Jump to content

Arado 234 Blitz Bomber


KJSimon
 Share

Recommended Posts

sevenless
2 hours ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

What bomb sights did the Ar234 have? Plan to have?

 

The B2 Manual answers that. Lotfe 7K:

 

image.thumb.png.0fdfafec17c7ce5959f0ba2d468c861f.png

 

image.thumb.png.4c06f03ee685f201b86ef08b0e455a8a.png

image.thumb.png.755207064c45d431634e4ed375b5ee74.png

image.thumb.png.d42ccb44e075894814ab666388c63343.png

image.thumb.png.4144aadcbd2dfe0c59b3e7558953b191.png

image.thumb.png.8f83345b884730187513ccb638606bcc.png

image.thumb.png.03571bba09b52bf950c4ba1a6f4a90d3.png

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

That doesn't answer the question though.

 

What bomb sights did the Ar234 have? Plan to have?

 

Were there other units (besides KG76) that flew the Ar234?

 

29 minutes ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

It doesn't surprise me that a Wikipedia source gets discredited so suddenly but the mere mention of it surely must mean there was some kind of a Lotfe on the 234 even if it's from Wikipedia.

 

Early Ar 234s had whatever version of Lotfe was current for 1944 but was then dropped, as I explained above. Photos and reports of captured planes prove this.

 

No other unit flew the Ar 234 as a bomber. There were some others flown in small reconnaissance detachments, but that's it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747
21 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

 

Early Ar 234s had whatever version of Lotfe was current for 1944 but was then dropped, as I explained above. Photos and reports of captured planes prove this.

 

No other unit flew the Ar 234 as a bomber. There were some others flown in small reconnaissance detachments, but that's it.  

So should IL2s version of the Ar234 have Lotfe or BZA or both options?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

So should IL2s version of the Ar234 have Lotfe or BZA or both options?

 

If it were my decision, it should have only the BZA. The interviews with KG 76 pilots state that no operational missions were flown with the level bombsight. From the time the Einsatzstaffel of KG 76 flying missions in December 1944, it was all dive-bombing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747

All that extra work they are going to need to do modeling a new bomb sight.

 

Will they do it or just reuse earlier Lotfe into Ar234.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless

The KG 76 cronicle by Jan Horn offers some very interesting insights on Lotfe 7K and the Arado 234. I quote some original pages which might explain a thing or two:

 

image.thumb.png.3e860f410c5a4e63db87ceeeb0bf6b26.png

 

image.thumb.png.12b41ae615624e58ac0645b9e77f5df8.png

And last but not least, they were frequently blindbombing using the german EGON system (related to OBOE, google it). By example while attacking Remagen bridge:

 

image.thumb.png.8820877004572f093f609d8ca8b8b024.png

image.thumb.png.ee16a5150eef91867abb6d2be775fe10.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747
33 minutes ago, sevenless said:

The KG 76 cronicle by Jan Horn offers some very interesting insights on Lotfe 7K and the Arado 234. I quote some original pages which might explain a thing or two:

 

image.thumb.png.3e860f410c5a4e63db87ceeeb0bf6b26.png

 

image.thumb.png.12b41ae615624e58ac0645b9e77f5df8.png

And last but not least, they were frequently blindbombing using the german EGON system (related to OBOE, google it). By example while attacking Remagen bridge:

 

image.thumb.png.8820877004572f093f609d8ca8b8b024.png

image.thumb.png.ee16a5150eef91867abb6d2be775fe10.png

Man, do you mind translating some of those bits, I always wondered how the Remagen bridge attack was conducted. I mean, there were a group of them and they all missed! 

 

It's incomprehensible to us as players but who knows what other external factors each pilot was dealing with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747
14 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

If it were my decision, it should have only the BZA. The interviews with KG 76 pilots state that no operational missions were flown with the level bombsight. From the time the Einsatzstaffel of KG 76 flying missions in December 1944, it was all dive-bombing. 

While that would be in line with historic events, I think both sights should be included in IL2. Let the server admins and mission designers choose whether or not to allow one or the other. Let them have the option to decide how historical they want their Planeset to be.
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
33 minutes ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

While that would be in line with historic events, I think both sights should be included in IL2. Let the server admins and mission designers choose whether or not to allow one or the other. Let them have the option to decide how historical they want their Planeset to be.
 

 

 

We´ll see how the devs handle that. As I understand from the manual, technical descriptions and especially the cronicle of KG76 Lotfe was present in every plane they flew with. They decided however not to use it due to tactical circumstances or lack of sufficient PDS calibration in some planes. So in general they were able to decide on their own which of the three modes for dropping bombs was the best for the tactical situation and mission (level bombing with Lotfe, level bombing with EGON or glide bombing with BZA). 

Edited by sevenless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JG4_dingsda

The manual (Teil 8f: Rüstsätze, Stand Dezember 1944), has it like so:

1983771113_arado_lotfe_rstsatz.thumb.png.e8f5a45c954b5633efa217f8d5fac03e.png

Default configuration is "Bomber". The Lotfe is considered a "Rüstsatz" which can be equipped to configure plane as "Bomber-Führungsflugzeug" ("Lead-Bomber").

Edited by JG4_dingsda
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
8 minutes ago, JG4_dingsda said:

The manual (Teil 8f: Rüstsätze, Stand Dezember 1944), has it like so:

 

Usual configuration is "Bomber". The Lotfe is considered a "Rüstsatz" which can be equipped to configure plane as "Bomber-Führungsflugzeug" ("Lead-Bomber").

 

You mean a given Staffel decided the day before flying a bomber run that plane 1,5 and 9 were to be designated lead-bombers and the night before takeoff the groudcrew climbed into the plane and mounted everything in? Remember the Lotfe and PDS-combo had to be calibrated before tactical usage, else they were highly innacurate and practically useless (650m Abweichung bei 3km Wurfhöhe). See my 01/45 quotes from KG76 above.

 

Further the manual says "sind eingebaut" - "are build in" and does not say "werden bei Bedarf eingebaut" - "can be build in, if needed"

 

As usual the more you get to the details the more questions arise.

 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JG4_dingsda
46 minutes ago, sevenless said:

You mean a given Staffel decided [...]

I did not mean too much, to be honest. :blush: Just remembered the different configurations and thought it might helpful here. :)

 

46 minutes ago, sevenless said:

Further the manual says "sind eingebaut" - "are build in" and does not say "werden bei Bedarf eingebaut" - "can be build in, if needed"

It has a section on adding it in and removing it again, though.

ein_ausbau_lotfe.thumb.png.95bfb3743c18c44c7b501482443d600a.png

 

Edited by JG4_dingsda
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson

Any good info on how these planes were used day to day?  Day or night operations?  Both?  Nuisance raiders?  Used to target key infrastructure much as we used the F-117?  Remagen bridge is well known,  but what did day to day ops look like for the pilots?  I kind of doubt that they were used simply to drop bombs on infantry.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
31 minutes ago, JG4_dingsda said:

I did not mean too much, to be honest. :blush: Just remembered the different configurations and thought it might helpful here. :)

 

Yep, I see. Just trying to make some sense of this and piecing together what it might mean to the given staffel on tactical level.

 

1.) They didn´t fly level attacks using the Lotfe. This is backed up both by LukeFFs sources and the cronicle of KG76

2.) They had problems to calibrate the PDS for usage with Lotfe, which explains 1)

3.) They flew testbombings with Lotfe in 01/45 with abysmal results (650m failure rate at 3000m drop altitude), which also explains 1)

4.) Manual states Lotfe is a Rüstsatz and can be build in as usage for lead bomber is necessary

 

My conclusion so far is, that due to the fact (?) that they were unable to solve the calibration problem of the PDS before 01/45 and possibly also after 01/45 (only 3 machines so far in January) that at least at unit level they made no use of Lotfe and even later switched to EGON for bad weather conditions (03/45). Question remains, if the 234s they received (each) had a Lotfe preinstalled or if they received only a limited amount of Lotfes and had to decide themselves on unit level where to build it in and where not.

 

23 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Any good info on how these planes were used day to day?  Day or night operations?  Both?  Nuisance raiders?  Used to target key infrastructure much as we used the F-117?  Remagen bridge is well known,  but what did day to day ops look like for the pilots?  I kind of doubt that they were used simply to drop bombs on infantry.

 

 

Same targets as KG51s 262s were sent to. In many cases even the identical targets.

Edited by sevenless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson

@sevenless Thanks for the info.  I did a quick Google search.  First use seems to be December 1944.  Never many made.  Per your comment, it does seem to have been used as a raider for high value targets and certainly not a generic ground pounder.  Also looks like day missions, which is convenient.

 

I introduced the raider concept as a squadron role to PWCG a few months ago.  KG51 is already exclusively in this role (piston engine fighter escorts for 262s are not useful), so KG76 will follow when this plane becomes available.  Interesting thing is that I don't need the map for the Normandy module as this thing never flew anywhere near Normandy.  As usual, not following history all that precisely.  The airplane will be available to a full squadron.  Operations will proceed like it was not a prototype forced into action.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
56 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

@sevenless Thanks for the info.  I did a quick Google search.  First use seems to be December 1944.  Never many made.  Per your comment, it does seem to have been used as a raider for high value targets and certainly not a generic ground pounder.  Also looks like day missions, which is convenient.

 

I introduced the raider concept as a squadron role to PWCG a few months ago.  KG51 is already exclusively in this role (piston engine fighter escorts for 262s are not useful), so KG76 will follow when this plane becomes available.  Interesting thing is that I don't need the map for the Normandy module as this thing never flew anywhere near Normandy.  As usual, not following history all that precisely.  The airplane will be available to a full squadron.  Operations will proceed like it was not a prototype forced into action.  

 

Sounds good. First mission was Liege at 24th of december. They were under KG51 command. They also dropped a whole lot of AB500s with SD 15s on area targets at the time (maybe the devs can include SDs in the future?).

 

Quote on first mission from Forsyth & Beale:

 

image.thumb.png.fbcc74c2e261e2bd83aa0d5aa9f9b821.png

 

image.png.d3878d2b14d2ed82943d8cf48856dd60.png

Edited by sevenless
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JG4_dingsda

@sevenlessYup, good summary there.

 

As I interpret the manual it did come without the Lotfe by default: "Das Flugzeugmuster wird normal als Bomber (B2) geliefert. Es kann jedoch ... mit folgenden Rüstsätzen ausgestattet werden." And the bomber-version has no Lotfe-mark.

 

I am curious now. Maybe this can be learned. :)

 

[edit] Hm... the more I dig, the more I think the Lotfe was always present. For Example: On 31.10.1944 the Erprobungskommando of KG 76 was moved to Burg (near Magdeburg) where it mainly was busy installing drogue parachutes and Lotfes. (Griehl, Arado Ar 234)

 

[edit2] And this one for @PatrickAWlson:

1828964167_EinsatzbeimKG76.thumb.png.ba5feff1fd48286beedb68ac762418a5.png

Edited by JG4_dingsda
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JG4_dingsda said:

[edit] Hm... the more I dig, the more I think the Lotfe was always present. For Example: On 31.10.1944 the Erprobungskommando of KG 76 was moved to Burg (near Magdeburg) where it mainly was busy installing drogue parachutes and Lotfes. (Griehl, Arado Ar 234)

 

Eh, I wouldn't read too much into that. That's still more than a month before the Einsatzstaffel was declared operational, which was still plenty of time to find out that the Lotfe was useless. If a piece of equipment is found to be useless, then it stands to reason that said equipment would be removed for operations. Lukesch was a very experienced commander, so I see no reason why he would require his pilots to carry dead weight into combat. 

 

That, and we do have reports of captured planes that mention the lack of a Lotfe bombsight. 

 

2 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Any good info on how these planes were used day to day?  Day or night operations?  Both?  Nuisance raiders?  Used to target key infrastructure much as we used the F-117?  Remagen bridge is well known,  but what did day to day ops look like for the pilots?  I kind of doubt that they were used simply to drop bombs on infantry.

 

In general, their targets were ports, railyards, and troop/vehicle concentrations - the type of targets that didn't require pinpoint precision.

 

Besides Remagen, they also were a part of Operation Bodenplatte. 

 

EDIT: some night missions were also flown. 

Edited by LukeFF
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
2 hours ago, JG4_dingsda said:

I am curious now. Maybe this can be learned. :)

 

[edit] Hm... the more I dig, the more I think the Lotfe was always present. For Example: On 31.10.1944 the Erprobungskommando of KG 76 was moved to Burg (near Magdeburg) where it mainly was busy installing drogue parachutes and Lotfes. (Griehl, Arado Ar 234)

 

I found another quote regarding the Lotfe. This one is from 08/44 and taken together with the status of 01/45 posted above from the cronicle it paints a picture (at least for me).

 

Between 08/44 and 01/45 they simply didn´t manage to get the PDS working in a sufficiently accurate form. As a direct consequence Lotfe usage didn´t make any sense at all on tactical level. Hence they dropped it completely when they went operational in 12/44.

 

Also from Forsyth & Beale

 

image.png.71c69190cc515f977608ba1d8234bf80.png

image.png.52010a2c926ab013513704944c721b8d.png

 

image.png.009736be6668b8ea617fb48caeb0e642.pngimage.png.de257bcc886fd7989beb1e83d155a908.png

 

image.thumb.png.42ba1768771c81e31dbd2f1b94e3b749.png

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747
9 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

We´ll see how the devs handle that. As I understand from the manual, technical descriptions and especially the cronicle of KG76 Lotfe was present in every plane they flew with. They decided however not to use it due to tactical circumstances or lack of sufficient PDS calibration in some planes. So in general they were able to decide on their own which of the three modes for dropping bombs was the best for the tactical situation and mission (level bombing with Lotfe, level bombing with EGON or glide bombing with BZA). 

EGON? Was that another bombsight?

 

How many bombsights can this plane fit??

 

Or does the Lotfe have several modes of which includes EGON and BZA?

8 hours ago, JG4_dingsda said:

The manual (Teil 8f: Rüstsätze, Stand Dezember 1944), has it like so:

1983771113_arado_lotfe_rstsatz.thumb.png.e8f5a45c954b5633efa217f8d5fac03e.png

Default configuration is "Bomber". The Lotfe is considered a "Rüstsatz" which can be equipped to configure plane as "Bomber-Führungsflugzeug" ("Lead-Bomber").

So the designers envisioned the Ar234 would drop bombs in formation? 

 

One lead bomber aims and the rest drop on his mark?

7 hours ago, dotDeutschland said:

Here in case anybody wants access to the Ar 234 Manuals to have a read of their own

https://mega.nz/folder/y7QBhCbD#IUQSYivr-avGyTYsMZuS4g

Also got a Lotfe 7C Manual in there, still looking for the 7D and K Manual tho. 

Can you link the 7C manual as well?

 

As I understand, the 7C is what the 88 and H6/H16 have?

7 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

Yep, I see. Just trying to make some sense of this and piecing together what it might mean to the given staffel on tactical level.

 

1.) They didn´t fly level attacks using the Lotfe. This is backed up both by LukeFFs sources and the cronicle of KG76

2.) They had problems to calibrate the PDS for usage with Lotfe, which explains 1)

3.) They flew testbombings with Lotfe in 01/45 with abysmal results (650m failure rate at 3000m drop altitude), which also explains 1)

4.) Manual states Lotfe is a Rüstsatz and can be build in as usage for lead bomber is necessary

 

My conclusion so far is, that due to the fact (?) that they were unable to solve the calibration problem of the PDS before 01/45 and possibly also after 01/45 (only 3 machines so far in January) that at least at unit level they made no use of Lotfe and even later switched to EGON for bad weather conditions (03/45). Question remains, if the 234s they received (each) had a Lotfe preinstalled or if they received only a limited amount of Lotfes and had to decide themselves on unit level where to build it in and where not.

 

 

Same targets as KG51s 262s were sent to. In many cases even the identical targets.

I'm just wondering if the fact that the Lotfe was tested (albeit not in combat like the 37mm on 110G2) if that alone will be the reason why IL2 wouldn't include it.

 

For context, the 110 G2s 37mm was only used in combat by testing squadrons and the results were abysmal so it never got real combat with combat units but somehow it is still in game.

6 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

Sounds good. First mission was Liege at 24th of december. They were under KG51 command. They also dropped a whole lot of AB500s with SD 15s on area targets at the time (maybe the devs can include SDs in the future?).

 

Quote on first mission from Forsyth & Beale:

 

image.thumb.png.fbcc74c2e261e2bd83aa0d5aa9f9b821.png

 

image.png.d3878d2b14d2ed82943d8cf48856dd60.png

The Ar 234 can carry SD15s? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
48 minutes ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

EGON? Was that another bombsight?

 

Nope. EGON was the german equivalent of the OBOE system described here:

 

IET Digital Library: Oboe: a precision ground-controlled blind-bombing system (theiet.org)

 

Yes, it appears that the german designed/planned either level formation bombing with Lotfe or to use Lotfe equipped machines for pathfinding.

 

48 minutes ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

The Ar 234 can carry SD15s? 

 

Yep 24 of them within an AB500 by example:

 

L.Dv. 4200; Die deutsche Abwurfmunition, Serie P, Blatt 4f: AB 500-1 D m. 24 SD 15 (Stand: Juli 1944) (michaelhiske.de)

 

image.thumb.png.e4fc62e2544348cf828b70e380472da5.png

 

Quote

if that alone will be the reason why IL2 wouldn't include it.

 

Hard to tell. The device was there, although it wasn´t used tactically that often if at all, they used it/trained with it on the few planes where they managed to calibrate the PDS 11.

 

image.png.0a9facc3567a9d334e1200c38c0b790a.pngimage.png.c74be67e885324cb99aab047e69b4388.png

Edited by sevenless
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

For context, the 110 G2s 37mm was only used in combat by testing squadrons and the results were abysmal so it never got real combat with combat units but somehow it is still in game.

 

ZG 1 had a Panzerjaegerstaffel equipped entirely 37 mm-armed Bf 110s for Operation Citadel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747
53 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

ZG 1 had a Panzerjaegerstaffel equipped entirely 37 mm-armed Bf 110s for Operation Citadel. 

This topic is about the Ar 234 so I'd like to keep it just that as much as possible but I will say this about the 110 G2 with 37mm.

 

Screenshot_20211012-150649_Bromite.thumb.jpg.675d22999366ad66148a7f2c160b7737.jpg

 

First G-2s arrive mid Jan 1943 in Rostov and go to I./ZG 1 in a desperate attempt to stem the rush of Soviet tanks from the Stalingrad direction. (Hopp, 3)

 

The 3.7cm was known as the Rustsatze 1. Bf 110G-2/R1.

 

03.43, it was suggested weapons up to 5cm could be installed on G-2.

 

Testing soon began and the Test pilots then went to test in combat in 04.43 on Eastern Front...the 3.7cm (R1) was found to be “totally inadequate”.

 

The 3.7cm was tested also on the Ju87, Hs 129, Ju88 and Bf110. The 87 and 129 did okayyy but the 88 and 110 were trash. This testing unit disbanded in 06.43.

 

When experimented against Allied bombers, the 3.7cm onboard made the 110 as slow as the bombers it was targeting. (Hopp, 19 and 25)

 

3.7cm field testing between 04.43 - 06.43 in Russia. Performed poorly and not proceeded with.

 

01.43, first units receive the 3.7cm. First used by 4th Air Fleet in the tank destroyer role. Quickly became apparent it sucked doing this. You would need to get low and close and the 110 was too vulnerable to ground fire. Makeshift airfields meaning shitty MX quickly lead to the removal of 3.7cm from tank destroying. (Murawski, 57)

 

Conclusion: A Bf 110G-2/R1 (37mm BK) had a very very short life during which it was used very very little. Bf110 was vulnerable to ground fire and frontline airfields could not maintain the cannon.

 

These were my notes but they are obviously paraphrased. 

 

I don't know where the devs draw the line regarding the inclusion of a certain feature but I imagine it isn't always going to be 100% consistent due to limitations of available information but it is my hope the devs would at least include features that were seriously close to implementation for the sake of varied gameplay (after all, this is a game) and let the servers decide what they want to restrict for modifications if they want to be realistic. Otherwise, it would seem like we are handicaping the advantages of a medium like gaming if we determine the inclusion of a piece of equipment solely based on their combat usage (which themselves were confined to the realities of their own situation at the time) while the IL2 community has already created many would-be, alternate history scenarios which vastly differ from their real life situations.

 

Now back to the Ar 234 because that's why we're all here.


 

Edited by =KG76=flyus747
Wording
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747
On 10/12/2021 at 1:36 PM, sevenless said:

 

Nope. EGON was the german equivalent of the OBOE system described here:

 

IET Digital Library: Oboe: a precision ground-controlled blind-bombing system (theiet.org)

 

Yes, it appears that the german designed/planned either level formation bombing with Lotfe or to use Lotfe equipped machines for pathfinding.

 

 

Yep 24 of them within an AB500 by example:

 

L.Dv. 4200; Die deutsche Abwurfmunition, Serie P, Blatt 4f: AB 500-1 D m. 24 SD 15 (Stand: Juli 1944) (michaelhiske.de)

 

image.thumb.png.e4fc62e2544348cf828b70e380472da5.png

 

 

Hard to tell. The device was there, although it wasn´t used tactically that often if at all, they used it/trained with it on the few planes where they managed to calibrate the PDS 11.

 

image.png.0a9facc3567a9d334e1200c38c0b790a.pngimage.png.c74be67e885324cb99aab047e69b4388.png

Do you know if the periscope was movable? Can it look around or is it just a view directly behind him?

 

I've read that a periscope they tried could even be rotated to point forward! 

 

What about the 2x20mm? It was featured on the 234 B-2 in 1946 but I don't know if that's historically accurate.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
18 minutes ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

Do you know if the periscope was movable? Can it look around or is it just a view directly behind him?

 

I've read that a periscope they tried could even be rotated to point forward! 

 

What about the 2x20mm? It was featured on the 234 B-2 in 1946 but I don't know if that's historically accurate.

 

 

 

The Periscope (BZA) afaik was only able to look ahead or backwards. No 360deg functionality.

 

As for 20mm in the B2-bomber. As per planning sketches for B1 and B2 they were supposed to be there. If you look however into the B2 manual or the diary of KG76, they were never realised.

 

image.png.c93332427815a0ad506796023ac9cc25.pngimage.png.ca371b84d0e26be02fb5c8b404447fa5.png

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

With the Rear Firing MG my Position at this Point is a solid "why not?" at this Point.

 

It's not very practical, so it wouldn't disturb the Force by being unbalanced.

Many German Late War Planes had speculative Options, that are solidly "Maybe, who knows what happened in the Chaotic last Days?"

 

It should be a speculative, optional Extra, just like the 1.98ata on the K-4 or the Sirens on the Ju-87D-3, Shvaks on the MiG-3, , Hell, even the single Piece Windscreen on the I-16.

 

All of these are Entertainment Add-Ons and I will be thoroughly impressed by anyone who can make the Rear MGs on the 234 work.

 

Edited by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747
56 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

With the Rear Firing MG my Position at this Point is a solid "why not?" at this Point.

 

It's not very practical, so it wouldn't disturb the Force by being unbalanced.

Many German Late War Planes had speculative Options, that are solidly "Maybe, who knows what happened in the Chaotic last Days?"

 

It should be a speculative, optional Extra, just like the 1.98ata on the K-4 or the Sirens on the Ju-87D-3, Shvaks on the MiG-3, , Hell, even the single Piece Windscreen on the I-16.

 

All of these are Entertainment Add-Ons and I will be thoroughly impressed by anyone who can make the Rear MGs on the 234 work.

 

It really sounds like in order for them to make an Ar234, they would need to make many innovative advancements.

 

A new Lotfe 7K

 

Periscope (with lateral and vertical movement)

 

New bombs. In Forsyth's book, the Ar 234s make heavy use of AB500s which don't exist in-game.

 

I hope they won't find excuses to not take advantage of such an opportunity to really innovate the tech of the series.

1 hour ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

With the Rear Firing MG my Position at this Point is a solid "why not?" at this Point.

 

It's not very practical, so it wouldn't disturb the Force by being unbalanced.

Many German Late War Planes had speculative Options, that are solidly "Maybe, who knows what happened in the Chaotic last Days?"

 

It should be a speculative, optional Extra, just like the 1.98ata on the K-4 or the Sirens on the Ju-87D-3, Shvaks on the MiG-3, , Hell, even the single Piece Windscreen on the I-16.

 

All of these are Entertainment Add-Ons and I will be thoroughly impressed by anyone who can make the Rear MGs on the 234 work.

 

Yeah I'm just afraid they'll pull the "it wasn't used in combat" card and use that as the reason it won't be included in the game which, again, I think is really selling the platform short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dotDeutschland
On 10/12/2021 at 10:21 PM, =KG76=flyus747 said:

Can you link the 7C manual as well?

Lotfe7C.PNG.e94f522361b2e94e96135db3d62184dd.PNG

Its in there 😁just gotta look closely enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/11/2021 at 4:35 PM, =KG76=flyus747 said:

All that extra work they are going to need to do modeling a new bomb sight.

 

Will they do it or just reuse earlier Lotfe into Ar234.

 

Honestly, I'd prefer to leave it out entirely - saves weight, saves modelling time, and makes a very very crowded little cockpit a bit less crowded.

 

I personally think it'd be great to be able to remove as much as possible from the cockpit - did the recon variants even have bomb sights? If no - can I remove all the bombsights so that I'm able to see?

 

 

On 10/14/2021 at 12:41 PM, =KG76=flyus747 said:

Periscope (with lateral and vertical movement)

 

New bombs. In Forsyth's book, the Ar 234s make heavy use of AB500s which don't exist in-game.

 

I can definitely see the justification for more bomb options.

 

Also, wasn't the periscope used in some Arados that didn't have the fixed reward firing guns?

 

IMHO, the big piece of tech that would be exciting to get is the Bombenzielanlage/BZA... especially if we get it as an option for the Ju-88 as well. Did the Me-410 ever use them? Also, the Ju-87D3? It is a really nice piece of tech.

Edited by Avimimus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Avimimus said:

IMHO, the big piece of tech that would be exciting to get is the Bombenzielanlage/BZA... especially if we get it as an option for the Ju-88 as well. Did the Me-410 ever use them? Also, the Ju-87D3? It is a really nice piece of tech.

I think the 410 and 87 only ever used the StuVi when it comes to dive bombing sights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=KG76=flyus747
On 10/16/2021 at 12:44 PM, Avimimus said:

 

Honestly, I'd prefer to leave it out entirely - saves weight, saves modelling time, and makes a very very crowded little cockpit a bit less crowded.

 

I personally think it'd be great to be able to remove as much as possible from the cockpit - did the recon variants even have bomb sights? If no - can I remove all the bombsights so that I'm able to see?

 

 

 

I can definitely see the justification for more bomb options.

 

Also, wasn't the periscope used in some Arados that didn't have the fixed reward firing guns?

 

IMHO, the big piece of tech that would be exciting to get is the Bombenzielanlage/BZA... especially if we get it as an option for the Ju-88 as well. Did the Me-410 ever use them? Also, the Ju-87D3? It is a really nice piece of tech.

That's the biggest mystery of this whole thing.

 

Thats what makes the Ar234 so unique in comparison to the rest of the aircraft coming out, it requires the developers to make a lot of additional new tech just like the 262 required the devs to make jet physics in IL2.

 

If the Ar234 only had one bombsight (hypothetically) and it was the exact same variant used as the 111 and 88, I am sure the devs would include it regardless of whether or not it actually was used in combat. However that is not the case, the Lotfe variant is not C but K. t

 

There are discussions of many different types of bomb sights, and this was reflected in reality as well. I hope they'll include these new functions like rear periscopes, 2x20mm, different options for bomb sights so that the players who want to adhere to the strictest of historic configurations + those who wish to experience a fully realized version of the aircraft can BOTH be possible.

 

According to Forsyth and Beale, during testing, the veteran bomber pilots selected to test out the aircraft basically found themselves in two camps: one wanted to dive bomb, another wanted to level bomb. These two extremes reflected the lack of a unified consensus on how best to employ the Ar 234.

 

Whatever happened, the dive bomber proponents were the first to field the aircraft in its first combat use as a bomber on the Belgium town of Liege, a logistic choke point for the Allies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JG4_dingsda
On 10/17/2021 at 4:38 PM, Asgar said:

I think the 410 and 87 only ever used the StuVi when it comes to dive bombing sights.

The 410 might get the one we have in the 87 and 88 ... :ph34r:

Edited by JG4_dingsda
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2021 at 10:38 AM, Asgar said:

I think the 410 and 87 only ever used the StuVi when it comes to dive bombing sights.

 

Ah, interesting. I seem to recall the D-5 in Il-2 1946 having a bombing computer... so I looked it up - apparently the order was given to integrate BZA-2 computers into 50 aircraft during the first half of 1944, but a shortage of sights and the increasing obsolescence of the design led to it only being trialed in a few machines. Interestingly the BZA-3 was also trialed on the FW-190!

 

Note: The BZA was integrated into a StuVi.

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...