PDA

View Full Version : Rocket for Mustang



FatBoyHK
01-01-2005, 09:52 AM
Will we have it one day?

http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/P-51/P-51ROCKETLAUNCH.gif

FatBoyHK
01-01-2005, 09:52 AM
Will we have it one day?

http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/P-51/P-51ROCKETLAUNCH.gif

PraetorHonoris
01-01-2005, 10:02 AM
If Oleg makes a sim about the war in Korea, you'll have them http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
But not in WWII...

FatBoyHK
01-01-2005, 10:31 AM
Oh, they were stuffs from korea war? sorry for my ignorance... How about those bozooka? (sorry for spelling http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif)

FRAGAL
01-01-2005, 11:36 AM
taken from here http://members.fortunecity.com/llium/history/warbirds/usa/p-51.html

"The first XP-51D made its maiden flight in November 1943, and demand for production forced North American to turn out 800 of the aircraft with the original cockpit and fuselage design. The next 7,156 aircraft were completed with the bubble canopy and rushed into service. The early versions had incorporated three 'bazooka' like launcher tubes for the 4.5 inch M8 air-to-surface rocket with an HE warhead. These were replaced in the P-51D-25 version with zero-length underwing launchers for the 5 inch HVAR rockets also carrying a HE warhead. Standard loadout allowed for 5 launchrs under each wing, or 3 each if bombs or drop tanks were used.

The P-51D was used in most theaters involving the US Army Air Forces, and its range made it the first P-51 variant to be used for the escorting the Boeing B-29 Superfortress heavy bombers of the US 20th Army Air Force into the Japanese home islands from bases in the Marianas. Even with the P-51D's extended range, most had to operate from the island of Iwo Jima which is somewhat closer to Japan, and still had to carry two 165 gal drop tanks. The P-51D was also flown by units of the 14th Army Air Force in China, and of the 7th Army Air Force in the Philippines.

In the European theater, the P-51D was flown from the UK by the 8th and 9th Army Air Forces, and in Italy by the 15th Army Air Force. In addition, the P-51D was modified into the F-6D photo-reconnaissance model, of which 126 were delivered as production-line conversions of the P-51D with an installation of two K-17, K-22 or K-24 cameras. Another 10 aircraft were produced as the TP-51D Mustang having a tandem cockpit with dual controls for use as a trainer. One of these machines was later converted into the ETF-51D for successful carrier trials.

The type was also transferred to the UK under the terms of the Lend-Lease Act, to a total of 271 aircraft having a service designation of Mustang Mk IV.

P-51D Specs:

Armament: Six 50cal. Browning MG53-2 machine guns in the wing leading edges, the inboard pair with 400 rounds per gun and the outboard two pairs with 270 rounds per gun.

Ordnance: Up to 2,000 lb. carried on two hardpoints (both under the wings with each unit rated at 1,000 lb. and generally comprising 2x 1,000 or 500 lb. bombs and, on later aircraft, up to 10x 5 in HVAR air-to-surface rockets.

Electronics: Standard communication and navigation equipment, plus a Type K-14A reflector gun sight.

Powerplant: One Packard (Rolls-Royce) V-1650-7 Merlin Vee piston engine rated at 1,450 hp for take-off and 1,695 hp at 10,300 ft.

Wing Span: 37 ft 0 in, aspect ratio 5.83.
Wing Area: 235 sq ft
Length: 32 ft 3 in.
Height: 13 ft 8 in.
Weight: Empty: 7,635 lb. Normal take-off: 10,100 lb. Maximum take-off: 12,100 lb.
Performance:
Maximum level speed 'clean' of 437 mph at 25,000 ft., declining to 395 mph at 5,000 ft.
Maximum range 1,650 miles with drop tanks; typical range 950 miles with internal fuel tanks.
Maximum rate of climb at 5,000 ft: 3,475 ft per minute; climb to 20,000 ft in 7 minutes 18 seconds; service ceiling 41,900 ft. "

have to agree with HK liked to see the HVAR added to the D version

PraetorHonoris
01-01-2005, 12:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FRAGAL:
have to agree with HK liked to see the HVAR added to the D version <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure, if it was a Korean war sim.
There is no evidence for Ponies using HVARs in Europe

Copperhead310th
01-01-2005, 12:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PraetorHonoris:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FRAGAL:
have to agree with HK liked to see the HVAR added to the D version <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure, if it was a Korean war sim.
There is no evidence for Ponies using HVARs in Europe <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well Sir since there is plenty evidence that they were used in the pacific theater would that do it for you? Since this is after all Pacific Fighters now. or are you just totally against the idea of a P-51 with the proper munitions capabilties?

PraetorHonoris
01-01-2005, 12:58 PM
Sure, just to annoy you, kupper. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Seriously, I am quite sure the Pony never used HVARs in Europe and I don't know about the PT.
If you find a proof that they were used - fine!

Share your info!

Copperhead310th
01-01-2005, 01:04 PM
Ok here: this is from the US Air Force Museum.
The worlds formost experts on WWII US airicraft.
USAF Museum (http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap9.htm)

SPECIFICATIONS
Span: 37 ft. 0 in.
Length: 32 ft. 3 in.
Height: 13 ft. 8 in.
Weight: 12,100 lbs. max.
<span class="ev_code_RED">Armament: Six .50-cal. machine guns and ten 5 in. rockets or 2,000 lbs. of bombs.</span>
Engine: Packard built Rolls-Royce "Merlin" V-1650 of 1,695 hp.
Cost: $54,000
Serial Number: 44-74936 NOTE THE SERIAL NUMBER: 44- MEANS THIS AIRCRAFT WAS MANUFACTURED IN 1944.
Displayed as (S/N): 44-15174

PERFORMANCE
Maximum speed: 437 mph.
Cruising speed: 275 mph.
Range: 1,000 miles
Service Ceiling: 41,900 ft.

PraetorHonoris
01-01-2005, 01:12 PM
Not convincing at all...

There is no doubt that WWII built Ponies could be equipped with HVARs. It was done in Korea!

It does not mean that they have done it in WWII.

Besides
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>P-51s had destroyed 4,950 enemy aircraft in the air, more than any other fighter in Europe. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't have to tell you, why this can't be true http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Udidtoo
01-01-2005, 01:31 PM
http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avp511.html

While not the type the original poster wished to see modeled in this example.

" The Mustangs did well at reconnaissance and close support missions. One P-51A outfit, the 1st Air Commando group, was assigned to provide close support for Orde Wingate's British Chindit warriors in Burma, and operated in the field at rough airstrips to keep up with the battle. They sometimes carried 450 kilogram (1,000 pound) bombs, or the three-tube 11.5 centimeter (4.5 inch) M-8 "bazooka"-style rocket launchers. "

There are numerous sites that gives more evidence that both P-51's and A-36 versions of Stangs did indeed carry out ground attack missions equipped with rockets. Therefore your "shouldn't be modelled, no evidence to support this" is in fact incorrect.

Copperhead310th
01-01-2005, 01:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PraetorHonoris:
Not convincing at all...

There is no doubt that WWII built Ponies could be equipped with HVARs. It was done in Korea!

It does _not_ mean that they have done it in WWII.

Besides
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>P-51s had destroyed 4,950 enemy aircraft in the air, more than any other fighter in Europe. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't have to tell you, why this can't be true http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

YOUR FULL OF *#%t too.
that is the acutual kill record for the P-51 in Europe. now if you want to argue about kill records i will ablige you. but that subject at hand is whether or not the P-51's were

A. Equiped with M8 Rockest and/ or HVAR's
B. Used them operationally in combat.

I entend to prove just that. then we can discuss kill records.

A P-51B/C with the double "three-pack" bazooka set, which added impressive firepower.http://www.geocities.com/koala51d/photo/p51baz.jpg

p1ngu666
01-01-2005, 01:37 PM
ive got pics of p51s with various rockets

sadly its most "testing of...."

we dont need rockets on mustang....

we need rocket typhoon
http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/tiffy1.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/tiffy2.jpg

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

PraetorHonoris
01-01-2005, 01:38 PM
I also had never any doubts about the Pony beeing equipped with M8... and yes, I would like to see them too.

I was talking about the HVARs all the time.

And Kupper, please try at least to stay mature. I did not want to start a flame war. Even if you can't stand that the Me109 was a European plane scoring many more than the P51, there is no need for such words, you'd like to use.

Udidtoo
01-01-2005, 01:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
ive got pics of p51s with various rockets

sadly its most "testing of...."

we dont need rockets on mustang....

we need rocket typhoon
http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/tiffy1.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/tiffy2.jpg

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Agreed, I don't even need the rockets though they would be nice. Just let me fly the beast/beauty.....what a ride.

Copperhead310th
01-01-2005, 02:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PraetorHonoris:
I also had never any doubts about the Pony beeing equipped with M8... and yes, I would like to see them too.

I was talking about the HVARs all the time.

And Kupper, please try at least to stay mature. I did not want to start a flame war. Even if you can't stand that the Me109 was a European plane scoring many more than the P51, there is no need for such words, you'd like to use. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Even if you can't stand that the Me109 was a European plane scoring many more than the P51"

And what factual Proof of this claim do YOU have?

I know as well as others here that the P-51's did infact use HVAR's in WWII. and i intend to prove that to you. So you tell me kido what evidence you require and i'll go out and find it for you. Hell i'll even contact Chuck Yeager...would the word of Chuck Yeager be enough proof for you?

Da_Godfatha
01-01-2005, 02:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PraetorHonoris:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FRAGAL:
have to agree with HK liked to see the HVAR added to the D version <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure, if it was a Korean war sim.
There is no evidence for Ponies using HVARs in Europe <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And the Germans used the 109Z in Europe?
Your logic is at fault young Padawan....

This game has enough "What-if" planes in it. The rockets for the Mustang, at least the Bazooka, should be in the game. BTW, just like the Tiny-Tims for the F6F-5 Hellcat.

PraetorHonoris
01-01-2005, 02:31 PM
Kupper, if you had any idea of history beside your beloved US wings, you would know that the 109 equipped
JG52 achieved more than 10000 kills - alone!
So even if I would not regard the other Geschwader,
the Pony€s number is bested by far.

You can read €žDas Jagdgeschwader 52€œ by N.Fast if you want to know more about it.
But even your military recognises this Success:
http://www.google.de/search?q=cache:6pASOhcyutQJ:www.au.af.mil/au/goe/eaglebios/94bios/hrabak94.htm+%22JG+52+achieved+its+10,000th+aerial +victory%22&hl=de&start=1

On the proof I need concerning HVARs...
well what about some mission reports, which clearly mention the use of HVARs?
And yes, a pilots account is proof enough for me.

Your assumptions are not enough.

berg417448
01-01-2005, 02:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PraetorHonoris:
Sure, just to annoy you, kupper. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Seriously, I am quite sure the Pony never used HVARs in Europe and I don't know about the PT.
If you find a proof that they were used - fine!

Share your info! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

€œIn May(1945) the 78th Squadron aircraft were modified to carry the 140 pound 5 inch High Velocity Aircraft Rockets (HVARs). This added a new dimension to the P-51's capability. On the first use of the rockets against Matsudo airfield northeast of Tokyo, Major Jim Tapp and his wing man Captain Phil Maher set the whole hanger line on fire. The HVAR carried a modified 5 inch Naval gun projectile. The fighter sweeps were so devastating to the Japanese that they started evacuating their aircraft from southern Honshu as they got warning.€

http://www.glorene.com/aviation/7th/history.htm
In the past, I have also found a pilot account of their use in the Pacific. I will try to find the link for you.

Udidtoo
01-01-2005, 02:42 PM
http://www.dixiewing.org/aircraft/p51/


One of the shortcomings of the P-51B was its limited firepower of only four machine guns. In addition, the guns in each wing were aligned at rather odd angles, requiring a severe bend in the ammunition belt feeds and resulting in frequent gun jams. The P-51D gun installation was completely redesigned, and the result was the installation of three MG53-2 .50-caliber machine guns in each wing, all of them mounted upright and all fed by straight ammunition belts. The inboard guns each held 400 rounds, and the others 270 rounds each. P-51Ds had under-wing hardpoints not only for bombs and fuel tanks but also for various types of air-to-ground rockets. These included zero-length stubs for six 5-inch rockets or as many as ten if no drop tanks were carried. Alternatively, "Bazooka" tubes could be carried in triple clusters. There were a few field conversions for special armament, examples including two drop tanks and six 100-LB bombs, four 100-LB bombs plus 36 fragmentation bombs, or four 75-Imp gallon drop tanks. Aircraft used in the China-Burma-India theater usually had a direction-finding loop antenna in front of the vertical stabilizer.


BTW dang Copper, it is entirely possible to disagree with a person without being a wang about it, give it a shot sometime.

Copperhead310th
01-01-2005, 02:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PraetorHonoris:
Kupper, if you had any idea of history beside your beloved US wings, you would know that the 109 equipped
JG52 achieved more than 10000 kills - alone!
So even if I would not regard the other Geschwader,
the Pony€s number is bested by far.

You can read €žDas Jagdgeschwader 52€œ by N.Fast if you want to know more about it.
But even your military recognises this Success:
http://www.google.de/search?q=cache:6pASOhcyutQJ:www.au.af.mil/au/goe/eaglebios/94bios/hrabak94.htm+%22JG+52+achieved+its+10,000th+aerial +victory%22&hl=de&start=1

On the proof I need concerning HVARs...
well what about some mission reports, which clearly mention the use of HVARs?
And yes, a pilots account is proof enough for me.

Your assumptions are not enough. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

With regards to JG 52 ....you cannot count thier Eastern Front victories since the never faced the USAAF & the P-51 in the EF.
And since the USAAF had little to no opperations in the east then you can only put up the numbers from that theater. your trying to combine the kill claims from diferant theaters of opperation to prove your point. a sad attempt at yet more propaganda i'm afraid.
Why not put up the true numbers for the western front and you will clearly see that the statment of "the P-51s had destroyed 4,950 enemy aircraft in the air, more than any other fighter in Europe." is clearly accurate and correct.

PraetorHonoris
01-01-2005, 02:53 PM
Berg, this is a good evidence, quite convincing...
if it is true I would appreciate these rockets as load out, too.

... Though I admit that I would appreciate the Panzerblitz more, as there is no Luftwaffe air-to-ground rocket in the game at all.

But nonetheless, if historical correct, I don't have any problems with HVARs on Ponies.

PraetorHonoris
01-01-2005, 02:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
Why not put up the true numbers for the western front and you will clearly see that the statment of "the P-51s had destroyed 4,950 enemy aircraft in the air, more than any other fighter in Europe." is clearly accurate and correct. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can try to diminish the Luftwaffe's success as much as you want, still the Eastern front was in Europe, the Me109 destroyed far more planes. Point.

BTW: true numbers... these are ALL CLAIMS, no true numbers.
Due to your immaturity and ignorance, I won't discuss theme like "Claims/actual numbers" or "how the eastern front was"
But please try to read a bit:

http://www.bergstrombooks.elknet.pl/bc-rs/text.html

carguy_
01-01-2005, 03:03 PM
Point #1:"the P-51s had destroyed 4,950 enemy aircraft in the air, more than any other fighter in Europe."

Point #2:Me109 shot whole lot more aircraft than the P51.

Both points are correct.

BTW Copper I wonder why do you have to be such a jerk everytime ppl say something about German avation.Why not just ignore the guy?He popped up and blablabla like a cassic troll and you take the bait.Please think about yer attitude Copper,mostly when I read yer posts I`m feeling as watching someone thretening to commit suicide because he wants to be in TV.

Udidtoo
01-01-2005, 03:04 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Evan the most wildly overenthusiastic pilots who actually flew the Stang have never tried to claim 4,950 "Air victories " most figures agree on 4,950 as a total of which 4,131 were destroyed on the ground. Probably isn't going to make nearly as good a film or book read but does I imagine put a serious dent in your adveseries ability to sorty effectivly.

VW-IceFire
01-01-2005, 03:17 PM
As much as I would love to see HVAR loadouts for Mustangs...and as much as I originally argued for them I am now convinced that there were no HVAR equipped Mustangs used in Europe. I cannot find a single WWII era photo with a P-51 of any model with HVAR tabs or HVARs on them.

However, there should be no reason that the B and C types (at the very least) shouldn't have the Bazooka Tube launchers like on the P-47. I would imagine those were on the D as well.

But with regards to HVARs...I'm not convinced. Frankly, none of the information here is new or offering any detailed evidence for their inclusion.

Von_Zero
01-01-2005, 03:39 PM
Cooper, here is a map of Europe:
http://www.mapsofworld.com/images/europe-outline-map.gif
For your info the European continent is that big yellow spot from the western coasts of Portugal in the West, to the line of URAL mountains in the East.
Saying that the eastern kill shouldn't be counted is simply stupid. Any 3rd grade schoolboy KNOWS that the fights in the east never passed the line of the Urals, therefore they WERE in Europe. That being said let's put it step by step:
#1: A single german sqadron scored more kills than any Mustang would have scored. (4950?)
#2: that squadron fought OVER Europe.
If you say that the Pony had the greatest number of kills among all american planes in ww2 (and you can give numbers for the rest) or with the greatest number of kills over Western Europe, then it is no problem. Anyone has numbers for the kills scored by the spits, Yaks, etc... btw?
But, as demonstrated above, the Mustang was not the plane with the greatest number of kills over Europe. (and when one says Europe he automatically includes the ENTIRE continent).
Back on topic, it would be nice to have those bazooka tubes, and since the models for them are already done and used on the P-47/P-38, would it be difficult to put them on the Mustang also?

berg417448
01-01-2005, 03:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Udidtoo:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Evan the most wildly overenthusiastic pilots who actually flew the Stang have never tried to claim 4,950 "Air victories " most figures agree on 4,950 as a total of which 4,131 were destroyed on the ground. Probably isn't going to make nearly as good a film or book read but does I imagine put a serious dent in your adveseries ability to sorty effectivly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to this source that is 4,131 ground in addition to the 4, 950 claimed in the air:

Kills Claimed
Type Sorties Tonnage Lost In-Air Ground
A-36 23,373 8,014 177 84 17
P-38 129,849 20,139 1,758 1,771 749
P-39 30,547 121 107 14 18
P-40 67,059 11,014 553 481 40
P-47 423,435 113,963 3,077 3,082 3,202
P-51 213,873 5,668 2,520 4,950 4,131
P-61 3,637 141 25 58 0
Total 927,460 159,272 8,471 10,720 8,160

BlakJakOfSpades
01-01-2005, 04:11 PM
lets not argue over symantex, as one wise greek guy once said "before you argue with me, define your terms" or something like that. so we can all agree when someone says europe it means the whole continent, but perhaps what they mean to say is the western front which i think we can all agree does not inclue the eastern front. I have no idea as to the numbers of kills or whether or not this or that type of rocket should be added, but first we should get these basic things straight.

Udidtoo
01-01-2005, 04:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlakJakOfSpades:
lets not argue over symantex, as one wise greek guy once said "before you argue with me, define your terms" or something like that. so we can all agree when someone says europe it means the whole continent, but perhaps what they mean to say is the western front which i think we can all agree does not inclue the eastern front. I have no idea as to the numbers of kills or whether or not this or that type of rocket should be added, but first we should get these basic things straight. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

........and give up wild conjecture based on opinion and bias with no supporting facts while degenerating into a name calling contest??? Welcome to IL-2/PF general discussion m8 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

BlakJakOfSpades
01-01-2005, 06:01 PM
what was i thinking, you're abselutely correct lol

Vortex_uk
01-01-2005, 07:40 PM
I was watching a programme on UK-History about the PTO a little while ago,it showed clip of a P-51C with 6 rockets (HVARs) (3 under each wing),that was taxing along a runway, so,if anyone could help dig up some explaination of this, be my guest.

berg417448
01-01-2005, 07:50 PM
Quote from 78th Fighter Squadron pilot:

€œIt was the third of July, 1945, and as the third assistant operations officer of the 78th Fighter Squadron, I was in the operations tent when we received the next day's FRAG from the 7th Fighter Command. The "FRAG" was an attack order which described the target, number of aircraft, route, ordnance, submarine rescue locations, frequencies, etc. in our orders to strike the Japanese fighter aircraft assembly plant located at Kasamigura Lake, about 50 miles northeast of Tokyo. This mission looked like a great chance to do some real damage to the Japanese war machine; and it was my turn to go get 'em! The ordnance for our 16 P-51Ds called for each plane to carry a load of six 5-inch high-velocity aerial rockets and two 165-gallon wing tanks. The 45th and 47th Fighter Squadrons were to provide us with high cover from attack by Japanese fighters during the attack. The 45th and 47th would have 16 planes per squadron, and each plane would have two 110-gallon drop-tanks. Captain Joe Fitzsimmons was the lead pilot, and I was flying his element in Code-X Red Flight€¦€

http://www.7thfighter.com/78th/history/Gordon.htm
http://glorene.com/aviation/78th/gallery/p51rocket.jpg
This photo is from the 78th Fighter Squadron page. The 78th flew the P-51 in WWII but was disbanded in 1946, so the photo cannot be from Korea. The 78th apparently used the HVAR beginning in May 1945. But I suppose it is possible that the photo was taken after the war.

JG7_Rall
01-01-2005, 08:22 PM
IBTL

Jeez Copperhead, cool yer jets.

LStarosta
01-01-2005, 09:21 PM
Okay, anyone comparing the Eastern Front to the Western Front has a serious mental defect, or otherwise enjoys trolling. There IS NO COMPARISON. Who cares if it was still Europe? It's a different front altogether. You should all know that when an American source says Europe, they most likely imply the Western Front because it's the major European front that the Americans fought in in WWII.

RiesenSchnauzer
01-01-2005, 09:23 PM
This question has been asked so many times that its a safe bet Oleg will not give the Mustang any kind of rocket loadout. Historical accuracy is not the only criterium.

Copperhead310th
01-01-2005, 09:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LStarosta:
Okay, anyone comparing the Eastern Front to the Western Front has a serious mental defect, or otherwise enjoys trolling. There IS NO COMPARISON. Who cares if it was still Europe? It's a different front altogether. You should all know that when an American source says Europe, they most likely imply the Western Front because it's the major European front that the Americans fought in in WWII. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you Sir for clearing that up. that is just the point i was trying to make.

here's the other.....

If they M8's & HVAR's were used operationally in THE PACIFIC theater they should be included. PERIOD. some pll are still thinking that this is a Eastern Front sim. Point is that IT DOES NOT MATTER WEATHER OR NOT THESE WERE USED OPERATIONALLY IN EUROPE. If they were used in the PACIFIC then they are more than justified to be included in the current sim. Just becuse they were or were not used in europe does not mean they shouldn't be included. Which i'm almost posative the P-51's used the M8's operationaly in the western front.

Vortex_uk
01-01-2005, 09:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RiesenSchnauzer:
This question has been asked so many times that its a safe bet Oleg will not give the Mustang any kind of rocket loadout. Historical accuracy is not the only criterium. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Practically everyone realises these rockets aren't the only thing that needs attending to in this sim, but if its what the people want,and its historically correct,then he doing him self a favour, beside, the B and C models had the bazooka tubes,which are on the P-47 if i'm not mistaken, surly it can't be that hard to apply them to the early model ponies, at least if would please most people, apart from those who want the HVARs on the later Ds.

VW-IceFire
01-01-2005, 10:17 PM
Copperhead, you make a perfectly logical and excellent point. If armament types were used operationally in Europe or the Pacific then by all means they can/should be included. That includes HVARs if evidence is dug up to include them. At present, my feeling is that Mustangs were ever only fitted with them for Korea. Thunderbolts weren't fitted with them till after the D-27 (was it the D-30 that was the first?).

But, the Bazooka Tubes...those should be there. Its a certainty that Mustangs were fitted with such rockets.

Copperhead310th
01-01-2005, 10:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Copperhead, you make a perfectly logical and excellent point. If armament types were used operationally in Europe or the Pacific then by all means they can/should be included. That includes HVARs if evidence is dug up to include them. At present, my feeling is that Mustangs were ever only fitted with them for Korea. Thunderbolts weren't fitted with them till after the D-27 (was it the D-30 that was the first?).

But, the Bazooka Tubes...those should be there. Its a certainty that Mustangs were fitted with such rockets. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah D-30 would be correct.
But fragmentation bombs were in use on both the P-47's and P-51's. P-47's starting with the D-25 wich was also the model that introduced the bubble canopy. We already have working clusters on the IL-2. should not be hard to emplement.
I mean lts face it. there will be no NEW USAAF planes added to the sim anymore. at least we can get the extra load out options as a consalation prize while the axis guys are flying what ever UFO was dreamed up and never got of the drawing board.

IL2-chuter
01-02-2005, 05:39 AM
------------------------------------------------

Serial Number: 44-74936 NOTE THE SERIAL NUMBER: 44- MEANS THIS AIRCRAFT WAS MANUFACTURED IN 1944.

------------------------------------------------



Actually, it isn't the year the aircraft is built, but the year the contract for the aircraft is let. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif



It seems obvious to me ( http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif come on, guys!) that HVAR's were used in PTO by Mustangs. 23rd FG certainly did (as well as oddball bomb loadouts mentioned previously) as well as . . . http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif a couple of other groups . . . http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif who's identities escape me right now (proof enough, I say! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif ). Seriously, I've seen a number of photos taken summer and fall '45 showing rocket mounts on Mustangs in China, Iwo Jima and Leyte.

As for a C with HVAR's, just gotta install the hardware and wiring . . . (I'm a professional aircraft mechanic and can make unsubstantiated statements like this, don't you be trying this yourself, though.) Lots of stuff was retro'd, -7 engines on B/C's, -3 engines on D's (changin' engines all the time), fin fillet extensions (on B/C's, too) rockets on early Corsairs and Hellcats (rather easy, I've got an original Navy rocket/bomb/guns control stick grip from a rocket upgrade kit new in the box) and on and on. If they needed it in the field, they worked it out (like A-20 and B-25 strafers - and did North American not like it when they put three .50's in each wing of a B-25D http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif, they shut that one down quick, somethin' about structural integrity blah blah blah. Engineers.

Feel free to use me as a definitive source for whatever. Have a nice year.


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Aaron_GT
01-02-2005, 07:12 AM
Did they put the guns IN the wings of the B25? I've seen instances of the blisters used on the fuselage being installed on the wings on B25s and A26s (as well as the internal wing guns on the A26).

p1ngu666
01-02-2005, 07:38 AM
pics http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/m1.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/m2.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/m3.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/m4.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/m5.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/m6.jpg

p51 blowing stuff up is for copper http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

249th_Harrier
01-02-2005, 08:04 AM
This story is of an action that occurred April 7 1945. A small unit claims to be saved when p-51 Jabos kill a tiger tank with their first salvo of rocket projectiles. The author who was part of the unit says his research indicated this was the first time these weapons were used agains tanks, so they seem to imply it was a newer weapon e.g. HVAR. Since this is a late war engagement, it is possible that some experimentation was going on rigging HVARs to p-51s. M-8s were notoriously inaccurate and might not have the punch to take out a tiger as is described here. It is also possible that p-47s were misidentified, I would need more proof to be sure it was a p-51 with HVAR.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/OOB/65-Div-Ladner.html


Here is an excerpt from
http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomb6.html

The earliest unguided rocket system used operationally by the United States in World War II was the "M-8" 11.4 centimeter (4.5 inch) triple-tube "Bazooka" launcher. This weapon consisted of what looked like three pipes bundled together, each containing a stubby rocket about 40 centimeters (16 inches) long, with the bundle attached to an aircraft's stores pylons in place of a bomb.

The M-8 had fins that unfolded in the airstream after launch. It was very inaccurate, but had a reasonable punch. The M-8 was used with US Army Air Force aircraft such as the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, North American P-51 Mustang, and Lockheed P-38 Lightning.

Combat experience demonstrated to the Americans needed something with more punch than the M-8 or the British RP. The US Navy accordingly sponsored the development of an improved aerial rocket at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), resulting in the 12.7 centimeter (5 inch) "High Velocity Air Rocket (HVAR)", which was introduced in mid-1944. The HVAR was also occasionally known as "Holy Moses" because of its impressive destructive effect.

The HVAR was 1.83 meters (6 feet) long and weighed 63.5 kilograms (140 pounds). It had fixed fins and was carried on streamlined stub pylons under the wings of aircraft such as the Thunderbolt, Mustang, Grumman F6F Hellcat, and Vought F4U Corsair. It had a steel-cased warhead and could penetrate 3.8 centimeters (1.5 inches) of armor and 1.2 meters (4 feet) of reinforced concrete.

FatBoyHK
01-02-2005, 09:06 AM
OK, after so much (meaningful as well as meaningless) discussion, seem we would agree that HVAR and Bazooka should be given to Mustang.... let's bring this issue to the ORR forum, shall we?

NorrisMcWhirter
01-02-2005, 09:57 AM
Hi,

It's already been in ORR, IIRC. The axis should receive some rockets before the allies have *yet more* in the interest of maintaining some balance.

Also, Praetor was perfectly valid in saying that the 109 had more kills overall irrespective of the theatre they were used in. If they had 10,000 kills, they had 10,000 kills; it doesn't matter who or what they were up against.

Or, for balance, shall we decrease the number of P51 victories as some will have been obtained when their opponents were vastly outnumbered, had very poorly trained pilots and were using **** fuel?

Cheers,
Norris

LStarosta
01-02-2005, 10:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Or, for balance, shall we decrease the number of P51 victories as some will have been obtained when their opponents were vastly outnumbered, had very poorly trained pilots and were using **** fuel?

Cheers,
Norris <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Much like the Russians?

FatBoyHK
01-02-2005, 10:51 AM
It is enough, can you guys pls stop hijacking my thread? 70% of this threads are talking about the number of kill Mustang and 109 have... that is insane, lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

regarding balance.... oh well, you may be right... Does 262 has R4M rockets? I am not sure, most servers don't allow 262, it is a shame..

Snow_Wolf_
01-02-2005, 11:07 AM
yes the ME-262 A1,A2 in game carrry R4M Rockets

yea would be nice to have some rockets for the 51 and some more different loadout for other planes such as the D9

p1ngu666
01-02-2005, 12:01 PM
us axis whiners want panzerblitz for 190 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

i want zero (the plane) to have more bombs and rockets too

VW-IceFire
01-02-2005, 02:13 PM
Mmmm....no US HVAR's I can see in those pictures. There are the Bazooka tube rockets which are great too and the Mustang Mark III in those shots has the British HVAR equivalent with the 60 pound rockets.

Nifty tho...I'm all for inclusion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I know the US aren't getting their ultra uber fighters but the P-47D-27 and the P-51D-20 are pretty powerful to take on all comers. I'll argue with anyone that these two planes represent two of the best fighters in the game bar none and that even with a Do-335 (which isn't a fantasy plane IMHO, there were examples of combat between these and Allied fighters - not alot mind you) and a Ta-152H you still see the Mustang and Jug as being the absolute best against the opposition. Whatever the Ta-152H can do...I can do it in a Jug or a Mustang with no problems. So chill out on that one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bring on the rockets!

Udidtoo
01-02-2005, 02:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FatBoyHK:
It is enough, can you guys pls stop hijacking my thread? 70% of this threads are talking about the number of kill Mustang and 109 have... that is insane, lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

regarding balance.... oh well, you may be right... Does 262 has R4M rockets? I am not sure, most servers don't allow 262, it is a shame.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your right about the hijacking M8 and I'm sorry. Some days I can read nimrodicy and just grin and shrug it off, others times you read a fellow or fellows who is just completly incabable of saying " really? then I stand corrected" and has to go off on some tangent involving number of total kills like that has something relevant to your original posting.

Might as well have answered with "No Hvar's for you, I Pretor have never seen the evidence and besides the Luftwaffe were much snappier dressers" While I would agree that is true, they were it also has absolutly nothing to do with wether any of the Mustangs were ever fitted with HVAR's. BTW Really nice picts PingU and should satisfy anyone who likes to employ silly little things like sense and reason to a matter but hey, we all know that doesn't always figure into the equations around here.

Anywho, FatboyHK, although I know better by now somedays my eyes read stuff in this forum and my fingers spring to life of their own accord going...what? What? So no more hijacking I promise......at least until the next time I can't sit on my fingers and let biased ignorance go unchallenged. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

LStarosta
01-02-2005, 04:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Mmmm....no US HVAR's I can see in those pictures. There are the Bazooka tube rockets which are great too and the Mustang Mark III in those shots has the British HVAR equivalent with the 60 pound rockets.

Nifty tho...I'm all for inclusion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I know the US aren't getting their ultra uber fighters but the P-47D-27 and the P-51D-20 are pretty powerful to take on all comers. I'll argue with anyone that these two planes represent two of the best fighters in the game bar none and that even with a Do-335 (which isn't a fantasy plane IMHO, there were examples of combat between these and Allied fighters - not alot mind you) and a Ta-152H you still see the Mustang and Jug as being the absolute best against the opposition. Whatever the Ta-152H can do...I can do it in a Jug or a Mustang with no problems. So chill out on that one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bring on the rockets! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Ta152 can cruise higher than both the Mustang and the Jug and with greater ease.

FatBoyHK
01-02-2005, 05:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Udidtoo:
Your right about the hijacking M8 and I'm sorry. Some days I can read nimrodicy and just grin and shrug it off, others times you read a fellow or fellows who is just completly incabable of saying " really? then I stand corrected" and has to go off on some tangent involving number of total kills like that has something relevant to your original posting.

Might as well have answered with "No Hvar's for you, I Pretor have never seen the evidence and besides the Luftwaffe were much snappier dressers" While I would agree that is true, they were it also has absolutly nothing to do with wether any of the Mustangs were ever fitted with HVAR's. BTW Really nice picts PingU and should satisfy anyone who likes to employ silly little things like sense and reason to a matter but hey, we all know that doesn't always figure into the equations around here.

Anywho, FatboyHK, although I know better by now somedays my eyes read stuff in this forum and my fingers spring to life of their own accord going...what? What? So no more hijacking I promise......at least until the next time I can't sit on my fingers and let biased ignorance go unchallenged. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol, don't get serious, never mind, m8 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Copperhead310th
01-03-2005, 12:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FatBoyHK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Udidtoo:
Your right about the hijacking M8 and I'm sorry. Some days I can read nimrodicy and just grin and shrug it off, others times you read a fellow or fellows who is just completly incabable of saying " really? then I stand corrected" and has to go off on some tangent involving number of total kills like that has something relevant to your original posting.

Might as well have answered with "No Hvar's for you, I Pretor have never seen the evidence and besides the Luftwaffe were much snappier dressers" While I would agree that is true, they were it also has absolutly nothing to do with wether any of the Mustangs were ever fitted with HVAR's. BTW Really nice picts PingU and should satisfy anyone who likes to employ silly little things like sense and reason to a matter but hey, we all know that doesn't always figure into the equations around here.

Anywho, FatboyHK, although I know better by now somedays my eyes read stuff in this forum and my fingers spring to life of their own accord going...what? What? So no more hijacking I promise......at least until the next time I can't sit on my fingers and let biased ignorance go unchallenged. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol, don't get serious, never mind, m8 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah sorry for the hijack fatboy. wasn't intended. i was only trying to prove my point. that they DID infact have and use both the M8's and HVAR's. and the kill ratio information was picked out of something that was in the information i copied from the USAF Museum.
I wasn't makeing a personal opinion...or stating those numbers as absolute truth. Just quoting.
But for the record i would tend to belive what an agency like the USAF Museum says as fact.
but sorry it got of track.

BelaLvgosi
01-03-2005, 05:15 AM
edit: nevermind

p1ngu666
01-03-2005, 07:25 AM
there was a pic of p51 with hvar stubs on wings, but from korea so i left it unphotoed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

if gonna have rocket p51, then make it raf, with raf 25lb boost http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

im not too bothered about the rockets tho, the other rocket american fighters are better for mud moving tbh

BSS_Goat
01-03-2005, 12:46 PM
http://www.pk-hq.com/community/images/smilies/2dedhorse.gif

Aaron_GT
01-04-2005, 02:18 AM
Did the RAF ever fit 45, 60, or 90lb rockets to their Mustangs?

Platypus_1.JaVA
01-04-2005, 02:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
Did the RAF ever fit 45, 60, or 90lb rockets to their Mustangs? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The NEIAF (dutch) did this. Together with bombs. They had 30 P-51 D-20 and 10 P-51 K (something)

Lukki
01-06-2005, 02:01 PM
I think the "napalm for P47" and P47N whines are better. ALso, there are very few loads for the corsair with napalm. I'd like to see more napalm. If you need rockets, fly F4U? Well, k, P51 could use rockets but I don't like using it for ground attack. P51 is better off flying clean.

Why not have a global ability to overload planes. Like fitting SC1800 or a torpedo on a FW190 or a 2000 lb bomb on a P51? And then take off from a carrier! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif