying which kinda nullifies the rare argument.
//fats
-
One thing to consider - Fw 190A cowl guns are a bit forward of the CG. Removing them and their ammo would cause an aft CG shift. Considering that Fw had to make several mods to the aircraft to move the CG forward, removing the guns may not have been feasible on all variants.
-
I dont know about rare. It was certainly common in conjunction with the 30mm outer guns. It is critical to be able to choose to shoot the mg151 and the mk108 seperatly. They dont fly the same at all and hitting with the 108 is much more difficult if the 20s are flying with it. So I want to be able to select to fire the cannons seperatly, dont really care about the mgs. Cant believe it will make that much more difference.
But, if funked is right and cg is an issue. The magazines for the inboard 151s are right bellow the cowl mgs. So just give us equivilent weight in 20mm rounds.... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
nother topic.
Funked do you know why the 108s where not carried inboard??? where they not syncronizable? Would seem to me to make more sence to remove outer wing guns, cowl guns and replace the iner guns with 108s. You could have like 200rpg that way and the whole thing would probebly weigh less then the 4X20mm a8..
course thats alot of ammo in the fuselage.
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
I dont know about rare. It was certainly common in conjunction with the 30mm outer guns. It is critical to be able to choose to shoot the mg151 and the mk108 seperatly. They dont fly the same at all and hitting with the 108 is much more difficult if the 20s are flying with it. So I want to be able to select to fire the cannons seperatly, dont really care about the mgs. Cant believe it will make that much more difference.
But, if funked is right and cg is an issue. The magazines for the inboard 151s are right bellow the cowl mgs. So just give us equivilent weight in 20mm rounds.... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
nother topic.
Funked do you know why the 108s where not carried inboard??? where they not syncronizable? Would seem to me to make more sence to remove outer wing guns, cowl guns and replace the iner guns with 108s. You could have like 200rpg that way and the whole thing would probebly weigh less then the 4X20mm a8..
course thats alot of ammo in the fuselage.
I doubt the 108's reciever could fit between the chord of the wing and the start of the gear bay. Also I think the bulk heads only had fittings for the 151 barrels.
- Jig
-
Its behind the main spar well behind the gear bay. Maybe the ammo would not fit in front of the firewall but behind the spar..
-
"where they not syncronizable?" - I'd say thats part of it. The MK 108 is pnuematically operated iirc, the MG 151 is electric.
-
Juzz, even if you are wrong about the pneumatic/electric operation (I have no idea), the synchronization is the key. It is a lot less of an engineering hassle to add a gun in a position which does not require synchronization.