Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Zacherof on September 04, 2013, 03:09:30 PM
-
They uses them in RL why not here! :pray
-
you're talking about the gondolas right?
-
Not neccasarily. I'm talking about when there was a lack of MK-108's that mg151/20's were installed.
-
you're talking about the gondolas right?
There is a discussion in the Aircraft forum, we all know there were 20mm hub cannons for the 109K4, it should be added into Aces high (not gondolas).
-
I'd say that if the coding for the old G-10 still exists, we should bring it back along with giving the K4 its 20mm. It seems as if late G-10's were essentially slightly lighter K4's with an Mg 151/20 hub cannon as standard. That means that we did, technically, have a G-10 in the game, even if it was based off the existing K4 (I think).
And even if the coding has been deleted, we should still add the G-10. We're already dropping the Mg 151/20 into the nose, why not duplicate the code, remove the Mk 108, and give us a G-10. It would make things easier to manage for special events where there were both G-10's and K4's. That way, if the event needs 30mm armed K4's, it can disable the Mg 151 for the K4, and still have G-10's.
-
I'd say that if the coding for the old G-10 still exists, we should bring it back along with giving the K4 its 20mm. It seems as if late G-10's were essentially slightly lighter K4's with an Mg 151/20 hub cannon as standard. That means that we did, technically, have a G-10 in the game, even if it was based off the existing K4 (I think).
And even if the coding has been deleted, we should still add the G-10. We're already dropping the Mg 151/20 into the nose, why not duplicate the code, remove the Mk 108, and give us a G-10. It would make things easier to manage for special events where there were both G-10's and K4's. That way, if the event needs 30mm armed K4's, it can disable the Mg 151 for the K4, and still have G-10's.
The old G-10 was a K-4. There was no flight model change when the Bf109s were redone and it was relabeled a Bf109K-4. The only change was taking away the 20mm options. AH has never had a Bf109G-10 flight model.
-
We're there any aerodynamic differences between late G-10, and K4's? Cause they use the same engine?
I haven't been able to find any, save for the cowl bumps on planes rebuilt from G-6 and - 14 airframes.
-
We're there any aerodynamic differences between late G-10, and K4's? Cause they use the same engine?
I haven't been able to find any, save for the cowl bumps on planes rebuilt from G-6 and - 14 airframes.
Per GScholz in the other thread the main gear would not be fully enclosed and the tail wheel would not retract. Mind you, he says that is true of most K-4s as well and that it would reduce the top speed to 425-430mph, which is right about where the G-10's should be expected to be. The AH K-4, and old, labeled as a G-10 but was really a K-4, 'G-10' does 452mph which means it has enclosed main gear and a retracting tail wheel, something the G-10 never did have I think.
-
I can't imagine it would be all that difficult to lock the tail wheel down, and remove the gear doors. I mean the gear is already modeled for drag (when down), as is the tail wheel.
Seems pretty quick, in a relative sense.
-
You guys msut have really selective hearing in regards to the K4, that long thread in the the other forum has stated the facts on this a couple of times.
-Less than the first dozen K4s had 20mm hubs installed at the factory, likely for a presentation or publicity stunt to some bigwigs. These were probabley replaced at the depot level before being issued to combat units, as no evidence of a K4 with a 20mm hub is known in combat or beyond first few produced at the factory.
-Some K4s were shipped from the factory to depots with 20mm gondies, and are well documented to having them immediatley removed. Again, no evidence of a K4 with 20mm gondies equiped is known in combat.
...OT: Want to really think about something amazing?... The K4 prominently being post-depot and field-unit modeled, but the 190A8 is factory-fresh and has disregarded anything beyond the factory dates into its modeling (options to exlude reinforced armor, the cowl MGs, or the upgraded "egg"/engine - all more common at various times in the field than not - but in HTCs defense it was a real mix-n-match, where the K4 is kinda standardised). Anywho, I'd personaly rather see an A-9, another mid and early A-series, and a few more F/Gs (and maybe another D) 190s before another late-war 109, but that is both my preference and thought on the most-lacking choices that would be nice additions to the planeset.
-
You guys msut have really selective hearing in regards to the K4, that long thread in the the other forum has stated the facts on this a couple of times.
-Less than the first dozen K4s had 20mm hubs installed at the factory, likely for a presentation or publicity stunt to some bigwigs. These were probabley replaced at the depot level before being issued to combat units, as no evidence of a K4 with a 20mm hub is known in combat or beyond first few produced at the factory.
Oh really? Then why didn't you post a source right away where you got your info that only first dozen had 20mm as a motor cannon?
Do you actually have a source or are you just adding noise to the thread?
...OT: Want to really think about something amazing?... The K4 prominently being post-depot and field-unit modeled, but the 190A8 is factory-fresh and has disregarded anything beyond the factory dates into its modeling (options to exlude reinforced armor, the cowl MGs, or the upgraded "egg"/engine - all more common at various times in the field than not - but in HTCs defense it was a real mix-n-match, where the K4 is kinda standardised). Anywho, I'd personaly rather see an A-9, another mid and early A-series, and a few more F/Gs (and maybe another D) 190s before another late-war 109, but that is both my preference and thought on the most-lacking choices that would be nice additions to the planeset.
Is it really that hard to try to keep these threads on topic?
-
Is it really that hard to try to keep these threads on topic?
I like turtles. :bolt:
-
One may also ask the other way round, is there any evidence for 20mm-hub K-4s in combat?
Gondies were always an option for the K-4, just like any other G-series fighter so why not include them as option?
-
One may also ask the other way round, is there any evidence for 20mm-hub K-4s in combat?
Gondies were always an option for the K-4, just like any other G-series fighter so why not include them as option?
I would like that.
I'd say that if the coding for the old G-10 still exists, we should bring it back along with giving the K4 its 20mm. It seems as if late G-10's were essentially slightly lighter K4's with an Mg 151/20 hub cannon as standard. That means that we did, technically, have a G-10 in the game, even if it was based off the existing K4 (I think).
And even if the coding has been deleted, we should still add the G-10. We're already dropping the Mg 151/20 into the nose, why not duplicate the code, remove the Mk 108, and give us a G-10. It would make things easier to manage for special events where there were both G-10's and K4's. That way, if the event needs 30mm armed K4's, it can disable the Mg 151 for the K4, and still have G-10's.
Are you asking for it only to have the mg151? or have the same package as the G14?
cause thge way im reading it you want to do away with the mk108. idk maybe its time for bed :uhoh
-
There is a discussion in the Aircraft forum, we all know there were 20mm hub cannons for the 109K4, it should be added into Aces high (not gondolas).
uh huh...that's not exactly the whole picture. try not skewing things just because you think it's a brilliant idea...
-
Oh really? Then why didn't you post a source right away where you got your info that only first dozen had 20mm as a motor cannon?
Do you actually have a source or are you just adding noise to the thread?
I have nearly a dozen Me-109 books ranging from E to K, nothing mentions much on numbers other then fact the K-4 used the 20mm and 30mm. The only thing I sadly don't have is the armament reports for August-December 1944 from the messerschmitt factory which would tell me which models got what coming out of the factory. Due to the bombings many records are lost, I am also missing the Armament Technical manual for the 109 series (september 1944 and on). Each new model a new manual was printed which shed lights on what what changes happened etc.
I cannot get any information on them period, or even find them to buy them - this would tell me a great deal on what the factories put on the aircrafts. Unless someone has this information its going to be damn near impossible to prove the K model had ALL 30mm or all 20mm.
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab56/Misconduc/109.jpg)
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab56/Misconduc/109-1.jpg)
-
I have nearly a dozen Me-109 books ranging from E to K, nothing mentions much on numbers other then fact the K-4 used the 20mm and 30mm.
.....
Unless someone has this information its going to be damn near impossible to prove the K model had ALL 30mm or all 20mm.
Yep.
This is exactly what I've been saying all along. Prien, Rodeike & Czech authors for example mention that both were used. As the production numbers for both K-4 and G-10 for example are not known exactly it could well be that this kind of exact numbers will never be found out.
-
Got a downloadable version for the 109E series Butch??
:x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
-
Got a downloadable version for the 109E series Butch??
:x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
I can mail it to ya whatever you want
-
Perk the K4. :aok :devil
-
I would like that. Are you asking for it only to have the mg151? or have the same package as the G14?
cause thge way im reading it you want to do away with the mk108. idk maybe its time for bed :uhoh
K4 would have the same gun options as the G-14, but without the gondolas.
But because HTC would already be doing work modifying the K4, what they should do is duplicate the code. One with both the 30mm and 20mm, and unchanged aerodynamics. That would be our K4. Then we take the copy of the code, remove the 30mm option, lock the tailwheel down, and remove the landing gear covers.
-
Oh really? Then why didn't you post a source right away where you got your info that only first dozen had 20mm as a motor cannon?
Do you actually have a source or are you just adding noise to the thread?
Is it really that hard to try to keep these threads on topic?
One may also ask the other way round, is there any evidence for 20mm-hub K-4s in combat?
Gondies were always an option for the K-4, just like any other G-series fighter so why not include them as option?
You must be new here Denniss, speaking logic will get you no where, here borrow my flame suit.
WMaker is a real funny guy around here, I almost love him, but he has relentlesly argued into this game top-line actual-combat brewsters but won't let us even THINK (nevermind discuss) actual-combat 190s. It's funny because I just don't get it, he flips from one side of the coin on the Finnish Brewster being the one Brewster modeled (best brewster model ever fielded, and a fighter that was further modified to be a better fighter), to the A8 being the one A8 modeled (nevermind it being the heaviest and being a modified fighter specialised for hit and runs against bombers).
Yep.
This is exactly what I've been saying all along. Prien, Rodeike & Czech authors for example mention that both were used. As the production numbers for both K-4 and G-10 for example are not known exactly it could well be that this kind of exact numbers will never be found out.
No it's not, you speak nothing of logic these days and haven't since the Brewster was released, but that's not why I ignore you now. Recently you've only been lurking in the wishlist forums, being as supportive and contributing as usual.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,353252.0.html Go hump on somoene else's leg since a few more before me were the first persons to of brought this up, and I've heard/read of it before too, but I don't care enough about 109s to own a book or know where the source comes from.
Read your responces again.
Oh really? Then why didn't you post a source right away where you got your info that only first dozen had 20mm as a motor cannon?
Do you actually have a source or are you just adding noise to the thread?
Is it really that hard to try to keep these threads on topic?
Yep.
This is exactly what I've been saying all along. Prien, Rodeike & Czech authors for example mention that both were used. As the production numbers for both K-4 and G-10 for example are not known exactly it could well be that this kind of exact numbers will never be found out.
What the heck does "what you're talking about" have to do with missing armament reports that YOU YOURSELF acknowledge nobody will ever likely absolutely know?... nonsense is what you're speaking.
And not to go offtop again, but I concluded long ago you'll keel over and die before agreeing to change or add another 190A8 in AH, but if you change your mind and want to help us get more models in the game that actualy saw wide use in combat, I'd love to welcome you.
-
wmaker likes to hide behind that "source" demand of his sometimes. Not always, but sometimes when he (IMO) really wants something and has nothing to back it up.
As for this entire thread, it's already being discussed in the other forum. Does this thread exist simply because you didn't like the answers you were getting? The answers that explained how few K-4s ever had 20mm options? And ignores the point that even some that did were converted to Mk108s after leaving the factory?
This thread is just wasted space, because the response received in that other sub-forum wasn't siding with you. Stick to the other topic.
-
wmaker likes to hide behind that "source" demand of his sometimes. Not always, but sometimes when he (IMO) really wants something and has nothing to back it up.
Yes that idiot, he and the entire scientific community with their fangled peer-review nonsense. Far better what you do: conjecture and quote websites :rofl :rofl
-
You must be new here Denniss, speaking logic will get you no where, here borrow my flame suit.
WMaker is a real funny guy around here, I almost love him, but he has relentlesly argued into this game top-line actual-combat brewsters but won't let us even THINK (nevermind discuss) actual-combat 190s. It's funny because I just don't get it, he flips from one side of the coin on the Finnish Brewster being the one Brewster modeled (best brewster model ever fielded, and a fighter that was further modified to be a better fighter), to the A8 being the one A8 modeled (nevermind it being the heaviest and being a modified fighter specialised for hit and runs against bombers).
No it's not, you speak nothing of logic these days and haven't since the Brewster was released, but that's not why I ignore you now. Recently you've only been lurking in the wishlist forums, being as supportive and contributing as usual.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,353252.0.html Go hump on somoene else's leg since a few more before me were the first persons to of brought this up, and I've heard/read of it before too, but I don't care enough about 109s to own a book or know where the source comes from.
Read your responces again.
What the heck does "what you're talking about" have to do with missing armament reports that YOU YOURSELF acknowledge nobody will ever likely absolutely know?... nonsense is what you're speaking.
And not to go offtop again, but I concluded long ago you'll keel over and die before agreeing to change or add another 190A8 in AH, but if you change your mind and want to help us get more models in the game that actualy saw wide use in combat, I'd love to welcome you.
So no source then? So you just pulled that number of K-4s produced with the 20mm cannon from your hat then?
Where did you come up with the number "less than a dozen"? If you knew to post that number you must have read it from somewhere right?
Welp, this drivel about the Brewster certainly won't warrant an answer.
You don't have a faintest clue about any Brewster data or numbers, nor is your perception on how it performs in the game worth commenting about.
wmaker likes to hide behind that "source" demand of his sometimes. Not always, but sometimes when he (IMO) really wants something and has nothing to back it up.
:huh
Nothing to back up? Interesting.
Ok lets play your way then. I'm going to state that EXACTLY 50% of the K-4s came with MG151/20 and the other 50% came with MK108. How do I know this? WELL BECAUSE I SAY SO!!!!! I don't need to present a single source for my statements since you don't seem to either. Now if you try to ask me where I get this 50% figure from I'm going to accuse you of "hiding behind a source demand" (what ever the hell that means).
:rofl
What a moron.
Yes that idiot, he and the entire scientific community with their fangled peer-review nonsense. Far better what you do: conjecture and quote websites :rofl :rofl
Thanks shida for the biggest laugh of the week! :rofl :D
<S>
Oh dear! :lol
-
Thanks shida for the biggest laugh of the week! :rofl :D
:rofl :cheers: :salute