Jump to content
Jason_Williams

Discussion of Bodenplatte, Flying Circus and Tank Crew Announcement...

Recommended Posts

Well, I tend to never pre order games, but this has tipped me over the edge into buying both BoK and BoBp. It's a small thank you both to the devs and to Tzigys incredible generosity earlier this week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PSST: Do I see hordes of Typhoons and the only Lightning squadron, wich is moreover a pure reconnaisance squadron, equipped with unarmed F-5's? ;) I mean, shouldn't be fair to give a Typhoon instead of Lightning to Allies?

 

Interesting, the Typhoon would be nice to have. Are the players in favor of giving up the P-38 for the Typhoon though? Maybe there could be a switch, having the Typhoon as standard and the Tempest as collector plane?

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

the Typhoon as standard and the Tempest as collector plane?
 
 

I think that's a great idea but the masses are clamouring for a Mosquito!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

All things being equal (an admittedly rarer and rarer situation as the war progressed) It's the 190's that represented the greater threat - not the late 109's. At least that's what the actual pilots tell me.

 

Listen I read a lot about P 51 pilots, many of them ended up in one so it is hard to avoid. I could really not get any information on how it performed against the 109. Those flying the JUG before getting the P 51 did not really want to go back either. Those flying jus not tried the P 51 would not change for a P 51

 

Anyway, did the 109 perform worser at high altitude than the P 51? Or was it the added weapons on the 109 making it loose its edge? I am very confused about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, the Typhoon would be nice to have. Are the players in favor of giving up the P-38 for the Typhoon though? Maybe there could be a switch, having the Typhoon as standard and the Tempest as collector plane?

IMHO that would be the most perfect idea.  Also, Typhoon+Tempest would be faster and cheaper in production, then P-38+Tempest.

 

Also, it would be fair: 

 

Average fighter/dedicated assault in standart set, an exellent fighter in premium set.

 

Fw190A-8/F-8 in standart set, Fw190D-9 in premium

Typhoon IB in standart set, Tempest in premium :)

 

But its Jasons choise. All is up to him.

Edited by I./ZG1_Panzerbar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but argument of faster and cheaper to produce is just wrong. I dont want them to deliver something faster and easier but rather the very best they can make. And I'm more than certain that they can make P-38. There is no reason to even consider dropping P-38L. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So, I would like to listen some Allied fighters experts out here, may they recognise sub-model useng serial-numbers of Spitfires, P-47's, P-51's e.t.c.

 

This website covers in detail P-47 serial numbers: http://p-47.database.pagesperso-orange.fr/

 

From there, it's easy to go to a particular page and run a search for, say, "01/01/45" to see what was in action on the day of Bodenplatte. 


 

 

I jumped back into Il-2 1946 and hooooo weeee...I forgot how ugly the Razorback cockpits were in Il-2. 

 

The P-47 cockpits in Il2 really were horrid.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but argument of faster and cheaper to produce is just wrong. I dont want them to deliver something faster and easier but rather the very best they can make. And I'm more than certain that they can make P-38. There is no reason to even consider dropping P-38L. 

Ok, bad argument.

Here is another:

Typhoon was in the heat of fight all through European campaign 1944-45, and Lightnings generally all went out to Pacific in mid-1944.

 

IMHO Typhoon, "an English Il-2", deserved its place in planeset :) It was a legendary aircraft in ETO.

 

P-38 is good aircraft too, but its fame came in PTO. In Europe, even Me410's and Bf110G-2's (sic!) had no problems with it :)

Edited by I./ZG1_Panzerbar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But its a premium aircraft. It doesnt have to be connected with this very operation. This was said before in regard to 190 A-3 or Mc. 202. 

I'm sorry but I find it hard to believe that Me-410 or Bf 110 had no problems with it. P-38s scored numerous victories and provided escort before Mustangs arrived. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But its a premium aircraft. It doesnt have to be connected with this very operation. This was said before in regard to 190 A-3 or Mc. 202. 

I'm sorry but I find it hard to believe that Me-410 or Bf 110 had no problems with it. P-38s scored numerous victories and provided escort before Mustangs arrived. 

 

1. If so, We may ask Me410B, bacause there was still II./ZG76 in Grossenhein airfield in december 1944, equipped with Me410B's :) Not on Western front, but still in combat with P-51's :)

 

2. Bf110 and Me410 suffered over Germany mainly in P-51/P-47 hands. Yes, there were several occasions when it was clearly Bf110G vs P-38 combats, with Zerstorer heavy losses (like on 29.01.44, when Hptm. Kiel of III./ZG76 - one of the top Bf110 experten was killed), but on the other hand there were many occasions when P-38 were in combat with Bf110/Me410 and were beaten hard. For example, Hptm. Tratt had two P-38 confirmed by USAAF losses on a single combat:

2/Lt. Leonard S. Smutko (79th FS in P-38J-10-LO 42-67821)

2/Lt. Melvin H. Orr (79th FS in P-38J-10-LO 42-67848)

And other examples. We have 3U+AT skin in game, wich belongs to Oblt. Paul Bley, who was one of leading P-38 killer among Bf110 pilots.

 

Zerstorer vs P-38 were never purely one-sided combats.

Edited by I./ZG1_Panzerbar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone,

 

You can discuss today's big announcement in this thread. Discussion of the delayed Pacific project will be conducted in another thread. Please hold you comments on that subject until then and do not discuss that in this thread. Comments about the PTO will be deleted in this thread. Please keep this civil and orderly.

 

I will be holding another question and answer session on TeamSpeak this weekend. Stay tuned for details.

 

Thank You! 

 

Jason

I am soo happy for the Tank and the flying crew modules, CANNOT WAIT :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If so, We may ask Me410B, bacause there was still II./ZG76 in Grossenhein airfield in december 1944, equipped with Me410B's :) Not on Western front, but still in combat with P-51's :)

 

2. Bf110 and Me410 suffered over Germany mainly in P-51/P-47 hands. Yes, there were several occasions when it was clearly Bf110G vs P-38 combats, with Zerstorer heavy losses (like on 29.01.44, when Hptm. Kiel of III./ZG76 - one of the top Bf110 experten was killed), but on the other hand there were many occasions when P-38 were in combat with Bf110/Me410 and were beaten hard. For example, Hptm. Tratt had two P-38 confirmed by USAAF losses on a single combat:

2/Lt. Leonard S. Smutko (79th FS in P-38J-10-LO 42-67821)

2/Lt. Melvin H. Orr (79th FS in P-38J-10-LO 42-67848)

And other examples. We have 3U+AT skin in game, wich belongs to Oblt. Paul Bley, who was one of leading P-38 killer among Bf110 pilots.

 

Zerstorer vs P-38 were never purely one-sided combats.

Sorry, but this makes no sense. Germans at that time are mustering all they can and Me410 was produced as any other plane at a diminished rate and Germans were using everything they got. 8th AAF under command of Gen. Doolittle had been standaridsing around P-51D for a while, and he also reworked many units that previously were flying on P-47s. There was one unit using P-38 and it remained doing so and of course Zemke's Wolfpack was using P-47's up untill the end of the war. But that was not because they were worse than Me410 in dogfighting, thats because Doolittle wanted fighters with overlaping range and maintnance, so that Fighter Groups could rotate when defending the heavies. Each fighter has a X-ammount of hours that have to be put into the maintnance. If you have 3 groups and they are scheduled to go tommorow, Two of them are P-51's and can go while third is P-38 and still needs time because spare parts didn't arrive, it can derail the whole operation and put your forces under more danger.

Thats what Germans could never do, standarisation!  Previous 8th AAF commanders also didn't appreciate that as much as Doolittle did and thats the whole thing. It is not because P-38L is worse than Me410 or 110 in a dogfight (and I cannot imagine it could be).

 

Not to mention, Germans were still pouring money into such planes as Me410 instead of closing the factory long ago, these planes were mostly grounded because they needed twice the fuel and were shot down way before they were even able to get close to the enemy bombers and could never run away from the likes of P-51D or P-47D/M or P-38L.

Edited by =LD=Solty
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As busdriver said, the P-51D cannot pull very high deflection, but that doesn't mean it cannot pull deflection at all. It is still a very capable airplane and can definitely win a turning fight with Fw190D9 equiped with MW50 and 1.8 ata power while at 61'hg of power itself. It is a fairly big difference in turning performance and only very defueled 190 with lots of skill can keep the fight interesting. I claim that P-51D will be even an issue for Bf109K4 and G6 in turning battles. It will definitely be closer than you think and especially with higher power settings.

 

190D9 has its share of advantages over the Mustang, but those diminish with higher boost and low speeds. P-51D with 75'hg can outrun, outturn and outclimb a 190D9 at most altitudes.

 

PS. If you think that pilots acoounts are so important and say the whole story (they don't), I can tell you that there are many pilot stories from Allied pilots who claim that outturning a 109 and 190 was easy.

 

You forgot to mention that P-51D can into space as well!

 

P.S. Pilot accounts aren't as important, I agree, but even an A-8 with a power/weight co-efficient 1/3 higher than the Mustang's is something that might give you an idea what you got wrong. Well, I forgot, P-51D can outrun, outturn and outclimb even a D-9 at most altitudes. Even if the Mustang climbed slower by 4-5m/s beneath 3km and couldn't set off unless over 5km. The P-51D still can outclimb even a D-9 at most altitudes, since altitudes 5km to 12km, are 7 out of 12, hence most altitudes, makes that assumption correct. Any questions?

 

 

So summary of your claim: P-51D outturns the Bf109 K-4 and G-6, and it outruns, outturns and outclimbs the FW190 D-9. Does this include the A-8 and the 262s as well? And where do I sign up?  :rolleyes:

 

 

P.P.S. With German planes it is like with the MG42. Remember soldier, its bark is worse than its bite!

Edited by 2./JG51_Fenris_Wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone,

 

You can discuss today's big announcement in this thread. Discussion of the delayed Pacific project will be conducted in another thread. Please hold you comments on that subject until then and do not discuss that in this thread. Comments about the PTO will be deleted in this thread. Please keep this civil and orderly.

 

I will be holding another question and answer session on TeamSpeak this weekend. Stay tuned for details.

 

Thank You! 

 

Jason

 

Hi Jason, look here, please: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/32362-golden-award-entire-development-team/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the plane roster. 

I adore it. I hope they won't touch it and leave it be. I am holding off my pre-order until I am sure I am getting those allied planes.

 

Sorry, but argument of faster and cheaper to produce is just wrong. I dont want them to deliver something faster and easier but rather the very best they can make. And I'm more than certain that they can make P-38. There is no reason to even consider dropping P-38L. 

Ditto.

 

I'm fine waiting for a different module to see the Tiffy and the razorbacks. Plus B-26, Me-210 plus three to five more as yet unnamed aircraft.

Yeah, that's what I am saying. As long as they are coming...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to mention, Germans were still pouring money into such planes as Me410 instead of closing the factory long ago, these planes were mostly grounded because they needed twice the fuel and were shot down way before they were even able to get close to the enemy bombers and could never run away from the likes of P-51D or P-47D/M or P-38L.

 

Wow really.... Liberator crews, killed on 20 june 1944 (JUNE 1944 !!!!) over Rugen island, not agree with You. And that massacre was not the only single sucсess....

 

 

20. June 1944

U.S. VIII Bomber Command: HAMBURG, OSTERMOOR, PÖLITZ, KONIGSBORN,

MAGDEBURG, FALLERSLEBEN & MISBURG

JaFü I. Jagdkorps/Lfl. Reich:

20.06.44  Ltn. Rudi Dassow                            Stab II./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF: 7.500 m. [N.W. Rügen]       09.05-15        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.15

20.06.44  Ltn. Rudi Dassow                            Stab II./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SG-1.2: 7.500 m. [insel Rügen]              09.05-15         Film    C. 2027/II    Anerk: Nr.16

20.06.44  Ofw. Nierhaus                                          6./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/TG-1 at 7.500 m. [W. Rügen]    09.05-15        Film        C. 2027/II                VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Ofw. Nierhaus                                          6./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF: 7.500 m. [N. Zingst]           09.05-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.86

20.06.44  Ltn. Manstein                                           2./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/TH at 6.200 m. [E. Rügen]         09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.18

20.06.44  Uffz. Ristitz                                             4./ZG 26   B-24           £ Zingst at 7.000 m.                                     09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.102

20.06.44  Ofw. Küdozus                                          5./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SG-SF: 7.500 m. [N. Zingst]     09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.74

20.06.44  Fw. Buchholz                                           6./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF: 7.500 m. [N. Zingst]           09.10-15        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.88

20.06.44  Ofw. Schneider                                         5./ZG 26   B-24           £ westl. Rügen: 7.500 m.                             09.10-15        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.75

20.06.44  Uffz. Jungmaier                                        6./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF-2: 7.500 m. [N. Zingst]        09.10     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.87

20.06.44  Ltn. Wenko                                       Stab I./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/TH-2.3: 6.200 m. [E. Rügen]     09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.7

20.06.44  Uffz. Wesske                                            3./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/TH-2.3: 6.200 m. [E. Rügen]     09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.23

20.06.44  Oblt. Fritz Stehle                                     5./ZG 26   B-24           £ westl. Rügen: 7.500 m.                             09.10-15        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.78

20.06.44  Ofw. Klos                                                 4./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF Zingst: 7.500 m.                   09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.103

20.06.44  Oblt. von Glasenapp                       Stab II./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF Rügen: 7.500 m.                   09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.104

20.06.44  Fhr. Retschy                                             5./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF Rügen: 7.500 m.                   09.10-15        Film        C. 2027/II                VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Uffz. Kischerer                                         4./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF Rügen: 7.500 m.                   09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.105

20.06.44  Uffz. Holzer                                             5./ZG 26   B-24           £ westl. Rügen at 7.500 m.                          09.10-15        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.79

20.06.44  Uffz. Grittler                                            5./ZG 26   B-24           £ nördl. Zingst: 7.500 m.                             09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.80

20.06.44  Uffz. Schinbauer                                      1./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/TH-2.3: 6.200 m. [E. Rügen]     09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.69

20.06.44  Ofw. Trestler                                            3./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/TH-2.3: 6.200 m. [E. Rügen]     09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.22

20.06.44  Ltn. Rudi Dassow                            Stab II./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SG-2.3: 7.000 m. [Wittow/Rügen]          09.10-20         Film    C. 2027/II    Anerk: Nr.17

20.06.44  Fw. Müller                                                5./ZG 26   B-24           £ westl. Rügen at 7.500 m.                          09.10-15        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: ASM

20.06.44  Fw. Budde                                                5./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF Rügen: 7.500 m.                   09.10-15        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.76

20.06.44  Uffz. Hissfeld                                          5./ZG 26   B-24           £ N.E. Zingst at 7.500 m.                             09.10-20        noch        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.77

20.06.44  Uffz. Esser                                               4./ZG 26   B-24           £ N.E. Zingst at 7.500 m.                             09.10-20        Film        C. 2027/II                VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Ofw. Kurt Muschner                               2./JG 300   P-51            £ 15 Ost S/JE bei Zerbst: 7.200 m.             09.13     noch                C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.5

20.06.44  Fw. Anton Gaißmayer                             4./JG 300   B-17           £ 5 km. E. Magdeburg: 6.500 m.                  09.15     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.7

20.06.44  Fw. Kobalsky                                           6./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SG-SH: 7.000 m. [Rügen]          09.15     noch                C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.89

20.06.44  Ltn. Manstein                                           2./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/TH: E. Rügen: 7.500 m.             09.15-25        Film        C. 2027/II                VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Uffz. Knut Witte                                    5./JG 300   B-17           £ nördl. Magdeburg: 6.000 m.                      09.15     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.7

20.06.44  Uffz. Jungmaier                                        6./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF-9 Rügen: 7.500 m.                09.17-20        noch        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.90

20.06.44  Ltn. Wolfsberger                                    9./JG 300   B-24           £ N. Insel Rügen: 6.000 m.                          09.32     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.26

20.06.44  Oblt. Hans Gottuck                                9./JG 300   B-24           £ N.E. Insel Rügen: 6.000 m.                       09.18     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Uffz. Hoyer                                              5./ZG 26   B-24           £ N. Bergen: 3.000 m.                                  09.20-30        Film        C. 2027/II                Anerk: Nr.81

20.06.44  Ltn. Herbert Schlüter                             2./JG 300   B-17           £ 30-50 km. vor Magdeburg: 7.800 m.         09.20     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Oblt. Gerhard Pilz                                  1./JG 300   P-51            £ 40 km. N. Bernberg: 6.700 m.                   09.20     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.4

20.06.44  Oblt. Fritz Stehle                                     5./ZG 26   B-24           £ Sassnitz/Rügen in See: 6.000 m.              09.20     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Ofw. Frös                                                 6./ZG 26   B-24           £ 15 Ost N/SF Rügen: 7.500 m.                   09.20     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Oblt. Kurt Gabler                                   8./JG 300   B-24           £ SH Insel Rügen: 6.000 m.                         09.22     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Fw. Resech                                              1./JG 300   B-17           £ GC Haldensleben: 7.200 m.                      09.22     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Ofw. Heinz Steinmacher                         8./JG 300   B-24           £ östw. Insel Rügen: 6.000 m.                     09.23     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Hptm. Iro Ilk                                Stab III./JG 300   B-24           £ SH Insel Rügen: 6.000 m.                         09.23     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Ofw. Schroeder                                         4./ZG 26   P-51            £ JD südl. Magdeburg: 6.000 m.                  09.25     Film C. 2027/II           VNE: ASM

20.06.44  Ofw. Paul-Georg Schaffrath                    5./JG 300   B-17           £ N.W. Magdeburg: 6.500 m.                       09.25     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.8

20.06.44  Hptm. Iro Ilk                                Stab III./JG 300   P-51            £ S.E. Greisfwald: 4.400 m.                        09.30     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.2

20.06.44  Oblt. Kurt Gabler                                   8./JG 300   P-51            £ Stettin at 3.000 m.                                    09.33     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.3

20.06.44  Uffz. Horking                                           6./ZG 26   P-51            £ AF-6-AG-4: 6-7.000 m. [Demmin]           09.35     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: ASM

20.06.44  Ltn. Germann Merz                                 9./JG 300   B-24           £ Neubrandenburg: 4.500 m.                       10.20     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.4

20.06.44  Uffz. Eiselt                                             8./JG 300   P-51            £ Pasewalk at 7.000 m.                                10.26     Film C. 2027/II           Anerk: Nr.4

 

 

Edited by I./ZG1_Panzerbar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I assume You to look closer to P-38 actions in Europe in combats vs Me410.  In pure fights Me410 vs P-38 german had (fact !) better kill/death ratio.

 

Not to mention, both Schweinfurth/Regensburg massacres would never happen without Bf110/Me410 with W.Gr.21, wich split "combat boxes" and made many "lame ducks" wich could be finished by 109/190.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, lets have a look on what Order of Battle both sides had on 1.jan.1945, during Bodenplatte:

 

 

PSST: Do I see hordes of Typhoons and the only Lightning squadron, wich is moreover a pure reconnaisance squadron, equipped with unarmed F-5's? ;) I mean, shouldn't be fair to give a Typhoon instead of Lightning to Allies?

 

To be fair, the AOB from that book (a pretty nice book by the looks of the data) for the USAAF and RAF is for bases attacked that day. It would be mistake to think this was the actual Allied AOB available within 50-100 km of each of the airfields hit. It omits RAF 2 Group twin engine bomber units. It omits 9th AF bombers. It omits all three 9th AF P-38 Fighter Groups. Only two were based in Belgium at the time. The 370th FG (401st FS, 402nd FS, 403rd FS) and 474th FG (428th FS, 429th FS, 430th FS) were at airfields near Florennes.

 

I suppose if BoBo's map doesn't include Florennes, then no need to include the P-38. If the Dev's intent is to only include fighters at bases attacked on 1 Jan, then no need to include the P-38. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, just for clarificaion,  the text said that "If successful, we plan to make the Li-2 next. We are making NO PROMISES, but here are a couple very early WIP pics." however the pics were of a Polikarpov Po-2 and not a Lisunov Li-2. Which are we going to get next, the model of the Po-2 looks pretty complete from the exterior but maybe the Li-2 is further along? I assume that we may get both? Not that I'm greedy but would really love to see the Li-2 as it would add the capabilities that the Ju-52 now does for the Axis and would add a new mission element.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Po-2 is the first test of the contractor team. If it is a success next comes Li-2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the issues here (taking a single example but of relevance to various a/c) is that the technical difference between a Mk IX and Mk XVI Spitfire.In RAF parlance is that the former had a Merlin produced in the UK and the latter a Merlin produced in North America: both engines were technically identical Merlin 66 series, with same hp at same boost and RPM.

 

Yet people are still exiting toys from pram over the new product featuring a IX rather than a XVI. The RAF / British did not have a useful sub-code of variants which distinguishes one Mk IX from the other, merely a list of engine types, wing types and other small elements which could and were frequently mixed. As a rule of thumb, the XVI was more likely to have the E Wing (2 x 20mm and 2 x .5s), the later [larger] vertical stabliser and possibly a bubble canopy, but the differences are pretty small. A Spitfire IX and XVI in later 1944 probably ran 18 or 25lb boost, but in most air forces squadrons generally ran a mixed bag until withdrawn and re-equipped (or suffered very heavy losses, whichever was earlier).

 

So the Spit IXs and XVIs may have been virtually identical, The Typhoon IBs were the later series with a bubble canopy and Sabre II engines, while the Tempest Vs would have all been Series II with the Sabre IIB, if only because the Series I was produced in very small numbers and had largely self-attrited by this point (early Sabres being very temperamental).

 

So, for 2TAF the IXs and XVIs are almost certainly all late model-, high-power variants, as are the Tififes and Tempests, though individual engine boost and so forth can be debated. Same likely true of 109 variants, possible the Fws as well. Given loss rates in the Luftwaffe summer-Autumn 1944, I expect a lot of the fighters were new models. Not sure about the Yanks.

 

There are documents and records that could narrow down the RAF sub-variants by squadron, but I suspect it would be better to take a base-line or 2 and call it even. If time and energy were available, say:

 

Spit IX C-wing, full span, 18lb boost, high back, traditional tail

Spitfire IX E-wIng, clipped, 25lb boost, bubble canopy, new tail,

 

Sure similar base-line models could be found for all types. May not cover the small number of exotic machines that every force had, but reflects the most common variant or 2 without upsetting any of the fan base or nobbling and famous design.

 

Learned a few new things here. I never knew the MK IX and the MKXVI were so similar. Nor did I know the MK IX got a bubble canopy (always thought that was just from the XVI  and 18's onwards). 

 

I need to brush up my aircraft knowledge. Can you recommend any books or websites for reference (especially for Spits and Hurris, but also generally for any British aircraft of the time)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen I read a lot about P 51 pilots, many of them ended up in one so it is hard to avoid. I could really not get any information on how it performed against the 109. Those flying the JUG before getting the P 51 did not really want to go back either. Those flying jus not tried the P 51 would not change for a P 51

 

Anyway, did the 109 perform worser at high altitude than the P 51? Or was it the added weapons on the 109 making it loose its edge? I am very confused about it. 

 

The 352nd Mustang pilots I talked with directly (McKibben, Powel, Bryan, Rigby, Starck, Moats, Wood) all said they'd gladly have traded their P-51 to get their Jugs back when flying ground attack missions.

In the air against 109's it was a different story, but at least one of them (cant' remember which now I'd have to go through my recordings) said he missed the 8x .50 cals since they often broke up German attacks

by flying head-on into their formations with guns blazing. ( sorry, for all you "head on's are for dweebs" types) it's what they did...in fact it became more or less doctrine.

 

Wood was a replacement and never flew Jugs with the 352nd, but noted that he'd gladly have traded.

 

Performance against the 109 at all altitudes did not pose a problem for the Mustang pilots who I talked to....this is where survivor bias comes in.

The ones who mixed it up and didn't make it were not around for me to interview. This is always a problem that you have to keep in mind when talking

with vets. Some got away with things that maybe should have gotten them killed, but they were lucked and lived to tell about it.

 

Bud Anderson's "straight up" fight is a good example of this. Many of you know that flying straight up into a stall and hanging there like a kite is a REALLY good way to get shot down.

I've splashed more than one player who was doing this in years past....you make an easy target. Most of us know not to do this, yet Bud Anderson did exactly this not once during that engagement, but twice.

Other's that did the same thing are dead and not here to talk about their "straight up fight" Bud did, and he can tell the story even though by all rights it should have killed him.

 

This is why trying to get a handle on German aircraft performance from vets is almost futile. I've tried various questions, framed in different ways.

The gist is always the same...the 109's and 190's posed little problem with rare exceptions...again for these surviving pilots.

 

Same thing on the German side etc. Willie Heilman remarked about how he didn't fear the Mustang...he has many dead buddies who are not here to counter why maybe one should.

Is what it is.

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As busdriver said, the P-51D cannot pull very high deflection...

 

Whoa big fella...that was not me. You are referring to that other guy, the one without an avatar...thebusdriver. I can see me getting blamed for lots of stuff now.  ;)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, bad argument.

Here is another:

Typhoon was in the heat of fight all through European campaign 1944-45, and Lightnings generally all went out to Pacific in mid-1944.

 

IMHO Typhoon, "an English Il-2", deserved its place in planeset :) It was a legendary aircraft in ETO.

 

P-38 is good aircraft too, but its fame came in PTO. In Europe, even Me410's and Bf110G-2's (sic!) had no problems with it :)

 

Would love the Typhoon sometime but I'm glad they decided on the Tempest instead.

 

I can see them maybe offering a Typhoon as a collector plane later. It's highly requested, highly relevant, and once they have done the work on the Tempest they should be able to back things up a bit and build us a late model Typhoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, the AOB from that book (a pretty nice book by the looks of the data) for the USAAF and RAF is for bases attacked that day. It would be mistake to think this was the actual Allied AOB available within 50-100 km of each of the airfields hit. It omits RAF 2 Group twin engine bomber units. It omits 9th AF bombers. It omits all three 9th AF P-38 Fighter Groups. Only two were based in Belgium at the time. The 370th FG (401st FS, 402nd FS, 403rd FS) and 474th FG (428th FS, 429th FS, 430th FS) were at airfields near Florennes.

 

I suppose if BoBo's map doesn't include Florennes, then no need to include the P-38. If the Dev's intent is to only include fighters at bases attacked on 1 Jan, then no need to include the P-38. 

 

No need to dump the P-38 at all. The modus operandi of the Dev's is to include AC which are tangentially associated to the theater (BOS 190 A3 anyone?) so the P-38 which was ACTUALLY in theater is fine. I'd actually dump the G-14 from the German side and include a twin engined Me-410 for the strike/bomber guys. It is a very futuristic if slightly underperforming AC and was also part of the ACTUAL operation. Interesting, topical, do-able and would go a long way to assuage the legitimate gripes of mud movers for BoBp.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jason pretty much said he wanted to make new planes if at all possible so that future additions can be more easily made down the road. He singled out the P-38-L and Tempest MkV as doorways to other P-38 series and the Typhoon. The ones they get to develop from current models are the Bf-109 G14, Spitfire MkIX, and Fw-190 A8. They might be able to do something with the Fw-190 D9 but its probably only the wings and center fuselage. The Bf190-K4 will have a lot of differences so it might be in the same boat as the 190-D9. The rest is all new stuff. 

Edited by Field-Ops

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to ruin that post: It is false. In order to elaborate:

 

MW-50 was a built-in standard throughout the full series of our A-8 - from the very beginning - it's not even a modification. It was a premise for this heavy plane. Hence the devs don't even need to consider this as an add-on, that could be unloaded. It was one of the defining developments to start the A-8 version with the new engine, led to a new tank behind the pilot (115 l), as well as EC Rüstsatz pushed forward so they could balance the shifted CoG.

 

What you were talking about and what you were mixing it up with could have been different things: Either the C3 injection system (which btw is present in our current A-5 Jagdbomber version), or you were considering the A7, or you were talking about "Erhöhte Notleistung" (increased emergency power) which was series from July 1944 and increased ATA to 1.58 at sealevel and 1.65 at higher altitudes (10 minutes, and achieved up to 2050PS for this flying brick, useable multiple times after cooling the engine). But you were probably thinking about Rüstsatz GM-1, because that would fit your description. But you see, many things to mix it up with.  ;)

 

Here multiple sources on BMW 801 D in the A-8 and its MW-50 system:

- BMW 801 A–C–D–G, MA, ML, Flugmotor und Kommandogerät: Technisches Kompendium, Luftfahrt-Archiv

- Kyrill von Gersdorff, Kurt Grasmann, Helmut Schubert: Flugmotoren und Strahltriebwerke. Bernard & Graefe Verlag, 1995

- Campbell/Greer, 1976, page 38

- FW Flugbericht der Fw190 A-5/U-8 / Werknummer 1428 vom 8.6.43

- Jet und Prop 1/2010, „Die Leistungssteigerung beim BMW 801 D in der Fw 190“, page 28

 

Looking forward to the A-8 with MW-50 as standard, and Increased Emergency Power to up to 1.65 at altitude as addon. Salute!  :salute:

 

 

TL;DR

Elaboration and five sources for reference why FW190 A-8's BMW 801 D engine had MW-50 in its series, from day alpha to day omega. 

 

 

Best regards

 

Fenris

 

 

Sorry Fen, but you've misunderstood a bunch of things here. Yes, BMW did experiment with MW-50 as they wanted to use it but it was never used operationally. If I may point you to the second page of this report by Focke Wulf:

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/Fw_190_A-8_15-3-44.pdf

 

It  specifically states that one curve depicts the performance gain via MW-50 injection which was not realized (in the sense that it wasn't used on the BMW 801D). Focke Wulf insists on a "timely" introduction of the BMW 801 F which was supposed to finally implement MW-50 (but which was probably not realized as the final go-ahead for this combo was IIRC not given until late January 1945 and by then things had begun to break down all over Germany - there are  conflicting statements in sources).

 

The same report puts the two fundamentally different boost mechanisms for fighters (1.58ata @ 2700 RPM in 1st gear, 1.65ata @ 2700 RPM in 2nd gear without additive injection) and the "Ausreißhilfe" for fighter-bombers and ground-attack Fw 190s (1.65ata below 1000m via injection of C3 fuel - see our Fw 190 A-5 with mod) together.

 

PS: Ist  der Jet&Prop Artikel von Dietmar Hermann? Kannst du mir den ggf einscannen? Ich suche den schon ewig. ;)

PPS: You can easily spot fighter Fw 190s with the simpler "Ladedruckerhöhung" via the small yellow circle in the lower left corner of the MG 131 cover. That was the recognition sign for mechanics, but then it was often overpainted (especially when exchanging damaged parts). I've got a bunch of Fw 190s with this circle in pics in my two JG 300 volumes.

Edited by csThor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa big fella...that was not me. You are referring to that other guy, the one without an avatar...thebusdriver. I can see me getting blamed for lots of stuff now.  ;)

What do you mean that I don't have an avatar? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very excited by these announcements!!! Have been hoping/wishing for an update ro ROF forever, this is fantastic!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean that I don't have an avatar? :P

 

Maverick inbound...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You forgot to mention that P-51D can into space as well!

 

P.S. Pilot accounts aren't as important, I agree, but even an A-8 with a power/weight co-efficient 1/3 higher than the Mustang's is something that might give you an idea what you got wrong. Well, I forgot, P-51D can outrun, outturn and outclimb even a D-9 at most altitudes. Even if the Mustang climbed slower by 4-5m/s beneath 3km and couldn't set off unless over 5km. The P-51D still can outclimb even a D-9 at most altitudes, since altitudes 5km to 12km, are 7 out of 12, hence most altitudes, makes that assumption correct. Any questions?

 

 

So summary of your claim: P-51D outturns the Bf109 K-4 and G-6, and it outruns, outturns and outclimbs the FW190 D-9. Does this include the A-8 and the 262s as well? And where do I sign up?  :rolleyes:

 

 

P.P.S. With German planes it is like with the MG42. Remember soldier, its bark is worse than its bite!

Now you're trolling mate. That's not nice. P-51 cant into space, but I'm sure Horten 229 can :P

 

But can you actually provide specific power curves for both aircraft. What power settings you have in mind for P-51 ? 67" MAP ? 72" MAP ? 75" MAP ? Did you take into account differences in propellers each of those machines has ?

P-51 is not a magic uber plane but neither is it a brick some wish to believe it was. It doesnt have to be the best in everything, it has to be good enough - just like Hellcat was the most mediocre of all deployed fighters but it had the best record. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By 1945, you had proximity fuses, and gun-laying radars, for the AA guns, and I'm guessing that allied fighters were being vectored all over the place with the aid of ground based radar.  Wonder how these techologies will be represented in Operation Bodenplatte because they probably played a pretty signifigant part in the tactical air operation that late in the war.  For example, will we have something similar to the old "Balloon-Dar" that was in RoF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pilot accounts are always interesting to read.

While they give valuable insight to the air combat that they experienced, it is lacking for comparing fighters capabilities against each other in anything more than a "rule of thumb" comparison.

Because they don't tell you exactly what aircraft they went up against at times, what condition was it in, how experienced the pilot was (and how rested) etc


For me this became very clear when reading the book "I flew for the Fuhrer" by Heinz Knoke.

In it he describes numerous combat sorties, one of which (28.08.1944), he describes being told that the 2 non-combat capable aircraft must be used (a flight of 6 aircraft in total all 109's), he pilots one, and his wing man the other.

His wing man barely gets airborne before stalling and crashing (trying to miss trees) and is killed instantly, and his aircraft won't climb above 10,000 feet, and when they get to the combat area they are greeted by some 60 Thunderbolts and P51's...
 










 

Edited by novicebutdeadly
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, bad argument.

Here is another:

Typhoon was in the heat of fight all through European campaign 1944-45, and Lightnings generally all went out to Pacific in mid-1944.

 

IMHO Typhoon, "an English Il-2", deserved its place in planeset :) It was a legendary aircraft in ETO.

 

P-38 is good aircraft too, but its fame came in PTO. In Europe, even Me410's and Bf110G-2's (sic!) had no problems with it :)

Not true. I have a book by a german Pilot called Peter Henn detailing his time as a 109 pilot,  he states clearly as cristal that  they feared the P38   .. a LOT. In fact  he states that they feared the P38  more than any  American fighters because it could  outclimb them and outdive them  making impossible to escape when outnumbered.   The only   weakness on the P38 from  his squadron point of view was that its shape made long range recognition very very easy and they could try to avoid them that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here an interesting comparison of wwii.aircraft.org between bf109 G ata 1.42 and Spitfire Mk XIV VS. Bf109 G/K

 

A Performance Comparison

Brief Description

 

The Spitfire XIV was a short range medium-high altitude fighter combining the Spitfire Mk VIII airframe with a Rolls-Royce Griffon engine. Armament was either: B wing - 2 x 20 mm cannon and 4 x .303 Browning guns, or E wing - 2 x 20 mm cannon and .50 Browning guns. The operational weight with full fuel and ammunition was 8,400 lbs. It was fitted with a two-speed, two-stage Griffon 65 engine of 2,220 h.p. Internal fuel capacity was 112 gallons with pick-up points provided for carrying of 30 gallon, 45 gallon or 90 gallon drop tanks. Later models could be equipped with a 33 gallon rear fuselage tank. In appearence it was very similar to the Spitfire XII with normal wings, except that it had a five-bladed propeller. The fin and rudder were further modified. Production models entering service beginning in February 1945 featured a cut-back rear fuselage and teardrop bubble canopy.

 

Spitfire XIVs of 610 Squadron in January 1944

Brief Operational

Me 109 G-14 of 12./JG 53 at Kirrlach, Germany, January 1945

Unfortunately there is little known documentation for climb performance of the Me 109 G using 1.42 ata. The following charts reflect performance of the Spitfire XIV and Me 109 K from the introduction of the K in mid October 1944 through to VE day. The Spitfire XIV's performance was rather stable, new development going toward the Spitfire Mk 21, whereas efforts were taken to increase the output of the DB 605 D series in order to make the Me 109 K-4 more competitive. Unfortunately, flight trials of Me 109 Ks appear not to exist. The following Me 109 K curves were produced by Messerschmitt's Project Bureau at Oberammergau. 30 31 While the curves are rather simplistic estimates (the effect of the hydraulic coupled supercharger being absent for example), they should give some idea of potential, however, they should be treated with reserve.

The first production Spitfire XIV was delivered in late October, 1943. No. 610 (County of Chester) Squadron was the first squadron to convert to Spitfire XIVs, re-equipment commencing on 4 January 1944

 

Spitfire XIV and aircrew of 322 (Dutch) Squadron, Hartford Bridge, April 1944

In September 1944, 41, 130, 350, and 610 squadrons, led by Wing Commander Colin Gray, made up the Spitfire XIV wing based at Lympne, Kent, their primary role being escorting bombers to Germany. 9 10 11 12 13 402 (RCAF) was first to move to the continent, arriving at Antwerp/Deurne, Belgium (B.70) Holland (B.88) in December, staying there into April.

 

In January 1945, Spitfire XIVs on strength with the RAF. 14

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109g-level.jpg

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109k-climb.jpg

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109k-level.jpg

Edited by RAY-EU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it was maneuverability that was touched as a main point of discussion I've found something I was looking for : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2369933&postcount=105 

I honestly dont expect P-51 D here to be anything less than in DCS. 

After listening to the Q&A I'd argue IL2's P-51 will be nothing in comparison to DCS's P-51. One of the questions were asking if the Meredith Effect is modeled/simulated and the fully admitted to not having it modeled and if they were to model little details they'd only be pumping out  a few planes a year. We all know just how significant the Meredith Effect is on the P-51. I can't give you a time stamp as I don't remember when it was asked. DCS inherently will always be the better simulator, but in terms of immersion IL2 takes the crown.

 

You forgot to mention that P-51D can into space as well!

 

P.S. Pilot accounts aren't as important, I agree, but even an A-8 with a power/weight co-efficient 1/3 higher than the Mustang's is something that might give you an idea what you got wrong. Well, I forgot, P-51D can outrun, outturn and outclimb even a D-9 at most altitudes. Even if the Mustang climbed slower by 4-5m/s beneath 3km and couldn't set off unless over 5km. The P-51D still can outclimb even a D-9 at most altitudes, since altitudes 5km to 12km, are 7 out of 12, hence most altitudes, makes that assumption correct. Any questions?

 

 

So summary of your claim: P-51D outturns the Bf109 K-4 and G-6, and it outruns, outturns and outclimbs the FW190 D-9. Does this include the A-8 and the 262s as well? And where do I sign up?  :rolleyes:

 

 

P.P.S. With German planes it is like with the MG42. Remember soldier, its bark is worse than its bite!

 

This idea that people think American planes are these godly machines isn't a issue within the flight sim community. Sure, if you go into some American propaganda youtube video you'll be baffled by the stupidity within the comment sections of claims that the P-51 could fly faster than a Me-262 in level flight. The German planes aren't some underdog unknown powerhouses, its well know just how powerful planes like the K-4 and D-9 were in WW2. Somewhat off topic but it had to be said.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but a weight to power ratio is not a co-efficient as the weight to power ratio of any plane changes with altitude. This isn't a constant value, unless you're talking about a P-47 ;) (kind of). Solty wasn't exactly clear on which figures he used to compare the P-51 vs German planes were on, but it was clearly under the use of a higher grade fuel. Judging by your claims the P-51 is using a boost setting of 67"Hg vs Solty's 75"Hg. Nope he did not suggest the P-51 could out turn a Bf-109K-4 or G-6 he simply stated that a turn fight against a P-51 would not be ideal.

 

So if you actually reread Solty's claims in the context of the P-51 at 75"Hg he's completely correct on every point.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not true. I have a book by a german Pilot called Peter Henn detailing his time as a 109 pilot,  he states clearly as cristal that  they feared the P38   .. a LOT

 

Authors name is actually Alfons Schertl, "Peter Henn" is a pseudonim.

 

SCHERTL, Alfons. (DOB: 15.04.20).

 

01.42 at Zerstörerschule 2.

10.42 trf to III./ZG 26 then to 2./NJG 5.

02.43 at JFS 2 (Zerbst).

01.04.43 promo to Oblt./A1.

05.43 trf to Erg.JGr. West.

21.06.43 trf to 6./JG 51.

02.44 Staka 6./JG 51.

23.04.44 WIA.

19.10.44 trf to SG 151.

14.11.44 Oblt., trf to 9./SG 4.

 

 

I have this book. You forgot to mention, that he feared P-47 also a lot (he was shot down by P-47's  on several times). "Achtung! Thunderbolts!" cry on radio-chatting usually brokes his gruppe like a wolf breaks rabbits.

 

You may also mention, time when that book was written - Cold War. Americans were superior in ex-Luftwaffe pilots memories books, Russkies were all lame ducks :)

 

Anyway, 1944 aircrafts were not faster each other in twice or several times. Doesen of km/h faster or slower aircraft dont became guaranteed coffin for its pilot. Hptm. Eckerle, kommander of I./JG54, was shot down over Leningrad in a fight vs I-153, wich is - how many ? - 150 km/h slower? Oblt. Ostermann (first JG54 "centiruon") and Oblt. Kittel (top Fw190 and top JG54 ace) both were killed by Il-2 pilots!

 

Tha fact is, that german interceptors - no matter single-engined ot twin-engined - lost a war over Germany in winter 1943-44, when americans improved their tactiks (sending numerous groups of P-38, P-47 and eventually P-51's of fighter sweep all around known Luftwaffe airfields on the route of bombers. Bf109, Fw190, Me410 and Bf110 - again - all of them - suffered extremly heavy losses before even reaching bombers, just caught in a climb by a large group of Yankee fighters out from sun. Yes, each of us remember january, february and especially march massacres with bloodly Bf110/Me410 losses (wich somebody like to use as an argument of Me410/Bf110 was sh#t), but in same time they just keep silence about same (and usually even worse) level of losses of single-engine fighters! 

 

Interceptor need a "vorfeld", a clear field to gain altitude. No matter what aircraft it is - Bf109 or heavy Fw190 or Me410. Cought up in a climb, interceptor had no chance to survive. This was prooven in BoB, this was prooven in Battles over Germany.

Edited by I./ZG1_Panzerbar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

After listening to the Q&A I'd argue IL2's P-51 will be nothing in comparison to DCS's P-51. One of the questions were asking if the Meredith Effect is modeled/simulated and the fully admitted to not having it modeled and if they were to model little details they'd only be pumping out a few planes a year. We all know just how significant the Meredith Effect is on the P-51. I can't give you a time stamp as I don't remember when it was asked. DCS inherently will always be the better simulator, but in terms of immersion IL2 takes the crown.

Hmm, Pacific was skipped (temporairly) in favor of this 1945 setup because of technological and technical issues. However I thought it was obvious to the team and members here that there are and will be some technological differences requiring a new code to be introduced to take advantage of all those. Whether we talk about Meredith Effect, MW-50, gyro-sights, M8 API and M20 APIT rounds or others its a heck of work but it must be done. Those details define a lot of aircraft to be introduced and 1944/1945 state of technology. I see no option to skip them.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...