PDA

View Full Version : Plane Request Stuka Ju87 G2



BBB_Hyperion
01-05-2004, 01:23 AM
As the Ju87D5 is most likely part of the addon and the G2 was based on it is maybe only a small step to the G2. Like D3 to G1 . Would be a nice addition to the Tankbuster fans http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.luftarchiv.de/bordgerate/ju87_bk37.jpg

Regards,
Hyperion

BBB_Hyperion
01-05-2004, 01:23 AM
As the Ju87D5 is most likely part of the addon and the G2 was based on it is maybe only a small step to the G2. Like D3 to G1 . Would be a nice addition to the Tankbuster fans http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.luftarchiv.de/bordgerate/ju87_bk37.jpg

Regards,
Hyperion

Stefan-R
01-05-2004, 02:19 AM
Good idea!

*bump*

Jippo01
01-05-2004, 02:20 AM
What G2 would bring to the game?

It is G1 with long wings, nothing more.


-jippo

LeLv28 - Fighting for independency since 2002
http://www.lelv28.com

Falkster's Ju-88 fan site:
www.ju88.de.tf (http://www.ju88.de.tf)

BBB_Hyperion
01-05-2004, 05:32 AM
This leads to the question why the D5 anyway with 3 flyable Stukas already in game only cause of the 20 mm guns i doubt. So for same reason when the d5 is there only slight adoption is needed to make a G2 and maybe a little tweak to FM.

For real Tankbusting only 2 Planes are useable in FB yet thats the Il2m and the Stuka G1 . Fw 190 with mk103 isnt quite as efficient . And Panzerblitz rockets are not available yet also they were fired in salvos of 3 when i remember right thats not much tanks you can take out with it. So what speaks against a better handling G2 ?

Regards,
Hyperion

Stefan-R
01-06-2004, 04:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
This leads to the question why the D5 anyway with 3 flyable Stukas already in game only cause of the 20 mm guns i doubt. So for same reason when the d5 is there only slight adoption is needed to make a G2 and maybe a little tweak to FM.


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

D5 was not designed as a Stuka (Sturzkampfbomber = Divebomber), it was a Schlachtfugzeug for close air-support. So the tactic with the D5 is a total different. D5 doesnt climb to 3000m and dives with 70-90 degrees on the targets, it goes very low to the target and attackes with a slight dive using the StuVi (Sturzvisier).

D5 is more like a slow Fw 190 F8 or a Ju87G-1 with bombs.

BBB_Hyperion
01-06-2004, 09:01 AM
Agree to that i missused the description of Stuka in this case also the word can be easily aligned with a Ju87 and the G1 still is mainly a D3. But it is not correct as you pointed out because no dive flaps , no bombs, no Stuka.

Regards,
Hyperion

TX-Zen
01-06-2004, 10:42 AM
Considering the essence of the game is Eastern Front combat and the Stuka in all it's versions played a significant role there, I'd say it we need all versions of the Stuka in the game.

We have what, 9 versions of the IL2? But we are missing some of the more effective versions of the Stuka. We got the G1 which is fantastic, but why stop there? Throw them all in because imho they deserve to be represented.


Good topic Hype, S!

TX-Zen
Black 6
TX-Squadron CO
http://www.txsquadron.com
clyndes@hotmail.com (IM Only)
TX-OC3 Server 209.163.147.67:21000
http://www.txsquadron.com/library/20031218144359_Zensig2.jpg (http://www.txsquadron.com)

Stefan-R
01-06-2004, 11:47 AM
Maybe it is possible to make a "G-2: 2x Flak 3.7 Loadout" for the D5?

jagdmailer
01-06-2004, 12:14 PM
I will second that!

JagdMailer
Do 17 - Do 217 - He 177 research coordinator
Omega Squad

necrobaron
01-06-2004, 03:32 PM
As a Stuka fan,I support this suggestion. The G2 is essentially a "clean"* G1 with an extended wing span,so I wouldn't think the conversion would be too difficult.

*(Meaning no faired over siren mounts or gun hardpoints)

[This message was edited by necrobaron on Tue January 06 2004 at 02:45 PM.]

p1ngu666
01-06-2004, 03:37 PM
dive bombing required more training that level, thats why they went away from it
according to this stuka book im halfway thru http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

necrobaron
01-06-2004, 03:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
dive bombing required more training that level, thats why they went away from it
according to this stuka book im halfway thru http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which book?

Stefan-R
01-07-2004, 08:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
dive bombing required more training that level, thats why they went away from it
according to this stuka book im halfway thru http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thin it was mainly because the chance that a enemy fighters can see you is much smaller if you fly 50m over a forrest instead of flying at 3000m.
Flying at low level also allowes to avoid the enemy AA.
The germans prefered divebombing because it was easier to hit something, easier means faster to learn, but it could be a reason too.

Jippo01
01-07-2004, 08:56 AM
One big (probably biggest) is that it makes bomber much more difficult target to AAA and reduces time needed over target area.

Plane in 90 degree dive is easist possible target for AAA.


-jippo

LeLv28 - Fighting for independency since 2002
http://www.lelv28.com

Falkster's Ju-88 fan site:
www.ju88.de.tf (http://www.ju88.de.tf)

jagdmailer
01-07-2004, 11:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by necrobaron:
As a Stuka fan,I support this suggestion. The G2 is essentially a "clean"* G1 with an extended wing span,so I wouldn't think the conversion would be too difficult.

*(Meaning no faired over siren mounts or gun hardpoints)

[This message was edited by necrobaron on Tue January 06 2004 at 02:45 PM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I am no expert in the Stuka, but Wasn't the G-2 produced in way more numbers than the G-1 anyway ??

JagdMailer

necrobaron
01-08-2004, 01:13 AM
Yes,you are exactly right,Jadg. I don't recall the exact numbers, but considerably more G-2s were built than G-1s.

Stefan-R
01-13-2004, 02:30 PM
BTW: I hope they finally add some loadouts to the Ju87!

The D-3 should be able to carry SD 50, SD 250, SC 1000, and of course AB 250 and AB 500.

The B-2 also needs SC 1000 and SD 50.
The SD 50 should be with the famous "Dinortst√¬§be"/"Dinortspargel".

necrobaron
01-13-2004, 07:13 PM
And let's not forget the "watering cans"...http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Timochka
01-15-2004, 12:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stefan-R:

D5 was not designed as a Stuka (Sturzkampfbomber = Divebomber), it was a Schlachtfugzeug for close air-support. So the tactic with the D5 is a total different. D5 doesnt climb to 3000m and dives with 70-90 degrees on the targets, it goes very low to the target and attackes with a slight dive using the StuVi (Sturzvisier).

D5 is more like a slow Fw 190 F8 or a Ju87G-1 with bombs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Originally D5 series had divebrakes and they were pure divebombers. I have many photos from summer 1944 showing this. Stukas used in Finland flew at 4000 m altitude to target.

Stefan-R
01-16-2004, 04:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Timochka:
Originally D5 series had divebrakes and they were pure divebombers. I have many photos from summer 1944 showing this. Stukas used in Finland flew at 4000 m altitude to target.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes you are right, i just today found out that they had divebreake (for example just have a look at the dev. pictures form oleg) and if the had divebreakes they could be used as divebombers if the situation allowed it (for example less enemy fighters in the region).

But one fact is that the Sturzkampfgeschwader (StG) were renamed to Schlachtgeschwader (SG) in october 43 which showes that there task had changed.
Because there task had changed, the airplanes had to change, too. The D5 had 20mm guns which a divebomber wouldn't need and they had the StuVi wich made it easier to aim with a smaller diveangle (arround 45‚?).

But my statement was to specific.
It all depends on the situation, the Stukas in Finland which you discribed would fly at low level if they had to attack tanks or trucks, just because it is easier to find them. But if they had to attack ships they would fly at 4000m to preform a good dive.

So lets change my statement: Ju87 D5 was a divebomber but it was also designed to preform close air support tasks.

Timochka
01-17-2004, 03:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stefan-R:

Yes you are right, i just today found out that they had divebreake (for example just have a look at the dev. pictures form oleg) and if the had divebreakes they could be used as divebombers if the situation allowed it (for example less enemy fighters in the region).

But one fact is that the _Sturzkampfgeschwader (StG)_ were renamed to _Schlachtgeschwader (SG)_ in october 43 which showes that there task had changed.
Because there task had changed, the airplanes had to change, too. The D5 had 20mm guns which a divebomber wouldn't need and they had the StuVi wich made it easier to aim with a smaller diveangle (arround 45‚?).

But my statement was to specific.
It all depends on the situation, the Stukas in Finland which you discribed would fly at low level if they had to attack tanks or trucks, just because it is easier to find them. But if they had to attack ships they would fly at 4000m to preform a _good dive_.

So lets change my statement: Ju87 D5 was a divebomber but it was also designed to preform close air support tasks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

During summer 1944 in Finland, D5 stukas ONLY did divebombing. They usually (weather permitting) flew at 4000 m to avoid flak. On the return trip they formed up and used a close formation at treetop level.

Jabo attack usually followed stuka attack - they finished off targets, often using strafing runs.

D5 stuka simply was too fragile and slow to be an effective strafer - exept on a very small soft target, e.g. a convoy of a few trucks.

LW changed all tactics as situation deteriorated during late war stages. Ju-88 and -87 dive brakes were removed to increase cruising speed (less drag), diving was also done using higher speed and low angle, 30-50 degrees, (less vulnerable time over target area flak). Bombs were occationally dropped from even as high as 2500 m (FAF Ju-88 with 1000 kg bombs).

Accuracy decreased a bit, even with Stuvi, but was generally under 50 m off. (With high angle, 70-90 degrees, accuracy usually was 10-30 m.)