PDA

View Full Version : You want reality , This is reality...



AFJ_Locust
07-01-2005, 11:39 AM
This is a quote from an avid historian within our squadron........

Many insignificant aircraft being fielded by everybody in the game. for example, on the german side you see people in 1944 maps using 1943 aircraft and sometimes even 1942 aircraft. the service life of aircraft was short, accidents, enemy fire, you name it.

I personally think either specific historic battle recreation maps or maps early42, late42 early43, late43, early44, late44, etc.

aircraft I am sick of looking at

Fw 190A6
Fw 190A9
bf 109G2
bf 109G6 A/S
bf 109G10
bf 109K4
Fw 190D9 44 w/mw 50
Ta-152H-1 rare bird

here is why I am sick of seeing them.

Fw 190A6, the main stay of the luftwaffe during 1944 was the Fw 190A8, the A6 was phased out by 1944!!! Phased out!!!

Fw 190A9, again the A8 was the mainstay of the luftwaffe, I have three books on the FW190 series some of which are written by German authors and translated into english. Fw 190A9 was never a major production block nor can any numbers be obtained due to its obscurity. Apparently some A8s were modified into A9s, but its any bodies guess how many.
There isnt any data available which show entire squads equipped with A9s. Wich we face today in most servers.

BF 109G2 this is a 1942 aircraft why is it in a 1944 server? btw only 80 were produced yet it usually makes up half of all bf 109s in a game.

Bf 109G6A/S there were 325 built

Bf 109G10 there were 118 built

Bf 109K4, of the 896 produced from october 44 thru december 44, many never made it into operation due to numerous reasons, mostly due to sabotage and accidents, this is really a 1945 aircraft also.

Fw 190D9 I forget exact figures, but 600-700 were built from about 9/44 till 12/44. THEY DID NOT!! recieve MW50. The top speeds at sea level and at altitude were 30-40 kph slower than what we have in the game now. I believe a lot of them were lost due to engine fires. there was some sort of oil leak which caused a lot of unexplained engine fires. the problem was eventually fixed.

The 1945 Fw 190D9 was the a/c with MW50 not the 1944D9 !!

Ta 152H-1, one book states that as they began production the factory was over run by the russians so few made it into operational units. another book states that only 10 made it to operational units. the Ta 152H-0 was the only ta 152 that got operational to my knowledge, some say 67 made it into service with JG/301, this was January 27th 1945. so any ta is a 1945 aircraft and they served in very limited numbers.

BTW the Ta 152H-0 (the one actually used in limited combat) did not have MW50 nor GM1, it was much slower than the published 472 mph TA that never went into production. it also was not a steller climber end of that story.

incase your wondering or have some doubts about bf 109s I will give production figures from a book written in germany by a german author

total bf 109 production from January 1944 till December 1944 was 6,316

Bf 109G6 50%
(btw about half had MW50 starting around 4/44)
Bf 109G14 29%
Bf 109K4 14%
Bf 109G6A/S 5%
Bf 109G10 2%

jump into most games and you will see the exact opposite.

The bf 109G6, Bf 109G6 late w/mw50 and the Bf 109G14 make up nearly every picture I see from 1944 luftwaffe units.

It looks like the K4 finally replaced most of the bf 109G6 late in 1945, but the bf 109G14 was still the mainstay fighter making up the bulk and majority. this is my rant.
================================================

Ok now with history more understood & the true yearning for reality around here, wouldnt you think that most German AC in any server for 1944
Should be the FW A8, G14 and G6 and maybe the G6late.

Pit thoes ac against what the allied have in same years, Early & late maps & then we have a game again not a Fantasy of Reality

Edited to protect the inocent & or Ignorant http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Platypus_1.JaVA
07-01-2005, 12:06 PM
Finally someone who dares to tell us the truth http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

A sensible post. Yet, you can never make all the arcade servers on HL doing this realisitc plane set. Sad really. I long for BoB really. There are a bit too much aircraft in this sim right now.

darkhorizon11
07-01-2005, 12:11 PM
I agree. Especially with the Ta-152 thing. Barely any got into action.

JG77_Rev
07-01-2005, 12:17 PM
Don't whine about it like everyone else in here, do something! Get your own server started up on HL or All-Seeing Eye or where ever you fly and do as you see fit.

Complaining about it is sure to get you ignored and classified as just another whinger.

Oh, and BTW, where's your rant about all the other planesets? Surely you have something to say about the P-51, the P-38, the Spit V-whatever, and the Russian birds. Why are you picking on just the LW?

Like I said, get a server up and running and hell, I know a bunch of guys that would fly it!

faustnik
07-01-2005, 12:21 PM
Fw 190A6, the main stay of the luftwaffe during 1944 was the Fw 190A8, the A6 was phased out by 1944!!! Phased out!!!

Complete BS. A rediculous statement. Why don't you read a book about the Fw190 before posting garbage.

faustnik
07-01-2005, 12:23 PM
Fw 190A9 was never a major production block nor can any numbers be obtained due to its obscurity.


What books are you "reading" (G.I. Joe comics don't count)??? What a complete load of cr4p.

Fw190A9 werk numbers:

202125-202319, 202360-202450, 202565-202590, 205001-205100, 205180-205300, 205901-205999, 206031-206-200, 207160-207240, 208378-209915.

Sorry Locust, but, a lie a day will not keep the LW away.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-01-2005, 12:24 PM
There's another side to this story:

If you go by what you see on the average HyperLobby server, there was only one model of Corsair: the 1945 1c with the cannons. You almost never see any 1943 or '44 models with 6 x .50s flying, which were by FAR the ones that did the work clearing out the Solomons and hopping islands.

It's just laziness on the part of scenario designers ... and it's also the community's "gottawin" mentality; 90% of the people flying gravitate to '44 or '45 ueberbirds EXCLUSIVELY, because they're well aware that these optimized birds have the raw power and weaponry that makes up for their lack of flying skill. I do NOT exaggerate when I say I can duck into up to 10 servers in a row and find the overwhelming majority of players flying a F4U-1c, a Yak 3, a Dora, a 109K, an La-7 with 3x20mms, or a '44/'45 Stang.

It would be better if server designers would, at a minimum, assign "years" to their server setups (or perhaps set them to rotate for variety). Of course, there would still be a few unsavory (mis)matchups that would crop up: some planes are mislabeled in their dates, or depending on venue, really weren't available (case in point: a desert '41 scenario wouldn't have Spit Vs because they didn't arrive in the Med until the last half of '42; or you wouldn't have cannon armed Hurricanes operating on the Murmansk map, because they sent the clapped out BoB era Hurricanes to the VVS not the newer versions).

And, also, a pox on those DF servers who don't even bother to separate planesets by as rough a measure as Axis vs. Allies. As a committed Bf109 alt monkey http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif I don't like fighting other 109s, FWs, etc. It just seems wrong somehow.

lbhskier37
07-01-2005, 12:25 PM
I agree with that, and is one of the big reasons I won't fly on servers like Warclouds anymore. But you have to look at both sides. Thoughout 1944 the majority of P38s flying in the ETO were J models. (not saying Ls weren't there, just not nearly as numerous as the Js) Also wouldn't the P51B/C be much more numerous than the D during this time period, along with the P47 D22?

On the LW side, the 1944 D9 we have now doesn't have MW50 just like in reality. Not sure about speeds, but currently it is about the same speed as the 1945 model which is 30-40kph slower than in reality. Not sure how a G6late w/MW50 performed in realtion to G6/AS, but the AS might be a good replacement for it.

In my opinion, the 1943 servers are the most fun, 190 A5/6s, 109 G2/F4, Spit IX, P47 D10, P38J, P40M.

Tachyon1000
07-01-2005, 12:25 PM
It's a game. You want reality. Start work on a time machine. Better yet, set up your own server with "historical" planesets.

geetarman
07-01-2005, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
This is a quote from an avid historian within our squadron........

Many insignificant aircraft being fielded by everybody in the game. for example, on the german side you see people in 1944 maps using 1943 aircraft and sometimes even 1942 aircraft. the service life of aircraft was short, accidents, enemy fire, you name it.

I personally think either specific historic battle recreation maps or maps early42, late42 early43, late43, early44, late44, etc.

aircraft I am sick of looking at

Fw 190A6
Fw 190A9
bf 109G2
bf 109G6 A/S
bf 109G10
bf 109K4
Fw 190D9 44 w/mw 50
Ta-152H-1 rare bird

here is why I am sick of seeing them.

Fw 190A6, the main stay of the luftwaffe during 1944 was the Fw 190A8, the A6 was phased out by 1944!!! Phased out!!!

Fw 190A9, again the A8 was the mainstay of the luftwaffe, I have three books on the FW190 series some of which are written by German authors and translated into english. Fw 190A9 was never a major production block nor can any numbers be obtained due to its obscurity. Apparently some A8s were modified into A9s, but its any bodies guess how many.
There isnt any data available which show entire squads equipped with A9s. Wich we face today in most servers.

BF 109G2 this is a 1942 aircraft why is it in a 1944 server? btw only 80 were produced yet it usually makes up half of all bf 109s in a game.

Bf 109G6A/S there were 325 built

Bf 109G10 there were 118 built

Bf 109K4, of the 896 produced from october 44 thru december 44, many never made it into operation due to numerous reasons, mostly due to sabotage and accidents, this is really a 1945 aircraft also.

Fw 190D9 I forget exact figures, but 600-700 were built from about 9/44 till 12/44. THEY DID NOT!! recieve MW50. The top speeds at sea level and at altitude were 30-40 kph slower than what we have in the game now. I believe a lot of them were lost due to engine fires. there was some sort of oil leak which caused a lot of unexplained engine fires. the problem was eventually fixed.

The 1945 Fw 190D9 was the a/c with MW50 not the 1944D9 !!

Ta 152H-1, one book states that as they began production the factory was over run by the russians so few made it into operational units. another book states that only 10 made it to operational units. the Ta 152H-0 was the only ta 152 that got operational to my knowledge, some say 67 made it into service with JG/301, this was January 27th 1945. so any ta is a 1945 aircraft and they served in very limited numbers.

BTW the Ta 152H-0 (the one actually used in limited combat) did not have MW50 nor GM1, it was much slower than the published 472 mph TA that never went into production. it also was not a steller climber end of that story.

incase your wondering or have some doubts about bf 109s I will give production figures from a book written in germany by a german author

total bf 109 production from January 1944 till December 1944 was 6,316

Bf 109G6 50%
(btw about half had MW50 starting around 4/44)
Bf 109G14 29%
Bf 109K4 14%
Bf 109G6A/S 5%
Bf 109G10 2%

jump into most games and you will see the exact opposite.

The bf 109G6, Bf 109G6 late w/mw50 and the Bf 109G14 make up nearly every picture I see from 1944 luftwaffe units.

It looks like the K4 finally replaced most of the bf 109G6 late in 1945, but the bf 109G14 was still the mainstay fighter making up the bulk and majority. this is my rant.
================================================

Ok now with history more understood & the true yearning for reality around here, wouldnt you think that most German AC in any server for 1944
Should be the FW A8, G14 and G6 and maybe the G6late.

Pit thoes ac against what the allied have in same years, Early & late maps & then we have a game again not a Fantasy of Reality

Edited to protect the inocent & or Ignorant http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Very interesting! Don't sweat the losses red

geetarman
07-01-2005, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by lbhskier37:
I agree with that, and is one of the big reasons I won't fly on servers like Warclouds anymore. But you have to look at both sides. Thoughout 1944 the majority of P38s flying in the ETO were J models. (not saying Ls weren't there, just not nearly as numerous as the Js) Also wouldn't the P51B/C be much more numerous than the D during this time period, along with the P47 D22?

On the LW side, the 1944 D9 we have now doesn't have MW50 just like in reality. Not sure about speeds, but currently it is about the same speed as the 1945 model which is 30-40kph slower than in reality. Not sure how a G6late w/MW50 performed in realtion to G6/AS, but the AS might be a good replacement for it.

In my opinion, the 1943 servers are the most fun, 190 A5/6s, 109 G2/F4, Spit IX, P47 D10, P38J, P40M.

The bog-standard P-51D we have in the game first arrived in the ETO in the spring of 1944, I believe. They would be quite suitable for any mid-late 1944 set.

spitfire22287
07-01-2005, 12:38 PM
While I'm glad someone finally came out and posted historical figures for operational use of planes (thank you for that, they seem accurate), there really is no point to post and gripe/criticize that online servers are unreal because people use the wrong planes.

Why? Because this is a simulation after all has been said and done. Why have reality in a sim when you're living it. If I wanted reality, I'd get myself into a dogfight in real planes with real weapons, etc. If you want accuracy, thats understandable....

If Oleg had wanted this all to be reality, then he would release a yearly patch in which new models of every plane are included. Imagine that! lol And even then, you couldnt stop people from flying the older planes....and why would you?! These planes are available to be flown, Oleg and team made them all, because they were there, and therefore nothing will stop people from flying the plane they want to fly. Isnt that the entire point of a simulation?? To be able to fly the planes of your dreams that you would never be able to fly in real life?
I mean, do you really expect someone to be like "Hmmm...well the Ta-152 is my favorite plane, but it didnt fly in 1944 so I'm not going to fly it either." http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif


I dont think so.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Good post nonetheless, and thanks for the accuarte info. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

lbhskier37
07-01-2005, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by geetarman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lbhskier37:
I agree with that, and is one of the big reasons I won't fly on servers like Warclouds anymore. But you have to look at both sides. Thoughout 1944 the majority of P38s flying in the ETO were J models. (not saying Ls weren't there, just not nearly as numerous as the Js) Also wouldn't the P51B/C be much more numerous than the D during this time period, along with the P47 D22?

On the LW side, the 1944 D9 we have now doesn't have MW50 just like in reality. Not sure about speeds, but currently it is about the same speed as the 1945 model which is 30-40kph slower than in reality. Not sure how a G6late w/MW50 performed in realtion to G6/AS, but the AS might be a good replacement for it.

In my opinion, the 1943 servers are the most fun, 190 A5/6s, 109 G2/F4, Spit IX, P47 D10, P38J, P40M.

The bog-standard P-51D we have in the game first arrived in the ETO in the spring of 1944, I believe. They would be quite suitable for any mid-late 1944 set. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wasn't sure when they arrived, thanks. But my point is wouldn't the majority of P51s, up until late 1944 be B/C models? It does take quite a bit of time to convert. I would think the P38L and P51D would be good for Ardennes scenerios, but then so would the D9 and G10,K4. What I see online a lot is Normandy scenerios where a P51D or P38J should be rare to non-existant (along with A9, D9, and K4 of course).

Now Jug pilots please don't castrate me if I am wrong, but wouldn't razorback Jugs be much more prevalent until late 1944 also? (razorbacks look much more sexy anyways)

faustnik
07-01-2005, 12:41 PM
While I'm glad someone finally came out and posted historical figures for operational use of planes (thank you for that, they seem accurate),

Historical figures??? Locust is posting complete BS and you're buying it? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Aeronautico
07-01-2005, 12:44 PM
True or almost true probably but... why people seems to look for realism in such details when realism is completely ignored or twisted upside-down in so many other things (and couldn't be anyway else)?!

What about squadron composition and behaviour?
What about appropriate aifields and number of planes in the air?
What about real goals with real targets?

Nothing is "realistic" in this game: not because it's bad at being realistic, but because way too many variables and details can't make in it.

While I understand the frustration of the original poster, I can't but think that anywahere else should one look at, even more frustartion would arise. So let's just relax and enjoy this game!

Tooz_69GIAP
07-01-2005, 12:45 PM
Tis why I enjoy ZvW, that server tends to stick to early-mid-war stuff, and keeps the planesets reasonably balanced.

faustnik
07-01-2005, 12:52 PM
While I understand the frustration of the original poster, I can't but think that anywahere else should one look at, even more frustartion would arise. So let's just relax and enjoy this game!

I also agree with Locust's idea of using a correct '44 planeset for a better matchup Aeronautico. What bothers me is the completely incorrect information that he includes in his post, it is rediculous. Unfortunately, as we already see in this thread, poeple see complete fabrications in text and tend to believe them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

stathem
07-01-2005, 01:00 PM
Can someone confirm or deny whether the G/AS we have in game is modelled with the weight of a MW50 system behind the pilot? ie is it a true G/ASM?

Blackdog5555
07-01-2005, 01:00 PM
Nobody realy wants reality..most want simulation, but people go on the DF servers to blow things up. Be honest.. I dont do do online because its just a fancy sky shooter. Even co-ops.

But blame the server, not the game. Set up you own DF server with old plane sets. onliners like to blast big cannons not fly a Fiat 50. BTW, Im an offliner for your very complaint.

Rare planes is not a bad thing...but if they are represented incorrectly.. you have a problem. Im glasd we have a chance to fly the rare birds.. Maybe a P47N fo F4U-4 or AU1 would be nice

What bothers me is that the P47 (best plane in WWII in the ETO) has a real **** cockpit.. The fantasy 185 is a work of art. go figure. Yes, its a Russian sim, but im sure, com'on..

my two cents....BD.

JG77_Rev
07-01-2005, 01:06 PM
Accurate FW190 information can be found in the FW190 Consortium forum located here (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=index). You need to register for the forums and PM the forum mod to get access. VERY STRICT mod rules there, no spamming or bogus info.

Have at it.

Tex-Hill-AVG
07-01-2005, 01:39 PM
German aircraft production during WWII: German aircraft Pro. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_aircraft_production_during_World_War_II)

geetarman
07-01-2005, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by lbhskier37:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by geetarman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lbhskier37:
I agree with that, and is one of the big reasons I won't fly on servers like Warclouds anymore. But you have to look at both sides. Thoughout 1944 the majority of P38s flying in the ETO were J models. (not saying Ls weren't there, just not nearly as numerous as the Js) Also wouldn't the P51B/C be much more numerous than the D during this time period, along with the P47 D22?

On the LW side, the 1944 D9 we have now doesn't have MW50 just like in reality. Not sure about speeds, but currently it is about the same speed as the 1945 model which is 30-40kph slower than in reality. Not sure how a G6late w/MW50 performed in realtion to G6/AS, but the AS might be a good replacement for it.

In my opinion, the 1943 servers are the most fun, 190 A5/6s, 109 G2/F4, Spit IX, P47 D10, P38J, P40M.

The bog-standard P-51D we have in the game first arrived in the ETO in the spring of 1944, I believe. They would be quite suitable for any mid-late 1944 set. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wasn't sure when they arrived, thanks. But my point is wouldn't the majority of P51s, up until late 1944 be B/C models? It does take quite a bit of time to convert. I would think the P38L and P51D would be good for Ardennes scenerios, but then so would the D9 and G10,K4. What I see online a lot is Normandy scenerios where a P51D or P38J should be rare to non-existant (along with A9, D9, and K4 of course).

Now Jug pilots please don't castrate me if I am wrong, but wouldn't razorback Jugs be much more prevalent until late 1944 also? (razorbacks look much more sexy anyways) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you would see a larger number of bubble-top D's flying out of England around D-day or thereafter, to the point that they became the dominant version.

Buzzsaw-
07-01-2005, 01:47 PM
Salute

This is an issue near and dear to my own heart.

There is a 'favorite' planeset which seems to be used all the time on the servers, to the exclusion of everything else. And that planeset is quite often not very historical.

Some corrections to the original poster though:

1) There were a lot more than 80 109G2's produced. This was first introduced in July of 1942 and was the mainstay of the Luftwaffe from approximately October of 1942 till July of 1943 when it was largely replaced by the 109G6. It was replaced because the extra weight of the DB605 engine and the higher landing speed required by the overall extra weight, and higher stalling speed, (over the 109F4) was causing too many landing gear failures, tire blowouts and ground loops. The G6 then had larger and heavier landing gear added, along with wing bulges to accomodate the larger tires as well as 13mm guns in the cowling.

Of all the models of 109 produced, the G series was produced in the largest numbers, although the G2 was not one of the biggest subgroups.

There is another aspect to this debate. The 109G2 we have in the game is modelled at 1.42 ata boost, which was not in common use till mid '43. The models introduced in '42 used 1.30 ata.

However, since the Finns received the 109G2 later, and used it right up until the end of the war, AND used 1.42 ata, we are see this later model being the standard in the game. Really we should have two versions, like the G6 early and late.

On the subject of the 190A's:

The 190A6 was introduced in mid '43 and was the standard during late '43. In the fall of '44 the A7, which was essentially identical to the A8 was introduced, but it was produced in very small numbers. The A8 itself was the single largest production block of the A designation models. More of them were produced than all the earlier models. The A6, and in fact the A5's remained in service through the first half of 1944, although in smaller numbers. The Luftwaffe did not like to dispose of the older 190's, they were considered more valuable to keep in service when compared to the 109's, which were replaced pretty quickly. You can even see pictures of 190A4's in service on the Balkan front in 1944.

In regards to the 190A9 kettle of fish:

The A9 as we see it in the game is a prototype of a proposed model, with the engine equipped with a turbo supercharger, the BMW 801TS/TH. In fact most "A9s" were not produced with this engine, only 5 prototypes were built, 190V66, 190V67, 190V72, 190V73 and 190V74. The model never went into production. There was also another proposed version of the 190A9, also only built in prototype, this one equipped with the BMW801F engine, rated at 2000 hp, and with a heavily armoured wing leading edge, intended for use as a "Rammjager", or bomber attack aircraft, which could ram B-17's if nessesary. Only three prototypes were made, those being 190V34, 190V35 and 190V36.

HOWEVER, most aircraft were essentially no different than the A8, as they had the same single supercharger equipped BMW801D-2 engine, and did not have the high altitude performance or higher horsepower. The frames were built for the , but the new engines did not become available due to reliability issues and so the older engines were installed. Even so, these aircraft were called "A9s".

We really should not be seeing the 190A9 as constituted, in regular availability on the servers.

Buzzsaw-
07-01-2005, 01:52 PM
Salute Tex

Looking at your chart, not sure where you get your figures, they are relatively accurate, but not the 190's. The numbers need to be all shifted one column to the right. As it stands now, the majority of the 190's are shown to be produced in 1943, when in fact the majority, like all German production, happened in '44.

faustnik
07-01-2005, 01:59 PM
Buzzsaw,

Please post your source that only prototype BMW801TS were produced.

SeaFireLIV
07-01-2005, 02:11 PM
AFJ_Locust though I doubt your figures greatly, I do agree with your main point.

But you`re missing an enormous point: HUMAN BEINGS.

Why do we (in real life) have jets, air to air misslies and radar in our modern day aircraft? Why didn`t we stay with our lovely `fair` WWII aircraft? For that matter why don`t we still use swords and not guns? Why don`t we fight the way real men fought?

Because a Jet missile blows away a WWII plane, a gun blows away the man holding the noble sword. And most Humans won`t give a monkeys how unfair/unhistorical it is. After a while even the noble sword carrier will drop the blade and pick up a grenade...

Same way with the servers: If a Human player sees he can have an ME262 or mega late war plane, he`s going to take it and blow away the guy with the Lagg3.

This is just ONE of the reasons that every game/sim should have a GOOD offline with AI dynamic Campaign, so people who wish to fly seriously against the historical planes of the time can without seeing a dozen a D9 or me262 everywhere..

You are asking to change the condition of Human Nature. Can`t be done. As others have said, your only way is to set your own historic planesset servers. Or play with a team you know will fly historically.


I think you secretly know this, but as usual, you feel you need to vent.

Buzzsaw-
07-01-2005, 02:21 PM
Salute Faustnik

Source: (among others)

FOCKE WULF, FW190

by Gordon Swanborough, William Green

Book lists all the prototypes manufactured.

Stackhouse25th
07-01-2005, 02:24 PM
i like the fact how he knows his history, but the plain truth is: its a game, but its unusual in that its more realistic then what most games strive for. Yes he may have his points, but the only way to get a game to become fully historic is 'public dev'.

this sounds like a rant, nothing we can do about it. However, shouldnt this be about making maps with proper planeset? Retitle the post, and you'll get better positive replies

faustnik
07-01-2005, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute Faustnik

Source: (among others)

FOCKE WULF, FW190

by Gordon Swanborough, William Green

Book lists all the prototypes manufactured.

Green is an older source, please list others.


BMW801"TS" or "S" engines were in serial production from late '44. These engines produced up to 2200ps and were interchangeable with the older D-2 versions.

Souces:

Focke-Wulf Fw 190, Lowe
Fw 190 A/F/G/S, Skupiewski
Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Griehl

idonno
07-01-2005, 03:11 PM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
...But you`re missing an enormous point: HUMAN BEINGS.

...Same way with the servers: If a Human player sees he can have an ME262 or mega late war plane, he`s going to take it and blow away the guy with the Lagg3.

The saddest thing about that is how these people don't care that they are wallowing in the depths of human nature rather than rising to the challenge of overcoming that nature. All that matters is that they win.

There's nothing wrong with flying something, like the Yak 3 for example, from time to time for the fun and variety of it, but when all you do is seek out the uber plane of the set, you're just cheating yourself.

The US Army's recruiting slogan used to be "Be all that you can be", the uber plane flying score *****s seem to have a "Be the least that you can be" motto.

VFS-214_Hawk
07-01-2005, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
This is a quote from an avid historian within our squadron........

Many insignificant aircraft being fielded by everybody in the game. for example, on the german side you see people in 1944 maps using 1943 aircraft and sometimes even 1942 aircraft. the service life of aircraft was short, accidents, enemy fire, you name it.......




Buy your own server and make some maps. Wish I could

Badsight.
07-01-2005, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
Pit thoes ac against what the allied have in same years, Early & late maps & then we have a game again not a Fantasy of Reality but you mean DF servers right ? where you can re-spawn after you have been killed & fly again

yeah realisim all the way

btw , the K4 we have in-game now is a joke speed wise , its got the MW50 versions speed downlow & the GM1 versions speed up high . . . . . that & the fact that most K4s never got to run at 1.98 ATA


& we have 1.42 ATA G2's , ok for the G6 but not really in 42 for the G2

all said & done tho DF servers are about airquake , & you will always see the best ones because DF servers have nothing to do with realisim & everything to do with kills - points - & stats

edit : nice & objective of you Locust to point out the things wrong with the planes/years only for the LW http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Badsight.
07-01-2005, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by Blackdog5555:
What bothers me is that the P47 (best plane in WWII in the ETO) has a real **** cockpit.. The fantasy 185 is a work of art. go figure. Yes, its a Russian sim, but im sure, com'on... blame the P-47s moddeler

the guy who did the I-185 had new features to introduce at the time it was made

the guy who did the P-47 had to get it done quickly way back before FB was released

theres genuine reasons for things being the way they are between those 2 planes

its not some russian bias conspiricy

Atomic_Marten
07-01-2005, 03:47 PM
Well I can say about title thread that it is really a server fault not the players fault. Whatever you give them they will fly.

For instance, give Me-163 to the masses, and seconds later everyone will be flying it (except few guys who will serve as targets). Generally, 90% of people online tend to choose the best plane on server (on their selected sides of course).

I really do not like dogfight servers that much anyway.

Buzzsaw-
07-01-2005, 03:48 PM
Salute Faustnik

Swanborough and Green may be considered an 'older' source, but they go into great detail regarding the aircraft.

I am not saying you are not right, but please list the dates the production aircraft began to come off the lines, the number which were produced, as well as the dates they began to equip the Squadrons.

And was this a case of these engines replacing wornout 801D-2's or new aircraft with the engines coming off the production lines?

And finally, what do your sources say about the reliability of the turbo/supercharger unit? My understanding was that this unit was the main source of delay in these engines being approved for service, and that the bearings in the turbocharger were constantly failing.

TooMuchCheese
07-01-2005, 03:52 PM
Only 80 G2s Produced according to this guy??
Can someone verify that statement please? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Atomic_Marten
07-01-2005, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Blackdog5555:
What bothers me is that the P47 (best plane in WWII in the ETO) has a real **** cockpit.. The fantasy 185 is a work of art. go figure. Yes, its a Russian sim, but im sure, com'on... blame the P-47s moddeler

the guy who did the I-185 had new features to introduce at the time it was made

the guy who did the P-47 had to get it done quickly way back before FB was released

theres genuine reasons for things being the way they are between those 2 planes

its not some russian bias conspiricy </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True.

Also, what people here often fail to realize (in most cases they simply don't know) is that many planes introduced in sim are work of some guy(s) that is not under strict Oleg supervision.

Think of Jippo's Ju88 and many more.

This is only an example:
I like Ki44. I start work on project (flyable Ki44). And I contact 1C guys about that. They say: you finish it before xx.xx.2005 and it will be included in patch if it meets our requirements.

That is basically it.

Hunter82
07-01-2005, 04:11 PM
ok he's wrong. G2 was made in such production numbers 42-43 that 80 would fit into the first MONTH of production


Originally posted by TooMuchCheese:
Only 80 G2s Produced according to this guy??
Can someone verify that statement please? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

MichaelMar
07-01-2005, 04:11 PM
I would like to set up a server/map for HL, but not sure how to. I see no where the ability to do so...

For I would like to set-up a early war map using the Italian, G50/CR42 against hawkers/Hurricans/other Brit BiPlanes...only.

Set realism on high and have some EW fun.

VFS-22_SPaRX
07-01-2005, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
Well I can say about title thread that it is really a server fault not the players fault. Whatever you give them they will fly.



That is the biggest BS statement I have ever read. Servers are run according to the server owners likes and dislikes. You make it sound like we force everyone to play on the server. The fact of the matter, the planeset is the #1 reason players fly on the server. #2 is deathkick and #3 is our maps/missions. If you dont like the server dont fly it. Plain and simple. Initally, in the case of my server, I started with a strict 44 planeset. But as time evolved, players asked for different planes. The server is not historical, so whats the big deal. As long as the planeset remainded balanced, that is all I concerned myself with. And as far as I am concerned, there is not ONE DOMINANT plane in the current planeset.

As for running a historical server. Sure I would love to have one. I enjoy flying those missions myself. But I personally do not have the time to do the research or create the maps. I have said this 1000 times. I will gladly host a server for anyone that is interested in creating the missions. You want a historic server, get off your butt and do something about it. I pay no mind to anyone that sits on the other side of a keyboard and whines about how they hate this server or that server. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Start your own, or take me up on this offer. Put up or shut up.

I have VERY strict requirements or maps on the server. This is vital to keeping minimal lag and freezes. And dont kid yourself, there is no such thing as a lag free server. So if any of you whiners in this thread wanna do something about it, then speak up and drop me an email. One thing to consider as well, Server settings are not open for discussion. Icons and other setting will be the same as on the current server.

S~

faustnik
07-01-2005, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:


I am not saying you are not right, but please list the dates the production aircraft began to come off the lines, the number which were produced, as well as the dates they began to equip the Squadrons.



Fw190 A/F/G/S, Skupiewski-

"Production (A9) started in late Autumn 1944 and continued in parralel with A-8's, monthly output depending on the availability of BMW 801TS powerplants."

"In October 1944 a new version, the Fw190F9, entered production. It was developed from the A9 fighter. The BMW 801TS engine was driving a VDM 3.50 m diameter three-blade propeller with wooden Heine or Schwarz blades."

Focke-Wolf Fw190, Griel-

"The Production version of the Fw 190 F-9 was powered by a BMW801TS, while the introduction of a BMW 801 TH was planned for a later date."

A physical example posted by Crumpp on the AAW-II board:

The FW-190F8/F9 on display at the NASM is a great example. IIRC It began life as an FW-190A6 and was factory rebuilt as an FW-190F8. Later it recieved the BMW-801TS power egg bringing it to FW-190F9 standards.

Blackdog5555
07-01-2005, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Blackdog5555:
What bothers me is that the P47 (best plane in WWII in the ETO) has a real **** cockpit.. The fantasy 185 is a work of art. go figure. Yes, its a Russian sim, but im sure, com'on... blame the P-47s moddeler

the guy who did the I-185 had new features to introduce at the time it was made

the guy who did the P-47 had to get it done quickly way back before FB was released

theres genuine reasons for things being the way they are between those 2 planes

its not some russian bias conspiricy </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


LOL, you must more bored then me..

For your information, there is a reason for everything. I think most people are aware that. So thanks for the platitudes. Your grasp of the obvious never ceases to amaze me.

You want to be an apologist , go ahead. I dont care. Bad work is just bad work. And! I know its not Russian conspiracy, what it is some Russian cockpit builder loves the 185 and they wanted to try out the new high res LOD on the prototype. Thats fine with me. Who cares. Im glad its there. The obvious point you missed though; why did they bum rush one of the most important planes in the ETO? Way below Olegs standard and not offer a patch.... I fly it with cockpit off so I dont have to look at the monster octagons..It reminds me of CFS1. So get your nose out of C1s bum and wipe off the jam. LOL.

Cheers

ComradeBadinov
07-01-2005, 04:34 PM
About the only way you can fix this is to make FB/PF DF servers run on the same engine that LOMAC runs on. Where you can set the type and NUMBER of each aircraft on either side . And ground objects move and fire like in our coops, So untill Oleg does that if you offer FW-190's and everyone chooses them, yer just gonna have to deal with it. Or just don't fly in DF servers anymore. Hopefully Oleg will design the DF servers in BoB more along the lines of how LOMAC works. Weather is more customizable too. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Badsight.
07-01-2005, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by Blackdog5555:
LOL, you must more bored then me..

For your information, there is a reason for everything. I think most people are aware that. So thanks for the platitudes. Your grasp of the obvious never ceases to amaze me.

You want to be an apologist , go ahead. I dont care. Bad work is just bad work. And! I know its not Russian conspiracy, what it is some Russian cockpit builder loves the 185 and they wanted to try out the new high res LOD on the prototype. Thats fine with me. Who cares. Im glad its there. The obvious point you missed though; why did they bum rush one of the most important planes in the ETO? Way below Olegs standard and not offer a patch.... I fly it with cockpit off so I dont have to look at the monster octagons..It reminds me of CFS1. So get your nose out of C1s bum and wipe off the jam. LOL. wow are you trying to be a A-hole or what

the P-47 moddeler offered to remake the P-47 cockpit , i cant remember if he was rejected outright or if he offered to do it to late , but your percious P-47 isnt the only plane in the game with cr4p cockpit textures Blackdog (nice of you to also point them out in your excellent objective & non biased way you have)

the I-185 was made with a higher level of moddeling that was said to be a test of what they are doing with the forthcoming BoB game

it wasnt just that some commie russian moddeler wanted to give yet another raised index finger to all the US plane fans http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

btw , you should actually bother to read before you go throwing around your character assumptions Blackdog , couldnt be more wrong as in you

Atomic_Marten
07-01-2005, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
Well I can say about title thread that it is really a server fault not the players fault. Whatever you give them they will fly.

That is the biggest BS statement I have ever read. Servers are run according to the server owners likes and dislikes. You make it sound like we force everyone to play on the server. The fact of the matter, the planeset is the #1 reason players fly on the server. #2 is deathkick and #3 is our maps/missions. If you dont like the server dont fly it. Plain and simple. Initally, in the case of my server, I started with a strict 44 planeset. But as time evolved, players asked for different planes. The server is not historical, so whats the big deal. As long as the planeset remainded balanced, that is all I concerned myself with. And as far as I am concerned, there is not ONE DOMINANT plane in the current planeset.

As for running a historical server. Sure I would love to have one. I enjoy flying those missions myself. But I personally do not have the time to do the research or create the maps. I have said this 1000 times. I will gladly host a server for anyone that is interested in creating the missions. You want a historic server, get off your butt and do something about it. I pay no mind to anyone that sits on the other side of a keyboard and whines about how they hate this server or that server. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Start your own, or take me up on this offer. Put up or shut up.

I have VERY strict requirements or maps on the server. This is vital to keeping minimal lag and freezes. And dont kid yourself, there is no such thing as a lag free server. So if any of you whiners in this thread wanna do something about it, then speak up and drop me an email. One thing to consider as well, Server settings are not open for discussion. Icons and other setting will be the same as on the current server. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhm.. what now you will tell me that I can not have my opinion on particular server?
Geez if that is the case, and it *IS*, thanks for expressing your narrowmindness and arrogance.

Of course you did not quote the rest of my post..

Buzzsaw-
07-01-2005, 06:22 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:

Fw190 A/F/G/S, Skupiewski-

"Production (A9) started in late Autumn 1944 and continued in parralel with A-8's, monthly output depending on the availability of BMW 801TS powerplants."

"In October 1944 a new version, the Fw190F9, entered production. It was developed from the A9 fighter. The BMW 801TS engine was driving a VDM 3.50 m diameter three-blade propeller with wooden Heine or Schwarz blades."

[/i]

Again, not to be negative, but that is pretty non-specific. No numbers, no indication of when they actually arrived at the Jagdgeschwader, etc.

The comment: "depending on the availability of the BMW 801TS engine..." is particularly notable. My sources say that the production of this engine was severely constrained by a) the Allied bombing, b) inferior workmanship, c) design problems with the turbo-charger.

It may be the case that some production aircraft were fitted with the 801TS/TH engines, but exactly how many, and when is the question. I have yet to see a source which definitively points to the arrival of a turbocharged A9 in a Jagdgeschwader. Sure there were A9's in service, but with which engine?


Originally posted by faustnik:

Focke-Wolf Fw190, Griel-

"The Production version of the Fw 190 F-9 was powered by a BMW801TS, while the introduction of a BMW 801 TH was planned for a later date."

A physical example posted by Crumpp on the AAW-II board:

The FW-190F8/F9 on display at the NASM is a great example. IIRC It began life as an FW-190A6 and was factory rebuilt as an FW-190F8. Later it recieved the BMW-801TS power egg bringing it to FW-190F9 standards.

Again, here we have a indication that possibly a 190F8 was retro-fitted with a 801TS engine. Which tells us it was equipped with the standard 801D-2 when it left the production lines. But when exactly did this engine upgrade happen?

faustnik
07-01-2005, 07:16 PM
The upgrade to happened when the aircraft was redesignated A9 from A8. The conversion to the TS led to redesignation.

If you want to disagree and demand specifics which are not available, go ahead, we all now what a gray area late war LW manufactuing data is. There is plenty of evidence that A9s and F9s flew with the later BMW801 versions. Certainly no evidence has been provided indicating otherwise.

Here is another account:

"The last production run version was the FW190A-9. It was supposed to be propelled by the BMW 801F, rated at 2,400 HP, but since BMW failed to begin production in time, they offered BMW 801Ss, rated at 2000 HP, with a more efficient fourteen-bladed fan. These engines were delivered as BMW801TS complete power units. They required a more efficient oil cooler and a greater oil tank, which were placed adjacent to each other in the form of a ring in front of the engine, under the armored cowling of an increased thickness of 10mm. The standard propeller was to be a three-bladed self-pitching one with wooden blades, but the majority of FW 190A9s were fitted with metal VDMs. Therefore it was a great sensation in 1996 when the wreckage of an FW 190A-9 was brought out of Lake Schloss near Alt-Zeschdorf with a BMW801S-1 engine and a metal propeller. This aircraft was lost on February 15, 1945 with pilot Lt. Hans Grapenthin of Stab 1./JG 11.

Production began in late Autumn of 1944 and proceeded alongside the production of the Fw190A-8, with monthy output depending on the limited 801TS deliveries."

- from Focke Wulf FW 190, Janowicz


The designation A9 indicated the TS power egg.

deathping---
07-01-2005, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
This is a quote from an avid historian within our squadron........

Many insignificant aircraft being fielded by everybody in the game. for example, on the german side you see people in 1944 maps using 1943 aircraft and sometimes even 1942 aircraft. the service life of aircraft was short, accidents, enemy fire, you name it.

I personally think either specific historic battle recreation maps or maps early42, late42 early43, late43, early44, late44, etc.

aircraft I am sick of looking at

Fw 190A6
Fw 190A9
bf 109G2
bf 109G6 A/S
bf 109G10
bf 109K4
Fw 190D9 44 w/mw 50
Ta-152H-1 rare bird

here is why I am sick of seeing them.

Fw 190A6, the main stay of the luftwaffe during 1944 was the Fw 190A8, the A6 was phased out by 1944!!! Phased out!!!

Fw 190A9, again the A8 was the mainstay of the luftwaffe, I have three books on the FW190 series some of which are written by German authors and translated into english. Fw 190A9 was never a major production block nor can any numbers be obtained due to its obscurity. Apparently some A8s were modified into A9s, but its any bodies guess how many.
There isnt any data available which show entire squads equipped with A9s. Wich we face today in most servers.

BF 109G2 this is a 1942 aircraft why is it in a 1944 server? btw only 80 were produced yet it usually makes up half of all bf 109s in a game.

Bf 109G6A/S there were 325 built

Bf 109G10 there were 118 built

Bf 109K4, of the 896 produced from october 44 thru december 44, many never made it into operation due to numerous reasons, mostly due to sabotage and accidents, this is really a 1945 aircraft also.

Fw 190D9 I forget exact figures, but 600-700 were built from about 9/44 till 12/44. THEY DID NOT!! recieve MW50. The top speeds at sea level and at altitude were 30-40 kph slower than what we have in the game now. I believe a lot of them were lost due to engine fires. there was some sort of oil leak which caused a lot of unexplained engine fires. the problem was eventually fixed.

The 1945 Fw 190D9 was the a/c with MW50 not the 1944D9 !!

Ta 152H-1, one book states that as they began production the factory was over run by the russians so few made it into operational units. another book states that only 10 made it to operational units. the Ta 152H-0 was the only ta 152 that got operational to my knowledge, some say 67 made it into service with JG/301, this was January 27th 1945. so any ta is a 1945 aircraft and they served in very limited numbers.

BTW the Ta 152H-0 (the one actually used in limited combat) did not have MW50 nor GM1, it was much slower than the published 472 mph TA that never went into production. it also was not a steller climber end of that story.

incase your wondering or have some doubts about bf 109s I will give production figures from a book written in germany by a german author

total bf 109 production from January 1944 till December 1944 was 6,316

Bf 109G6 50%
(btw about half had MW50 starting around 4/44)
Bf 109G14 29%
Bf 109K4 14%
Bf 109G6A/S 5%
Bf 109G10 2%

jump into most games and you will see the exact opposite.

The bf 109G6, Bf 109G6 late w/mw50 and the Bf 109G14 make up nearly every picture I see from 1944 luftwaffe units.

It looks like the K4 finally replaced most of the bf 109G6 late in 1945, but the bf 109G14 was still the mainstay fighter making up the bulk and majority. this is my rant.
================================================

Ok now with history more understood & the true yearning for reality around here, wouldnt you think that most German AC in any server for 1944
Should be the FW A8, G14 and G6 and maybe the G6late.

Pit thoes ac against what the allied have in same years, Early & late maps & then we have a game again not a Fantasy of Reality

Edited to protect the inocent & or Ignorant http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif
I wish Germany had won the war, that would have been awesome for production. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Buzzsaw-
07-01-2005, 08:13 PM
Salute Faustnik

Ok, I'll accept your sources as factual until otherwise proven.

However:


Originally posted by faustnik:

"...monthy output depending on the limited 801TS deliveries."



It's clear that if the aircraft flew on a regular basis, it did so in very limited numbers, and that the majority of the aircraft even in 1945 were standard 190A8 versions.

So the original point, that this aircraft should not be generally available, is still correct.

Jumoschwanz
07-01-2005, 11:26 PM
Hey, where was the thread this moron Locust started that said he was going to quit this sim and get the F7ck out of here? Someone should cut it, paste it, quote it or whatever it takes to add it to every stupid-a$*$ topic like this he starts.

Once again, if it is too good to be true, it usually isn't........

S!

Jumoschwanz

Xiolablu3
07-02-2005, 08:10 AM
If you want a server like this then why not host one and pick the planes yourself??

People can put what planes they like on their own server.


Also, are you going to take a lesser ride to be 'more historical'? You want to take the ride that you do best in for yourself or your team.

ElAurens
07-02-2005, 09:15 AM
Zeke vs. Wildcat has very historic planesets, and is about the only place I fly anymore, because of that.

It is funny when someone pops on a server depicting Rangoon or Singapore in the first days of the Pacific war and asks for a B25.

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

carguy_
07-02-2005, 11:39 AM
Locust,you`re a haunted person,man! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

F19_Olli72
07-03-2005, 03:39 AM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
This is a quote from an avid historian within our squadron........

Many insignificant aircraft being fielded by everybody in the game. for example, on the german side you see people in 1944 maps using 1943 aircraft and sometimes even 1942 aircraft. the service life of aircraft was short, accidents, enemy fire, you name it.

I personally think either specific historic battle recreation maps or maps early42, late42 early43, late43, early44, late44, etc.


This avid historian should know the so called 'phased out' models were in use as long as they were available. For instance 6./JG 5 didnt convert to 109 F's until in Alta in summer 1942 (yes F's not 109 G(!) ). Proir to that they flew 109E's, also iirc from Knokes book the planes could vary within the units even down to single gruppes i.e some flying older models some flying freshly delivered.

quiet_man
07-03-2005, 04:31 AM
YEA RIGTH, WE WANT HISTORIC DF!!!
blue planes at 45 DF servers should be limited to zero http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I read from an 190 pilot how he was flying 45 ALONE crossing the path of a stream of a few hundred american planes, he wondered if they didn't see him or if they were to bussy keeping formation to send one of two fighters squads after him. he did not attack, had other orders http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

what I read about 45 LW tactic was to sneak in, do the job and get out, if possible alive. Nothing about furballs

If you want "historic" DF, you need to fly 42/43 planes server, only problem is they also don't have those fancy lat war alied fighers http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

quiet_man

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by JG77_Rev:
Don't whine about it like everyone else in here, do something! Get your own server started up on HL or All-Seeing Eye or where ever you fly and do as you see fit.

Complaining about it is sure to get you ignored and classified as just another whinger.

Oh, and BTW, where's your rant about all the other planesets? Surely you have something to say about the P-51, the P-38, the Spit V-whatever, and the Russian birds. Why are you picking on just the LW?

Like I said, get a server up and running and hell, I know a bunch of guys that would fly it!


With the help of a new member "Freebird"

We will soon have a OP "openpit" and a CP Closed pit server running with objectives & stats simular too Warclouds but with Hard core maps that feature Planesets of a more stringent reality... Its gona take a month or two but its comming!!!

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by spitfire22287:


If Oleg had wanted this all to be reality, then he would release a yearly patch in which new models of every plane are included. Imagine that! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Id loved too have seen this

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 08:48 AM
Originally posted by Aeronautico:


What about squadron composition and behaviour?
What about appropriate aifields and number of planes in the air?
What about real goals with real targets?






Thats what we want, Id love too see these typs of things Implimented into the sim not that they could be perfected either but we could get alot closer too them than we are now.....

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">While I understand the frustration of the original poster, I can't but think that anywahere else should one look at, even more frustartion would arise. So let's just relax and enjoy this game!

I also agree with Locust's idea of using a correct '44 planeset for a better matchup Aeronautico. What bothers me is the completely incorrect information that he includes in his post, it is rediculous. Unfortunately, as we already see in this thread, poeple see complete fabrications in text and tend to believe them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Faust If some of this information is incorect I appoligise, It was not my intension to lie or distort truth, This is second hand information given too me by an avid historian of ww2 and I dont think he would give me this info if it was false on purpose....

maybe the books he has had some faulty information....

Fact is that many of the German ac that we see in servers were not DF'ing on the deck they were Hunting Bombers with thoes mk108s, I realy Like the new mg151 I think its alot more realistic

What Im disturbed about is ac that had Loadouts for Bombers demise are constantaly using them for DF wich you have too admit is unrealistic

CUJO_1970
07-03-2005, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
In regards to the 190A9 kettle of fish:

The A9 as we see it in the game is a prototype of a proposed model, with the engine equipped with a turbo supercharger, the BMW 801TS/TH.


This is incorrect. Your other information regarding the A-9 is largely incorrect as well -I'll try to get to that later.

There was no A-series Focke-Wulf in service that had a turbo-supercharger. They all had mechanical superchargers, with different designs and drive ratios as the war progressed.

There was, however, BMW801 powerplants that were equipped with exhaust-driven turbo-superchargers. This powerplant was the BMW801TJ. It was used in _bombers_ such as the late Junkers 88 series aircraft and had a ceiling of over 40,000ft.

British engineer Roy Fedden regarded the BMW turbo-supercharger to be an advanced design.

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute Faustnik

Source: (among others)

FOCKE WULF, FW190

by Gordon Swanborough, William Green

Book lists all the prototypes manufactured.

Green is an older source, please list others.


BMW801"TS" or "S" engines were in serial production from late '44. These engines produced up to 2200ps and were interchangeable with the older D-2 versions.

Souces:

Focke-Wulf Fw 190, Lowe
Fw 190 A/F/G/S, Skupiewski
Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Griehl
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ya Late 44 real late you could even say 45

Thoes ac should be more in a 45 arena imho

That just my opinion Faust

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
Pit thoes ac against what the allied have in same years, Early & late maps & then we have a game again not a Fantasy of Reality but you mean DF servers right ? where you can re-spawn after you have been killed & fly again

yeah realisim all the way

btw , the K4 we have in-game now is a joke speed wise , its got the MW50 versions speed downlow & the GM1 versions speed up high . . . . . that & the fact that most K4s never got to run at 1.98 ATA


& we have 1.42 ATA G2's , ok for the G6 but not really in 42 for the G2

all said & done tho DF servers are about airquake , & you will always see the best ones because DF servers have nothing to do with realisim & everything to do with kills - points - & stats

edit : nice & objective of you Locust to point out the things wrong with the planes/years only for the LW http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The allied ac are truly more realistic imo but the german ac are over the top imo thats why this is a seemingly biased post the main point was that It will be more favorable to fly AC from bolth sides that were the AC most normaly flown not the High breeds that are out of there enviroment too begin with...

I like the German ac I fly ALL the ac man Im not biased, I only come off that way when one side of the sim is seems to be vastly improved over the other...

Like whats up with the p51 fuel its full full full & then all of a sudden drops too 0 ??? LOL

guess the patch needs a patch I still love this sim its the only game I play besides Pinball LOL

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Jumoschwanz:
Hey, where was the thread this moron Locust started that said he was going to quit this sim and get the F7ck out of here? Someone should cut it, paste it, quote it or whatever it takes to add it to every stupid-a$*$ topic like this he starts.

Once again, if it is too good to be true, it usually isn't........

S!

Jumoschwanz

Hmm I dont recall using thoes words

When in doubt Curse

JG52Karaya-X
07-03-2005, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by lbhskier37:
Not sure how a G6late w/MW50 performed in realtion to G6/AS, but the AS might be a good replacement for it.

Well, Bf109G6late with MW50 = Bf109G14 ...

In order to use MW50 the G6 needed to be reengined with a DB605AM engine that we have in the G14 ("M" standing for Methanol injection).

lbhskier37
07-03-2005, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
Pit thoes ac against what the allied have in same years, Early & late maps & then we have a game again not a Fantasy of Reality but you mean DF servers right ? where you can re-spawn after you have been killed & fly again

yeah realisim all the way

btw , the K4 we have in-game now is a joke speed wise , its got the MW50 versions speed downlow & the GM1 versions speed up high . . . . . that & the fact that most K4s never got to run at 1.98 ATA


& we have 1.42 ATA G2's , ok for the G6 but not really in 42 for the G2

all said & done tho DF servers are about airquake , & you will always see the best ones because DF servers have nothing to do with realisim & everything to do with kills - points - & stats

edit : nice & objective of you Locust to point out the things wrong with the planes/years only for the LW http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The allied ac are truly more realistic imo but the german ac are over the top imo thats why this is a seemingly biased post the main point was that It will be more favorable to fly AC from bolth sides that were the AC most normaly flown not the High breeds that are out of there enviroment too begin with...

I like the German ac I fly ALL the ac man Im not biased, I only come off that way when one side of the sim is seems to be vastly improved over the other...

Like whats up with the p51 fuel its full full full & then all of a sudden drops too 0 ??? LOL

guess the patch needs a patch I still love this sim its the only game I play besides Pinball LOL </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

About the P51 fuel gauge, I think its like the one in the stuka that only starts moving when the tank gets to like 25%. The gauge in the stuka is in liters and doesnt go up to the full capacity, so for most of the flight it doesnt move. The P51s gauge might be similar.

CUJO_1970
07-03-2005, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:


HOWEVER, most aircraft were essentially no different than the A8, as they had the same single supercharger equipped BMW801D-2 engine, and did not have the high altitude performance or higher horsepower. The frames were built for the , but the new engines did not become available due to reliability issues and so the older engines were installed. Even so, these aircraft were called "A9s".

We really should not be seeing the 190A9 as constituted, in regular availability on the servers.


No, the engines were not the same.

And the BMW801D was largely phased out in the summer of 1944.

The BMW801TS and TU powerplants both entered serial production, and both BMW and unit maintenance reports show this.

Even ground attack units were using them, as a Jan. 1945 report from III/KG(J) 6 that had about 20 FW190s on hand, several had 801T series powerplants as well as 801F-66 and F-600 powerplants.

The title of the document is "Reis des Ing. Reichel bei KG(J) 6 in der Zeit vom 9.1 - 18-1-45." I dont have a copy of the original unfortunately, but may be able to.

The "T" or "Triebwerksanlage" refers to a complete cowled powerplant or "power egg" including fairings, exhaust system etc.

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

As far as FW190A-9 availability, most red crybabies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif don't know what they are talking about WRT the FW190A-9.

1. Faustnik has already referenced the WNr. blocks. For more information:

http://www.geocities.com/bookie190/Varients.htm

http://www.geocities.com/bookie190/Werkn.htm

2. Historian Peter Rodeike states around 910 Fw190A-9 were built. Loss reports, replacement logistics reports, WNr. blocks provide evidence for this.

3._Serial_ production for the FW190A-9 apparently began in the fall of 1944.

RLM meeting notes refer to a number of FW190A-9s delivered to units prior to the fall of 1944.

These are the numbers given in an RLM production report, referenced on butch2k's site *IIRC (I will have to re-check to verify):

FW190A-9 deliveries in 1944:

4/44 - 2
5/44 - 15
6/44 - 21
7/44 - 70
8/44 - 30
9/44 - 122
10/44 - 14
11/44 - 99

446 FW19A-9 delivered to the LW by Jan. 1945

This seems to support hisrorian Rodeike's number of 910 FW190A-9s built by the end of the war.

JG52Karaya-X
07-03-2005, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
btw , the K4 we have in-game now is a joke speed wise , its got the MW50 versions speed downlow & the GM1 versions speed up high . . . . . that & the fact that most K4s never got to run at 1.98 ATA
Which GM1 version are you talking about - no Bf109K ever got GM1 installed. And btw speeds are correct for the K4.
And what are you talking about 1.98 ata DB605DC engines - you must be having a newer version of the game than I have, 5.0 maybe? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif



& we have 1.42 ATA G2's , ok for the G6 but not really in 42 for the G2

As far as I know it's an instrument mixup... the gauge is incorrect and should actually read 1.3 ata. It's comparable to the mal-functioning fuel gauge on the Bf109F which shows about 100litres fuel too much

CUJO_1970
07-03-2005, 10:21 AM
Never mind http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by CUJO_1970:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:


HOWEVER, most aircraft were essentially no different than the A8, as they had the same single supercharger equipped BMW801D-2 engine, and did not have the high altitude performance or higher horsepower. The frames were built for the , but the new engines did not become available due to reliability issues and so the older engines were installed. Even so, these aircraft were called "A9s".

We really should not be seeing the 190A9 as constituted, in regular availability on the servers.


No, the engines were not the same.

And the BMW801D was largely phased out in the summer of 1944.

The BMW801TS and TU powerplants both entered serial production, and both BMW and unit maintenance reports show this.

Even ground attack units were using them, as a Jan. 1945 report from III/KG(J) 6 that had about 20 FW190s on hand, several had 801T series powerplants as well as 801F-66 and F-600 powerplants.

The title of the document is "Reis des Ing. Reichel bei KG(J) 6 in der Zeit vom 9.1 - 18-1-45." I dont have a copy of the original unfortunately, but may be able to.

The "T" or "Triebwerksanlage" refers to a complete cowled powerplant or "power egg" including fairings, exhaust system etc.

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

As far as FW190A-9 availability, most red crybabies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif don't know what they are talking about WRT the FW190A-9.

1. Faustnik has already referenced the WNr. blocks. For more information:

http://www.geocities.com/bookie190/Varients.htm

http://www.geocities.com/bookie190/Werkn.htm

2. Historian Peter Rodeike states around 910 Fw190A-9 were built. Loss reports, replacement logistics reports, WNr. blocks provide evidence for this.

3._Serial_ production for the FW190A-9 apparently began in the fall of 1944.

RLM meeting notes refer to a number of FW190A-9s delivered to units prior to the fall of 1944.

These are the numbers given in an RLM production report, referenced on butch2k's site *IIRC (I will have to re-check to verify):

FW190A-9 deliveries in 1944:

4/44 - 2
5/44 - 15
6/44 - 21
7/44 - 70
8/44 - 30
9/44 - 122
10/44 - 14
11/44 - 99

446 FW19A-9 delivered to the LW by Jan. 1945

This seems to support hisrorian Rodeike's number of 910 FW190A-9s built by the end of the war. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok maybe these numbers are fact but thoes ac were not hunting around 100feet off the deck man & thats what there being used for now they were flying UP in the SKY Hunting Bombers Not DFing on the deck !!!!!!!!!

even if thoes numbers are accurate the point is that FWA9 should be a 45 year AC imo.
theres not enough numbers in 44 to justify its use in DF server, The Elite flew thoes few FWA9 the rest flew A8 period !!

You want too defend some marginal numbers in 44 out of thousands of ac in the sky 940 is nothing & that was in 45 there should be maybe 4 or 6 FWA9 flying in a 40 person server if that many!

You guys just dont get it !!!

You want your uber killing machiens, flying around on the deck where they dont belong, with giant gun loadouts that were ment for bringing down bombers that were flying at Alitutude NOT ON THE DECK!!!!!!

Its comical too say the least !!!!

CUJO_1970
07-03-2005, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
[Its comical too say the least !!!!


What's really comical is all of your dumb posts(like your first one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) that have no basis in fact.


Planeset for the AFJ Locust crybaby server:

Blue:

109E-4 (but not the E-7Z - it's uber!)

109F-2 (but not the F-4 - it's uber!)

FW190A-4 (They get one uber)


Red:

Mustang Mk III
P-51D
P-63
P-38L (Late)
P-80
P-47D
All Spitfires
A-20
B-25


I'm looking forward to flying on your crybaby server.

Vipez-
07-03-2005, 03:05 PM
As usual, people like Buzzsaw post complete rubbish trying to make german planes look bad.. **** it, you really don't have anything else to do, but to search these forums, and write something negative about german planes every single time ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

Besides, according to oleg's object viewer, we certainly do not have FW-190 A-9 with BMW-801TS-engine modelled in the game, oleg's info says BMW-801 S, so it is not the A-9 with 2200 hp, and IT certainly does not feel like on having BMW-801TS http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 09:02 PM
Then you just dont know how to fly it.........

That thing is a wicked killing Energy machien with the strength of a sherman tank

AFJ_Locust
07-03-2005, 09:11 PM
CUJO_1970

Im looking foward too the day when you come practice with me in 1v1 server & you get raked over the coals over & over again

Actualy the server will look more like this NOOB

G6
G6late
G14
A5
A8
F8
He111
BF109G2

P51D
P51C
P51B
P51MkIII
some early spit or two
P38 (Not late)

faustnik
07-04-2005, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:


Ya Late 44 real late you could even say 45

Thoes ac should be more in a 45 arena imho

That just my opinion Faust

Yeah, more common in '45, but, definately did fly in '44. As for heights, well, many Fw190 units were sent on missions specifically to hunt Allied jabos on the deck. Low level dogfights were common in late '44, '45.

I still agree that a mid-'44 server would be the best balanced. If was your initial post, I would have agreed 100% with you from the start Locust. Too bad you had to include and the whiny BS in your post too.

faustnik
07-04-2005, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:



Actualy the server will look more like this NOOB

G6
G6late
G14
A5
A8
F8
He111
BF109G2

P51D
P51C
P51B
P51MkIII
some early spit or two (wich I dont fly Noob)
P38 (Not late idiot)

Good list, include the P-47s and Fw190A6 and delete the Bf109 G2 and Mustang III.

JG53Frankyboy
07-04-2005, 02:49 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
As far as I know it's an instrument mixup... the gauge is incorrect and should actually read 1.3 ata. It's comparable to the mal-functioning fuel gauge on the Bf109F which shows about 100litres fuel too much

well, thinking about that a F4 have 30min (!) more flight time than a G2 at 100% power. im not sure its "only" a mal-function gauge bug ?!

waffen-79
07-04-2005, 06:17 AM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
And, also, a pox on those DF servers who don't even bother to separate planesets by as rough a measure as Axis vs. Allies. As a committed Bf109 alt monkey http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif I don't like fighting other 109s, FWs, etc. It just seems wrong somehow.

AMEN for that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

AFJ_Locust
07-04-2005, 07:25 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:



Actualy the server will look more like this NOOB

G6
G6late
G14
A5
A8
F8
He111
BF109G2

P51D
P51C
P51B
P51MkIII
some early spit or two
P38 (Not late)

Good list, include the P-47s and Fw190A6 and delete the Bf109 G2 and Mustang III. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Opps ment BF110G2

G6
G6late
G14
A5
A6
A8
F8
He111
BF110G2

P51D
P51C
P51B
P47D10
early spit or two
P38J
B25
A20

lbhskier37
07-04-2005, 11:10 AM
That would be a nice refreshing server. Could use a Stuka D5 and G model though.

JG52Karaya-X
07-04-2005, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:

G6
G6late
G14
A5
A6
A8
F8
He111
BF110G2

P51D
P51C
P51B
P47D10
early spit or two
P38J
B25
A20

That certainly is a nice setup! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Supr
07-04-2005, 11:33 AM
Originally posted by JG77_Rev:
Don't whine about it like everyone else in here, do something! Get your own server started up on HL or All-Seeing Eye or where ever you fly and do as you see fit.

Complaining about it is sure to get you ignored and classified as just another whinger.

Oh, and BTW, where's your rant about all the other planesets? Surely you have something to say about the P-51, the P-38, the Spit V-whatever, and the Russian birds. Why are you picking on just the LW?

Like I said, get a server up and running and hell, I know a bunch of guys that would fly it!


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

still the best point

CUJO_1970
07-04-2005, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:

Opps ment BF110G2

G6
G6late
G14
A5
A6
A8
F8
He111
BF110G2

P51D
P51C
P51B
P47D10
early spit or two
P38J
B25
A20



OK, so you're looking for a good early-ish 1944 server.

Why didn't you just say that in the first place? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


BTW, I'm on WC usually nightime when I can, after 9pm EST.

You can page me there and if I'm so inclined, I may grant you an audience http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

RedDeth
07-04-2005, 11:53 AM
interesting discussion. it brings up many ideas for a good pit on server planeset.

what year did the Mustang mk III come out though? isnt that a 43 to 44 plane? and the P-38L Late was flying in mid 44. not in huge numbers but in good numbers in the winter of 44.

so if you use any winter maps at all for the 44 planeset you will have to include the P38L Late and maybe the mustang mk III.

and if its a winter map 44 year are there any P-47D27s arount winter of 44 and in what numbers. was it a trickle or alot?

i know this planeset is trying for balance and no 45 planes like TAs and K4s and no Doras with MW50 as they didnt have it in 44

but wouldnt more historically accurate include those better american planes i mentioned? now THAT seems a balanced planeset to me.

also arent the spit 8 and 9 available in mid to late 1943?



no? i dont know myself

Buzzsaw-
07-04-2005, 01:31 PM
Salute

Here's a perfect example of a Luftwaffle shooting himself in the foot with his own contradictory claims:


Originally posted by CUJO_1970:

And the BMW801D was largely phased out in the summer of 1944.



If the 801D was phased out, then what engine was used to equip the A8's coming off the production line, since they continued to be manufactured during the late summer and fall of 1944, and even into 1945? In larger numbers than the A9's. Or did they magically fly with no engines?

Meanwhile you claim that:


Originally posted by CUJO_1970:

Serial_ production for the FW190A-9 apparently began in the fall of 1944.



Why was largescale production of the A9 delayed till the fall of 1944? If all those 801TS/TH engines were available by mid '44 as you claim? None of the 801TS/TH's were installed in A8's.
As Faustnik has mentioned, the A9 designation was created to reflect an <span class="ev_code_RED">intended</span> use of these turbocharged engines.

Yet by your numbers, we see a very small number of A9's being manufactured.


Originally posted by CUJO_1970:

Even ground attack units were using them, as a Jan. 1945 report from III/KG(J) 6 that had about 20 FW190s on hand, several had 801T series powerplants as well as 801F-66 and F-600 powerplants.



Too bad that Bomber units used F and G model 190's, NOT A models, so these claimed 801F engines are obviously not installed in A9's. (in fact, the 801F never went into production at all)


Originally posted by CUJO_1970:

2. Historian Peter Rodeike states around 910 Fw190A-9 were built. Loss reports, replacement logistics reports, WNr. blocks provide evidence for this.



As I said in my earlier posts in this thread, there is no question that many "A9's" were manufactured, the issue is what engine they were equipped with. The evidence suggests that the overwhelming majority of the "A9's" were equipped with planejane BMW801D-2 engines.

Here's Faustnik's source:


Originally posted by faustnik:

Production began in late Autumn of 1944 and proceeded alongside the production of the Fw190A-8, with monthy output depending on the <span class="ev_code_RED">limited</span> TS deliveries."

- from Focke Wulf FW 190, Janowicz



All the sources I referenced say the BmW801TF/TS were plagued by problems with the turbocharger unit, and that German industry's inability to manufacture products with the high standard of metallurgy required to withstand the operating temperatures of a exhaust driven turbocharger was key to the failure of this engine to be produced in large numbers.

I am willing to trust Faustnik and other objective Blue side proponents if they make a point, however those with
absurd claims regarding the availability of German fighters I take with a large grain of salt.

BaronUnderpants
07-04-2005, 05:52 PM
Some of u people are giving me a splitting headace.....wake up from your "i was a ace pilot in my previous life" dream and relize this......ITS A SIMGAME!!

Majority of people actually DOESNT find it fun to spend a good part of an houer flying along looking for dots in the sky.....wich u have an 50% chanse of missing if u blink in any case, just to find your windscreen splattered with oil from a singel 303..effecivly turning u into a flying duck.

What is all this elitist "Full real" **** anyways....u try staying alive consistently on a DF server and then talk about skill........being a dot in a cloud at 7000 meters on a "Full real" server doesnt count...my blind grandma can do that.

ALL historicaly correct, why not have accurate flyingtime/flight preporation to...never gonna happen...and i pray it doesnt.

IL2-chuter
07-04-2005, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:


I am not saying you are not right, but please list the dates the production aircraft began to come off the lines, the number which were produced, as well as the dates they began to equip the Squadrons.



Fw190 A/F/G/S, Skupiewski-

"Production (A9) started in late Autumn 1944 and continued in parralel with A-8's, monthly output depending on the availability of BMW 801TS powerplants."

"In October 1944 a new version, the Fw190F9, entered production. It was developed from the A9 fighter. The BMW 801TS engine was driving a VDM 3.50 m diameter three-blade propeller with wooden Heine or Schwarz blades."

Focke-Wolf Fw190, Griel-

"The Production version of the Fw 190 F-9 was powered by a BMW801TS, while the introduction of a BMW 801 TH was planned for a later date."

A physical example posted by Crumpp on the AAW-II board:

The FW-190F8/F9 on display at the NASM is a great example. IIRC It began life as an FW-190A6 and was factory rebuilt as an FW-190F8. Later it recieved the BMW-801TS power egg bringing it to FW-190F9 standards. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

Someone else responded to this by asking when this "upgrade" happened (to the NASM airplane). It didn't. It has an "old-fashioned" D-2 engine that has about 25 hours on it (NASM has a couple of D-2's to compare it to). Seen it myself, the tag on the engine is missing, but it ain't no TS.

On a sidenote: production serial number blocks are no indication of production numbers, or even of production. Blocks were issued upon tentative production agreements (manufacturers were always confident the bugs would be worked out and production started, soon) and not all of the block numbers were assigned to actual aircraft to prevent actual production numbers being deduced from photos.

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

ElAurens
07-04-2005, 08:46 PM
Originally posted by BaronUnderpants: Blah...blah...blah...


Seeing that you are relatively new to the sim, I won't rip you the new one that the tone of your post leads me to believe you so richly deserve.

Let it suffice that one of the benefits of this sim is it's scalability. If you choose to fly no cockpit with all the aids on you can. If you don't like that you can fly more realistically if you so choose.

Frankly, I don't know anyone who, after flying full realism for a time, has gone back to no 'pit and icons on. It just seems so terribly arcade.

Oh well, to each, his own.

Buzzsaw-
07-04-2005, 10:13 PM
Salute

Here is some information from the Luftwaffen Experten board. It would suggest that my original assertion was correct, and that only a very few 190A9's with turbo charged engines were built.

=====

BMW 801 TS.

1.) The 43 engines if have now documented as €œTS€ engines were all mounted on Fw 190 F-9/R1s, and have Motornummern in three batches ranging from 437 044 to 439 413.

2.) All but two of these €œTS€ engines were built by €œjha€ (BMW F/M München). One engine, 347 887, had a three-letter manufacture code of €œjgk.€œ Ditto for 348 064, with the code €œJGH.€ I think these two might be transcription errors. Anyone know who these two manufacturer are?

3.) A series of engines used in factory tests with MNrn. 347 763 to 347 891 are identified as both €œTS-1€ and €œS-1€?

4.) Interestingly, the only Fw 190 F-9/BMW 801 TS combination for which I have photographic evidence (Fw 190 F-9, WNr, 440 401, <o+ -, Neubiberg, 45/05/08, Motornummer 347 763), has the 12-blade cooling fan and not the 14-blade unit which is often used as an identifying trait. Either Art Medcalf or Nick Beale (sorry, I can€t remember which) has a report which shows a slight decrease in the top speed of an Fw 190 when using the 14-blade fan in place of the 12-blade fan. This might be why we never see too many BMW 801s with the 14-blade fan?

BMW 801 TH.

1.) I have three €œTH€ engines listed, 385 004, 385 029, and 385 066. These were used in Focke-Wulf factory tests on Fw 190 A-5 (VO+LY) and Fw 190 A-8 (TG+MG).

2.) One engine, 020 214, was flown in Fw 190 A-8 TG+MG. It was listed as "F-66," and is a possibly a "TH" prototype?

BMW 801 TJ.

1.) Six €œTJ-0€ engines were recorded in Ju 388 L and K airframes. Like the TH engines mentioned above, the €œTJ€ engines have MNrn. in the 385 XXX range. Recorded MNrn. are, 385 220, 385 256, 385 274, 385 275, and 385 837. No manufacturers or 3-letter codes were listed.

========

Thread here:

http://p069.ezboard.com/fluftwaffeexperten71774frm95.sh...age?topicID=67.t opic (http://p069.ezboard.com/fluftwaffeexperten71774frm95.showMessage?topicID=6 7.topic)

lbhskier37
07-05-2005, 05:48 AM
So the TS engine does have a turbosupercharger, or doesn't it? We now have some saying it did, and some saying it was just a different supercharger. Does anyone have any pics/info on this engine? I'm trying to visually see how they would mount a turbosupercharger in the the 801 power egg. It seems to me that would be a tough thing regarding exhaust routing.

Buzzsaw-
07-05-2005, 08:52 AM
Salute

As far as I can tell from looking at pictures and diagrams of the engine, the Turbocharger unit is located at the rear and low down on the engine. The exhaust seems to be routed out below the cockpit. However, the A9 model in the game doesn't seem to have any graphics differences to the standard 190A8.

The Turbocharger unit is quite a bit smaller than the one used in the P-47, and likely could not provide the same level of boost.

I will try to find some pictures.

lbhskier37
07-05-2005, 09:14 AM
Pics would be awesome. I have the cutaway blueprint of the 801D on my wall right now. Amazing how much stuff they pack into such a small area. I think current car manufactures have taken a lesson from them. (and thats not a good thing imho)

A.K.Davis
07-05-2005, 09:47 AM
A lot of disinformation in the first post, but I agree people should strive for more historical match-ups. Limiting planesets seems to help with stuttering anyways.

But to the original desire to see broad limitations placed on Axis aircraft, while continuing with rather lax standards for Allied aircraft, a lot more needs to be considered here.

Take the 109G2, for example. Not only are the numbers given incorrect, but you should also consider that the G2 is filling gaps in the planeset by standing in for G1s and G4s. By this same standard, P-38Js are generally placed in '43 servers as a stand-in for the earlier models that dominated in '43.

Also, Fw-190A6s continued in widespread use on the East Front well into '44.

Concerning Fw-190A8/9 with Mk.108s, I agree this loadout was intended for bomber interception and that would be the primary role of aircraft so equipped. However, saying that the aircraft should be eliminated from DF planesets on these grounds is absurd. You could likewise say the Mustang should be removed, because it's primary role was escorting heavy bombers.

BaronUnderpants
07-05-2005, 10:19 AM
ElAurens:

Seeing that you are relatively new to the sim, I won't rip you the new one that the tone of your post leads me to believe you so richly deserve.

Dont even go there u dork....Not posting on numerous whinerpost doesnt mean i havent been arround playing the game...jeeze, how dumg can u get on a scale... coming up with stupid remarks and rewriting what i allredy said to make it look like u where right all along doesnt fool anyone, aspecially not me.....gonna be a sweet experiance riping u a new one on a server in the near future.

Have a nice day.

Slingn
07-05-2005, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
ElAurens:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Seeing that you are relatively new to the sim, I won't rip you the new one that the tone of your post leads me to believe you so richly deserve.

Dont even go there u dork....Not posting on numerous whinerpost doesnt mean i havent been arround playing the game...jeeze, how dumg can u get on a scale... coming up with stupid remarks and rewriting what i allredy said to make it look like u where right all along doesnt fool anyone, aspecially not me.....gonna be a sweet experiance riping u a new one on a server in the near future.

Have a nice day. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

oh no, everybody run, this is one tough guy. Better stay clear.

BaronUnderpants
07-05-2005, 11:52 AM
BTW..sorry AFJ_Locust, didnt intend to flame you or your post, whent a bit off topic.

Accurate planesets is by its own a good idea...flown on several servers like that and enjoyed flying planes i normaly dont use...and learned alot in the process.

Best yet was a Polish campaign flying P11 against Bf 110`s and Bf 109`s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

AFJ_Locust
07-05-2005, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by CUJO_1970:



BTW, I'm on WC usually nightime when I can, after 9pm EST.

You can page me there and if I'm so inclined, I may grant you an audience http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


I will & we will have some fun

Same ac, short or no icons+speedbar or fullswitch if you prefer, either way its gona be a blast...

Stigler_9_JG52
07-05-2005, 03:50 PM
Underpants, you're not doing your already weak and juvenile arguments any favors by not being able to spell half the words you use, or to tap out a coherent sentence...

On another point, it's pretty convenient to single out the A9 Focke Wulf as being non-representative, when we have all 6 MiG-3Us, the I-185 and other non-common/upgunned/custom-engined ueber planes for the self-serving gamers to glom onto. I would think we should have ALL plane variants be "the most produced and fought in" models across the board. But, apparently, that's just me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BaronUnderpants
07-05-2005, 05:51 PM
Seeing that you are relatively new to the sim, I won't rip you the new one that the tone of your post leads me to believe you so richly deserve.

Unlike this well thought out reply.

Just because U dont agree with what im saying doesnt make it weak and juvenile....and dont be so pompuse to claim that.

And please refraim from commeting on the spelling......its my second language...can u say the same.....u really droped a massive amount just by using that kind of remark, bilingual or not.

Buzzsaw-
07-05-2005, 06:25 PM
Salute

Here's some historical Western/Mediteranean Front matchups:

July 1943

Mediterranean

109G2
109G6 early
190A4 (limited numbers, plus mostly Jabo U-4 version)
190A5 (same as above)
110G2
Ju-87D-2
He-111H-2

Spitfire VC LF
P-40M
P-39N
Hurricane IIc
A-20 (approx.)
Beaufighter (approx.)


English Channel

109G6 (Early)
190A5
190A6 (limited numbers)
110G2
He-111H-2

P-47D10
Spitfire IXc (limited numbers)
Spitfire Vb LF
Beaufighter (approx. model)
A-20 (approx. model)

Jan. 44

Mediterranean

190A5
190A6
109G6 Early and Late
He-111H2

P-47D10
P-47D22
P-38J
Spitfire Vb LF (clipped and unclipped)
Spitfire VIII (limited)
P-40M
P-39N
A-20
B-25

English Channel

190A6
190A8
190F8
109G6 Late
110G2
He-111H-2

P-47D10
P-47D22
P-51B (limited)
P-38J
Spitfire Vb LF
Spitfire IXc
B-25
A-20
Beaufighter

April 1944

Mediterranean

190A5
190A6
190A8
190F8
109G6 Late
He-111H-2

P-47D22
P-51B
P-51C
P-38J
Spitfire VC LF (limited)
Spitfire VIII
B-25
A-20
Beaufighter

English Channel

190A6
190A8
190F8
109G6 Late
109G6AS (limited)
110G2
He-111H

P-47D10
P-47D22
P-51B
P-51C
P-51D-5 (limited)
Spitfire IXc
Spitfire Vb LF (limited)
P-38J
B-25
A-20
Beaufighter

RedDeth
07-05-2005, 09:27 PM
A.K. Davis... not to nitpick but one of your points stated the P-51s role was bomber escort.

actually britain was looking for an interceptor and thus the mustang was born i think...not absolutely sure on that point.

but i do know that the P51s first role was as a ground attack aircraft but it was replaced in that role by the P47 and P38 which could do it better.

im no expert though

Takata_
07-05-2005, 10:10 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Here's some historical Western/Mediteranean Front matchups:
Jan. 44
English Channel
190A8
190F8

S~Buzzsaw,
I you want something historical, don't use any Fw 190A-8/F-8 prior to April 1944. No unit had such aircraft in dotation in March 1944 according to the Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen der Luftwaffe. I checked about the production output and that's the same, there is no production deliveries until end of March 1944 for any of them:

DEL: Deliveries
PLA: Planned that month
TDL: Total deliveries
TPL: Total planned in RLM 225

January 1944
RLM 225 ----- DEL --- PLA --- TDL --- TPL
Fw 190A-6 --- 118 --- 107 --- 667 --- 681
Fw 190A-7 --- 199 --- 275 --- 298 --- 523
Fw 190G-3 --- 066 --- 065 --- 453 --- 444
Fw 190F-3 --- 001 --- 000 --- 372 --- 368

February 1944
RLM 225 ----- DEL --- PLA --- TDL --- TPL
Fw 190A-6 --- 061 --- 096 --- 728 --- 767
Fw 190A-7 --- 132 --- 017 --- 430 --- 540
Fw 190A-8 --- 000 --- 244 --- 000 --- 244
Fw 190G-3 --- 053 --- 000 --- 506 --- 483
Fw 190F-3 --- 055 --- 047 --- 427 --- 415

March 1944
RLM 225 ----- DEL --- PLA --- TDL --- TPL
Fw 190A-6 --- 038 --- 015 --- 766 --- 782
Fw 190A-7 --- 182 --- 000 --- 612 --- 540
Fw 190A-8 --- 083 --- 450 --- 083 --- 789
Fw 190G-3 --- 044 --- 030 --- 550 --- 513
Fw 190G-8 --- 083 --- 000 --- 083 --- 000 (R5)
Fw 190F-3 --- 005 --- 017 --- 432 --- 432
Fw 190F-8 --- 138 --- 133 --- 138 --- 133

Source:
http://www.luftwaffe.no/SIG/RLM/RLM44.html
National Archives and Records Administration, Washington. T-177, reel no. 42.

CUJO_1970
07-07-2005, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by lbhskier37:
So the TS engine does have a turbosupercharger, or doesn't it? We now have some saying it did, and some saying it was just a different supercharger.



It absolutely did _not_ have a turbo-supercharger.

I repeat:

No A-series FW190 was ever serially produced with a turbo-supercharger.

No A-series FW190 ever flew a single combat mission equipped with a turbo-supercharger.


NONE

NADA

ZERO

ZIP

ZILCH


The only BMW 801s equipped with an exhaust driven turbo-supercharger were used in bombers, mainly the late Junkers 88 series aircraft.


EVERY A-series FW190 was equipped with a mechanical supercharger.


Buzzsaw simply does not know what he is talking about WRT this subject, please don't consider him a source of accurate information in this thread.

CUJO_1970
07-07-2005, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by Takata_:

S~Buzzsaw,
I you want something historical, don't use any Fw 190A-8/F-8 prior to April 1944. No unit had such aircraft in dotation in March 1944 according to the Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen der Luftwaffe. I checked about the production output and that's the same, there is no production deliveries until end of March 1944 for any of them:





This is quite correct!

Excellent post Takata, and thank you for providing your source material.


From the Focke-Wulf Factory production books, as well as C-Amt Monatsmeldung, the A-8 designation apparently did not begin until March 1944, when the first 83 FW190A-8 were built.

Also, the same source - in agreement with what you posted - states FW190F-8 serial production began in March 1944 with the first 98 FW190F-8 delivered that month.