Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

222 Excellent

About DB605

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Punkrock, planes, fast bikes & cars :)

Recent Profile Visitors

882 profile views
  1. Anyone able to help me out here? As seen above, i did modify some sounds files back then. Now after many updates, if i allow mods i don't have sounds at all with those planes i modified (G/K series 109's). If i don't allow mods sounds are fine. Is there way to have OEM sounds back with mods on? Edit; feeling even more stupid now. Just removing the modified files from luascripts did the trick. 😁
  2. Perfect, thanks a lot! Would be great to have other Hangar 10 109's too in future
  3. Took these pics while i was visiting MT-452 at Utti yesterday. Not great as they are taken throught glass but proved my point about too thin windshield frames/panzerglass pretty well. And the last one is just for enjoy the view
  4. Aww noooo... Proper sounds would have bring so much athmosphere and feeling to game, that is something it currently lacks...a real shame. Screenshots looks really good!
  5. Yeah it would actually be very simple to do them. To make G14/AS, devs just have to take existing G14 airframe and make/fit AS engine with K4 streamlined fairings. Change oil hatch to lower position. To make G10, fit engine and cowlings from K4 to existing G14 airframe. Decide if use K4 wings with fat tyres minus outer wheel covers or just regular G14 wing. Maybe possibly add tall tailwheel availble and delete antenna mast from canopy/install loop one to it. Even without those additional things it would be totally plausible G10/14/AS. Not really that hard. If devs would choose to make Erla built G10, again; G14 airframe, make Erla cowlings, take engine from K4. Choose if make it with fat/regular tyres and short or tall tailwheel. http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/g10/g10.htm?fbclid=IwAR2amHNLAPAp30cPK_IXdFJIIHDXW8BpZyq-MpskZhnhoDfmWNw_6Y9q9rk
  6. I have also this kit in stash, hopefully i actually finish it someday... But as i said earlier about tailwheels, what Klaus wrote is not exactly the truth as tall tailwheels were fitted from late G6's on and therefore any late G can have it. Diana built G10's used only short tailwheels, Erlas had both types.
  7. Not exactly true about long tailwheels, those were fitted from later G6 on. More regular on later models thought.
  8. That is unfortunately true, however Wotowskis book is focused to colors and it's worth of money for the profiles in my opinion, even they might have bit more "colorful" (literally) sometimes than other authors But late war paint jobs were mess anyway so who knows. It is kinda sad that to have good and accurate overall picture of 109 production and up to date details you really need them all, there is no single definitive book for it. -Prien / Rodeike -Radinger / Otto -Janda and Poruba (JaPo publishing) -J-C Mermet For finnish speakers/readers there is also excellent Hannu Valtonen's book "Messerschmitt Bf 109 ja saksan sotatalous" ("109 and german war economy")
  9. Correct, G6's with MW/50 operating from june-july, G14 from august on.
  10. Jean Claude mermet's book is probably best out of there, especially if you are interested of little details and differences between models. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Messerschmitt-Bf-109-complete-monography/dp/2916403140 http://www.letletlet-warplanes.com/2016/05/12/bf-109-bible/ In my opinion, simplest way to make late G6 available is just to add possibility to fit MW/50 and Erla hood to current G6. That way it would not affect too much for skinning, it would be realistic (many of the late G6's were still flying with old tail anyway) and there would still be little external difference to G14. "Icing of the cake" would be to have tall tail wheel available as option to all late G's (same as k4 but not recratable), as it was IRL. if we ever get another 109, i really hope it will be Erla built G10. Would be first time in any sim, externally different to K4 and great performance.
  11. And the fact that 109 was still on par with others fighters in many ways. Not really, those who were trained properly to it, it was just like any other fighter of the era. Edit. this arguing won't lead to anywhere and it's also off-topic so i'm going to leave it here.
  12. Well, after reading most of the pilot memoirs/reports available (not just allied test pilots) i have quite different view about 109. And yes, many of them have flown different types of fighters during/after the war. With all of it's well known quirks it was not easy plane for novices for sure, but experienced pilots could beat pretty much anything with it. And that was not just about the speed.
  13. Well, in my opinion it could handle increased power/weight surprisingly well. So well actually that it could stay competitive against all allied fighters till the very end. Thats quite remarkable for 1935 design. And most of the pilots who flew them, didn't share your view about 'poor little 109'. 😉
  14. I have (Valmet RediGo, not comparable to ww2 fighters ofc), but only for a short time and it did not required lots of rudder Climbs tooks only few minutes usually. It was not probably ideal solution, but also not as big issue as some people think it was.
  • Create New...