Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Good

About 4./JG53_Wotan

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Florida, USA
  • Interests
    Bf 109

Recent Profile Visitors

337 profile views
  1. AI is needed if you want a more historic and immersive air combat experience. Almost nothing in a "fight to the death" dogfight server reflects reality. I am not saying these types of servers can't be fun. However, without AI very rarely will there be organized flights of bombers, or fighters, trying to accomplish an "objective" with the intent to survive. If AI flights are available these can be scripted into the mission / server for those that want that type of experience. A lot people do enjoy "Dead is Dead" and many enjoy flying organized sorties with their friends and squad mates. Wotan
  2. Most engine restrictions have nothing to do with "engine kabooms" - the limits set are based off maintaining serviceable aircraft. The more pilots pushed their aircraft to and beyond those limits meant more time the "black men" had to spend doing inspections and repair. Aircraft engine life was based on hours. Its not realistic to have all engines going "kaboom" just because a sim pilot ran his aircraft 1 minute over some power restriction. If you want realism then limit the overall number of aircraft on a server and then pull aircraft from "service" for the various maintenance routines. Very few would want that so we will continue to get a brand new aircraft every time we spawn in.
  3. Water methanol is injected into the eye of the super charger where it evaporates cooling the charge - this prevents detonation and as such allows for higher ata. Wotan
  4. "Claims" are “Claims” not infallible truth - you can go here, "Tony Wood's Combat Claims & Casualties Lists": http://lesbutler.co.uk/claims/tonywood.htm and download these files (PDF): Eastern Front Vol 2. Aug to Dec 1942 and Eastern Front Vol 2. Jan to Jun 1943 and read official claims filed by the Luftwaffe. However, that doesn't mean a pilot claiming to have shot down a certain plane type is not in error - it happened all the time. You see can see that easy enough in those PDF files. Instead of looking for "claims" as a form of “verification” it would be better if you could find an actual and verifiable orbat that shows P-40s, or P-39s, of P-38s, or Spitfires, or Hurricanes (or whatever) in theater, and in service, during the announced time frame and combat area for BOS. I don't care if they are added to the game or not – but historically they were not there – just like the Fw 190 A-3. Wotan
  5. There were no Hurricanes or P-40s in theater during the announced time frame for BoS - this was pointed out in a couple other threads. The best lend lease option would be an A-20 variant - that is if the developers follow their own time line. Whether they do or not maybe in question since the "Fw 190 A-3" was announced as a "special" plane for premium buyers. There were no Fw 190s at Stalingrad either.
  6. Because I do not want to see rainbow bright and / or vulgar and offensive squadron insignia. If you want to see that then you can control that on your end. RoF does aircraft skins right - I only get to see the ones I chose to download. If they do that with squad insignjia, and other personal decals that can be added to our aircraft, that would be great - again I will only see the ones I downloaded. Or if they decide to allow this stuff like the old Il-2 the client should be able decide what they want to see (skin download off). The above may sound like elitism to you but so what..? There are too many attention seekers that troll these games. Allowing anyone to put anything they want on their aircraft would be ridiculous. Wotan
  7. As long as I can toggle it off - too many people put stupid crap on thier aircraft and I don't wish to see most of it - just look at the stupid pilot skins people used in the old Il-2.
  8. There were no Hs 123s in service suring the time frame announced for BoS - November - December 1943. From Pegg's book:
  9. The context of Tony Williams quote is clear, and is supported by USAAF war time tests I posted above, and by tactics used by the Sturmgruppen in the quote I provided. I gave you a link to Tony Williams website and to his forum and gave you a book suggestion. You are making rationaliztaions, with no supporting evidence, based on your "sim pilot experience". If you want to debate what Tony Williams stated in that quote, or if you do not understand it, then visit his forum. I will be unable to post for the next several days but if you want to keep up this circular discussion I will pick it up when I get back...
  10. Its a silly discussion because you just don't have the knowledge base to work from. There are plenty of books that detail the tactics of the Sturmgruppen. There are multiple books out their that go into great detail about gunnery in general and how effective bomber gunners were. You brought up "sim pilots". What I quoted was Tony Williams referring to the effectiveness of real bomber defensive gunnery: That quote is absolutely 100% correct. The effectiveness of bomber defensive gunners was very poor. The Luftwaffe all but gave up a head on and flank attacks. After the first pass it ended in tail chase any way. Only experienced pilots were able to shoot down bombers in head-on attacks. The Luftwaffe created battle formations, "gefechtverband" that would attack a combat box from the rear just like in the quote I posted above. Sure the Luftwaffe suffered casualties from bomber defensive fire but in general defensive fire from bombers gave the crews a morale boost while intimidating the attackers - well beyond the real effect they had in damaging and shooting down the attackers.
  11. Bomber gunners were lucky to hit anything in real life - that's a proven fact. One of the tactics of the the Sturmgruppen were to fly right up to a bomber formation - dead 6 and shoot them down and they did so in droves:
  12. You would be wrong - as I said go read the book, "Gunner:- An Illustrated History of World War II Aircraft Turrets and Gun Positions". In it there is war time test data done on the ground with both the B-24 and B-17 firing 12 round bursts from their guns at 600m - that is static on the ground / engines off.
  13. This thread reminds of a reply ^Tony Williams once gave on another forum: If you can pick up the book, "Gunner:- An Illustrated History of World War II Aircraft Turrets and Gun Positions" ISBN 1 84037 304 0 by Donald Nijboer *Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum
  14. From the book,"Hs 129 Panzerjager!" by Martin Pegg: The following covers from November to December 1942 - covering the time frame announced for BoS: From the book, "Aviation Elite Units 13: Luftwaffe Schlachtgruppen" by John Weal:
  • Create New...