Jump to content

Kurfürst fans?


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

There are tons of treads talking about 1.98 ata and 150 oc grade fuel. So you can go there and read. Kurfust provided enought evidence that the 1.98 was not that rare and that was not needed too much to convert this engines to 1.98. 

150 Grade fuel is far more difficult to corroborate than the 1.98 K4s

 

Maybe re-read the threads? 😁

 

But if you liked the 1.98 ata ‘operational use / actual numbers’ evidence, I have this great bridge that I can sell you...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Even the ‘46 Tempest will have issues with the 109K at certain altitude bands (3-4000) but I guess that is just part of the dynamics of the planes. That probably the best thing about the K-4 (apart from having both of its historical DB and DC engine settings) - it is quite able to match any opponent in any scenario: Tempests down low and P47s high up.

 

I am very much hopeful of late war Soviet planes add on, fighting La 7s in this thing was legendary. 

 

I wonder though  makes the boost to last only 10 minutes, whereas the flight manual of the thing is quite clear that WEP can be used 2x10 minutes, with an apprx 5 min interval at lower settings to allow engine components to cool down.

 

If we are to have this ‘timer’ thing which I do not approve very much, that handles time limits in manuals as they were countdowns like that of a hand granade, at least it should be consistent in sticking to what the manuals say - or finally replace that WEP system that makes more sense.

 

It is like in the manuals, maximum power has 10 minutes time limit and the timer is recharged in Combat mode, (didnt test if it was 5 min rest time, but I think it is for the G-14). Then you can use it again, and repeat until MW 50 runs out. 


I tested the K-4 at both power settings and compared it with the real numbers, and it looks like they are modelled with the G-14's lower altitude propeller? They are a bit too fast at low alt and a bit too slow at high alt:

K-4_in_game_vs_irl_1.8_ata.png

  K-4_in_game_vs_irl_1.98_ata.png

If you want to see both combined:
 

Spoiler

K-4_in_game_vs_irl_both.png

 

 

3 hours ago, CSAF-D3adCZE said:

Soooo, a La5FN? 

 


The FN isn't that great of a turner though, once slow it becomes sluggish and the 109s can turn better than it in my experience

 

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

Maybe re-read the threads? 😁

 

But if you liked the 1.98 ata ‘operational use / actual numbers’ evidence, I have this great bridge that I can sell you...

 

I think he's just trying out new material for his next Edinburgh show...

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, nightrise said:

we know how much 150 octane fuel was used down to the liter. 

We don't even know if 1.98 ATA k4s saw any combat.

 

Yet which one do we bloody get 🙃

 

There was 11 1.98ata K-4s (~6-7% of the onhand K-4s) that flew during Bodenplatte and shortly afterwards reverted to 1.80ata. After that it is pure speculation, especially very late war when there was fuel and methanol shortages.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

There are tons of treads talking about 1.98 ata and 150 oc grade fuel. So you can go there and read. Kurfust provided enought evidence that the 1.98 was not that rare and that was not needed too much to convert this engines to 1.98. 

150 Grade fuel is far more difficult to corroborate than the 1.98 K4s

 

That is a great joke.

The sure thing I learned from Kurfust is his double standards when asking for quantity and quality of proof depending on the aeroplane.

There is incomplete but ample evidence of the use of 150 octane by allied fighters. Compared to this, there is hardly any evidence of the use of 1.98 rating in combat.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, HR_Zunzun said:

 

That is a great joke.

The sure thing I learned from Kurfust is his double standards when asking for quantity and quality of proof depending on the aeroplane.

There is incomplete but ample evidence of the use of 150 octane by allied fighters. Compared to this, there is hardly any evidence of the use of 1.98 rating in combat.

Remember the game is biased unless the 109s have utter superiority at all times kamaraden 😉

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I saw Jason say in another thread that the team does not have the time to do the 150 octane fuel, for now (but possibly could be done later), so there is no point really arguing about it. Seeing the list of mods that the P47 already has, in addition to making totally new systems, turbocharger etc, compared to the list of mods for K4 (two bombs, gunpods and the engine mod), I think that the devs already spent way more time on P47 than on K4 (or probably any fighter so far). If they have time to add another mod later on, like they did with La5F, I am pretty sure they will.

 

Also, about the P47 vs K4 comparisons, if I look at the Bodenplatte planeset and want to match the planes in pairs, I would rather match the P47 with A8, Spit with G14, Mustang with K4 and Tempest with Me262.

Edited by II./JG77_Kemp
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

I think I saw Jason say in another thread that the team does not have the time to do the 150 octane fuel, for now (but possible could be done later), so there is no point really arguing about it. Seeing the list of mods that the P47 already has, in addition to making yotally new systems, turbocharger etc, compared to the list of mods for K4 (two bombs, gunpods and the engine mod), I think that the devs already spent way more time on P47 than on any other fighter so far. If they have time to add another mod later on, like they did with La5F, I am pretty sure they will.

 

Also, about the P47 vs K4 comparisons, if I look at the Bodenplatte planeset and want to match the planes in pairs, I would rather match the P47 with A8, Spit with G14, Mustang with K4 and Tempest with Me262. 

 

Except they tend to get flown against each other and there is only one on that list that has a modification that is at best unknown and at base a tiny minority of aircraft available. The other - more pertinent - point is: one a/c with a little-known, little-used but extreme powerful modification from the last weeks of the war versus the others with a rating that was being replaced in the previous Autumn.

 

Either the aircraft are modeled to a standard (most common version 30/11/44, 1/1/45, 31/3/45 etc) or all receive a range of options. Appreciate the limits on time, but otherwise you are offering a/c with 6 months [which is a long time in both world wars] difference in development and hence performance. If the plan is ultimately a range, fantastic. If it is not, that sucks a little for anyone not flying the tiny number of late-war, last-gasp aircraft which comprised a fraction of the fleet.

 

I have nothing against a boosted K-4 605, or a Ta-152, Do-335, He-162 etc. I would buy all of them as extra a/c. The slightly trying element is when the opposing types are based on older models DESPITE the known and clearly catalogued existence of early '45 variants of Allied aircraft. It's not about balance, it's more about historical accuracy, relevancy and suitability.

 

Oh, and I found this meme 😜

 

Spoiler

Ha_ha.png

 

Edited by EAF19_Marsh
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Except they tend to get flown against each other and there is only one on that list that has a modification that is at best unknown and at base a tiny minority of aircraft available. The other - more pertinent - point is: one a/c with a little-known, little-used but extreme powerful modification from the last weeks of the war versus the others with a rating that was being replaced in the previous Autumn.

 

Well, that is your opinion, that much has been made abundantly clear. I think we got that part already the first hundred time you have repeated it. 😄

 

1 minute ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

Either the aircraft are modeled to a standard (most common version 30/11/44, 1/1/45, 31/3/45 etc) or all receive a range of options.

 

 

I think that's exactly what the developers did, they did model most common version of the 109K-4 in November 1944 till April 1945 i.e. the one with the DB 605DB/DC engine, i.e. an engine that had an option to use both low boost settings (DB) and high boost settings (DC) by setting a couple of screws. So now we have the 605DB setting (1.80) as default, but we can also choose to use the DC setting (1.98) - and its done almost as easy as an engine would be re-set at the field for the higher setting, by simply selecting a different rating.

 

I think the developers did a great job by modelling both historical settings of this engine and we are very happy with it. Well, at least the vast majority of us, virtual pilots. There's a tiny, but extremely vocal minority who obviously do not like it very much.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

 

Well, that is your opinion, that much has been made abundantly clear. I think we got that part already the first hundred time you have repeated it. 😄

 

 

I think that's exactly what the developers did, they did model most common version of the 109K-4 in November 1944 till April 1945 i.e. the one with the DB 605DB/DC engine, i.e. an engine that had an option to use both low boost settings (DB) and high boost settings (DC) by setting a couple of screws. So now we have the 605DB setting (1.80) as default, but we can also choose to use the DC setting (1.98) - and its done almost as easy as an engine would be re-set at the field for the higher setting, by simply selecting a different rating.

 

I think the developers did a great job by modelling both historical settings of this engine and we are very happy with it. Well, at least the vast majority of us, virtual pilots. There's a tiny, but extremely vocal minority who obviously do not like it very much.

And upgrading the Merlin to +25lbs boost is exactly the same

Add better fuel and change the supercharger regulator with a couple of screws.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Oh, and I found this meme

 

So is there also some kind of point behind posting that meme?

 

15 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

I have nothing against a boosted K-4 605, or a Ta-152, Do-335, He-162 etc.

 

That is great. For now there are no plans for Ta-152, Do-335 or He-162, as far as I know of, so enjoy the boosted K4.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

I think I saw Jason say in another thread that the team does not have the time to do the 150 octane fuel, for now (but possibly could be done later), so there is no point really arguing about it. Seeing the list of mods that the P47 already has, in addition to making totally new systems, turbocharger etc, compared to the list of mods for K4 (two bombs, gunpods and the engine mod), I think that the devs already spent way more time on P47 than on K4 (or probably any fighter so far). If they have time to add another mod later on, like they did with La5F, I am pretty sure they will.

 

Also, about the P47 vs K4 comparisons, if I look at the Bodenplatte planeset and want to match the planes in pairs, I would rather match the P47 with A8, Spit with G14, Mustang with K4 and Tempest with Me262.

 

Pretty much. The mind boggling amount of ground attack modifications to the P-47 come to mind, or the amount of modification the Spitfire has - different tail, clipped wing, different guns, two types of bombs, mirror, rockets that were seldom, gyro sights that were fitted to an (unknown) number of planes but never became standard fitting, if ever used, an extremely rare Merlin 70 engine option that in addition is know for certain never used in the Bodenplatte area by any 2nd TAF unit, (now curious you do not see people complaining about it).

 

Compared to that amount of work the K-4 basically gets a single historical engine setting as an extra option, as rockets, gondolas etc. were all there on the previous models, and a slightly bigger 500 kg bomb is hardly that much to speak of. That is all the 'extra' work you have with it, a single mod, without any 3D artist work needed. 

 

Now of course if you start adding 150 grade fuel to an Allied plane, the tsunami of whines will be unstoppable, and you will pretty much tie your own hands to do it for all six Allied planes, as P-47 guys will not suffer that only P-51 guys have higher boosts, RAF P-51 guys will not suffer if USAAF P-51 guys have their boost but not the RAF approved boost for the Mustang, and of course Spitfire guys will not suffer any kind of slight lest ALL of the ABSOLUTE BEST of Spitfire modifications ever created are present. 

 

So either you choke on trying to do too many things at once, or pick the ones that are easy to do and leave the rest for later.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, CMBailey said:

 

E1330256-42F2-40AC-B662-1941F079BC58.jpeg

don't get me wrong i lover the patch and the 47 is great when its  not fighting against wehraboo wet dreams. 

1 minute ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

 

 an extremely rare Merlin 70 engine option that in addition is know for certain never used in the Bodenplatte area by any 2nd TAF unit, (now curious you do not see people complaining about it).

 

 

The merlin 70 isn't really used and it doesn't turn the plane into a wehraboos wet dream. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's quite sad to see the usual suspects do nothing but trade petty insults about the different fuel/boost types.  I would love to see 150 grade fuel modeled for Allied aircraft but it isn't.  I would partly understand if the devs said "never" but they didn't, they said "when we have time".

 

Please be patient, stop the petty point scoring and enjoy what we have for now.  The reality is if ~10 MPH at higher boost is not going to magically transform any fighter to untouchable levels.

  • Upvote 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, RoflSeal said:

And upgrading the Merlin to +25lbs boost is exactly the same

Add better fuel and change the supercharger regulator with a couple of screws.

 

See above. You would then have to do it for all planes, there would be no end.

 

And its not like Spitfire IX fliers did not get a boatload of options on which far more time was probably spent than on any other aircraft's mods. Because we obviously cannot settle for one typical Spitfire IX, right? Some of them had slightly different tails for God's sake! And there was a version with a high altitude engine of which perhaps two dozen operated 600 mile away from our map! Don't you dare leaving that one out! That is not to say we can have only those normal wings fitted to 99% of them, we need to clipped ones, because you know historical accuracy, and of course because it improves our roll rate.

 

THAT just cannot be, and its also not acceptable not having an extremely rare fighter type, the Tempest, instead of the far more standard Typhoon.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

 

Well, that is your opinion, that much has been made abundantly clear. I think we got that part already the first hundred time you have repeated it. 😄

 

 

And yet you have no logical, intelligent or useful answer. I think we expected that the first hundred times you posted

 

5 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

I think that's exactly what the developers did, they did model most common version of the 109K-4 in November 1944 till April 1945 i.e. the one with the DB 605DB/DC engine, i.e. an engine that had an option to use both low boost settings (DB) and high boost settings (DC) by setting a couple of screws. So now we have the 605DB setting (1.80) as default, but we can also choose to use the DC setting (1.98) - and its done almost as easy as an engine would be re-set at the field for the higher setting, by simply selecting a different rating.

Except you have never shown how many were used. Ever. Except that it was allowed. More to the point, you (as usual) totally ignored the second part of the point, which was that if a certain standard or variation of an a/c is used, would it not make sense to model the other aircraft to a contemporary standard. That would be an intellectual point that you debate if you so wished
 

Quote


I think the developers did a great job by modelling both historical settings of this engine and we are very happy with it.

 

 

The Royal We? I'm sure you are, but the point was about the logic of differences in a/c offered rather than what makes you happy. 😄
 

Quote


Well, at least the vast majority of us, virtual pilots. There's a tiny, but extremely vocal minority who obviously do not like it very much.

 

 

Actually, a lot of opinion seems to be that the P-47 has been short-changed given the unicorn K-4 mod. But I'm sure you echo chamber knows better

 

Quote

So is there also some kind of point behind posting that meme?

 

Yes, it was a comedic counter-point to Kurfy's bizarre reference to the tyrannical reign of Commodus and the Marcomanic Wars. Feel free to check before you post

 

Quote

That is great. For now there are no plans for Ta-152, Do-335 or He-162, as far as I know of, so enjoy the boosted K4.

 

🙄

 

Quote

Pretty much. The mind boggling amount of ground attack modifications to the P-47 come to mind, or the amount of modification the Spitfire has - different tail, clipped wing, different guns, two types of bombs, mirror, rockets that were seldom, gyro sights that were fitted to an (unknown) number of planes but never became standard fitting, if ever used, an extremely rare Merlin 70 engine option that in addition is know for certain never used in the Bodenplatte area by any 2nd TAF unit, (now curious you do not see people complaining about it).

 

Except - and you of course know this - most of those modifications ARE documented in endless pages of reports (unlike your K-4 mod) and the 70 series was a bizarre choice that very few people use (like the odd rocket option) on the grounds that it has limited utility. I'm not against options at all, as long as they make some sense.

 

4 minutes ago, ICDP said:

It's quite sad to see the usual suspects do nothing but trade petty insults about the different fuel/boost types.

 

My apologies for posting in a discussion forum, I clearly misunderstood the purpose of this locale.

2 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

THAT just cannot be, and its also not acceptable not having an extremely rare fighter type, the Tempest, instead of the far more standard Typhoon.

 

122 Wing Tempest compliment vs KNOWN 1.98 ata K-4s? Care to define 'RARE'

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

See above. You would then have to do it for all planes, there would be no end.

 

But they've already started, by giving the k4 an upgraded boost option. The start of it isn't giving one allied plane 150 octane, this is the start of it. Because you know, the 109 just has to have its best engine settings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ICDP said:

The reality is if ~10 MPH at higher boost is not going to magically transform any fighter to untouchable levels.

Every bit helps, but it's about more than just a speed increase, 150 fuel gives other "advantages" than just higher MAP settings.

 

I'm not expecting 150 fuel to turn the aircraft into uber fighters (we already have the K4 for that) but it would help in terms of historical accuracy and even the gap between sides.

 

If we actually had high altitude objectives I wouldn't complain as much since up high the P-47 is light as a feather and performs beautifully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus the ammount of butthurt over an engine mod, this surely didn't happen when the LA got its upgraded engine, arugeably somewhat similar in rarety and documentation

Also the (sorry) rtarts clamiming that their unicum P47 got short changed

Have you actually seen the mod list for that AC? Its quite impressive.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Miller1 said:

Jesus the ammount of butthurt over an engine mod, this surely didn't happen when the LA got its upgraded engine, arugeably somewhat similar in rarety and documentation

Also the (sorry) rtarts clamiming that their unicum P47 got short changed

Have you actually seen the mod list for that AC? Its quite impressive.

 

ASh-82F is not a rare engine and was the engine fitted in mid production La-5s. It also doesn't turn the aircraft into a Saturn V rocket.
 

Edited by RoflSeal
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Miller1 said:

Jesus the ammount of butthurt over an engine mod, this surely didn't happen when the LA got its upgraded engine, arugeably somewhat similar in rarety and documentation

Also the (sorry) rtarts clamiming that their unicum P47 got short changed

Have you actually seen the mod list for that AC? Its quite impressive.

 

How is the P-47 a unicorn? I'd understand calling the K4 a unicorn but not the P-47 lol.

 

The complaints aren't really over the engine mod of the K4, it's the fact that the German side gets the best version while the allies don't. If the allies got their best power settings no one would complain.

Edited by Legioneod
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

 

Pretty much. The mind boggling amount of ground attack modifications to the P-47 come to mind, or the amount of modification the Spitfire has - different tail, clipped wing, different guns, two types of bombs, mirror, rockets that were seldom, gyro sights that were fitted to an (unknown) number of planes but never became standard fitting, if ever used, an extremely rare Merlin 70 engine option that in addition is know for certain never used in the Bodenplatte area by any 2nd TAF unit, (now curious you do not see people complaining about it).

 

 

 

None of those make any difference in the game mode 90% of people play this game. Climbing up high and clubbing unsuspecting pilots in inferior plane. 

 

K4 is only thing that adds what people really want, need, crave. Speed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RoflSeal said:

ASh-82F is not a rare engine and was the engine fitted in mid production La-5s. It also doesn't turn the aircraft into a Saturn V rocket.
 

Because 1.8 to 1.9 turns the 109 from a bicycle to a Hayabusa... 

 

5 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

 

None of those make any difference in the game mode 90% of people play this game. Climbing up high and clubbing unsuspecting pilots in inferior plane. 

 

K4 is only thing that adds what people really want, need, crave. Speed. 

 

Yeah who cares about ground attack mods for one of the most legendary CAS aircraft of WW2.

I'd like to see the shitstorm if they just gave it more speed but no rockets or bombs, ehehe...

Yeah i can tell the allies got nothing this patch
 

1 minute ago, RoflSeal said:

Yeah, 150 extra horsepower in a 3.4t airframe is nothing at all. Lets see, -82F upgrade for La-5 gives you an extra of.... 0 hp.

The lengths of delusion that wehraboos go to justify their need for uber planes while saying the allies should get nothing.

Completely agree, in fact this patch is very bia--, i mean favored towards the axies powers, incredbly so. 

Edited by Miller1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Miller1 said:

Because 1.8 to 1.9 turns the 109 from a bicycle to a Hayabusa... 

Yeah, 150 extra horsepower in a 3.4t airframe is nothing at all. Lets see, -82F upgrade for La-5 gives you an extra of.... 0 hp.

The lengths of delusion that wehraboos go to justify their need for uber planes while saying the allies should get nothing.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

 

None of those make any difference in the game mode 90% of people play this game. Climbing up high and clubbing unsuspecting pilots in inferior plane. 

 

K4 is only thing that adds what people really want, need, crave. Speed. 

 

I think you missed the point. The K-4 is a clubber. It always was. It was seal clubbing everything in Old Il-2, it is seal clubbing Mustangs in DCS to point that Solti's tear glands ran dry, and that was the 1.8ata version there (albeit a different FM). As long as its a K-4, it will club, regardless of which historical boost setting it uses.

 

Boost simply doesn't make a whole lot of difference, percentage wise its like the difference between the G-2 and G-4, as the secret of the plane is not how much engine power it gets, but that it is a small size, lightweight fighter plane. On the higher setting it will climb and run a bit better, but there's no huge difference, it and the G-14 are both monsters that has extremely high power to weight rations between 550 to 600 HP for every ton of plane.

 

No matter what version you get of a Mustang, or Thunderbolt, none will match that as both are around 400 HP / ton, and 5-10% more or less power will not change this basic fact. You have to fly them differently, to their strength, which is pretty similar BTW - they are fast, .50s had ample of ammo and good range, good sights,, good SA, and good high speed maneuverability. They can match or surpress the 109K in these areas. But if you keep trying to beat the 109K at its very own playing field, i.e. sheer energy tactics, you will loose, 90% of the time.

 

 

  • Upvote 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Totally understandable as one had about 1800 produced compared to the meagre 1600-ish production run of the other.  🙈

 

But as you well know (or should know, as it is well documented) production does not equal delivered nor used. But basic, intelligent observation of facts appear to be pointless at this stage.

 

I have a Maus I could sell you...

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

 

Totally understandable as one had about 1800 produced compared to the meagre 1600-ish production run of the other.  🙈

 

He was talking about the 1.98. But anyway. It is not about what was produced but what was actually used in combat.

And coming back to the ratings. Well, if the developers had the time to change the screw for an almost fantasy plane (1.98), it is only fair that the rest of user wish their favourite planes get the same attention of changing a few small screws here and there.

Moreover, this symmetry of allies vs axis means that allies only get a few version of most of the aeroplanes while the axis gets almost every possible version. If we talk about simulation of reality doesn´t seem fair either. Nonetheless, I understand that this is more a commercial issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Boost simply doesn't make a whole lot of difference, percentage wise its like the difference between the G-2 and G-4, as the secret of the plane is not how much engine power it gets, but that it is a small size, lightweight fighter plane. On the higher setting it will climb and run a bit better, but there's no huge difference, it and the G-14 are both monsters that has extremely high power to weight rations between 550 to 600 HP for every ton of plane.

If its so inconsequential then why were you whinging so relentlessly for it? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

 

Ok, then I re-word it for you - 1600 K-4s with 1.98ata.

 

Hope it is better understandable now.

 

Are you seriously saying there were 1600 K4's flying at 1.98ata, roflmao.

 

Even for you thats a gem.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

 

Ok, then I re-word it for you - 1600 K-4s with 1.98ata.

 

Hope it is better understandable now.

 

Not even you believe that. A possibility is a concept far away from the evidence of use (especially in those numbers). And the k4 at 1.98 doesn´t have any evidence of combat use of the quality that you demand to the allies.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

 

I think you missed the point. The K-4 is a clubber. It always was. It was seal clubbing everything in Old Il-2, it is seal clubbing Mustangs in DCS to point that Solti's tear glands ran dry, and that was the 1.8ata version there (albeit a different FM). As long as its a K-4, it will club, regardless of which historical boost setting it uses.

 

Boost simply doesn't make a whole lot of difference, percentage wise its like the difference between the G-2 and G-4, as the secret of the plane is not how much engine power it gets, but that it is a small size, lightweight fighter plane. On the higher setting it will climb and run a bit better, but there's no huge difference, it and the G-14 are both monsters that has extremely high power to weight rations between 550 to 600 HP for every ton of plane.

 

No matter what version you get of a Mustang, or Thunderbolt, none will match that as both are around 400 HP / ton, and 5-10% more or less power will not change this basic fact. You have to fly them differently, to their strength, which is pretty similar BTW - they are fast, .50s had ample of ammo and good range, good sights,, good SA, and good high speed maneuverability. They can match or surpress the 109K in these areas. But if you keep trying to beat the 109K at its very own playing field, i.e. sheer energy tactics, you will loose, 90% of the time.

 

 

 

 

Why are you telling me this? I did not miss the point, i am just pointing out that people like the things K4 get, and wish their favorite mounts had also the top tier configurations available to them, like K4 has. 

 

It is quite reasonable position to have. Considering the difference in numbers and war material held by the allies at the end. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...