Jump to content

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

3% of all axis fighters in BoBp were rocket 1.98K4s but on servers they are almost only things you see, but no need for limitations as red get of lagg23s on other missions, so all is ok LOL

 

Which server are you talking about? Since you do not ever set a foot out of WoL, it is funny you bring it up.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

They were beaten at sea, where almost everything German, sub or not, was sunk. They were beaten in the air. They were beaten on the ground. They were beaten in intelligence. Great Britain was a closed book to them. Imagine, the Allies could prepare D-Day without the Germans getting a good idea about that. That's just crazy. On the other hand, the Allies always had very good intel about Germany, and it was not just from Enigma. Enigma provided just further important pieces to the puzzle. They were beaten in weapons as well. There is only one weapon that in itself can change the course of war, and this is the nuke. The Germans were never even in a remote position for obtaining one.

 

That's in no small part was the result of the ideology. As some important physicians were Jews their works were labeled as "Jewish physics" with expected consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Ehret said:

 

That's in no small part was the result of the ideology. As some important physicians were Jews their works were labeled as "Jewish physics" with expected consequences.

 

Thats some deep insight from someone who thinks a physician works in the field of physics

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They made some good stuff and some bad stuff. Some of it was driven by the course of the war, some by the talent and innovation of their tech. and industry people. Some of the good stuff had bad bits, some of the bad stuff had good bits.

 

They never made any of it in sufficient quality or quantity for a whole host of reasons, but for our sim purposes it is fun to fly.

Share this post


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

but for our sim purposes it is fun to fly.

This!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

Thats some deep insight from someone who thinks a physician works in the field of physics

 

A word typo - should be a physicist - nitpicking it that's some shallow insight. Doesn't change the sense by any means, thought. The Nazi ideology thus Germany at the time was really screwed up place with lots of screwed up people. The fact that an ideology was forced into objective sciences just confirms how badly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Get back on topic which it is the Me262 or I will lock it. Will give it a chance but It looks to me that this topic run his course already.

 

And again, NO politics/ideologies discussions in this forum. Will start to be very serious with that.

 

Haash

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, how much pilots used throttle in combat? If they attacked bombers even in shallow dive with throttle at 90-100% , speed must be dangerous if the safe limit was 960km/h.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For obvious reasons there's been a lot of discussion about the 262 in multiplayer, but for my part, I spend most of my time in one of three places;

Career

PWCG Solo campaign

PWCG Co-op campaign

 

For all of the above, I'm definitely looking forward to the 262 coming into game. Evidently the heavy bombers aren't there for bomber killing missions, but it's worth bearing in mind that we have squadron strength flights of A-20s on the Eastern front already. For me, given that Pat has already mentioned putting RAF and USAAF A-20s into the campaign, the 262 still has a bomber hunting role. 

 

Outside of that, as a fast bomber it'll add a dimension of technical flying that might not be so enjoyable in multiplayer where the drive is always there to get back into the action, but in a campaign where you can have upwards of 120km to fly before you're safely home, I can see there being a certain satisfaction in it. It's much like the method of employment for a PR Spitfire or a Mossie path-finder, get in, get out, and try not to get shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JtD said:

Milo, where's the A-9 in these figures? There were plenty around before January 45 and they cannot all have been lost.

 

Imho, the G-14/AS could also be rolled into standard K-4's, given the improved high altitude performance over the standard version.

 

Thanks for the figures, couldn't find them when I wanted to post them a page ago.

 

The A-9 is not yet in the game afaik so would be included in with the A-8s. I count 20 A-9s serviceable for Bodenplatte. There was also 75 F-8s serviceable for Bodenplatte. So far there is no G-14/ASs, so yes, the standard K-4 percentage could be modified.

 

Anyways, it was only a generalized table that should be tweaked with further research.

 

I should add that the percentages for the Bf109s are for those that participated in Bodenplatte and not what was available to participate in Bodenplatte.

 

For those that want to do some number crunching NZTyphoon posted images from the Manrho/Putz book in this thread, https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/33650-luftwaffe-aircraft-strength-prior-to-bodenplatte/

 

33 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

Ok, how much pilots used throttle in combat? If they attacked bombers even in shallow dive with throttle at 90-100% , speed must be dangerous if the safe limit was 960km/h.

 

Actually when attacking bombers they attacked from below in a climb so as not to exceed speed limits. I can't find an imaged online but am sure others have seen such an image.

Share this post


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

Actually when attacking bombers they attacked from below in a climb so as not to exceed speed limits. I can't find an imaged online but am sure others have seen such an image. 

Hmm, I know that Walter Schuck in his book wrote that he attacked from above and after attack he climbed and attacked another bomber box, but maybe it was exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Err, that was a rhetorical question which referenced exactly what you then said. You have just repeated my point.

Sorry, I thought you were saying that the important part of the debate was 'why' they were limited, i.e. debating what motivation would be the right one. on rereading I see I misinterpreted that.

Share this post


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

Sorry, I thought you were saying that the important part of the debate was 'why' they were limited, i.e. debating what motivation would be the right one. on rereading I see I misinterpreted that.

 

No worries, my response also sounded a little rude so apologies for that.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

 

Which server are you talking about? Since you do not ever set a foot out of WoL, it is funny you bring it up.

LOL

04f.gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone - it might be Steinhoff - speaks of attacking bombers head-on in a 262. I was a little surprised by that, will try to find the quote.

 

Oh, and we nearly there yet.....?

Share this post


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

Someone - it might be Steinhoff - speaks of attacking bombers head-on in a 262. I was a little surprised by that, will try to find the quote.

 

Oh, and we nearly there yet.....?

 

https://www.historynet.com/interview-with-world-war-ii-luftwaffe-eagle-johannes-steinhoff.htm

 

Steinhoff: "The B-17 Flying Fortress without a doubt. They flew in defensive boxes, a heavy defensive formation, and with all of their heavy .50-caliber machine guns they were dangerous to approach. We finally adopted the head-on attack pioneered by Egon Mayer and Georg Peter Eder, but only a few experts could do this successfully, and it took nerves of steel. Then you also had the long-range fighter escorts, which made life difficult, until we flew the Me-262 jets armed with four 30mm cannon and 24 R4M rockets. Then we could blast huge holes in even the tightest formation from outside the range of their defensive fire, inflict damage, then come around and finish off the cripples with cannon fire. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2019 at 11:07 AM, ZachariasX said:

I was said that in the context of being capable to conduct a war successfully. Here in these fora, we have a very narrow view on individual items and make use of them in a very sporty manner, clearly not representing the actual situation back then at given points in time.

 

 

 

Concerning actual weapons, it is fair to say that most hands on items were on par to a level where only crew training made a difference when using "fair" matchups something that in principle can be done. This was not the case at the beginning of the hostilities, where Germany had considerable advantage in terms of material (and doctrine).

 

 

 

The point I was making is about force projection. Air, land, sea, intelligence, production, supply, maintenance. You only have an aircraft up in the air doing something useful (for your purposes) because all of the underlying and connecting departments do their job. In case of the Germans, everything that was in place providing a weapon was not up to the task. Initially, it was sufficient, but then it never improved really. In case of the Allies, they had inferior weapons and a subpar "back office", but they cleaned their stable and that worked out for them and eventually provided weapons of the performance in the numbers required. They also improved their tactics by even copying German tactics. 2TAF was run almost like Germany operated their squadrons in 1940. Germany failed that same thing at almost every level. They never scaled in that way. They only did so occasionally at the cost of something else. That they in fact ran a pirate business fueled by looting obscured that fact a fair bit, at least as long as they could invade. As soon as their tanks were driving in reverse gear, total output collapsed (total industry output that is: “Kanonen statt Butter!”) Yes, they had many of certain types, but only of that and not much else anymore.

 

 

 

It was not that the Allies "just had more", they were capable of making more as well as denying the Germans to make more than the little they could do themselves. All those material didn't just come from nowhere, they had to be made. You had to think of that and you had to spend resources for that. The Germans didn‘t do that and it screwed them.

 

 

 

They were beaten at sea, where almost everything German, sub or not, was sunk. They were beaten in the air. They were beaten on the ground. They were beaten in intelligence. Great Britain was a closed book to them. Imagine, the Allies could prepare D-Day without the Germans getting a good idea about that. That's just crazy. On the other hand, the Allies always had very good intel about Germany, and it was not just from Enigma. Enigma provided just further important pieces to the puzzle. They were beaten in weapons as well. There is only one weapon that in itself can change the course of war, and this is the nuke. The Germans were never even in a remote position for obtaining one.

 

 

 

While individual tech was nice, like the A4 rocket, the Fi-103 cruise missile etc., this was interesting, but merely a consequence of anything of value behind the front on the Allied side being out of reach for Germany. Having to invest in such tech is a sign just illustrates how bad the situation already was in 1944. If you are conducting a war, the only thing that matters is force projection and you can be agnostic to how this is achieved. If an Allied General could point his finger anywhere on the map of Germany and this target is then flattened by the end of the week, then you have what you need to win. The Allies had that. Germany needed the fancy tech as a remote hope achieve that as well (they didn't).

 

 

 

To paraphrase, it is like comparing two department stores. A good one and a bad one. It might well be that the bad one has the best brioche and the prettiest pillow. It is just not enough to keep the business afloat if your sales reps are villains and the other store beats you at ops in every possible way. Receivers are not good business men. If you expose them to open competition, they fail, because what they really do and are good at is far from running a real shop.

 

 

 

What is most important to us in order to win a WoL map is really only borderline significant in the entire requirements to win a real war. Having the theoretical best the Germans could do is a poor representation of the actual situation then. In no instance have “the reds” ever beaten “the blue” on WoL as the “the blue” were trashed from 1944 onwards. If we were to make such a matchup, you’d have plenty rage quitters on the blue side. (Vice versa for 1941 scenarios in the east.) And that we don’t want, so we “balance” sides in mission design.

 

 

 

For our purposes, it is just grand that the toys were very similar in performance, giving us ample possibilities to set up fair matches. But that is the game, not war. War is not fun. Our game is.

 

 

I had a feeling this is what you were trying to get across, I just wanted to make sure as your words could easily be misinterpreted :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Someone - it might be Steinhoff - speaks of attacking bombers head-on in a 262. I was a little surprised by that, will try to find the quote.

 

Oh, and we nearly there yet.....?

 

I think the head on reference is the preferred tactic with piston engine planes.  They probably tried it with the 262 early on, since that was what they were used to doing, butI believe that they abandoned it pretty quickly.  The closure rate was too high.  For the 262 he talks about using rockets in a side attack to cripple some and break up the formation with rear attacks to finish off cripples.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really looking forward to the 262. Together with the D9 and the K4 it will be a tough nut to crack. In the game the situation will look much different than in real life back then. In the game the German side will be able to provide high fighter cover in equal numbers. This will even make life for Tempests hard, whose operations basically relied on there not being enemy fighters up high. The couple of times German ground control could provide that, it was a bitter fight for the Tempests. Also the short mission flight times in the game help the short legged German designs. I just hope we get 1945 engine ratings on Allied side as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, EAF_Sunde said:

Seriously tho, the 262 will obviously be a powerful plane, but it wont be some untouchable UFO like i think some might believe it to be. I am excited to learn to fly and try to counter the 262 anyway. 

 

The current (9.5km) contact visibility range and limited (5m) continuous WEP for P-xx fighters will ease life of the 262 pilot when in defensive. Normally (as IRL) you would be followed by slower props for some time which will be impossible in the sim. IRL pilots could try to catch the jet in hard dives which is also not practical due to the contact range and FM (elevator authority in P-47D) issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it the developers have no interest in designing the ME262 A1/U4 with the 50mm cannon. I can understand as to why that may not be implemented into the game considering the intention behind the 50mm was so it could be an effective bomber destroyer. And, as we know there are no bombers in the game that cannot be taken down by regular cannons below 50mm. 

 

However, in the future would this become a reality or because Germany only ever produced two prototypes that all we can do is hope? Regardless, I look forward to what the developers have in store for us. (Also, think this is my first post on this forum!) - All I really want in the end is a pacific campaign and I am more than willing to wait for it!

Edited by Hewlettasha
Additional information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...