PDA

View Full Version : Gunpods



XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:40 AM
Did gunpods really make the 109s fly that terrible? It seems worse then the 190s fm, and such a disadvantage just wondering if anyone knows. also the me262 r4ms cause so much drag its not possible just wondering if there is an error with the drag of gunpods

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:40 AM
Did gunpods really make the 109s fly that terrible? It seems worse then the 190s fm, and such a disadvantage just wondering if anyone knows. also the me262 r4ms cause so much drag its not possible just wondering if there is an error with the drag of gunpods

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:30 AM
Actually im thinking if they flew worse, think about how heavy those guns must have been in reality. Not to mention all the ammo.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:56 AM
Yeah, I love the notion of gunpods on the 109, but it degrades performance too much. From what I have read I think they probably degraded performance worse than they do in FB even. Most comments are along the lines of "it made the 109 useless as a fighter." They are good for bomber intercepts though, as they were intended. The 109G-2 with the 20mm gunpods seems to get away with it a little more than others, but who knows.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg


Message Edited on 07/05/0309:57AM by kyrule2

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 11:10 AM
All a matter of Drag caused(airflow around the wing)and higher wing loading.The pods were for use against the heavy bombers of the time (B-17, B-24 etc) and improve the chances of knocking out the four engine heavys in the first pass.As you have discovered it also cripples performance.

<center><a href="http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/" target="mash"><img src="http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_hawkeye.jpg" width="205" height="95" border="0"

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 11:31 AM
I prefer flying 109 with gunpods. (also with the G6 series)

It gives max. FIREPOWER.
AIMING seems easyer to me.
UNTOUCHABLE ,compared with BnZ!!!

The very best: Mk151 gunpods+ Mk 108 !!!!!
>>>>then the 109 will be the eraser, the godness of the air.


But u need high alt. and lots of experiance!!!!!!!



kama1

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 03:07 PM
I think they probably degraded performance
- worse than they do in FB even.



Possibly, I know from my reading, that the 109's suffered
greatly perfortmance wise with them on...



BTW, nice Nicholas Trudigian print in your post /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 04:07 PM
I dunno about FM degredation from gun pods - all I know is there are few things more entertaining than strapping 2 dual-20mm gun pods onto a FW-190 and blowing the hell out of anything that gets in front of me.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 04:52 PM
I've read accounts from Luftwaffe pilots who said that the 109 was highly degraded in maneuverability when armed with gunpods. I think the modeling is correct in FB. But unless you have actually flow the aircraft its impossible to know just how much is too much or too little degredation.

_____________________________________

When does a game end being a game and become a simulator? Interesting questions to ponder while waiting, from Aces-High.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 05:24 PM
who needs gunpods?

If the mk-108 cannon is in your nose, no other armament is needed. it can esaily take down 2 or more Pe-8 heavy bombers (provided that the AI gunners won't get you first) I can see that some early model G's and F's need some armament improvement.

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye
shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be
measured to you again.

http://members.chello.se/ven/ham-pin.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 08:14 PM
When I'm forced to fly a Bf 109G (I prefer Fw 190A/F's) in VOW I usually take gunpods. Gunpods make the Bf 109's slow, but atleast you can kill the enemy rather than tickle them. An altitude advantage is essential and you can't stay in the fight. You only get one pass and then you have to leave the fight. But as said earlier, it does make the Bf 109G's semi-dangerous. The MK108 made the late G models acceptable in IL2, but now the MK108 shoots blanks sideways/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif . So I usually take gunpods in all the G models.

----------------------------------------
I/JG1 Oesau (http://jg1-oesau.org) is recruiting. Join us!

Stab.I/JG1Death at HL, Maj_Death at Ubi.com

As we all know, the Soviet Union had too many fighter pilots during WW2. So Stalin's scientists came up with a brillient way to solve this problem. They would make some of their pilots fly British made Hurricanes. The Hurricane was an uber flying coffin. It was designed to maximize pilot kills by providing nothing but fabric and a few wooden spars around the cockpit. This setup prevented the pilot from escaping easily while at the same time not interfering with enemy bullets and shrapnel trying to pass through it. The rest of the Hurricanes structure was designed to ricochet bullets and shrapnel into the cockpit. And thanks to the cockpits superb design, all of them would pass through the cockpit and the pilot inside with little difficulty. Of course the Hurricane's designers didn't stop there. In order for the Hurricane to become a flying coffin, they had to make it easy to shoot. They did this by making the Hurricane the slowest monoplane fighter in use at the time and even gave it a very bulky shape so that it would be easy to spot and hit. The final feature of the Hurricane was its ability to bury or cremate itself. And because it was made of biodegradable materials, the Hurricane was environmentally friendly after it buried itself. Because of these brillient features, the Hurricane was a perfect flying coffin and helped the Soviets solve the pilot surplus they were suffering.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif

Message Edited on 07/05/0302:16PM by Maj_Death

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 08:27 PM
kama1 wrote:
- I prefer flying 109 with gunpods. (also with the G6
- series)
-
- It gives max. FIREPOWER.
- AIMING seems easyer to me.
- UNTOUCHABLE ,compared with BnZ!!!
-
- The very best: Mk151 gunpods+ Mk 108 !!!!!
- >>>>then the 109 will be the eraser, the godness of
- the air.
-
-
- But u need high alt. and lots of experiance!!!!!!!


What's the use of having a big gun if you just can't aim it properly? It's like trying to shoot down a fly with an UZI Machine Gun.

Anyway I found out that the MK-108 Gunpods can be good against bombers and especially against Sturmoviks but when it comes to duke it out with the likes of a YAK-3 you end up as easy meat even for an amateur, the heavier the gun the harder it is to manoeuver, my current fave is the good old MK-108 Nose Cannon formula, I got my *** outta rough situations with this one.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 08:55 PM
for example look at the il2 with cannons rails r4ms and bombs which the wingload weight is 4 times that of gunpods but you dont even notice it at all and can turn on a dime. But the 109s you notice it severly. I just think somethings really off and need to find charts.

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:09 PM
The IL2 in general was a much heavier aircraft. It was designed to carry a large ammount of bombs, cannons are nothing for it. Also, I have noticed the cannon armed IL2's carry quite a bit less in bombs. Besides, you think you can tripple the firepower in a light hot-rod fighter without some downfall? Remember how LIGHT the 109 is, and how heavy the cannon's are. That weight ratio is whats critical.

Gib

LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- for example look at the il2 with cannons rails r4ms
- and bombs which the wingload weight is 4 times that
- of gunpods but you dont even notice it at all and
- can turn on a dime. But the 109s you notice it
- severly. I just think somethings really off and need
- to find charts.
-




"You dont win a war by dying for your country. You win a war by making the other fool die for his country."

<center>
http://gibbageart.havagame.com/images/sig01.jpg (http://gibbageart.havagame.com)
</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:39 PM
Hey Leadspitter,
Your sig pic really hurts my eyes to look at. It's annoying as heck, with those vibrating vertical bars. Unless you just really love it, or your intention is to be annoying could you change it plz? Plz? I'll give you a dollar and take your side in any reasonable altercation if you'll do that for me. Thanks. I haven't got a clue about the gunpods effect. I seem to fly about the same with or without them, but that ain't good. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:48 PM
^ just to pi$$ you off


Gibbage you flown the il2s and seen how they float almost weightless like. And the one cannon shot out thing that lets you travel in a forward momentum while pressing the fire button and spinning your plane around 360 degrees and let go it whips around -360.

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

http://www.tripleespresso.com/images/spinner.gif


http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter



Message Edited on 07/05/0308:54PM by LeadSpitter_

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:50 PM
Tokarev, glad you like the print. His stuff is amazing, I was even going to post the link to his collection of prints, great stuff. He even had one of the Me-163 called "rocket attack." He has some prints of the Typhoon that are incredible, one is called Typhoon country and I forget the other. Maybe I'll post the link later.

To be back on topic and to be fair, the Typhoon's performance was greatly effected when mounted with rocket racks and the Typhoon has some weight behind it. This was improved upon later with more aerodynamic racks.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:45 PM
Another thing is that the IL~2 was *very* slow airplane even when empty. Something to think about when comparing performance reduction with a clean 600km/hr bf109.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:49 PM
btw, I like Leadspitter's sig. Keeps me awake on late night postings. Or it makes me think I'm awake. Its kinda like that bulbacious jumping girl.gif you just get hypnotizated and you can't look away.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 11:28 PM
the bullet movements looked screw up when i had to reduce it to 30k

My original one

<img src=http://www.freewebs.com/leadspitter/leadspitter.txt>

15sec to download too for 56k user and mods threatend to ban.

Forums still run crappy with reduced sigz and no scripts

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter



Message Edited on 07/05/0310:28PM by LeadSpitter_

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 11:28 PM
The IL-2 has a stronger engine than the BF-109 but not only does it carry a much heavier payload, it has also a much heavier armor, too much armor to allow it to slug it with fighters actually.

Engines Comparison

IL-2: Mikulin AM-38F 1750hp 12 cylinder inline
BF-109G-6http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gifaimler-Benz DB 605A-1 1475hp 12 cylinder inline

In fact the IL-2 could only relie on it's armor, rear-gunner (if any) and fighter cover (if any) in order to be kept alive, unless they are lucky enough to have the ennemy fighter in their sights.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 11:59 PM
uhhmm it wasn't common for the V-VS to give IL-2 fighter cover to their protection. If they receive some then very rarely.


http://www.geocities.com/kimurakai/SIG/262_01011.jpg


"Kimura, tu es une tĂÂȘte carĂ©e comme un sale boche!"



Message Edited on 07/06/0312:02AM by KIMURA

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 12:20 AM
Bob Johnson,

Thunderbolt pilot of Zubke's Wolfpack (the 56th) considered a Bf-109 with "gun tubs" on it to be "meat on the table". He had the same opinion of the Bf-110.

Adler52

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 12:34 AM
AATaube wrote:
- Bob Johnson,
-
- Thunderbolt pilot of Zubke's Wolfpack (the 56th)
- considered a Bf-109 with "gun tubs" on it to be
- "meat on the table". He had the same opinion of the
- Bf-110.

The same on statments of LW high scoring Experten, they found the P-38 as a easy an sure kill and the P-47 as tough and could absorb damage but also easy to stay with......and.......and................./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Aces and Experten are always exceptions and are mostly superior to their opponents doesn't matter what they flew./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



http://www.geocities.com/kimurakai/SIG/262_01011.jpg


"Kimura, tu es une tĂÂȘte carĂ©e comme un sale boche!"

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 12:42 AM
I believe the gun pods affect a large area of the wings botton half of the airfoil causing a great lose of lift and higher wingloading Dave

<center>http://www.churchofthegrey.com/coolferret/hal9000/hal2.jpg <marquee>Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before and it has always been due to human error.</marquee></center>

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 05:18 AM
Depends on what you want to shoot at. If you want to take down bombers and you've got support from aircraft with the standard loadout, then take the big guns. If you're on escort duty and need to engage fighters for a longer time, then don't.