Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1407 Excellent


About Riksen

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2185 profile views
  1. Great job Det! Amazing work as usual
  2. Would you like access to the table I made in Google Sheets (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BiM6bx5YQ7XYejHvMqBlpjg-pInLtJ-iW_WnVoEcwo4/edit?usp=sharing)? You can tweak the numbers around so that will save you some time with the creation part. If so, send me your email and I'll give you rights to edit it. S!
  3. THANK YOU SO MUCH SIR! I appreciate the gesture and I hope you stay safe as well! Really happy about this. You are amazing! Again, Thank you!
  4. I agree and it all comes down to what the TAW admins want but from what I have seen so far, it is a good mix between history and gameplay balance. I actually think this is a great idea! We could consider that this initial balance issue would be later offset by the introduction of the Me-262 in the later maps so basically we would have a scenario where P-51 D with 150 grade oct would dominate early maps and then Me-262s dominating late maps and apply restriction to the use of both. It is just an idea that could be potentially used as well. No problem. I appreciate the apology and I'm happy to know we can continue our discussion in a civil and friendly way, respecting each other's opinions, even with they diverge at times. These are good references and indeed may indicate a more spread use, especially if we assume it could be done by simply adjusting a screw however, as you correctly noted, that would also depend on the availability of both C3 and MW50. Both of which, we know, were in overall short supply. Also, the simple fact that you have the marking for C3 fuel on the plane does not directly indicate the airframe operated with the 1.98 ata rating as the source above indicates. You could very well have a Bf-109 K4 with C3 fuel marking and have it fly with no MW50 and, therefore, no 1.98 ata rating. So, in the end, even if all units were able to adjust the screw and switch the ratings on the go, which may very well have been the case, how was the availability of C3 as well as MW50 for those units? The simple fact that this could have been done therefore does not necessarily imply it was widely used since both C3 fuel and Methanol was in short supply. It does, however, indicate it was possible. How is this a false symmetry? This is what proves the point. There were more P-51Ds operating with 150 oct fuel over the continent, although not based there, than Bf-109 K4s in general. Because the Allies produced more planes and therefore predominated in the air, they will, therefore, have more airframes of that type vs the ones for the Axis so this here: Should not happen since they were more relevant than the K4s and any other LW planes in general. The symmetry would only potentially be false if we were to compare the proportion of P-51D using 150 oct fuel and, therefore their proportion, to other US produced airframes and then determine how common they were within the USAAAF. Based on @KW_1979 post, however, they were more common than the 100 oct versions, despite of not being based in the continent. I totally agree with you here if we were to take a more historical approach and I think this is also an excellent suggestion. Like you said earlier though, it is up to the devs of TAW and I'm not sure the whole LW community would approve a more historical approach when it does not favor then. Not every one is like you and enjoys the immersion of being on the shoes of a LW pilot and having to face similar adversities as they did. The vast majority (and this is not something exclusive to LW-only players), scream BALANCE when they see themselves in the short end of the stick and scream HISTORICAL when they have the advantage. For just proposing something like this, you have my respect and I salute you! Although I prefer a more historical approach, I'm okay with either one of them (balance or historical) and even a mix of both as long as there are plausible arguments to support them. Either way, thank you for the documentation and the great discussion and @KW_1979 for the additional info. I believe this is the way all the community should approach issues. Just like the 1.98 ata. Do I believe you have a point that they were used even earlier than March 1945? Most definitely! But we just dont know how many were there. We could even introduce the DC engine earlier and just have smaller numbers and then apply a higher availability after March 45. Anyways, these are all good points and again I appreciate both of you for this discussion! Cheers Also, @KW_1979 and @SCG_Gustav_Hagel This is another important point: "While spark plug fouling was eliminated, PEP was found to have an undesirable effect on valve seats. As a result of excessive maintenance required on the V-1650 engines, General Doolittle of the Eighth Air Force decided in late March 1945 to revert to the normal 100/150 (1 T) grade fuel." (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/atsce-28march45.pdf) That we should consider and it would make things very interesting in the late stages of the campaign.
  5. It is not rocket science to "guess" where they will be taking off from. If you read the rules of the server and evaluate priority targets, usually ground attackers go first for: - Trains; - Bridges; - Tanks. Since most will not bother to climb or plan an alternative route, you can bet that most will take off from the closest available base. From there you trace a line to the target and voila! You see, to be an effective fighter you have to be an INTERCEPTOR and not a REACTIONARY FORCE ONLY. You have to prevent bombers for attacking and not react to them after they killed your troops. If they drop their ordinance, it means you have failed your mission, even if you kill him afterwards. To properly intercept you have to fly BEHIND enemy lines, take risks, and, most importantly, BE PATIENT. It seems like you lack the latter and you will probably end up being just another "fighter" pilot that hovers on top of the target waiting for the first bomb to explode or the flak to start firing. It would be better to make yourself useful as bomber instead then. "Nobody in TAW is going to send a message out " hey guys they are in this grid heading that way " though i have seen it in another server even warning that they have cover" There are a lot of guys that actually do this and, believe it or not, a lot of us coordinate even in chat but if you want better communication, join TeamSpeak during your flights. There are a lot of people flying together in TAW TS3. The pilot is the limit.
  6. It tells the number of serviceable (operating) aircraft. This is for the date of Operation Bodenplatte that took place in 1st January 1945 and only includes those units operating Bf-109 K4s as per the Order of Battle of the operation. You are correct regarding the numbers, however. I hastily typed them from my cell phone, as I'm doing now, and as I was going back and forth between tabs, I ended up mixing up the numbers. The corrected numbers are: II./JG2 = 9 III./JG3 = 8 I./JG4 = 2 III./JG4 = 26 IV./JG4 = 7 II./JG11 = 11 III./JG26 = 26 I./JG27 = 14 III./JG27 = 26 Stab./JG53 = 2 I./JG77 = 1 III./JG77 = 27 Giving us a total of 159 for that date (1st January 1945). Even If you take the number that each one of these units started with in December 1944, which is about 300, this is still inferior to the numbers of P-51Ds (800) operating within the similar period as mentioned by @KW_1979: All of these Mustangs, except those associated with the 352nd and 361st FG, operated from Great Britain and used 150 oct grade fuel. This alone proves the relevance of the P-51 D operating with the aforementioned fuel as compared to that of the Bf-109 K4 and it is a strong argument to not have it removed as you suggested here: Regarding this: They represent the total of available airframes for Operation Bodenplatte as I stated above which was used as a date to provide comparison in numbers between the P-51D Mustang operating with 150 oct fuel to the total Bf-109 K4s available according to the Order of Battle for the operation. Although those were all K4s, how many of those were using the 1.98 ata rating? And which units? We just do not know. As I mentioned earlier: Again, could be that all of them used 1.98 ata rating? Maybe. Could it be that only a few of them did? Maybe. We just do not have hard evidence saying which units did, we only have that for the II./JG11 and that was for March 1945 as testing. If you do come across such data, please, share it here. I absolutely love the Bf-109 and that is one of my favorite aircraft. I'm always curious to learn additional things about this plane. And I don't have too because, as I stated, we do not have documents showing which ones used it. Even if there was 1 million K4s on the 1st of January 1945, we do not know which units used the rating (if all, none, or some). For convenience, I picked only those units that participated in the Operation, as stated above in the order of battle of the operation that is most relevant to us here. You are also correct, a lot of documentation was lost during WW2 and that could mean several things: - 1: One of the documents lost showed in detail orders to convert units to the new 1.98 ata rating; - 2: Document number 1 never existed and there was never such order; - 3: Everything in between. You see, without evidence, we can only assume and not prove anything and this opens our discussion to different interpretation. This is where the problem lies ... Some will argue in favor and some will argue against it, but the reality is, neither side have can prove or disprove the point. As mature adults, I hope we can agree that there is evidence suggesting the use of the 1.98 ata but we do not know how widely it was uses without additional information which, unfortunately, I have not yet found. The earliest evidence of 1.98 ata use we have is from December 1944 so even if the K4s were delivered in October and, again assuming all of them used the new rating, they only had 27 aircraft available at the time of the Operation. But again, we have to assume this was the case and we do not have proof that this unit even operated with this rating. Could that be the case? Yes. Could it not? Yes. C'mon man, I thought we were having a civil discussion here where both of us were trying to learn something form each other instead of playing an ego game. If that is your intention then, please, knock yourself out and carry on with this topic without me. I'm here open minded and willing to learn new things about my favorite plane and how to make my favorite campaign better, not to see who can yell the loudest. I would appreciate if you had the same intentions so I will just ignore this part and pretend you did not mean anything by it. You are correct again. Proportionally wise, the concentration of C3 fuel increased in comparison to B4 and that shows that the Luftwaffe placed more emphasis in C3 but we also have to remember that other planes used this fuel and not only K4s. Despite of the change in production ratios between C3 and B4, however, the overall stores of fuel available decreased substantially for both. If you normally produce 100 oranges and 50 apples a day but later decrease production to 10 oranges and 30 apples a day, your overall fruit production is still lower than normal despite the change in ratio. Just in 1944 alone, AVGAs production fell from 180,000 tons to about 20,000 (Luftwaffe Over Germany: Defense of the Reich). By 1945, the shortage got to the point of even restricting air operations. So even if we consider that all Bf-109 K4s operated with the new rating, how did this also impact the units and the possibility of actually operating with 1.98 ata? The point is to show two things: The impact of the Allied bombings on Germany's Industrial capabilities and, secondmy, the lack of methanol, which, as you know, is needed for the 1.98 ata rating. Again, assuming all Bf-109 Ks were using 1.98 ata, how did this also impact their operation? Based on these conditions, it seems like there was a negative impact on the Luftwaffe and this is further supported by the lack of resistance from the Luftwaffe at this stage of the war. How negative was it for the K4s with 1.98 ata? We do not know because we do not know which units used the rating and depended on methanol and C3. Also, as you correctly stated, how much of these two essential materials did they receive? And I never said otherwise. It is, in the end Kathon and the other TAW admins decision, but that does not mean we cannot have a civil discussion and provide good arguments to improve the campaign and assist them in their decision, regardless of what that might be. IMHO, if we are to remove the 150 oct fuel from Mustangs, which is also a valid point, we should also consider removing the Bf-109 K4 with 1.98 ata. This is from a gameplay perspective as well as a historical one (evidence situation above) but if either one stays, I think we should have both present for the same reasons. Both are valid arguments in my opinion. Cheers
  7. No that is not the problem. Air fields are possible targets, even though they will have a much lower impact in the mission victory condition than attacking actual targets as per briefing. The problem is that you chose to attack a plane that was not even "wheels up" and the rules clearly state: Attacking enemy players on the ground is not allowed. While airfields should not be considered "safe", being killed while your engine spools up is not fun. Once players are in the air they are valid targets. Player airfields are not mission objectives. You attacked a player that had not completely taken-off yet and, therefore, violated the rule. The rule is pretty clear and I'm not sure why you keep insisting that the rule is not somehow open to interpretation. The rule is not inconsistent either. "Once wheels up" and "Off the ground" are basically the same thing so, if you want to attack pilots taking off, at least have the decency to wait for them to take off. That is what the rule is saying. What is confusing about that?
  8. As per @KW_1979 research: You can see that for the period of just 29 days, there were, at least, 319 P-51 D Mustangs operating with 150 grade octane fuel in missions over the continent. They were not stationed in the continent but still participated in missions there. We know the Allies, at this time, had air superiority and prevailed in numbers over Europe to ratios as high as 10:1 against the Germans and the use of 150 oct fuel was widely employed for units operating from Britain, especially for V-1 bomb hunting. As you will see below, proportionally speaking, this number of Mustangs is higher than that of Bf-109 K4s with DC engine and C3. There is evidence of Bf-109 K4s using as early as Dec 1944, but unfortunately we do not know how many aircraft and which units used that rating. Apparently, however, its use caused issues as an order was issue by the LW to withdraw its use on January 24th 1945. Could this mean all units used it? Maybe. Could that mean only a handful used? Maybe. What we do know, though, is that during this period, the II./JG11 received 12 K4s for testing with the rating of 1.9 ata. So we simply do not currently have enough info to determine how widely used it was. What we also know is the number of units and serviceable aircraft for the units for the timeframe: II./JG2 = 7 III./JG3 = 5 I./JG4 = 2 III./JG4 = 10 IV./JG4 = 2 II./JG11 = 4 III./JG26 = 13 I./JG27 = 14 III./JG27 = 14 Stab./JG53 = 1 I./JG77 = 1 III./JG77 = 18 That is less than 80 aircraft. Similarly to what we have done with the Mustangs, we also have to consider where they were stationed (https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/39794-oob/): II./JG11 Zellhausen 17-12-44 (Out of the map) Strasburg 23-1-45 (Out of the map) I./JG27 Stormede 19-3-45 Helmstedt 30-3-45 (Out of the map) III./JG27 Gutersloh 18-3-45 Goslar 29-3-45 (Out of the map) Halberstadt 8-4-45 (Out of the map) III./JG53 Nellingen 23-3-45 (Out of the map) Neuhausen ob Eck 26-3-45 (Out of the map) IV./JG53 Reichenbach 2-4-45 (Out of the map) Even if we consider that all of them used 1.98 ata, this further reduces the number of available aircraft. In addition, we also have to consider fuel availability. Evidence shows otherwise. Please see here: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/39355-the-state-of-german-avgas-stock-april-1945/ and here: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Methanol.pdf The use of 1.98 ata was resumed again in March 1945 but, except for the II./JG11 during testing, there is no other evidence suggesting any other unit using the rating. Could that mean the I./JG27, III./JG27, III./JG53, and the IV./JG53 also used it? We do not know. Either way, the number would be inferior to that of Mustangs for sure, even if we assume all of these units converted to the new rating. Therefore, regardless of the merit of the use of the 1.98 ata rating, if we are to exclude the P-51D with 150 grade oct fuel from the plane set, by the same logic, we should also remove the Bf-109 K4 DC engine. Hope it all makes sense lol. Cheers
  9. You would be surprised Tumu on how many bombers just go straight to target lol.
  10. Let me gather the documents and I'll send you them to prove that the real situation was different. Regarding the tempest, unfortunately, I have no info on as Im yet to do any research on them. I'll be back here soon.
  11. Lol this is hilarious. Comparing a Spitfire to a 262 lol. Cmon man ... You can do better than that.
  12. It is also your job as a fighter to spot them. To rely on ground spotters to do the job for you is a very bad way to protect your troops. Go inside enemy lines and intercept the enemy in route … Not when they have already dropped or are about to drop their load. That is the correct way to do it and it is only done by the minority of the fighters in TAW. The vast majority just sits on top of the troops like flies around shit; attacking the bombers after they already dropped the bombs which is just useless at that point. Every TAW I see this behavior … Go like 10 to 20km behind enemy lines and not a single friendly can be seen lol.
  13. These are good suggestions as well but if we also want to be historically accurate, we would need to remove the Bf-109 K4 with DC engine as well as the P-51D with 150 oct. Despite of not having operated from bases in the continent, the P-51 D with 150 oct fuel saw way more action over the continent than did the K4 with DC engine. And, as you said, the G6 we currently have is not a good candidate for the first map at all since it is not representative of the version that was available then.
  • Create New...