Who is going to buy and fly the G-6?

[=RvE=Windmills]

I am fine with it, they can add all the modifications and unlock for every plane, just map makers have to use it correctly, and If they do a what if, what's the problem...

 

Nothing, it just seems like a pretty unlikely thing to happen. I bought it, I'm sure most here did, why would people want less value for money?

 

 

 

in any case for devs is a waste of time re visit every plane after is already launched.

 

They don't really need to, G14 is pretty much the same thing.

 

Same reason they probably won't keep updating Yak1, Yak7, LA5FN etc to late war series for free.

 

Though feel free to make a thread asking for a 1945 La5FN series, then all the people super excited for a late war G6 can also throw their support behind that. Judging by this thread it will receive enthusiastic support from the LW guys.

Edited February 8, 2018 by Windmills

[Alexmarine]

Same reason they probably won't keep updating Yak1, Yak7, LA5FN etc to late war series for free.

 

 

Well, the Yak-7B that we are getting looks like one of the latest series, just before the passage to the Yak-9. On this case an earlier version would be more wanted

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Honest question, not trying to troll you: against which other aircraft do you intend to fly the G-6 with MW-50 upon release? In SP or MP? Dserver or COOP? In which scenario would having this feature right now make the 'game' more of a 'sim' in your opinion?

 

I'm asking because even though I am in favor of MW-50....

I fly La-5FN. I may have a LW avatar, but I fly VVS. Edited February 8, 2018 by SCG_Red_Wolf

[=X51=VC_]

In my mind the only real utility of adding late-war features to the G6 collector is to allow multiplayer fans who don't own Bodenplatte to participate in late-war scenarios in servers.

 

Of course this would tend to cut into Bodenplatte sales so they have no real incentive to do it.

They could just give it the Erla canopy and servers could use it in BoBp scenarios but there would still be the incentive to buy the expansion for the MW50.

 

To be honest that's off-topic and has been done to death. I will probably buy the G-6 and fly it because of its history, but in terms of performance for me what will make or break it are the MG131s. The G-2 armament feels weak to the point I am tempted to make taking gunpods on it my standard loadout (if available). If the G-6 offers a decent firepower upgrade for less performance cost than gunpods, it will be great. If the MG131s hit like tissue paper, it won't be fun.

[Haza]

Just popped into the Australian War Memorial today to look at the G-6 on display. I forgot how small these aircraft really are/were. Anyway, whatever the engine or weapon outload I for one will enjoy trying anything and everything in this game as thankfully for us it is only that!
Apparently the G-6 here in Canberra is still in the original WW2 paint. Hopefully we might be able to get this paint scheme when it is released, even if it is a little dull.

 

https://acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com/2016/04/17/australian-war-memorial-messerschmitt-bf-109g-6/

Regards

Edited February 9, 2018 by Haza

[D3adCZE]

Just popped into the Australian War Memorial today to look at the G-6 on display. I forgot how small these aircraft really are/were. Anyway, whatever the engine or weapon outload I for one will enjoy trying anything and everything in this game as thankfully for us it is only that!

Apparently the G-6 here in Canberra is still in the original WW2 paint. Hopefully we might be able to get this paint scheme when it is released, even if it is a little dull.

 

https://acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com/2016/04/17/australian-war-memorial-messerschmitt-bf-109g-6/

 

Regards

Damn, she's a beauty. I'd like to take her up for a spin.

[Wolfram-Harms]

Apparently the G-6 here in Canberra is still in the original WW2 paint.

 

Wow! Is she hanging high, or can you take color comparisons?

Cause that is a very interstingly painted plane!

While the sides and undersides seem to be mostly in the late war "eggshell" which I think had no RLM code number,

the engine hood at the bottom, and the rudder, are in RLM 77 Greyblue (I assume - could even be the earlier RLM 65 - or RLM 78 Mediterranean Skyblue).

 

The upper camo must be RLM 80 Olive Green + RLM 81 Brownviolett; or RLM 81 plus RLM 83 Dark Green.

The craft was obviously painted or compiled, when the Luftwaffe had run out of the correct paints or pre-painted repair parts.

Wonderful - I'd love to see more of this craft!

And I'd like to wash it clean - if they payed me the flight, I'd do it for free!

 

EDIT: the green mottling on the rudder is another green again - possibly RLM 82 pea green.

Edited February 9, 2018 by Wolfram-Harms

[Haza]

Wow! Is she hanging high, or can you take color comparisons?

Cause that is a very interstingly painted plane!

While the sides and undersides seem to be mostly in the late war "eggshell" which I think had no RLM code number,

the engine hood at the bottom, and the rudder, are in RLM 77 Greyblue (I assume - could even be the earlier RLM 65 - or RLM 78 Mediterranean Skyblue).

 

The upper camo must be RLM 80 Olive Green + RLM 81 Brownviolett; or RLM 81 plus RLM 83 Dark Green.

The craft was obviously painted or compiled, when the Luftwaffe had run out of the correct paints or pre-painted repair parts.

Wonderful - I'd love to see more of this craft!

And I'd like to wash it clean - if they payed me the flight, I'd do it for free!

 

EDIT: the green mottling on the rudder is another green again - possibly RLM 82 pea green.

 

W-H,

 

There is an observation platform located at the same height as it is hung.  The display area is darkened out with limited lights, however, I will try and source some better pictures either from the internet or I can try and take some.  I'm sure that the War memorial must have more information about the colours etc.

 

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/REL/16285

 

Regards

Edited February 9, 2018 by Haza

[Wolfram-Harms]

Thank you - maybe a close foto of a wing surface?

But it will be tricky - I guess you cannot operate without lightbulb.

And that will cause a lot of reflection light.

[Mac_Messer]

Yeah dude you got it. Friendships break through unprofessional discussion behavior. It's a shame. People can't take criticism or other opinions no more. The forum has that problem, too and ya can't never ever fix that. We think we are so supiorer to the people in the past, but we are not.

I don`t know where you live, but where I live, both parties enter debate with a set of rules. One of them being honesty, especially intelectual honesty. If one party commits intelectual dishonesty, then I have every reason to refuse to debate.

 

Read again in this very thread posts of people opposing inclusion of 109G6 mods, then read P39 and Spitfire IX threads. Astounding hypocrisy of the very same people who want 1944 mods for P39, 1945 mods for the Spitfire - for the sake of balance. Historical accuracy in terms of an aircraft being tied directly to the name of the expansion Title went out the window long ago for those people.

[=RvE=Windmills]

1945 mods for the Spitfire

 

You think it might have something to do with when Bodenplatte happened?

Edited February 10, 2018 by Windmills

[1_Robert_]

Just popped into the Australian War Memorial today to look at the G-6 on display. I forgot how small these aircraft really are/were. Anyway, whatever the engine or weapon outload I for one will enjoy trying anything and everything in this game as thankfully for us it is only that!

Apparently the G-6 here in Canberra is still in the original WW2 paint. Hopefully we might be able to get this paint scheme when it is released, even if it is a little dull.

 

https://acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com/2016/04/17/australian-war-memorial-messerschmitt-bf-109g-6/

Regards

What a gorgeous plane. Everyone has different taste but to me that model with that paint scheme is a beast.

[Mac_Messer]

You think it might have something to do with when Bodenplatte happened?

Yes, how about it? It was tied directly to the Ardennes offensive. When did that happen, huh?

[=RvE=Windmills]

Yes, how about it? It was tied directly to the Ardennes offensive. When did that happen, huh?

 

Honestly not sure what we're getting into now, you think that including 45 stuff in this expansion is unreasonable?

 

What modifications are we even talking about? The gyro sight?

[Mac_Messer]

Feel free to provide evidence that military operation named oficcialy Bodenplatte happened after January 1st 1945. If not, any and all aircraft models, variants and mods not featured in Bodenplatte, should not happen in BoBP expansion - by the very same reasoning stated by you in this thread.

[=RvE=Windmills]

Feel free to provide evidence that military operation named oficcialy Bodenplatte happened after January 1st 1945. If not, any and all aircraft models, variants and mods not featured in Bodenplatte, should not happen in BoBP expansion - by the very same reasoning stated by you in this thread.

 

 

I disagree, I think every relevant mod until the end of the war is fair game for an expansion like this.

 

Maybe you want to remove content from the expansion but I certainly don't.

 

Are you going to specify which mods you object to though? Because atm it really seems like you're just being spiteful due to the MW50 stuff.

[Mac_Messer]

Nah man. I`m just point out the obvious hypocricy - like you just stating every mod until the end of the war, regardless if Bodenplatte took place after January the 1st 1945.

 

I asked you to provide evidence, you doged it by calling me spiteful. If that`s it then I rest my case, no more posts needed from you.

[=RvE=Windmills]

 

 

Nah man. I`m just point out the obvious hypocricy - like you just stating every mod until the end of the war, regardless if Bodenplatte took place after January the 1st 1945.

 

You think wanting a late 44 western front mods on a plane intended for the mid 43 eastern front is comparable to extending the timeframe by a few months into 45?

 

You think they are going to save any modifications or planes for a late 45 expansion?

 

Also still can't point to any specific mods you are talking about?

[Mac_Messer]

Yes, why shouldn`t I ? Since either you restrict the mods and variants to a certain expansion or don`t restrict it. Should not be that for Kuban, while Bodenplatte is no holds barred. That`s called being consequent.

 

Sure they can. We have PTO upcoming and the rest, unless you know something I don`t, BoX series ending with PTO maybe?

 

All the mods are listed in Spitfire/P39 thread.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Right now we can only speculate about Bodenplatte's mods... there are possibilities for both German and Allied planes. But I guess until we get the timeframe the devs want to cover (could be a couple of months before and after 1st January I guess?) we wouldn't know for sure.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Right now we can only speculate about Bodenplatte's mods... there are possibilities for both German and Allied planes. But I guess until we get the timeframe the devs want to cover (could be a couple of months before and after 1st January I guess?) we wouldn't know for sure.

 

I've been researching the possible timeframe and things do stay somewhat static on the west front starting in late September or early October through to the end of January before things seem to really change again. I may be misstating the time period a bit but generally speaking I think we can go for a few months either side of Bodenplatte as the center point. Jason said he wanted to make sure there was a "green" map as those do tend to be popular and despite Bodenplatte's winter time period.

 

So when we're thinking about Bodenplatte aircraft I'd say anything in that period of time is at least a possibility. But... as you say, it's all speculation.

 

I really doubt that the G-6 we're getting is suitable (if that's the argument that some are making) but if folks want to fly it during that time... I'm sure it'd be okayish for a multiplayer scenario.

[LukeFF]

 

 

Astounding hypocrisy of the very same people who want 1944 mods for P39, 1945 mods for the Spitfire - for the sake of balance.

 

And exactly which 1944 P-39s mods are those?  

[[I./JG62]steppa]

This is about the G6, thank you.

[CUJO_1970]

There is no indication that the 109G-6 Collector aircraft was ever meant to be tied exclusively to Kuban map, or even to Kuban time frame.

 

That is a myth that was propagated by a forum member and never at any time a statement from the development team.

 

In fact, we are getting a series of skins for the 109 G-6 Collector that are well outside the Kuban theater and Kuban time frame. If it is meant only for Kuban map then we would get official skins only for Kuban theater and Kuban time frame.

 

From Developer diary 180:

 

Bf109G-6 "White 1" W.Nr.20 014, Hauptmann Langer flew in the autumn of 1943 over Germany, and on October 14

 

Bf109G-6 "Red 13" W.Nr.27 169 Oberfeldwebel Bartels flew to Greece in October-November 1943

 

Bf109G-6 "White 7" W.Nr.163269, Elias Kühlein flew in the spring-summer 1944 over Bulgaria

 

Bf109G-6 "Green 1" W.Nr.15 913 Major Graf flew in September-October 1943 from the Wiesbaden-Erbenheim airfield

 

Bf109G-6 "Brown 12", the Dreesmann flew in April 1944 from the Lisyatichi airfield near Lvov, Ukrainian SSR

 

Bf109G-6 "Double Chevron, White 5", Barkhorn flew from the end of the summer of 1943 to January 1944

 

Bf109G-6 W.Nr.20 499 "Yellow 1", Lieutenant Hartmann flew from the middle of September to November 14, 1943

 

 

 

Hartmann's other (later) G-6 "Yellow 1" in summer 1944 shown below - notice the blisters covering gun breaches and especially that canopy is interesting.

 

 

 

Bf109G-6 "Yellow 1" W.Nr. 440 141 Schilling, flew in January-February 1944 to intercept American four-engine bombers

 

Bf109G-6 "White 10", Oberleutnant Weiss flew in the winter of 1943-44 from the airfields Idritsa, Dno and Pskov.

 

Bf109G-6 "Yellow 1", Lieutenant Dieterle flew in the spring-early summer of 1944

 

Bf109G-6 (V8) + 66, Laszlo Molnar flew in the winter of 1943-44 from Kalinovka airfield (Vinnytsia region, USSR),

 

Bf109G-6 "White 11" W.Nr.165 274, MT-453 was delivered to 1 / HLeLv 34 on 23 July 1944

 

 

So, we clearly see that locking the G-6 Collector (a separate, paid aircraft) to a particular map and for a couple of months in 1943 has no basis in fact, and was never said by the development team.

 

------------------------------------------

Since it is clearly not good enough for some members here that campaign makers and online server admins can easily block certain non-historic features, the developers could slap a G-6 "Late" label if they should decide to ever add these historic correct features to the G-6 (like Erla canopy late '43 and MW-50 early-mid '44).

 

The G-6 "Late" label would correctly bridge the gap between G-6 and G-14, while at the same time assuage the grief and (hopefully) stemming the inevitable flow of tears that would stream from the eyes of the German-haters.

Edited February 11, 2018 by CUJO1970

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

As long as it's a modification I don't have problem with it as it can be locked as I said earlier, also that this whole discussion is pointless as the plane is already made with or without it. Maybe if it was in the Suggestion sub-forum when the plane was announced for the first time it would have had some real impact.

I wouldn't make an argument relying on the skins though, because there are planes that have not only different timeframe skins, but also even different variants I think. For example there is a February 1945 night fighter skin for the Bf 110 G-2, wouldn't surprise me if that was one of the radar equipped 110s

[Alexmarine]

Yep, skins never meant anything. Several skins for soviet planes too are of different period and models than the actual plane. Look at the LaGG for example. A good numbers of them were never flow with the series 29 we have in game.

[Royal_Flight]

Thank you - maybe a close foto of a wing surface?

But it will be tricky - I guess you cannot operate without lightbulb.

And that will cause a lot of reflection light.

I took these photos when I was there. They're not terribly good photos but hopefully show a bit.

There's quite low light with spotlights pointing at things to illuminate them which doesn't come across too well on camera.

[Rolling_Thunder]

There is no indication that the 109G-6 Collector aircraft was ever meant to be tied exclusively to Kuban map, or even to Kuban time frame.

 

 

That is a myth that was propagated by a forum member and never at any time a statement from the development team.

 

In fact, we are getting a series of skins for the 109 G-6 Collector that are well outside the Kuban theater and Kuban time frame. If it is meant only for Kuban map then we would get official skins only for Kuban theater and Kuban time frame.

 

From Developer diary 180:

 

 

Really? Youre basing your argument on skins?

Lol

Sorry, I don't care about the modifications. I bought the G6 just because. I will purchase pretty much everything these devs produce regardless of the modifications available. My point of view is I get what I'm given. I'm not going to demand anything from these devs, they're doing a grand job, I'd rather something than nothing.

Edited February 11, 2018 by Rolling_Thunder

[BlitzPig_EL]

Well that is good to know...how about the G-6 gets MW50 when the P-40 gets a manifold pressure regulator and late-war combat power/WEP limitations? Would that not be fair and reasonable?

 

 

 

Agree 100%.

 

I too purchased the G6 and will fly it on occasion.   I really don't take too much offense at the inclusion of late war modifications to the G6, as long as they do not show up against Kuban era opponents.

 

That said, the vociferous, and sometimes spurious, arguments laid out by some of the usual suspects in this thread all point to them using the late war MW 50 and 30mm cannon at  their earliest availability.

 

Why?

 

Because seal clubbing.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Agree 100%.

 

I too purchased the G6 and will fly it on occasion.   I really don't take too much offense at the inclusion of late war modifications to the G6, as long as they do not show up against Kuban era opponents.

 

That said, the vociferous, and sometimes spurious, arguments laid out by some of the usual suspects in this thread all point to them using the late war MW 50 and 30mm cannon at  their earliest availability.

 

Why?

 

Because seal clubbing.

Well, some People aren't interested really in historical Accuracy, they just want the better Stuff. 

[BlitzPig_EL]

True Klaus.

 

Sad but true.

 

Sometimes I think we agree on things more than either of us would like to admit.

 

[Mac_Messer]

 

Since it is clearly not good enough for some members here that campaign makers and online server admins can easily block certain non-historic features, the developers could slap a G-6 "Late" label if they should decide to ever add these historic correct features to the G-6 (like Erla canopy late '43 and MW-50 early-mid '44).

 

The G-6 "Late" label would correctly bridge the gap between G-6 and G-14, while at the same time assuage the grief and (hopefully) stemming the inevitable flow of tears that would stream from the eyes of the German-haters.

The jist is, the point you`re making is not good enough if you`re talking about the G6. The very same explanation however, is ok whenever the allied planes are in question.

[Trooper117]

[[TWB]dillon_biz]

My God people if you have that much of a problem with some out of time period mods just don't check the damn box. Wasting time arguing about unsubstantiated rumors about what mods might be added on release or after is obnoxious. Almost as obnoxious as having a personality defining position on the argument.

 

More is better, IMO, and ultimately it's up to the mission makers to keep the historicity in check.

[Rolling_Thunder]

As the argument seems to be the collector aircraft don't have to be battle specific maybe the next round of collector aircraft can be a Mk XIV Spitfire and a Typhoon. No German aircraft. That would certainly cut down on these kind of arguments as the British/Commonwealth players would be more than happy with anything to boost the paltry number of aircraft current and in development. Maybe the Mosquito and Beaufighter. Or a British and an American aircraft. Or two American aircraft.

[Frenchy56]

As the argument seems to be the collector aircraft don't have to be battle specific maybe the next round of collector aircraft can be a Mk XIV Spitfire and a Typhoon. No German aircraft. That would certainly cut down on these kind of arguments as the British/Commonwealth players would be more than happy with anything to boost the paltry number of aircraft current and in development. Maybe the Mosquito and Beaufighter. Or a British and an American aircraft. Or two American aircraft.

Battle of Smolensk (1941) with earlier versions of most current planes.

 

 

Forums explode with flamewars about wanting to include practically the same planes.

[Royal_Flight]

Battle of Smolensk (1941) with earlier versions of most current planes.

 

 

Forums explode with flamewars about wanting to include practically the same planes.

Not more Eastern Front, please.

Spitfire XIV and Mosquito would do nicely.

 

Or if you're keen on an earlier map, Malta would be something original, or the Battle of France.

New aircraft, assets and maps to avoid forum flamewars about getting more of the same.

Edited February 12, 2018 by Royal_Flight

[Wolfram-Harms]

I took these photos when I was there. They're not terribly good photos but hopefully show a bit.

There's quite low light with spotlights pointing at things to illuminate them which doesn't come across too well on camera.

 

Thanks for sharing. Like all other images from that craft, they are from some distance.

It would be interesting to get real close to the color surfaces - but even then I guess the flashlight wouldn't

allow for any half-reference samples. I once did a shot of a WW1 tailplane which was a little better -

but then that was lying in a much brighter room.

[=X51=VC_]

Thanks for sharing. Like all other images from that craft, they are from some distance.

It would be interesting to get real close to the color surfaces - but even then I guess the flashlight wouldn't

allow for any half-reference samples. I once did a shot of a WW1 tailplane which was a little better -

but then that was lying in a much brighter room.

I'm not sure you'll get an accurate colour either way. Given how old and badly taken care of that paint is, plus the weird lighting in the room, the camo could just as likely be RLM 74/75 as 83/81 or whatever. If it helps, the "staircase" edge on the wing camo means the machine was built at Erla.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

My only BIG Hope is that Subcontractors will not compromise on the Quality of the Products they make available.