German teams... why ?

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Maybe giving 111s airstarts near LW bomber airfields would be an idea

[Willy__]

 

 

Maybe giving 111s airstarts near LW bomber airfields would be an idea

 

That would be nice.

 

+1 

[=CFC=Conky]

I flew a Ju-87 today, a 190 was nice enough to try to escort me. Of course, he wasn't there when I got jumped by a Yak.

I did hit my target though. 

I'm definitely looking forward to that 110, it'll probably be more like a German IL-2 for me. 

 

Personally, I'd rather fly a 190 than a 110 in the ground-attack role but in the end I too will enjoy having the chance to file the Zerstorer   .

 

As for LW survival odds at low altitude, we're likely facing a higher number of highly competent VVS pilots on a given map than would have been actually present at that point in the war.  The same applies to the LW which is why you see pilots try to fly their kites in the most advantageous flight envelope to increase their chances of staying 'alive'. Just a feature of online play...

 

Good hunting,

=CFC=Conky

Edited August 31, 2015 by CFC_Conky

[Wulf]

Maybe we need the Hs 129 B-3 at some stage. Only problem is the date for accuracy but if the YAKS can have uber flaps then the krauts can get 129's with Bordkanone and BMW 801 engines.

 

 

Hs 129 B-3

 

A close up of the Bordkanone BK 7,5 75 mm cannon.

By late 1942 reports were coming in about the ineffectiveness of the MK 103 against newer versions of the Soviet T-34 tanks. One obvious solution would be to use the larger Bordkanone BK 3,7 37 mm gun, recently adapted from the ground-based Flak 18. These guns had already been converted into underwing pod-mounted weapons for the Ju 87 and found to be a fearsome weapon, despite the fact that only 12 shells per pod could be accommodated. When mounted on the Hs 129, the empty area behind the cockpit could be used for ammunition storage, which would address the only problem with the Ju 87's mounting: the limited ammunition supply. Few Hs 129s were actually fitted with the 37mm cannon, however.

It was also decided that the semi-automatic Rheinmetall PaK 40 75 mm anti-tank gun, which had already been adapted for use in the Junkers Ju 88P-1, would be further modified for use in the Hs 129. This resulted in the Bordkanone BK 7,5, which, even though it weighed 1,200 kg (2,645 lb), was: lighter than the PaK 40 75 mm; fully automatic; featured a new, hydraulic recoil-dampening system and a new, more aerodynamic muzzle brake. An autoloader system, with 12 rounds in a rotary magazine, was fitted in the empty space behind the cockpit, within the rear half of the wing-root area. The gun and its recoil mechanism occupied a substantial gun pod under the fuselage, and a circular port at the rear of the pod allowed spent cartridges to be jettisoned immediately after firing. While this new variant, the Hs 129 B-3, was theoretically capable of destroying any tank in the world, the added weight worsened the aircraft's general performance and was inferior to previous variants.^[1]

The Bordkanone 7,5 was the heaviest and most powerful forward-firing weapon fitted to a production military aircraft during World War II. The only other aircraft to be factory-equipped with similar guns were the 1,420 examples of the North American B-25G and B-25H Mitchell, which mounted either a M4 cannon, or light-weight T13E1 or M5 versions of the same gun. These weapons, however were hand-loaded, had shorter barrels and/or a lower muzzle velocity than the BK 7,5, resulting in lesser ballistic performance, accuracy and rate of fire. (The Piaggio P.108A Artigliere was equipped with a 102 mm gun for the anti-shipping role, but only a single prototype of this aircraft was tested in 1943.) The BK 7,5 was unsurpassed as a production aircraft-fitted gun until 1971, when the four-engine Lockheed AC-130E Spectre – equipped with a sideways-aimed, hand-loaded 105 mm M102 howitzer of about 3,298 lb (1,496 kg) apiece – entered service with the U.S. Air Force. The 1,200 kg (2,645 lb) Bordkanone BK 7,5 cannon installation in the Hs 129B-3 was the heaviest forward-firing autocannon ever made for a series production military aircraft, until the introduction of the Fairchild Republic A-10 "Warthog", with its General Electric GAU-8 Avenger seven barrel 30mm caliber anti-tank Gatling cannon main armament coming in at a total weight of up to 1,830 kg (4,030 lb) with ammunition included in a drum magazine integral to the weapon system, much like the much smaller 12-round magazine of the BK 7,5.

From June 1944, only 25 examples of the Hs 129 B-3 arrived at front-line units before the production line was shut down in September (a small number were reportedly also created by converting B-2 aircraft). In the field the B-3 proved deadly, but its small numbers had little effect on the war effort.

 

 

I agree the Hs 129 would make an interesting addition to the BOS battlefield and I suspect, in time, it will become available. However, I doubt very much that it would be, in any sense, a 'game changer' for the Axis forces, in terms of the current debate.   I don't know that much about the aircraft but my recollection is that it was only ever viable in circumstances where the LW had complete local air superiority.  Without effective fighter cover the Hs 129 was just another sitting duck.  There's no reason why the necessary cover couldn't be arranged of course but again, it all comes down to organization.  If people aren't willing to use TS to co-ordinate their activities the Hs 129s  will simply find itself in environments that are totally unsuited to its capabilities.  A couple of bad experiences doing that and the thing would very quickly get relegated to the back hanger.

 

The Ju 88 should be a better option but on a bangs for bucks basis, the FW 190 is the best thing going for the Axis.  It's fast, carries a big bomb and  can fight it's way out of trouble - especially  when employed in numbers.

Edited August 31, 2015 by Wulf

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Maybe better asking people who like dropping bombs which bomber they prefer rather than focus on Axis versus VVS. I'd bet that people find the IL2 and Pe2 more fun, get better successes and they're quicker to get to target as the Pe2 is fast and the IL2 doesn't climb. So in short maybe when someone is in the mood to bomb they chose the VVS over the Germans. I enjoyed flying both the Pe-2 and IL2 and if I was going to bomb online I'd probably do it in one of those aircraft but when the 110 (and possibly the 88) that might change.

Edited August 31, 2015 by JG5_Emil

[Jade_Monkey]

Less than 50% iirc. 

 

The map is about 360 km wide, so crossing 75% of the map twice should be possible with 25% fuel.

 

 

Thanks guys for your estimations!

 

I'll definitely lighten up the next time.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Thanks guys for your estimations!

 

I'll definitely lighten up the next time.

all the ingame engines use 400l/h at high power settings. The 111 gets as low as 600l/h.

[=EXPEND=Dendro]

The problem with the He129 was its poor engines so it got a bad rap pretty fast. The DEVS are known for sticking to historical accuracy so I doubt the He129 would be a game changer here anyway if it is historically implemented. Give it the BMW801 engine and the Bordkanone it would really be a lovely machine to take on the tanks.

 

Did the 88 have guns to take out tanks or did it need bombs to do the job?

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Did the 88 have guns to take out tanks or did it need bombs to do the job?

The Ju 88 P and C were dedicated tank buster variants armed with 30mm, 37mm, 5cm or 75mm guns. There even has been a test model with an 88mm installed which failed due to instability when firing the gun.

Edited September 1, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[=EXPEND=Dendro]

The Ju 88 P and C were dedicated tank buster variants armed with 30mm, 37mm, 5cm or 75mm guns. There even has been a test model with an 88mm installed which failed due to instability when firing the gun.

 

We are getting the Ju 88 A-4 which was armed with lighter machine guns for defense, as far as I can tell. So we still don't have anything like an IL2 with 37mm canons for taking out tanks besides the super slow Ju 87.

[csThor]

The problem with the He129 was its poor engines so it got a bad rap pretty fast. The DEVS are known for sticking to historical accuracy so I doubt the He129 would be a game changer here anyway if it is historically implemented. Give it the BMW801 engine and the Bordkanone it would really be a lovely machine to take on the tanks.

 

The bad rep of the Hs 129 comes from the truly abysmal pre-series and A-models, not the much better B-1 and B-2. The latter did have problems with the libyan dust ... because they were deployed in such a haste that they didn't even have the most basic dust filters installed. A second deployment of another Staffel to Tunisia a few months later got much better results - simply because their aircraft did have dust filters installed.

 

Unfortunately the standard book on Hs 129 ops (Hs 129 Panzerjäger by Martin Pegg) is only available with a lot of luck as "antiquity", otherwise I'd recommend it. I was very very lucky to get my copy on a fair for a very moderate price.

[Juri_JS]

We are getting the Ju 88 A-4 which was armed with lighter machine guns for defense, as far as I can tell. So we still don't have anything like an IL2 with 37mm canons for taking out tanks besides the super slow Ju 87.

According to official Luftwaffe documents it was possible to equip the Ju-88A4 with WB81 gun pots and a 20 mm MG FF for low level ground attacks. It would be great to have these armament options in the game, but I doubt it will happen.

Edited September 1, 2015 by Juri_JS

[SYN_Ricky]

It's a fact that the Luftwaffe didn't have any dedicated anti tank plane until the Hs-129 and the Ju-87G appeared. The germans will now have the 110 and the 109 E-7 for Jabo work, and tey were still used in the Battle of Stalingrad. For now the Luftwaffe has to rely mostly on bombs to destroy tanks. I don't know when historically the AB container bombs were first used, and if variants with anti-tank bomblets existed, but that could be also an option.

[JtD]

The problem with the He129 was its poor engines so it got a bad rap pretty fast. The DEVS are known for sticking to historical accuracy so I doubt the He129 would be a game changer here anyway if it is historically implemented. Give it the BMW801 engine and the Bordkanone it would really be a lovely machine to take on the tanks.

The Hs 129 in the anti tank role was superior to the Il-2 in many ways. Since the Il-2 is pretty good at knocking out tanks, I'd expect no less from the Hs 129. Maybe not a game changer, but a good equalizer.

[Gunsmith86]

It's a fact that the Luftwaffe didn't have any dedicated anti tank plane until the Hs-129 and the Ju-87G appeared. The germans will now have the 110 and the 109 E-7 for Jabo work, and tey were still used in the Battle of Stalingrad. For now the Luftwaffe has to rely mostly on bombs to destroy tanks. I don't know when historically the AB container bombs were first used, and if variants with anti-tank bomblets existed, but that could be also an option.

 

Early in 1942, the first container was called AB 23 with 23x SD 2 bombs in it.

Later there were bombs that were designed to kill tanks they were called SD 4 HL.

We have a Thread in the german Forum for ammunition and guns there a lot of infos about AB container and what they were used for.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/16645-der-bos-waffen-und-munitions-thread/

Only in german i have not enough time to translate it.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Early in 1942, the first container was called AB 23 with 23x SD 2 bombs in it.

Later there were bombs that were designed to kill tanks they were called SD 4 HL.

We have a Thread in the german Forum for ammunition and guns there a lot of infos about AB container and what they were used for.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/16645-der-bos-waffen-und-munitions-thread/

Only in german i have not enough time to translate it.

 

I don't think the SD-2 was an anti tank weapon was it? I thought it was used against airfields to disrupt operations and had a fairly small charge?

[Gunsmith86]

The SD 2 ia no anti tank weapon it was used against trucks, cars, planes, troops and to mine roads, airfields and citys.

I just told about it because it was the first to be droped with containers.

 

The SD 4 HL was the anti tank weapon later used in large numbers and much more effective than a SC 250 or SC 50 bomb in destroying tanks.

 

Edited September 1, 2015 by Gunsmith86

[6./ZG26_Emil]

The SD 2 ia no anti tank weapon it was used against trucks, cars, planes, troops and to mine roads, airfields and citys.

I just told about it because it was the first to be droped with containers.

 

The SD 4 HL was the anti tank weapon later used in large numbers and much more effective than a SC 250 or SC 50 bomb in destroying tanks.

 

 

Thanks

 

This topic came up a while back and someone said that the first time the SD-4 was used was during the battle of Kursk, was it used earlier?

[wtornado]

The Hs 129 in the anti tank role was superior to the Il-2 in many ways. Since the Il-2 is pretty good at knocking out tanks, I'd expect no less from the Hs 129. Maybe not a game changer, but a good equalizer.

With heavy armor plating and a heavy gun platform the HS-129 did not have the horse power it needed to maneuver like a IL-2 or a even a Bf-110.The 75mm cannon alone weight

alone was 1200 kgs.Bloody heavy.Way too under powered for armor plating and heavy payloads.No way to maneuver out of a fight.

 

The SD 2 ia no anti tank weapon it was used against trucks, cars, planes, troops and to mine roads, airfields and citys.

I just told about it because it was the first to be droped with containers.

 

The SD 4 HL was the anti tank weapon later used in large numbers and much more effective than a SC 250 or SC 50 bomb in destroying tanks.

 

SD 2 or butterfly bomb was used mostly on airfields.

 

The Russians would take German prisoners or local partisans,men and women

and give them sticks to run out on the fields and set off the charges.

 

USAF aircrew seen men and women walk out in to the airfield being cleared with sticks

during on of their ''Operation Frantic Joe'' missions with lets say very high casualties

and it freaked them right out. 

[Gunsmith86]

Later the first SD 4  in march 1944 development took one year.

Edited September 1, 2015 by Gunsmith86

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Later the first in march 1944 development took one year.

 

Thanks again!

 

 

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

The SD-2 could be pretty handy to destroy artillery lines, flak concentrated areas or trains. I don't know if we're going to see them at this point.

[Gunsmith86]

 

 

SD 2 or butterfly bomb was used mostly on airfields.

 

 

airfields are just the targets we now the most about today but most were droped on troops.

 

1943 they used over 1000000 SD 2

Edited September 1, 2015 by Gunsmith86

[JtD]

With heavy armor plating and a heavy gun platform the HS-129 did not have the horse power it needed to maneuver like a IL-2 or a even a Bf-110.The 75mm cannon alone weight

alone was 1200 kgs.Bloody heavy.Way too under powered for armor plating and heavy payloads.No way to maneuver out of a fight.

Which Il-2 carried a 75mm gun, if you want to compare that Hs129 with the Il-2? More accurately, comparisons should be made between the standard B-1 and B-2 carrying the MK101 or MK103 and the Il-2 carrying 2xNS37. If you look at these two, you'll find similar power loading, similar wing loading, better span loading for the Hs129, making it the better turner. I also see no reason why the smaller Hs129 should be any less agile than the larger Il-2. No idea what it will look like in game, though, there have been quite a few surprises already.

In terms of ground attack, the centralized weapons of the Hs129 improve stability and accuracy in the attack run, more than compensating for the lack of the second heavy gun. The air cooled engines are less vulnerable to enemy fire, and even if one fails, you still have the second one to bring you home. You have a better view over the nose, worse to the rear. The main shortcoming is the lack of a rear gunner, which in game is probably more important than in real life.

[Maxyman]

Thanks

 

This topic came up a while back and someone said that the first time the SD-4 was used was during the battle of Kursk, was it used earlier?

You probably mean PTAB. Those bombs were used during battle of Kursk.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

You probably mean PTAB. Those bombs were used during battle of Kursk.

 

Yep spot on I realised that now

Which Il-2 carried a 75mm gun, if you want to compare that Hs129 with the Il-2? More accurately, comparisons should be made between the standard B-1 and B-2 carrying the MK101 or MK103 and the Il-2 carrying 2xNS37. If you look at these two, you'll find similar power loading, similar wing loading, better span loading for the Hs129, making it the better turner. I also see no reason why the smaller Hs129 should be any less agile than the larger Il-2. No idea what it will look like in game, though, there have been quite a few surprises already.

In terms of ground attack, the centralized weapons of the Hs129 improve stability and accuracy in the attack run, more than compensating for the lack of the second heavy gun. The air cooled engines are less vulnerable to enemy fire, and even if one fails, you still have the second one to bring you home. You have a better view over the nose, worse to the rear. The main shortcoming is the lack of a rear gunner, which in game is probably more important than in real life.

 

I think I'd prefer a 129 without a rear gunner over a stuka with one in game plus the 129 has two engines which would make me feel like I had a chance of running for base with engine damage.

[=CFC=Conky]

Just because an airplane has two engines doesn't necessarily mean it can fly on one. With the Hs-129, if you lose an engine the other will probably only get you as far as the crash site...  .

 

Good hunting,

Conky

[6./ZG26_Emil]

and its 10 mph faster

[Y-29.Silky]

Maybe giving 111s airstarts near LW bomber airfields would be an idea

It's the "Big Bomb" mentality going on right now I.e 2500kg + 1000kg. When people take out the He-111 they think they have to go big or go home. Recently I've only been taking ×4, 250kg's that have no bombs externally and I reach 3000m in no time. Pretty much does the same damage as the 1000kg but just with a smaller explosion. And the He-111 is rather fast with that ordinance due to the reduction of drag.

Edited September 1, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[JtD]

Just because an airplane has two engines doesn't necessarily mean it can fly on one. With the Hs-129, if you lose an engine the other will probably only get you as far as the crash site...  .

It wasn't easy but possible to fly the Hs129 on one engine.

[Gunsmith86]

According to official Luftwaffe documents it was possible to equip the Ju-88A4 with WB81 gun pots and a 20 mm MG FF for low level ground attacks. It would be great to have these armament options in the game, but I doubt it will happen.

 

sorry i am drunk when  i wright this.

6x WB  81 gun pods was possible for Ju 88 A4 4x fiering forward and two backwards.

for more ask tomorrow.

[LLv24_Zami]

sorry i am drunk when  i wright this.

 

Nice

[Leaf]

sorry i am drunk when  i wright this.

 

Best way to approach most forum threads tbh. :D

[=CFC=Conky]

It wasn't easy but possible to fly the Hs129 on one engine.

 

Yeah, it probably was, I wonder how well it performed on one fan with the big gun tub underneath although if I recall correctly, you could jettison that.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Yeah, it probably was, I wonder how well it performed on one fan with the big gun tub underneath although if I recall correctly, you could jettison that.

You could for sure. The B-3 wasn't the most typical model either. The B-2 was and it could definitely fly, albeit poorly, on a single engine... Even with the Mk101 and Mk103 cannons fitted.

 

Side note that it's quite fun to fly in IL-2 1946 if you want to do some tank busting Luftwaffe style.

[=EXPEND=Dendro]

Last night the LW won.... anyone experienced a LW win before? We had a few He111 pilots causing absolute carnage and a few dedicated Ju87 pilots doing just the same (well done boys). I won't mention that the VVS had only half the amount of players.....

[Y-29.Silky]

Side note that it's quite fun to fly in IL-2 1946 if you want to do some tank busting Luftwaffe style.

 

I just flew the TB-3 in the battle-fields server not too long ago..

FUN was an under statement! And I actually survived bringing her home on 2 engines.

 

With my Bf-110, I actually came back with only one prop attached.

Edited September 2, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[csThor]

Yeah, it probably was, I wonder how well it performed on one fan with the big gun tub underneath although if I recall correctly, you could jettison that.

 

It was mandatory to jettison the entire gun mount on the Hs-129 B3 if you suffered the loss of an engine.

[xvii-Dietrich]

Maybe better asking people who like dropping bombs which bomber they prefer rather than focus on Axis versus VVS.

 

I'm a Luftwaffe (and Ilmavoimat!) bomber pilot in an online LW bomber unit.  We are completely new to BoS, although we have about 1000 hours each of CloD experience.

 

We are shying away from the general multiplayer scene at the moment, because the mission times seem far too brief. For a full mission, my squad needs 2-3 hours and unless you catch the start of the mission, this means flights are often cut short.

 

My all-time preferred aircraft is the He-115 floatplane (not appropriate for BoS, but it would be good at Murmansk... hint, hint). After that, the Ju 88 is a close second. The Ju 88 (in my opinion) is good, as it is a moderately fast, capable and versatile aircraft. Historically, it was also available in large numbers. I think the developers are making a good choice including the A-4 variant in BoM.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I'm a Luftwaffe (and Ilmavoimat!) bomber pilot in an online LW bomber unit.  We are completely new to BoS, although we have about 1000 hours each of CloD experience.

 

We are shying away from the general multiplayer scene at the moment, because the mission times seem far too brief. For a full mission, my squad needs 2-3 hours and unless you catch the start of the mission, this means flights are often cut short.

 

My all-time preferred aircraft is the He-115 floatplane (not appropriate for BoS, but it would be good at Murmansk... hint, hint). After that, the Ju 88 is a close second. The Ju 88 (in my opinion) is good, as it is a moderately fast, capable and versatile aircraft. Historically, it was also available in large numbers. I think the developers are making a good choice including the A-4 variant in BoM.

 

Exactly my point

 

I think the DF missions should be longer personally.

 

By the way check out the esport section for coops there's a few big events being run that require LW bomber pilots