Jump to content
-[HRAF]BubiHUN

KNIGHTS OF THE AIR Multiplayer Server

Recommended Posts

Not currently in game..

but the devs could easily wip something together in a week im sure..

Also not sure what you mean by can get location of player...
server knows where every plane is at every second and its angle/speed/energy and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate that the missions have only just recently been re-jigged but in the times ive been flying with my squad i've found the new "compact" nature of the targets from the airfields and their proximity to one other means they dont last very long. i've seen maps won in under 25 or 35 minutes perhaps less. Could a more diffuse target layout be considered in furture once again? Or perhaps the existance of one or two target groupings being a little more far flung?  

 

Its a selfish request made only because it takes the squad several minutes to form up. In the meantime, other squads and indivdual players have set off and decimated most of the targets either in single FB sorties or in a "tourist" fashion one after the other.  Whilst i have no problem with this, it does make KOTA less appealing for us to fly on in a larger mixed squad or Fighters and GA because of the very real chance of the targets dissappearing en route when the server is well populated. 

 

Regardless I would like to end by saying "thank you" for KOTA and for the efforts put into it. 

 

Thanks
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, =TBAS=Sshadow14 said:

Also not sure what you mean by can get location of player...
server knows where every plane is at every second and its angle/speed/energy and so on.

 

The server creators don't have access to that info.  They can only access the log and that only holds 'events' such as firing guns & taking damage etc.

 

4 hours ago, SCG_BOO said:

I appreciate that the missions have only just recently been re-jigged but in the times ive been flying with my squad i've found the new "compact" nature of the targets from the airfields and their proximity to one other means they dont last very long. i've seen maps won in under 25 or 35 minutes perhaps less. Could a more diffuse target layout be considered in furture once again? Or perhaps the existance of one or two target groupings being a little more far flung?  

 

Its a selfish request made only because it takes the squad several minutes to form up. In the meantime, other squads and indivdual players have set off and decimated most of the targets either in single FB sorties or in a "tourist" fashion one after the other.  Whilst i have no problem with this, it does make KOTA less appealing for us to fly on in a larger mixed squad or Fighters and GA because of the very real chance of the targets dissappearing en route when the server is well populated. 
 

 

My squad has much the same problem as we field about 6 players each squad night.  On the other hand they do spend way too much time debating targets & routes and  then spend at least another ten minutes getting in the air and formed up then two minutes later see their intended target destroyed and start the whole process again! 😏

Edited by 56RAF_Roblex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like many KOTA historical missions. Moscow 41 and the Battle of Kuban in 43 are excellent

I would ask for more varieties as in the battles of the east, for the battles of the West. After the introduction of the 109K, all battles simulating Bodenplatte have the same set of aircraft. But ... the 109G-14 was indroduced in the summer and only became numerically relevant in the autumn of 1944. The 109K is a variant that was most used at the very late end of the year 1944, being more common its use in 45 until the end of the conflict. In addition the 109K has a very late engine modification and makes it much faster than the P-47 and Spitfire could follow. All airplanes available at the Battle of Bodenplatte were introduced by the Allies in the spring of 1944, while the 109K and 190D entered later. The 190D was only equipped with MW-50 in versions that came into service in 1945

So ... would be good map variants with the underdogs of the battle of Bodenplatte and a way to estimate their use, in particular of the 109G-14 and 190A8 that are the shadows of the other later models
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, 56RAF_Roblex said:

 

The server creators don't have access to that info.  😏


I said the Devs..(game makers not server creators)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, LUZITANO said:

P-47 and Spitfire could follow

Spit IX is still very competitive against late 109s. 
There are few players who can use it properly. 

Edited by -[HRAF]BubiHUN
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, =TBAS=Sshadow14 said:


I said the Devs..(game makers not server creators)

 

Err. No 🙂      The *server creator* said he could not get hold of the position data necessary to write the script  you desire and you answered *him* to say you don't understand why not. 🙄

Edited by 56RAF_Roblex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

Spit IX is still very competitive against late 109s. 
There are few players who can use it properly. 

 

The Spit, and even the 47, are competitive against late 109's. But what is a late model 109? Is it only a K4? Or do the G6 and 14 count as late models? Because the K4, especially with the engine mod, is comfortably advantaged. Seeing more of the less advanced models would be nice, especially considering the trend of numerical advantage enjoyed by the blue team.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Disarray said:

 

The Spit, and even the 47, are competitive against late 109's. But what is a late model 109? Is it only a K4? Or do the G6 and 14 count as late models? Because the K4, especially with the engine mod, is comfortably advantaged. Seeing more of the less advanced models would be nice, especially considering the trend of numerical advantage enjoyed by the blue team.

IMO there's currently nothing on VVS side that can match a K4 in raw performance. Of course, this just makes it all the more delicious when you manage to kill one.

G-6s and G-14s should be the mainstay of the Luftwaffe forces in late war scenarios - the P-47s and Spit IXs are a good match for them in terms of time period and performance balance. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

IMO there's currently nothing on VVS side that can match a K4 in raw performance.


Not "imo" Kestrel, there IS nothing that can match K4s performance. This is not an opinion, anyone who can read statcards and can fly the planes themselfes can see that.

 

53 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

G-6s and G-14s should be the mainstay of the Luftwaffe forces in late war scenarios

Completely agree. And therefore the use of K4, I say it again as I said in my videos, should be limited.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Spicysauced said:


Not "imo" Kestrel, there IS nothing that can match K4s performance. This is not an opinion, anyone who can read statcards and can fly the planes themselfes can see that.

 

Completely agree. And therefore the use of K4, I say it again as I said in my videos, should be limited.

As they are now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maps with layers of historical and technological chronology would be interesting

The technological difference between the 109K and the Spitfire IX 16lbs is enormous. 16lbs is the 1943 variant.I honestly think that Blue players have a very easy game with this set

 The only one capable of competing with this 109K is the Tempest Mk V which also exceeds 600 km / h on the deck, but ... the 109 is more maneuverable and fast at high altitudes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, LUZITANO said:

Blue players have a very easy game with this set

Thats not true. Played on both sides in the last about 8-9 days, and not just for 20 minutes. It was fun, and hard at the same time for both teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

Thats not true. Played on both sides in the last about 8-9 days, and not just for 20 minutes. It was fun, and hard at the same time for both teams. 

The only time I felt really outmatched was a 44 planeset where all I had was a yak-7B, since I don't have bodenplatte yet. Got massively sealclubbed just about every flight, and it seemed like every 109 I met was a K4. That's just my problem for not buying BoBP just yet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

The only time I felt really outmatched was a 44 planeset where all I had was a yak-7B

I suppose it was KubanSummer1944 mission, wich is built for the brand new planes, to put them in right after the updates - as it was stated before many times.
So yes, you are right.

 

9 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

every 109 I met was a K4

Yes, there are two sections for K-4 on late maps. People try to save their planes as they can, so they can fly it again.

Edited by -[HRAF]BubiHUN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah really need to either really limit the k4 or or just remove it all together for now. It absolutely should not have the dc conversion available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

I suppose it was KubanSummer1944 mission, wich is built for the brand new planes, to put them in right after the updates - as it was stated before many times.
So yes, you are right.

 

Yes, there are two sections for K-4 on late maps. People try to save their planes as they can, so they can fly it again.

Sorry, I don't mean to come across as complaining. I don't mind so much - when I saw the 1944 date I knew what I was getting into. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

Yeah really need to either really limit the k4 or or just remove it all together for now.

I second that. G14 as maximum for axis. Introduce K4 again when P51 and Tempest are available. 
The K4 is not limited right now either Bubi, last time I was on there (I cant remember the name of the map though), there were still more than enough (literally) K4s available ( 40+?), and that was just on one of the bases, I guess the other ones had K4s available aswell. Which basically means, that everyone who wants to fly K4 can do it - then it is, by definition of the word, not a limitation. 
My proposal is, that the Axis on late war maps has to treat the K4 as a valuable asset, which is _really_ limited, so fighting with it or in it should be a rarity and special.
5-10 K4s per map is the specific number I have in mind, so that players have to treat it well, it actually has to matter when a K4 goes down. Now its still so that when a K4 dies, one can just go into the next one, neither was it like that historically, not does it make sense regarding balance.
Quote from historyofwar.org (but following fact is well known so you can take any other source aswell):"Whatever its merits as a fighter, the 109K-4 appeared too late and in too small numbers to have any chance against the overwhelming British, American and Russian attacks that it had to face at the end of the war."

These "small numbers" have to be modelled if the server description which says "Balanced, historical planesets in numbers, and in plane variants." should be correct. 

There were about 700 K4s built (including technical flaws and not properly trained pilots mind you), opposed to ~9000 LA5 including variants(FN/F), ~8700 Yak1 including variants(b), ~5000 Spitfire IX including variants (LF) and so on. These numbers, imo, have to be reflected regarding general plane availability on the server. Yes, its okay that the Axis has theoretically access to superior planes in the current planeset, but then at least make them less available and as a result, a few of these superior planes more valuable. 
This also and especially will be true when the 262 comes out. If I'd go on the server one day and see 80+ 262 available for axis, well ... :)

 

Edited by Spicysauced
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, 56RAF_Roblex said:

 

Err. No 🙂      The *server creator* said he could not get hold of the position data necessary to write the script  you desire and you answered *him* to say you don't understand why not. 🙄

I assume he meant that the kill script would be added into the game as built-in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frakkas said:

Why don't you ask the dev's to create the tempest? Not really the place here to discuss about this. As far as I know, it is not planned in BOP.

Nice of text of a red side pilot ... if we stick to historical planesets, you should be flying hurricans from lend lease, the devs decided not to do this...

and the P47 which is floating in the air too then

I don't have BOP either, I fly the BF-109 G6 and having a lot of fun.

And this bubble script protection is stupid and will bring down the game to arcade style

The tempest is planned for bobp. Just not out yet. Having 80+ k4s all able too use the DC engine mod is complete malarkey. Should be 10 maybe 20 at best. None with DC mod. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until there is a +25lbs boost spit mk.ix there should be NO 1.98ata K4 engine mod available on server.

Stock K4 in numbers as they are now is perfectly fine.....Spit mk.ix is a decent match for it!

But once 262 and Dora are out, very limited numbers on all 3 should be applied since Allies have only 16lbs spit.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think too many focusing on wrong meta..(what fighter is versing what fighter)

Should be thinking / concentrating on about which bombers can outbomb who faster.
As the war(map) is only won by bombers..War thunder is won by fighters.

So can Russians provide cover for A20's with spits and la5s = Yes
Will they always make it home or often win = No
(But thats irrelevant if 3 fighters die in cover of 2 A20's provided the bombers made it and bombed target without trouble the mission was a success just like real war fighters are only a support role not primary deciding factor which is Bombers who carry maps to victory)


EDIT:
Even if you have 10 x Spit mk9
against
8 x 109 f4 and 1 x ju88
The germans will still win
as vvs or any team cant win without bombers (cant jabo enough in 3.5 hours)


 

Edited by =TBAS=Sshadow14
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, =TBAS=Sshadow14 said:

I think too many focusing on wrong meta..(what fighter is versing what fighter)

Should be thinking / concentrating on about which bombers can outbomb who faster.
As the war(map) is only won by bombers..War thunder is won by fighters.

So can Russians provide cover for A20's with spits and la5s = Yes
Will they always make it home or often win = No
(But thats irrelevant if 3 fighters die in cover of 2 A20's provided the bombers made it and bombed target without trouble the mission was a success just like real war fighters are only a support role not primary deciding factor which is Bombers who carry maps to victory)


EDIT:
Even if you have 10 x Spit mk9
against
8 x 109 f4 and 1 x ju88
The germans will still win
as vvs or any team cant win without bombers (cant jabo enough in 3.5 hours)


 

In a fighter it seems that's all I'm good for lol. Maybe I don't make it home, but if I distract the enemy air cover long enough with my gruesome demise, I have accomplished my mission. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =TBAS=Sshadow14 said:

I think too many focusing on wrong meta..(what fighter is versing what fighter)

Should be thinking / concentrating on about which bombers can outbomb who faster.
As the war(map) is only won by bombers..War thunder is won by fighters.

So can Russians provide cover for A20's with spits and la5s = Yes
Will they always make it home or often win = No
(But thats irrelevant if 3 fighters die in cover of 2 A20's provided the bombers made it and bombed target without trouble the mission was a success just like real war fighters are only a support role not primary deciding factor which is Bombers who carry maps to victory)


EDIT:
Even if you have 10 x Spit mk9
against
8 x 109 f4 and 1 x ju88
The germans will still win
as vvs or any team cant win without bombers (cant jabo enough in 3.5 hours)


 

 

The fighter component doesn't matter to you. You don't fly fighters often, if ever, so it makes sense why you wouldn't care much about which fighters are fighting each other. But it should matter to you. If the fighters that are attempting to keep you alive long enough to make it to target are entirely out classed they will be swept from the air and then you are next. Putting bombs on target win the map, true, but fighters get the bombs there. If you want to refute that, fine, but you'll have to explain why you keep asking for cover then.

 

The fighter/bomber advantage to the blue side is an issue that I think merits examination, though; seeing as you can basically bomb out a map without needing to touch the bombers all that much. It is a bit like finding a unicorn when I see a German bomber these days. I actually came across a Stuka the other day when there were plenty of 190's out three that could do the same job, and then some, and do it better.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Spicysauced said:

There were about 700 K4s built

No, its more than 1,100. And about 600 of them were equipped with the DC engine. Not at the same time, of course. 

 

6 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

Having 80+ k4s all able too use the DC engine

Very few K-4s is available with that modification. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would very much like to say that the KOTA P-47 pilots are the BEST IL-2 pilots

when they added the P-47 I was very excited, but ... after some tests at Berloga against de 109K I realized the Jug it would only make me be a great target 

I was impressed with some pilots and YouTubers that face the P-47vs109K challenge, I could watch happening live (on the Spitfire seat) haha

My online experience with the "Jug" in the old IL-2-1946 was so ... 109G2 / 6 and 190A5 against the P-47 with the ugly roof, which had an iron bar in front of sights. summing up ... the 109G6 and 190A5 (from 1943) easily destroyed many P-47s ... it was a map where the only American options were the P47D-22 and the P-38J. This P-47 has the same performance as the D-28, the D-28 is slightly better and has a buble canopy

The 109G-14 easily shoot down both the P-47 and Spitfire IX. On the deck, the 109G14 makes 575 km / h for 10 min while the Spitfire IX only 540 for 5 minutes

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Changing the subject ... Any plans to make an alternative Balaton Lake mission? 
We do not have Yak-3, but the 109G14 could fight LA-5FN and Yak-1B on an alternate mission in this scenario!

I would also like to suggest constructive ideas for missions...

Western front cronology 1944
 

1944 Summer (Normandy as a fantasy using BOBP map)
D-day                                       (6  June)
Operation Cobra                    (25-31 July)
 

1944   Autumn

Operation Market Garden    (17-25 Sept)
Battle of Hürtgen Forest      (19 Sept -25 Dez  )

Battle of the Scheldt            (2-8 Oct)
 

1944-45 Winter 
Battle of the Bulge                (16 Dez - 25 Jan)
Bastogne is surrounded      (18 Dez)
Operation Bodenplatte        (1 Jan 1945)

 

Airplanes for the scenery and notes

Summer
109G14 was indroduced in the summer of 1944, but the 109 recommended for this battle is the 109G6 / late. The 109G14 can replace it, since the 109G6 late has a very similar performance, both use MW-50
P-47D-28 was introduced in the summer, maybe even a little earlier. But it's a plane to be used in the fall of 1944. Since we do not have the P-47D22 or D25, it could replace these models
P-51D-15 was introduced in this period, but in limited quantities. I do not recommend using it in summer, the ideal P-51 would be the "B" version, but ... the D version could be a substitute
Fw-190A8, P-38J and Spitfire Mk IXe are full operational airplanes for Normandy
Autumn 
Tempest V, 109K and 190D went into service in this season
109K and 190D began to be delivered in mid-October. But this amount is extremely limited
The 190D9 of 1944 had no MW-50. The full version only came into service in 1945
The Tempest Mk V was in use since Summer... but made only a one-off participation in Normandy being more used in home defence (against the V-1). It was introduced on the front line in mid-autumn, but in very limited quantities
In my opinion these airplnaes (109K, 190D and TempestV) versions should be used on winter (44-45) or in the spring of 1945

Me-262 case...
Well... That jet was very limited at the end of 1944 ... I think he should be allocated on the last possible missions in the spring of 1945 and in VERY LIMITED numbers

I hope you like the suggestion, for every text I write I spend hours checking information
 

Edited by LUZITANO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

The tempest is planned for bobp. Just not out yet. Having 80+ k4s all able too use the DC engine mod is complete malarkey. Should be 10 maybe 20 at best. None with DC mod. 

Please before you are writing something, check the facts. K4's are mainly available without DC engine, only few can be purchased with it. THX!

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

5 Tempest V squadrons on the continent from September 1944 ( http://www.hawkertempest.se/index.php/action/worldwar2 ) :

 

On 28 September the Tempests squadrons were returned to the operational control of the 2nd TAF and took up residence on the continent (advance landing ground B.60 at Grimbergen in Belgium.) Nos 3 and 56 Squadrons were the first to deploy followed by Nos 80, 274 and 486. The renewed round of combat had cost fourteen aircraft, primarily to ground fire, although the squadrons did clash with Luftwaffe fighters on more than one occasion. Shortly after the five Tempest squadrons settled into Belgium, they were moved to Volkel, Holland under No 122 Wing. Nos 80 and 274 Squadrons were based at Grave temporarily, just long enough to come under attack by an Me262, before rejoining the rest of the Wing at Volkel.
Beamont was shot down and became POW on 12 October, with command of the Wing being passed to Wing Commander J.B. Wray. The Tempest Wing then embarked on a intensive period of air superiority missions, which was to last until the end of the war.

 

56 Sqn:

September-October 1944: B.60 Grimbergen
October 1944-April 1945: B.80 Volkel
April 1945: B.112 Rheine-Hopsten
April-May 1945: B.152 Fassberg

 

3 Sqn:

28 September-1 October 1944: B.60 Grimbergen
1 October 1944-2 April 1945: B.80 Volkel
2-17 April 1944: Warmwell
17-26 April 1945: B.112 Hopsten
26 April-21 June 1945: B.152: Fassberg

 

80 Sqn:

September-October 1944: Deurne
October 1944: B.82 Grave
October 1944-April 1945: B.80 Volkel
April 1945: B.112 Hopsten
April-May 1945: Warmwell
May-June 1945: Fassberg

 

274 Sqn:

September-October 1944: B.70 Deurne
October 1944: B.82 Grave
October 1944-March 1945: B.80 Volkel
March-April 1945: B.91 Kluis
April-June 1945: B.109 Quackenbruck
June-September 1945: B.155 Dedelstorf

 

486 Sqn:

 

I am finding it harder to find detailed information on 486 Sqn RNZAF, but I have found that they were at Grimbergen and Volkel.

They were part of the Newchurch Wing with 56 squadron, so it is likely that they went on to Hopsten and Fassberg as well. 

 

 

 

Edited by 56RAF_Talisman
Add 486 Sqn detail
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Frakkas said:

@LUZITANO why do you bring these subjects complaining about planes performances here

The reason is very simple. It would be nice to have more than one option, not just 1 single set of aircraft
Fewer people play KubanSummer1944 with the 109K available. It is a disproportionate senary, in the summer of 1944 the 109K did not even exist, so why not make more than one senary and separate by layers?
 

6 hours ago, Frakkas said:

so if I follow your thinking

No, you're not following my thinking. This is for yourself



@56RAF_Talisman I understand, you are correct. Just ... I think it's good to separate two things. The introduction into combat and the period when the airplane becomes numerically relevant ... I think Tempest should be allocated along with the 109K and 190D, they are very competitive planes. Tempest is the best allied fighter of the BOBP
 

Edited by LUZITANO
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, LUZITANO said:

Fewer people play KubanSummer1944 with the 109K available. It is a disproportionate senary, in the summer of 1944 the 109K did not even exist, so why not make more than one senary and separate by layers?

It was stated here, and on our discord many times. KubanSummer1944 mission is for adding the brand new planes right after the patches.
Please, read the forum with more attention.
Thank you

Edited by -[HRAF]BubiHUN
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, LUZITANO said:

 

@56RAF_Talisman I understand, you are correct. Just ... I think it's good to separate two things. The introduction into combat and the period when the airplane becomes numerically relevant ... I think Tempest should be allocated along with the 109K and 190D, they are very competitive planes. Tempest is the best allied fighter of the BOBP
 

S/Ldr G. M. Cotes Preddy of 56 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 29 September 1944:

      I was leading 56 Sqdn on a patrol in the Arnhem – Nijmegen area. When at 8000 ft just South of Nijmegen Control told me to turn East as huns were coming up. When over Emmerich I saw some Spitfires engaging about 20 e/a at my own height. As we approached the melee I saw one 190 break away and dive towards thin cloud. I followed him down with my No. 4 and fired a short burst 30 degs deflection from 100 yds. I saw 2 or 3 strikes on his port wing tip. He climbed and started a stall turn. I then fired a fairly long burst with no deflection from 100 to 30 yds and saw strikes on engine cowling and cockpit. Light grey smoke streamed out and the engine seemed to have stopped as the e/a dived away. I then had to break as another hun was on my tail. I did not see the e/a again, but Red 4 confirms that it went over the vertical and exploded 50 feet from the ground, the pilot not getting out. I claim 1 FW 190 destroyed.
      I saw another 190 with a Tempest firing at it from 30 yds. The e/a burst into flames and went into a grass field. The pilot did not appear.
      In all I saw 5 hun a/c burning in the air. 4

F/O D. E. Ness (Can.) of 56 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 29 September 1944:

      I was flying Blue 2. When my section got into the melee I fired at three passing huns without result and then overtook one flying in my own general direction. I was doing about 300 (3500 revs) and overhauled the e/a steadily. He saw me and half rolled and the dived, but I was able to keep behind him although his initial acceleration slightly increased his lead. He dived through thin cloud. When we broke cloud he was at an angle of 20 degs to my line of flight about 300 yds in front of me, still diving steeply. I fired a quick burst without allowing enough deflection. I then closed to about 100 yds and fired a 3-second burst, angle of 10 degs, ¾ ring deflection, seeing strikes on the starboard side of the fuselage. The e/a continued in its dive, hit the ground in a field, and exploded. This is confirmed by S/Ldr. Cotes-Preddy.
     I then climbed to 3000 ft and saw another 190 1000 ft below me diving away towards home. I overtook him very fast, doing approx 350, and as I closed he turned in to me. I fired a 1-second burst from about 200 yds, 20 degs deflection, seeing no strikes. We then had a turning match lasting 4 minutes, mainly at tree-top height, with the hun apparently anxious to go home. I found I was able to hold him in the turns, in the course of which I fired about 3 short bursts seeing strikes on the starboard wing and a large piece coming off the port wing. I noticed vapour trails from both aircraft. The hun then climbed and did a stall turn, immediately repeating the manoeuvre. The second time I overshot. Coming back for a final attack I saw his hood fly off and the pilot baled out, the parachute opening the a/c turned and dived straight at me. I took evasive action as it shot past and continued earthwards.
      I claim 2 FW 190’s destroyed. 5

F/Lt. A. R. Moore D.F.C. of 56 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 29 September 1944:

      I was flying Yellow 1. I sighted a 190 crossing from right to left in front of me at my own height (6000 ft) I got on his tail. He did a half-roll, almost immediately pulling up from the dive, which I followed, having no difficulty in closing to about 50 yds, at which range I fired a 4-second burst, seeing strikes along side of cockpit and engine. A large piece of the tail unit came off (confirmed by F/Lt. Ryan) The hun went straight down in a steep (70.80 degs) dive. I pulled up to one side, watching him go down, and then saw P/O Watts firing at it, noticing strikes. I turned away when E/A was about 2000 ft from ground.
      I claim 1 FW 190 probably destroyed, shared with P/O Watts. 6

P/O K. Watts of 56 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 29 September 1944:

      I was flying Blue 4. I was split from my section and joined up with a Tempest (F/Lt. Moore) which was line astern to a FW 190 and was firing at it. From 400/500 yds I saw strikes on the E/A and a large piece fly off the tail. The 190 immediately went into a dive. The other Tempest broke away so I followed in and fired a long burst from line astern 150 yds range. I saw strikes all over the engine and cockpit with plenty of smoke but no flame. The E/A took no sort of evasive action but continued in a dive of approx 60 degs. angle. It went through a thin layer of cloud and I broke off.
      I claim 1 FW 190 probably destroyed, shared with F/Lt. Moore. 7

F/Lt. S. S. Williams of 486 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 30 September 1944:

      I was flying Green 1 on a patrol of the Arnhem area. While flying South parallel with Arnhem at 5000 ft I sighted a single ME 109 flying due East at 2/300 ft. I immediately called Topper Leader and reported the a/c and that I was going down with my section. Immediately I broke formation the E/A turned in towards me climbing slightly and I lost height circling to get in behind him. After about 2½ steep turns still about 200 ft above the hun he was still turning in to me and I gave him a 2-second burst 95° deflection about 600 yards range. I saw no strikes. I lost sight of the hun momentarily under my nose and when he reappeared he was no longer turning but climbing slightly, emitting glycol from his starboard radiator, after which the engine burst into flames. The E/A lost height and the pilot baled from about 4/500 ft. The a/c crashed in a wood below and blew up. This is confirmed by the whole of my Squadron. I claim 1 ME 109 destroyed. 8

W/Cdr R. P. Beamont D.S.O. DFC. of 122 Wing recorded in his Combat Report for 2 October 1944:

      While leading 56 Squadron on patrol in the Nijmegan area, heading S.E. at 11,000 ft, I saw four Spitfires coming down on my formation from 7 o’clock. Immediately behind them and closing rapidly in a steep dive I saw another formation. These I identified as FW 190’s, and I broke the Sqdn towards them. 12/15 FW 190’s attempted to attack but, being unable to pull tight enough, half rolled to starboard and went straight down aileron turning towards the N.E. through a hole in the cloud. At this point we were approximately South of Nijmegan. I peeled off after them at 11,000 ft, and by 5,000 ft had closed the range to 300 yds at 510 ASI on the nearest 190. Two 4-second bursts from dead astern closing to 300 yds set it on fire and it abruptly increased its dive over the vertical at 2500 ft 520 ASI with a trail of flame and smoke. I lost sight of it when I pulled out, but I saw a large fire below and behind me as I turned to port to avoid a low cloud. Nalgo Red 2 saw the E/A well on fire, and Red 3 saw it on fire on the ground. Owing to the cloud conditions (7/10ths, base 1500 ft, top 9000 ft) it was not possible to pinpoint the position of the combat, which took place approximately in area from S.E. to N.E. of Nijmegen. All E/A were coloured Grey Green with crosses clearly marked.
      I claim 1 FW destroyed. 9

P/O A. S. Millar (Aus) of 56 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 6 October 1944:

      I was flying Yellow 3. Control reported 30 plus E/A at 25,000 ft when we were on a sweep just North of Nijmegen at 7000 ft. The section began to climb and I saw 2 FW 190’s diving vertically in front of us followed by one Spitfire. With Yellow 4 I followed them down from 7000 ft to deck level at approx 80 deg. I was clocking 525/530 and closed steadily. Levelling out we chased the 190’s at deck-level from 9/10 miles due East in a straight line. I fired 3 short bursts dead astern from about 300 yds. The shots kicked up dust in a field just in front of the E/A and he immediately broke port and slightly upwards. I turned inside him and fired another long burst about 20 degs deflection from approx 20 yds. The hun flicked on his back and crashed into the middle of a village, several housed catching fire. This was approx Nth of Goch.
      I claim 1 FW 190 destroyed 10

F/Sgt L. Jackson of 56 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 6 October 1944:

      I was flying Yellow 4. I followed Yellow 3 down after the 2 190’s to deck level. I was about 300 yds behind and to starboard or Yellow 3 but overtook him as I saw his E/A crash into a village. The second 190 turned into me and pulled up to about 400 ft. I swung onto his tail as he attempted a stall turn. I gave him a one second burst seeing strikes on his tail. The a/c flicked onto its back and went vertically down crashing into a field, exploding as it hit.
      I claim 1 FW 190 destroyed. 11

F/O K. Watts of 56 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 8 December 1944:

      I was flying Red 3 on an armed recce to the Gutersloh/Muster area; When in the Rheine area Control warned us that bandits were about. A few minutes later leader reported 10-12 huns traveling S.W. in wide line abreast about 2 miles away on our starboard side. Our formation dived slightly towards them, & I jettisoned to one L.R. tank I was wearing. When we were about 800 yards abeam of the Huns they broke & scattered in all directions, some of them dropping one centre tank (much like a Spit’s). I then noticed 3 a/c 1500 ft. above me through a thin layer of cloud. I do not think these a/c were part of the original formation because they were flying straight & level in a south-westerly direction. I identified them as 190’s & climbed to get on the tail of one which was straggling. When I came through the thin cloud I was about 350 yards from the rear E/A about 15° off. I gave a long burst but saw no strikes. I closed right in at a fairly slow speed, overtaking steadily & fired another long burst 150 – 20 yards. The hun started to turn just before I fired this second burst, but I kept him in the sights. I did not see many strikes but when I was close behind him a sheet of flame gushed out from just above the wing root, behind the engine, with a large yellow flash. The E/A flicked on to its back, & began to spin, so I had to break to avoid collision. I also got into a spin, falling about 1500 ft. When I got out of it I saw the hun pilot in his chute & then the a/c burning on what I thought was an aerodrome. The E/A was very light in colour under the fuselage, grey on top.
      I claim 1 FW.190 destroyed. 12

5 Tempest V squadrons on the continent from September 1944 ( http://www.hawkertempest.se/index.php/action/worldwar2 ) :

 

On 28 September the Tempests squadrons were returned to the operational control of the 2nd TAF and took up residence on the continent (advance landing ground B.60 at Grimbergen in Belgium.) Nos 3 and 56 Squadrons were the first to deploy followed by Nos 80, 274 and 486. The renewed round of combat had cost fourteen aircraft, primarily to ground fire, although the squadrons did clash with Luftwaffe fighters on more than one occasion. Shortly after the five Tempest squadrons settled into Belgium, they were moved to Volkel, Holland under No 122 Wing. Nos 80 and 274 Squadrons were based at Grave temporarily, just long enough to come under attack by an Me262, before rejoining the rest of the Wing at Volkel.
Beamont was shot down and became POW on 12 October, with command of the Wing being passed to Wing Commander J.B. Wray. The Tempest Wing then embarked on a intensive period of air superiority missions, which was to last until the end of the war.

 

56 Sqn:

September-October 1944: B.60 Grimbergen
October 1944-April 1945: B.80 Volkel
April 1945: B.112 Rheine-Hopsten
April-May 1945: B.152 Fassberg

 

3 Sqn:

28 September-1 October 1944: B.60 Grimbergen
1 October 1944-2 April 1945: B.80 Volkel
2-17 April 1944: Warmwell
17-26 April 1945: B.112 Hopsten
26 April-21 June 1945: B.152: Fassberg

 

80 Sqn:

September-October 1944: Deurne
October 1944: B.82 Grave
October 1944-April 1945: B.80 Volkel
April 1945: B.112 Hopsten
April-May 1945: Warmwell
May-June 1945: Fassberg

 

274 Sqn:

September-October 1944: B.70 Deurne
October 1944: B.82 Grave
October 1944-March 1945: B.80 Volkel
March-April 1945: B.91 Kluis
April-June 1945: B.109 Quackenbruck
June-September 1945: B.155 Dedelstorf

 

486 Sqn:

 

I am finding it harder to find detailed information on 486 Sqn RNZAF, but I have found that they were at Grimbergen and Volkel.

They were part of the Newchurch Wing with 56 squadron, so it is likely that they went on to Hopsten and Fassberg as well. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/11/2019 at 2:04 PM, LUZITANO said:

after some tests at Berloga against de 109K I realized the Jug it would only make me be a great target 

The Jug need energy to combat and it is a great attacker plane, so any "test" in Berloga is inappropriate and must be disregarded.

On 3/11/2019 at 2:04 PM, LUZITANO said:

I would very much like to say that the KOTA P-47 pilots are the BEST IL-2 pilots

I'm sorry but how do you scientifically prove that a pilot of one particular airplane is better than another?

 

The best pilot is the one who returns home alive!

On 3/11/2019 at 2:04 PM, LUZITANO said:

On the deck, the 109G14 makes 575 km / h for 10 min while the Spitfire IX only 540 for 5 minutes

 

The pilot is the key, not the aircraft.

I recommend you read the In Pursuit book.

Edited by EWilhelmPaulus
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Tempest V.

 

Operations over the continent also took place from England in August 44 and early in September, as can be seen from the 3 combat reports below.  Although England is not on the BoBP map, air starts with drop tanks could provide historical missions from early September by the Tempest V, which was operating over the BoPB map airspace.

 

This 1st September 1944 to 10th September 1944 extract from an Anti-Diver (150 Octane fuel) Tempest V Sqn Operations Record Book is interesting.  It shows that with Anti-Diver (V1 flying bomb) interception duties tailing off, the Sqn, as part of a whole Tempest Wing, was flying over Europe on operations.  Other missions over Europe followed, after which they were eventually transferred to 2nd TAF.

 

There is a respite in flying bomb activity as the launch sites are over-run. On September 6th, 150 wing with 3,56 and 486 squadrons, led by the Wing Commander, flew bomber escort to Emden with long-range tanks. It was the first Tempest Wing operation, and the first time Tempests flew over Germany.

 

(To help read the text, click on it to highlight in blue and/or use the Windows magnification feature.)

 

1to10sept1944-sm.jpg

Another big Wing Op for a dawn attack on V2 rocket bomb installations in Holland. Later, several squadron operations looking for and attacking V2 launch sites near the Hague. On 13th September, S/L Wigglesworth DFC now commanding 3Sqn is killed in a similar operation. S/L Cotes-Preedy takes over from S/L Hall as CO. He leads the squadron to support the "D-Day for the invasion of Holland" on 17th September.

 

(To help read the text, click on it to highlight in blue and/or use the Windows magnification feature.)

 

10to17sept1944-sm.jpg

 

The squadron recce and identify a Radar Installation site over Cassel on 25th August, they return to attack it three days later with the WingCo W/C Beamont. Then they all go off to a party thrown by Beachy Head GCI (Ground Controlled Interception) Radar Station. F/L P St Quentin from Rhodesia joins the squadron.

 

(To help read the text, click on it to highlight in blue and/or use the Windows magnification feature.)

25to31aug1944-sm.jpg

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Tempest V.

 

Operations over the continent also took place from England in August 44 and early in September, as can be seen from the 3 combat reports below.  Although England is not on the BoBP map, air starts with drop tanks could provide historical missions from early September by the Tempest V, which was operating over the BoPB map airspace.

 

This 1st September 1944 to 10th September 1944 extract from an Anti-Diver (150 Octane fuel) Tempest V Sqn Operations Record Book is interesting.  It shows that with Anti-Diver (V1 flying bomb) interception duties tailing off, the Sqn, as part of a whole Tempest Wing, was flying over Europe on operations.  Other missions over Europe followed, after which they were eventually transferred to 2nd TAF.

 

There is a respite in flying bomb activity as the launch sites are over-run. On September 6th, 150 wing with 3,56 and 486 squadrons, led by the Wing Commander, flew bomber escort to Emden with long-range tanks. It was the first Tempest Wing operation, and the first time Tempests flew over Germany.

 

(To help read the text, click on it to highlight in blue and/or use the Windows magnification feature.)

 

1to10sept1944-sm.jpg

Another big Wing Op for a dawn attack on V2 rocket bomb installations in Holland. Later, several squadron operations looking for and attacking V2 launch sites near the Hague. On 13th September, S/L Wigglesworth DFC now commanding 3Sqn is killed in a similar operation. S/L Cotes-Preedy takes over from S/L Hall as CO. He leads the squadron to support the "D-Day for the invasion of Holland" on 17th September.

 

(To help read the text, click on it to highlight in blue and/or use the Windows magnification feature.)

 

10to17sept1944-sm.jpg

 

The squadron recce and identify a Radar Installation site over Cassel on 25th August, they return to attack it three days later with the WingCo W/C Beamont. Then they all go off to a party thrown by Beachy Head GCI (Ground Controlled Interception) Radar Station. F/L P St Quentin from Rhodesia joins the squadron.

 

(To help read the text, click on it to highlight in blue and/or use the Windows magnification feature.)

25to31aug1944-sm.jpg

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, 3./JG15_HansPhilipp said:

The Jug need energy to combat and it is a great attacker plane, so any "test" in Berloga is inappropriate and must be disregarded.

I'm sorry but how do you scientifically prove that a pilot of one particular airplane is better than another?

 

The best pilot is the one who returns home alive!

 

The pilot is the key, not the aircraft.

I recommend you read the In Pursuit book.

I've read In Pursuit. I've also read Fighter Combat Tactics and Maneuvering. Both are excellent books. But I think 'the pilot is the key, not the aircraft' is an overused phrase that doesn't really stand up to scrutiny, and its popularity. You say yourself, how do  you scientifically prove that a pilot of one particular airplane is better than another?

There is no way to determine, based on the outcome of any combat, which pilot was more skilled, only which one is more dead. The nature of air combat (and all combat, to be honest) is that one can do nearly everything right and still die, and one can do nearly everything wrong and blunder into a kill (that's how I get my kills). The skilled pilot increases his odds of success over the novice, but luck, happenstance, and the risks of certain mission types never reduce the danger to zero. 

As a phrase its also often used to dismiss any frustration pilots have with facing better performing aircraft. To say 'the pilot is the key' to the player fighting a 109K4 in an I-16 is cruel to the I-16 pilot, and quite generous to the 109K4 pilot! Perhaps an extremely skilled pilot could turn the tables on a novice K4 pilot, or they could get extroardinarily lucky, but that doesn't change the fact that the contest is fundamentally uneven. Pilot skill, outside of really extreme examples, is just one factor in the outcome of the combat.

I agree with you that testing the P-47 in Berloga is not going to net you great information, other than how it handles in a furball (poorly). Although I have heard of people using flaps to great effect, which would not have been possible IRL due to asymmetric deployment and some wonky modeling of the effects of the flaps in game.

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

You say yourself, how do  you scientifically prove that a pilot of one particular airplane is better than another?

My apologies about "scientifically ". I corrected my text and IMHO The best pilot is the one who returns home alive!

 

4 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

The nature of air combat (and all combat, to be honest) is that one can do nearly everything right and still die, and one can do nearly everything wrong and blunder into a kill

Die is a risk to all of us as virtual pilots BUT skilled people has great k/d ratio all the way and I still believing that pilot is more important then plane.
We have pilots with great result flying very poor aircrafts such as Rambo in his LaGG and others pilots in same situation.

 

4 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

the risks of certain mission types never reduce the danger to zero.

I didn't say zero danger.

 

4 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

To say 'the pilot is the key' to the player fighting a 109K4 in an I-16 is cruel to the I-16 pilot, and quite generous to the 109K4 pilot!

I agree with "To say 'the pilot is the key' to the player fighting a 109K4 in an I-16 is cruel to the I-16 pilot, and quite generous to the 109K4 pilot!" but I'm not talking about K4 vs I-16 but G14 vs a Spit or a P47.

Edited by EWilhelmPaulus
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Pilots! Our statepage fixed, all data is on the stat system now, tomorrow 05:00 AM we scheduled a system maintenance reboot on the server, thanks!
By -[HRAF]Arrow19

See you around

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

Dear Pilots! Our statepage fixed, all data is on the stat system now, tomorrow 05:00 AM we scheduled a system maintenance reboot on the server, thanks!
By -[HRAF]Arrow19

See you around

Thank you for the update! I see that all my sorties and stats now show correctly, previously some parts of the campaign were missing.

However my awards section seems wrong. I've got several awards that are supposed to be given for certain number of air kills, streaks, etc. that I haven't met the criteria for.

In total I've got 2 air kills, 1 assist and 65 ground kills (I am, perhaps, not the most effective pilot in the Glorious VVS). But I've got Order of the Patriotic War 1st and second class, medals for defense of stalingrad and mosco, and order of suvarov 3rd class. As near as I can tell, I only qualify for the Order of Suvarov one. 

Its not a big deal, I was just wondering about the discrepancy. Thanks again for your great server!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

Thank you for the update! I see that all my sorties and stats now show correctly, previously some parts of the campaign were missing.

However my awards section seems wrong. I've got several awards that are supposed to be given for certain number of air kills, streaks, etc. that I haven't met the criteria for.

In total I've got 2 air kills, 1 assist and 65 ground kills (I am, perhaps, not the most effective pilot in the Glorious VVS). But I've got Order of the Patriotic War 1st and second class, medals for defense of stalingrad and mosco, and order of suvarov 3rd class. As near as I can tell, I only qualify for the Order of Suvarov one. 

Its not a big deal, I was just wondering about the discrepancy. Thanks again for your great server!
 

Yes, somehow they work a little bit different since the latest update. We will try to understand the logic.

  • Thanks 1

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...