Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Hans on January 29, 2001, 05:36:00 AM
-
Fw190D9s were used in WarBirds before they had an Rolling Plane Set, and didn't overwhelm the arena. They were fairly common, but the P51 and Spitfire-9 were also very common.
I don't think a D9 would terribly unballance the game. If its added, I don't think its a perk ride.
Also, I am curious why we don't see the Fw190A4 and A8 very much? I flew one and found it to be a bit unstable when flying it. It flew "mushy" compared to other machines.
Hans.
-
I dont think it's to be perked.
even with mw-50
-
No. It will turn less good than the P-51, and only be marginally faster.
Only reason for perking it would be that
a) otherwise we get a zillion instant LW converters, like back when the A5 was buggy and
b) because the allies don't want a level playing field (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Heheh (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_3845234)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
D9 will most likely be perked in the 50 or 100 point range according to HT.
-
D9 will most likely be perked in the 50 or 100 point range according to HT.
Hmmm... Are you sure? Why? It is as fast as P-51 which is not perked and it does not climb as good as Bf 109G-10 which is not perked and it's armament is much weaker than Typhoon's which is not perked and it was produced 4 times the number of F4U-1C's which is not perked.
So I can't see why it should be perk plane and I think/hope neither does HT or Pyro. D-9 would not be more popular plane than G-10.
Lets make a bet: I say it will not be perked!
------------------
jochen Gefechtsverband Kowalewski
Units: I. and II./KG 51, II. and III./KG 76, NSGr 1, NSGr 2, NSGr 20.
Planes: Do 17Z, Ju 87, Ju 88A, He 111H, Ar 234A, Me 410A, Me 262A, Fw 190F, Fw 190G.
Sieg oder bolsevismus!
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
D9 will most likely be perked in the 50 or 100 point range according to HT.
HT is this true?
how many perks will a P51 cost?
-
D-9 is in the same class as Me 109G-10 and P-51D. If you perk one, better perk 'em all.
-
HTC, Puh-leeez DO NOT PERK the D-9.
The whining about that one would last forever!
In fact, any and all LW planes should NOT be perked. Give them anything...anything...they want.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Thx Toad ;=)
danish
-
A 190-D9? Not a perk
-Westy
-
If the MW-50 version of the d9 is perked, then the non MS-50 version should also be made available.
Hooligan
-
and it was produced 4 times the number of F4U-1C's which is not perked.
LOL! Thats not saying much (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
I hope it is NOT perked......comparable to P51D we have, no need to perk it IMHO.
My main wish is that HT would make some of the Allied planes' optional armaments available......like the different one available for the FW-190 and the 109's.
Give me a Hellcat with the optional 20mm's in place....... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by Hooligan:
If the MW-50 version of the d9 is perked, then the non MS-50 version should also be made available.
Hooligan
Almost all 190D9s were fitted with MW50, if not from factory, retrofitted on the field.
MW50 is the D9 we should see here. It is a bit faster than a P51, it is much worse turner, and has worse firepower.
The non-MW50 unperked is a sorry excuse. If the MW50 fitted D9 is perked, so it should be the P51D
Give me a Hellcat with the optional 20mm's in place....... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Give me the chance to get rid of the useless cowl MGs in the 190, please (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
And remember that only 30% of the common weapons schemes of the 109 and 190 are simulated here...
Or you want to see a G10 with 3xMk108? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-29-2001).]
-
And remember that only 30% of the common weapons schemes of the 109 and 190 are simulated here...
Or you want to see a G10 with 3xMk108?
And would you like to back that statement up? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
And please don't tell me about the 190 with the Mk103's (which was a single test aircraft only).
And a 109 with x3 Mk108's? I hope your not talking about the K10 (or was it K14?) because it only ever existed on paper.
Just yanking your chain RAM (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
If you have some more data on 109's and 190's that I don't have, please post it.
But what I have seen in my research material, shows that we do have the most common armament loadouts for the 109s and 190A's (excluding F's and G's). But there may be a few esoteric ones that AH misses.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
I hope the Fw190D-9 with MW50 is not perked.
Let that be the top end non-perk German fighter. It is pretty closely matched with the P-51D so I think they'd be a good pair. The LA7 and Ki84 should also not be perked. I can't think of a British aircraft that matches the P-51D, they all seem to either overmatch it or be weaker than it. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Sisu
-Karnak
-
From the figures I have seen, the D9 is more than 50 mph faster than a Spit IX below 20,000ft. It also rolls a lot faster and has better armour/survivability. If everything Britain produced after 42 is perked, then the D9 should be too.
Or don't the Axis want a level playing field? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Not only should it not be perked. It should come out with version 1.06, and be the ONLY new plane in the initial release (the rest of the planes could be added with a patch a day or two later).
Then, perhaps we could cure some of the poor LuftWafflies of their Paranoid Delusions & Conspiracy Theories! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
SOB
-
Better perked than castrated (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
-
Originally posted by Vermillion:
And would you like to back that statement up? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
Of course.
And please don't tell me about the 190 with the Mk103's (which was a single test aircraft only).
Ohh no, no,sure I wont (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
lets see...
Fw190A5:
----------------------------------------
-Fw190A5/U2 Could carry wing DTs.Night fighter and intruder. ETC501 rack able to carry 4 50kg (110lbs) bombs.
----------------------------------------
-Fw190A5/U3 Could carry wing DTs, had cowl MGs removed, and up to 1000kg (2200lbs) of bombs in different configurations. Wing DTs could be carried. Base of Fw190G3
----------------------------------------
-Fw190A5/U8 Long range Jabo, similar weapon layout as in U3 (no MGs), but only 250Kg of bombs.
----------------------------------------
The only Fw190A5 we have here is a standard fighter one, with either 4 or 2 cannons. No cowl MG removal possible. No 1000Kg bomb. No wing Drop tanks. No ETC 501 with four 50kg bombs.
----------------------------------------
Fw190A8
-Fw190A8/R1: external 20mm guns removed, twin 20mm gun pods in its place (so firepower ammounted for 6 mausers)
----------------------------------------
-Fw190A8/R2: with MK108 cannons (in AH)
----------------------------------------
-Fw190A8/R3: Mk103 cannons (hehe sorry, couldnt resist (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif))
----------------------------------------
-Fw190A8/R6:with wing rockets fitted (In AH)
----------------------------------------
-Fw190A8/R7: Rammjäger. heavy armor in frontal side
----------------------------------------
-Fw190A8/R8: Rammjäger. as R7 but with Mk108 cannons
----------------------------------------
Not to mention that the buff hunter squadrons removed the cowl 13mm MGs in a regular basis, wich is not simulated in AH.
If we consider the Fw190A8 and we think in it as an F8...then we have INNUMERABLE jabo configurations not modelled in aces high.
----------------------------------------
Me109G6/G10 (shared many schemes)
Me109G10/R1: Ventral rack for 250kg bomb (in AH) or 4 50kg bombs (NOT in AH).
----------------------------------------
Originally posted by Vermillion:And a 109 with x3 Mk108's? I hope your not talking about the K10 (or was it K14?) because it only ever existed on paper.
Me109G10/R5: INTERCEPTOR WITH ADDITION OF A PAIR OF UNDERWING GONDOLAS CARRYING 30-MM MK108 SHORT BARREL CANNON (ahem, no not an K-14)
----------------------------------------
Now do your calculations. No, even 30% is an optimistic % of the USUAL LW CONFIGURATIONS in RL not modelled in Aces high.
Happy now, verm?
BTW source: "The great book of world war II airplanes"
ISBN 0-517-16024-2
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-29-2001).]
-
Hi
MK108 pods were fitted to 109s tho MG151/20 were more common, but that doesnt seem to preclude armament options in AH. (chog) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) So they should definatly be here too, available in G6 and G10.
The model you are referring to was the K-6, basically a K-4 with a newly modified wing with internal MK108 cannon/55rpg. This was very unusual and prolly 99% sure saw no action.
Interestingly enough its possible a few K-14 were built and given to service pilots in the last few weeks- but that is such a minor thing and so unlikely that they ever fought that it shouldnt be in here.
thanks GRUNHERZ
-
lol... perk the LW, give them just fieschler storch.. that'll be enough easy to not be perked.
-
From Grunherz's post in this forum.
SPEEDS:
Value in ( ) is most likely MW-50
Bottom of document says "Eingeklammerte Werte fur Sondernotleistung ( Start u. Notleistung mit MW-50)"
Ground level:
360 (380)mph
5,7km or 18750ft:
(436)mph MW-50 *No other value given for this alt
6,6km or 21,710ft:
426mph *No MW value given for this alt
419mph is also given for this alt???
Highest speed mentioned here is 436 MPH with MW-50. P51-D top speed 437 MPH. Mustang MkIII = 439MPH and P51-H = 487 MPH.
Mustang is still faster - albiet by 1 MPH (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
I have no problem with 190 D9 being non-perked as long as i get my MkIII Mustang (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by Spatula (edited 01-29-2001).]
-
--- Jochen ---
and it was produced 4 times the number of F4U-1C's which is not perked.
--- end ---
--- Vermillion: ---
LOL! Thats not saying much
--- end ---
Guess ~800 fighters meant more to the axis than ~200 for the allied during the time each was available, even though the axis indusrty was cranking out more planes in autumn '44 than in any other period of the war. Allied prolly were stepping down production figured by the time 1C was available?
// fats
-
Originally posted by Spatula:
Highest speed mentioned here is 436 MPH with MW-50. P51-D top speed 437 MPH. Mustang MkIII = 439MPH and P51-H = 487 MPH.
Mustang is still faster - albiet by 1 MPH
Most sources I've read talk about Fw190D9 doing 445mph with MW50 at 20-25000 feet.
That's still only 8mph more than the P51...but its more (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (death to the runstangs!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)).
-
Most sources I've read talk about Fw190D9 doing 445mph with MW50 at 20-25000 feet.
Im not clear on how long the MW-50 can run for. From what i understand, it can (should?)be used in short bursts totally only a few minuites. Someone enlighten me plz. If so, whats the max deck speed of D9 without MW-50? The mustang can maintain its max speed *alot* longer than D9 - from what i understand.
-
MW50 was used in four runs of 10 minutes each, and then the system had to be disengaged for a while to let the engine cool down before using it again. So there was enough MW50 for 40 minutes, separated in four 10 minutes bursts.
I dont know exactly wich where the times between boosts, tho.
In AH the effect would be similar to that of the G10. 10 minutes of WEP but then a long time to cool down the engine. Not a bad compromise, IMO (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-29-2001).]
-
Deck speed of Dora without MW-50 is 360mph, MW-50 can be implemented pretty much as it is in 109G10- with maybe a longer overall time as FW had a bigger MW tank I think.
-
IIRC RAM rest time between full 10minute MW-50 runs was 5 minutes
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Deck speed of Dora without MW-50 is 360mph, MW-50 can be implemented pretty much as it is in 109G10- with maybe a longer overall time as FW had a bigger MW tank I think.
with the fuel multiplier in AH the MW50 tank will have still a lot of methanol-water mixture while the fuel tanks are already empty (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Please do not perk the D-9, as my esteemed brethren have stated the P-51 and the D-9 are very close in performance, so what would be the point?....ethnocentrism?...the same goes for the Ki-84...I don't think their is a single Japanese aircraft produced during the war that saw service that warrants perking, except maby a Baka..or a Kaiten( i know it's a torp (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) )
Brady
------------------
(http://content.communities.msn.com/isapi/fetch.dll?action=MyPhotos_GetPubPhoto&photoId=nHwCwcDEJznXbXfCxAJfgD0a7w1sDVrWuMP28UBOabRCH339Yvya3KrR2Q8UMjrBJ)
-
From the figures I have seen, the D9 is more than 50 mph faster than a Spit IX below 20,000ft. It also rolls a lot faster and has better armour/survivability. If everything Britain produced after 42 is perked, then the D9 should be too. Or don't the Axis want a level playing field?
And the Typhoon is a peice of junk? BTW, its my favorite ride along with the La5-FN. Its a killer in Boom and Zoom, particularily with the seat jacked up and back so you can see better. Nice high deflection shooting with it.
Plus! This game's first perk fighter is the British Tempest.
Oh, yeah. The British sucketh big time in AH. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I agree with Brady that the Ki-84 Frank isn't a perk ride either. Its just a normal, latewar fighter on par with the rest of the pack. The one in WarBirds wasn't an Uber plane.
I guess we are all in agreement that the FW-190-D9 is a regular 1944 fighter, non perk. Not 1 post in 30 said to perk it.
Hans.
-
I think Nath was just trolling (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
jochen Gefechtsverband Kowalewski
Units: I. and II./KG 51, II. and III./KG 76, NSGr 1, NSGr 2, NSGr 20.
Planes: Do 17Z, Ju 87, Ju 88A, He 111H, Ar 234A, Me 410A, Me 262A, Fw 190F, Fw 190G.
Sieg oder bolsevismus!
-
Originally posted by RAM:
Me109G10/R5: INTERCEPTOR WITH ADDITION OF A PAIR OF UNDERWING GONDOLAS CARRYING 30-MM MK108 SHORT BARREL CANNON (ahem, no not an K-14)
Hello RAM,
Not all sources are correct and the book you quote isn't very reliable source...I have it too, awsome drawings but the text has lot of errors especially in the 109 section. A fact that applies in all reference material about WW2 aircraft:The older the material is the more errors it has. And all this misinformation has lived very long because almost every new book that got published quoted the older ones.
I'll give you an example: Bf 109K-4 armed with single Mk 103 and 2x 15mm MG 151 cowlguns. Now, I think most in this thread agree with me that this never happened drawingboard aside (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
My source is "Messerschmitt Bf 109 F, G,& K Series (isbn# 0-88740-424-3)" by Jochen Prien & Peter Rodeike. My copy is from the second edition published 1995. Section about Bf 109 in "The Great Book of World War II Airplanes" is over 20 years old.
It's based on stuff which is old old old and it just isn't correct. I don't claim that Prien & Rodeike's book is 100% correct but it's THE BEST one around conserning variants of the fighter known as Messerschmitt Bf-109.
So, what is Bf 109G-10/R5? From Prien & Rodeike's book:"...also widely used by the G-10 was Rustsatz R3 with its 300 liter auxiliary fuel tank beneath the fuselage. The installation of other Rustsätze was planned, such as an ETC 500IXb as R1, two MG 151/20 as R5, two 210mm rocket launching tubes as R7 ..." As you can see it says "planned". How many photos of G-10s have you seen with underwing gondolas anyway RAM ?
I'll just add that I believe these guys more than anybody on this thread in this matter.
1Wmaker1
Lentolaivue 34
-
From "Warplanes of the Luftwaffe", ISBN 1-84013--374-5
Apart of mentioning the G10/R5...
"While the 109G6/U4 was armed with two 30-mm Mk108 underwing cannons"
And a bit later:
"the Bf109G10/U4 had provision for a belly gun pack containing two MK108 30mm guns, but this could be replaced by a non-jettisonable fuel tank know as the "inner behalter "
The book was first edited in 1994. I have the 2000 year edition. As you may understand I wont post data that only appears on one of my books but not on the rest (Jane's mentions that configuration too, but I know the reliability you give to Jane's here)
So, then, this was too an "old book"?
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-30-2001).]
-
RAM, but now you have to prove the "most common" part. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Originally posted by Vermillion:
RAM, but now you have to prove the "most common" part. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
I dont have proof that the 30mm gondolas were widely used, but have little doubt that some numbers had to see action.
Almost all the R or U versions of the 190 and 109 listed in the books I have explicitly say when a modification was only in the form of prototypes (for instance the twin cannon gondolas in the Fw190A8/R1 was tested on the Fw190A5/U12 but only in 2 prototypes...the A8/R1 was another thing and some numbers seem to have seen action). The 109s fitted with Mk108 wing gondolas surely saw action, as the R6s did.
Anyway you must admit that the 190s lack the chance to get rid of the useless cowl MGs, and the flexibility of the ETC501 rack, wing drop tanks, etc. The combinations we can do with the lacking elements are countless, because a plane could be fitted with various R and U schemes at the same time.
-
BTW Wmaker, check your sources because they are not so reliable as you say:
Originally posted by Wmaker:
My source is "Messerschmitt Bf 109 F, G,& K Series (isbn# 0-88740-424-3)" by Jochen Prien & Peter Rodeike.
.........
So, what is Bf 109G-10/R5? From Prien & Rodeike's book:"...also widely used by the G-10 was Rustsatz R3 with its 300 liter auxiliary fuel tank beneath the fuselage. The installation of other Rustsätze was planned, such as an ETC 500IXb as R1, two MG 151/20 as R5, two 210mm rocket launching tubes as R7 ..."
Your source is wrong. The 109G10 fitted with two MG151/20 wing gondolas were the R6 rustsätze. All 109s fitted with underwing mauser 20mm gondolas, since the F series,were noted as the R6 configuration.
The R5 was the 30mm Mk108 underwing cannons field modification.
I suggest you to give less credit to that source.
-
Originally posted by RAM:
From "Warplanes of the Luftwaffe", ISBN 1-84013--374-5
Apart of mentioning the G10/R5...
"While the 109G6/U4 was armed with two 30-mm Mk108 underwing cannons"
And a bit later:
"the Bf109G10/U4 had provision for a belly gun pack containing two MK108 30mm guns, but this could be replaced by a non-jettisonable fuel tank know as the "inner behalter "
The book was first edited in 1994. I have the 2000 year edition. As you may understand I wont post data that only appears on one of my books but not on the rest (Jane's mentions that configuration too, but I know the reliability you give to Jane's here)
So, then, this was too an "old book"?
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-30-2001).]
First of all...we were taking about Bf 109G-10/R5, right? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
Well I have "Warplanes of the Luftwaffe" too (Edited by David Donald, right ?). And as I said...many new books quote old ones and misinformation lives on and this one is example of just that! It still lists Bf 109K-4 with possible MK 103 and MG151/15s (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
And what comes to Jane's...I know it's reputation but on WW2 planes and especially german ones I still believe these guys. Janes is good for newer stuff tho, won't deny it.
Before we go to Bf 109G-6/U4 and Bf 109G-10/U4 I'll tell you the sources these guys used while writing "Messerschmitt Bf 109 F, G,& K Series" (straight quote):
"Sources
Messerschimitt delivery plans;conversion kit delivery plans;C-Amt program;GL/C discussion minutes;Aircraft Contstruction Central Commitee discussion notes;Messerschimitt AG discussion notes;Air Division Headquarters Austria - Special Report No.2;Air Industry Austria;Aircraft Type Sheet Bf 109, Chief Technical Air Armaments,as of 1.8.1944;flight logs of test pilots and service pilots;Quartermaster-General's loss reports"
...And what does this book say about Bf 109G-6/u4...(straight quote):
"From the summer of 1943 WNF delivered a considerable number of G-6 aircraft in which the MG 151/20 engine-mounted cannon had been replaced by a 30mm MK 108; this installation received the designation G-6/U4. It is unsertain to what extent machines with Umbausatz 4 were also equipped with two additional MK 108 cannon in underwing gondolas. Minutes of the RLM discussions concerning special measures for the air defence of the Reich held on 9 August 1943 reveal that the Messerschmitt AG had been instructed to begin planning for the earliest possible change-over from the installation of Rustsatz R6 to two MK 108s. this scheme does not appear to have proceeded much beyond the planning stage however, as beyond test machines, no other production aircraft are known to have been so armed. Still, the conversion was listed in an aircraft type sheet of the Chief of Technical Air Armanents dated August 1, 1944 as G6/U6."
Conclusion: We have G6/U4 in AH and G6/U6 never entered production.
And then we have the Bf-109G-10/U4...Again, this book says (straight quote): "The stantard engine-mounted MG 151/20 cannon was in many instances replaced by a 30mm Mk 108, the installation receiving the designation U4."
I'm VERY baffled with this "belly gun pack". If you RAM or someone else have pics/drawings or anything about this I would sure love to see them...What ever this thing you quoting here is it surtainly isn't U4...
Conclusion: Messerschmitt Bf-109G-10/U4 indeed is in AH.
RAM SAID:
"Your source is wrong. The 109G10 fitted with two MG151/20 wing gondolas were the R6 rustsätze. All 109s fitted with underwing mauser 20mm gondolas, since the F series,were noted as the R6 configuration.
The R5 was the 30mm Mk108 underwing cannons field modification."
This is arguable between two sources but I still believe Prien & Rodeike's list is correct.
Prien & Rodeike's list for G-10:
U4 :MK 108 replaced MG 151/20
R2 :Rb 50/30 camera
R3 :300 litre extra fueltank
R5 :two MG 151/20 in wing gondolas
R6 :a PKS 12 single-axis autopilot which automatically controlled the aircraft's rudder, whereas the elevator and ailerons were operated manually by the pilot.
Now here comes the misinformation:
Jean-Claude Merret lists the following:
R1 ETC bombrack or 503
R2 MW 50
R3 300 litre droptank
R6 MG 151-cannons in wing gondolas
R7 BR-21 rocketlauncher tubes in the wings
R8 BSK-16 camera in the left wing
I believe Prien & Rodeike got it right because of the information of surtain finnish book called "Messerschmitt BF 109 and Germany's war economy (english translation)". Author of this book, Hannu Valtonen is the director of Finland's Aviation museum and has also done a ton of research for his many books and crushes many myths conserning Germany's economy and production during the war for example. This is a translation from that book conserning those two lists:
"It looks like the first list is more correct, since the latter is missing reconnasance version which was built without a doubt"
So, RAM I still stand behind my sources and advice you to buy Prien & Rodeike's book and to double check your sources.
1Wmaker1
Lentolaivue 34
[This message has been edited by Wmaker (edited 01-30-2001).]
[This message has been edited by Wmaker (edited 01-30-2001).]
-
If 190D9 isn't perked, i don't understand why Tempest should be... Only few mph faster.. don't fly well high... what's up ladies ? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Bartlomiej Rajewski
aka. Wing Commander fd-ski
Northolt Wing
1st Polish Fighter Wing
303 (Polish) Squadron "Kosciuszko" RAF
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF
Turning 109s and 190s into scrap metal since 1998
Northolt Wing Headquarters (http://www.raf303.org/northolt/)
-
i gotta agree with fd-ski
190-d9 should be a perk a/c, but low perk (i would say 100 pts)
where as tempest mabye 200
4 hispanos is reason why (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Heh zig, when you start paying, perhaps you'll have a say, you anti D) person. I shall fight you on the beaches... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Perk the D9, and you'll have to perk G10 and P-51 and YAK.
Good way to go IMHO; then we'll fly the lesser a/c.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_3845234)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Originally posted by Vermillion:
RAM, but now you have to prove the "most common" part. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
There is some controversity concerning this issue. And by asking RAM how many photos of G-10s with underwing gondolas I didn't mean that they weren't used. The book I mentioned has one photo of G-10 with gondolas. It's just that they weren't used that often...
They still have a right to be in AH as a viable load out option...no question about it.
[This message has been edited by Wmaker (edited 01-30-2001).]
-
Yup, if D9, without or with mw50 gets perked, P-51D should be perked as well
(lets not forget N1K2 as well, numbers and flight models and... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif))
-
My question is this.
What defines a "perk"?
Is it productions numbers?
No, C-hog and C205 are exceptions to that rule. Dora is less than 1,000 I believe.
Is it speed?
No, 109G10 is at 450MPH and 370Mph on the deck. Typhoon is 375mph on the deck. Both faster than the P-51D at their best alts. contrary to popular belief.
Is it firepower?
No, already 2 4 hipano birds in AH and countless other 4 cannon birds. A8, A5 and NIK2.
Is it late war design?
Ding, ding, Winner!
AH is currently in a no later than mid 1944 planeset. The NIK2, P-51D, P-47D30, BF109G-10 and F4U-1D/C are all early to Mid 1944 birds. Anything after that time starts to fall into the true late war design category.
So when was the FW190D-9 built and shipped??
I do not know, I am only asking?? I think that is your answer.
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
So when was the FW190D-9 built and shipped??
I do not know, I am only asking?? I think that is your answer.
August 1944. DING DING!!!!, fits into the planeset.
Said that, the F4U1-C was used ONLY in 1945..DING DING DING DOESNT FIT INTO THE PLANESET!!!!!!!
-----------------------------------------
Wmaker, the G10/R6 had 2x20mm cannons in wing gondolas...just as the G14/R6, the G6/R6, the G2/R6, the G1/R6...and I could follow ad nauseam.
The G10/R6 (once again) was the two 20mm gondola armed G10.
BTW "Warplanes of the luftwaffe" was first edited in 1994, as I said in my previous post. If instead of running to post how good is your book you took the time to read my post then you would have noticed it.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-30-2001).]
-
F4UDOA,
We all know that the Spitfire MkXIV is going to be a perk, and it entered service before the P-51D.
The criteria is an overall judgement of how good the aircraft would be in the MA environment. If it is higher than the P-51D, its a perk (maybe it has to be higher than the F4U-1C).
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Is it late war design?
Ding, ding, Winner!
AH is currently in a no later than mid 1944 planeset. The NIK2, P-51D, P-47D30, BF109G-10 and F4U-1D/C are all early to Mid 1944 birds. Anything after that time starts to fall into the true late war design category.
So, since the Me-262 became operational in the summer of '44, it will not be perked? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
(http://raubvogel.tripod.com/signew.gif)
[This message has been edited by LJK Raubvogel (edited 01-30-2001).]
-
RAM SAID:
"BTW "Warplanes of the luftwaffe" was first edited in 1994, as I said in my previous post. If instead of running to post how good is your book you took the time to read my post then you would have noticed it."
Hmm...well feel free to think so...The real reason for this is that english isn't my native language either and when you said "edited" it leads to edition...understand? SO I thought the book was published earlier and that it was the first "edited" version..ahh well I understand now that second edition is second printing...so it was just an english snafu. If you would have said "published in 1994" we would have avoided this hassle, my fault. I honestly mistook this book on some William Green's book. They came out first in the sixties...isn't that right? Never seen or let alone read one...I just thought your book was revised version of William Green's "Warplanes of the Luftwaffe" (I somewhere remember seeing a book called that with him as the author??" Anyways I noticed mistake (I even have the book myself DOH!) and started editing my message..few minutes too late obviously...but anyways thanks for understanding RAM (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) And I can see you hate it when you are wrong (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by Wmaker (edited 01-30-2001).]
[This message has been edited by Wmaker (edited 01-30-2001).]
-
i been paying for 2 weeks now santa
-
Originally posted by Wmaker:
And I can see you hate it when you are wrong (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
The luftwaffe album, by Joachim Dressel and Mandfred Griehl.
ISBN 1-86019-978-x
Page 52
"Bf109G10/R6: Fighter with MG151/20 nacelle-mounted armament and MW50 cannon"
So far I have brought here three different sources of information, all of them independent from each other.
You only brought one, and an evidently wrong one.
I hate it when people who has only one book thinks they are the eve of the universe.
You got a book. And one with errors. And you are wrong.
-
LOL RAM !!! I wasn't talking JUST about Bf 109G-10/R6...I think I mentioned something about G-6/U4 and G-10/U4 too...and RAM care to tell what the hell is MW 50 cannon! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
RAM,
The F4U-1C is a -1D with a different gun package. Hardly a late war fighter. If it weren't for the anomaly of the cannon damage multiplier in AH you wouldn't care.
Karnak and Raubvogel are more in the ballpark with performance that exceeds other A/C in the planeset. But what is the criteria?
I'm asking the question, what qualifies an A/C as a perk plane? Answer that question grasshopper and you will know if the Dora will be perked. Personally I don't think it has to be. Especially since I haven't seen one piece of test data that put it over 436MPH max speed.
I would luv to have a distraction to quiet all of the C-hog whining on these boards.
-
Originally posted by Wmaker:
LOL RAM !!! I wasn't talking JUST about Bf 109G-10/R6...I think I mentioned something about G-6/U4 and G-10/U4 too...and RAM care to tell what the hell is MW 50 cannon! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
LOL...that was a typo -mine,not book's- (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
BTW the U4 is the Factory conversion Kit. The U4 were the planes that came from factory fitted with Mk108 cannons, the R5 were the ones fitted with it on the field.
Simple.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
RAM,
The F4U-1C is a -1D with a different gun package. Hardly a late war fighter. If it weren't for the anomaly of the cannon damage multiplier in AH you wouldn't care.
Karnak and Raubvogel are more in the ballpark with performance that exceeds other A/C in the planeset. But what is the criteria?
I'm asking the question, what qualifies an A/C as a perk plane? Answer that question grasshopper and you will know if the Dora will be perked. Personally I don't think it has to be. Especially since I haven't seen one piece of test data that put it over 436MPH max speed.
I would luv to have a distraction to quiet all of the C-hog whining on these boards.
For What I understand the criteria is a judgement of HTC about the unbalancing role in MA.
And a push toward more use of many different models.
Or you prefer a MA filled only of F4U1-C, or what will be the next dweebplane ??
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
Zigrat:
LOOK what you've DONE!
You've RUINED a PERFECTLY well placed point!
I shall have to fight you on the beaches for this!
Welcome back bud (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_3845234)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Originally posted by RAM:
BTW the U4 is the Factory conversion Kit. The U4 were the planes that came from factory fitted with Mk108 cannons, the R5 were the ones fitted with it on the field.
Once more...U4 was the designation which tells that the particular G-10 has MK-108 engine-mounted cannon fitted in the factory...nothing more, nothing less.
When these aircraft rolled off the production line everything in Hitler's Germany wasn't going according to plan and these aircraft were fitted with weapons that time available for the factories to fit! WNF obviously had MK 108s because as I understand all G-10/U4s were produced by it.
Again...U4 means that particular aircraft has MK 108 as the engine mounted weapon...no belly gunpacks...
Yep...R5 was fitted in the field and it consisted of two MG 151/20s mounted in wing gondolas.
I still stand behind my statement and sources.
1Wmaker1
Lentolaivue 34
-
Originally posted by Wmaker:
Yep...R5 was fitted in the field and it consisted of two MG 151/20s mounted in wing gondolas.
I still stand behind my statement and sources.
1Wmaker1
Lentolaivue 34
No. You stand behind your statement and SOURCE
The day you bring another source here saying that the G10/R5 had wing gondolas I will stop laughing. (But I still will not believe it...note I have said FOUR (4) SOURCES of information on the R6-R5-U4 matter.
You only one. So yours is the books of the All-Mighty-And-Knowing-Gods, huh?
lol
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by Hans:
And the Typhoon is a peice of junk? BTW, its my favorite ride along with the La5-FN. Its a killer in Boom and Zoom, particularily with the seat jacked up and back so you can see better. Nice high deflection shooting with it.
Plus! This game's first perk fighter is the British Tempest.
Oh, yeah. The British sucketh big time in AH. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Hans.
The Typhoon will soon have it's rollrate decreased dramatically.
Whichever way you look at it, the Spitfire was one of the great planes of WW2, competitive with it's rivals from the begining to the end of the war.
It seems the only Spit to be freely available in AH will be the IX, which is outclassed by the D9, G10, P51 etc.
As to the British getting the first perk plane, I don't see that as a benifit. The Tempest is every way the contemporary of the D9 (though the Tempest was earlier). Would the Luftwaffles be rejoicing if the Tempest was coming unperked and the D9 had the "honour" of being the first perk plane?
-
Isn't the perk system there to allow planes that could unbalance the arena enter the arena at a limited rate? Since the Dora is contemporary to the p51D, 109G10 it shouldn't be perked. I don't think people would all flock to flying the Dora since there are planes with better characteristics (e.g. better/more cannons, higher speed, better turn, ground attack loadout, etc.). The way the arena looks now, I don't think the SpitXIV should be perked either. If it still has the same 2x20mm and 2x12.7mm with it's limited clip, it will probably be used by dedicated Spit lovers (and some converts). Reason being the tiff is still fast on the deck and has more cannon + ammunition. And the IX will still turn better (right?). As for the Tempest, isn't it a "fixed" Tiffie? i.e. better high alt-performance, faster at all alts, better and more cannon, and better wing? (correct me if I'm wrong.. haven't read about Tempest in a long time).
mauser
-
Originally posted by mauser:
Isn't the perk system there to allow planes that could unbalance the arena enter the arena at a limited rate? Since the Dora is contemporary to the p51D, 109G10 it shouldn't be perked. I don't think people would all flock to flying the Dora since there are planes with better characteristics (e.g. better/more cannons, higher speed, better turn, ground attack loadout, etc.). The way the arena looks now, I don't think the SpitXIV should be perked either. If it still has the same 2x20mm and 2x12.7mm with it's limited clip, it will probably be used by dedicated Spit lovers (and some converts). Reason being the tiff is still fast on the deck and has more cannon + ammunition. And the IX will still turn better (right?). As for the Tempest, isn't it a "fixed" Tiffie? i.e. better high alt-performance, faster at all alts, better and more cannon, and better wing? (correct me if I'm wrong.. haven't read about Tempest in a long time).
mauser
Mauser, the problem with the Spit XIV is that it is as fast as a P51 and a bit slower than Fw190D9...but it is maneouverable as hell and a great E-fighter by any means. Accelerates like a bastard with a rocket in his prettythang ( (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)), runs like a runstang, climbs way better than a Yak9, and turns like a Spit9.
The P51 is fast as hell...but at least it can't turn too much and accelerates very slow.
The 109G10 is fast and accelerates like a rocket...but its hispeed maneouverability, and its turnrate are toejamty.
The Fw190D9 will be FAST!! but...apart of being fast and a great roller it wont be able to turn, will bleed E worse than a 190A8 and will turn worse too.
The Spit XIV will do everything good. I am all for it in the MA but it will be the most used plane, more even that the blue cannon devil. If its not perked at the first, it will be later. Its simply too good an arena plane.
-
I HATE doing this, it feels like shooting myself in the foot, but...
RAM is right about the Spitfire MkXIV (except its speed, his description is accurate at sea level, but up higher its faster than the P-51D by 11mph and faster than the Fw190D-9 by even more). Its just too good of an aircraft for the MA. If it is not perked. Mating a two stage Griffon 65 engine to a strengthened, refined Spitfire airframe produced what is arguably one of the best air-to-air weapons of WWII.
Fw190D-9 with MW50 = Non-Perk (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Spitfire F.MkXIV = Perk (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
IMHO (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I'm going to go curl up into a fetal position and blubber now....
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Originally posted by RAM:
No. You stand behind your statement and SOURCE
The day you bring another source here saying that the G10/R5 had wing gondolas I will stop laughing. (But I still will not believe it...note I have said FOUR (4) SOURCES of information on the R6-R5-U4 matter.
You only one. So yours is the books of the All-Mighty-And-Knowing-Gods, huh?
As I said before I indeed have two sources:
Prien & Rodeike states those arguments and
"MESSERSCHMITT BF 109 JA SAKSAN SOTATALOUS" (isbn#951-95688-7-5) by Hannu Valtonen confirms them, so you can stop laughing now. Hannu Valtonen is one of the leading aviation historians/argeologists in Finland and done tons of research and he has my trust when specifically states that Prien & Rodeike's list is more correct than Jean-Claude Merret's.
Well anyways...I have another way to prove you wrong about R6 being the designation for gondola-mounted cannons in G-10s. Gondola-mounted cannons were a field conversion kit for all 109 variants which had it...we both agree on this, right? For example, Valtonen's book has werkenummer-list of all the production G6s built and there isn't a single mention about G-6/R6 in that list (I can post the list if you refuse to believe me). This is obvious because those cannons were installed on the field, not in the factory, and this is factory list I'm talking about. Here is the werkenummer-list of the G-10s which were finished before the war ended:
Mtt GmbH WNr. 130100-130700 123 G-10
Erla WNr. 150500-151088 c. 350 G-10/R6
Erla WNr. 151498-151634 c. 80 G-10/R6
Erla WNr. 151825-151999 c. 100 G-10/R6
Erla WNr. 490130-490399 c. 270 G-10
Erla WNr. 490400-490799*c. 350 G-10/R6
Erla WNr. 491100-491500'c. 370 G-10/R6
WNF WNr. 610300-611099 c. 370 G-10/U4
WNF WNr. 611900-612010 c. 70 G-10/U4
WNF WNr. 612700-613199 c. 210 G-10/U4
WNF WNr. 770100-770399 c. 200 G-10/R2
WNF WNr. 770900-771199 c. 100 G-10/R2
*Probably only 490231, -239, 241 and 244 were G-10/R6s.
'There could have been Bf 109G6/AS-machines in first werkenummer.
So R6 was installed in the factory, gondola-mounted cannons weren't, they were installed in the field.
R6 designation means plane was equipped with PKS 12 single-axis autopilot. You can't just "plug-in" something like this in the field conditions...SO it was installed in the factory and that is why it shows in the werkenummer list.
And RAM, do you honestly believe that about 650 G-10s out of about 2600 planes had gondola-mounted MK 108s? I'm telling you they never came into operational use and U4 designation means that engine-mounted MG 151/20 is replaced with MK 108...no wing cannons.
1Wmaker1
Lentolaivue 34
[This message has been edited by Wmaker (edited 02-01-2001).]
-
One thing to keep in mind....
For borderline AC like the Dora, perhaps it would be ideal to try it non-perked and see what happens.
However; here's the problem..it's infinately more controversial to add a plane unperked and perk it later, than to simply add it perked first.
If there was no F4U-1C, and tomorrow Pyro said "we're gonna add a Corsair with 4 20mm cannons, and make it a cheap perk, in 1.06" I think there would be widespread and universal happiness and appreciation.
But now, IF it's ever perked, it will set up the s***storm of all s***storms.
-
I can't imagine why they would perk the D-9
Both WB's and AW had it freely available, and it did not unbalance the game. Indeed, the greatest impact it had was as a "replacement runstang"--the runner dweebs (and a few good pilots, too) all flew the D-9 instead of the P-51.
In either game I still felt the P-51 was a slightly better airplane. It surprises me that the D-9 may be perked in AH.
I CAN understand why the Spit 14 would be perked....it would utterly dominate the arnea if modeled properly. I can understand the Tempest too--even faster than the D-9 and much better weapons and E retention.
I CANNOT understand why some people think the Spit 9 is "outclassed"--because it isn't. It turns well, climbs well, is easy to fly, has good weapons, and accelerates well. As a plane it's much better than the F6F or C.205 IMO. Because the SPit 9 isn't incredibly fast means it is BALANCED well for arena play, rather than dominating like the Spit 14 would be.
Bottom line--no need to perk a FW-190D-9.
J_A_B
-
Wmaker...see...this is my last word in this thing.
You prove again that you are wrong, or at least you do assumptions in a wrong way.
The list you present has only ONE U-modification...and many R. R2, R6...
Rustsätze modificatious could be fitted in the field. But also from factory!. LOL if you can put a couple of wing gondolas on a 109G10 in the field why are not going to do in the factory?
Then why didnt they call all those Rustsatze you mention in that list as U-X??? because as they were done in factory... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
4-2, I still have presented more sources. R6 was the wing gondola cannon G10 (As was the G6. as was the G5. as was the G2,as was the G1...etc etc etc)
Have a nice day.
-
During G-10 production Erla had other things to worry about than installing gondola-mounted MG 151/20 cannons on 530 production aircraft...a job that could easily be done on the field!!! When you claim that R6 was the rustsätze designation for G-10 you are also claiming that about 530 G-10s rolled off the production line MG 151/20 gondola-cannons allready installed...plus installations which were done on the field...AND that about 650 came from the factory MK 108 gondola-cannons allready installed...LOL...RAM give me a break!!! Just to remind you it is generally stated that gondola-mounted cannons were rarely seen in G-10s anyway (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif). And what I find very interesting is that you obviously don't seem to believe in the list I presented. It comes from a first hand source: Messerschmitt's delivery plan-documents.
I have hard time believing your naive approach on this source-issue:"You have only two books, I have as much as four, so of course I'm right!!!" First of all I don't consider "Warplanes of the Luftwaffe" or "The Great Book of WWII Airplanes" as sources of information at all on this matter. If a book says K-4 was equipped with pair of MG 151/15 on cowling and MK 103 cannon firing through the spinner it sure as hell makes me wonder are the rest of the statements conserning that particular aircraft correct, obviously it isn't so in your case (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif). Books I use, quote first hand sources; the orginal documents from factory and RLM records. Your "sources" quote other books. See the difference?? I don't care if you try backing up your statements by quoting 100 different books using old information. Of course you can find more of them because Prien & Rodeike published their work as late as in 1992!!!
Even I can write 50 books saying: "Bf 109G-10/R-6 had 6 forward firing MK 108 30 mm cannons and two MK 103 cannons in the upper turret"...still wont make it right, you know (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif).
1Wmaker1
Lentolaivue 34
-
Ruestsaetze = field conversion.
Umruest-Baustsaezte = factory conversion.
-
Don't perk the D9, don't perk the P47M either then (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
(will not fly the D9, but sure is a beautifull aircraft, the anti-P47 shapewise)
-
Originally posted by J_A_B:
I can't imagine why they would perk the D-9
Both WB's and AW had it freely available, and it did not unbalance the game.
it did not unbalance the game because it wasn´t modelled with mw50. Compared to allied fighter german fighter never had the best engines. I.e Warbirds, the 109K and the Fw190-D had both only 1800hp engines, while the real 605DCM produced 2000Hp and
the jumo213A with mw50 2100hp.
niklas
-
Shouldn't be perked.
-
Originally posted by niklas:
I.e Warbirds, the 109K and the Fw190-D had both only 1800hp engines, while the real 605DCM produced 2000Hp and
the jumo213A with mw50 2100hp.
Are you sure about that? And if so, then what engines were they modelled after in the WB or was that 1800 hp just some arbitrary number? And how did you get by it anyway? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
---
SageFIN
"I think I´ll believe in Gosh instead of God. If you don´t
believe in Gosh too, you´ll be darned to heck."
---
-
I don't know about WarBirds, but in AW it WAS modeled with MW50 (for some reason this was changed recently).
It performed as an MW50 D-9 should--faster than P-51 and better climb at lower altitudes.
It did not unbalance the game. The only real effect it had was to change the plane that "runner dweebs" flew. Instead of "Runstangs" we had "Dorka Dweebs".
Recently in AW the MW50 modeling was removed from the D-9, and it isn't very competative now, except up high. The non-MW50 D-9 is a match for the P-47, but not much else.
Certainly the D-9 isn't "perk" material. I wouldn't even call it a vast improvement over earlier FW's--it never was as popular as the A-4 or A-8, except among runners. It couldn't roll quite as well, didn't handle as well and had less firepower. It was at a noticable disadvantage against bombers. The ONLY things it had that the other FW's didn't was speed and high-alt performance.
I don't know whether HTC will perk the D-9, but I DO know this:
As a P-51 pilot, I had no fear of the Dora.
As I stated above, the Fw-190D-9 is not perk material. It would fit the current AH non-perk planeset quite well.
J_A_B
NOTE: I suspect RAM might not like this bird, as he currently seems to like the A-5 for its handling. The D-9 handles even worse than the A-8 does. As a plus though, it looks a lot meaner (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Niklas, WB Fw 190D-9 speed matched the RLM MW 50 figures quite accurately. And your point about the WB hp is cute, but if you look at the hacked FM specs you are referring to, almost all the other planes had reduced hp as well.
-
Wasnt there some arguing that the WB Dora became (too) heavy after an initial uber period.
danish
PS: and no, Dora should not be perked.Neither should the Spit XIV.But give the monsters some torque.
-
Why would a D9 handle worse than an A8? It weighed about 200-300lbs less at T/O. Why was roll reduced- same wings, less weight in outer wingpanels, lighter, same size vertical tail it doesnt make sense why roll would be any different, maybe somebody confuses Dora with Ta152 in this regard?
-
Originally posted by J_A_B:
NOTE: I suspect RAM might not like this bird, as he currently seems to like the A-5 for its handling. The D-9 handles even worse than the A-8 does. As a plus though, it looks a lot meaner (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
J_A_B, I LOVE A5, yes, I LOVE to close the fights in it, use its awesome maneouverability. I simply love what this bird can do (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But I know well that the 190D9 will turn worse than Fw190A8, and that is not a problem for me. I know to fly A8 (after all until 1.03 was my main ride), and the transition to D9 wont be too bad for me. Sure, I wont be able to outmaneouver enemy planes as easily as with an A5, but at least I will be able to not let the runstangs end the fight running away after they have been unable to kill me bouncing me with a lot of feets of advantage (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[edit] And yes, it is BEAUTIFUL (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)[/edit]
Grun, D9 is 300lbs lighter than A8, but seems that the lenghtened tail has a bad influence in turning performance. Dont know it very well ,this was something I read in this forum some time ago.
Regarding rollrate, I agree. D9 has the same wing, wingspan and ailerons as A8 has, it should roll the same.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 02-04-2001).]
-
Originally posted by funked:
Niklas, WB Fw 190D-9 speed matched the RLM MW 50 figures quite accurately. And your point about the WB hp is cute, but if you look at the hacked FM specs you are referring to, almost all the other planes had reduced hp as well.
They have reduced hp because it is 100% without wep i think. 1600hp without wep isn´t much for the 190D isn´t it? What is wep? 500hp more, 2100hp? This would make a bigger difference in climbrate when you hit wep. i think wep means 18-1900 hp in wb.
niklas