Jump to content
Huntsman

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

Recommended Posts

November 1943 is close enough in my book. I think it should be there

 

 

 

 

From Han... 

- Battle of Kuban goes for 176 days from the German attempt to crush the Soviet bridgehead at Mysjako near Novorossiysk on April 17th, 1943 till October 9th, 1943, when the remaining German troops were evacuated from Taman peninsula to Crimea.

 

'German Troops evacuated in early October'... If November is the correct period when the Erla Haube was introduced then maybe we will be unlucky...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kan live with a historical inaccuracy of a month or two, if it helps give the G6 a little flavor. It’s not like it’s an MW50 that will turn it into a completely different 2000hp aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is interesting, because G4 should have same engine as G2 but with unlocked ATA limit.

 

all I say taht for G4 1.37 ATA and 2700 RPM (which is auto for that ATA) give better results than 1.3 ATA and 2800 - not that manually going 2800@1.3 does not help.

Edited by przybysz86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kan live with a historical inaccuracy of a month or two, if it helps give the G6 a little flavor. It’s not like it’s an MW50 that will turn it into a completely different 2000hp aircraft.

 

I can just imagine the online frenzy about 'cheating, and having an unfair advantage, etc, etc, lol!'

 

But yes, I'd like to see it in game as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes, I can definitely see how sticking to one platform would help with developing proficiency.

 

Fortunately since my life isn't on the line I can bounce around from MiGs to Yaks to P-40s to 109s to FW 190s and suck at them all as much as I want LOL.

 

Really looking forward to the P-39, that's going to be a whole other deal.

Yes, all you want. Though when the result of an entire online campaign is on the line, the little differences matter even more.

 

When going up against VVS squads in online wars, the different types of planes they fly meant that LW pilots were opposed by people who were not of the same level as opposed to when they`ve had one or two types to fly. The wider the VVS planeset becomes, the less specialists they have. This is where the virtual guard VVS squads came into play. You go up against them flying the P39, you are unaware of the surprise that is about to catch you with your pants down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought it as with the La5 FN.

 

+1 for Rekt's comment ))

 

Oh yes, I can definitely see how sticking to one platform would help with developing proficiency.

Fortunately since my life isn't on the line I can bounce around from MiGs to Yaks to P-40s to 109s to FW 190s and suck at them all as much as I want LOL.

Really looking forward to the P-39, that's going to be a whole other deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, 'meanest looking' goes to the Hawker Typhoon. The Bf109 is pure elegance compared to that.

 

But it looks like Jay Leno, sympathetic and a big chin. No evil there. It's performance gives me a different impression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The F4 has always been my favorite but the G6 is probably the most distinctive looking 109 after the post E-series changeover and I will certainly fly it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish there was a drop tank included in the available modifications.Sometimes i like to have more fuel.

IIRC droptanks are on of the post kuban upgrades the devs are planing on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it looks like Jay Leno, sympathetic and a big chin.

:biggrin:

 

Jay Leno doesn't have four protruding Hispano cannons in his wings, that makes him look much less menacing.

Edited by JtD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

November 1943 is close enough in my book. I think it should be there.

 

It should be remembered that what we have bought is Battle of Kuban not Battle of 1943.

 

This isn't directed at you specifically - your post simply mentions dates so it prompted this thought.

I don't think it is bad to want certain mods and options and I agree that mission makers have ample freedom to constrain types and field modifications ot be historically accurate as they see fit, but people need to stop short of demanding that things be included in BOK because they existed somewhere in the world during the time of the Kuban campaign.

 

They may not be anachronistic from a manufacturing or even availability standpoint, but many of the options people have said emphatically must be included simply weren't used on the Eastern Front at this time. There are plenty of 109 mods we shouldn't get in this particular title in the series in the same way you shouldn't see Mustangs, Mk.IX Spitfires, Corsairs etc. They will undoubtedly come in titles that target the appropriate theatres.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be remembered that what we have bought is Battle of Kuban not Battle of 1943.

 

This isn't directed at you specifically - your post simply mentions dates so it prompted this thought.

I don't think it is bad to want certain mods and options and I agree that mission makers have ample freedom to constrain types and field modifications ot be historically accurate as they see fit, but people need to stop short of demanding that things be included in BOK because they existed somewhere in the world during the time of the Kuban campaign.

 

They may not be anachronistic from a manufacturing or even availability standpoint, but many of the options people have said emphatically must be included simply weren't used on the Eastern Front at this time. There are plenty of 109 mods we shouldn't get in this particular title in the series in the same way you shouldn't see Mustangs, Mk.IX Spitfires, Corsairs etc. They will undoubtedly come in titles that target the appropriate theatres.

Believe it or not, I agree with this line of reasoning, but I think exceptions can be made when we are talking something that isn’t anachronistic by more than a couple months and doesn’t have a huge impact on gameplay but which actually adds some unique flavor to a plane of which we have 5 variants already.

 

I have no horse in this race since my flying time in the G6 will likely be limited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't go 100% historical because then you have to implement all kind of ridiculous stuff like lack of fuel or pilot skill,more numbers for one side.

But mw50 for ex feels stupid to me.there will be enough of it in BOBO to drown in methanol and more chalange is more fun.

Edited by IVJG4-Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It should be remembered that what we have bought is Battle of Kuban not Battle of 1943.

 

G6 is not part of the Battle of Kuban package. It is a separate collection plane. We have had Battle-of- ... collection planes before that were never used in the mentioned battles, though. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G4 is way better than a F4. I'll take the G4 any time

 

I guess that the pro about the F4 is simply the better cockpit vision.

The craft had no pressure cockpit for higher altitude, and so the "bars of the greenhouse" were much sleeker

and the overall vision was a bit better.

Beate Uhse had been a pilot in those days, and she liked the F4 a lot; she described it as being a beautiful "light aircraft".

But she only transfered fighters to their units - she never flew them with ammunition and under combat conditions.

 

In combat, I would prefer the G-2, cause I can fly the additional "combat performance" for 10 minutes or so,

whilst in the F4, I would have to use the "emergency performance" to get a similar result -

but that "emergency performance" must not be used for longer  than a minute or so.

 

That is an important difference - in air combat.

 

 

EDIT: Oh, and I would take ANY Bf 109, as they all had their times in history. G-6 was a good fighter, according to Erich Hartmann.

Edited by Wolfram-Harms
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess that the pro about the F4 is simply the better cockpit vision.

 

Glass headrest >>> thinner frames, G-2/4/6 have better vision just because of that. Edited by VC_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G6 is not part of the Battle of Kuban package. It is a separate collection plane. We have had Battle-of- ... collection planes before that were never used in the mentioned battles, though. 

 

/thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Na, he's right, just realized this. This means no more argument against mw50, except "I want the G6 to be a fat slow juicy prenerfed heavy target, I don't care u paid to get a proper G6 like advertised, you'll have an early nerfed version". People led "it's no regular summer '43 technology as an argument, even though the Mk108 wasn't either and sits in the same boat as the mw50. All that is irrelevant though. Mw50 is part of one of the Luftwaffe's most iconic most produced fighter aircraft, and hopefully will be in the G6. Server admins who want it slower and heavier and less maneuverable than even the F4 can still lock the module.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess that the pro about the F4 is simply the better cockpit vision.

The craft had no pressure cockpit for higher altitude, and so the "bars of the greenhouse" were much sleeker

and the overall vision was a bit better.

Beate Uhse had been a pilot in those days, and she liked the F4 a lot; she described it as being a beautiful "light aircraft".

But she only transfered fighters to their units - she never flew them with ammunition and under combat conditions.

 

In combat, I would prefer the G-2, cause I can fly the additional "combat performance" for 10 minutes or so,

whilst in the F4, I would have to use the "emergency performance" to get a similar result -

but that "emergency performance" must not be used for longer  than a minute or so.

 

That is an important difference - in air combat.

 

 

EDIT: Oh, and I would take ANY Bf 109, as they all had their times in history. G-6 was a good fighter, according to Erich Hartmann.

I think f4 and g4 are similar types. They both break speed records using WEP. And have nice helicopter abilities. Im not sure if g4 will out helicopter the f4 or not. perhaps it will because T:W seems better on g4.

 

F4 has better visibility and also it will turn better because it has favorable weigh/surface between the two.

 

And ofc G2 on combat is worse then f4 on emergency.

Edited by Max_Damage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In combat, I would prefer the G-2, cause I can fly the additional "combat performance" for 10 minutes or so,

 

More than 30 Minutes full power with everything automatic. 

 

Edit: The not derated G2 would be by far the best Fighter until Bodenplatte in my opinion.

 

I don't know why so many people consider G4 over G2. The G4 has overall a worse flight performance(I still love the G4).

The G4 covers things that are NOT modelled in BoS and they are an overall good idea under war conditions by Messerschmitt. Better landing gear wheels because of the very bad airfields and weather conditions(which is clearly not a problem in BoX)

 

Like this, the Dora maybe touched the ground with the propeller.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnBbj1pQaKg#t=10s 

 

And a better radio which isn't a problem in BoS as well

Edited by MeoW.Scharfi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the announcement of G6

 

Aaand to finish today's Dev Blog, we want to begin, how should we call it, 'the month of surprises'. We don't tell you early about everything, and there are reasons for this. But when we do, we hope that you'll be pleasantly surprised. So, here goes the first one - we're making a new Collectors Plane, Bf 109 G-6, for a month already. This is a highly anticipated aircraft and since it fits into the Battle of Kuban timeframe, it's possible for us to make it. The exterior 3D model is being built right now, so we can show you several WIP screenshots of it:
 
 

fairly clear it was intended to fit in Kuban time frame , I would imagine the development would have been for that , bodenplatte was not considered at that time

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glass headrest >>> thinner frames, G-2/4/6 have better vision just because of that.

 

Sorry, but not overall. The glass headrest does of course help the G-2 a lot for checking the six.

But the much slimmer side and forward canopy frames of the F-4 give it a better combat vision in those directions - sideways and forward.

Checking six ain't everything, you know?

 

More than 30 Minutes full power with everything automatic.

 

THIRTY minutes? Wow - didn't know it was SOOO long! THAT is nice knowledge!! Thx Scharfi!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry, but some people here have much too much „Oleg‘s“ G-6 in mind......

 

i would suggest..wait and see. You still can complain after its release here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't know why so many people consider G4 over G2.

G4(1.3 ATA) needs 1-2 sec less for a complete turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the announcement of G6

 

Aaand to finish today's Dev Blog, we want to begin, how should we call it, 'the month of surprises'. We don't tell you early about everything, and there are reasons for this. But when we do, we hope that you'll be pleasantly surprised. So, here goes the first one - we're making a new Collectors Plane, Bf 109 G-6, for a month already. This is a highly anticipated aircraft and since it fits into the Battle of Kuban timeframe, it's possible for us to make it. The exterior 3D model is being built right now, so we can show you several WIP screenshots of it:
 
 

fairly clear it was intended to fit in Kuban time frame , I would imagine the development would have been for that , bodenplatte was not considered at that time

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Fairly clear then the Erla Haube would not have been in service at the time of the German evacuation then stated by Han... oh well :)

Mind you, if you want to see a late G6 in Bodenplatte you are probably going to have to pay for it as a collectors plane as it isn't going to be in the initial release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that given the fact collector planes are not necessarily tied to a "battle" release and that most planes are available across a wide range of scenarios and time periods, the Erla canopy and maybe even MW50 might make sense as modifications on the G-6, only locked in BoK scenarios. Then the plane would be very useful when BoBp comes out and could be used in that without being sub-par.

 

Also, I love how absolutist people get, comparing G-2/4/6 as if one is great and the other useless when the actual differences in performance are so tiny they will rarely factor into anything in a real engagement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mind you, if you want to see a late G6 in Bodenplatte you are probably going to have to pay for it as a collectors plane as it isn't going to be in the initial release.

Didn’t the G14 more or less just standardize the many alterations to the G6 design? What would be the difference between a late production G6 and a G14?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn’t the G14 more or less just standardize the many alterations to the G6 design? What would be the difference between a late production G6 and a G14?

 

Think you are right, although all G-14's had the taller tail assembly as standard, plus others had an uprated engine, but I can't remember what it's designation was...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn’t the G14 more or less just standardize the many alterations to the G6 design? What would be the difference between a late production G6 and a G14?

 

None really apart from the serial number, although the G-14 failed somewhat at standardisation as it ended up with a bunch of modifications itself. The tall rudder could be a difference, as could flettner tabs and trim tabs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude thats not the point, it realistic and historical that the G6 early was a crap plane compared to 109F4 and G2. It only has good weapons.

 

given the G2 and G6 an engine with the same performance, in real the difference between both where most propably not as huge to call the G6 crap. And the shape of the plane was more important - so a good build and mantained G6 would give a bad G2 some surprise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling people absolutists because they would rather chose the better Messerschmitt than the worse. These "tiny differences" are enough to get rekt. The turnabilities of Yak1 and Yak1b are also not that huge but they make a lot people sweat in their chairs.... 

Dunno about different Yaks, but I`m pretty sure Yak1 vs Yak1B is not nearly the same as 109G2 vs 109G6.

Didn’t the G14 more or less just standardize the many alterations to the G6 design? What would be the difference between a late production G6 and a G14?

The point is - 109G6 was around when 109G14 wasn`t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm excited for the G6 not because I think it will be the best, but because it is just a very iconic plane. I do not always select the plane that gives me the most competitive edge and instead enjoy learning how to use the strengths of each plane for success. That being said, I am hoping the heavier armament on the G6 will help me against Peshkas, IL-2s, and the new A-20. I'm sure the G6 will be very useful in that respect and its value should not just be based on whether or not it can out-turn a Yak. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G4(1.3 ATA) needs 1-2 sec less for a complete turn.

Is that from your testing? If from Hans plane performance notes, IIRC turn times are at emergency power, not 1.3ata.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn’t the G14 more or less just standardize the many alterations to the G6 design? What would be the difference between a late production G6 and a G14?

Didnt G14ASM have different engine cowling than G6?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didnt G14ASM have different engine cowling than G6?

As did the G6/AS but we’re talking main production version here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...