PDA

View Full Version : The Luft 46 Premise



darkhorizon11
06-20-2004, 06:11 PM
Hey though I'd put in my support for the uber American, British, Russian, and German planes that never made it in a war that unfortunately ended too late for 50 million people but soon enough for many more to live.
This post is gonna be bombarded by BoB babies but thats okay we'll just ignore them. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

I was hoping the could come up with a patch that would quench our thirst for more Luft 46 planes. An add-on iisss a little much I'll admit that but just another 10 or so planes would definetly float my boat. I was even thinking some new maps of NYC, Chicago, LA, Boston, Toronto or something. It would really put a new twist to the war and as an American it would be cool to fly these beautiful warbirds over some familiar landmarks.
It would def. be good stuff but I'll admit anything beyond 47 is wayyy too much. Anyone that as asks for a F-86 or a Mig 15 is gettin' slapped!
Lend your support!

Some ideas for flyables and nons are:

Do335
Ar234
G. Meteor
Shinden
Ju287
Manta Fighter
XTB3F-1

[This message was edited by darkhorizon11 on Sun June 20 2004 at 05:20 PM.]

darkhorizon11
06-20-2004, 06:11 PM
Hey though I'd put in my support for the uber American, British, Russian, and German planes that never made it in a war that unfortunately ended too late for 50 million people but soon enough for many more to live.
This post is gonna be bombarded by BoB babies but thats okay we'll just ignore them. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

I was hoping the could come up with a patch that would quench our thirst for more Luft 46 planes. An add-on iisss a little much I'll admit that but just another 10 or so planes would definetly float my boat. I was even thinking some new maps of NYC, Chicago, LA, Boston, Toronto or something. It would really put a new twist to the war and as an American it would be cool to fly these beautiful warbirds over some familiar landmarks.
It would def. be good stuff but I'll admit anything beyond 47 is wayyy too much. Anyone that as asks for a F-86 or a Mig 15 is gettin' slapped!
Lend your support!

Some ideas for flyables and nons are:

Do335
Ar234
G. Meteor
Shinden
Ju287
Manta Fighter
XTB3F-1

[This message was edited by darkhorizon11 on Sun June 20 2004 at 05:20 PM.]

BlitzPig_DDT
06-20-2004, 06:16 PM
One word. Bearcat. All else is meat on the table. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/784.gif

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif

CV8_Dudeness
06-20-2004, 10:07 PM
maaan . . .

with only the P-80 for the allieds id LOVE to see the MiG-9 in FB

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8030/mig9_1.jpg

DONB3397
06-20-2004, 10:30 PM
People fly this sim for different reasons. A few seem to be interested in "what if" scenarios. Would the war have ended differently if...? What would the dogfights have looked like if the ceilings and speed and maneuverability had been different, e.g. uber a/c?

Given unlimited development time and resources, why not? Let the users choose.

But resources and time are (always) limited. For many people, a WWII sim is about history, playing out reconstructed events and times, recreating battles. FB/AEP provides the best framework for that to date. But there are holes. If there are additional models to be built and programmed, they think these should include missing aircraft that affected the conduct and outcome of the air war -- Mosquito, Tempest, Lancaster, Beaufighter, Liberator, etc.

I guess I'm one of those guys.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v243/DONB3397/SpitSig01b.jpg
"And now I see with eye serene/The very pulse of the machine;
A being breathing thoughtful breath,/A Traveller between life and death." -- Wordsworth

Mitlov47
06-20-2004, 10:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DONB3397:
If there are additional models to be built and programmed, they think these should include missing aircraft that affected the conduct and outcome of the air war -- Mosquito, Tempest, Lancaster, Beaufighter, Liberator, etc.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amen.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/387_1087594628_110sigj3.jpg

darkhorizon11
06-21-2004, 01:25 PM
Oh I agree. I'm not saying everything else should be overlooked. It would still be cool to have those planes and maybe an San Francisco or canadian map though.

Mitlov47
06-21-2004, 01:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
Oh I agree. I'm not saying everything else should be overlooked. It would still be cool to have those planes and maybe an San Francisco or canadian map though.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That might be cool, but I'd rather have some North African, Italian, Mediterranean, and British maps first. Places where the war DID take place http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/387_1087594628_110sigj3.jpg

enraged_chimp
06-21-2004, 02:56 PM
yeah i have to say i am a "what if" person it has fasinated me ever since i read 'fatherland' and then 'archangel' (by robert harris i think). after reading the box of the Arado E(for entwurf = design) 555 by Revell (which didnt include figures btw grrr) i reckon a boming raid from norway to greenland to newyork in a Ho-IX or E555 would be excellent duking it out with corsairs and other insanely powerfull piston fighters from american supercarriers or alternatively anti convoy strikes or dogfighting german carrier fighters from the graff zepplin (is that what it was called?) in my sea vixen or sea fury how cool would that be or and i just saw a programme on this kelly johnsons lockheed l-101(or something like that you might notce im rubbish at aircraft designations!) dogfighting late model 262's/ pulsejet salamanders or even treibflugelen!
perhaps an easier option would be a ramjet b-1(the russian rocket plane in FB btw the ramjet version was built with twin wingtip ramjets)
oh and btw i dont think there could have been a mig-15 or at least it wouldnt be as we know it as it was supposedly built on captured ta154 (the jet one anyway) documents in the russian eqivelent of 'paperclip'.

i can but dream

edit: just thought about Pacific Fighters they should have those submarine launched bombers
and Anti Submarine autogyros the japs had and a home islands invasion map with kika's & shuswis(spelt right?) etall (jap jet and rocket fighters and bombers) you could even have that huge 6 engined jap stratigic bomber to chemical weapon bomb san francisco i also like flying boats a lot and i reckon it woudbe great to have battles between sunderlands and are they called mars or marlins or something? versus that huge german flying boat and the big jap one would be class kind of like 17 th century firing broadsides from galleons and frigates anyway thats my vision of what it should be like it kind of merges reality and not i have held back a little i mean id have had philadelphia experiment cloaking devices and flying saucers with russian mammoth(from red alert) tanks duking it out with Maus and M6's but i doubt any one but me would buy it! be great fun tho

[This message was edited by enraged_chimp on Mon June 21 2004 at 02:19 PM.]

ASM 1
06-21-2004, 03:03 PM
I would be more than happy with a DO-335 as it seems more realistic than any other planes touted for a '45/'46 scenario.

S!

Andrew

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/asm016/WW2%20Stuff/Sig_Pic.jpg

Vladimir_No2
06-21-2004, 03:43 PM
How about a Pe2, or [gasp] a Ju-88? How about making some of these common aircraft that actually fought in the war and made history flyable before we move on to "what ifs." Il-2 is a WWII flightsim, and WWII aircraft should be more of a priority than "fantasy" luft '46 stuff that never went beyond the drawing board or prototype. I have no problem with these fantasy aircraft, I just feel that they should not be the first priortity for Il-2. I hope they can eventually be in the game, but lets see some real combatants first.

http://ww1.m78.com/photo-2/scharnhorst.jpg
"Engage the enemy more closely" -Rear Admiral Cradock

Chuck_Older
06-21-2004, 03:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darkhorizon11:

This post is gonna be bombarded by BoB babies but thats okay we'll just ignore them. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So which sim are you complaining about? FB, or BoB, which doesn't even exist outside of development?


~edit-

I read this again, and it seems mean, so I will clarify-

In BoB...why are we worried about 1947 just yet? Let's take care of 1940...you know, the year of the...well you know

In FB, we have the Go229 and the Bf109Z, and the YP-80...so, you already have a pretty fair start to Luft '46

Personally I think it's silly to worry about post-WWII planes when the Tiffie isn't in FB yet


*****************************
The hillsides ring with, "Free the People",
Or can I hear the echoes from the days of '39?
~ Clash

[This message was edited by Chuck_Older on Mon June 21 2004 at 03:28 PM.]

jensenpark
06-21-2004, 04:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
One word. Bearcat. All else is meat on the table. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/784.gif

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Make that two words:
SeaFury (and then)
Bearcat!

http://www.corsair-web.com/thistler/rtfoxint.jpg
Buzz Beurling flying his last sortie over Malta, Oct.24, 1942

Yellonet
06-21-2004, 04:48 PM
*EDIT*

Made my post a new topic.


- Yellonet

ASH at S-MART
06-21-2004, 04:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
I was hoping the could come up with a patch that would quench our thirst for more Luft 46 planes.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Our Thirst? Enh.. I think the game has plenty of what if planes now.. But I wouldnt scoff at one if they added it.. I just think there are more important things to be done.. Put another way, adding more 46 stuff would be very low on my list of things important to do!

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

Philipscdrw
06-21-2004, 05:15 PM
I love what-if scenarios, but this thread is moot. The modellers will make what the modellers want to make, not what we petition for here. I don't think that any of Oleg's crew will be making more aircraft for FB/AEP, other than working in 3rd party models, because they're working on PF and BoB.

I would like to see what-if scenarios, like the war starting in 1945 as Hilter told Goering to expect, or continuing US vs USSR into 1947. But I agree with everyone who stated that Liberators, Mosquito's, Pe-2s, ect which actually flew deserve the highest priority.

PhilipsCDRw

"Nietzsche is dead." - God.

View Cpt. Eric Brown's review of FB here (http://www.aerosociety.com/raes/news/SimReview.pdf) and discuss it here. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=309109534&r=875101634#875101634)

darkhorizon11
06-21-2004, 08:19 PM
"Our Thirst? Enh.. I think the game has plenty of what if planes now.. But I wouldnt scoff at one if they added it.. I just think there are more important things to be done.. Put another way, adding more 46 stuff would be very low on my list of things important to do!"

Haha well thats ur opinion. Then again I can't argue with Bruce Campbell! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/34.gif



"So which sim are you complaining about? FB, or BoB, which doesn't even exist outside of development?


~edit-

I read this again, and it seems mean, so I will clarify-

In BoB...why are we worried about 1947 just yet? Let's take care of 1940...you know, the year of the...well you know

In FB, we have the Go229 and the Bf109Z, and the YP-80...so, you already have a pretty fair start to Luft '46

Personally I think it's silly to worry about post-WWII planes when the Tiffie isn't in FB yet"

Yeah but thats just my point I think that BoB is just focusing on the earlier stages of the war anyways, or at least the Western Front. I never really expected there to be much Luft 46 stuff in BoB anyways. I was only teasing and pointing out that most people who are negative about the topic are more into BoB since it focuses on the earlier stages of the conflict when even the 262 was just a drawing on paper.

ASH at S-MART
06-21-2004, 09:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
Haha well thats ur opinion.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Actually my opinion of your opinion! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
Then again I can't argue with Bruce Campbell!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>GROOOVY! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

SUPERAEREO
06-22-2004, 02:57 AM
Most of the so-called "Luft '46" planes only existed in the form of general arrangement projects: they were never built as prototypes, the engines that should have propelled them existed only on paper, their weights, wing profile and speed can only be made up by approximation.

In other words they are little more than figments of the designers' imagination, yet people keep talking of them as if they had been real.

They were not real, they never existed.

By the same token I could make a 3-view drawing of an imaginary plane and ask for it to be included in FB, but I stopped making drawings of imaginary planes around the age of seven or eight.

Please understand that with very few exceptions Luft '46 planes were only wishful thinking, and many of them would not even had been able to fly if they had been built.

They give us an interesting and often unique insight into the minds of German aeronautical designers, but nothing more than that.

If those projects had really been all some people purport them to be, don't you think that Russians and Americans would have rushed to build them following the blueprints they had captured?

They didn't, did they? Ask yourself why: you will come up with the conclusion that it was becase most projects, although incorporating innovative concepts, were totally unfeasible.

If we are talking fantasy planes we might as well play Crimson Skies...

S!



"The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down." - Chuck Yaeger

"Ja, Hunde, wollt ihr denn ewig leben?" - Friedrich der Große

"Timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes" - *neid

Indianer.
06-22-2004, 03:00 AM
CFS3

http://www.fighter-collection.com/film/img/dark_blue_world.jpg

"Wer auf die preussische Fahne schwort, hat nichts mehr, was ihm selber gehort"

Fritzofn
06-22-2004, 05:59 AM
hmmm, i thought the russians actually designed SOMETHING of theire own....but it seems that they are masters of copying...

MIG 9 look's ALOT like the Fock-Wulf TA 183 designe 3 --&gt; <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-ii.html </pre>

and the Mig 15 look's to be a replica of the Fock-Wulf TA 183 designe 2 <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html </pre>

SUPERAEREO
06-22-2004, 06:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Indianer.:
CFS3
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Or CFS3, exactly... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

S!



"The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down." - Chuck Yaeger

"Ja, Hunde, wollt ihr denn ewig leben?" - Friedrich der Große

"Timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes" - *neid

SUPERAEREO
06-22-2004, 06:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fritzofn:
hmmm, i thought the russians actually designed SOMETHING of theire own....but it seems that they are masters of copying...

MIG 9 look's ALOT like the Fock-Wulf TA 183 designe 3 --&gt; <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-ii.html </pre>

and the Mig 15 look's to be a replica of the Fock-Wulf TA 183 designe 2 <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html </pre><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And what's the F-86 Sabre a copy of? And the F-84 Thunderstreak?

Come on, Fritzofn: some design ideas were certainly taken from German projects, but there's no way Migs were plain copies of FW designs.

If you want to see a post-war Kurt Tank design look at the Argentinian Pulque II.

Even the Italian Aerfer Sagittario looks a bit like a German project, but certainly Italy didn't get any secret German projects...

S!



"The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down." - Chuck Yaeger

"Ja, Hunde, wollt ihr denn ewig leben?" - Friedrich der Große

"Timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes" - *neid

Magister__Ludi
06-22-2004, 04:19 PM
Some of the Luft'46 planes flew, at least in similar configuration. They maybe aren't 100% similar with the planes that flew, but this happened because the requirements evolved a lot in 5 years, also because Luft'46 designs were the simplest solutions to fit a jet engine into an airframe (they had to develop them in a very short time). That doesn't mean that they would not fly well, for example the stepped design has big advantages in terms of balancing but looses a lot in speed. This is why first generation of jets dropped the stepped fighters even though they handled better.

Examples of well known Luft'46 projects that flew: Me P.1101 and Ju-287. Both show good flying characteristics, but were too slow by the time they were completed (just before 1950), so they were declared obsolete and finished their useful life as platform for various (and sometimes bizarre) aerodynamic experiments.

Those two can be made for AEP. Also piston engine Komet could be interesting or other piston engine or turboprop long range planes projected for '46. Since those unconventional were actually tried in one form or another and had no handling vices, and those conventional aren't likely to have developed such vices, I see no problem in estimating a FM for those planes.

Me P.1101 disguised as NACA's X-5
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-5/Small/E-648.jpg

Ju-287
http://prototypes.free.fr/ju287/images/ef140_02.jpg

http://prototypes.free.fr/ju287/images/ef131_01.jpg

http://prototypes.free.fr/ju287/images/ef131_03.jpg

[This message was edited by Magister__Ludi on Tue June 22 2004 at 03:28 PM.]

ASH at S-MART
06-22-2004, 04:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fritzofn:
hmmm, i thought the russians actually designed SOMETHING of theire own....but it seems that they are masters of copying...

MIG 9 look's ALOT like the Fock-Wulf TA 183 designe 3 --&gt; <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-ii.html </pre>

and the Mig 15 look's to be a replica of the Fock-Wulf TA 183 designe 2 <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html </pre><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes.. and an apple looks alot like an orange

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

Magister__Ludi
06-22-2004, 04:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASH_SMART:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fritzofn:
hmmm, i thought the russians actually designed SOMETHING of theire own....but it seems that they are masters of copying...

MIG 9 look's ALOT like the Fock-Wulf TA 183 designe 3 --&gt; <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-ii.html </pre>

and the Mig 15 look's to be a replica of the Fock-Wulf TA 183 designe 2 <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html </pre><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes.. and an apple looks alot like an orange

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


That USA and USSR used the German knowhow for its first generation of jets is an undeniable fact. Only a lunatic can deny this.

North American engineers made special efforts to come into possesion of the microfilms recovered from Germany's research centers. On those microfilms there were 5 years of aerodynamic experiments at high Mach speeds and even supersonic speeds. Remember, Germany was the only country in the world that had supersonic wind tunnel during ww2. USA got one in '46! therefore there were no such experiments until then. Even NACA had only a few papers on transonic and supersonic speed range beginning with '45, but they were only side comments on German experiments.

There is no doubt that Germany was leading the research in high speed aerodynamics at that time. All victor countries benefit (or at least tried) from German experience. This influx of German knowhow was so profound that completely changed the major aeronautic programmes in USA, USSR, France and to a smaller degree in UK (they still thought that Spit outrolls anything, 'hard to change their mindshttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif).

ASH at S-MART
06-22-2004, 04:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
That USA and USSR used the German knowhow for its first generation of jets is an undeniable fact. Only a lunatic can deny this.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Really? So how did that P-80 happen? ROTFL!

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

Baltar
06-22-2004, 05:17 PM
Since we already have some Luft '46 stuff, I'd actually kinda like to see the Flying Flapjack and Twin Mustang...

darkhorizon11
06-22-2004, 06:12 PM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/353.gif

Okay SuperAereo, Majistar, sorry guys but keep this about planes that could be put in the game.
I don't want to create a dispute about the origins of modern aircraft. Yes many can trace there roots to WW2 Germany. But WW2 German jet technology can trace its roots to Coanda, Whittle, and Goddard. So were all even.

Anyways I push for at least all the super planes that saw action in the war. The Meteor, Blitz, Do-335 (well it was like a month away) as a minimum. Many argue that there are many prop planes that saw combat and aren't in the game which they are right. But although limited, those planes did see some combat so somebody has to argue for them too.
Yes I agree a twin Mustang would be awesome!!!!
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Magister__Ludi
06-22-2004, 07:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASH_SMART:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
That USA and USSR used the German knowhow for its first generation of jets is an undeniable fact. Only a lunatic can deny this.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Really? So how did that P-80 happen? ROTFL!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

P-80 had a conventional configuration, obsolete by the time it entered in service (summer of '46). And please Tagert before saying again that P-80 flew operationaly in '45, I have to tell you again that P-80 status was in operational TRIALS until summer of '46, when the test unit was disbanded.

And one more thing. The engine mounted on P-80A remained very unreliable throughout their entire initial series (-9 trough -17, -9 series were really miserable), consequently P-80A gathered very little flight hours. Only after the Korean war, when war surplus engines from P-80C were becoming available, P-80A retrofitted with engines from P-80C (-23/35 series) were returned to serviceable status again.

Magister__Ludi
06-22-2004, 07:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/353.gif

Okay SuperAereo, Majistar, sorry guys but keep this about planes that could be put in the game.
I don't want to create a dispute about the origins of modern aircraft. Yes many can trace there roots to WW2 Germany. But WW2 German jet technology can trace its roots to Coanda, Whittle, and Goddard. So were all even.

Anyways I push for at least all the super planes that saw action in the war. The Meteor, Blitz, Do-335 (well it was like a month away) as a minimum. Many argue that there are many prop planes that saw combat and aren't in the game which they are right. But although limited, those planes did see some combat so somebody has to argue for them too.
Yes I agree a twin Mustang would be awesome!!!!
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


In fact I would love to see a P-51H or a twin Mustang in this game (if 3rd party modellers have enough time).

ASH at S-MART
06-22-2004, 07:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
P-80 had a conventional configuration, obsolete by the time it entered in service (summer of '46)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Conventional? Obsolete? ROTFL! Well if that doesnt indicate where your comming from... Nice try but no sale! NEXT!

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

darkhorizon11
06-22-2004, 09:06 PM
Didn't the Twin Mustang see combat in Korea?

WUAF_Badsight
06-22-2004, 10:32 PM
hey ASH .... i know you , & you know me

on this subject magister ludi is quite correct

the captured german technology greatly benefitted the Russians British & Americans . . . . . . the Germans at WW2s end had the leading research done up to that point in time

as for Magisters comments on the P-80 , they are also true

the P-80 in FB aint true to RL dude . . . .

.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
actual UBI post :
"If their is a good server with wonder woman views but historic planesets...let me know!"
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

ASH at S-MART
06-22-2004, 11:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
hey ASH .... i know you , & you know me

on this subject magister ludi is quite correct<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So when Ludi said

"That USA and USSR used the German knowhow for its first generation of jets is an undeniable fact."

He does not consider the P-80 a first generation jet? Or that the USA had a time machine and in 1943 jumped to 1946 to look at the captured German data to develope the P-80? Or... what? In that I dont think either is anywhere near the truth.. But hey Badsight.. you claim I know you.. And your right.. So why am I wasting my time trying to explain this? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

[This message was edited by ASH_SMART on Tue June 22 2004 at 10:14 PM.]

SUPERAEREO
06-23-2004, 05:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/353.gif

Okay SuperAereo, Majistar, sorry guys but keep this about planes that could be put in the game.
I don't want to create a dispute about the origins of modern aircraft. Yes many can trace there roots to WW2 Germany. But WW2 German jet technology can trace its roots to Coanda, Whittle, and Goddard. So were all even.

Anyways I push for at least all the super planes that saw action in the war. The Meteor, Blitz, Do-335 (well it was like a month away) as a minimum. Many argue that there are many prop planes that saw combat and aren't in the game which they are right. But although limited, those planes did see some combat so somebody has to argue for them too.
Yes I agree a twin Mustang would be awesome!!!!
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would have no problems with a Meteor or a Do.335, it's the things that never flew I have an issue with (Bf.109 Z in the FB configuration, for example, I can EVEN put up with the Ho.229... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).

S!



"The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down." - Chuck Yaeger

"Ja, Hunde, wollt ihr denn ewig leben?" - Friedrich der Große

"Timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes" - *neid

I JG3 Troz
06-23-2004, 10:17 AM
i will have to side with the "historical group" . I would much rather see aircraft (even ugly nasty ones) that actually flew in combat, and maps of places that actually hosted combat, included in the game first. I guess i am just not a fan of "what if" scenarios.
my 2 cents worth.
S!

Chuck_Older
06-23-2004, 10:28 AM
I would have to agree with Ash that the YP-80 is in the group that should be termed "the first generation of US jets".

Post war designs should be considered the second generation.

Of course we used information from the design and research that went into the German jet powered aircraft. Why is that surprising or somehow 'dishonorable'? The Allies had some technological breakthroughs that the Axis did not, and the Axis had some breakthroughs that the Allies did not. A German Naxos was not comparable to HF/DF, and the YP-80 was not as advanced as an Me262. If priorities had been different, maybe the Wurzburg radars would have been even more advanced, or Naxos more reliable at long range, or maybe the YP-80 could have flown a year earlier and seen combat in WWII? Who knows, but things panned out the way they did and war needs dictated the paths that Axis and Allied research took. For instance, the German scientists were and are rightly known as very good at what they did and do. But in many ways, they lost the technology war badly because the Allied technological breakthroughs were more sweeping, and the German breakthroughs were more specific applications. For example, a jet engine was useless on a ship, but radar development allowed the invention of the proximity fuse.

*****************************
The hillsides ring with, "Free the People",
Or can I hear the echoes from the days of '39?
~ Clash

Capt.England
06-23-2004, 11:20 AM
Try CFS3 I hear people shout for we who like luft46 type planes. Ok, then. Try CFS3 for Tiff, Mozzie, Bombers, Whirlwind, Ju88, etc, etc...

Just because some people want something different and new, does not mean that if they ask for it that they should get shot down in flames (pun intended).

Also, if I knew how to model for this sim, rest asure that most of the Luft46 planes would be made. BTW, OT but I am making a TSR2 for FS2004. Hope to finish it by September time if anyones interested. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

darkhorizon11
06-23-2004, 12:00 PM
Does anyone have a plane list for the updated CFS3??

Magister__Ludi
06-23-2004, 01:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASH_SMART:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
hey ASH .... i know you , & you know me

on this subject magister ludi is quite correct<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So when Ludi said

"That USA and USSR used the German knowhow for its _first generation_ of jets is an undeniable fact."

He does not consider the P-80 a first generation jet? Or that the USA had a time machine and in 1943 jumped to 1946 to look at the captured German data to develope the P-80? Or... what? In that I dont think either is anywhere near the truth.. But hey Badsight.. you claim I know you.. And your right.. So why am I wasting my time trying to explain this? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Aerodynamically P-80 did not bring anything new, it was a classical solution. For this Lockheed engineers did not need anything from Germany. The engine however was British technology - although in the end Americans decided to develop their own powerplant based on a British design. rather than directly take a British jet engine.

So before "wasting your time" explaining here, spend some time reading and thinking.

Magister__Ludi
06-23-2004, 02:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maynard420:
i will have to side with the "historical group" . I would much rather see aircraft (even ugly nasty ones) that actually flew in combat, and maps of places that actually hosted combat, included in the game first. I guess i am just not a fan of "what if" scenarios.
my 2 cents worth.
S!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Not all Luft'46 remained hypotetical. At least those should be modelled. But there were many others similar with postwar aircrafts. For those a FM can be modelled with decent error margins.

Now of course, Luft'46 aircrafts should stay on '46 hypothetical servers only. No need to mix them with historical planesets servers (which are hard to come by unfortunatelly, many claim to have such planesets, but very few it).

Magister__Ludi
06-23-2004, 02:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
I would have to agree with Ash that the YP-80 is in the group that should be termed "the first generation of US jets".

Post war designs should be considered the second generation.

Of course we used information from the design and research that went into the German jet powered aircraft. Why is that surprising or somehow 'dishonorable'? The Allies had some technological breakthroughs that the Axis did not, and the Axis had some breakthroughs that the Allies did not. A German Naxos was not comparable to HF/DF, and the YP-80 was not as advanced as an Me262. If priorities had been different, maybe the Wurzburg radars would have been even more advanced, or Naxos more reliable at long range, or maybe the YP-80 could have flown a year earlier and seen combat in WWII? Who knows, but things panned out the way they did and war needs dictated the paths that Axis and Allied research took. For instance, the German scientists were and are rightly known as very good at what they did and do. But in many ways, they lost the technology war badly because the Allied technological breakthroughs were more sweeping, and the German breakthroughs were more specific applications. For example, a jet engine was useless on a ship, but radar development allowed the invention of the proximity fuse.

*****************************
The hillsides ring with, "Free the People",
Or can I hear the echoes from the days of '39?
~ Clash
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


When it comes to high speed aerodynamics, Allied breakthroughs are splendid but inexistent. As I said before Germany was the only country that had a supersonic wind tunnel during ww2, and was the only country to have a coherent program in high speed aerodynamics. Swept wings, delta wings, slender bodies,..., were all studied in countless tests. There was NO equivalent program in any of the Allied countries.

On the P-80 -- Me-262 comparison, yes Me-262 was more advanced as a plane. Performance wise they were comparable, but Me-262 had much better handling (almost imperceptible CG variation from full fuel tank to empty tank - absolutelly remarcable for an early jet, P-80 was miserable in this respect). And although P-80 had better Cd0 (0.0135) it looses a lot of power because of long intake ducts and tail pipe (1/4 of the power). That's why Me-262 had wing nacelles, to counter the loss of power caused by ducts, but also to have the engines far away from the fuel tanks, because of fire danger with the early jets (if Bong would have tested Me-262 instead of P-80 he would have survived most certainly). What should I say about the armament. Americans feared the 37mm cannon of the MiG-15, but MiG had only one and it was slow firing. Me-262 had 4x30mm fast firing cannons, each shell packing much more HE power that the 37mm shell of the MiG.

Radar is a copycat case of ww2 planes case. Just a lot of poor researched information plus heavy nationalistic bias and you get the trash articles that everybody can read on the Internet. I still hope that Target for Tonight will materialize (that's because Oleg showed little interest in such an add-on to FB) and then there'll be a lot of interesting discussions comparing the performance and achievements of Allied and German radars.

I kept for end this interesting opinion of yours: "they lost the technology war badly because the Allied technological breakthroughs were more sweeping". What technological war did Germany loose?? Germany was simply outproduced and outnumbered. The Allied leaders made clear their intention to outproduce Germany in order to win the war. By 1944 they were obviously succeded in this plan. There was no technology that helped the Allies win the war.

Magister__Ludi
06-23-2004, 02:54 PM
Another Luft'46 plane produced someplace else:

Fw J P.011-45 design for a night fighter:

http://www.luft46.com/fw/3bfjp045.jpg

became the radar equipped MiG I-320:

http://prototypes.free.fr/yak50/images/I-320_12.jpg

though its competitor looked even more interesting: Su-15, mean looking radar interceptor for a postwar planeset.

http://www.aviation.orc.ru/images/su15/su-15.jpg

[This message was edited by Magister__Ludi on Wed June 23 2004 at 02:10 PM.]

Danschnell
06-23-2004, 03:12 PM
I think that a plane should only count in a sim if it was built and flown in real life. Anything other than that is only hypothetical.

I could draw a blueprint for a warp engine right now if I wanted, but it wouldn't work... I would have no right to claim that the warp engine was invented in 2004.

The only plane in IL2 right now that doesn't count is the 109Z. People often ban the 262... but why? It was possible to combat it in real life. Just as in WW2 if you came accross a 262 - tough luck, you had to deal with it.

The Horten 9 as well, was built and flown in real life, so it was still theorheticall possible for an Allied pilot to have engaged one. Therefore I'm glad we can dogfight in it in the game. The Luft '46' combat planes that I would like to see in IL2 are as listed, because they were all built and flown.

Ar234B-2
Ar234C-3
Ba349
Do-335
Me262A
Me262B
Me163B
Me328
He162A-2
He280
Ho229
Ju287

Any IL2 add-on to include these planes would be the ultimate - and perfectly valid - Luft '46' sim! I would find it VERY exciting because I love the Luftwaffe's futuristic birds.

ASH at S-MART
06-23-2004, 10:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
Aerodynamically P-80 did not bring anything new, it was a classical solution. For this Lockheed engineers did not need anything from Germany. The engine however was British technology - although in the end Americans decided to develop their own powerplant based on a British design. rather than directly take a British jet engine.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ROTFL!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
So before "wasting your time" explaining here, spend some time reading and thinking.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Right back at yah!

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg