new P-47 and P-51 variants.

[cav58d]

What is the Malcom canopy?

[StarOfAfrica2]

I really could care less if they add more ponys or jugs, I rarely fly either one as it is.  I just said that from the way his post was written, it left me with the impression that "variants" meant variants of the planes they are currently remodelling, which is the pony and jug.  

I dunno how I coulda forgotten about the Fw190A-6, but this plane also has a very good chance to be introduced. It was a major variant, essentially very simular to the Fw190A-5, but wields 4x MG151/20s instead of 2x MG-FF + 2x MG151/20s.

All they would need is use the same model, add some increased weight for the 2x MG151/20, and then label it "A-6".

We already have it.  The A5 has that option already in the loadout selection.  So they dont have to add a thing for the A6 to be included.  What we really need (if we need more FWs) is an A3 and perhaps a D13 (although not for ToD).  More bomb choices for the F8 would be nice too.

But back to the subject, I suppose Pyro's wording can be taken many ways, depending on what it is you want it to mean.  So we'll just have to wait and see.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by cav58d
What is the Malcom canopy?

Malcom hood was produced in Britain.  It gave much better visibilty to the P51B. First used on RAF Mustang IIIs, it also showed up on P47s as well

A profile I did a while back of "The Deacon's " P51B with a Malcom hood, May 1944

Dan/CorkyJr

[AKFokerFoder+]

Originally posted by TDeacon
One P-51 variant Pyro may be referring to would be a Malcolm-canopied P-51b.  This has been discussed a number of times in the past.

A Macolm hood on a Pony B would be boss.  Even if it only has 4 guns, I would certainly fly it a bit.  The B is a fighter pilots dream, almost as good as a Yak, but of course, unlike the Yak, it has an almost adequate guns package.

[Kweassa]

We already have it. The A5 has that option already in the loadout selection.

 Check the labels again. If we already had it, don't you think I would have been aware of it during all these years flying AH?

hat we really need (if we need more FWs) is an A3 and perhaps a D13 (although not for ToD). More bomb choices for the F8 would be nice too.

 An A-3 would be great. A glimpse of the early 190s.... (except this one would be totally outclassed, considering our SpitV runs at 16+ boost).  

 D-13 would be a sweet ride, but it's definately a perk material, and I don't think enough production numbers to justify modelling it to the game.

 More bomb options for the F8 would be really cool.

So we'll just have to wait and see.

 Totally agree.

[TexMurphy]

Personally I do hope they introduce a Malcom Hood P51C.

Yeah I do know the B&C are the same, thats why it would work so well with the Malcom on the C.

Tex

[Kegger26]

Originally posted by TexMurphy
Personally I do hope they introduce a Malcom Hood P51C.

Yeah I do know the B&C are the same, thats why it would work so well with the Malcom on the C.

Tex

Well in AH they would be the same. In real life they were alittle diffrent.

[Wotan]

We already have it. The A5 has that option already in the loadout selection.

Nonsense. the A-5 carries 2 x MG151/2cm  inboard and the option of 2 x MGFF/M outboard.

MGFF/M and MG151/2cm are not the same and their lethality is quite different especially in AH.

Their different ballistic characteristics and the fact that the MGFF on the A-5 can only carry 60 rpg (60 rnd drums; they could carry 90 rnd drums as well. These fit into the same space as the 60 rnd drums) makes them just about useless. In fact from previous tests you are better off just taking 2 X MG151/2cm and leaving the  MGFF/M off (weight / performance loss verses added lethality).

The A-6 loadout would be

2x MG 17 - cowling - 900rpg
2x MG 151/20 - outer wing - 140rpg
2x MG 151/20 - wing root -  250rpg

the A-5 is

2x MG 17 - cowling - 900rpg
2x MGFF/M - outer wing - 60rpg (which as I said are quite useless)
2x MG 151/20 - wing root -  250rpg

If you don't see any difference in the lethality of the 2 then you are blind especially if one of the ToD theaters is 1943 ETO where by the Würgers will be facing Ami heavy bombers.

Don't make things up to help your point. Take time to understand what it is the other guy is saying.

An earlier FW is needed as well (preferably as A-3 but an A-4 would due).

ToD damn sure doesn't need a D-13...

[Wotan]

FYI:

The A-5 was had one of the samller production runs of the pre-'43 190s...

190 Production figures as posted by 'ArtieBob' on Butch's AAW2 forum:

Total Fw 190 production (This data is from FW factory production book and C-Amt Monatsmeldung so should be pretty solid. )

To 30.11.43
A-1 (102)
A-2/3 (952)
A-4 (905)
A-5 (675)
A-6 (783)
A-7 (27)
B-1 (5)
F-1 (18)
F-2 (270)
F-3 (366)
G-1 (50)
G-2 (625)
G-3 (329) Total 5107
December-missing A-6 (SWAG approx. 200)
72 A-7
5 F-3
58 G-3 Total 5442
January-117 A-6
199 A-7
1 F-3
66 G-3 Total 5825
February-45 A-6
137 A-7
55 F-3
53 G-3 Total 6115
March- 17 A-6
182 A-7
83 A-8
5 F-3
98 F-8
44 G-3 Total 6544
April-1 A-6
8 A-7
347 A-8
2-A-9
265 F-8
83 G-8/R 5 Total 7250
May-492 A-8
15 A-9
177 F-8 Total 7934
June-430 A-8
103 A-8/R2
21 A-9
390 F-8 Total 8878
July –502 A-8
180 A-8/R2
70 A-9
515 F-8 Total 10145
August- 648 A-8
202 A-8/R2
30 A-9
511 F-8 (1391) Total 11536
September-465 A-8
159 A-8/R2
14 A-8/R11
122 A-9
55 A-9/R11
40 D-9
536 F-8 Total 12927
October-293 A-8
123 A-8/R2
79 A-8/R11
14 A-9
80 A-9 R11
89 D-9
412 F-8 Total 14017
November-482 A-8
88 A-8/R2
33 A-8/R11
99 A-9
58 A-9/R11
237 D-9
294 F-8 (1291) Total 15308
December-missing 6 (SWAG approx. 1250) Total 16558
January-328 A-8
51 A-8/R2
73 A-9
73 A-9/R11
228 D-9
76 D-9/ R11
220 F-8
147 F-9 (1196) Total 17754
February to Capitulation-missing (SWAG approx. 1550)
Total approx. 19300

Here's a link to an image how his data looks in excel (posted by Zamex on that same forum):

190 production

[StarOfAfrica2]

Originally posted by Wotan
Nonsense. the A-5 carries 2 x MG151/2cm  inboard and the option of 2 x MGFF/M outboard.

MGFF/M and MG151/2cm are not the same and their lethality is quite different especially in AH.



The A-6 loadout would be

2x MG 17 - cowling - 900rpg
2x MG 151/20 - outer wing - 140rpg
2x MG 151/20 - wing root -  250rpg

the A-5 is

2x MG 17 - cowling - 900rpg
2x MGFF/M - outer wing - 60rpg (which as I said are quite useless)
2x MG 151/20 - wing root -  250rpg

If you don't see any difference in the lethality of the 2 then you are blind especially if one of the ToD theaters is 1943 ETO where by the Würgers will be facing Ami heavy bombers.

Don't make things up to help your point. Take time to understand what it is the other guy is saying.

An earlier FW is needed as well (preferably as A-3 but an A-4 would due).

ToD damn sure doesn't need a D-13...

Well.  I'll give that one a WTF?  Show me one post where I have ever shown you or your posts the slightest disrespect Wotan, that was just plain uncalled for.  I dont make things up to support my views.  I was wrong.  OOPS guess what, that happens sometimes.  I guess its impossible to believe in the AH "hangar" you could see one gun loadout with 2x20mm 2x20mm 2x7.9mm and another with 2x20mm 2x7.9mm and not think the 20mm were the same, huh?  No, I didnt see that one set were MG-FF and the other set were MG-151/20.  I have no idea what the ballistics of either gun are, and never claimed to.  I did understand what the other guy was saying, I just assumed from my erroneous information that he had it wrong.  Now I know otherwise.  Oh, and if YOU would take the time to read and understand what I was posting, YOU would see that after the D13 was a (not for ToD) qualifier.  I know we dont need a plane like that for ToD, I'd just like to see it in Aces High.  

In the future, if you see that I or anyone else has their facts wrong in a post, instead of assuming the person is just stupid, why dont you try assuming he is just wrong instead and try to educate him?  While I did learn something from your post, it wasnt helped by your attitude.

[Overlag]

Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
Well.  I'll give that one a WTF?  Show me one post where I have ever shown you or your posts the slightest disrespect Wotan, that was just plain uncalled for.  I dont make things up to support my views.  I was wrong.  OOPS guess what, that happens sometimes.  I guess its impossible to believe in the AH "hangar" you could see one gun loadout with 2x20mm 2x20mm 2x7.9mm and another with 2x20mm 2x7.9mm and not think the 20mm were the same, huh?  No, I didnt see that one set were MG-FF and the other set were MG-151/20.  I have no idea what the ballistics of either gun are, and never claimed to.  I did understand what the other guy was saying, I just assumed from my erroneous information that he had it wrong.  Now I know otherwise.  Oh, and if YOU would take the time to read and understand what I was posting, YOU would see that after the D13 was a (not for ToD) qualifier.  I know we dont need a plane like that for ToD, I'd just like to see it in Aces High.  

In the future, if you see that I or anyone else has their facts wrong in a post, instead of assuming the person is just stupid, why dont you try assuming he is just wrong instead and try to educate him?  While I did learn something from your post, it wasnt helped by your attitude.

well said.

[Wotan]

While I did learn something from your post, it wasn't helped by your attitude.

My 'attitude' is consistent in all my posts.

Show me one post where I have ever shown you or your posts the slightest disrespect Wotan, that was just plain uncalled for.

I don't see any 'disrespect' in my post, at least no more then usual. The 'tone' of my posts are pretty consistent regardless of who I am replying to.

I don't make things up to support my views. I was wrong.

You didn't?

We already have it. The A5 has that option already in the load out selection. So they don't have to add a thing for the A-6 to be included.

Clearly that is wrong and it came from 'some where'.

My reply is 'nonsense'. Is that word disrespectful? Inaccurate?

I have no idea what the ballistics of either gun are, and never claimed to. I did understand what the other guy was saying, I just assumed from my erroneous information that he had it wrong.

Your information was not 'erroneous' your 'assumption' was.

Here's what it says on the AH web page:

190A-5 ...

Armament:      
2x20 mm MG-FF 60 rpg
2x20 mm MG 151/20 250 rpg

The information is correct, your assumption that they are the same is not. Another word for assumption could be 'made-up' couldn't it?

I wrote:

Don't make things up to help your point. Take time to understand what it is the other guy is saying.

What the other guy said was:

I dunno how I coulda forgotten about the Fw190A-6, but this plane also has a very good chance to be introduced. It was a major variant, essentially very simular to the Fw190A-5, but wields 4x MG151/20s instead of 2x MG-FF + 2x MG151/20s.

So you didn't understand what he was saying. He is clearly referring to lethality and gun load out. In fact he correctly states the 2 aren't the same.

Oh, and if YOU would take the time to read and understand what I was posting, YOU would see that after the D13 was a (not for ToD) qualifier. I know we dont need a plane like that for ToD, I'd just like to see it in Aces High.

I didn't say you did. What I wrote was to contrast need verses want.

AH needs an A-6 for ToD.

AH doesn't need a D-13 for ToD or for the main for that matter. it would be perked and no better then the Ta-152.

The context of my replies in these 'new plane' threads is  to try to keep a focus on ToD. Kweassa's suggestion has to do with ToD as well. The main will never get any better then it is now. No 'gimmick' or 'wonderwaffe' plane will make the main better. However, there are many lesser planes that could certainly help ToD be better.

In the future, if you see that I or anyone else has their facts wrong in a post, instead of assuming the person is just stupid, why dont you try assuming he is just wrong instead and try to educate him?

I didn't make any such assumption. I simple countered your assumption with facts. I am not an 'educator' (but struggled to be one with this reply ).

Don't take it so personal, I know I didn't...

[paulieb]

I think the Mustang IA would be an excellent addition to the planeset, whether it be for the MA or for TOD. An Allison engined P-51 with 4 Hispanos... enough firepower to make an impact, but underpowered enough that it would not be an uber plane unless flown by an expert, IMO. Pretty decent speed on the deck, but nothing like an LA-7 or 109-G10.

[StarOfAfrica2]

Originally posted by Wotan
My 'attitude' is consistent in all my posts.

Quite possible.  I've never had it aimed at me before, so perhaps it just seemed like there was a difference.  I'll keep that in mind in the future when I get the urge to defend your posts to others.

 (From me)  We already have it. The A5 has that option already in the load out selection. So they don't have to add a thing for the A-6 to be included.
(From You)
Clearly that is wrong and it came from 'some where'.

It did come from somewhere, directly from the loadout screen in the hangar in Aces High.  I saw two different loadouts for the guns package, one with 2x20mm MG-FF and 2x20mm MG-151/20 and the other with just the 2x20mm MG-151/20.  I didnt read past the "2x20mm" part on any of them to note there was a difference.  

Your information was not 'erroneous' your 'assumption' was.

That was my assumption yes.  I "assumed" alot in my post, and I was wrong.  And I got called on it.

Here's what it says on the AH web page:

190A-5 ...

Armament:      
2x20 mm MG-FF 60 rpg
2x20 mm MG 151/20 250 rpg

The information is correct, your assumption that they are the same is not.

Again, I didnt get my information from the website, although it is identical to what is listed in the hangar for the loadouts.  Rather than assuming they were the same, I just didnt read far enough.  Not quite the same, but I assumed enough in my post to take my lumps for it.  But since  you seem to like splitting hairs, I thought I'd mention it.  Let it speak to my degree of wrongness, one way or the other.  

Another word for assumption could be 'made-up' couldn't it?

That would be a stretch.  "Made-up" would usually imply that I fabricated information with no basis and presented it as real.  "Assumption" would imply I read or saw information and misinterpreted it, and then presented that incorrect information as my belief.  Misinterpretation and fabrication are not synonyms that I am aware of.

As for the rest, I understand your wish to keep the discussion aimed at planes useful to ToD.  I should not have even mentioned the D13 in the same post, even with the qualifier.  Irregardless, we are both venturing off topic for the thread, regardless of relevance to ToD, becuase the original thread title is P-47 and P-51 variants.  I do appreciate your pointing out my error on the guns package though, and the information on the MG-FF.  It will certainly affect the loadouts I choose when I fly the A-5 from now on.

[Kegger26]

You two monkeys are fighting about 109s and 190s in a P-51 and P-47 thread. Take it somewhere else.

 As for the A36 I would love to see it added. Or even the Mustang IA. It would be a tank killer for sure.