Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi all

-I would like to ask you a few questions about the new A6
When I choose to remove the external 20mm, what is the speed gain? (fw190 A3 / A5 has a penalty of 7-8 km / h when equipped with 4 cannons)
- Are the specifications (speed, climb rate and curve rate) for A6 with 4 cannons or just 2?

*I don't have the Battle of Normandy

Edited by 3./JG15_Kampf
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, 3./JG15_Kampf said:

Hi all

-I would like to ask you a few questions about the new A6
When I choose to remove the external 20mm, what is the speed gain? (fw190 A3 / A5 has a penalty of 7-8 km / h when equipped with 4 cannons)
- Are the specifications (speed, climb rate and curve rate) for A6 with 4 cannons or just 2?

My gues is reason why on A3 and A5 you lose speed when you putt aditional 20mm and on A6 you dont gain same diff in speed when you remove same outer 20 mm guns on wing is that on A6 wings keep wholes where guns were, as by default airplane is made for them, on A3 and A5 is adition, as by default they were without them.

 

Is that the way its ment to work or its bug i dont know, but it seams thats the reason.

 

 

Also yesterday i was checking top speed and there is little diff betwen A5 and A6 (i used default trim on both):

Spoiler

A6A5.jpg.b6d624c7a36727ef9582d4895f6a5e11.jpg

 

Edited by CountZero
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, CountZero said:

default airplane is made for them, on A3 and A5 is adition, as by default they were without them.

Standard armament for the A5 fighter was four cannons, not two. The game has it the other way around.

Edited by Jaws2002
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jaws2002 said:

Standard armament for the A5 fighter was four cannons, not two. The game has it the other way around.

It looked to me also that speeds per altitudes they listed for A5 in specs are also ones with all 4x20 in wings and not games default 2x20 version.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, CountZero said:

It looked to me also that speeds per altitudes they listed for A5 in specs are also ones with all 4x20 in wings and not games default 2x20 version.

I don't know about that. I didn't check the speeds in game for a long time, but regarding the weapons, By the time production got to A5, the four cannons armament was the standard one, unlike the older versions. 

In the vast majority of tests done with A5, they tested with four cannons. Another clue is in this second image. In the armament for the A6, they are saying that the two MG FF cannons were replaced by two MG-151. They are not saying that they added two extra cannons, going from A5 fighter to A6 fighter. 

12378_fw190_A5_speed_122_315lo.thumb.jpg.6f608f33224e411af444a878050d3422.jpg91273_FW190APerformance.jpg.39659238f3b66401df75279456d108b0.jpg

Edited by Jaws2002
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting to see that the A6 was generally slower than the A5. Wonder whether that was due to the added drag from the cannons or the weight.

 

My first guess would be drag because weight only marginally affects top speed but then again, a 4kph loss is marginal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, =VARP=Tvrdi said:

Yeah, A6 has nothing to be excited about, compared to A5. With that said, A5 is one of my favourites in the sim and A6 is very simmilar.

 

I think the main things that set the A6 apart from A5 is ability to carry three larger bombs instead of only one large and 4 small. Also, MG151s in outer wing instead of FF provides higher fire rate and more velocity for projectile.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, =VARP=Tvrdi said:

Yeah, A6 has nothing to be excited about, compared to A5. With that said, A5 is one of my favourites in the sim and A6 is very simmilar.

They have to keep 5v5 balance so we are wasting airplane slots on copy paste airplanes like G6 and A6 insted having more Allied airplane types to represent history. 

Edited by CountZero
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CountZero said:

They have to keep 5v5 balance so we are wasting airplane slots on copy paste airplanes like G6 and A6 insted having more Allied airplane types to represent history. 

We have to remember that not everyone is buying every module like you or I might do. Normandy may be their only purchase so the G-6 Late and 190 A6 would be their first and only German fighter aircraft. Let's also remember that the 109 and 190 were the Luftwaffe staple fighters, so of course we are going to see some planes with minimal changes to them, I wouldn't necessarily call them "copy paste" nor say that they are "wasting airplane slots". What would we rather have seen when it comes to German fighter aircraft during this time period? If they were replaced with Allied planes, there would be uproar.

Edited by =AW=Q_Walker
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CountZero said:

They have to keep 5v5 balance so we are wasting airplane slots on copy paste airplanes like G6 and A6 insted having more Allied airplane types to represent history. 

 

The A6 is what Priller flew over the beaches of Normandy.  Seems to me it belongs.  109 G6 Late is one of the most heavily produced 109s of the war.  Seems to me it belongs too.

 

Honest question: what would you have substituted?

Edited by PatrickAWlson
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Honest question: what would you have substituted?

 

I'm just going to intrude on this question out of boredom.

 

If we're talking fantasy wishes more than practical wants, I'd rather have the Me-163 instead of the A6. I'd also rather have the He-177 or the Do-217 (any version with the smooth, stepless canopy) instead of the Ju-88 we're getting (edit: I know the Ju-88 isn't a bomber version; that doesn't change my replacement wish).

 

Since I have a soft spot for 109s, I don't mind getting another one. But another Fw-190 with the light machine guns and slightly different cannon/bomb selection does leave me cold. Of course it's historically logical to include the A6, but that doesn't make it any more exciting.

Edited by oc2209
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

I'm just going to intrude on this question out of boredom.

 

If we're talking fantasy wishes more than practical wants, I'd rather have the Me-163 instead of the A6. I'd also rather have the He-177 or the Do-217 (any version with the smooth, stepless canopy) instead of the Ju-88 we're getting (edit: I know the Ju-88 isn't a bomber version; that doesn't change my replacement wish).

 

Since I have a soft spot for 109s, I don't mind getting another one. But another Fw-190 with the light machine guns and slightly different cannon/bomb selection does leave me cold. Of course it's historically logical to include the A6, but that doesn't make it any more exciting.

 

I'm an FW190 fan myself, so being able to fly through the progression in a career is nice for me.  Transitioning straight from A5 to A8 would have been fine but even better if I get another intermediary. 

 

I feel the same way about the 109 as you do about the 190.  Will probably never fly it, but it's there for 109 fans.  Mustang fans will get both the B and D.  P47 fans have two.  Spitfire fans will have the V, IX, and XIV.  Etc.  I don't think that these progressions are a waste at all.

 

Big on my list of not done planes is the Ju87B, but that has nothing to do with Normandy.  Honestly not sure that the He-177, Do-217, or Me-163 would fir the title either. 

 

The 163 would really not fit the game at all.  Take off!  Where are they?  Crap!  5K meters beneath me.  After them.  Crap!  Out of fuel.  :) 

 

Anyhow, I always like alternatives to complaints.  Much more useful, so thanks for chiming in.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I don't think that these progressions are a waste at all.

 

Big on my list of not done planes is the Ju87B, but that has nothing to do with Normandy.  Honestly not sure that the He-177, Do-217, or Me-163 would fir the title either. 

 

The 163 would really not fit the game at all.  Take off!  Where are they?  Crap!  5K meters beneath me.  After them.  Crap!  Out of fuel.  :)

 

No, incremental versions of planes aren't a waste. While they're not as sexy as the rarer planes, they're nevertheless necessary as a comprehensive framework.

 

The general rule of the releases so far is that frontline, somewhat commonplace aircraft are chosen for the standard lineup for each package, while more exotic, rare choices are left to collector's planes. Exceptions to this rule, of course, would be planes like the 109G-6, La-5 series, Yak-1B, and Yak-9. So there are plenty of exceptions.

 

Anyway, my point is that something like the Me-163 would definitely belong more as a collector's plane. But I do think it'd be a very interesting addition to the game. The very premise of it is alien to anything we're used to, so the novelty alone would be worth the price. Also, it was a brilliant glider. Gliding can be fun. The actual combat part would be arguably the least appealing aspect of the plane.

 

I mentioned the He-177 because it did attack England during '44, so having an English map at last would allow it to do so. Also, I just think it's a very interesting looking plane. Forget, you know, that it was a technical nightmare and operational failure. Again, maybe it also belongs more as a collector plane.

 

The Do-217 would just be more interesting to me than the Ju-88 because the cockpit redesign sets it apart from other German bombers, and because we lack any Dornier designs so far.

 

*edit: just did some lazy Wikipedia research to confirm the Do-217 was, in fact, used against the Normandy invasion. So that means all of my suggestions fit within the early-mid '44 Normandy timeframe.

 

It also turns out that the He-177, when it didn't burn out its own engines, had a much better survivability rate than any other German bomber during the Baby Blitz:

 

"While Steinbock was unsuccessful, the He 177 did achieve some successes. During Steinbock crews typically carried two 1,800 kg and two 1,000 kg bombs. Climbing to 7,000 m while still over German territory, the He 177s approached the target in a shallow dive, both engines throttled back, the pilot putting his aircraft into a gliding descent to take it across the bomb release-point at about 4,500 m. After releasing the bombs the pilot re-opened the throttles, but continued the descent at approximately 200 m per minute. The bombers typically re-entered German airspace at an altitude of 750 m, and headed back to base. By such means, the He 177s were able to keep up speeds of about 600 to 700 km/h during their withdrawal phase. The higher speed and constant change of altitude made interceptions difficult, increasing the survivability of the aircraft, but decreased bombing accuracy and concentration. With an average loss rate of 60% for bomber aircraft types used in Operation Steinbock, the He 177's loss rate below 10% made it the most survivable bomber in the campaign."

Edited by oc2209
Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about planes like the He 177 and Do 217 is the amount of time it would take to model them, since they would be brand new planes not based on earlier work. There's a certain group of people here who will reply to that with "But just model the pilot's position to save time!" And that's largely a moot point, since it's still going to take a lot of time to model even just the pilot's cabin. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I would love to have the He 177, but that is one crazy complex interior to model, even just for the pilot's cabin. It's just that modeling something like that likely means other things are going to go by the wayside at least for a while. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

Don't get me wrong, I would love to have the He 177, but that is one crazy complex interior to model, even just for the pilot's cabin. It's just that modeling something like that likely means other things are going to go by the wayside at least for a while. 

 I know it's a fantasy. I'll keep it reserved for my imaginary schedule of future collector planes, somewhere after the last Eastern Front module and before the Pearl Harbor module, circa 2024.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you would replace the 88 C6, then I would anyhow suggest to do it with the Ju 188. It is in some parts the same aircraft as the Ju 88, which would make it much easier to develop. But, as Luke said, there still would be the cockpit to model.

About the Me 163, it simply doesn't fit in any way into the game. It was even more than the Me 262 a high altitude heavy strategic bomber interceptor.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2021 at 1:52 AM, 3./JG15_Kampf said:

Hi all

-I would like to ask you a few questions about the new A6
When I choose to remove the external 20mm, what is the speed gain? (fw190 A3 / A5 has a penalty of 7-8 km / h when equipped with 4 cannons)
- Are the specifications (speed, climb rate and curve rate) for A6 with 4 cannons or just 2?

*I don't have the Battle of Normandy

Very good Question!

II like to fly the A3, A5, A6 without wing cannons because the machines are much more agile. The option can also be selected on the A6, but unfortunately you don't notice anything from the 2x20 / 151 that have been removed. The machine is then also very sluggish and suddenly tends to tip over to one side. The A5 is still very comfortable in the curves compared to the A6. The basic weight of the A6 has increased by 200kg + compared to the A5. So if you can expand the wing armament you should also notice that in the agility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference in agility between the A5 and A6 with removed wing guns might have to do with the modified wing constriction of the A6, which was neccessary for fitting of the Mg151/20 and later 30mm guns in or under the wing. The wings were stiffened for the additional weight and the larger recoil of the new guns. This means additional weight of the wing itself and maybe also a different responsiveness to maneuvers.

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

I still would like an early war collector plane set to flesh out the Moscow map a bit more...

 

I-153

Hs 123

Curtiss Hawk 81 or LaGG 3 series 4

Ju 87B

 

I like those.  With a a Moscow map I have been wanting a Ju87B for awhile.  For me the B is the iconic Stuka. 

I-153 vs Hs 123 on a dogfight server.  That would be fun.  Toss in the I-16 and do the Spanish civil war.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The A-6 is much more versatile than the A-5, it is without a doubt an upgrade, just like it was in real life.

 

It is the very best all-around, most versatile aircraft in the 1943 plane set. 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, =AW=Q_Walker said:

We have to remember that not everyone is buying every module like you or I might do. Normandy may be their only purchase so the G-6 Late and 190 A6 would be their first and only German fighter aircraft. Let's also remember that the 109 and 190 were the Luftwaffe staple fighters, so of course we are going to see some planes with minimal changes to them, I wouldn't necessarily call them "copy paste" nor say that they are "wasting airplane slots". What would we rather have seen when it comes to German fighter aircraft during this time period? If they were replaced with Allied planes, there would be uproar.

 

By the time BoN is out you can get other dlcs for 75% off, It would be better to have earlyer SPit9, P-38, or even A20G or Beaufighter insted forcing onother 109/190 combo just to have balance 5v5. With G6, G14 A5 A8 you dont need G6L and A6.  

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

They aren't forcing another 190/109 combo, they fit perfectly within the Normandy time period. I still am unsure how people would react if the 5 Allied and 5 Axis planes changed to either more on the Axis side or more on the Allied side. I can't see a scanario where people don't find issue with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, =AW=Q_Walker said:

They aren't forcing another 190/109 combo, they fit perfectly within the Normandy time period. I still am unsure how people would react if the 5 Allied and 5 Axis planes changed to either more on the Axis side or more on the Allied side. I can't see a scanario where people don't find issue with that.

 

Flying Circus Vol.2 is going to lean Entente. Three French, Three Brits, Four Germans. I feel they definitely could've done that for Normandy and given the Americans a twin-engined plane to match the Mosquito and Me-410, but what's announced is announced

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, =AW=Q_Walker said:

They aren't forcing another 190/109 combo, they fit perfectly within the Normandy time period. I still am unsure how people would react if the 5 Allied and 5 Axis planes changed to either more on the Axis side or more on the Allied side. I can't see a scanario where people don't find issue with that.

 

That formula is going to have to bend at some point - it’s not endlessly sustainable for a few reasons.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Allies need a flyable medium bomber, desperately.  B 25 or B 26, I don't care which one at this point, pick one and run with it.

 

Also the A20G with the solid nose would be a perfect fit for Normandy and Bodenplatte.  Bring it.

 

All of the above aircraft would also work in any future Pacific scenario.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, =621=Samikatz said:

 

 I feel they definitely could've done that for Normandy and given the Americans a twin-engined plane to match the Mosquito and Me-410, but what's announced is announced

 

We will have an American Twin avaliable, the P-38J.

 

The P-38J was used over Normandy, so it will round it out. As someone else here corrected me, the earlier J-15 and J-10 versions were used, but the J-25 was pretty similar

Edited by NightFighter
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CountZero said:

By the time BoN is out you can get other dlcs for 75% off, It would be better to have earlyer SPit9, P-38, or even A20G or Beaufighter insted forcing onother 109/190 combo just to have balance 5v5. With G6, G14 A5 A8 you dont need G6L and A6.  

 

There's more to it than "balance". The A-6 and G-6 Late are low-hanging fruit in terms of development difficulty because they're very similar to earlier work. Creating new aircraft like the Beaufighter or A-20G instead would probably require sacrifices elsewhere.

 

Although we could make do with only the A-5, A-8, and G-6 (early), it would leave a big gap in 109 and 190 development. By the same logic, we could say that we "don't need" another Spitfire IX or P-38.

 

When modeling the Luftwaffe, we don't have the luxury of multiple single-seat fighter lines to choose from. If the series continues in Europe, I suspect that we'll see more 109 G and 190 A variants.

Edited by Mitthrawnuruodo
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

 

Flying Circus Vol.2 is going to lean Entente. Three French, Three Brits, Four Germans. I feel they definitely could've done that for Normandy and given the Americans a twin-engined plane to match the Mosquito and Me-410, but what's announced is announced

 

The Mossie and 410 are twin engine but they are also two place machines.  The American mediums are 6 crewmen.  The co pilot just sits there and nods every so often but the rest are gun positions, including two turrets.  

 

I get what they are doing.  Being realistic they cannot cost effectively give you 10 completely new and different airplanes.  For me, from a wish list PoV, I could completely do without the Ju88C and replace it with flyable American medium.  But I also understand that the Ju88C for a flyable B25 or B26 is not equivalent tradeoff.  And you can't really argue too much because the Ju88C really was there (until they got slaughtered and then they weren't there anymore).

 

Anyhow, what I do not know is the return on investment on a presumably very expensive investment like a flyable B25 or B26.  I don't buy any argument that making them flyable is easy because if it was it would have been done long ago.  However, there is a demand for them.  Hoping they make one relatively soon and the ROI is such that it motivates them to make another.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

The A6 is what Priller flew over the beaches of Normandy.  Seems to me it belongs.  109 G6 Late is one of the most heavily produced 109s of the war.  Seems to me it belongs too.

 

Honest question: what would you have substituted?

@PatrickAWlson See that's what I have heard too but according to JG 26 Luftwaffe Fighter Wing War Diary, Stab./JG 26 and I./JG 26 were equipped almost entirely with Fw 190A-8 (pg 265).  JG 26 Top Guns of the Luftwaffe (pg. 232)have the Fw 190A-8 and a fewer Fw 190A-7s on hand.  Also, Michael Holm https://www.ww2.dk/ had the Stab./ JG 26 inventory at 1 Fw 190A-7 and 1 Fw 190A-8 but neither serviceable. Now Stab./JG 26 and I./JG26 were stationed at Poix-du-Nord with 25 A-8s and 7 A-7s on hand and zero A-6's. Unless someone else has contradicting information, Pips, his wingman and the rest of JG 26 were flying either the Fw 190A-8 or the A-7 on June 6th 1944.

 

The Fw 190A-6 was being phased out in April.

Edited by JG7_X-Man
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

 

That formula is going to have to bend at some point - it’s not endlessly sustainable for a few reasons.

I do agree with you, I was more talking to the fact of Normandy still being able to have a 5/5 split. I definitely see it becoming more difficult to have a balanced split after this module.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 Pips, his wingman and the rest of JG 26 were flying either the Fw 190A-8 or the A-7 on June 6th 1944.

 

That is what I understood as well. He used either an A7 or A8 machine on 6th of june. Nevertheless, since we already have the A8 with BoBP, I am more than happy we got the A6 with BoN, because it was still quite common in the 1st half of 1944.

 

image.png.99380db279f2ac46a3d2ff5d5580d7eb.pngimage.png.f9094bffe2e4dff373da188b9ff7dd3d.png

 

In reality though, we all know it, he used a Bf-108 😉

 

image.png.e4d503c271a5ae4316c04715214a0ea6.png

Edited by sevenless
  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NightFighter said:

 

As a P-38 aficionado, I would love to believe that the P-38 is much better than the Mosquito and the Me-410, as it could carry almost twice the bombload, was around 40mph faster

 

You might want to do a bit more research on the Mossie.

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...