Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

83 Excellent

About IVJG4-Knight

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

541 profile views
  1. Mostly yes. Page 39(the right one) "S" stands for structural failure. The name of the document is ADA800394. You can find it with google i think.
  2. I looked on that thread you mentioned. Do you know for a fact and can prove those are 30 mm and not 20 mm ? The real life shots i mean. The real life shots are not as focused on one area as those in the game. According to post war tests done in US mk108 in one shot should have a 27% chance of kill within minutes and a 40% chance of kill withing 2 hours (structure failure on the flight home😞 Some pics from the test: Looks powerful enough in real life .
  3. It's most refreshing to see someone respond in an elegant manner . Based on what i know c3 fuel in the tank + mw50 = 1.98 . There would be no reason to use that combination for another reason. From what i understand based on the (January 1945 2nd TAF intelligence report of crashed G-10 with Db 605DC ) both those substances were found in the respective tanks. I also read in a german magazine (Flugzeug Classic )that based on their research 1.98 ata declared combat ready as of end of march 1945 . Anyway from a logical perspective it's much harder to prove a negative.Seems more logical to me (even if the evidence is not 100% black and white obvious) to believe that it was used. That doesn't mean i'm 100% sure. If i use the same 100% sure standard .The p47 story doesn't hold up at least to me personally . I analized the 21 hits vs P47 situation below. This is a test of 10 20mm hits vs P47: A means it goes down withing 5 minutes B means the plane fails to return to base if the base is 2 hours flight time or more. m 96,97 used in the test have 7,7 to 10 grams or tetryl with a relative affectiveness factor of 1.25 mk 151 german cannon of FW 190 . Minnengeschosspatrone contain 18,6 g PETN filling with relative effectiveness factor 1.66 (wikipedia ) Mineshell would probably not be the only type of ammo used .It would probably be a mix of Mineschell , HEI but even the HEI wouldn't be weeker than the one presented in the test. AFAIK german ww2 mineshell had thinnner casing and was able to pack more ecsplosive and be more effective in combat , look at the test and how close the effectiveness of 30 mm mk108 is compared to 37 mm amarican cannon . also the explosive used were more powerfull accoridng to pilot testimony and from what i can see based on the relative effectiveness factor It's verry probable that a german mk 151 would have a more damaging effect . The test calculates probability for 10 random hits not aimed. Also the test is for just 10 hits .20 hits would induce even more damage. Seems to me like the 21 hits vs p47 would not be the rule but rather the exeption .
  4. One of the uses of speaking fluent german is i know what some of the german habbits were during the war. Hartman tells that after getting shot down he took out one of the gauges that was in short supply back at the base . There were all kinds of shortages . Funny how Milo doesn't know this because he has "more books about german aircraft ". 😄 As for this idea "I particularly like the idea that procedure for painting a letter on a cowling = definitely used" . Yes but if you use this standard than the evidence of p47 vs 21 cannon rounds ( Robert Johnson ) is also not evidence.Is just a story. Same with late war documents. In Germany some were destroyed , some were taken by the Allied powers and so on. Someone told me Smithsonian had some useful info on this topic. This doesn't mean i'm adamant in receiving 1.98 boost .In multiplayer I can play g6 vs the latest allied fighters and get kills and have fun. I have enough skill and practice to play even 109 with no mw50 vs p51 which i did in DCS .
  5. What i noticed in DCS (109 k4 vs d9): Dora : -faster at low level and as high as 5500m - better visibility -dives faster and cleaner -better high speed maneuverability (this is hugely important for me) -better roll rate -more ammo 109: -small fighter (hard to spot) -faster at high altitude -in sustained turns it turns much tighter -climbs much better and can hang on the propeller better without overheating -more torque (negative aspect)
  6. It's true my response was childish .Lol. " the 262 was not ideally suited to attacking fighters" The opinions are split on this toppic. Some said it was a great fighter because it's easy to achieve surprise. I know the germans devised a tactic where if the flight leader missed the enemy fighter that the wingman will hit it. Some german commanders said attacking a bomber from behind is is very dangerous because of vulnerable jet engines and attacking from front was too hard since the pilots had little time to train at this stage of the war with the much faster jet.So considered it more suited for attacking fighters. In korea the mig 15 couldn't possibly turn with a p51 but the got lots of p51 kills .And projectile speed of the cannons on the mig wasn't all that better from the mk. 108 The really bad part about the 262 is the acceleration. In games I don't know what to say. In DCS considering the difficult spoting and how many times i achieved surprise it would have been a great fighter . In the old IL2 considering the big dot sistem it was so so.
  7. I wonder why you can't find a comparison 262 vs allied fighters on WW2 aircraft performance ?
  8. I agree with that . And you think you distinguish yourself with this name calling like luftwhiners (which you wrote twice btw ) from those immature individuals ? If i want to read stuff that shows positive things about the german planes and pilots there's little to find and i think there should be more that's all .
  9. About the two jets everyone can believe what they like .I don't want to spend more time on this issue . About combat reports there are also british reports that support german planes being better : "Johnny Johnson himself describes being badly out-turned in flat turns at full power in his Spitfire Mk V against a FW-190A. " I remember this one from some time ago .Also where's the spitfire V comparison ? Because that's the worst spitfire .I'm sorry It just looks like he picked info . Again i've said enough and everybody can make their own mind.
  10. First of all i was responding to something absurd like germans always had bad planes.I was just mirroring he's nationalism .Also for such uncalled for insults I will just ignore you from now on. As for what you wrote it's basically fantasy . Meteor was way inferior to me262 and not even combat used in comparable numbers if at all .Vampire used in combat during ww2 ? Fantasy. I don't think we can come to any consensus now or in the future as our opinions are too different . @ Everybody else. At least the combat reports on the ww2 performance website are too one sided.Post some german air kills described from german PoV. I would be happy with that . Everybody is more passionate about planes that flew either on allied side or german side .It's very rare or not possible to be 100% not biased that likes all sides the same.
  11. To say spitfires war better than 109s all throughout the war is not accurate. 109 F 4 was better than Spit V and so they made the Spit 9 which was better than 109 F and G .Than germans introduced MW50 and they were again better and then allies introduced 25lbs boost .In my personal opinion the site could do a better job . I din't know that and i'm sure there is at least some truth to that . I'm guessing you don't get sarcasm.. Nice emotional argument quoting my words as blah blah. I got it but i chose to play dumb use it against you. They should donate that money to sick children .Even i waste too much time with this nonsense.
  12. German's were not superior at every step during the war .But they were really advanced: -"After the war F86 saber was the first American aircraft to take advantage of flight research data seized from the German aerodynamicists at the end of World War II" -Von Braun's work at NASA and the moon landings . To have comparable aircraft with worse materials at your disposal , worse fuel , and while being bombed day and night is not that bad. These comparisons are quite illogical involving either very rare planes or prototypes .Spitfire V and He 280 didn't even meet in battle and the disparity in numbers is quite obvious as you observe yourself . You write about Me 262 vs Mk 14 when i already posted myself that it's convenient that 262 performance is missing but the plane was built in comparable numbers to spitfire 14. Practically helping me make my point. My claim isn't that he's biased but that it's impossible to claim lack of bias when the comparisons are made in such a way(intentionally cherry picking or by accident) as to highlight the superiority of one side. If you want to choose 109 vs Spitfire 9 .It's perfectly fine to post 109 g6 vs MK 9.But if you stop there and not post late G models as well in the same graph seems to me like you're not showing the full picture.For example a late war 109 would have a much higher probability to meed in battle an mk 9 than a mk 14 . By all means post mk14 vs K4 .But after you already posted 2 comparisons picked in such a way that show only one side had the better planes .Shouldn't there be just one comparison where german planes are shown as being better in at least one way on the graph ? I forgot about the " pilot accounts" that are also one sided as well .Practically 1000 accounts of pilots shooting german planes and the other side ...i guess germans didn't shoot any planes. I din't make that "implication that a source is biase" claim.And if i did i did it by mistake.But rather it's very hard to claim total lack of bias. My point is the situations are chosen in such a way that a person who opens that website and doesn't know that much about ww2 planes will believe one side was greatest at everything .When the reality was somewhat different.
  13. That's an emotional argument an i want a logical one.
  14. If it's unbiased why are all performance charts cherry picking situations where the spitfire was the best in every aspect. Where is 109 K4,G14,G10 vs spitfire 9 chart ? Where is the spitfire 14 vs me 262 performance comparison ? Planes build in comparative numbers . Where is the Spitfire V vs german planes comparison .The fw190 was a far better plane at the time .
  • Create New...