PDA

View Full Version : Anymore news on Do-335



3.JG51_BigBear
03-12-2005, 09:27 PM
Does anybody know if this one will end up making it in. The cockpit for it looked awesome.

Codex1971
03-13-2005, 03:09 AM
I don't think it will be included...it might give us LW flyers an unfair advantage... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I remember the Do335 in Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, that thing kick major butt. Yeah I know it wasn't an accurate sim but I had fun with it none the less.

Hristo_
03-13-2005, 03:42 AM
Well, it is a 4WD plane, you could probably induce tailslidelike turns, thus managing to outturn planes with lighter wingloading. To my knowledge, it was aerodynamically very clean, also with great powerloading. MK103 and 2xMG 151 in the nose (ballistically very close and hard hitting). Six view was poor, but the plane had mirrors.

The plane would be sheer terror. However, it is also cursed. Probably the next one who will try to make it will die a mysterious death or something http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Still, being a what-if plane, it isn't any more needed than a Go 229.

OldMan____
03-13-2005, 04:48 AM
Well It is well less " what if" than a go 229 It flew.. a lot. Me 163 also did almost nothing in combat.. but its presence is OK.


This plane will give no unfair advantage to anyone. It will be probably a $!@$!#$ to maneuver and will be a change only for P47 drivers..that will face someone big up there.

Codex1971
03-13-2005, 07:08 AM
The Do-335's would have out performed any of the late model allied planes...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The unique configuration of this aircraft conferred on it a phenomenal performance, which completely eclipsed all of its contemporaries. Technically innovative, heavily armed and possessing a performance which no other piston-engined aircraft has ever achieved or surpassed, the Do 335 possessed great potential as a combat aircraft, but never got the chance to prove itself. Delayed by high-ranking indecision and Allied bombing raids, it simply ran out of time. Today, the sole remaining example of this unique type is on display at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.swannysmodels.com/Do335b.html

http://www.answers.com/topic/dornier-do-335

kubanloewe
03-13-2005, 08:30 AM
Atzebrueck finished this fine Cockpit since christmas.....but seems no one like to implement the Plane.

http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=59010161&f=388104122&m=7531044552

3.JG51_BigBear
03-13-2005, 09:19 AM
Yeah the cockpit was great, I remember seeing in one of Oleg's more recent posts that the team was working on their own model for the Do-335 and I was wondering if anyone knew how that was progessing.

Hristo_
03-13-2005, 09:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kubanloewe:
Atzebrueck finished this fine Cockpit since christmas.....but seems no one like to implement the Plane.

http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=59010161&f=388104122&m=7531044552 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OMG !!!! (and I don't use OMG lightly http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

That is some amazing quality work. Now I'm hooked...

p1ngu666
03-13-2005, 10:01 AM
the external needtobe improved before its added in the game, but i think its being done.

DH hornet had similer performance i think, plus surprising climb... outclimbed mk22 spit, which was one of the best or close...

AB_Zipper
03-13-2005, 11:16 AM
p1ngu666... I've been waiting for this plane for almost 2 years! I was hopeing that you could give us some insight being you do talk to the 3 party modalers, Maybe you can get the blood hounds out and see if you can find something out for us... please.....http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

3.JG51_BigBear
03-13-2005, 12:22 PM
From the couple things I've seen I don't think this plane is a third party effort anymore.

p1ngu666
03-13-2005, 12:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
From the couple things I've seen I don't think this plane is a third party effort anymore. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i think your correct
from olegs post

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Do-335 (working with the own external model) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i think the cockpit was finished, then they found out external model wasnt correct (probably not correct for engine, which is very hard) so i think do335 external is being worked on, cockpit is probably done http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

think i may have hear rumour of it being in next patch but im not sure

Werre_Fsck
03-13-2005, 05:01 PM
OMG that cockpit is incredibly well done.
God ****. Even if I didn't want to fly it myself... God ****. That's on par with the 110 pit!

ElAurens
03-13-2005, 05:06 PM
What are the verifiable performance numbers for it?

RedNeckerson
03-13-2005, 05:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
What are the verifiable performance numbers for it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


RAF test pilot Eric Brown flew one of the bigger two seater versions without boost and it did 430mph.

The single seat 335 had a 10% better performance due to less weight and less drag.

So realistic numbers for the Dornier we are getting should have a cruise speed of 426 mph and a top speed of ~477 mph according to published numbers.

Eric Brown said the one he flew was "overpowered".

Codex1971
03-13-2005, 05:53 PM
I was a member of the IPMS in Australia (International Plastics Modellers Society) and was speaking to an ex-RAAF pilot who flew Gloster Meteor in the early 50's. During his time he stated that he was assigned to a test flight program in England where they evaluated some of the captured LW planes after the war. In conversation with him about the German planes he said to me (I€m paraphrasing here) €œ€¦thank God for Hitler€s incompetence because if the Germans were able to produce the Me-262 and Do-335 in large numbers and sooner the war would have taken a completely different course€¦€

p1ngu666
03-13-2005, 07:32 PM
should be really fast, specialy at alt?

ive not seen any numbers, dunno much about it, most of the stuff ive got about it is in german french or some other language i cant really read http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

same with ki100, was chuffed to get pdf onit. pdf was in japanease http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

3.JG51_BigBear
03-13-2005, 09:29 PM
Basic performance data like cruising speed, maximum speed, and max alt seem to be fairly easy to get a hold of and the information stays fairly consistent from different sources. I wonder how much data on other aspects of the plane's performance exist (climb, dive, turn, etc.), especially for those versions that did go into combat (on whatever limited scale that might have been on). I'd also be curious to see how those other performance figures compare to late war allied fighters. The plane was praised for its handling, especially turning. I wonder if the pilots didn't believe it would turn at all so even a little was impressive or if the thing was bat turning around 109s.

If the plane ends up being added it would also be interested to see if the high speed oscillations and porposing are incorporated.

Humpy_Dumpy
03-13-2005, 10:45 PM
Do 335 should be second to the jets.

Do 335 is the reason why I got PF.

Do 335 is my middle name

Do 335 rocks.

Von_Rat
03-13-2005, 10:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Humpy_Dumpy:
Do 335 should be second to the jets.

Do 335 is the reason why I got PF.

Do 335 is my middle name

Do 335 rocks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
DO 335 will be banned.

Humpy_Dumpy
03-14-2005, 12:51 AM
If the Do 335 is banned then that announces the fact that no one wants uber German planes. Permit me to demonstrate.

LA 7: Come on, we all know it's a bit on the uber side.

Spitfire: If you can't see it's Uberness then get out! right now, drop everything and get out!

You see, German planes are good at high altitudes, yet allied planes are good at low. Germans would fly long distances to be at the high altitudes. But in online games people forget that.

This is not a go at bias, just the uber plane balance. Jets do unbalance it yes, so atleast give the Do 335 a go in servers. (Directed at Server hosts).

Reply with mature posts please http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

HayateAce
03-14-2005, 01:37 AM
Dorkier335 should ban nicely from the good servers, but I say bring it on where the likes of P80 are allowed.

Six fifties should set that rear engine to burning really well.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Codex1971
03-14-2005, 02:09 AM
Well just remember that when that the other Do-335 that you didn't see, due to it's 650+kph "cruise" speed and superior turn rate bearing down on your 6 with two fuselage 20mm cannons, two wing 15mm cannons, and the Mk-108 30mm engine mounted cannon (all standard inclusions) hehehehe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ElAurens
03-14-2005, 04:33 AM
The P51H was faster.

And we easily could have built them in the tens of thousands.

End of story.

Hetzer_II
03-14-2005, 04:38 AM
@ElAurens
OMG...

@Rat
"DO 335 will be banned."
Shure it will be banned like anything superior to the allied planes....
Dont get me wrong.. i dont even want the 335 to be in the game.. waste of time imho for the same reason you say..
But why the hell we never get 262´s on serious servers?

ImpStarDuece
03-14-2005, 04:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
The P51H was faster.

And we easily could have built them in the tens of thousands.

End of story. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Me-262 was faster

And the Germans could of easily built them in the, um, the, um, ... dozens?

Start of trolling

Hetzer_II
03-14-2005, 04:45 AM
@ImpStarDuece
Dont write:
"Carl von Clauswitz (1827)"
His name was
Carl von Claus<span class="ev_code_RED">e</span>witz (1827)!!!!

ElAurens
03-14-2005, 05:01 AM
HetzerII,

Why the OMG?
I'm just stating facts. The Do335 was very interesting, and fast. But for some reason my European friends think that the US had no piston engined competitors for it.

The P51H had a top speed of 487mph at 25,000ft.
The P47N was similar.
The Do335 would have made no appreciable difference to the outcome.

Not taking anything away from it, just stating fact.

Hetzer_II
03-14-2005, 05:21 AM
Its alway the way how to say something..

First off all the research for the do335 began much earlier than it flew.. i believe if was middle 43? First flight was on 26. Oktober 1943...
That it doesnt flew in service such early was a failure.. the 335 had no big friends...
But think about what should have stopped the 335 if it was available earlier? Maybe early 44...or middle 44 where were youre p51h and p47n at this time? First P51H was flown in feb. 1945.. P47N in may 1945.. (i hope that was right.. tell me if not... i dont have books about these...)

I dont want any argue about the 335.. its a not needed plane imho and the time spended to it was time in which many other things could have been done.

Greets

kubanloewe
03-14-2005, 06:07 AM
DO335 was built prior as a "Blitzbomber" which can carry Bombs in its belly and fly fast enough to escape from Fighters. Especially at low level under the Radar it´s Performance was unbeaten. Later on with appearance of the AR234 Jetbomber Design the DO 335 Destroyer Variant with 2 MK103 in the wings should be another Weopon against the main LW Problem; the allie Bomberfleet.

and Hetzer is right; Dornier didn´t have such an influence like Messerschmitt f.e. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Atzebrueck
03-14-2005, 06:24 AM
And don't forget that the plane and the engines still had a lot of potential for further improvements.

Imagine the DB603N being used ... 2*2800 PS instead of 2*1800 PS http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Additionally the built Do335 A0/A1 were in bad condition.

So, I would expect something like 640 km/h on the deck and 770 km/h at altitude for the A0/A1.

some links:
http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/do335/do335_3.html
(in German, but interesting nevertheless)
or
http://www.do335.de.vu/

BBB_Hyperion
03-14-2005, 06:55 AM
@ElAurens
How much P51H , P47N were deployed to Europe ?

Further the do335 was already on drawing board with jet prop combinaton . So speculations about the outcome are little doubtfull. Anyway the do335 is a heavy fighter class plane not compareable to p51s etc. Like hetzer_II already pointed out that the first flight was in 43. And no one really liked or wanted that thing at first like the 262. The speed difference to fw or other planes wasnt enough to give it a priority. Only real advantage beeing firepower and range. Technical however there were more advantages like a ejection seat and technical gimmicks like search radar etc.

ImpStarDuece
03-14-2005, 07:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hetzer_II:
@ImpStarDuece
Dont write:
"Carl von Clauswitz (1827)"
His name was
Carl von Claus<span class="ev_code_RED">e</span>witz (1827)!!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, technically I shoud be writing <span class="ev_code_RED">K</span>arl von Claus<span class="ev_code_RED">e</span>witz.

However, my 1956 edition of "On War" is one of those very anglicized versions, with some questionable translations, so out went the K and the E! Still, it does keep the pedants amused.

VW-IceFire
03-14-2005, 07:54 AM
No reason to ban the Do-335 and no reason to complain about the Spitfire or any of the others since none of them are "uber". Myths.

Word from Oleg on the FM was that the Do-335 would not be a terribly manuverable plane. I'm just paraphrasing but I imagine it would be like a Me-262...fast in a straight line but not so good anywhere else.

Unlike the 262, the Do-335 is still a prop fighter and it probably would not be so uncatchable. Besides, with a Tempest and a Spitfire XIV around, the Do-335 is up against some of the fastest fighters of the war provided they all come in the same patch. Add that to the higher altitude maximum speed of the Mustang and we've got a very close competition on all sides.

Philipscdrw
03-14-2005, 08:44 AM
The 'uberness' of the Spitfire is matched by the 'n00bness' of most of the pilots who fly them - I shot down 2 in quick succession on GreaterGreen the other day, from a Zero - 'That's not very remarkable!' I hear you say. Well, in the ~5 months of online Il-2 I've had, and the 3.5 years of Il-2 offline, I've shot down less than 10 aircraft in regular, fighter-to-fighter combat. There's more than that if you include the P-40s my He-111 gunners shot...

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 09:19 AM
i got 3 in a il2 a few days ago http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

tbh, we just haveto wait and see how it performs ingame. imo itll be banned if its way better than everything else, but allowed if its reasonably close to other stuff

Buzzsaw-
03-14-2005, 09:42 AM
Salute

Don't know where anybody might get the idea that this would be an aircraft which turns well. This is a huge plane, the size of a medium bomber.

Do-335

Normal loaded 21,165 lb (9,600 kg)

Span 45 ft 3.3 in (13.8 m); Length 45 ft 5.25 in (13.85 m); Height 16 ft 4.8 in (5.0 m): Wing area 414.411 sq ft (38.5 sq m)

The large wingspan is going to reduce rollrate considerably.

The wingloading is over 51 lbs per Sq/ft, hardly a recipe for tight turns.

The best that could be hoped for would be that it's aileron turns and low G turns at high speeds might be decent. Although speed bleed would be considerable.

But if it ever got slow, it would be a major pig.

In my personal opinion, the Do-335 is an example of what German designers working with piston engines had to come up with in the abscence of high octane fuel.

Without the high power output possible from running hi octane fuel in their engines, the Germans had to resort to stuffing two engines in a huge frame to get the same performance as a single highly boosted Merlin running on hi-octane. (which is what the P-51H was engined with, a standard Packard Merlin running at +25 boost on 150 octane)

A much better route, was the one taken by Messerschmidt, in opting for Jet engines and designing the Me-262 around them.

That was the truly revolutionary aircraft from German designers, not the Do-335.

The TA-152 was also a much better design. The designers had the same handicaps, but managed to achieve decent performance by focusing on a lighter weight aircraft, with a single large engine.

But hope you guys have fun flying the Do-335 anyway... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JtD
03-14-2005, 09:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
HetzerII,

Why the OMG?
I'm just stating facts. The Do335 was very interesting, and fast. But for some reason my European friends think that the US had no piston engined competitors for it.

The P51H had a top speed of 487mph at 25,000ft.
The P47N was similar.
The Do335 would have made no appreciable difference to the outcome.

Not taking anything away from it, just stating fact. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you telling me that if the war had lasted longer the Allies would have won?
I always thought it had only been a question of days until the Axis forces had crossed the big pond to invade the USA.

And they would have used planty of Do-335's for it, just to keep this related to the topic. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

3.JG51_BigBear
03-14-2005, 10:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

Don't know where anybody might get the idea that this would be an aircraft which turns well. This is a huge plane, the size of a medium bomber.

Do-335

Normal loaded 21,165 lb (9,600 kg)

Span 45 ft 3.3 in (13.8 m); Length 45 ft 5.25 in (13.85 m); Height 16 ft 4.8 in (5.0 m): Wing area 414.411 sq ft (38.5 sq m)

The large wingspan is going to reduce rollrate considerably.

The wingloading is over 51 lbs per Sq/ft, hardly a recipe for tight turns.

The best that could be hoped for would be that it's aileron turns and low G turns at high speeds might be decent. Although speed bleed would be considerable.

But if it ever got slow, it would be a major pig.

In my personal opinion, the Do-335 is an example of what German designers working with piston engines had to come up with in the abscence of high octane fuel.

Without the high power output possible from running hi octane fuel in their engines, the Germans had to resort to stuffing two engines in a huge frame to get the same performance as a single highly boosted Merlin running on hi-octane. (which is what the P-51H was engined with, a standard Packard Merlin running at +25 boost on 150 octane)

A much better route, was the one taken by Messerschmidt, in opting for Jet engines and designing the Me-262 around them.

That was the truly revolutionary aircraft from German designers, not the Do-335.

The TA-152 was also a much better design. The designers had the same handicaps, but managed to achieve decent performance by focusing on a lighter weight aircraft, with a single large engine.

But hope you guys have fun flying the Do-335 anyway... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I expect it to be a total **** plane, I just want it. In real life pilots actually complained that the aircraft had too much power and at higher throttle setting the plane would buck and oscillate. As a fast intruder type bomber the plane had a lot of promise. Had it been rushed into service earlier it could have acted much like a Mosquito, flying low and fast to drop bombs on strategic targets and using pure speed as its defense. I have a feeling the fighter version would make a good bomber interceptor but I don't think anyone has to worry about it being uber.

Obi_Kwiet
03-14-2005, 11:26 AM
I herd the Germans canceled it because it was as instable as heck. I hope they model it on actual performance instead of projected performance.

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 11:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Obi_Kwiet:
I herd the Germans canceled it because it was as instable as heck. I hope they model it on actual performance instead of projected performance. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

heard the real thing was fast, handy cos its entire combat career was runnin away, from what i know of it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

3.JG51_BigBear
03-14-2005, 11:43 AM
It was never cancelled. About twenty were built and there are sources that say the Germans were preparing to build 100 more with some already in various stages of production. From what I've read the B model was going to be the major production version for at least these first 100.

kubanloewe
03-14-2005, 12:05 PM
think the JUG was a fat Pig too with 2200hp and 6,5-7 tons. By release of FB the JUG was a really easy meet for most 190´s but now it can climb way to good. (other planes too;K4 f.e)
A 3,2ton 109G6 couldnt outclimb the latest JUG in the Game, it´s a joke this FM now.

The DO335 had 3700hp btw 4200hp (603LA) with 10tons. With the 3700hp it reaches 6000m in 10min.
So it should climb like the JUG in the Game but is way faster; a real Killer for Onlinewars with hard settings.

one more Time; this Plane should be the fastest Prop Plane in groundarea with Bombs in its belly . For that it was origin designed.

anarchy52
03-14-2005, 01:21 PM
Does anyone have original Do-335 specs?
There seems to be a lot of confusion on Max TO weight and combat weight from different sources...

PraetorHonoris
03-14-2005, 01:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:

Actually, technically I shoud be writing <span class="ev_code_RED">K</span>arl von Claus<span class="ev_code_RED">e</span>witz.

However, my 1956 edition of "On War" is one of those very anglicized versions, with some questionable translations, so out went the K and the E! Still, it does keep the pedants amused. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How anglicized your book may be, the man's name is still Carl von Clausewitz, where ever you live. In Germany the name Carl was/is as popular as Karl.

http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/3499451387.03.LZZZZZZZ.gif

Sorry for being OT.

Codex1971
03-14-2005, 03:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

Don't know where anybody might get the idea that this would be an aircraft which turns well. This is a huge plane, the size of a medium bomber. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> NASM - Unlike a normal twin-engined aircraft, with wing-mounted engines, loss of an engine on the Do-335 did not cause a handling problem. Even with one engine out, speed was a respectable 621 kph (348 mph). Because of its appearance, pilots dubbed it the "Ant eater" ("Ameisenbar"), although they described its performance as exceptional, particularly in acceleration and turning radius. The Do-335 was very docile in flight and had no dangerous spin characteristics. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Source - http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/dornier_do335.htm

DarthBane_
03-14-2005, 03:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HayateAce:
Dorkier335 should ban nicely from the good servers, but I say bring it on where the likes of P80 are allowed.

Six fifties should set that rear engine to burning really well.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You did it in your bed again! Why oh why? Maybe you should have your Ypee80, ofcourse if he162 is absent, othervise your condition can become worse than it is now. Little funboys shouldnt play with fire.

VW-IceFire
03-14-2005, 03:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Obi_Kwiet:
I herd the Germans canceled it because it was as instable as heck. I hope they model it on actual performance instead of projected performance. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think you may be thinking of the Go-229 which we already have and yes its very unstable. I don't like flying it much...

It was flown operationally and there's the famous encounter of Pierre Closterman with one of these things. The Do-335 outran both Closterman and his wingmen, both in Tempest Vs. Although neither Closterman nor his wingman had the inclination to break the pin on the throttle and goto WEP. Apparently the Do-335 was on WEP because there was a thin trail of smoke coming from the engines.

I can't see the Do-335 being unstable...I can see it being too stable. Its huge...its got big wings...its like a bomber http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Codex1971
03-14-2005, 03:30 PM
The most detailed site I have found yet on the Do-335...it's a French site so the Google Translation tool is in the URL.

http://216.239.37.104/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&langpair=fr%7Cen&u=http://xplanes.free.fr/do335/do335-1.htm&prev=/language_tools
http://peanut.scale.free.fr/images/3v-do335-planche1.jpg
http://peanut.scale.free.fr/images/3v-do335-planche2.jpg

anarchy52
03-15-2005, 02:47 AM
- Huge wing area, very thick profile (reminds me of hurri) => more lift for smaller wing area = turn
- Large elevators => turn
- Large ailerons and no engine nacelles outside the plane axis => better roll then any other twin engined plane
- boosted controls + two hand stick => high speed manuverability
- Enormous power (3600 up to 4200HP for later version) and very clean aerodynamics => acceleration inferior only to rocket powered fighters.
- Faster then any other prop in the game.
- mk103 cannon => nuke
- ejection seat => can bail out on high speed
- internal bomb bay => ideal jabo

3 main outstanding characteristics that all test pilots point out is:
- speed
- acceleration
- manuverability especially in turn(surprising isn't it?)

What it should be is the ultimate killing machine.
<luftwhine mode="on">
What it will be in FB...my guess it will roll like B-17, accelerate like focke A, rear engine will torch with .303 hit (and spill oil on the windshield), it will stall viciously in the gentlest of turns and probably have unstoppable fuel tank leak.
</luftwhine>

dadada1
03-15-2005, 05:59 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by anarchy52:
- Huge wing area, very thick profile (reminds me of hurri) => more lift for smaller wing area = turn
- Large elevators => turn
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What makes you think it can turn ? Eric Brown flew (the 2 seater) and was not impressed by the turing ability or the control harmony.

------------------------------------------------------------
- _manuverability especially in turn_(surprising isn't it?)
------------------------------------------------------------

Which test pilots ? Can we have some names, I've never heard this claim anywhere for the Do335.

----------------------------------------------------
What it should be is the ultimate killing machine.
----------------------------------------------------

For bombers perhaps, but for a fighter, doubdtful. I'm not trying to provoke an angry response from you. I myself am a dedcated Luft flyer, I just fail to see your reasoning. This and your summary is contrary to anthing I've read about this aircraft. I'am however very much looking forward to it's inclusion.

anarchy52
03-15-2005, 07:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dadada1:
What makes you think it can turn ? Eric Brown flew (the 2 seater) and was not impressed by the turing ability or the control harmony.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
He flew the twin seater - have you seen that thing? No wonder.

http://www.infowrangler.com/phpwiki/wiki.phtml?title=Dornier_Do_335
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Fitted with Dailmer-Benz DB 603A engines delivering 1,750hp at take-off, the first prototype flew in October 1943. The pilots were surprised at the speed, acceleration, turning circle and general handling of the type -€" it was a twin that flew like a single. The only sore spots they found were the poor rearward visibility and weak landing gear.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/dornier_do335.htm
(Smithsonian National Air And Space Museum)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Because of its appearance, pilots dubbed it the "Ant eater" ("Ameisenbar"), although they described its performance as exceptional, particularly in acceleration and turning radius. The Do-335 was very docile in flight and had no dangerous spin characteristics.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.swannysmodels.com/Do335b.html
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
They commented favorably on its general handling behavior, maneuverability and in particular on its acceleration and turning circle. However, they also criticized the very poor rearward vision and weak undercarriage and some slight porpoising at high speeds.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://modelingmadness.com/reviews/axis/luft/wolf335b.htm
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Dornier€s design, which became the Do-335, was powered by two 1750 hp DB-603 engines and had maneuverability on par with the single engine fighters of the day.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://e-hobbyland.com/dornierdo335.html
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Two 1,750HP Daimler Benz DB603 engines allowed for a top speed of 760kn/hr., yet the sleek design ensured maneuverability on par with single prop aircraft.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually everything I ever read about Do-335 emphesizes it's speed, acceleration (not surprising) and manuverability in turning (surprizing). BTW Do-335 had boosted ailerons so it shouldn't be sluggish in roll either. On the other hand nobody claims it can turn with yaks or spitfires. But I think it would compare favorably to underpowered stall machine (FW-190).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Which test pilots ? Can we have some names, I've never heard this claim anywhere for the Do335.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm looking for the Brown comments on Do-335 I kew I had it somewhere...
Does anyone have german docs?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
For bombers perhaps, but for a fighter, doubdtful. I'm not trying to provoke an angry response from you. I myself am a dedcated Luft flyer, I just fail to see your reasoning. This and your summary is contrary to anthing I've read about this aircraft. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

why not? P-47 wasn't a very manuverable aircraft compared to 109 or 190 yet it was probably the best US fighter of the war.
As for angry response...what should I be angry about? And dedication to fly red or blue should have nothing to do with it.
Everything I read about the Do-335 that it was manuverable fast and had tremendous acceleration. I remember watching a documentary featuring one of the german test pilots that said that acceleration was incredible that it would "pin you to the seat". I'll try to dig up some docs when I get home.

JG53-Falkster
03-15-2005, 08:15 AM
Of course there is much confusion with the Data's and Stories about the Do335.
Everbody thinks he knowns everything.
Often these posts are only rumors or history which they heard long time ago.
But they never touched a book with serious sources,
why also, it takes to much time to
read a book......right?
The most things i read in this thread are
just completely wrong.......

But nice to see that there are
a couple of guys who knows about what they're talking.
Unfortunatly nobody is listen to them.......

MOhz
03-15-2005, 08:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG53-Falkster:
Of course there is much confusion with the Data's and Stories about the Do335.
Everbody thinks he knowns everything.
Often these posts are only rumors or history which they heard long time ago.
But they never touched a book with serious sources,
why also, it takes to much time to
read a book......right?
The most things i read in this thread are
just completely wrong.......

But nice to see that there are
a couple of guys who knows about what they're talking.
Unfortunatly nobody is listen to them....... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You would not mind being a bit more precise, to whose opinion you think we should be listening to? Or state your own since you seem to know which ones are (this has to be put in brakets...) "correct" (...since how are we going to know)

p1ngu666
03-15-2005, 09:00 AM
if u have do335 stuff, then share http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG53-Falkster
03-15-2005, 10:48 AM
Well, it doesn't make sense to scann all my books, and post them here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I made a page about the do335, like i did for the ju88 project.
Because the Do335 project stopped several times i lost the patience,
so i stopped to develop and extend the page.

But the Page is still online and there are some usefull information with good sources,
unfortunatly not that much text, like on the Ju88 page......

So have a look at www.do335.de.vu (http://www.do335.de.vu)

A french Pilot who actually flew the P-47 during the war,
tested the do335 after the war and said that the maneuverability was nearly the same like with the P-47
he was surpised because the plane's size.
The Do335 was a very stable plane because
the propeller at the tail. So the plane don't swivel when you change the "thrust".T
his because the front and tail propeller turned against each other.
So the plane is very suitable for guns and precise firing...................

p1ngu666
03-15-2005, 11:18 AM
ive wondered about the twist effect the engines would have...

in pf it seems its better to have torque than no torque
p38 vs pretty much everything for example http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Sparky401SQD
03-15-2005, 11:36 AM
Definitely loved The DO-335 in Secret weapons of the luftwaffe, We have the twin boom 109Z, so why not !

Codex1971
03-15-2005, 07:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dadada1:
Which test pilots ? Can we have some names, I've never heard this claim anywhere for the Do335.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

First test flight was on 26 Oct. 1943 by Hans Dieterle, lead test pilot for Donier at that time. Further test were carried out on 2 Nov. 1943 read on...
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Two additional flights of C-335 V1 were carried out on November 2, 1943. At the time of the first, the plane was flown by Werner Altrogge, who flew on of Ju-86R of recognition above Great Britain before becoming test pilot. For the second, C-335 was controlled by Quenzier. These two pilots and Dieterle carried out all the flights with Rechlin during the first part of the tests.

Although a directional instability was noted at high speed, the test pilots were generally enthusiastic. They favorably noted its general behavior, its maneuverability and in particular its acceleration and its ray of turn. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"ray of turn" I think should read "rate of turn"

From http://xplanes.free.fr/do335/do335-3.htm (French web site translated using Google language tools)

I would assume that the pilots were surpised that such a large plane could turn the way it did. I haven't seen any figures on turn rates but my guess is that the thing might turn like an FW or P47. But turn rate isn't everything. It is interesting to note the Do-335 has similar dimensions and weight to the P-47, but has two engines so maybe the extra power allowed for a tighter turn than the P-47.

VW-IceFire
03-15-2005, 07:38 PM
The P-47 I think turns as well as it does because of its wings and streamlining. No doubt power plays into this.

I can't see the Do-335 being a plane you want to go around and around in but having a decent enough turn can be useful. This is one area I put the Corsair at better than the FW190. The two are similar in roll rate but the Corsair has an awesome snap turn at almost any speed which means you can bring guns to bear. If the Do-335 has this ability, then its an added bonus.

Plus with a MK103 (which is like a rapid fire bazooka!) and two MG151/15s...the aircraft will put the hurt on pretty quickly. I also understand there were gunpods in the MG151/20 variety? Or only on some versions?

Humpy_Dumpy
03-15-2005, 09:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Atzebrueck:
And don't forget that the plane and the engines still had a lot of potential for further improvements.

Imagine the DB603N being used ... 2*2800 PS instead of 2*1800 PS http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Additionally the built Do335 A0/A1 were in bad condition.

So, I would expect something like 640 km/h on the deck and 770 km/h at altitude for the A0/A1. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

640km/h? 770km/h?!?! Read from this link:

http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/dornier_do335.htm

Buzzsaw-
03-15-2005, 09:50 PM
Salute

The reason the Corsair turns better than the 190 is simple, lower wingloading.

And back to the Do-335:

It doesn't matter how large the elevator is, the crucial issue is how it is profiled, ie. wide width and thin depth works better at high speeds, narrow width and wide depth works better at low speeds.

Second, in regards to the wing profile. I don't know the aerofoil used on Do-335, but if they used an aerofoil similar to the Hurricane, the Doernier would turn like cr*p at high speeds, due the compressibility from the very quickly forming shock wave in the airflow moving over the thickly sculptured wing. The Hurricane is one of the worst handling aircraft at higher speeds.

I doubt the Doernier used a high lift wing, that is not what is needed at high speeds, which is where the aircraft was designed to operate. Conversely, if it had a wing designed for high speed, then the wing would not generate much lift a lower speeds and high angles of attack. Thus it would be pig at low speeds.

And we have to come back to the overall wingloading. As I mentioned, over 51 lbs per Square foot. Doesn't matter how good the aerofoil is at low speed, with all that weight on the wing, you are going to have a high stall speed. Which again, means you have a pig at low speeds.

Not to mention speed bleed. With the huge 414 Sq ft for the wing area, everytime you present that wing at a higher angle of attack to the airflow, you are going to get a LOT of drag generated. Which is going to bleed speed VERY fast.

As far as the rollrate is concerned:

Someone mentioned, powerassisted ailerons. Well that only applies at high speeds. At low speeds, the pilot can generate full deflection of the ailerons with his own muscles, once they have hit full deflection, nothing more can be done. Only at high speeds when the pilot cannot physically move the airerons to full deflection is the power assist of use. At that point the full deflection achieved with the power assist, combined with the high velocity air stream pushing against the aileron, moves the wing quickly laterally. At low speeds the air stream is not nearly as powerful and effective in moving the aircraft around. And again, with the large wingspan of the beast, you have a lot of air to push out of the way, as well of course, the inertia of the wing weight working against the lateral movement.

These are the same issues which the P-38L had. It was equipped with power assisted ailerons. They worked great at high speeds, but at low and medium speeds, the P-38 was a pig when it came to attempting fast transitions.

As far as that page which people keep quoting. It is of very limited value and should not be taken at face value. It does not inclue quotes from any original source, in fact I don't think it quotes a single source for the material on the page.

And as far as the difference between the two seater trainer and the regular model, there was very little difference in performance or weight. Of all the sources for how the Do-335 actually performed, Eric Brown's test is probably the best source available next to the original German tests.

ImpStarDuece
03-15-2005, 10:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Humpy_Dumpy:

So, I would expect something like 640 km/h on the deck and 770 km/h at altitude for the A0/A1.
640km/h? 770km/h?!?! Read from this link:

http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/dornier_do335.htm[/QUOTE] (http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/dornier_do335.htm <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>) [/QUOTE]


Quote from the Smithsonian site has a couple of BAD typos in it;

"It was the fastest production piston-engined fighter ever built, attaining <span class="ev_code_RED">846 kilometers per hour (474 mph)</span> in level flight at a time when the <span class="ev_code_RED">official world speed record was 755 kph (469 mph).</span>"

Now im no expert but some how I doubt that the difference between 469 mph and 474 mph is the same as the difference between 755 kphand 846 kph . 469 mph is 755 kph but 474 mph is only 763 kph not 846 kph.

846 kph is 525 mph. If this is correct then the Do-335 was the first 500 mph prop fighter, something i'm sure someone would of raised here before. Mid 470 mph (760 ish kph) is ****ed impressive though.

Similarly when it states; "Even with one engine out, speed was a respectable 621 kph (348 mph)."

621 kph is 385 mph
348 mph is 560 kph

Again, more than a little distortion in the figures. I assume that the article writer has a few problems with the whole miles/kilometers conversion thing. I wouldn't trust the internet as far as I could throw it!

Codex1971
03-15-2005, 11:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I can't see the Do-335 being a plane you want to go around and around in but having a decent enough turn can be useful. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree, what I meant to to say is that the Do-335 might sustain a turn longer due to the two engines, thus keeping it tighter longer than a P-47.

Hetzer_II
03-16-2005, 12:29 AM
The 335 dont have to turn to be dangerous..
look at the 190.. that one cant turn but is still dangerous besides everything Oleg do to it...

Greets

anarchy52
03-16-2005, 03:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

The reason the Corsair turns better than the 190 is simple, lower wingloading.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, it's not simple at all, allow me to illustrate:
If the wingloading were the only factor then:
compare P-38 with Bf-110G2
Bf-110G2, P-38
weight empty: 5700kg, 5804kg
weight loaded: 7300kg, 7945kg
wingloading (when fully loaded): 189.6kg/m^2, 261.1kg/m^2
power-to-weight: 0.40HP/kg, 0.37HP/kg
power-to-wing-area: 76.62HP/m^2, 96.98HP/m^2

So Bf-110G2 pwnz P-38 in no time. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
And back to the Do-335:

It doesn't matter how large the elevator is, the crucial issue is how it is profiled, ie. wide width and thin depth works better at high speeds, narrow width and wide depth works better at low speeds.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Size (area) of control surface matters:
analogy: what is heavier 10kg of sand or 1kg of lead?
You are correct about profiles though.

Also in FB...there is another factor being calculated (Von Thewar's correction :-) )

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Second, in regards to the wing profile. I don't know the aerofoil used on Do-335, but if they used an aerofoil similar to the Hurricane, the Doernier would turn like cr*p at high speeds, due the compressibility from the very quickly forming shock wave in the airflow moving over the thickly sculptured wing. The Hurricane is one of the worst handling aircraft at higher speeds.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I do not know the exact parameters, but the wing of Do-335 is VERY thick in wingroot thinning towards the wingtips with a noticable dihedral.
thick profile reminded me of hurricane's wing.
Strangely, hurri seems to hold energy rather well for its thick and draggy wing and weak engine...and it's elevators don't seem inferior at high speed to say...109E?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I doubt the Doernier used a high lift wing, that is not what is needed at high speeds, which is where the aircraft was designed to operate. Conversely, if it had a wing designed for high speed, then the wing would not generate much lift a lower speeds and high angles of attack. Thus it would be pig at low speeds.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think it's too generalizing to say that wing can be made only for low or only for high speed and say that thick profile is for low thin profile for high. Or asses plane's manuverability by wingload alone (although it is the rule of thumb)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Doesn't matter how good the aerofoil is at low speed, with all that weight on the wing, you are going to have a high stall speed. Which again, means you have a pig at low speeds.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, landing speed is 190km/h, but note that 335 must have had low angle of attack on landing due to rear prop. As for wingloading - it has lower wingloading then P-38 and similar to P-47 with Do-335 having better power-to-weight, and powerloading.

Hmm maybe P-47 should be a pig with high speed wing and high wingload. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
These are the same issues which the P-38L had. It was equipped with power assisted ailerons. They worked great at high speeds, but at low and medium speeds, the P-38 was a pig when it came to attempting fast transitions.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
P-38 had engines in wing nacelles. That accounts for a lot of inertia which probably had more impact on it's roll performance then aileron design.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
And as far as the difference between the two seater trainer and the regular model, there was very little difference in performance or weight. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
2-seater was 40-60km/h slower, 300kg heavier (empty) and had much worse aerodynamics. It's surprisingly close to performance of single seater considering the aerodynamics. I guess it's like what they said about F-4 Phantom: It's a proof that even a brick can fly if you have powerfull anough engines.

Based on the basic parameters and pilot's accounts without specific data on turn times and roll rate I'd expect Do-335 to be overall similar in manuverability to P-47, with advantage in acceleration, arnament and level speed. a lot of it depends on the version of the DB603 engine we're getting.

dadada1
03-16-2005, 04:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dadada1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by anarchy52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dadada1:
What makes you think it can turn ? Eric Brown flew (the 2 seater) and was not impressed by the turing ability or the control harmony.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
He flew the twin seater - have you seen that thing? No wonder.

http://www.infowrangler.com/phpwiki/wiki.phtml?title=Dornier_Do_335
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Fitted with Dailmer-Benz DB 603A engines delivering 1,750hp at take-off, the first prototype flew in October 1943. The pilots were surprised at the speed, acceleration, _turning circle_ and general handling of the type -€" it was a twin that flew like a single. The only sore spots they found were the poor rearward visibility and weak landing gear.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/dornier_do335.htm
(Smithsonian National Air And Space Museum)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Because of its appearance, pilots dubbed it the "Ant eater" ("Ameisenbar"), although they described its performance as exceptional, particularly in acceleration and _turning radius_. The Do-335 was very docile in flight and had no dangerous spin characteristics.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.swannysmodels.com/Do335b.html
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
They commented favorably on its general handling behavior, maneuverability and in particular on its acceleration and turning circle. However, they also criticized the very poor rearward vision and weak undercarriage and some slight porpoising at high speeds.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://modelingmadness.com/reviews/axis/luft/wolf335b.htm
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Dornier€s design, which became the Do-335, was powered by two 1750 hp DB-603 engines and had maneuverability on par with the single engine fighters of the day.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://e-hobbyland.com/dornierdo335.html
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Two 1,750HP Daimler Benz DB603 engines allowed for a top speed of 760kn/hr., yet the sleek design ensured maneuverability on par with single prop aircraft.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually everything I ever read about Do-335 emphesizes it's speed, acceleration (not surprising) and manuverability in turning (surprizing). BTW Do-335 had boosted ailerons so it shouldn't be sluggish in roll either. On the other hand nobody claims it can turn with yaks or spitfires. But I think it would compare favorably to underpowered stall machine (FW-190).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Which test pilots ? Can we have some names, I've never heard this claim anywhere for the Do335.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm looking for the Brown comments on Do-335 I kew I had it somewhere...
Does anyone have german docs?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
For bombers perhaps, but for a fighter, doubdtful. I'm not trying to provoke an angry response from you. I myself am a dedcated Luft flyer, I just fail to see your reasoning. This and your summary is contrary to anthing I've read about this aircraft. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

why not? P-47 wasn't a very manuverable aircraft compared to 109 or 190 yet it was probably the best US fighter of the war.
As for angry response...what should I be angry about? And dedication to fly red or blue should have nothing to do with it.
Everything I read about the Do-335 that it was manuverable fast and had tremendous acceleration. I remember watching a documentary featuring one of the german test pilots that said that acceleration was incredible that it would "pin you to the seat". I'll try to dig up some docs when I get home. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not in any (apart from the model kits, but you take thatas serious evidence?)of the links you posted does it mention the D0 335s turning ability. I don't think speed and acceleration can be in question. Look at the thickness of the wing chord, thicker than a Typhoons for sure. Of course I've seen the 2 seater, how would I have the book and not see the photos in it? Of the links you posted it is clear that they are edited from other sources. If your to convince me and others on this forum that the D0 335 had a good turning circle could you post a link to an original pilot evaluation document. This would carry far more weight as evidence for your argument than what I can get from the material you presented. At the end of the day, these are net links which are (In general but not always) not as well researched or academic as books. I'm playing devils advocate to a certain extent, don't misunderstand me. I am a long suffering Ta pilot so I know all about aircraft not meeting their initial expectation. The Ta also suffer from a lack of substantial documentation with regard to its manouverability. I'm talking about evaluation that led to figures on paper rather than favourable pilot accounts, which is the only thing that seems to get any respect around here. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

anarchy52
03-16-2005, 05:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dadada1:

Not in any (apart from the model kits, but you take thatas serious evidence?)of the links you posted does it mention the D0 335s turning ability.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually text in EVERY single document takes note of Do-335 turning ability. Even the Smitsonian National air And Space Museum.
Check the Codex1971's post with pilot's names.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Of the links you posted it is clear that they are edited from other sources. If your to convince me and others on this forum that the D0 335 had a good turning circle could you post a link to an original pilot evaluation document.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I do not have the original document.
this is the best so far: http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/do335/do335_3.html
I agree that Internet is not a reliable source of information because although a lot of info you can find on the net is really taken from books a lot of it comes from god knows where and it's complete rubbish. But then again there are **** books also http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I'm talking about evaluation that led to figures on paper rather than favourable pilot accounts, which is the only thing that seems to get any respect around here.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'd be more then happy if it were so, but unfortunatelly you are mistaking. If you post anything that contradicts "common knowledge" or "popular myth" you'll be attacked no matter if you scan the original doc or restore the **** plane and flight test it yourself. Von Thewar's correction factor is unfortunatelly very important both in the sim and this forum.

dadada1
03-16-2005, 06:21 AM
I've no doubt this AC will be banned for it's rareity alone, but if it has an excellent flight model as well, it's going to come under some very close scrutiny.

However, I am very much looking forward to taking the controls, even if I won't be able to touch the controls after I've had to bail out from her once or twice, if you know what I mean.

VW-IceFire
03-16-2005, 10:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dadada1:
I've no doubt this AC will be banned for it's rareity alone, but if it has an excellent flight model as well, it's going to come under some very close scrutiny.

However, I am very much looking forward to taking the controls, even if I won't be able to touch the controls after I've had to bail out from her once or twice, if you know what I mean. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Then why aren't these aircraft banned already?:
- BF.109Z (never flew)
- Spitfire HF IXe (only 5 or 6)
- La-7 3xB-20 (conflicted reports ranging from never flew during wartime to only about 200 used during the war in the final weeks)
- Ta-152H (small numbers flown at the end of the war)
- Yak-9UT (equipped to one or two IAP's only)
- A6M7 (very rare Zero variant produced in small numbers)

And I'm totally excluding the jets http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

In some ways the Do-335 has the leg up on these. It did fly, it did fly over the frontlines...it probably saw as much combat as He-162 or Me-163 although I don't know of any being shot down or shooting anything down.

In the average dogfight server...history is of little value it seems. Tossing in another prop fighter isn't a problem. Other servers you'll never see this on...or see it very rarely in what-if scenarios. Thats the fun in it.

So the precedent is against your comment. But it depends on where you're at. I doubt the FM is going to be something under huge amounts of scrutiny...the plane was fast but not much else. I think in many ways it'll be much like another FW190...which is cool http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

RedNeckerson
03-16-2005, 11:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:

Do-335

Normal loaded 21,165 lb (9,600 kg)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


According to "Wings of the Luftwaffe" 20,966lb is the MAXIMUM loaded weight for a Do-335A-0, including a SC 500 in the internal weapons bay.

So your wingloading figures are for a Do-335 fully loaded and carrying a 1,102lb bomb.

Empty equipped weight is 14,396lbs.

Wing area is correct at 414 sq. ft.

By comparison a loaded P-47D-30 weighed 19,400lbs for a wing area of only 300 sq. ft.

Buzzsaw-
03-16-2005, 11:23 AM
Salute

Do-335 never saw any combat, unless you count it being bombed.

Claims for world speed record for piston engined aircraft are not accurate, as the P-51H easily exceeded the Do-335's top speed.

All these 'never saw combat/built in small numbers' late war German UFO's being considered for inclusion in the game is somewhat incongruous. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Let's hope that if the Do-335 appears, that at least the combat tested/full production Tempest V, Spitfire XIV and P-47M also are included. Not to mention the higher boost versions of the P-51D and Spitfire IX. And the Meteor Jet.

Buzzsaw-
03-16-2005, 11:32 AM
Salute

About the Hurricane wing.

This is a high drag wing, clearly evidenced by the fact that the Hurricane IIc can only manage 342 mph maximum speed at altitude, on 1460 horsepower.

The zero lift drag coefficient of this aircraft is definitely not something to brag about.

On the other hand, the low speed high angle of attack lift characteristics are very good.

The aerofoil of various aircraft are always tradeoffs, and when you go for a high lift wing, you suffer penalties at higher speeds with compressibility and drag.

Look at the Me262. Wing on it was very thin, giving excellent characteristics at high speeds, (not to mention the swept back design, which was included purely by coincidence by the German designers, and not because they realised it would reduce the onset of compressibility at high speeds) but poor response at low speeds. This is one of the reasons the 262 had a high landing speed. Both the lack of airbrakes and the poor lift characteristics meant it had to be brought in very fast.

RedNeckerson
03-16-2005, 11:35 AM
It's the same with every thread about the Do-335.

People will show up and politicize the thread so fast it makes your head swim.

p1ngu666
03-16-2005, 01:07 PM
whinning about do335 fm will be limited to stabs in the dark, as we know not much about it...

btw i think speed record needed tobe set at low altitude, like 1000ft or something

to my limited knowledge, do335 may have SEEN combat, but didnt take part in any itself, think it just ran away http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

VW-IceFire
03-16-2005, 01:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

Do-335 never saw any combat, unless you count it being bombed.

Claims for world speed record for piston engined aircraft are not accurate, as the P-51H easily exceeded the Do-335's top speed.

All these 'never saw combat/built in small numbers' late war German UFO's being considered for inclusion in the game is somewhat incongruous. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Let's hope that if the Do-335 appears, that at least the combat tested/full production Tempest V, Spitfire XIV and P-47M also are included. Not to mention the higher boost versions of the P-51D and Spitfire IX. And the Meteor Jet. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Pierre Closterman and his wingman one fought with one. It ran away and they were low on fuel. His wingman even shot at it...

Apparently they did start to show up in a few places because they already knew about it and weren't surprised when he filed his report.

It saw combat...we just don't know of any kills or losses http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Choctaw111
03-16-2005, 02:51 PM
Why don't we get the F8F Bearcat. At least those aircraft were on carriers in the Pacific on thier way to operational units. they were already built and on their way. I think that I will start a separate thread about this.

JtD
03-16-2005, 03:27 PM
Because it's a Grumman plane and you have to pay 10 bucks everytime you say Grumman.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-16-2005, 03:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Choctaw111:
Why don't we get the F8F Bearcat. At least those aircraft were on carriers in the Pacific on thier way to operational units. they were already built and on their way. I think that I will start a separate thread about this. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand what your saying in terms of the 109Z and the Go-229 but the Do-335 seems to have actually seen combat in WWII. I've read several accounts of them being used as night bombers.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-16-2005, 03:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JtD:
Because it's a Grumman plane and you have to pay 10 bucks everytime you say Grumman. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, you said it.

AB_Zipper
03-16-2005, 04:31 PM
It's seem that I heard Oleg said that he wonted to add some more German planes to even things up, God help us if a Do-335 shoots down a Spitfire! Someone will throw the red flag... the game will stop till the officials look at the replay! I'v flown the Spit's you can really rack up the points in one of those baby's, It's so easy to fly... like a Cessna 150 So... now a new plane appears on the horizon, just the thought of it shakes the halls of the red teams pillers of justice, uber they cry and ban it! I personally think that if it in the game... let it play! I'v been up against 262's, and it makes it... that more enjoyable when why keep missing you, and you get the kill! it's all in the tactics.

Buzzsaw-
03-16-2005, 05:12 PM
Salute Nickerson

Your figures on the weight of the P-47D30 are complete nonsense and don't bear the slightest resemblance to the facts.

19,000 lbs... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Weights were 10,700 pounds empty, 14,600 pounds normal loaded. Maximum loaded weight of 17,500 was with two drop tanks, one 1000lb bomb and 8 HVAR rockets.

And the normal loaded weight was with the aircraft carrying 370 gallons of fuel, which is close to 2500 lbs.

The P-47D had easily better wingloading than the Do-335 especially if it was running with tanks 1/2 full.

If you look at the later model P-47M, which the Do-335 would have been up against, since it was designed as a high speed interceptor, it was even lighter at 13,275 lbs normal loaded weight and had a slightly larger wing, at 308 Sq/ft, so its wingloading was considerably better.

It had a top speed of 470 mph, only marginally slower than the Do-335, in a plane which would easily be more maneuverable.

Both the P-47M and the P-51H, (487mph) would have torn to pieces any Do-335's which were foolish enough to appear in their vicinity.

Buzzsaw-
03-16-2005, 05:20 PM
Salute Zipper

Maybe if you looked at the facts, you might understand why the Spitfires are so easy to fly.

At 7440 lbs and a wing area of 242 Sq/ft, the Spitfire IX has a wingloading of 30.74 lbs per Sq/ft. That means it is 29% better than a 109K4 with a wingloading of 43 lbs per Sq ft, or 44% better than a 190D9 with a wingloading of 48.1 lbs per Sq/ft.

That is the reason the Spitfire handles so well at low speeds. It's low wingloading gives it a stall speed far lower than its adversaries.

Buzzsaw-
03-16-2005, 05:24 PM
Salute

In regards to a D0-335 engaging in combat, the one which was encountered by Clostermann's Tempests was not part of a combat Staffel. There were ZERO operating combat staffels equipped with Do-335's.

The fact is, it was likely out on a test run, and because the Allies completely dominated the skies over Germany in the last stages of the war, it encountered an Allied Fighter sweep. And ran away as fast as its twin engines would allow... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Good thing too, the Tempests would have made short work of it.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-16-2005, 05:33 PM
I have accounts of the Do-335 being used in night operations. In my spare time today I have been looking through books and CDs of information. As soon as I get my hands on them I'll post them. The plane definitely never equipped an entire active unit but it was used in combat.

Choctaw111
03-16-2005, 05:48 PM
I would like to see all planes of the appropriate time period be allowed to be flown. If we are playing in an arena that has mid 1945 AC in it then all planes of that type should be flown and not locked out. THE CATCH to this is that they should be available in the proportionate numbers that they were available in at that time. If only a small number of D0335s were in service at that time then there should only be one or two available in the arena with the rest of the AC being in abundant supply. This brings me to something that I had posted a while back about there being only a certain number of each AC available and once all of those AC have been destroyed or shot down then those particular AC can no longer be flown until the arena is reset.

AB_Zipper
03-16-2005, 08:59 PM
Salute Buzzsaw I have to disagree I have a photo of a Do-335 with a staffel #! Here is the thing that bothers me most, All I see is people talking about... WING LOADING AND PERFROMANCE! The fact of the matter is that the grave yards are full of pilots and our ace's that where not killed by ether of these phenomena's Yes you hear about some of these grate air battle, and I guess that dose make for a good read, But mostly it was quick and with out fan fair, I would love to see the Do-335 make it in the game, I would also like to see more high alt flying in Hyper Lobby, Flying around in a circle is ok for warming up, but thats about it.
I'd say that the most memorable kill that I have had was the time I shot down 2 FA squad guy's at about 25,000ft After takeoff I noticed contrails over head, I decided to go check them out, after what seem to be almost 30 minutes I managed to swing around on there tail, As I closed in, I could see the one wing man kicking left rudder time to time to check his six, ever time I seen this I would kick right rudder to swing out and keeping in there contrails tell I was with in .15 and opened fire! The first one was quick and painless, the second was crippled badly, I was like a dog on a poor defenseless rabbit, I was new to the game at the time, and the FA Squad was well known at the time, I Salute the FA Squad, moral of the store... No wing loading are better perforance I work my tail off to get up there, I used everthing that the aircraft had to offer to make it happen! and I used TACTICS

3.JG51_BigBear
03-16-2005, 09:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I would like to see all planes of the appropriate time period be allowed to be flown. If we are playing in an arena that has mid 1945 AC in it then all planes of that type should be flown and not locked out. THE CATCH to this is that they should be available in the proportionate numbers that they were available in at that time. If only a small number of D0335s were in service at that time then there should only be one or two available in the arena with the rest of the AC being in abundant supply. This brings me to something that I had posted a while back about there being only a certain number of each AC available and once all of those AC have been destroyed or shot down then those particular AC can no longer be flown until the arena is reset. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree 100%. A guy I used to fly with in JG51, Hunde, also brought up this idea several times. It makes a lot of sense and would add realism to online arenas, I wonder what keeps Oleg and company from implementing something like this. Limitation of the game perhaps?

3.JG51_BigBear
03-16-2005, 09:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AB_Zipper:
Salute Buzzsaw I have to disagree I have a photo of a Do-335 with a staffel #! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yellow 10? Let me see if I can get a link for it.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-16-2005, 09:22 PM
http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW3/do335-002.jpg

RedNeckerson
03-16-2005, 10:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute Nickerson

Your figures on the weight of the P-47D30 are complete nonsense and don't bear the slightest resemblance to the facts.

19,000 lbs... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Perhaps I should have spoon-fed it to you a little more clearly. My mistake.

Some publications don't distinguish between the late P-47D-30-RE with the R2800-C engines and other related components added to try and improve the P-47, with the P-47M.

P-47M is _basically_ a P-47D-30-RE with more power.

MAX LOADED WEIGHT for the P-47M(P-47D w/-C engine) is given in some sources as 19,400lbs and 18,000lbs in others.

Roger Freeman(8th AF, 56th FG historian) gives 18,000lbs so for the benefit of your pet wingloading subject we will go with the lower weight http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

MAX loaded, wingloading.

P47M @18000lbs has a loading of 58.4lbs

Do-335A @20966lbs has a loading of 50.64lbs

And if you would like to start trying to fudge the wingloading numbers to fit your agenda by lowering the P-47's fuel and ordinance load, don't "forget" to do the same with the Do-335 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

P.S:

P-47N MAX t/o weight is over 20,000lbs just like the Dornier, for a minimum loading of 62.11lbs. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Buzzsaw-
03-16-2005, 11:22 PM
Nickerson

You clearly don't know when you are painting yourself into a corner and making yourself look even less educated than you obviously are.

Try peddling those weights to anyone who has done any research, including Oleg, and you'll get laughed out of town.

Go ahead. Try.

Then do some research.

I'm not going to bother to reply further to someone who is not smart enough to look for decent sources.

By the way, the engine in the P-47M is a R-2800-57C, not R2800C. The engine in the D30 was a R-2800-59.

The P-47M was designed strictly as a Fighter, no underwing racks were fitted, so its normal loaded weight would be the same as its max. loaded.

If you did any decent research, you'd know that.

RedNeckerson
03-16-2005, 11:23 PM
Sorry BigBear, but that particular picture of the Dornier is a very good fake.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-16-2005, 11:25 PM
Uh, fooled me. I wonder how it was done.

RedNeckerson
03-16-2005, 11:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Nickerson

You clearly don't know when you are painting yourself into a corner and making yourself look even less educated than you obviously are.

Try peddling those weights to anyone who has done any research, including Oleg, and you'll get laughed out of town.

Go ahead. Try.

Then do some research. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

All numbers come from the following sources:

Roger Freeman - The Mighty Eighth War Manual

Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War Two

Eric Brown - Wings of the Luftwaffe

Francis Dean - America's Hundred Thousand

Warplanes of the Luftwaffe - Edited by David Donald

Michael O'Leary - USAAF Fighters of World War Two



Now, you pompous jerk - go do a little reading yourself http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

RedNeckerson
03-16-2005, 11:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
Uh, fooled me. I wonder how it was done. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't feel bad, it fools everyone at first glance.

I believe it's from a modeling mag. from several years back.

Buzzsaw-
03-16-2005, 11:35 PM
Nickerson

Max loaded weight is not what is used to determine wingloading. It is calculated from normal fully loaded, clean condition.

You can continue to make a fool of yourself.

Obviously you've never opened AMERICA'S HUNDRED THOUSAND.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-16-2005, 11:36 PM
All I wanted to know was if anyone had any info on the ant eaters appearance in the next patch. I didn't mean for it to come to this http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

p1ngu666
03-16-2005, 11:59 PM
hm, lack of data makes it interesting, and its uglyness too

so we will strap in, and not know what to expect, just like the real (test) pilots http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

BBB_Hyperion
03-17-2005, 12:32 AM
Seems for some Wingloading is the only criteria a plane needs to be good in .)

Then we have the powerloading guys that somehow always use max power at ground level and completely forget that the engine hp output at alt is different and that some engines really shine up there while others have a slight performance problem.

BTW does someone know how a pilot did enter this cockpit ladder or over wing ?

uglyness is part of the design p1ngu666 for a "What the hell ? immersion factor gives 2 s more time in combat " http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Von_Rat
03-17-2005, 12:32 AM
hmmm people keep comparing the do335 to p51h or p47m, are either of these two planes going to be in the game before olegs pulls plug.

RedNeckerson
03-17-2005, 12:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Nickerson

Max loaded weight is not what is used to determine wingloading. It is calculated from normal fully loaded, clean condition.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>




Then why, pray tell, did you quote the MAX LOADED T/O weight for the Do-335 at 21,165 lbs?


Here's what you wrote:

=========================================
Salute

Don't know where anybody might get the idea that this would be an aircraft which turns well. This is a huge plane, the size of a medium bomber.

Do-335

Normal loaded 21,165 lb (9,600 kg)

==========================================

Then you proclaimed the Do-335 had a 51 lb. wingloading.

Now, when shown the fact that the P-47 has a much higher wingloading than the Dornier, suddenly

"Max loaded weight is not what is used to determin wingloading" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


So, please stop trying to twist things by giving the MAX T/O weight and wingloading for the Dornier and then comparing it to "normal fully loaded, clean condition" P-47s.

Compare apples to apples Buzzsaw, like I did when I showed you that the P-47 had a higher wingloading than the Dornier at MAX T/O weights for each a/c.

Want to reduce fuel for the P-47, take away it's external stores and racks?

DO THE SAME THING FOR THE DORNIER, make your calculations and get right back to me with the results. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

And anyone that has access to the publications I listed can see for themselves that the numbers I gave are accurate PUBLISHED NUMBERS.

I've given my book sources for my numbers mr. "flt.880" , now you can use them to prove me wrong.

(But you won't be able too)

RedNeckerson
03-17-2005, 12:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Seems for some Wingloading is the only criteria a plane needs to be good in .)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yeah, I've never been able to figure that one out myself.

It's like the Spitfire pilot that said, "turning doesn't win battles".

^I agree with him^

RedNeckerson
03-17-2005, 01:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Von_Rat:
hmmm people keep comparing the do335 to p51h or p47m, are either of these two planes going to be in the game before olegs pulls plug. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Nope.

Those are just the typical planes that get interjected into every thread ever made about the Do-335.

Seriously.

You could start a thread about the air pressure in the Do-335's back left tire and seconds later someone will chime in with

"the P-51h had better tires and we could have built them in the thousands and the P-47M has better wingloading duh"

They just cant help themselves.

Hetzer_II
03-17-2005, 01:03 AM
Why all this guys everytime want to compare wingload? If you want to do something more inteligent try to compare liftload.... where you can find how much lift every aircraft has produced.. i have no idea.. but if you compare the wings of P47 and 335.. i dont believe it is realy usefull to compare wingload when you want to know which behaves better....

I also can compare Apples with melons.. but is the apple more delicious because it is lighter?

;-)

JG53-Falkster
03-17-2005, 02:42 AM
I agree with hetzer, a lot of people thinks it's only about Wingload, then tell my wy the old german and american planebuilder, didn't produce planes with 1g wingload per 10m2. I think areodynamics isn't that easy, or are all here ingineurs from boeing and airbus? Are we really better planebuilders than Dornier Tank Messerschmitt and all the amercian (sorry i don't know names http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif )

I don't think so.....

Don't forget that the most importend thing is to see the enemy first. So you can even shoot down a P-51 with a Ju88 C-6. And im not care if the P-51 turns better than the C-6.......

anarchy52
03-17-2005, 03:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hetzer_II:
Why all this guys everytime want to compare wingload? If you want to do something more inteligent try to compare liftload.... where you can find how much lift every aircraft has produced.. i have no idea.. but if you compare the wings of P47 and 335.. i dont believe it is realy usefull to compare wingload when you want to know which behaves better....
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm glad someone who actually knows something spoke out. Wingloading isn't actually a dependable parameter to judge airplane's performance (except for rough approximations).
You can build a very large wing with low lift.
What you actually want to know is liftloading.
That was one of the key points used in an article criticizing Brown's "Best of Breed".
http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/Carson/Carson.html

I've been motivated by some of the posters in this thread to go slightly off-topic:

FM should not be influenced by "common knowledge", "myths" and "popular wisdom" but I understand that developers must produce a product according to customer's wishes and expectations. That is, along with limitations of PC computing power the main reason of some *quirky* performance figures and ac behaviour in FB. Some aircrafts have their advantages disproportionatelly inflated while some aircraft's advantages have been minimized. Same with their deficiencies.

What surprises me is strange discrepancy between so called "allied whining" and "luftwhining". While "allied whiners" mostly base their points on "common knowledge" (.50 cals killing tigers by bouncing rounds of the road is my favorite. I have original british test documents featuring Hispano with tungsten-carbide AP ammo which concludes that it's ineffective as anti tank weapon AND they were testing vs early PzIV). Strangelly anough, in FB it's easy to kill PZIV with .50 cals (yes, I have a track if you're interested http://marvin.kset.org/~riddler/Jug_rulz.ntrk)

I saw a thread yesterday where some guy very arrogantly claimed that current MG151/20 ammo belt is correct and historical. No docs, no charts no photos. Sadly, when "luftwhiners" politely, scientifically and patiently researched the MG151/20 found what was wrong with it, notified Oleg (He confirmed thir findings) and presented documents that explain the error in modelling they were fought against tooth and nail by "allied whiners" both openly and subtle.

Then there is the question of MW50 engine overheat. Manual says 10 minutes max. In game after ~6-7 minutes of MW50. On the other hand - Spit manual says max 5min WEP and engine check afterwards if WEP is used (they actually had a wire on the throttle that breaks if you go to WEP power to ensure ground knows about it). Allies have been treated in this respect quite generously yet nobody whines about it.

Then there is the "Mother of all fuel tank leaks " on focke-wulf with a few .50 cals or even .303. It is almost impossible to create such a massive fuel tank leak on other aircrafts in game (although some other ac also exhibit this behaviour when sufficiently damaged).

What I'm trying to say is: there are a lot of cases where LW aircrafts got the worse end of FM/DM in game yet some of you act as if you're trying to win WWII by trying to influence "other guy's FM/DM".

This is in no way limited to allied fans only but is way more pronounced and arrogant. I guess some people do not want the challenge or realism. They want their favorite ride to be "uber" and if it takes flaming every topic so be it. I suggest they should go offline and play vs rookie AI if they want to roxxorz with their favorite ride and let the people who want to play a FLIGHTSIM not a fanboi arcade alone.

Nobody is asking for "balance" or unfair advatage for the "luftwaffe side", but I think it would be nice for once if fanbois would keep out and leave the discussion to those who actually have something to say that doesn't come from brakfast cereal cards history and physics.

Fehler
03-17-2005, 03:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by anarchy52:
.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey anarchy52, are you blue in the face yet? I only ask because they still arent listening. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

WTE_Gog
03-17-2005, 04:37 AM
Hey Buzzsaw,

If Closterman and his mate in a pair of Tempests would have chewed up that 335 then why didn't they?

If a P47-M is better than a 335 but slower then how are the 47's going to catch it to kill it?

What you are saying is if the engagement is in their favour, the allied aircraft will win, well that's the same with every engagement isn't it.

Bottom line.
The 335 has the neddies to get into whatever position it likes. If it can't achieve the best position then run for home, safe in the knowledge than no-one can catch you. Flown by a smart pilot, it should eat P-47M's and Tempests for brekkie.

Your best chance is to linger around strips with your P-51 buddies and go for the easy kills....as befits most on-line allied pilots.

(please note I said 'most', not 'all')

Hristos
03-17-2005, 05:14 AM
Close your books and never open again. Do-335 is new best !

be sure !

IIJG69_Kartofe
03-17-2005, 05:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> and all the amercian (sorry i don't know names http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif ) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No .... Nooooo !! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Don't say the wooord !

Don't pronounce their name ... Or they'll ask you copyright$ ..


Don't ...


Don't !

JG53-Falkster
03-17-2005, 07:09 AM
allright kartofe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Buzzsaw-
03-17-2005, 09:08 AM
Salute

Despite the usual ****ging by those with an agenda, actually, what happened here was that in response to claims that the D0335 was a good turning aircraft, I quite accurately pointed out that it was a very large and heavy aircraft, which would clearly work against it turning well, especially at low speeds.

I pointed out the NORMAL loaded weight of the Do-335 was over 20,000 lbs, and that its wingloading was very high, which would mean its stall speed would be high as well. (basic physics)

I stand by that, and any reputable source on the D0-335 will give similar weight figures to below:

Empty equipped 16,005 lb (7,260 kg); Normal loaded 21,165 lb (9,600 kg).

In response to my post, Nickerson and others went on a Luftwhine, and immediately started to bring in spurious figures to suggest that Allied aircraft like the P-47 were just as heavy as the Do-335, something which is clearly false.

This should be obvious to anyone who takes the time to even do the most cursory of inquiries. The P-47D is a single engined aircraft with dimensions as follows:

Wingspan 40 feet 9 3/8 inches, length 36 feet 1 3/4 inches, height 14 feet 7 inches, and wing area 300 square feet.

Compare that to the Do-335, which has TWO engines, (the heaviest part of an aircraft) and the following dimensions:

Wingspan 45 ft 3.3 in (13.8 m); Length 45 ft 5.25 in (13.85 m); Height 16 ft 4.8 in (5.0 m): Wing area 414.411 sq ft (38.5 sq m).

Those who try to suggest the P-47 weighs the same as the D0-335 are on a par with children who hold their hands over their eyes and insist that what is sitting in front of them does not exist because they can't see it.

Second, in regards to Wingloading, which was one of the issues I raised, but only one.

For those who also continue to ignore basic physics, here is a primer:

Wingloading, or the ratio of aircraft weight to wing area, is one factor among several which determines the overall flight characteristics of an aircraft. Wingloading is crucial to how well an aircraft behaves at low speeds. Given two aircraft with the same aerofoil, the aircraft with the lower wingloading will have a lower stall speed, and thus the ability to maintain controlled flight at lower speeds, as well as in tight turns.

It is true that the shape of the aerofoil is a factor in how much lift a wing generates, and an aerofoil which has better low speed characteristics will generate more lift at low speeds and at higher angles of attack. However, a high lift aerofoil on its own cannot compensate for extremely high wingloading. There is no magic formula which says that a wing with an aerofoil designed for high lift can compensate for a huge aircraft with high wingloading.

It is also true that in the case of aircraft like the Dornier, which is designed to operate at high speeds, the use of a high lift aerofoil is counterproductive, since such a type generates very high amounts of drag at high speeds, and also induces the onset of compressibility sooner. That means that the Dornier is unlikely to have used an aerofoil which was designed for high lift at low speeds. Instead it is more likely, the designers would have chosen an aerofoil which had low drag characteristics at high speed, but lower lift at low speeds, and which generated its maximum lift at low angles of attack.

All of this I have pointed out in my earlier posts, but of course, those who prefer to shut their eyes will ignore facts in favour of some imaginary super weapon which would have led their fantasy Luftwaffe to victory in the war. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Ugly_Kid
03-17-2005, 12:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Empty equipped 16,005 lb (7,260 kg); Normal loaded 21,165 lb (9,600 kg).
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Normally loaded with 2340 kg payload? Pray tell what were they carrying to the combat? in lack of ammunition dropped an elephant on 'em B17s? **** nazis molested Dumbo too - I find that hard to forgive. 7260 kg Rüstmasse means everything except the payload! The figures are given for A-1 which is a JaBo BTW.

Could it be that you account for all 1350 kg fuel in 335? Aha? and what is the remaining 900 kg from equipped weight to 9510 kg? Sauerkraut?

Let's just put it on P-47 level of 1110 kg fuel we have acc. AHT P-47D-25 and up at 7205 kg and DO 335 at 9270 kg. Do 335 240 kg/sq. m and P-47 in 258 kg/sq m.

If you can't explain the questionable 900 kg of Sauerkraut I am afraid we have to assume that it really isn't there in all glory - for example in FW 190 D-12 MG-151/20 with 2x250 rounds ammunition + 1 MK108 with 85 shots would have weighed 264 kg. Thus, donning the remaining 634 kg Sauerkraut (after all we're talking about JaBo weigth - so Bomb is not really out of question, is it) you'll get a wingloading of 224 kg/ sq m, now considerably better than P-47 for instance. Of course, since Reich was rather small at that time even 2000 km range is rather overdriven you could have gone to the combat even with half of the fuel load and the wingloading starts being better than average.

Now take the powerloading and have fun trying to explain that to Jug's benefit.

It is also notable that wingloading indeed isn't the one and only parameter in the equation. There was a discussion where it wasn't very difficult to see that Ta-152 in spite of relatively high wingloading can still put up quite an impressive turning performance because of extremely low induced drag due to high aspect ratio.

Maybe you're a bit short on facts but plenty on agenda, eh?

There's no magic formula saying that a high lift profile can cope with weight is true - it is the very basic equation for lift, however I agree Dornier hardly had a particularly high lift profile allthough t/c was about 18% at root and 12% at tip which IS thick. You're of course wrong with your "onset of compressibility" theory.

You should also know that there is something to compensate the drag it's called engine - Dornier had two. You seem to be fixated on wing as the main and only source of the drag too, you're wrong of course - again. Your confusion's showing.

I don't care much about DO 335 in the game - I doubt they get FM anywhere near the real thing anyway so externals is all there is to it (which seem to be excellent) and whining (which seems to be tremendous too). I, however, appreciate the hard effort that someone has put into modeling it, if the bickering moaners put even fraction of the time from whining around here to modeling, maybe their pet plane would have been also included already years back.

p1ngu666
03-17-2005, 12:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Seems for some Wingloading is the only criteria a plane needs to be good in .)

Then we have the powerloading guys that somehow always use max power at ground level and completely forget that the engine hp output at alt is different and that some engines really shine up there while others have a slight performance problem.

BTW does someone know how a pilot did enter this cockpit ladder or over wing ?

uglyness is part of the design p1ngu666 for a "What the hell ? immersion factor gives 2 s more time in combat " http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i think there was a ladder in the wing root, so ud get onto wing and then walk along to cockpit, ill check later http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

its uglyness does give it a certain charm http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

the one we getting doesnt have armoured windscreen does it?

anarchy52
03-17-2005, 01:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Empty equipped 16,005 lb (7,260 kg); Normal loaded 21,165 lb (9,600 kg).
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Empty equipped: 7260kg
Now let's see how we got to those 9510kg takeoff weight (rounded to 9600?).
Kraftstoff (fuel) 1350kg
Schmierstoff (lubricant) 135kg
Besatzung (pilot) 100kg
2*200 Schuss MG 151/15 (2*200 rounds MG 151/15) 87kg
1*70 Schuss MK 103/30 (1*70 rounds MK 103/30) 73kg
<span class="ev_code_RED">1*SC500 Bombe (1*SC500 bomb) 500kg </span>
Sauerstoff und Leuchtmunition (oxygen and flare ammunition) 5
9510kg is weight WITH 500kg bomb and 100% fuel.


So tell me:

Normal loaded P-47D (2300HP) (according to your post, I believe you since I'm no expert on Jug - I just fly the **** thing):
weight: 14600 lbs (6662 kg)
wing area: 27.9m^2
wingloading: 238kg/m^2
power/weight: 345 HP/t
powerloading: 82.4HP/m^2

Do-335 (DB603 1800HP)
weight: 9010kg (100% fuel - 1850l)
wing area: 38.5m^2
wingloading: 235kg/m^2
power/weight: 400HP/t
powerloading: 93.5HP/m^2

What does this numeric comparison tell us about their relative performance buzzsaw?

I don't see Do-335 as unmanuverable overweight slouch as some obviously want to believe nor some kind of wunderwaffe.



P.S. And for Christ's sake use metric system like the rest of the world.

Ugly_Kid
03-17-2005, 01:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by anarchy52:
_1*SC500 Bombe (1*SC500 bomb) 500kg_
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thx for confirming the suspicion, just as I figured http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JG53-Falkster
03-17-2005, 01:47 PM
Which Version with which engine are we actually finally getting?
I guess A-1 with DB603E?!?

VW-IceFire
03-17-2005, 02:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WTE_Gog:
Hey Buzzsaw,

If Closterman and his mate in a pair of Tempests would have chewed up that 335 then why didn't they?

If a P47-M is better than a 335 but slower then how are the 47's going to catch it to kill it?

What you are saying is if the engagement is in their favour, the allied aircraft will win, well that's the same with every engagement isn't it.

Bottom line.
The 335 has the neddies to get into whatever position it likes. If it can't achieve the best position then run for home, safe in the knowledge than no-one can catch you. Flown by a smart pilot, it should eat P-47M's and Tempests for brekkie.

Your best chance is to linger around strips with your P-51 buddies and go for the easy kills....as befits most on-line allied pilots.

(please note I said 'most', not 'all') <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Closterman and his wingman were at the end of a patrol. I can't remember all the details right now (I'll go find the book later) but the plan was to head home when they spotted the Do-335. So they did engage it...his wingman even fired at long range trying to hit it. But the Do-335 pilot saw them, turned around, engaged boost, and ran away. I think they both felt that at that point they were not going to chase the Do-335 into flak territory and they probably didn't have enough fuel to goto full power (breaking the boost pin) and try and catch it.

They might have were the situations different.

My main point is this...there's alot more to talk about in a wartime situation than raw performance stats. The pilots above all want to get home alive.

Buzzsaw-
03-17-2005, 02:17 PM
Ho hum... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

You luftwhiners never quit with the disinformation do you? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Let's look at the REAL facts shall we, instead of your imaginary fantasies. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

In regards to your claim that the P-47D had 2300hp:

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

P-47D30 had either 2535 hp for low boost model used in early '44, or 2600 for higher boost used from fall of '44. That on weight of 14,600 lbs or 6636.4 kgs.

That gives a powerloading of 5.61 lbs per hp, or 2.55 kgs per hp.

But never mind the D30 which equipped the ground attack Squadrons, lets look at the P-47 type which would ACTUALLY have been assigned to chase Do-335's, shall we... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

56th Fighter Group, assigned on anti-Jet patrol, was equipped with P-47M which had 2800 hp pushing 13,275 lbs or 6034 kgs.

That gives us a powerloading of 4.74 lbs per hp, or 2.15 kgs per hp.

Wing area was 308 Sq/ft, which gives us wingloading of 43 lbs per Sq/ft.

And how about the Do-335?

Well, even if we subtract the 500 kg bomb, we still have 9010 kgs, or 19822 lbs on a wing area of 414.41 Sq/ft

Wingloading is 47.86 lbs per Sq/ft, almost identical to fully loaded D30, but MUCH worse than the 47M.

Powerloading is 5.56 lbs per hp, so completely inferior to the P-47M, much the same as D30.

When you factor in the HUGE speed bleed you are going to get from from the massive wing area, and the ponderous weight, anytime you start to present a higher than normal AOA of the wing to airflow, you can see that the Do-335 is not going to want to tangle with the 47M, and in fact would be at a considerable disadvantage with the D30 in a turning contest.

Bring the P-51H into the equation and the Do-335 starts to look distinctly like what it is:

An overweight, overlarge, but fast aircraft, which might have been useful in the bomber intercept role, or as a fast Jabo, but certainly not an air superiority fighter.

Atzebrueck
03-17-2005, 02:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Do-335

Normal loaded 21,165 lb (9,600 kg)

Span 45 ft 3.3 in (13.8 m); Length 45 ft 5.25 in (13.85 m); Height 16 ft 4.8 in (5.0 m): Wing area 414.411 sq ft (38.5 sq m)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here is a quite detailed list about the specifications of the Do335.

http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/do335/do335_1.html

9510kg/9600 kg includes internal bombload.

JG53-Falkster
03-17-2005, 02:21 PM
In my book which is the best i know about the do335, is written, that the do335 never crossed enemy planes. Only that some planes get enemy AAA fire.....The author was abble to have a look at the flying reports from the "Erprobungskommando" which did fly recon missions over sicilia and the UK.

(Karl Heinz Regnat Dornier Do335).

JG53-Falkster
03-17-2005, 02:31 PM
Well Buzzsaw, the do335 never was designed to intercept P-51's and P-47's.

First it was designed as fast bomber. That the do335 was!

Than as bomberintercepter and (Nightfighter) (Version B-2). Well that she was too! (2xMG151/20 3xMK103)

To hunt your P47 or P51 i take the good old 109
that is nevertheless enough!

That's strange then i never heard some one who was scared when the A-20 came into the game, that he's 109 actually could be shooten down by a Bomber?

anarchy52
03-17-2005, 03:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw
In regards to your claim that the P-47D had 2300hp:

P-47D30 had either 2535 hp for low boost model used in early '44, or 2600 for higher boost used from fall of '44. That on weight of 14,600 lbs or 6636.4 kgs.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
from P-47 Aces - 8th Air Force
P-47D-25 onwards R-2800-59 2300HP

How many were overboosted to 2535HP? docs? charts? numbers?

I was under the impression that P-47N was a stopgap measure used for V-1 interception and not over Germany.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
56th Fighter Group, assigned on anti-Jet patrol, was equipped with P-47M...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
were they deployed on anti jet patrols or were just chasing V-1s?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
An overweight, overlarge, but fast aircraft, which might have been useful in the bomber intercept role, or as a fast Jabo, but certainly not an air superiority fighter.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
They said exactly the same thing about P-47 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Do-335 was designed as fast bomber (it had INTERNAL bombrack ****it!) and would probably be a very good interceptor not the best air superiority fighter (agreed) but far from useless as a fighter. By the time Do-335 was "entering combat" jets were the future and golden age of props was rapidly nearing it's end.

DIRTY-MAC
03-17-2005, 04:25 PM
the Do335
had two prop-engines = doble the amount
of propblades(area) grabbing air.that should pe an issue,
and for turning,wouldn´t a pushing prop help this?

About the Clostermann encounter:
I think they didn´t even bothered to open up the "E"power and try to chase after the 335
because they were short on fuel and they recon the Dornier was just moving to fast.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-17-2005, 04:52 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DIRTY-MAC:
the Do335
had two prop-engines = doble the amount
of propblades(area) grabbing air.that should pe an issue,
and for turning,wouldn´t a pushing prop help this?
QUOTE]

Now granted this experience came from flying an R/C plane but here goes. A guy at our field about a year ago found a website, bought some plans, and over the winter built a fairly large Do-335 model. It had an OS 1.20 in the tail and the same in the nose. Both engines were using large bore carbs from thunder tiger (engines were **** by the way). Anyway, when we flew it, the Do was almost too stable. Roll was excellent, the plane was very controllable and it tracked extremely well, but it took a heck of a lot of elevator deflection to get that plane to do anything. As the throttle was reduced on the engines the elevators were far more responsive. It had nothing to do with speed really it was more the torque from the props. I've seen this effect on other push/pull models.

Buzzsaw-
03-17-2005, 05:29 PM
Anarchy

It's not the P-47N, it's the 'M'. The 'N' model only saw service in the Pacific, plus it was an entirely different type of aircraft, with larger wings, fuel tanks in the wings, much heavier.

The 'M' model was a quick design evolution intended for use versus the V-1 Rockets and also the German Jets.

In regards to your continued claim that the R-2800-59 only had 2300 hp. 2300 hp was the amount generated under normal MILITARY power, not COMBAT or TAKEOFF power when the pilot engaged water injection and higher boost. MILITARY power could be maintained for 30 minutes, COMBAT power for 10 minutes. ALL P-47D's after the D5 model had Water injection, all bubble top P-47D's had the higher boost R-2800-59 engine.

You guys really need to start reading some books which you list as references, such as AMERICA'S HUNDRED THOUSAND, or other reputable sources.

Online sites are 90% Cr*p and not worth bothering with.

One site with some accurate data, (but no original documents) is Joe Bauger's:

US MILITARY AIRCRAFT site:

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/

The Republic P-47 is here:

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p47.html

jagdmailer
03-17-2005, 06:18 PM
P-47 is fat & real ugly. Do 335 is better but not much in the looks dept. although it looks fearsome and would have been a nasty bomber destroyer.

I would personaly rather have a real fighter:

http://www.luft46.com/aoart/ao176-4.jpg

http://www.luft46.com/aoart/ao176-5.jpg

880 km/h or 546 MHP on 2800hp dual-turbosupercharger Daimler-Benz DB603N.

Now move over flying toilet seat....

Jagd

WTE_Gog
03-17-2005, 07:23 PM
Would it be fair to assume that the Do335 may end up being flown along much the same lines as the Beaufighter in the Pacific?

It will be faster than it's opponents and will come in hard, do it's thing (whether that be bomb or strafe or pounce on unsuspecting aircraft) and then turn and run for home, safe from harm due to speed advantage?

Of course, like the Beau, once one of those engines is hit and starts playing up it's going to be a long hard slog back to base, jigging and praying all the way.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-17-2005, 07:26 PM
More like the Mosquito I would think.

WTE_Gog
03-17-2005, 08:12 PM
Yeah, but we don't have the Mosquito do we.

3.JG51_BigBear
03-17-2005, 09:09 PM
Quite right. My Mistake.

VW-IceFire
03-17-2005, 09:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I was under the impression that P-47N was a stopgap measure used for V-1 interception and not over Germany. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I was also under that impression till I read the story of the 56th Fighter Group. Basically the 56th right from the start was a staunch supporter for Republic and the P-47. They really liked the plane...even before they were in real combat. But they didn't loose affection for it when they did.

Because of that, they were the only group to move to the P-47M instead of the P-51D. In any case, from what I can tell from their history, they did fly patrols over German airspace. Infact, apparently they were big fans of flying three squadrons separated a few minutes apart and with one low alt, one medium alt, and one high alt. Apparently worked wonders. So they did more than just V-1 patrols...

It seems aircraft assigned to V-1 patrols seem to be mistakenly regarded as not combat fit for other duties.

p1ngu666
03-17-2005, 09:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I was under the impression that P-47N was a stopgap measure used for V-1 interception and not over Germany. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I was also under that impression till I read the story of the 56th Fighter Group. Basically the 56th right from the start was a staunch supporter for Republic and the P-47. They really liked the plane...even before they were in real combat. But they didn't loose affection for it when they did.

Because of that, they were the only group to move to the P-47M instead of the P-51D. In any case, from what I can tell from their history, they did fly patrols over German airspace. Infact, apparently they were big fans of flying three squadrons separated a few minutes apart and with one low alt, one medium alt, and one high alt. Apparently worked wonders. So they did more than just V-1 patrols...

It seems aircraft assigned to V-1 patrols seem to be mistakenly regarded as not combat fit for other duties. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

indeed. funny how it got top prioity to the ppl in britain at the time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

ImpStarDuece
03-17-2005, 11:10 PM
I would hardly call the Tempest, Typhoon, or the 25lb boost Spitfires and Mustangs as 'unfit for combat'. Would you?

I have been doing a little research for a TAF campaign and the 'Noball' ops against the V1 preparation sites are fascinating.

It seems that the Allies knew of the V1 for at least 6 months before the first weapon was fired. That was how long they were carrying out sorties on the factories, launching facilities and preparation grounds. In fact they may of been a little too successful at first, which caused operation to be less and less fruitful when the V1s did actually start hitting London.

Still, the way the British had the guts and skill to completely re-organise their air defence assest in southern England in slightly more than 48 hours is admirable.

Buzzsaw-
03-17-2005, 11:15 PM
Salute

The 56th F.G. was flying V1 patrols long after the target for the rockets was no longer London, but rather Antwerp.

The were not behind the lines, they were right up front, and they did not exclusively fly V1 patrols. They still flew escorts with the 8th Air Force with the B-17's and B-24's, and remained a part of that organization.

They also flew anti-Jet patrols, ie. in the area of the Jet's landing fields.

A P-47M pilot landed at a P-51D's home base and after discussions in the pub, challenged the P-51 pilot to a race. The P-51 pilots assumed this was a standard P-47D, not an M model, and therefore were quite surprised to find the P-47M easily pulling away from them on the straight and level, as well as their cash. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

(and these were P-51D's running the late war boost)

Almost all the leading American Aces of the European war flew P-47's and were from the 56th F.G. Most of their victories came in the fall of '43 and the Spring and Summer of '44, when the Germans still had some decent pilots.

80% of the American escorts in the Fall of '43 and Spring of '44 were P-47's.

Ugly_Kid
03-17-2005, 11:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
It's not the P-47N, it's the 'M'. The 'N' model only saw service in the Pacific, plus it was an entirely different type of aircraft, with larger wings, fuel tanks in the wings, much heavier.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure AHT: M basic weight 11100 lbs and N 11600 lbs, I see. (now it would be a comfortable place to make aboutturn dish AHT and come up with some other source, right?)

What's some bomb between friends here and the fact that you decided obviously to limit ammunition and fuel to ~1675 lbs for that "lightweight jug", eh? Now does that 335 have to come with 2976.75 lbs of fuel all the way to America for the fight of the giants or what?

Interesting that you're so strained to turn figures to your favour, comparing a bomber to a fighter? Do you also make similar effort on Ju 88 discussions?

Marc-David
03-18-2005, 12:25 AM
I, personally, would simply be glad having something like my trusty Me 110 G-2 in a 45er style. Turns aceptable, rolls sufficent, is very fast in the horizontal, and has a decent zoomclimb. And comes with a bunch of real nice guns and a little tiny bomb.
What a SEAD-plane! Pray for your airfield. I'll be on the way!
(OOps, did I really not include some facts about winglift oder wingloading... I must still have fun flying AEPPF http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

Yours, MD

p1ngu666
03-18-2005, 12:28 AM
the M jugs didnt always carry 8 mg guns
and, i guess the do335 would need more fuel for same range, cos of engines

tbh, we wont know if the fm is right or wrong, unless its waaaaaaaayy off.

anarchy52
03-18-2005, 02:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
It's not the P-47N, it's the 'M'.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
srry, was a typo

Ugly_Kid
03-18-2005, 06:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
the M jugs didnt always carry 8 mg guns
and, i guess the do335 would need more fuel for same range, cos of engines

tbh, we wont know if the fm is right or wrong, unless its waaaaaaaayy off. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The consumption on cruise is not really a question of number of engines but more a matter of dragforce over distance - the work/energy for a range. I'd guess, you'll face some hardship trying to show that a faster aircraft here will put up a lower glide ratio...

waaaaay off is probably something that can't be shot down with little bit labour, excersize and clever tactis on a DF server. I think Emil is way off too...funnily Oleg doesn't even have to include it FM seems to be already waaaay off since it potentially has a good performance.

I think I'll anyway spend about five minutes with Do just like with any other of Oleg's gay toys and then return to G-6 early and never look back. It still doesn't make me blind to recognize some of the interesting innovations in the real AC.

Buzzsaw-
03-18-2005, 09:21 AM
Salute

Gasoline consumption is NOT just a case of the energy required to overcome drag.

Take two aircraft, with identical airframes adn weight, one powered by a 30 liter engine, the other by the same engine, bored out to 40 liters. The larger engine will use more gasoline, simply because the volumic intake of gas/air going into the larger engine is going to be more, even at idle. You can't just run it at lower throttle, or lean it too much as that will affect power output and can also cause overheating or other damage. Also, simply to keep an engine turning over, requires energy, ie. overcoming the weight of the reciprocating parts, etc.

In the case of the Do-335, having two engines running will considerably exceed typical fuel consumption for a single engined fighter, even when its engines are not being called upon to produce maximum power.

This is the reason the aircraft has to have such a large amount of fuel onboard, which of course, adds to the overall weight, and requires the airframe be larger to accomadate the tanks.

Efficiency in a single engined aircraft is much better.

Ugly_Kid
03-18-2005, 10:21 AM
You'd be telling something else if you would telling something about the pros of P-38, I bet.
You're generally right about engine but still nowhere near comparable. (of course your argumentation of big engine consuming more, even when lower setting is exactly a reason for going to multi-engine configuration with increasing size http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif thus using smaller engines with smaller power variations between cruise/max power for each engine)

You see 13275 lbs P-47M tuned up to 2800 hp has hardly the 2060 km range, now has it? That's what Do 335 has with 1850 l internal fuel...

Hristos
03-18-2005, 10:36 AM
Well, it is obvious that Jug won the war.

It destroyed the Luftwaffe all by itself. Back when Luftwaffe was Experten only, it came to their homes and kicked their butts.

It saved England and Netherlands when it destroyed V-1 flying bombs in the air.

It was also very tough. Not only it was immune to numerous 20mm rounds, but it could stand a direct 88mm hit in the cockpit and still bring its pilot home.

It was also hard hitting and able to destroy heavy Tiger tanks with its .50 cals. Its fire was devastating to enemy planes, as even at 1000 yards it used to smoke 109s.

It outpaced Mustangs and would be outpacing a Do 335 if it ever met it. It also flew farther than Mustangs.

It hunted jets and killed them in droves.

Its sleek lines and low drag allowed it great energy retention. Its elliptic wing was superior to Spitfire's.

Its rugged R2800 radial was able to produce 3500hp without even a need to cool it.

It participated in Korean conflict where it was the highest scoring planetype.

Yes, people, Jug was all this. Please come to the nearest cinema where we will show you how Jug won the war !

MOhz
03-18-2005, 10:41 AM
I am sorry, but Russia won the war http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif !

p1ngu666
03-18-2005, 10:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ugly_Kid:
You'd be telling something else if you would telling something about the pros of P-38, I bet.
You're generally right about engine but still nowhere near comparable.

You see 13275 lbs P-47M tuned up to 2800 hp has hardly the 2060 km range, now has it? That's what Do 335 has with 1850 l internal fuel... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

p47N uses 3 big drop tanks, i think the wing ones u could in fit 2 men, if u wanted too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

range doesnt matter in PF, but i think p47N is the culmination of the american way...
big fat powerful engine, needs big airframe, to house all the fuel, turbo etc, so the weight goes up and up, so u add more power...

do335 will be trip into the unknow, which i will enjoy http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Humpy_Dumpy
03-18-2005, 06:49 PM
The Jug? weren't they in sky during the time Germany was being bombed to hell and they could hardly get any planes in the sky? Yeah, there really good fighters...

Russia won the war through force!
Germany won the war through Statics!

Germany had the best of everything but they just didn't have the materials to launch large scale production.

Sharkey888
03-18-2005, 10:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Humpy_Dumpy:

Germany had the best of everything but they just didn't have the materials to launch large scale production. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Or the fuel.........or the manpower.........

p1ngu666
03-19-2005, 06:40 PM
actully, german was in a better position to make tons of tanks, aircraft,guns than the russians.
they just didnt.
they had the manpower too, with all those slaves...

and, the eastern front was THE biggest front in ww2 in nearly every way (troops, tanks, aircraft, battles, area..)

jugs where also in the skies, when the germans could claim air supority over germany http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

JG53-Falkster
03-20-2005, 05:21 AM
ok, and what has this to do with the do335?

DarthBane_
03-20-2005, 07:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MOhz:
I am sorry, but Russia won the war http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif ! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, ameros, british and rest were joke compared to war effort Russia was commited to.
Look at loss ratio of German army. When we come to civilian casualities, thats the turf of ameros and english: bombing attacks on Dresden, Hamburg and meny other cities, later crowned by Hiroshima and Nagasaki. ameros perfected their war method at the end. Why attack enemies armies when you can kill or burn their families.
Thats the spirit!

Sharkey888
03-20-2005, 11:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DarthBane_:
Exactly, ameros, british and rest were joke compared to war effort Russia was commited to.
Look at loss ratio of German army. When we come to civilian casualities, thats the turf of ameros and english: bombing attacks on Dresden, Hamburg and meny other cities, later crowned by Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea really good strategy, the Soviet Union losing 5 men to kill 2 enemy, really sound.

And let's not start about civilian casualties, who was mass executing their own people in gas chambers or firing squads, Hmmmmmm, let me think.

Just remember who started these terrible Wars, twice in the same century.

p1ngu666
03-20-2005, 11:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sharkey888:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DarthBane_:
Exactly, ameros, british and rest were joke compared to war effort Russia was commited to.
Look at loss ratio of German army. When we come to civilian casualities, thats the turf of ameros and english: bombing attacks on Dresden, Hamburg and meny other cities, later crowned by Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea really good strategy, the Soviet Union losing 5 men to kill 2 enemy, really sound.

And let's not start about civilian casualties, who was mass executing their own people in gas chambers or firing squads, Hmmmmmm, let me think.

Just remember who started these terrible Wars, twice in the same century. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

germans didnt start ww1. just sort of happened, and, they where fighting over nothing.
pretty sad really http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

VW-IceFire
03-21-2005, 08:15 AM
Well you could blame the leaders of Germany for starting WWI by giving Austria-Hungary the "blank cheque". Which meant that they started behaving irrationally...submitted an impossible to uphold ultimatum to the Serbs, Russia mobilized, Germany had to mobilize, France and England got in there too and Germany's schliefen plan saw that two front wars were impossible and the plane was to wipe the French out first. But that never happened and so WWI started.

WWI is more of a case of some bad decisions here and there combined with rising tensions over everything...

BBB_Hyperion
03-21-2005, 09:42 PM
I see hardly any connection between do335 and ww1 but we can surely construct one ,)

For not taking out the french i blame "Alexander von Kluck" as guilty .

Foo.bar
03-22-2005, 04:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sharkey888:
Just remember who started these terrible Wars, twice in the same century. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

germany didn't start the ww1 at all. and the attack against poland just went to an global conflict when uk and france wanted to deal with germany.

BAG.LordDante
03-22-2005, 04:50 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gifcome on guys ! stay on topic plz.

Sharkey888
03-22-2005, 12:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Foo.bar:
[germany didn't start the ww1 at all. and the attack against poland just went to an global conflict when uk and france wanted to deal with germany. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok I'll give that Germany did not start WW1. But trying to imply that France and the UK started WW2 by defending Poland is just REVISIONIST HISTORY.
As an example I saw alot of that when I went to Vienna last summer, haven't been there in 20 years. You would think that Austria was an Allied country in WW2, by all the plaques all over commemorating resistance to the Nazi occupiers.


Oh yea , I do hope the DO-335 makes it into the game-maybe in the Russian only addon!?

VW-IceFire
03-22-2005, 09:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Foo.bar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sharkey888:
Just remember who started these terrible Wars, twice in the same century. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

germany didn't start the ww1 at all. and the attack against poland just went to an global conflict when uk and france wanted to deal with germany. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Regardless of what Britain and France did...the Russians were on the list of nations to attack. Hitler was on a mission to achieve "living space" for the German peoples and expanding eastward was the plan. Right from the start.

That would have been pretty global no matter what. Also consider that all of these parties for several hundred years had been part of one alliance or another to fight with the opposing sides. This changed all the time too...although France and Russia were often times allies in post-Napoleonic war times.

Also, as already stated, historians generally attribute Wilhelms "blank cheque" (also the Schliefen plan and the Dreadnought Arms Race with Britain) to the Austrians as being one of the causes for WWI. Although the start of that war is in many ways more complicated than WWII.

Hristos
03-22-2005, 11:01 PM
I'm certainly very impressed by your knowledge of history. Especially since I live in Balkans where it all started.

But there is one thing you forgot, you know. This thread is about Do-335 ! Yes, indeed, check the thread title http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

VW-IceFire
03-23-2005, 05:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hristos:
I'm certainly very impressed by your knowledge of history. Especially since I live in Balkans where it all started.

But there is one thing you forgot, you know. This thread is about Do-335 ! Yes, indeed, check the thread title http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ohhh pfft...we've done the Do-335 to death. Some guys think it will be banned, some guys love it to pieces, some guys think its some sort of conspiracy, and most of us are just content to talk about whatever is going.

Usually when gross mistatements of history are made, I try and give them the abridged version in the hopes that they'll at least pick up a history book and read it instead of spewing forth total ****. I did simplify but as far as I know, its the generally accepted truth regarding the situation...as rexamined many times over by academics and historians.

Sharkey888
03-24-2005, 07:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hristos:
I'm certainly very impressed by your knowledge of history. Especially since I live in Balkans where it all started.

But there is one thing you forgot, you know. This thread is about Do-335 ! Yes, indeed, check the thread title http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ohhh pfft...we've done the Do-335 to death. Some guys think it will be banned, some guys love it to pieces, some guys think its some sort of conspiracy, and most of us are just content to talk about whatever is going.

Usually when gross mistatements of history are made, I try and give them the abridged version in the hopes that they'll at least pick up a history book and read it instead of spewing forth total ****. I did simplify but as far as I know, its the generally accepted truth regarding the situation...as rexamined many times over by academics and historians. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just by the looks of it, the DO-335 should be a bear to fly. Also seems overly "complex" for a WW2 fighter-or in other words-German OVER engineering http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Nevertheless, it will be a welcome addition, when and if.

VW-IceFire
03-24-2005, 08:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sharkey888:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hristos:
I'm certainly very impressed by your knowledge of history. Especially since I live in Balkans where it all started.

But there is one thing you forgot, you know. This thread is about Do-335 ! Yes, indeed, check the thread title http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ohhh pfft...we've done the Do-335 to death. Some guys think it will be banned, some guys love it to pieces, some guys think its some sort of conspiracy, and most of us are just content to talk about whatever is going.

Usually when gross mistatements of history are made, I try and give them the abridged version in the hopes that they'll at least pick up a history book and read it instead of spewing forth total ****. I did simplify but as far as I know, its the generally accepted truth regarding the situation...as rexamined many times over by academics and historians. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just by the looks of it, the DO-335 should be a bear to fly. Also seems overly "complex" for a WW2 fighter-or in other words-German OVER engineering http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Nevertheless, it will be a welcome addition, when and if. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That it will be. I can make a German side of my Shooting Stars campaign where you fly such aircraft as the Do-335 or the Go-229 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

WOLFMondo
03-24-2005, 10:15 AM
Winter 44/45 or Spring 45 maps then bring it on! Looks like an interesting plane to fly and fight against.

Sharkey888
03-24-2005, 12:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Winter 44/45 or Spring 45 maps then bring it on! Looks like an interesting plane to fly and fight against. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I just had the realisation that this plane begs to be tailed to shoot down. I wonder how it flys/crashes on the front engine only!? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

DIRTY-MAC
03-26-2005, 08:33 AM
the was a film circling arund here somewere on Do 335 in flight anyone? I can´t find it

3.JG51_BigBear
03-26-2005, 12:16 PM
Little bump to see if anyone has that video.

JadehawkII
03-26-2005, 01:59 PM
Do-335 Arrow....Gimmie this beast and let me shoot down all these Allied Wonder Jocks with their pants on backwards! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif Having said that, you know that comment is 100% BS too and that's ok. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif I do NOT care what the load factor for the wing is. I do not care is this thing can turn like a champ (or not). I also do not care if it came with a built in Stein holder for my favorite German Beer. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I want it for the simple fact it's there and it existed and YES it was Flown and used, abit in a somewhat very limited and unplanned circumstances. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
Now about the P-47N. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif The P-47M was a stop gap until the P-47N arrived, but was not to be. That plane was first conceived at the request of the 56th Fighter Group when it was apparent the range was not what they need in the ETO (European Theater of Operations). It just so happens it also benefited the PTO when they increased the wing size to make room for larger fuel tanks. In fact, the first examples of the P-47N were being shipped to the 56th Fighter group when the war ended there but were diverted to the PTO.....OK, just got back from searching and cannot find my references for the P-47N connection with the 56th Fighter Group. Sigh... Sould be in the 56th Fighter Group's autobiography though. Remember, it's all about having fun doing something we never will do in real life. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Have fun and good hunting. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

starfighter1
03-31-2005, 12:37 AM
hi,
why not a new payable 'Addon' with all this
fighters and bombers like 'Luft46'and 'Airforce 1946' and of course from all airplane developers:

http://www.luft46.com/

Next step to a 'Korear War' Addon

Money is the best answer to stay in with a constructive 3party design in the future

Humpy_Dumpy
04-01-2005, 07:32 PM
Do 335 was as tough as a bomber and could fight like a fighter and speed almost as fast as a jet. This plane will kick some buttocs.

McThag
04-04-2005, 11:48 AM
I want this plane because of my dad. He was on the road a lot and built me the 1/48 Monogram kit when he came back from a unusually long trip. Mom said he stayed up until 5am to finish it so I could see it in the morning when I got up.

It's bleeding heart sentimentality, but hey.

92SqnGCJimbo
04-07-2005, 08:03 PM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Hristos:
I'm certainly very impressed by your knowledge of history. Especially since I live in Balkans where it all started.

But there is one thing you forgot, you know. This thread is about Do-335 ! Yes, indeed, check the thread title
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

histros.. your one to complain about thread stealing...

ohh.. dont forget about the assasination of the austro franz ferdinand.. this was the official cause of ww1 however all the tension b4 this didnt really help... alot of it was because hindenberg was jealous of his englsh relations and wanted to carve himself a empire...


ww2 on the other hand wasnt helped by the fact the big 4 (america italy britain and russia) at the end of ww1 crippled germany and blamed her for a war that she didnt start and had no plans for but fought in.. Hitler although unhappy at this arrangement himself saw this as a oppertunity to get to power and make germany a superpower once again and be an all round bad guy

oh and as for the d0335 arrow... bring her... i need a play thing for my xiv

also dont forget the fact that


please be warned this has been typed at 3am... so there might be a few speeling mistakes

avramis
04-08-2005, 10:57 AM
heres some food for u book worms http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.battle-fleet.com/pw/his/do335.htm
http://www.kheichhorn.de/html/body_dornier_do_335.html
http://www.squadron13.com/do335/DO335.htm
http://cip.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~vernalek/Do335.html
http://www.aviationshoppe.com/Dornier-Do-335.html
http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/dornier_do335.htm
http://www.waffenhq.de/flugzeuge/do335.htm
http://aeroflt.users.netlink.co.uk/profile/d335top.htm

i do not wish too provoke anyone here, but it seems like an unbeatable aircraft for ww2 standards, even for HIV, P51H, P47N and anything else until T6 Texan http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Skalgrim
04-10-2005, 06:04 AM
Please compare not the end of development technology like p51h from 45 with begin of new development of piston engine plane like do335 from 43,

p51h is the end from p51 design, and do335 the begin of new piston engine time,

but to bad germans need jets, it would be interesting how the d335 had developed until 45 to compare with p51h.

do335 has many development potential, other as p51h it was the end of potential, much more can you not get from the p51 airframe.

with 2 * db603n 2800ps insteat 2 db605a 1800ps, fly she sure over 800km/h and sealevel sure too faster as the tempest.

With easy words, she has more potential as most piston engine plane, at least from speed.

p80 has never see combat too, but give in fb, that is reason never see combat count not fb.



.
When i read so crape statements jug p47m there and there and could that with 2800ps and has so good aerodynamic, only in you dream, it give many prove that all wrong at least one prove.

http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/jugbw.jpg

Logic this ugly bird need 2800ps.



Now i understand they have not publish datas and picture from p47m


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
HetzerII,
Why the OMG?
I'm just stating facts. The Do335 was very interesting, and fast. But for some reason my European friends think that the US had no piston engined competitors for it.

The P51H had a top speed of 487mph at 25,000ft.
The P47N was similar.
The Do335 would have made no appreciable difference to the outcome.

Not taking anything away from it, just stating fact. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LEXX_Luthor
04-10-2005, 05:13 PM
I want to see Do~335 vs MiG~13 (coming on Russian CD).

p1ngu666
04-10-2005, 06:28 PM
p47m looks like p47d i think, just someone has gone, omg power http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif and boosted the engine.

they had no wingracks some of the time, and some had 6 .50cals

p47 got speed up high, do335 midish alt i guess, like most german engines?

VW-IceFire
04-12-2005, 11:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
p47m looks like p47d i think, just someone has gone, omg power http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif and boosted the engine.

they had no wingracks some of the time, and some had 6 .50cals

p47 got speed up high, do335 midish alt i guess, like most german engines? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
P-47M was a P-47D-30...with tail fillet and bomb racks removed (until later).

quiet_man
04-13-2005, 09:31 AM
normaly I'm not so interested in late war stuff

Do-335 and Go-229 are an exception, I find it interesting to fly them cause the idea behind this planes was far ahead

take away the jets, how would the next generation of fighters have looked?
bi-plane -> mono-plane -> push-pull?

quiet_man
looking forward to try the Do in flight

Willey
04-13-2005, 03:29 PM
I'm interested in that experimental stuff... yeah, there are more important planes like the Ju-88 oder 110 series. But there are also important and less important experimental planes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif . The Do-335 is probably one of the most important experimental planes in WW2, so I very much hope she will make it in.
Another really interesting plane I'd like to see is that russian folding wing biplane that becomes a monoplane with gears retracted, I think it was Ikarus 2 or something like that. But that's rather in the range of those russian addon CDs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

lrrp22
04-13-2005, 04:51 PM
Skalgrim,

I'm not sure what exactly you are trying to say, but I suspect that you are attempting to denigrate the P-47M's performance. Am I correct?

Skalgrim
04-14-2005, 06:03 PM
last passage was a little bit joke, look the picture.

p47m performance was sure very great,

i would only say dora335 design had probable great potential for more development as p51 and p47 airframe

because p51h and p47m was almost end of the development, and the performance that we know from the do335 is from 43,

and that are only the begin of the development from do335, it was sure more performance possible for do335.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
Skalgrim,

I'm not sure what exactly you are trying to say, but I suspect that you are attempting to denigrate the P-47M's performance. Am I correct? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ImpStarDuece
04-14-2005, 07:57 PM
A better comparison for the Do-335 than the P-47N or P-51H would be aircraft like the MB-5, Spiteful, Fury, Bearcat, Tigercat or a lot of the other 'also rans' that existed in prototype or early production form at the close of hostilities. Most of these had the same development potential that Skalgrim is talking about with the Do-335 and most were in developemnt by late 1943 or early 44.

The Allies had a WEALTH of prototype and experimental designs during the war, probably far more than the German industry. They never got built simply because there really wasn't a need for them as the war progressed. What they had was clearly doing the job, doing it well and the Allies didn't need to scabble about for 'wunderwaffe' in order to give themselves (deluded) hope.

The history of the US and British experimentals program is probably more interesting than the German one. Its just that the German one, being different from that of the victors, creates so many what ifs that it draws a lot of people in.

Lewicide
04-14-2005, 08:51 PM
Over at the CWOS PF forum there is a discussion/speculation at the moment about which plane is in/out of 4.0. a fellow who worked on exterior of Do-335 at seems to think it's going in the Russian CD but who knows?

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

p1ngu666
04-14-2005, 09:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
A better comparison for the Do-335 than the P-47N or P-51H would be aircraft like the MB-5, Spiteful, Fury, Bearcat, Tigercat or a lot of the other 'also rans' that existed in prototype or early production form at the close of hostilities. Most of these had the same development potential that Skalgrim is talking about with the Do-335 and most were in developemnt by late 1943 or early 44.

The Allies had a WEALTH of prototype and experimental designs during the war, probably far more than the German industry. They never got built simply because there really wasn't a need for them as the war progressed. What they had was clearly doing the job, doing it well and the Allies didn't need to scabble about for 'wunderwaffe' in order to give themselves (deluded) hope.

The history of the US and British experimentals program is probably more interesting than the German one. Its just that the German one, being different from that of the victors, creates so many what ifs that it draws a lot of people in. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

indeed
also i think stuff like hornet, lincon wasnt in active service because leaders didnt want to upset mossie and lanc production...

germanys only hope was the wonder weapons...

one nation developed a supersonic fighter during the war, play guess the nation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BBB_Hyperion
04-14-2005, 11:47 PM
Hmm developed could be everything was it supersonic before VE day yes or no ? Or just on drawing board .)

LEXX_Luthor
04-15-2005, 12:59 AM
Lewicide:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Over at the CWOS PF forum...a fellow who worked on exterior of Do-335 at seems to think it's going in the Russian CD but who knows? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I always thought that would be a natural fate for Do~335, since it would mate well with MiG~13 and the jets.

Butt....Oleg posted *here* about future Patchings and he mentioned working over the Do~335 without saying it would be for Russian CD only (like he said would happen to Pe~2 and IL~10).

So, I think Do~335 is still in for the west market.

Oleg_Maddox
04-15-2005, 01:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
Does anybody know if this one will end up making it in. The cockpit for it looked awesome. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In progress...

Lewicide
04-15-2005, 01:41 AM
Thanks Oleg, I've been really looking forward to this one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

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

Charos
04-15-2005, 02:08 AM
Nothing makes a passenger on public Transport happier than knowing theres a driver sitting up the front.


Thanks Oleg. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

ausmondo
04-15-2005, 02:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
Does anybody know if this one will end up making it in. The cockpit for it looked awesome. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In progress... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


"In progress....."

I just love that one....
The 'Il2 Sturmovik' series has been a work 'in progress' since day one, as far as I can see.
and I just love it.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
I don't mind the wait...
It's the suspense thats killing me.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

RedNeckerson
04-15-2005, 11:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
In progress... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Great news Oleg!

p1ngu666
04-15-2005, 03:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Hmm developed could be everything was it supersonic before VE day yes or no ? Or just on drawing board .) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

wind tunnel, and full size mockup http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

later tests proved it would have gone thru sound barrier without problem.

cmon, name a nation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

AB_Zipper
04-15-2005, 04:03 PM
In progress...

Thanks Oleg! I've been waiting for years!

92SqnGCJimbo
04-15-2005, 05:04 PM
it was a american lockheed design... that had the same outer wing panels as the p38...


the lockheed l-133

go here for more info http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Histories/Lockheed-L133/L133.htm

p1ngu666
04-15-2005, 05:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 92SqnGCJimbo:
it was a american lockheed design... that had the same outer wing panels as the p38...


the lockheed l-133

go here for more info http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Histories/Lockheed-L133/L133.htm <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

RedNeckerson
04-16-2005, 03:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
[cmon, name a nation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Have no idea which one you are talking about, but DFS in Germany had a supersonic airframe that was captured by the Russians and used by them for research.

BBB_Hyperion
04-16-2005, 07:03 AM
When it didnt reach supersonic speed (in levelflight ? ) to VE Day its regardless anyway. I have found some Brit , US and German developements that all fall in this area and would have meet the requirements. To get supersonic it needs at least to be jet powered engine with the low hp output of these available i assume it was not in levelflight hardly archiveable in levelflight with available jet engines. (even with alt .))And futher it needs to be a low drag design . If it survives supersonic is another question http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


DFS 346
http://www.luftarchiv.de/flugzeuge/dfs/dfs346.jpg
http://www.luftarchiv.de/flugzeuge/dfs/dfs346_2.jpg

This plane is tho a top candidate.

Its a Tu4 before someone asks no B29 .)

3.JG51_BigBear
04-16-2005, 10:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
Does anybody know if this one will end up making it in. The cockpit for it looked awesome. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In progress... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sweet, thanks for the reply.

Copperhead310th
04-20-2005, 06:21 PM
yep the L-133 would have OWNED every thing in the entire Axis arsenal. bet on it.
and it was a 1940 design!!! light years ahead of it's time.

WWMaxGunz
04-20-2005, 07:51 PM
L133.... nice *drawing*. Best part really, as real as the "specs".

p1ngu666
04-20-2005, 09:56 PM
ok
miles m52 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Aaron_GT
04-21-2005, 05:47 AM
Copperhead wrote:
"Yep the L-133 would have OWNED every thing in the entire Axis arsenal."

Well if the L-133 is allowable than all sorts of LW designs that were also paper only are allowable as competition.

At least the Miles M-52 was virtually completed before the project was cancelled.

BBB_Hyperion
04-21-2005, 07:42 AM
So we agree us , britain , germany had capable plane designs that were able to reach mach speed.

Further we can note all this designs had trouble with stability at supersonic speed.

None of these projects was supersonic before VE day.

Windtunnel tests were done and promising supersonic speed that is not the same as reaching it.

Bump

p1ngu666
04-21-2005, 08:08 PM
well, models of m52 past supersonic speeds in actual proper tests, not windtunnel. think they where done awhile later tho.

alot of info from the project was given to americans, for there X1 and other projects, they renigaded the deal tho after getting the goods...

shame really.
think the brief for miles was make a 1000mph aircraft in 6 or 9 months, i forget.
at the time, 500mph was just being reached

i didnt know about the german and american thing, but thats the good thing about this forum, u can pickup knowledge http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Aaron_GT
04-22-2005, 01:20 AM
There's a book on Miles coming out sometime soon (I am waiting for the publishers to let me know when).

Rocket powered 1/3 scale models of the M.52 mananged around Mach 1.25 in 1948. The full sized jet powered piloted M.52 was about 80% complete before being stopped in, I think, 1946, and could well have broken the sound barrier in 1947 had it proceeded. Britain was broke at the time, so development ended. (Development had started in 1942).

Elements of the design lived on the X1, notably the tailplane.

WWMaxGunz
04-22-2005, 05:57 PM
There's a good bit of history in the attempts to break mach 1.
A few dead famous test pilots doing what should have worked at the time.
They were all reasonably sure based on everything up to the end.

Back in 77 I was at a library when a friend said "read this". It was an
account of an early jet in a power dive off Long Island, NY. Two seater,
IIRC. The author was pilot and wrote about the shaking and rattling, then
they got through but the plane was damaged and started slowing down. He
described the shock wave hitting the plane from the rear and pushing them
along for some seconds, and the plane was more damaged. Down low they got
slow enough to bail out. It was interesting reading, but was it real or
just BS? The book was non-fiction military history but I had doubts even
then.

TAGERT.
04-22-2005, 06:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
Copperhead wrote:
"Yep the L-133 would have OWNED every thing in the entire Axis arsenal."

Well if the L-133 is allowable than all sorts of LW designs that were also paper only are allowable as competition.

At least the Miles M-52 was virtually completed before the project was cancelled. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Well if they are going to allow more what-if planes that didnt make it off the knapkin they were drawn on, let alone blue print.. than they should include a F4u-4 that was actually produced in the thousands and saw action. F the legal action from northrop!

RedNeckerson
04-23-2005, 12:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:

account of an early jet in a power dive off Long Island, NY. Two seater,
IIRC. The author was pilot and wrote about the shaking and rattling, then
they got through but the plane was damaged and started slowing down. He
described the shock wave hitting the plane from the rear and pushing them
along for some seconds, and the plane was more damaged. Down low they got
slow enough to bail out. It was interesting reading, but was it real or
just BS? The book was non-fiction military history but I had doubts even
then. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Sounds like the same thing that happened with the Me-262 in a powered dive - parts of the aircraft goes supersonic but the airplane cannot break the sound barrier because it really has a sub-sonic airframe.

It was not a well understood phenomenon in those days, some pilots of piston engine fighters even believed they had broken the sound barrier.

Aaron_GT
04-24-2005, 02:09 AM
Tagert, if you are not careful I am going to have to start quoting lines from the current Michael Winner TV adverts!

darkhorizon11
04-24-2005, 10:33 PM
What was the Do-335s specific purpose?

I always thought it was to replaced the earlier versions of the FW-190 being used as Jabos. Although I always saw it as a multi-purpose aircraft it seems more suited for mud-moving since its powerful, armored, and bulky.

Hristos
04-24-2005, 10:59 PM
It was a result of 1000-1000-1000 concept, meaning a plane able to fly 1000 kilometers with speed of 1000 km/h, carrying a 1000 kg load.

Of course, these conditions were not met, but Do-335 was closer to the goal than any other piston engined plane.

So yes, it was a fighter bomber. With bomb bay, to eliminate drag. However, its stellar performance and ability to take different armament and equpiment made it suitable for for other roles, for example two seat nightfighter with radar. Some versions were intended to carry guided missiles.

The mud moving version had two additional MK103s proposed. I'm not sure if it reached production.

Given the speed and firepower, no matter what it was intended for, it would be a great fighter and bomber interceptor.

Even though it probably never engaged in combat, it is an interesting plane to have. Push-pull props would make for an interesting turn performance, similar to cars with rear wheel drive skidding through corners. Actually, Do-335 is a 4WD http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Doug_Thompson
04-24-2005, 11:31 PM
The Germans produced it as a heavy fighter and fighter bomber, but it would have been the perfect high-speed recon airplane. Especially for low-level photo recon.

The night-fighter version with two cockpits and radar antenna on the wings probably held a lot of promise.

The single-seat version was fast, but not so fast that it could have engaged swarms of allied fighters with impunity. Late-war daylight operations against the allies would have been rough for any piston-engined plane.

The shame is that the Americans didn't dream up that airplane. It would have made a wonderful long-range fighter for the Pacific Theater.

LEXX_Luthor
04-25-2005, 01:09 AM
Hristos:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Even though it probably never engaged in combat, it is an interesting plane to have. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree, they are all interesting to have in the sim. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

However, unlike I~185, MiG~3U, and some other "fantasy" planes, the Do~335 is a cult idol inside the western flight sim community, and so unlike the others, Do~335 as "fantasy" plane is accepted over the FB/PF by the Hardcore "real plane" western flight simmer/simmerette.

I long ago predicted Do~335 would be spared the webboard fate of the other "fantasy" planes. Again, as always, I made 100% accurate prediction. Flight simmer webboard behavior makes this easy, predictable, a book formula. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ...that, and I too can feel the Cult attraction of the Dornier. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

Doug_Thompson
05-02-2005, 07:38 PM
Re: Which fantasy planes get the nod.

I suspect that the planes that Maddox & Co. adopt need more than a fanbase.

The Dornier 335, the Ki-84, and others were flight tested by the Western Allies after the war. There is a basis -- however slim -- for a flight model for these aircraft.

Sure, there are exceptions. The Gotha jet's in the game, for instance. Still, I'd imagine that having some numbers helps improve the odds.

One plane I'd love to see is the Ki-116, which is the Ki-84 redesigned around a smaller, more reliable engine. It was 1,000 pounds lighter than a regular Frank, and had a very light wing loading. I'll probably never see it, because nothing much is known about it. I've never even found a picture of it.

========

Another factor is novelty.

The Do 335 is not a conventional tractor monoplane. It will have some different flight characteristics, perhaps some bizarre ones. Many other types that we'd all like to see are just variations of the some other plane. The Do 335 is unique.

========


... and I too can feel the Cult attraction of the Dornier.

Yes, yes. Feel the Power of the Dark Side. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

VW-IceFire
05-02-2005, 09:06 PM
Whatever the reason for accepting or not accepting the Do-335...I find it fascinating. Its a warbird. Its experimental. It flew. It'll be a fun challenge.

gombal40
05-03-2005, 02:58 AM
some screenie would make my day...
but let the skinning begin http://www.xs4all.nl/~nijssie/do335/Color2.jpg

gombal40
05-03-2005, 03:36 AM
or to make thing even better

Behold the DO335 Z
http://www.xs4all.nl/~nijssie/do335/Afbeelding_2.JPG

http://www.xs4all.nl/~nijssie/do335/Afbeelding_1.JPG

Philipscdrw
05-04-2005, 11:19 AM
That Do-335Z must have had some crazy flying characteristics...

Come to think of it, Dornier had been making push-pull aircraft for ages before the war, with tractor/pusher engines sharing a nacelle. The Do-335 is innovative in that the nacelle is the fuselage.

Aaron_GT
05-04-2005, 12:07 PM
but it would have been the perfect high-speed recon airplane.

Recon versions were planned.