Jump to content

BSS_Stel

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About BSS_Stel

  • Rank
    Founder

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    North Carolina

Recent Profile Visitors

301 profile views
  1. BSS_Stel

    Spit XIV

    Thanks all for the great discussion on this topic. Glad it didn't turn out to be a flame war (just a flame skirmish). 😎 That said, I think 99% agree that adding the Mk XIV to the allied stable would be beneficial for mission designers, and financially profitable for the developer. Seen some discussion above about it not being used in overwhelming numbers vs other Mks, but I consider that superfluous since we already have aircraft that do not meet any such criteria, aka the FW-190D, the 109-K4 (w.1.98 ATA...never made it into production, let alone combat), and soon the ME-262. Also, some discussion about adding yet another allied plane to an already robust variety when Axis only has ME-109 and FW-190 (and variants thereof to choose from). Actually, they do have one IT plane, but not often seen on many servers. Somehow, this lack of variety is being associated with "balance." IMO, this has nothing to do with balance. It merely reflects the aircraft offered by the main antagonists/protagonists in this TOW(s): Germany vs USSR, USA and GB. Hence one would expect to see more variety on the allies. Most of Germany's allies used their aircraft, so one can expect less variety on the axis side. In any case, appreciate the above discussion. I learned quite a bit from two or three very informative posts with historical documentation. Just hope that the Devs are already planning on adding this aircraft. Tschüss!
  2. BSS_Stel

    Spit XIV

    Great read. Tks for sharing!
  3. BSS_Stel

    Spit XIV

    True, but I rarely look up the info on the planes. Just fly online Fr-Sat nights and pick a side depending on balance most times. Love the Sim! Great hobby for us old retired farts.
  4. BSS_Stel

    Spit XIV

    I found a pretty good read/comparison of Spit XIV vs G6/G14 and K4 here if anyone is interested --> http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html It appears that 610 Squadron's Mk XIVs were being converted to 21 lb boost in July 44, and outperformed the K4 at most altitudes (level speed and climb). Whereas, the K4 with 1.98 ATA was tested but never made it into production. Quote from link..."newly delivered Me 109 K-4's were equipped with a DB 605 DB engine operating with 1.80 ata/2800 rpm engine limitations beginning approximately mid January 1945. Various engine and propeller configurations were experimented with. The 9-12159 propeller was the standard production propeller but various German curves are extant showing estimated performance of the Me 109 K-4 with 9-12199.10 and 9-17018.10 thin blade (Dünnblatt) props and Projektschraube with 4 light-metal blades. The 452 mph figure often cited as the top speed of the Me 109 K-4 derives from an estimate assumming an experimental 9-12199 Dünnblatt propeller. The DB 605 DC engine running at 1.8 ata boost without MW-50 was tried but did not find favour. (Die E-stelle hat Bedenken gegen den Betrieb mit 1,8 ata Aufladung ohne MW mit C 3 Kraftstoff.) The DB 605 DC engine running at 1.98 ata boost with MW was tested but seems not to have made it into service (Nach Mitteilung der E'Stelle sind 1,98 ata gesperrt.)" Not intended to criticize the devs, nor start a "whine" fest, but if the K4s in BoBP are rated at 1.98 ATA, not really representative of what was flown. That said, I have no real knowledge of what we have in the game WRT what is modeled. If the K4s are 1.98 ATA, then I'd think the Mk XIV should be 21 lb boost. At least we know they saw service.
  5. BSS_Stel

    Spit XIV

    Not sure what your point is. Allies made various improvements in most of their variants throughout the war, just as did the Axis, including airframes, engines, etc. Higher octane fuels were used well before '44-'45.
  6. BSS_Stel

    Spit XIV

    That is true, however, The Mk XII was an interim airframe and never went into full production with only 100 being built. The Mk XIV was more prolific (947 built) and would better represent the RAF combat aircraft for the period. That was my point. The Axis counterparts to the Mk XIV have already been released (K4 & Dora). Allies are flying '43-'44 aircraft against '44-'45 Axis aircraft. In any case, I'm hoping ShamrockOneFive is spot on with his assessment and we eventually see it added as a collector plane.
  7. BSS_Stel

    Spit XIV

    The guys I fly with fly both Allied and Axis aircraft in several servers, so this is not intended as a partisan post. Just wondering if any thought given to adding the Griffon powered Spit(s) to the Allied stable such as the Spit XIV. From what I can find online and in books, it appears that the Spit XIV (first operational Griffon powered Spit) became fully operation in RAF 610 Squadron in Dec '43 with another 5 additional squadrons fitted out later. The FW 190D-9 and the ME 109K-4 both entered operational service in Oct '44. It just seems the allies are always fighting a year behind in aircraft development. It would be nice to see the Mk XIV developed for Bodenplatte as well, especially since we'll soon be getting the ME 262 added to the Axis options. Just sayin...
  8. Negative Luke. was not aware that time period covered was from Sep-44 on. Also, was not tracking that release was going to be J-25-LO which, I believe had the boosted ailerons and mods for the dive brakes applied. Appreciate the info. I don't get to these boards very often and didn't see anything in the Dev updates talking P-38 variant to be modeled. Looking forward to flying this as most others here. Cheers!
  9. Not sure what is so historical about having "J" model in BoP (Jan 1945). The references I've read indicate that all "J" models had been withdrawn from the ETO before the end of '44. I believe only one P-38 squadron remained in the 8th AF after Dec '44, and that was P-38L model. That said, they should at least be the P-38J-25-LO that had boosted ailerons and dive brakes. With those, compressibility is solved and she will out roll all other fighters. I will continue to hope, but I fear we will get a 1943 A/C vs 1945 GE A/C. Not a good prospect.
  10. Yes it was 1920 x 1080. Viewing distance is the same. Haven't tried locking the fps at 60 Hz to test it to see if spotting gets worse. Sorry. Not sure what size the 4K monitor my squad mate has, but almost sure it is >30 in.
  11. I second what Capt Teddy Bear stated above regarding the monitor refresh rate. I was using a Samsung 24" 60 hz monitor and had real problems seeing other aircraft until I was right on top of them (or usually they were on top of me). Other members of my squad could spot cons and even though they would direct my view to the part of the sky they were at, I could still see nothing. I recently purchased a 34" Predator (2560 x 1440 resolution) with a 144 hz refresh rate...and the difference was amazing! I could finally spot cons, and they wouldn't suddenly disappear when they passed out of rendering range like my old Samsung. Another member of the squad who has the same problem purchased a 4K monitor (as opposed to my ~2.5K), but although his graphics are fantastic, he still has problems spotting and dealing with disappearing cons. So, I have to conclude that the refresh rate is more important than resolution when it comes to spotting moving targets.
  12. As Cpt_Cool said above. Also, I was told by support that as long as your purchase was not completed, the code renews within 12 hrs. My second code never showed back up in my profile, listed as available, but I just purchased a BOM collector plane and the code appeared and applied automatically when I went to check out. Worked! BTW, my experience with "support" in this matter was very good. They answered my submitted tickets via email in less than 24 hrs from submission. Good luck!
  13. Appreciate the thought. All stores here are out of water, lanterns, etc. And no gas at the pumps. We're not on the coast, but still in the Sandhills area in the path. All buttoned up and ready. Support just reactivated one of the promo codes (for FC), so purchase is complete. See you in the cyber skies when the wind dies down.
  14. Same happened here. I'll contact support to see if I can get the promo code back. Hurricane will be hitting here (NC) ~48 hrs from now, so I'll probably lose power...and the promo.
  15. Understood, and thanks for being so transparent. I'll support by pre-purchasing the new path, but...I'm 65 yrs old. PLEASE hurry!
×
×
  • Create New...