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

[-TBC-AeroAce]

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

A good company should not except sub contacted work if it doesn't meet specifications

[Royal_Flight]

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

If you mean the third-party aircraft, Jason has stated that the main team will check over the results and the flight model will be done by themselves as well. Further, the Po-2 is being used as a test case to see if that way of working is worthwhile so I assume that the third-party team is still 'on probation' and if the finished result isn't up to standard then it won't go ahead.

 

So I expect that by the time anything done by the/a third-party team makes its way into the released version of BoX it will be at the same standard as everything that has been released thus far.

[Holtzauge]

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.

 

Could be the lighting is the way it is for effect but it could also be that the museum are concerned with keeping the original paint from deteriorating more than it already has: AFAIK bright lighting is bad news for old paints and fabrics and I for one would love to see one in the original paint even dimly lit. Have unfortunately seen examples of WW2 birds repainted in bright shiny modern paints that were truly sad to behold.....

[PatrickAWlson]

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.

 

None of the planes, collector or otherwise, is tied to a battle/map.  I can make I16 vs FW190A5 missions if I want.  Pretty sure the same is true of online servers.  So yes, the option for 777 to add collector planes is unlimited and has no ramifications for SP or MP beyond what mission makers or server owners want.

[=27=Davesteu]

I just finished glancing over the last 17 pages and hopefully didn't miss anything.
It seems to be a divisive debate to some, but actually I don't see why.
As far as I can trace this back, one side fears missing chance of arguably important modifications within the production run of the single most produced subseries of Luftwaffe fighter aircraft.
The other side isn't interested in them for various reasons, not wanting the man hours to be wasted on, in their opinion, admittedly not timeframe-fitting equipment.
To me both ways of arguing are understandable and therefore I can't see what the fuss is about.

Before summing up, let me present my point of view on topic of the G-6

What's the definite difference between a G-6 and a G-14?
My answer: There is none except for the "Werksnummer" (serial number)!
Most of you are looking at this from a today's, peacetime point of view.
In wartime production is quite different. It's not as linear!
Let's focus on the three major plants/contractors WNF(Wiener Neustädter Flugzeugwerke), Erla & MTT Regensburg (Messerschmitt), using the "Erla-Haube" as an example. Like the name suggests it originated from the Erla factory.
 All of mentioned plants eventually changed to this superior design after some time, offering better visibility and actually simplified production. Yet there were many old canopies left, produced for stock. You don't waste those. Also the two other plants had to adopt to the new style first and you don't want to halt production, right?
Interestingly I don't recall anyone mentioning the "tall tail" which too was introduced within the G-6's production run.
Talking of "production run", a major point to take into consideration is in fact many G-6 got refurbished before, as well as way after production changed to newer models, some multiple times until war's end. Every time additional or renewed equipment was installed, basically upgrading them to G-14, more often than not G-10, or a mix and match of available parts.
The point I want to bring across is you can't provide all possible modifications and combinations of those. And that's fine. In terms of this game you don't have to have WM-50. Yes, it was used, but those late models don't have any important difference from the G-14.
The first generation IL2 (Sturmovik to '46) solves this situation with providing the "G-6" and "G-6 late" as separate aircraft. Difference being the later features the Erla-Haube and "tall tail", but no MW-50.
Our current, second generation Il2 uses modifications for this, which quite nicely represents the continuance and on the same time changes within one subseries.

For example, do we need...

...GM-1?
Comparably few G-6 used it, the scenario it was intended for isn't yet, and most likely won't be covered. Additionally we are missing its opponents, leaving us with fighting non-historical engagements.

...Wfr.Gr.21? Same argumentation as above.

Resulting answer: No

...MW-50?
Introduced towards the end of the (long) production run, it was largely a retrofit. It was first operated in a scenario which isn't, and most likely won't be covered. Becoming integral with the following subseries, it naturally became more common all around. But this very subseries is already announced as future content. Refurbished G-6 reaching the frontline in parallel, those didn't differ significantly in any way from mentioned G-14 subseries, thus providing no real addition.

Resulting answer: Not really necessary*, except for indirectly teaching about 109's production history. But then those with real interest will already, or are going to know about it.

...Erla-Haube?
Beginning to be introduced mid-way during the production run, it was even made available as an official field-retrofit kit, incorporating an adaption to the jettison-mechanism of the old-style canopy, thus making it a more and more frequent sight at the latest from early spring 1944. 

..."tall tail"?
Introduced early in 1944, it was a simple but effective change, easily adaptable to standard-type vertical stabilizers. It quickly became a frequent feature on factory-fresh, as well as refurbished aircraft from spring 1944.

Resulting answer: These are the two major and widespread changes within the G-6 subseries. While we lack actual scenarios for it right now, there are aircraft to match it. Both the early La-5FN and the Yak-1b were in operational use during summer of 1944 and can face it as much as any early G-6.
With the G-14 being announced in early development, those features can be transferred to the G-6 quite easily in comparison. That's true for WM-50 too though.
At least the first two are too important of features to be skipped on the single most important Gustav!

 

*: Later the G-14 featured bigger, square fairings to accommodate the once more enlarged 660x190 main wheels, as seen on the G-10 or K-4 too.
I don't expect earlier and later fairings as modifications, changing the flight model while not being as significant.
So if we are getting the later G-14 in BoBp, the earlier G-14 can be represented by G-6s with Erla-Haube, "tall-tail" and MW-50 modifications. I wouldn't need and expect those features immediately with the G-6 being released, but as they have to be developed anyway with G-14, they can be added as G-6 modifications with G-14's release.
If we get the earlier wings with G-14, I don't think it would be worth even a few hours adding MW-50 as modification to the G-6.
But I would be seriously disappointed not to get the Erla-Haube at the very least in any case. And I'm no full time 109- jockey.


Finally, to answer the threads original question: I preordered the G-6 for multiple reasons.
First of all it's a very important subseries with a staggering variety of combat-deployments.
Secondly I just like the "Beule", while thirdly there was this one G-6 quick-mission in the first generation IL2, taking off from Sevastopol you had to sink two small Russian vessels threatening a convoy leaving the close by harbor. For some reason this mission stuck in my mind.

Edited February 12, 2018 by =27=Davesteu

[CUJO_1970]

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

 

 

The point about the skins is to demonstrate that the 109G-6, just like every plane in the sim, is not tied to a specific map or few month timeframe.

 

Limiting the features on any aircraft (especially a separate, paid collector aircraft) is a silly, petty stance that has no merit.

[CUJO_1970]

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?

 

If anyone suggested the P-40 gets a manifold pressure regulator, etc. - do you really for a second think you would get the petty forum bickering against it that we see surrounding the 109G-6?

 

Obviously, we would not, and it's just pure hypocrisy.

 

To answer your question - sure - be free to pay $20.00 for a P-40 with a pressure regulator and late-war engine settings. Knock yourself out! Fly it on any map you want!

[CUJO_1970]

I've asked this before and no one answered me, so let's try again: where, when and against which other aircraft do you actually plan to fly the G6 'Late'? Other than clubbing bots in the QMB, or running fantasy missions with your buddies in the coming COOP mode, what application do you see for it upon release?

 

 

 

You can fly it with the plane-set that will be complete upon release of Battle of Kuban and it will be historic correct in many cases.

 

Please look VVS OOB -  some VVS units were still flying Yak-7, LaGG-3, and La-5 through 1944 - and some later. So you can actually have a historic scenario with the aircraft released with Battle of Kuban. 

[CUJO_1970]

If it's going against the current Kuban and earlier plane sets, then so much for the 'Historical accuracy' paladins who suffer an emotional breakdown at the absence of a fully-formed swastika and write to their Congressman about 10 km/h LOL.

 

If it's going against the Bodenplatte plane set, great I agree but certainly the devs have some time yet to address that. IMO it would not make sense to add later-war capabilities to the G-6 until there are later-war aircraft to go against...and in conjunction with the G-14 development work.

 

Just my 2¢...I bought and plan to enjoy the G-6 regardless.

 

It has been stated over and over and over in this thread that the G6, if the developers decide to add any feature to it like Erla canopy or MW-50, it will not show up in the Kuban campaign. 

 

Really not sure how many times this needs to be repeated? Infinitely? Would infinitely be enough?

 

Really though, this stopped being about the Kuban scenario a long time ago and morphed into a "german-bad" campaign. Kuban just really became an excuse.

 

109G-6 "Late" would have as it's primary adversaries mostly the Bodenplatte planes-set anyway since these would all be released after Kuban anyway. 

 

I do believe the what-if G-6 "Late" would be easier to deal with than a K-4, but suit yourselves lol.

[CUJO_1970]

 

Sorry, I don't care about the modifications. 

 

Thanks for sharing. Apology accepted 

[Rolling_Thunder]

Wow somebody is angry. Heaven help us if the G6 doesn't come with Erla canopy or MW-50. I predict a complete melt down.

[CUJO_1970]

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.

 

Can you imagine 17 pages of dogged resistance and virtue signalling happening if someone asked for a pressure regulator and late-war engine settings for a $20.00 P-40 collector plane?

 

Nah, me neither.   

Wow somebody is angry. Heaven help us if the G6 doesn't come with Erla canopy or MW-50. I predict a complete melt down.

 

The melt down if those things were included would be even better IMO.

 

I would pay double for the G-6 just to witness it. 

[Rolling_Thunder]

JFC, nobody is forcing you to buy the collector aircraft. 

I bought it I'll fly it. 

[CUJO_1970]

None of the planes, collector or otherwise, is tied to a battle/map.  I can make I16 vs FW190A5 missions if I want.  Pretty sure the same is true of online servers.  So yes, the option for 777 to add collector planes is unlimited and has no ramifications for SP or MP beyond what mission makers or server owners want.

 

Exactly.

 

There is no real discussion to be had here. 

[Rolling_Thunder]

Can you imagine 17 pages of dogged resistance and virtue signalling happening if someone asked for a pressure regulator and late-war engine settings for a $20.00 P-40 collector plane?

 

Nah, me neither.   

 

The melt down if those things were included would be even better IMO.

 

I would pay double for the G-6 just to witness it. 

Witnessing, I assume, a grown man getting worked up to the point of foaming at the mouth over a video game is hardly a source of entertainment. 

[CUJO_1970]

JFC, nobody is forcing you to buy the collector aircraft. 

I bought it I'll fly it. 

 

In the EULA, in terms and conditions, do you think it will say 

109G-6 to be used exclusively on Kuban map.

 

Witnessing, I assume, a grown man getting worked up to the point of foaming at the mouth over a video game is hardly a source of entertainment. 

 

_Wrong.

 

I've seen it happen before and trust me it's hilarious.

[Rolling_Thunder]

I'm witnessing it right now and it's pretty pathetic in all honesty.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

You can fly it with the plane-set that will be complete upon release of Battle of Kuban and it will be historic correct in many cases.

 

Please look VVS OOB -  some VVS units were still flying Yak-7, LaGG-3, and La-5 through 1944 - and some later. So you can actually have a historic scenario with the aircraft released with Battle of Kuban. 

 

The "Late G-6 wouldn't have any opponents" is a bit of an exaggeration because as Davesteu said the La-5FN and Yak-1B were used until the end of the war, even though they weren't the newest toys available. The Yak-1B in particular has almost the same performance to a regular Yak-9 and that one checks nicely for 1944, so you can pretend it's a Yak-9 without much problems. For the Yak-7B it could be a similar case as well, although maybe not that much into the end of 1944 because I guess there would be updated with 9s at least, since that one was produced in very high numbers.

 

I'm not that optimistic about the late 1942 LaGG-3 and La-5s though, it would be like having our 1943 Yak-1B vs F-2s or E-7s because some rare unit or Axis allied still employed them as fighters... If they were the mid-1943 LaGG/La-5F variants I would agree.

 

After reading Davesteu post.. I would push more for the tall tail and erla haube as those look like more relevant for portraying a 1944 109 G-6 than the MW 50 (or at least having those as a minimum, a MW 50 G-6 with the early tail and canopy would be very rare I guess?). Surprised there wasn't much talk about the Werfer-Granate 21.

Edited February 13, 2018 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[CUJO_1970]

The "Late G-6 wouldn't have any opponents" is a bit of an exaggeration because as Davesteu said the La-5FN and Yak-1B were used until the end of the war, even though they weren't the newest toys available. The Yak-1B in particular has almost the same performance to a regular Yak-9 and that one checks nicely for 1944, so you can pretend it's a Yak-9 without much problems. For the Yak-7B it could be a similar case as well, although maybe not that much into the end of 1944 because I guess there would be updated with 9s at least, since that one was produced in very high numbers.

 

 

 

 

My thoughts as well - once Kuban plane set is released those aircraft are all contemporary with G-6 "Late" quite nicely through 1944. 

 

It looks like we are also getting map from Finland community (?) so it is all that much more cool to have. 

I'm witnessing it right now and it's pretty pathetic in all honesty.

 

Link, please and thank you. 

 

(best if read in Ron Swanson voice)

Edited February 13, 2018 by CUJO1970

[CUJO_1970]

Spitfire thread is interesting.

 

Folks making the same arguments for the Spitfire that are being made for the 109 in this thread...but I don't seem to see the same folks here in this thread over there in that thread arguing against features being added to the Spitfire. 

 

[Trooper117]

I think the answer to all this is simply 'Collector' planes...

Not 'Additional Battle Of ?' planes.

The dev's know what aircraft are being asked for, they read the forums, they also know it can generate extra income, not just for any particular battle they release, but for potential future buyers that have an interest in that particular plane...

I enjoy discussing whether this or that particular modification was in use in that particular battle etc, I love the research aspect.

The dev's can include whatever they want as a modification, it's their train set after all... I certainly don't get bent out of shape about it!

[=X51=VC_]

a MW 50 G-6 with the early tail and canopy would be very rare I guess?

The canopy yes but the tail not really. The short tail was used well into the G-14 production run and the combination of it with MW50 should not be uncommon. I can find a few examples for you, first that comes to mind is actually Hartmann's "White 1". There's also at least one Finnish 109 that has early canopy and tall tail, which is odd.

Edited February 13, 2018 by VC_

[Finkeren]

The canopy yes but the tail not really. The short tail was used well into the G-14 production run and the combination of it with MW50 should not be uncommon. I can find a few examples for you, first that comes to mind is actually Hartmann's "White 1". There's also at least one Finnish 109 that has early canopy and tall tail, which is odd.

Don’t forget the radio mast. That is the most surefire way to tell a 1943 G6 from 1944 one.

[Dakpilot]

Spitfire thread is interesting.

 

Folks making the same arguments for the Spitfire that are being made for the 109 in this thread...but I don't seem to see the same folks here in this thread over there in that thread arguing against features being added to the Spitfire. 

 

 

If people were calling for mid late 44 P-39 there would be arguments ..but they are not

 

There are not calls for post theatre mods/versions of the Spit either, just discussion on what is relevant, no one is calling for late FN mods for the La-5, we got a mid 43 series 2 and people are happy

 

Your suggestion that May 42 Lagg-3 series 29 would be a sensible  matchup for mid 44 late G6 is just as irrelevant

 

without contemporary matchups, dev time on a single out of theatre late G6 is wasted, now if you were also calling for a similar mid 44 series FN then perhaps there would be more point, but they still would be both banned from  99% of servers..so what would be the actual point other than a personal desire to have all the 'goodies'

 

Foe an aircraft with such a long production run and with so many models (even Messerschmitt realised this and tried to streamline to a single type) it is unreasonable and unprecedented to expect to get everything with a single release

 

Much better to get a "full" earlier relevant version and leave the later one for later theatres..there are only so many 'mod slots' per aircraft, what is being requested for the G6 (covering entire production) is just not a reasonable expectation, considering it's long history, and the precedent of "collector aircraft" with the standalone Yak-1b series 127 as an example as a similar product collector plane" to the G6 and FN

 

no one is calling for "pre nerfing" or displaying any anti Axis product sentiment

 

The whole "us against them" persecution complex that pure LW customers (probably over generalizing) seem to bring into threads  always seems tiresome  

 

I foresee more howling/interesting debate, as Bodenplatte seems to be tentatively going to be covering Sept 17 44 - Apr 1 45 (undecided/unconfirmed)  as yet, and not just 1st Jan

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

[=27=Davesteu]

@@Dakpilot, you are seemingly addressing CUJO, but much of what you wrote relates to my reply yesterday too.

 

Regarding the La-5FN and Yak-1b, both aircraft are (going to be) 1943 models, but both fought in noteworthy numbers 1944 also. It's not like a new series or even model is being put into production, replacing all older models after three months.
For example Factory No.292 produced the Yak-1b until July 1944 without any significant changes to performance (we are talking of less than 5kph) compared to our Series 127. These late airframes mostly differed in featuring ribs a few millimeters wider compared to earlier ones, trying (mostly in vain) to increase structural strength.

 

no one is calling for late FN mods for the La-5, we got a mid 43 series 2 and people are happy

That might be the case, but please keep in mind a late 1944 series FN differs significantly from the Series 2 we are anticipating, while the G-6, by a fair margin, doesn't as much with the proposed modifications (excluding MW-50 (cf. my previous post)) compared to the initial G-6.
The single most important factor justifying the call/wish for these modifications is they are going to develop them anyway with the G-14.
Without knowing about the G-14 being forthcoming, I personally wouldn't even argue about the Erla-Haube or the "tall tail".

I wouldn't need and expect those features immediately with the G-6 being released, but as they have to be developed anyway with G-14, they can be added as G-6 modifications with G-14's release.

Bodenplatte seems to be tentatively going to be covering Sept 17 44 - Apr 1 45 (undecided/unconfirmed)

While I don't think the map will (unfortunately) be anything near as big as to cover up to April 1945 (not even March imho.), it provides for an scenario and time-frame justifying later modifications to the G-6 even more. Jason told us about the possibility of a non-winter map, probably allowing us to recreate historic scenarios of autumn 1944 - a timeframe the G-14 in large quantity started to replenish losses in frontline-units, but the G-6 still remained a relatively common sight.
 

The canopy yes but the tail not really. The short tail was used well into the G-14 production run and the combination of it with MW50 should not be uncommon. I can find a few examples for you, first that comes to mind is actually Hartmann's "White 1". There's also at least one Finnish 109 that has early canopy and tall tail, which is odd.

Don’t forget the radio mast. That is the most surefire way to tell a 1943 G6 from 1944 one.

Nothing wrong with what you guys wrote, just quoting it to stress the fact I too tried to bring across yesterday in my digressing post.
The antennae isn't a big deal for our brilliant Developers I guess, it's an G-14-feature anyway.

Noteworthy: The direction finding loop is missing on the screenshots in Dev. Diary No.180, but is present in Dev. Diary No. 173!

I guess in case they decide to add the Erla-Haube, they use the very same as on the G-14, making it a factory-fresh or refurbished G-6. Going with the retrofitted one would cause unnecessary labor without any benefit.

 

It's quite a nice idea to show some pictures of Finnish Mersus @@VC_.
Being quite well documented and being partially factory-fresh, partially refurbished airframes, they give an inside into the variety of second half G-6 production.
 

Edited February 13, 2018 by =27=Davesteu

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

@=27=Davesteu regarding the G-6 and it's different modifications in 1944, which would be the timeline in which each one of them (tail, canopy, mw50) started to be used commonly? For example was the mw 50 commonly used during Operation Overlord/Operation Bagration?

Edited February 13, 2018 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[Mac_Messer]

Spitfire thread is interesting.

 

Folks making the same arguments for the Spitfire that are being made for the 109 in this thread...but I don't seem to see the same folks here in this thread over there in that thread arguing against features being added to the Spitfire. 

 

Yeah, exactly the case. The same folks using the same points against G6 mods in this thread and for Spitfire mods in the other one.

[Mac_Messer]

If people were calling for mid late 44 P-39 there would be arguments ..but they are not

Armor removal, guns removal/exchange, engine rev governor plus field mods tested by Soviets specifically. No evidence of them being used commonly yet there are hopes P39L is going to have them.

 

There are not calls for post theatre mods/versions of the Spit either, just discussion on what is relevant, no one is calling for late FN mods for the La-5, we got a mid 43 series 2 and people are happy

+25 lb boost and Spitfire XIV, bubble canopy, 4xHispano, 2x.50cal mods are being brought up specifically about BoBP. Again, no evidence of common use of those.

 

without contemporary matchups, dev time on a single out of theatre late G6 is wasted, now if you were also calling for a similar mid 44 series FN then perhaps there would be more point, but they still would be both banned from  99% of servers..so what would be the actual point other than a personal desire to have all the 'goodies'

 

Foe an aircraft with such a long production run and with so many models (even Messerschmitt realised this and tried to streamline to a single type) it is unreasonable and unprecedented to expect to get everything with a single release

Ofcourse not wasted. MW-50 will be featured in BoBP Luftwaffe aircraft, hence it is obvious the G6 will have it also. And yet, it being a Collector Plane is a special case of dedicating dev resourses to model the aircraft.

 

 

 

Much better to get a "full" earlier relevant version and leave the later one for later theatres..there are only so many 'mod slots' per aircraft, what is being requested for the G6 (covering entire production) is just not a reasonable expectation, considering it's long history, and the precedent of "collector aircraft" with the standalone Yak-1b series 127 as an example as a similar product collector plane" to the G6 and FN

I disagree, although if I were to agree on this, then the very same case should be made of the Airacobra and the Spitfire. Yet, the discussion over there evolves around those planes being developped with mods not relevant to the theatre of respectfully - Kuban and Bodenplatte.

 

 

no one is calling for "pre nerfing" or displaying any anti Axis product sentiment

 

The whole "us against them" persecution complex that pure LW customers (probably over generalizing) seem to bring into threads  always seems tiresome  

 

I foresee more howling/interesting debate, as Bodenplatte seems to be tentatively going to be covering Sept 17 44 - Apr 1 45 (undecided/unconfirmed)  as yet, and not just 1st Jan

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

Pre nerfing is what maybe two people said and you stuck it like a label to all people wanting the G6. It is that intelectual dishonesty I`m talking about.

 

The entire point is to make all the mods because why not? And this question you`ve been surpressing with irrelevant answers in this here thread, while the very same question got answered positively in P39/Spitfire threads.

[Mac_Messer]

 

*: Later the G-14 featured bigger, square fairings to accommodate the once more enlarged 660x190 main wheels, as seen on the G-10 or K-4 too.

I don't expect earlier and later fairings as modifications, changing the flight model while not being as significant.

So if we are getting the later G-14 in BoBp, the earlier G-14 can be represented by G-6s with Erla-Haube, "tall-tail" and MW-50 modifications. I wouldn't need and expect those features immediately with the G-6 being released, but as they have to be developed anyway with G-14, they can be added as G-6 modifications with G-14's release.

If we get the earlier wings with G-14, I don't think it would be worth even a few hours adding MW-50 as modification to the G-6.

But I would be seriously disappointed not to get the Erla-Haube at the very least in any case. And I'm no full time 109- jockey.

 

 

Finally, to answer the threads original question: I preordered the G-6 for multiple reasons.

First of all it's a very important subseries with a staggering variety of combat-deployments.

Secondly I just like the "Beule", while thirdly there was this one G-6 quick-mission in the first generation IL2, taking off from Sevastopol you had to sink two small Russian vessels threatening a convoy leaving the close by harbor. For some reason this mission stuck in my mind.

Mate, nice of you to post that but IMO you`re overcomplicating it.

 

We`re getting a Collector Plane 109G6. Did the Luftwaffe aircraft historically use Erla Haube, MW-50, MK108, MG151/20, GM-1, MG151/20 gondolas, Wfr.Gr.21? If the answer is yes, then all the options should be included, everything else being academic debate.

 

Same train of thought for any of the allied planes.

 

Now go look at the Spifire thread. Mid 1945 mods are being discussed as relevant for BoBP. Kurfurst comes in saying that all there will be flying on DF servers is +25lb boost Spitfires, he gets confonted by ppl saying that server admins will restrict that as it happens already.

 

The very same question was made here in this thread, but by the very people who opt for Spitfire mid 1945 mods, saying that people will fly late 109G6 only, because server admins will not restrict that.

 

Try to wrap your head around that I dare you.

[BlackSix]

Guys,

 

Bf 109 G-6 is finished and it will be released with 3.001. We've done early version of this modification (but it's includes Mk108) and we are going to use G-6 in the BOK career.

Right now we've no 3-D models and technologies to show Erla Haube, MW-50, GM-1, Wfr.Gr.21, etc. All of this will appear during BOBP development.

Many of Luftwaffe units used Bf 109 G-6 in the second half of 1944 and I really want to include it in the future career, so maybe we'll add more modifications in the future.

I would like you to understand our situation and show some patience. Thanks)

[Voidhunger]

Thanks BlackSix, finally some of us can rest now

[Mac_Messer]

Guys,

 

Bf 109 G-6 is finished and it will be released with 3.001. We've done early version of this modification (but it's includes Mk108) and we are going to use G-6 in the BOK career.

Right now we've no 3-D models and technologies to show Erla Haube, MW-50, GM-1, Wfr.Gr.21, etc. All of this will appear during BOBP development.

Many of Luftwaffe units used Bf 109 G-6 in the second half of 1944 and I really want to include it in the future career, so maybe we'll add more modifications in the future.

I would like you to understand our situation and show some patience. Thanks)

No problem mate. The entire thread to my understanding was not directed at the devs in any sense (even though I mentioned that ppl had to pay additionaly for it). You`re doing what you can do and I`m sure we`d rather have the G6 you made now than the G14 you`ll make in the future.

 

Still, this and P39L/Spifire IX threads do pose a certain material for analisys what is a Collector Plane, what it is not, and how does it differ from the standard/premium aircraft.

 

Also, plenty of speculation going around the P39, since the dev team did not state what mods will it have and which type of Allison you modeled.

[BlackSix]

Also, plenty of speculation going around the P39, since the dev team did not state what mods will it have and which type of Allison you modeled.

V-1710-63, here is an official instruction for this plane http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39K-1_L1_Operating_Instructions.pdf

[BlitzPig_EL]

Thank you BlackSix.

 

So, how does the P39 fly?   (Sorry, had to ask).

[BlackSix]

Can't answer, I've no time to fly now...

[BlitzPig_EL]

Well thanks in any case, and I hope you, and the whole team can get some time soon to relax and do some relaxing things.

[Jade_Monkey]

Thanks BlackSix!!

[Wolfram-Harms]

Folks making the same arguments for the Spitfire that are being made for the 109 in this thread...but I don't seem to see the same folks here in this thread over there in that thread arguing against features being added to the Spitfire.

 

Mmuahahahahaaa!!! Of course not - it's a war, man! Pilots are not exchanging Spits for 109s or vice versa!  

 

I think, as long as people behave, it's alright to "fight" for something until the last minute.

But I guess the devs have set up a plan for their products long ago, and will follow that line pretty much.

So, if you get no Erla-Haube and no MW50, you'll have to make do with what you receive - just like any real Luftwaffe pilot.

Remember: we cannot win this war anyway. It's long over!

[Godspeed]

Hi

 

 

Im thinking about to pre order Bf-109 G6 and most likely info what im asking is answered somewhere but.. here they are

 

Does G6 come with Finnish Camo Option?

 

To my knowledge Finns did not have 30mm Nose cannon on G6's so is there an option to use 20mm instead ?

[BlackSix]

Does G6 come with Finnish Camo Option?

 

To my knowledge Finns did not have 30mm Nose cannon on G6's so is there an option to use 20mm instead ?

Finnish Camo

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/page-5?do=findComment&comment=537774

 

You can choose between MK 108 and MG 151/20