Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Leek on October 18, 2009, 02:47:24 PM
-
How hard would it be to allow for the Ju 87 D3 model to have the single 20mm MG 151/20 mounted in each wing? Or for that matter to step up to the G1 model or the modified D models that had the 37mm wing pods as used on the Russian front. I love flying the Stuka, but once your one bomb is gone, there's really nothing left to fight with. Besides it would be a fun alternative to always using an IL.
-
How hard would it be to allow for the Ju 87 D3 model to have the single 20mm MG 151/20 mounted in each wing? Or for that matter to step up to the G1 model or the modified D models that had the 37mm wing pods as used on the Russian front. I love flying the Stuka, but once your one bomb is gone, there's really nothing left to fight with. Besides it would be a fun alternative to always using an IL.
D-3 didn't have 20 mm cannons mounted in the wings, nor was it ever a field modification option. The D-5 was the one that had the wing mounted 20 mm cannons.
ack-ack
-
To be fair ack ack it would be much easier to modify the existing loadouts than adding a model...no one would care about the historical accuracy of something as simple as gunpods for the existing model since the biggest differences between the models was engine, wingspan and armor...personally the current loadouts are a bit extreme and could use some tweaking.
The "field modification" issue could be debated as well:
D-1 and D-3 variants operated in combat with the 37 mm (1.46 in) BK 37 cannon in 1943...
The G-1 was converted from older D-series airframes retaining the smaller wing but without the dive brakes. The G-2 was similar to the G-1 except using the extended wing of the D-5 with 208 G-2 new built and at least 22 more converted from D-3 airframes.
"During the Battle of Kursk, only a handful of production Gs were committed. On the opening day of the offensive, Hans-Ulrich Rudel flew the only "official" Ju 87 G, although a significant number of Ju 87 D variants were installed with the 37 mm (1.46 in) cannon, and operated as unofficial Ju 87 Gs before the battle. In June 1943 the RLM ordered 20 Ju 87Gs as production variants."
IMO this would be more appropriate
1 1800Kg
1 1000Kg
1 1800Kg + 2x 250Kg
1 1000Kg + 2x 500Kg
2x 500Kg
2x 250Kg
2x 37mm (6 rounds per gun)
-
I love flying the Stuka, but once your one bomb is gone, there's really nothing left to fight with.
The Stuka will surprise you. Once you have offloaded ord, she is fairly nimble! I have gotten kills, although it takes time hammering away with those pea-shooters.
-
To be fair ack ack it would be much easier to modify the existing loadouts than adding a model...no one would care about the historical accuracy of something as simple as gunpods for the existing model since the biggest differences between the models was engine, wingspan and armor...personally the current loadouts are a bit extreme and could use some tweaking.
The "field modification" issue could be debated as well:
IMO this would be more appropriate
1 1800Kg
1 1000Kg
1 1800Kg + 2x 250Kg
1 1000Kg + 2x 500Kg
2x 500Kg
2x 250Kg
2x 37mm (6 rounds per gun)
im sure they held way more than 12 rounds
-
im sure they held way more than 12 rounds
Nope...
The G-1 was armed with two 37 mm cannons mounted on under-wing gondolas, each loaded with a 6-round magazine of armour piercing tungsten ammunition.
Several sources found with the same info.
-
To be fair ack ack it would be much easier to modify the existing loadouts than adding a model...no one would care about the historical accuracy of something as simple as gunpods for the existing model since the biggest differences between the models was engine, wingspan and armor...personally the current loadouts are a bit extreme and could use some tweaking.
I would care about the historical accuracy. Basically, you'd be introducing a plane type that was never produced or flown and that's what would happen if the D-3 was given an ordnance option of wing mounted 20 mm cannons.
Give the D-3 the 37 mm Flak 18 gun pod option? Sure, why not? It was a load out that was used on the D-3 until they were converted to the G-1 so historical accuracy in this case wouldn't be given the shaft.
ack-ack
-
I would care about the historical accuracy. Basically, you'd be introducing a plane type that was never produced or flown and that's what would happen if the D-3 was given an ordnance option of wing mounted 20 mm cannons.
Give the D-3 the 37 mm Flak 18 gun pod option? Sure, why not? It was a load out that was used on the D-3 until they were converted to the G-1 so historical accuracy in this case wouldn't be given the shaft.
ack-ack
Well. ya know seriously here...we now have a P-47M that was produced in very low numbers (130)...even though we have vastly incomplete plane sets for other factions. Modifying the loadouts available to the existing Stuka models would be a very minor infraction on the "historical accuracy" issue.
-
Spit16's had 23 TOTAL hours of combat time.....they weren't seen flying around in droves like you see them here. A spit16 never scored a single kill in WWII, so if we're going to split hairs on historical accuracy, let's get serious.
-
Spit16's had 23 TOTAL hours of combat time.....they weren't seen flying around in droves like you see them here. A spit16 never scored a single kill in WWII, so if we're going to split hairs on historical accuracy, let's get serious.
True... :aok
-
Spit16's had 23 TOTAL hours of combat time.....they weren't seen flying around in droves like you see them here. A spit16 never scored a single kill in WWII, so if we're going to split hairs on historical accuracy, let's get serious.
Source?
-
Well. ya know seriously here...we now have a P-47M that was produced in very low numbers (130)...even though we have vastly incomplete plane sets for other factions. Modifying the loadouts available to the existing Stuka models would be a very minor infraction on the "historical accuracy" issue.
That we now have the P-47M or how many combat hours a plane has is irrelevant to this discussion.
Spit16's had 23 TOTAL hours of combat time.....they weren't seen flying around in droves like you see them here. A spit16 never scored a single kill in WWII, so if we're going to split hairs on historical accuracy, let's get serious.
The Spitfire Mk XVI had more combat time than that, not sure of the exact number of hours but it was far more than 23. You are also incorrect about not having any kills. TB 752 flown by Flying Officer ‘Bob’ Young shot down a Fw 190 and a couple of days later, TB 752 agaub scored another A2A victory when Flying Officer ‘Fred’ Town shot down a He 111 (TB 752's "Final Victory" is depicted in the painting by Michael Turner). You can read more about TB 752 and the pilots that flew her in combat in the book, 'The Manston Spitfire - TB 752'.
So, now let's get serious...
You are wishing for something that never existed on the D-3. Since you're so willing to chuck historical accuracy out the window, why not ask for lasers or an AMRAAM missile system?
The simple fact is that the D-3 never carried 20 mm cannons on the wings, the wing design of the D-3 couldn't fit 20 mm cannons.
ack-ack
-
So, now let's get serious...
You are wishing for something that never existed on the D-3. Since you're so willing to chuck historical accuracy out the window, why not ask for lasers or an AMRAAM missile system?
The simple fact is that the D-3 never carried 20 mm cannons on the wings, the wing design of the D-3 couldn't fit 20 mm cannons.
ack-ack
No what I'm saying is that if the low production numbers can be overlooked to include a plane that was not needed then a simple modification to the armaments on another plane...which could have very easily been field enhancements...to include a set of weapons included as field mods on another plane (which for some reason does not exist in the set even with larger production numbers)...should be possible.
When the 37mm and 20mm were first deployed, they were retrofitted to operational D3 units that had the need...so don't just say it never existed.
-
No what I'm saying is that if the low production numbers can be overlooked to include a plane that was not needed then a simple modification to the armaments on another plane...which could have very easily been field enhancements...to include a set of weapons included as field mods on another plane (which for some reason does not exist in the set even with larger production numbers)...should be possible.
When the 37mm and 20mm were first deployed, they were retrofitted to operational D3 units that had the need...so don't just say it never existed.
The 37mm Flak 18 gun was used on the D-3s before they were converted to G-1s, the D-3 never had 20mm wing mounted cannons nor were any D-3s converted to be able to mounted the 20mm cannons in the wing. The D-5 and the G-2 (based on the D-5) had options to carry either the 20mm wing mounted cannons or the 37mm Flak 18 gun pods.
ack-ack
-
Spit16's had 23 TOTAL hours of combat time..
Holy cow I reckon I have read a few outrageous statements in my time....
Here's a living example of single Spitfire XVI that flew more than that just by its little old self:
http://www.aviationmuseum.com.au/aircraft/spitfiremkxvi.cfm (http://www.aviationmuseum.com.au/aircraft/spitfiremkxvi.cfm)
This Supermarine Mk XVI Spitfire is an ex-wartime example, built at Vickers Armstrong's Castle Bromwich "shadow factory", near Birmingham, in late 1944.
The aircraft’s first action was on 24 March (wearing squadron code FU-P) when, laden with two 250lb bombs and a long range belly tank, the aircraft headed a flight of four Spitfires for an armed reconnaissance; briefed to bomb rail targets in the Utrecht/Hague/Leiden area. TB863's cannons were fired in anger for the first time during a strafing attack on a large railway coach by the four, claimed as probably destroyed, before returning to altitude. The aircraft continued with these sorties flying twelve missions during its six weeks on operations; 23 hours 55 minutes in total.
and as for the extrordinary " A spit16 never scored a single kill in WWII" statement, I present information from "American Spitfire Aces of World War 2" about another surviving aircraft:
Spitfire XVI TB752/KH-Z of SQN LDR H P M Zary RCAF, No 403 Sqn RCAF, B114 Diepholz, Germany, 21 April 1945
.........
During the late afternoon of 21 April, Zary was flying his Spitfire XVI when he shot down a Bf109 near Schnackenburg to become the final American Spitfire Ace of World War 2. Four days later, while being flown by another pilot, TB752 shot down its second enemy aircraft and the fighter claimed its third kill when yet another pilot destroyed an FW190. The aircraft survived the war and is now on display in the Spitfire Memorial Museum at Manston, in Kent.
-
I apologize, i misread my information....I don't post here much so please bear with me. The information I got was on a single a/c, S/N TB863. http://www.aviationmuseum.com.au/aircraft/SpitfireMkXVI.cfm Again, sorry for the confusion on my part, I will dig a little deeper before posting again. <S>
-
I would love to see a 37mm gun pod option for the D-3, or the introduction of the G1 which sounds like it was just a D series with upgraded pilot armor and 37mm pods.
-
To shut Ack-Ack up,We could take the Stuka Model we have now. Tweak the speed and increase durability, fit it with two German 20mms with the same ord load outs + the 37mms.
And cross out the D-3 and Write D.5
Which would take HTC at max a week and Im being generous there.
-
To shut Ack-Ack up,We could take the Stuka Model we have now. Tweak the speed and increase durability, fit it with two German 20mms with the same ord load outs + the 37mms.
And cross out the D-3 and Write D.5
Which would take HTC at max a week and Im being generous there.
You'd have to tweak more than speed and increase durability to turn the D-3 into a D-5, but hey, don't let historical accuracy get in your way.
And you guys wonder why we long time players laugh at you console kiddies.
ack-ack
-
I have to say that I agree with Akak, if we start messing around with loadouts to substitute another model we open the door to all sorts of other stuff, its the thin edge of the wedge, next thing you know we'll have rocket powered triplanes and pumpkins :bolt:
-
You'd have to tweak more than speed and increase durability to turn the D-3 into a D-5, but hey, don't let historical accuracy get in your way.
And you guys wonder why we long time players laugh at you console kiddies.
ack-ack
Didn't know you were there flying Stukas...amazing stuff. Please tell me your squadron commander wouldn't allow field mods in your D-3 model without Goering's approval in writing.
-
Didn't know you were there flying Stukas...amazing stuff. Please tell me your squadron commander wouldn't allow field mods in your D-3 model without Goering's approval in writing.
Maybe if you would crack open a book about the planes in this game, you'd maybe learn something in the process. Again, there are absolutely no records or any other evidence that the D-3 carried the 20 mm wing mounted cannons. You want to know why? Because only the D-5 and later the G-2 (which was based on the D-5) had the 20 mm cannons. If you have definitive proof that shows otherwise, please by all means post the evidence.
It would take more than just a 'field mod' to make a D-3 to D-5 standards, this is something that you and some others in here have a tough time comprehending. Maybe if I was to type slower you might understand but something tells me it would be a lost cause.
ack-ack
-
Maybe if you would crack open a book about the planes in this game, you'd maybe learn something in the process. Again, there are absolutely no records or any other evidence that the D-3 carried the 20 mm wing mounted cannons. You want to know why? Because only the D-5 and later the G-2 (which was based on the D-5) had the 20 mm cannons. If you have definitive proof that shows otherwise, please by all means post the evidence.
It would take more than just a 'field mod' to make a D-3 to D-5 standards, this is something that you and some others in here have a tough time comprehending. Maybe if I was to type slower you might understand but something tells me it would be a lost cause.
ack-ack
I agree, the 20's have no place on the D-3 as it was never documented historically. But the 37's were fitted to D-3's and D-3's were also converted to G-2's...
The most likely update to the stuka if there ever will be one is the adition of 37mm option or just introduce the G-1.
-
You'd have to tweak more than speed and increase durability to turn the D-3 into a D-5, but hey, don't let historical accuracy get in your way.
And you guys wonder why we long time players laugh at you console kiddies.
ack-ack
2 years playing this game and an in depth knowledge of WW2 aircraft. So Ulrich Rudels Ace record of ground kills is void because he didn't have these tank busters, he had a "field mod' and his kills were made by "local tanks' which he took claim for.
It is recorded and lo and behold, Il2's Oleg Maddox has the JU87 Tank buster with 20mms 37's. A weapon change is really the only MAJOR change in the stuka variant.
Oh and this is a SIMULATOR not the real deal, so we do not have angry russians 2 weeks away and we do not have angry Germans bombing our factories. We like PLANES. and if we want a plane and the majority wants it then we should get it in due course. Im not suggesting anything like Amraams, what Im saying is. If it was in WW2 we should be allowed to have it and that model Stuka CERTAINLY was there in substantaial numbers.
So Ack-Ack, Give me the top five reasons WHY this plane should not and will not be added.
-
Maybe if you would crack open a book about the planes in this game, you'd maybe learn something in the process. Again, there are absolutely no records or any other evidence that the D-3 carried the 20 mm wing mounted cannons. You want to know why? Because only the D-5 and later the G-2 (which was based on the D-5) had the 20 mm cannons. If you have definitive proof that shows otherwise, please by all means post the evidence.
It would take more than just a 'field mod' to make a D-3 to D-5 standards, this is something that you and some others in here have a tough time comprehending. Maybe if I was to type slower you might understand but something tells me it would be a lost cause.
ack-ack
Maybe you should re-read the differences between the models again, because aside aside from the engines, no other major modifications that would show a visible difference were made between the D-3 and the G-1...of which the base models for the G-1 were the D-1 and D-5. The G-2 variant was produced from modified D-5s. Perhaps while you're making your claims on "historical accuracy" you can figure out why the dive sirens still exist on the D-3 Stukas in AH when they were removed on the D-3 models in real life.
There is only one documented claim of a Ju-87D-3 being equipped with 20mm's and that was reportedly flown by Hans Rudel successfully against Soviet tanks. It was a field mod. Other than that, the supposed original plans for the G-1 were to use 30mm cannons and not the 37mm...but after tests with a converted D-1 model that had a Jumo 211J and 37mm gun pods mounted on it, many already in service D-1's and D-3's were converted to the specifications of the G-1 before that model was produced in sufficient quantities using the D-1 and D3 airframes and armor.
That sir is in your books.
-
2 years playing this game and an in depth knowledge of WW2 aircraft. So Ulrich Rudels Ace record of ground kills is void because he didn't have these tank busters, he had a "field mod' and his kills were made by "local tanks' which he took claim for.
Wow, you're so far off the argument that it's funny. Maybe you should start reading some books and stop getting your plane information from shows on the History and Military Channel.
It is recorded and lo and behold, Il2's Oleg Maddox has the JU87 Tank buster with 20mms 37's. A weapon change is really the only MAJOR change in the stuka variant.
Which version of the Ju87 is modeled in IL2? Again, a weapons change is not the only major difference between the D-3 and the D-5.
Oh and this is a SIMULATOR not the real deal, so we do not have angry russians 2 weeks away and we do not have angry Germans bombing our factories. We like PLANES. and if we want a plane and the majority wants it then we should get it in due course. Im not suggesting anything like Amraams, what Im saying is. If it was in WW2 we should be allowed to have it and that model Stuka CERTAINLY was there in substantaial numbers.
You are advocating adding something to a plane that it did not field in real life. You point out this is a simulation and it is, it's a simulation of aerial and ground combat using historically accurate WW2 aircraft. Your wish would be like me asking for the P-38K or having 8 .50 cals in the P-38L.
So Ack-Ack, Give me the top five reasons WHY this plane should not and will not be added.
I've already given you the reasons why the D-3 shouldn't have the option to have 20 mm cannons in the wing. Again, show any evidence that the D-3 had 20 mm cannons in the wings and were used operationally in numbers.
Maybe you should re-read the differences between the models again, because aside aside from the engines, no other major modifications that would show a visible difference were made between the D-3 and the G-1...of which the base models for the G-1 were the D-1 and D-5. The G-2 variant was produced from modified D-5s.
Of course there is no visual difference between the D-3 and the G-1, the G-1 was basically a D-3 with the 37 mm Flak 18 gun pods. The G-1 was based solely on the D-3. After the Battle of Kursk, those D-3s that were equipped with the 37 mm Flak 18 cannon were given the G-1 designation. The D-1 and the D-5 were not base models for the G-1.
Perhaps while you're making your claims on "historical accuracy" you can figure out why the dive sirens still exist on the D-3 Stukas in AH when they were removed on the D-3 models in real life.
Sure I can figure out why some players have the 'Horns of Jericho' in game. It's due to the custom sound pack they're using, the default sounds for the Ju-87D-3 in game does not have the siren. Some customer sound pack creators switched the Wind sound file for the siren because some players requested it.
There is only one documented claim of a Ju-87D-3 being equipped with 20mm's and that was reportedly flown by Hans Rudel successfully against Soviet tanks. It was a field mod. Other than that, the supposed original plans for the G-1 were to use 30mm cannons and not the 37mm...but after tests with a converted D-1 model that had a Jumo 211J and 37mm gun pods mounted on it, many already in service D-1's and D-3's were converted to the specifications of the G-1 before that model was produced in sufficient quantities using the D-1 and D3 airframes and armor.
That sir is in your books.
Please, show this 'official document' that shows Rudel flew a D-3 that had 20 mm cannons mounted in the wing like the D-5 or any other Ju87 variant fielded 20 mm cannons mounted in the wings. The only other one was the D-4 and that was only on paper as the D-4 was a naval variant prototype.
Yes, various D models were used as test beds to test different weapons configurations but these were one offs and most didn't see operational status beyond one or two aircraft and never in squadron strength.
Using your argument, we should get the P-38K, after all one prototype was built and that should be sufficient enough to get it added and we might as well get a P-38L with 6 and 8 .50 cal machine guns mounted in the nose. Let's just chuck out historical accuracy to cater to you console kiddies.
ack-ack
-
Of course there is no visual difference between the D-3 and the G-1, the G-1 was basically a D-3 with the 37 mm Flak 18 gun pods. The G-1 was based solely on the D-3. After the Battle of Kursk, those D-3s that were equipped with the 37 mm Flak 18 cannon were given the G-1 designation. The D-1 and the D-5 were not base models for the G-1.
Yeah I wrote the wrong thing in there...the D-1 and D-3 were the base models used during the initial field conversions after the idea was accepted by Luftwaffe command. After that the D-3 was the airframe used in the G-1. The D-5 which had longer wings and a few other modifications was the base model used in the G-2.
According to Rudel's story the initial 37mm battle tests were with an experimental squadron sent to the Eastern front which he got assigned to...that was a few months before he was awarded the oak leaves for his Knight's Cross and re-assigned (at his request) to his original Stuka squadron. I'm still looking for the reference on the 20mm experiment, but your point of "one off" and "prototype" I agree with. Doesn't belong.
Let's just chuck out historical accuracy to cater to you console kiddies.
ack-ack
I don't play consoles...don't even own one, so you can keep your ill attempted insult.
The fact is that the D-3 model in AH is such that it could be given "alternate" options in weapons loadouts including wing mounted 20mm MG/151-20 cannons since the only physically discernible difference between the D-3 and the D-5 was the length of the wings...and after the introduction of the Jumo 213 engine the longer wings on the D-5 were no longer needed. The D-5 model had 3 different engines, 1 wing modification, 1 aileron modification and the floor window was reinforced. From photographs it's very difficult to tell the difference between the D-3 and D-5.
That being the case, would it be ok with you in your "expert opinion" if we ask that the current Ju-87 in game be "upgraded" to the D-5 model and have the 37mm gunpods available as an "alternate" loadout?
-
The solution is obvious, and there is no need to toss insults.
When the Ju87 gets redone, update the Ju87D-3 and add the Ju87G-3 as a separate aircraft. Add a BoB Ju87 while at it too.
-
Ok Ack-Ack I am now officially sick of your demenour and contempt.
I may be 15 years old and yes I do play consoles. But I have been flight simming for almost all my life and have been facsinated with planes since I became self aware. So to say that I have no knowledge of aircraft and their history PARTICULARLY Second World War aircraft is ludicrous.
So please, If you have no constructive input to add to this idea. Butt out.
-
Ok Ack-Ack I am now officially sick of your demenour and contempt.
I may be 15 years old and yes I do play consoles. But I have been flight simming for almost all my life and have been facsinated with planes since I became self aware. So to say that I have no knowledge of aircraft and their history PARTICULARLY Second World War aircraft is ludicrous.
Well, you haven't shown any real knowledge of history, particularly in regards to WW2 aircraft. Oh, and by the way, I've been playing online flight sims since before you were born.
So please, If you have no constructive input to add to this idea. Butt out.
So, someone can only post in this thread if they agree with your wildly inaccurate historical wish? Nut up little man and get used to people disagreeing with you.
ack-ack
-
2 years playing this game and an in depth knowledge of WW2 aircraft. So Ulrich Rudels Ace record of ground kills is void because he didn't have these tank busters, he had a "field mod' and his kills were made by "local tanks' which he took claim for.
That right there excludes it. Not allowed
-
Well, you haven't shown any real knowledge of history, particularly in regards to WW2 aircraft. Oh, and by the way, I've been playing online flight sims since before you were born.
So, someone can only post in this thread if they agree with your wildly inaccurate historical wish? Nut up little man and get used to people disagreeing with you.
ack-ack
Im not talking about disagreement. Im talking about your attitude. In my IMO besides the designation number and armament layouts the difference between the Stuka Variants is almost non-existent. The same goes with all aircraft variants, almost no changes in airframe.
So we have 303. Machine Guns that do no damage and Laser Beam observer guns, but when an armament package is added to an aircraft with NO asthetic changes ITS NOT HISTORICAL.
Please show some sense
-
So we have 303. Machine Guns that do no damage and Laser Beam observer guns, but when an armament package is added to an aircraft with NO asthetic changes ITS NOT HISTORICAL.
Like so many others, you obviously seem to be not able to distinguish between why some aspects of the game are inevitably ahistorical due to necessity, and why others should remain true to history.
So, I'd suggest that before questioning someone else's attitude, you might want to learn the basic rules or tendencies on how the developers of this game chooses their selection of planes or armaments. Because usually, one looks at back at these sort of moments and tends to become very embarassed, thinking "oh boy, was I stupid back then".
-
Im not talking about disagreement. Im talking about your attitude. In my IMO besides the designation number and armament layouts the difference between the Stuka Variants is almost non-existent. The same goes with all aircraft variants, almost no changes in airframe.
So we have 303. Machine Guns that do no damage and Laser Beam observer guns, but when an armament package is added to an aircraft with NO asthetic changes ITS NOT HISTORICAL.
Please show some sense
There is a difference in the airframe between the D-3 and the D-5. For someone that claims to have knowledge of WW2 aircraft, I am suprised you didn't know that.
ack-ack
-
Yes I did know, But they were MINOR. But if you guys want to knitpick thats fine. Im not particular, its a stuka and it bombs stuff. If it looks like a stuka, flies like a stuka and has weapons that are a stuka's. ITS A STUKA.
Not a d-3 or d-5 or G-1 IT IS A STUKA.
-
Yes I did know, But they were MINOR. But if you guys want to knitpick thats fine. Im not particular, its a stuka and it bombs stuff. If it looks like a stuka, flies like a stuka and has weapons that are a stuka's. ITS A STUKA.
Not a d-3 or d-5 or G-1 IT IS A STUKA.
Sonny boy just admit defeat. Because a 25-c is a far diff bird than a 25-h. Same applies to a stuka. :neener:
-
Sonny boy just admit defeat. Because a 25-c is a far diff bird than a 25-h. Same applies to a stuka. :neener:
Come on Bronk, that was like trying to compare the Ju-87 prototype to the Ju-87G-3. Not even a close comparison to what is being discussed here.
There is a difference in the airframe between the D-3 and the D-5. For someone that claims to have knowledge of WW2 aircraft, I am suprised you didn't know that.
ack-ack
I thought we already discussed this or are we going to start using the "selective subject" argument. The only differences between the D-3 and D-5 were lengthened wings on the D-5, Jumo 211P or Jumo 211J-1 or Jumo 213 engine, increased armor in the floor window, and 1 hinge was added to the ailerons...the biggest changes had already been made between the B series and the D series. The structural changes in the airframes occurred between the B and D series, and we're not talking about taking the B series and turning it into a G-1.
-
The structural changes in the airframes occurred between the B and D series, and we're not talking about taking the B series and turning it into a G-1.
No, you're just talking about adding a weapons option that didn't exist for the D-3.
ack-ack
-
No, you're just talking about adding a weapons option that didn't exist for the D-3.
ack-ack
Forget the 20mm...I already admitted it was a "one off" field mod that wasn't well documented nor used in production...but if you're referring to the 37mm gunpods, that's a different story.
-
Yes I did know, But they were MINOR. But if you guys want to knitpick thats fine. Im not particular, its a stuka and it bombs stuff. If it looks like a stuka, flies like a stuka and has weapons that are a stuka's. ITS A STUKA.
Not a d-3 or d-5 or G-1 IT IS A STUKA.
Let's take out the Spitfire MK V, VII, XIV and XVI. After all, it's a spit, it flies around and shoots stuff. The Spitfire MK I looks like, flies like, and has weapons found on a Spitfire; it's a Spitfire. no other attention needs to be paid to it.
-
Let's take out the Spitfire MK V, VII, XIV and XVI. After all, it's a spit, it flies around and shoots stuff. The Spitfire MK I looks like, flies like, and has weapons found on a Spitfire; it's a Spitfire. no other attention needs to be paid to it.
Whoa when did the Mk VII sneak in. ;)
-
Whoa when did the Mk VII sneak in. ;)
Hopefully soon!!! :banana:
-
37mm armed stuka would bring a bit of variety to the ground game I think..., heck im bored with IL-2's tracking, or otherwise disabling my tank.
I have a personal affinity for the plane because Hanz Ulrich Rudel is so associated with it, (and we all know he was the most succesful pilot in history) It would be fun to compare oneself to such a historical pilot, and I believe there would be alot to gain in the senario's.
It seems silly to argue..., sure there where diffrent models of Ju-87, but I think our friend is elluding to the fact that since there is all ready a stuka on the books, adding another of the appropriate model would be simpler since there is a baseline established, i.e. BRING THE 37mm Ju TO THE GAME!!!
I vote yes :aok (without lingering to argue point and counter point)
-
question didnt the stukas have a trapeze the lower the bomb so it could clear the prop?