Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: kilo2 on June 08, 2010, 05:16:53 PM
-
I love this plane. Love it, head over heels for it.
Although a lot of people seem to think I like the ugly girl of the 109s though. I have heard its the worst performing overall of the G series we have in the game. Why is this? What makes this one worse off than the G2? Is there any one out there that likes this plane?
-
G2 has the same engine and is lighter. The G6 has more hitting power. I may be wrong, but I believe other than the 50cals instead of 30cals, its basically the same plane as the G2. The G6 is a ~400lb more g2. The G14 with the 20mm cannon is a G6 with better boost, ie when wep is hit, the ATA is higher.
-
If you love the G6, you'd better try the G2. The G2 has worse armament but you will barely notice it. In my opinion the G2 is the best 109 performance wise next to the K4. It turns and climbs better then both the G6 and G14 (on military power that is) and its even faster then a G14 on the deck on military power.
Personally I don't recommend gondolas AT ALL since it ruins the performance (especially the G6's). But if there is one 109 i would consider using gondolas, it would be the G2.
I'm taking up the G2 every once in a while when i don't feel like using 30mm's.
-
G2 vs G6 climb rate
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=14&p2=15&pw=2>ype=2)
G2 vs G6 speed
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=14&p2=15&pw=2>ype=0)
G2 vs G14 climb rate
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=14&p2=84&pw=2>ype=2)
G2 vs G14 speed
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=14&p2=84&pw=2>ype=0)
-
Is there any one out there that likes this plane?
Me.
- oldman
-
In real life the G-6 was a better fighter than the G-2, but the improvements does not easily translate to a simulation since they are mostly instrumentation/pilot aids, reliability and structural changes. The upgraded fire power is really the only benefit that we get in the game. The all-out performance suffered slightly due to increased weight, but more so because of increase in drag from the cowl bulges, wing bulges for the new stronger gear, and fixed tail wheel (the G-2 has a retractable one).
-
G6 is my favorite 109 we have. Something about it just screams out to be thrown about the sky and between the trees. It's got alot of character and can do some gravity defying moves when pushed.
-
G6 is my favorite 109 we have. Something about it just screams out to be thrown about the sky and between the trees. It's got alot of character and can do some gravity defying moves when pushed.
On the deck I feel unbeatable in it. Even with those performance sapping gondies.
-
Just curious if anyone has any knowledge of WW2 German pilot experiences while flying the g-2 or the g-6?
-
It is my favorite 109 as well. It may be because I'm used to it, but I prefer it over the G2 for some reason.
-
It is my favorite 109 as well. It may be because I'm used to it, but I prefer it over the G2 for some reason.
Not about the 109G's in particular but about 109's themself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STFdRrWBW2w
-
It seems to me that the G-6 is more stable than the G-2 or G-14. It might be slower in speed and climb, but it just seems to be more stable in some of those quirky maneuvers, especially the stall turns, snap rolls, snap turns, etc.
I certainly do not stall out (i.e. "lose control") in the G-6 like I do the other 109's.
-
pilot aids
hehe
-
The G6 used to be cool, then they took away the tater gun.
-
109g6 have so many variants, we just had to have the basic model, (same go for the fw190a8)
One thing about the 109g2 : its very vulnerable to hits in hte airframe from .50s, killing/wounding pilot.
The 109g6 otoh can absorb the bullets with its better pilot protection.
-
It is my favorite 109 as well. It may be because I'm used to it, but I prefer it over the G2 for some reason.
ditto
-
I really wish the 109G-6/AS was the model we have in AH.
-
I really wish the 109G-6/AS was the model we have in AH.
The only G-6 model?
Oh, god no.
-
The only G-6 model?
Oh, god no.
Why not, if we're stuck with just one, the G6/AS is a lot better than the one we have now.
-
I'm fairly sure that the G-6/AS was heavier and in any case it only starts to get better performance than standard G-6's above... 20,000' I think? Unless it was modeled with MW50 boost, in which case it would be completely unsuitable to sub for the G-6.
Further the /AS would be poorly representative of the G-6 that was in service from 1943-44 as the /AS was 'modern' as the G-6 line was in the spring of 1944, meaning that all G-6/AS's had the Erla Haube canopy and tall tail rudder, plus the cowling redesign required for the AS engine.
The G-6 would just loose all of the character that makes it the G-6, and the G-6's character is what makes it such a fun plane.
Replacing the G-6 with a G-6/AS would really just not be beneficial. It would just shift the gap.
-
I think you're mixing the G-10 up with the G6/AS. Primary differences between the G6 and G6/AS was the engine. The AS model had the DB-605 engine with the DB-603 supercharger giving it better performance at alt. Didn't use the MW50 system. The only other change was a more aerodynamic cowling.
The G-10 had the Erla canopy, longer rudder, different tail wheel, etc...
-
All of the things in the late G line (G-6 on) were mixed in as time went on, including the Erla Haube canopy and tall rudder... and all of the other improvements. The G-14 and G-10 were just attempts to standardize this.
As such, you'll see G-6's with Erla Haubes, G-14's with short rudders, etc. etc... in fact, those two 'abnormalities' in particular are pretty commonplace. I've even seen a G-10 with a short rudder.
Our G-6 is a fairly early model, representative of a G-6 produced in late summer/fall of 1943.
-
I forgot about the propeller blades too (VDM 9-12159 ?). Something about having a broad cord design to them.
I'm gonna have to dig again but I could have sworn the first G6/AS versions without the Erla canopy were distributed between Feb-Apr 1944.
-
All of the things in the late G line (G-6 on) were mixed in as time went on, including the Erla Haube canopy and tall rudder... and all of the other improvements. The G-14 and G-10 were just attempts to standardize this.
As such, you'll see G-6's with Erla Haubes, G-14's with short rudders, etc. etc... in fact, those two 'abnormalities' in particular are pretty commonplace. I've even seen a G-10 with a short rudder.
Our G-6 is a fairly early model, representative of a G-6 produced in late summer/fall of 1943.
Ja, field modifications were the norm with the G6, they were all over the map, I believe some of them had engine mods beyond the supercharger, I know some had a 30mm option, and the list goes on and on. Saying a 109 is a G6 is more like saying its not a G2 and not a K4, but something somewhere in between a G2 with 50 cals and a G14(which was an attempt to standardize the mess).
-
Ja, field modifications were the norm with the G6, they were all over the map, I believe some of them had engine mods beyond the supercharger, I know some had a 30mm option, and the list goes on and on. Saying a 109 is a G6 is more like saying its not a G2 and not a K4, but something somewhere in between a G2 with 50 cals and a G14(which was an attempt to standardize the mess).
30mm became much more common as production went on. As Motherland noted, our G-6 is an early one and that is why it lacks the 30mm option.
-
in "jg26 war diaries vol2" their 109g6 had 30mm's to a large extent during summer -44.
The disadvantage of the 30mm weight was ok since of its destructing power was so great.
-
The MK 108 weighs only 16 kg more than the MG 151/20. Pilot obesity would be a bigger factor than what engine gun option you choose.