PDA

View Full Version : P-51 featured



BSS_Vidar
09-27-2007, 02:32 PM
DOGFIGHTS is featuring the exploits of the "Pony" tonight. Should be a great show for the fanboys and critics alike. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Let's talk about it here after we watch it.

V

Choctaw111
09-27-2007, 03:52 PM
I can't watch it tonight http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif I have my American Legion meeting tonight. Let me know how it is.
BTW shouldn't this be in GD?

BSS_Vidar
09-27-2007, 06:28 PM
I'm no Ubi Forum police. This is the only forum I have book marked along with Pacific Fighters.

If they want to move it thats fine. However, I would like Oleg and company to know its on too - since this IS "Oleg's Readyroom".

V

BSS_Vidar
09-29-2007, 02:27 PM
What a bummer! They replaced the show with a documentory about the Library of Alexandria Egypt! My DVR recorded it because they didn't change the program in the time-slot.

Anyone get to see it, or was it a bust for everyone?

V

badatit
09-30-2007, 09:06 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lt8G3vxLmKE

BSS_Vidar
10-01-2007, 12:06 PM
No sir, that's not it. That's the Bud Anderson 4v4 engagement from the "Famous Dogfights" episode. You know, the one that shows the P-51 out runs, climbs, and turns a 109 in late '43 -'44 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

This is a whole new episode which features the P-51 the whole hour.

V

LEXX_Luthor
10-01-2007, 07:17 PM
Ya Oleg should be watching USA Dogfight Channel. 24 hours back-to-back dogfight.

M_Gunz
10-01-2007, 11:44 PM
Oh boy, History Channel where they always get everything right. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Really good shows to grab vintage clips from but when they leave things out and talk like they
have just fed you the complete line.. they add in and either draw conclusions or leave the ones
they want hanging in front of the reality exit ramps they provide so the average 8th grade
mentalities targets it's written for can feel smart.

And then we get to see clips and read "so and so said so that makes it all true".

IFly_1968
10-02-2007, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Oh boy, History Channel where they always get everything right. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Really good shows to grab vintage clips from but when they leave things out and talk like they
have just fed you the complete line.. they add in and either draw conclusions or leave the ones
they want hanging in front of the reality exit ramps they provide so the average 8th grade
mentalities targets it's written for can feel smart.

And then we get to see clips and read "so and so said so that makes it all true".

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif and it starts

Rjel
10-02-2007, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by IFly_1968:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Oh boy, History Channel where they always get everything right. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Really good shows to grab vintage clips from but when they leave things out and talk like they
have just fed you the complete line.. they add in and either draw conclusions or leave the ones
they want hanging in front of the reality exit ramps they provide so the average 8th grade
mentalities targets it's written for can feel smart.

And then we get to see clips and read "so and so said so that makes it all true".

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif and it starts </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Right on time. You can almost set your watch by it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BSS_Vidar
10-02-2007, 09:08 PM
Some folks don't realize just how much information is available on these engagements at the State classification level in archives. The Top Gun, now know as NAWTC (Naval Air Warfare Training Center) instructors have full disclosure to events like these. Also known as Strike University in Fallon, Nevada has a full library on engagements taken right off the post action reports dating back as far as WWI from pilots on BOTH sides of the war. Many of the ground sessions in Top Gun/Strike U. review these post action reports as case studys because dogfighting is still dogfighting no matter how fast you're going. I assure you that the Top Gun Instructors in these programa are NOT making Shizit up for American propaganda's sake. What good would that do? And I'm also pretty sure you can take Bud Anderson's account as pretty much solid info.

They have the people and an extensive library of information to come up with a straight forward, historicaly accurate program. If they lied or speculated on everything the U.S did, I'm pretty sure they would not have mentioned that 89 out of every 100 U.S air-to-air missiles fired in Nam either failed or missed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I'm still looking forward to the airing of this particular episode... and I'm not even a Mustang fan!

V

Enforcer572005
10-02-2007, 09:51 PM
Well if the bloody History channel would make up its mind about when they show the program it would help. They used to come on Fridays at the same time. now it might be a 11pm, or it might be some other night, and strangely, they have quit the promotions they used to do. Has Jane Fonda taken over the network or something? Now they show (expletive deleted) like ice road truckers (non history), movies like planet of the apes (a good flick, but on H channel?) and the posted schedules mean nothing.

The last episode I saw a couple of weeks ago was an excellent one about night fighters, The P-61, The Skynight in Korea, and F-15 kills over Bosnia, including one by the guy that got two Migs over Iraq in 91. GREAT show despite its faults. Just wish I could catch it.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

M_Gunz
10-03-2007, 04:25 AM
Originally posted by BSS_Vidar:
Some folks don't realize just how much information is available on these engagements at the State classification level in archives. The Top Gun, now know as NAWTC (Naval Air Warfare Training Center) instructors have full disclosure to events like these. Also known as Strike University in Fallon, Nevada has a full library on engagements taken right off the post action reports dating back as far as WWI from pilots on BOTH sides of the war. Many of the ground sessions in Top Gun/Strike U. review these post action reports as case studys because dogfighting is still dogfighting no matter how fast you're going. I assure you that the Top Gun Instructors in these programa are NOT making Shizit up for American propaganda's sake. What good would that do? And I'm also pretty sure you can take Bud Anderson's account as pretty much solid info.

They have the people and an extensive library of information to come up with a straight forward, historicaly accurate program. If they lied or speculated on everything the U.S did, I'm pretty sure they would not have mentioned that 89 out of every 100 U.S air-to-air missiles fired in Nam either failed or missed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I'm still looking forward to the airing of this particular episode... and I'm not even a Mustang fan!

V

History Channel including Dogfights series does present true facts. They also leave a LOT out
and nail what they did gather together as if it's the whole story.
I've watched these series and have a little game of "spot the error", how they present false
conclusions one after the other. These guys ain't geniuses by any stretch and their budget
including time isn't enough to get the full story. Some of the experts they quote also do
not know as much history as they'd like to but hey that's not their jobs and never was.

And then there's the ones that about HAVE to be cherry pickers but I can't PROVE what they
don't know.

You want to believe it all word for word including the conclusions then go right ahead.

BSS_Vidar
10-03-2007, 02:04 PM
I'm not going down this road with you. Believe what you want. As a 20 year Naval Aviator vet who has been exposed to TONs of aviation history which has been incorporated into my training as Lesson's Learned - I see the validity in this particular program. Not all of the programs, just this particular one. I was personaly involved in two incidents in my Flying career that got completle screwed up by the media AND the History Channal.

1. My plane crash where CNN reported me missing, presumed dead for 24 hours. I was only in the water for 25 min.

2. The 2 Lybian MiG 23's trying to intercept my aircraft in international waters were shot down by 2 F-14's from our Airwing in the Central Med aired on Discovery Wings one evening. The Aircraft I was in was discribed as an A-6 Intruder when I was actualy in an S-3A Viking!

So, NO, I do not watch these shows with blinders on. I do scrutinized them probably more than you do. However, Dogfights has done an extrodinary job of recreating the facts in every detail.

I pull things apart on other programs as well i.e. file footage being used in the wrong context, movies showing the wrong planes doing the wrong missions. This is not the case with Dogfights. Everything has been rendered in CGI to put everything in its rightful place according to authentic post-action reports.

V

DustyBarrels77
10-22-2007, 07:08 PM
german was going too fast to out turn the 51 lol that wont happen in this game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif should for all ac but needs that thing...

better simulated stick pressures and compressibility.

Typical oleg response would be guncam faked propaganda film, aces old and forget nowai .50 cal can break parts off german plane! Mustang not a dogfighter at all!

history channel has alot of little wrongs now and then but they do so much more sourced research then a videogame developer when it comes down to it. Seen the vets talk here who flew the real aircraft most couldnt even stay airborne for a few seconds in this game and did point out its wrongs but all those threads were eliminated and never featured on the site charlie brown, oscar beoche and others, a few of the russian sites have them as well as virtualpilots.fi and a few others.

props to my bud sooty for the great skins in dogfights, you the man and job well done! They need that japanese guy for the animations tho.

Flight_boy1990
10-23-2007, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by badatit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lt8G3vxLmKE

LOL guys....it's not the full movie,it's a fake.
In the frames,when the 109 pulls up after the Ponye in the vertical,there's a little info about the 109's guns/that have been removed in the movie above/,and the guy who talks the entire movie/i'm not talking about the P-51 veteran/ tells what the 109 behind Ponye had,here it is:
1-1x Nose mounted Mk.108 nose cannon.
2-2x MG 151/20 gunpods,one under each wing/
And as you can see dudes,the 109 here is the G-6,or maybe G-6 late/only this models had such old cammo sheme in the late war,and i'm talking about the yellow stripes...there are no "Deffence of the Reich" stripes only on the G-6 in late war/...

...So let's get back to the storie!The P-51 veteran says that when he pulled up in vertical and looked on his 6,he saw the 109 after him,and "The Vulcano" in the 109's nose /that's the Mk.108 nose cannon/.

Conclusion:
The 109's in this battle were with heavy anti-bomber arming/1x Mk.108 + 2x MG 151/20 gondolas/.
This 109's are G-6 /early or late/ which are a bit older than the Mustangs here!
And even somewhere in the both movies i thing that this 109's were send to intercept a group of B-17's,which were escorted by these Mustangs.

If you don't believe this,write "dogights" in the Youtube's search and you'll find the movie,that i'm talking about.
I just could give you the link to watch it,but i don't have time to search it.

I hope this will stop the whining that the P-51 could outturn the 109,with a normal loadout./especially here,in this movie,these guys in the P-51's just had a luck,especially the "OLD CROW" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /

Well,that's all http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif .I've wroted everything above as simplyest as i can,so everyone will get it/ even a baby http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /.

VW-IceFire
10-23-2007, 04:33 PM
Makes sense...the P-51 can hold a regular G-6 in a turn in the game at speed so a heavier bomber killed G-6 with extra guns on the wings is less likely to be able to hold a turn with a Mustang in a similar situation in-game. So not too surprisingly that the same situation occurred in real life.

Any of the dogfights that I know covered in Dogfights seems to be accurate and generally well researched. A few things tend to bug me and some of the information is omitted but is generally correct.

The PROBLEM in my mind is that people watch these things and then they come play a game like this and wonder why they can't be Buzz Anderson with their Mustang. Then they jump to conclusions that some Russian programmer with a vendetta purposefully slighted them and then come on the forums and generally carry on. Those are the people missing the vital bits of detail which may or may not be spelled out in Dogfights or some other production. Its not that Dogfights is wrong since they seem to be pretty good most of the time...its that people who watch it remember only what they like or omit details in their own head.

I also think those type of people miss the point. That people like Buzz Anderson or any of the other people they have covered were that good/just in the right place/lucky to have survived and the reason that their stories are being told and retold again is because of that incredible bigger than life sequence of moments they experienced. I think its a treasure to see a show like this be able to reach out to these people and get them to talk about their experiences. Historically its very important.

DKoor
10-23-2007, 09:14 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
The PROBLEM in my mind is that people watch these things and then they come play a game like this and wonder why they can't be Buzz Anderson with their Mustang. +1

Buzz had an uber-mojo stick settings.

berg417448
10-23-2007, 09:28 PM
Is "Buzz" Anderson related to Bud Anderson? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Wildnoob
10-24-2007, 03:59 PM
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/anderson/anderson.htm

I preffer this story by Anderson's autobiography.

Flight_boy1990
10-25-2007, 06:20 AM
Man..you yanks will never give up,eh?
Btw it's not 20mm,it's 30mm cannon in the 109's nose/+plus the MG-151/20 gondolas under the wings/!
Someone of those guys is lieing pretty good.

JG53Frankyboy
10-25-2007, 09:11 AM
you cant tell from outside, or to be specific, from the spinner hohle if the 109 is armed with a 20mm or a 30mm.

anyway, i guess , these history channel series is not always 100% correct.
i remember the Robon Olds story when the backround speaker put the mentioned dogfight in 1943 - when in real it was in 1944...............


BUT, i like this TV-show - its a good entertainment !

R_Target
10-25-2007, 08:03 PM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
you cant tell from outside, or to be specific, from the spinner hole if the 109 is armed with a 20mm or a 30mm.

I didn't know that, thanks. So there would be no way to know.


BUT, i like this TV-show - its a good entertainment !

Agreed. Some take it very personally though.

VW-IceFire
10-25-2007, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by berg417448:
Is "Buzz" Anderson related to Bud Anderson? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Close cousins no doubt http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Please just fix my messages in your mind! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

R_Target
10-25-2007, 09:30 PM
Can anyone with Anderson's book verify him describing gunpods under the wings of the 109's?

Flight_boy1990
10-26-2007, 05:35 AM
Hahaha,it's hard to believe,right yankee?
Watch..the answer is here.

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/8139/4251gu4.jpg

ps:Guncam movie probably from this day...Maaaan Anderson definitely had biiiig a luck that day...He's shooting like on his wedding day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-WVxB5MBdYE

Flight_boy1990
10-26-2007, 05:47 AM
And guys look what Anderson's saying about the P-51!I think that will finnaly stop the whining:


Bud: The stall warning on the Mustang is not that bad. If you have experience in the P-51 you can recognize the stall warning. I have never departed from controlled flight unintentionally. It may not have a large stall warning but it will warn you. One problem computer flyers have is not having the feel of the airframe buffet and of course if you continue to horse it around it will stall and depart from controlled flight. When in actual combat fighter pilots naturally could get pretty excited and this could lead to over-controlling, snapping out of a tight turn or even over-stressing the aircraft. This problem would pertain to any type of fighter.

Wildnoob
10-26-2007, 06:06 AM
hear a relate that the Mustang is wonderful in FS-X.

anyone here flow it on both sims and agreed ?

JG53Frankyboy
10-26-2007, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
Hahaha,it's hard to believe,right yankee?
Watch..the answer is here.

....................

what kind of hole you are expecting in the 109 spinner ??
http://www.warbirdphotographs.com/LCBW7/Me109-Nose-1.jpg

i hope you dont expect that the gun's barrel itself ended in the spinner..........

Flight_boy1990
10-26-2007, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
Hahaha,it's hard to believe,right yankee?
Watch..the answer is here.

....................

what kind of hole you are expecting in the 109 spinner ??
http://www.warbirdphotographs.com/LCBW7/Me109-Nose-1.jpg

i hope you dont expect that the gun's barrel itself ended in the spinner.......... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now this on your photo is 109/maybe G-6/ with 20mm cannon in the nose.And this what i've post is a 109 with a Mk.108 /30mm cannon/in the nose+the gondolas.
A classic bomber interceptor loadout for the 109 G-6/early and late version/!

Wildnoob
10-26-2007, 03:55 PM
Anderson and his fligth where at hig altitude. I never performed hig altitude combat with the P-51 against humans, but despite everything, all the times I flow it above 20,000 ft (6000 meters) I found the plane have an excellent performance, like the game info says.

anyone here who experince the P-51 in hig altitude combat against humans wants to share info ?

Korolov1986
10-26-2007, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by Wildnoob:
anyone here who experince the P-51 in hig altitude combat against humans wants to share info ?

8 P-51D-5s couldn't catch a Frank at 35,000ft, that's about what it comes to for me. The Ponies had at least 5kft over the Frank at the start, too. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

(I eventually got the Frank because he tried to make an attack pass on a Pony operating at about 20kft.)

You get above about 25kft and the Pony doesn't work so hot anymore. 15-20kft is the sweet spot.

@Bf-109 debate

The Mk108 was a compact weapon and the Bf-109G-6 was a versatile fighter; it had to be designed to accept either the MG151/20 or the Mk108. It would be pointless to have two different prop spinners for each cannon type.

R_Target
10-26-2007, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
Hahaha,it's hard to believe,right?
Watch..the answer is here.

Are you basing your opinion on the 3D animation from "Dogfights?" I'll resist the temptation to ridicule you, although the urge is strong. Again, the relevant passage from Anderson's book can shed some light on this.


Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
yankee

Thanks! I'm from the Northeast and consider it a compliment. However, understanding the intent, if you can relate any slurs from wherever it is you are from, I'd be happy to reciprocate. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
I can think of a couple that fit you no matter where you're from.

BigKahuna_GS
10-26-2007, 11:24 PM
S!


I have had the pleasure hearing Col.Anderson describe this P51 vs 109 encounter in person. Col.Anderson refered to the 109s as a clean fighter with a 20mm in the nose, no wing guns or drop tank.


http://www.oldgloryprints.com/Vertical_Duel_at_Angels_33.jpg

Col. Bud Anderson:
"There is nothing distinctive about the aircraft, no fancy markings, nothing to identify it as the plane of an ace, as one of the "dreaded yellow-noses" like you see in the movies. Some of them did that, I know, but I never saw one. And in any event, all of their aces weren't flamboyant types who splashed paint on their airplanes to show who they were. I suppose I could go look it up in the archives. There's the chance I could find him in some gruppe's log book, having flown on this particular day, in this particular place, a few miles northwest of the French town of Strasbourg that sits on the Rhine. There are fellows who've done that, gone back and looked up their opponents. I never have. I never saw any point.

He was someone who was trying to kill me, is all.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">So I'm looking back, almost straight down now, and I can see this 20-millimeter cannon sticking through the middle of the fighter's propeller hub.</span> In the theater of my memory, it is enormous. An elephant gun. And that isn't far wrong. It is a gun designed to bring down a bomber, one that fires shells as long as your hand, shells that explode and tear big holes in metal. It is the single most frightening thing I have seen in my life, then and now.

But I'm too busy to be frightened. Later on, you might sit back and perspire about it, maybe 40-50 years later, say, sitting on your porch 7,000 miles away, but while it is happening you are just too damn busy. And I am extremely busy up here, hanging by my propeller, going almost straight up, full emergency power, which a Mustang could do for only so long before losing speed, shuddering, stalling, and falling back down; and I am thinking that if the Mustang stalls before the Messerschmitt stalls, I have had it.

I look back, and I can see that he's shuddering, on the verge of a stall. He hasn't been able to get his nose up enough, hasn't been able to bring that big gun to bear. Almost, but not quite. I'm a fallen-down-dead man almost, but not quite. His nose begins dropping just as my airplane, too, begins shuddering. He stalls a second or two before I stall, drops away before I do.

Good old Mustang.

He is falling away now, and I flop the nose over and go after him hard. We are very high by this time, six miles and then some, and falling very, very fast. The Messerschmitt had a head start, plummeting out of my range, but I'm closing up quickly. Then he flattens out and comes around hard to the left and starts climbing again, as if he wants to come at me head on. Suddenly we're right back where we started.

A lot of this is just instinct now. Things are happening too fast to think everything out. You steer with your right hand and feet. The right hand also triggers the guns. With your left, you work the throttle, and keep the airplane in trim, which is easier to do than describe.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Any airplane with a single propeller produces torque. The more horsepower you have, the more the prop will pull you off to one side.</span> The Mustangs I flew used a 12-cylinder Packard Merlin engine that displaced 1,649 cubic inches. That is 10 times the size of the engine that powers an Indy car. It developed power enough that you never applied full power sitting still on the ground because it would pull the plane's tail up off the runway and the propeller would chew up the concrete. With so much power, you were continually making minor adjustments on the controls to keep the Mustang and its wing-mounted guns pointed straight.

There were three little palm-sized wheels you had to keep fiddling with. They trimmed you up for hands-off level flight. One was for the little trim tab on the tail's rudder, the vertical slab which moves the plane left or right. Another adjusted the tab on the tail's horizontal elevators that raise or lower the nose and help reduce the force you had to apply for hard turning. The third was for aileron trim, to keep your wings level, although you didn't have to fuss much with that one. Your left hand was down there a lot if you were changing speeds, as in combat . . . while at the same time you were making minor adjustments with your feet on the rudder pedals and your hand on the stick. At first it was awkward. But, with experience, it was something you did without thinking, like driving a car and twirling the radio dial.

It's a little unnerving to think about how many things you have to deal with all at once to fly combat.

So the Messerschmitt is coming around again, climbing hard to his left, and I've had about enough of this. My angle is a little bit better this time. So I roll the dice. <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Instead of cobbing it like before and sailing on by him, I decide to turn hard left inside him, knowing that if I lose speed and don't make it I probably won't get home. I pull back on the throttle slightly, put down 10 degrees of flaps, and haul back on the stick just as hard as I can. And the nose begins coming up and around, slowly, slowly. . .</span>

Hot damn! I'm going to make it! I'm inside him, pulling my sights up to him. And the German pilot can see this. This time, it's the Messerschmitt that breaks away and goes zooming straight up, engine at maximum power, without much alternative. I come in with full power and follow him up, and the gap narrows swiftly. <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">He is hanging by his prop, not quite vertically, and I am right there behind him, and it is terribly clear, having tested the theory less than a minute ago, that he is going to stall and fall away before I do.</span>

I have him. He must know that I have him.

I bring my nose up, he comes into my sights, and from less than 300 yards I trigger a long, merciless burst from my Brownings. Every fifth bullet or so is a tracer, leaving a thin trail of smoke, marking the path of the bullet stream. The tracers race upward and find him. The bullets chew at the wing root, the cockpit, the engine, making bright little flashes. I hose the Messerschmitt down the way you'd hose down a campfire, methodically, from one end to the other, not wanting to make a mistake here. The 109 shakes like a retriever coming out of the water, throwing off pieces. He slows, almost stops, as if parked in the sky, his propeller just windmilling, and he begins smoking heavily.

My momentum carries me to him. I throttle back to ease my plane alongside, just off his right wing. Have I killed him? I do not particularly want to fight this man again. I am coming up even with the cockpit, and although I figure the less I know about him the better, I find myself looking in spite of myself. There is smoke in the cockpit. I can see that, nothing more. Another few feet. . . ."

__

BigKahuna_GS
10-26-2007, 11:49 PM
Korolov1986--8 P-51D-5s couldn't catch a Frank at 35,000ft, that's about what it comes to for me. The Ponies had at least 5kft over the Frank at the start, too.


The Frank is grossly over modeled in this sim especially at high altitude.
The Frank's best FTH is about 20,000ft, as the Frank increases altitude it's performance/V-max/climb rate should decrease but it does not.

During testing I was able to maintain the Franks FTH (Top Speed) to about 30,000ft. The Frank was known to have a lack of high altitude performance as a result of it's design (single stage supercharger). That is why the japanese were working franticaly on a high altitude version Ki84 to counter B-29 raids but it had serious engine problems and never got going before the war ended.


__

Flight_boy1990
10-27-2007, 01:56 AM
Guys i'm telling you in the youtube there's another movie /the full version of this episode/ from the History channel with the story of Bud Anderson!
AND there i clearly remember that he said,that there's a 30 mm cannon in the 109's nose!!!
But i can't find the exact movie,probably it's removed!
IF ANYONE HERE HAVE THE TIME,WRITE 'DOGFIGHTS' IN THE SEARCH IN THE YOUTUBE,AND HE'LL FIND IT'.
Even the guys from the history channel clearly represent the Mk.108 30 mm cannon!

ps:This movie which everyone have watched here,is reworked version downloaded from here:
http://sonicbomb.com/index.php
/it's clearly visible in the clip/
S!Dudes.

Flight_boy1990
10-27-2007, 02:01 AM
Just think about it:
Would the germans send a 109's with 20 mm only and 2x13mm MG's to intercept a 100~150 B-17's???
Even a master n00b wouldn't do that!

ps:

http://www.oldgloryprints.com/Vertical_Duel_at_Angels_33.jpg

Kahuna...sorry but this picture is inaccurate...See... the 109 was hit baddly in the fuel tank in the middle,not in the engine area,so the fire came from the fuel tank explosion,and the fuel tank is right behind the pilot seat in the 109,and when it exploded,it probably nailed the 109's pilot.
If you don't believe this,watch the guncam video i posted above.

horseback
10-27-2007, 12:16 PM
Just think about it:
Would the germans send a 109's with 20 mm only and 2x13mm MG's to intercept a 100~150 B-17's??? No, but they would -and did- send them to protect the heavy fighters and zerstorers and to divert the Allied escort fighters.

With that armament, the 109 is in optimal configuration for fighter to fighter combat; with the gondolas, he's much easier meat for the escorts, and hopefully smart enough to know it and avoid them.

cheers

horseback

Flight_boy1990
10-27-2007, 12:49 PM
The problem is that there were no other fighters in the area!
And the 109's/4x 109's/ were send to inercept the B-17's,so they were the only fighters there,so they're four and the Mustangs are four,so maybe they decited to take out the escort first and than go for the bombers.
Actually that is a tippical tactick,even me and my squadron do this when flying intercept in some of the IL-2 Online wars.

horseback
10-27-2007, 02:22 PM
Clearly, you are too young to realize that there is no such thing as 'always.' We only know that Anderson saw no other German aircraft. That hardly means that weren't any, or that there weren't supposed to be.

People missed rendezvous all the time, even when the escorted flights and the escorting flights originated from the same field. Real life weather, poor visibility and bad radio comms have a way of fouling up the finest tactical concepts.

You have a flight of 4 109s at 2-3000m above the bombers' alt with no gondolas from the description of the only witness we have. Tactically, a flight of four lightly armed 109s at that place & time only makes sense if they were there to try to pick off the escorts; if they were looking to hit the bombers, they were in position to avoid combat with the Mustangs and look for easier targets.

Instead, they chose to attack the Mustangs. That tells me that they were either a scratch team sent up to see what damage they could do, and Anderson's flight was a target of opportunity, or that they were purposely sent out to kill or distract enemy fighters.

What you and your squad do online has nothing to do with real life tactics; the 109 as modelled in-game has far more endurance than the real thing, which had only enough fuel to climb to altitude at max power, make two or at most, three unmolested passes at a nearby bomber box, or one combat with the escort and then search for a place to land. Combat operations were extremely demanding of fuel consumption, and the 109 simply lacked the capacity to carry enough fuel for truly long missions, with air to air combat part of the job.

In-game, the 109 doesn't begin to approach the fuel consumption of the real thing in extended combat. If it did, your squad would be having to chose whether to engage the bombers or their escorts, because they wouldn't have the fuel for both (even with the 300l belly tank).

cheers

horseback

Vike
10-27-2007, 02:44 PM
Hmm,just a clarification:

The Me109 had a 50mm "blast tube" going from engine till spinner.This tube permitted to mount different types of gun during the WW-II:

-The 20mm MG151/20,with vertical convergence settings possible.
-The 30mm MK108,with or without vertical convergence settings possible.

There was even a special "MK103-M" 30mm high-range canon that was planned for the Me109-K10 at the end of the war. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

Anyway,the Me109 nose design permitted many possibilities,and,naturally it was externally impossible to know what kind of gun was mounted on the Me109 for those P51s...Until they opened fire:

If the P51 pilot hadn't had the time to say "Oh my Goooo..." KaboOom =>It was MK108.
If he had had the time => It was MG151/20.

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

R_Target
10-27-2007, 02:55 PM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
I have had the pleasure hearing Col.Anderson describe this P51 vs 109 encounter in person. Col.Anderson refered to the 109s as a clean fighter with a 20mm in the nose, no wing guns or drop tank.

Thanks for the clarification Kahuna.

Flight_boy1990
10-28-2007, 04:26 AM
Maaan...i've got the thinking that i'm the only who's against the US whining here...

So look what both of those guys who flew P-51 said about it:

Bud: The stall warning on the Mustang is not that bad. If you have experience in the P-51 you can recognize the stall warning. I have never departed from controlled flight unintentionally. It may not have a large stall warning but it will warn you. One problem computer flyers have is not having the feel of the airframe buffet and of course if you continue to horse it around it will stall and depart from controlled flight. When in actual combat fighter pilots naturally could get pretty excited and this could lead to over-controlling, snapping out of a tight turn or even over-stressing the aircraft. This problem would pertain to any type of fighter.

AAANNNND watch this one...the guy clearly said that the 109 have a waaaaay tighter turn:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFl8X4y9-94

Let's see what you'll say now profs!

Flight_boy1990
10-28-2007, 04:35 AM
Originally posted by horseback:
Clearly, you are too young to realize that there is no such thing as 'always.' We only know that Anderson saw no other German aircraft. That hardly means that weren't any, or that there weren't supposed to be.

People missed rendezvous all the time, even when the escorted flights and the escorting flights originated from the same field. Real life weather, poor visibility and bad radio comms have a way of fouling up the finest tactical concepts.

You have a flight of 4 109s at 2-3000m above the bombers' alt with no gondolas from the description of the only witness we have. Tactically, a flight of four lightly armed 109s at that place & time only makes sense if they were there to try to pick off the escorts; if they were looking to hit the bombers, they were in position to avoid combat with the Mustangs and look for easier targets.

Instead, they chose to attack the Mustangs. That tells me that they were either a scratch team sent up to see what damage they could do, and Anderson's flight was a target of opportunity, or that they were purposely sent out to kill or distract enemy fighters.

What you and your squad do online has nothing to do with real life tactics; the 109 as modelled in-game has far more endurance than the real thing, which had only enough fuel to climb to altitude at max power, make two or at most, three unmolested passes at a nearby bomber box, or one combat with the escort and then search for a place to land. Combat operations were extremely demanding of fuel consumption, and the 109 simply lacked the capacity to carry enough fuel for truly long missions, with air to air combat part of the job.

In-game, the 109 doesn't begin to approach the fuel consumption of the real thing in extended combat. If it did, your squad would be having to chose whether to engage the bombers or their escorts, because they wouldn't have the fuel for both (even with the 300l belly tank).

cheers

horseback

Dude...of course every side in the war want to say that their planes were the best,so you're trying to make me believe on 4 yankee pilots,that the Mustang is better.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif .

Look now...if you find me the entire movie from which we have a couple of scenes cut in the clip we have in the youtube/the clip in the YT is not the full version/,you'll see that a hell of important notes for the arming are missing.
Even the beggining of the combat is missing.
You'll see the 30mm in the nose...everything.And i hope that everyone who whin about the Ponye's turn will finnaly shut up!

ps:IF you find this movie,you'll proof your words above!I think you'll find it...if you REALLY found the info above.

Flight_boy1990
10-28-2007, 04:51 AM
First step for stopping the whining...Look what they've wrote for the 109 in the History Channel's main site dudes.
And get a huuuuuge attention when reading his loadouts!

http://www.history.com/genericContent.do?id=55454

S!

Wildnoob
10-28-2007, 07:34 AM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
First step for stopping the whining...Look what they've wrote for the 109 in the History Channel's main site dudes.
And get a huuuuuge attention when reading his loadouts!

http://www.history.com/genericContent.do?id=55454

S!

maybe you should think in factors before say this.

I have an opinion about the P-51 :

it will never be the aircraft you would use in a arcade game full of icons and KI-84 IC's, LA-7's and Spitfires 25 lbs in low altitude turning dogfigths.

but when you are in a bomber escort mission, 25,000 ft up (7500 meters if I are not wrong) with full realism and hear over the radio "enemy figthers" you will know that you are really in a P-51.

Flight_boy1990
10-28-2007, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by Wildnoob:
maybe you should think in factors before say this.

You telling this to me?
And if you're telling this to me,what is it supposed to mean???What factors???

R_Target
10-28-2007, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
First step for stopping the whining...

...is for you to quit before you dig yourself in an even deeper hole. Do you think anybody takes you seriously when your source is the sloppily researched Dogfights? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

And you posted the Skip Holm edit. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Wildnoob
10-28-2007, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
You telling this to me?
And if you're telling this to me,what is it supposed to mean???What factors???

supposed to mean the maneuverbility for example, will depends on the altitude you're in determined momment.

wath this means ?

by wath I've understand you are saying that because the P-51 as poor turning performance at low altitude and the BF-109 not.

the maneuverbility depends on witch altitude you are too. in the Mustang case, I think if you meet human flow P-51's in hig altitude with a BF-109 your opinion maybe be different.

Flight_boy1990
10-28-2007, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by R_Target:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
First step for stopping the whining...

...is for you to quit before you dig yourself in an even deeper hole. Do you think anybody takes you seriously when your source is the sloppily researched Dogfights? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

And you posted the Skip Holm edit. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Man you can't get,right???
The entire movie on which all your hopes were is probably uploaded by a Mustang fan,which probably wanted to show "how well the Mustang can turn" it wasn't me who gave the link.
I think that You->R_Target just went into the bottom of your hole!

AND if You call the Dogfights-"sloppily researched",maybe you're the creator of the universe or what???AND You know everything???
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif You make me laught on your foolish mind.
...You just blow up the entire Ponye storie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif .
So it's a "sloppily researched" clip,why we have to believe that the Mustang can turn tighter than the 109 by watching it???

ps:Now all Musang fans can beat this guy for blowing up the Mustang whining for better turn http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .

Flight_boy1990
10-28-2007, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by Wildnoob:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
You telling this to me?
And if you're telling this to me,what is it supposed to mean???What factors???

supposed to mean the maneuverbility for example, will depends on the altitude you're in determined momment.

wath this means ?

by wath I've understand you are saying that because the P-51 as poor turning performance at low altitude and the BF-109 not.

the maneuverbility depends on witch altitude you are too. in the Mustang case, I think if you meet human flow P-51's in hig altitude with a BF-109 your opinion maybe be different. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A little correction.
The 109 is better in it's turns at all altitudes!BUT only if it's at low and medium speed.The P-51 is a high altitude fighter /the same as Focke-Wolf/ and at high speeds it have a very good stick responce,so it turn way faster than a 109 at high speeds.

ps:I even cauth La-7 many times with a FW-190 A-9 in turn fight.Ones we were at 6,5k,and we both were at 560~600 km/h and the FW have a way better rate of turn at high speed than the LA,and without any problem i stayed with the guy in a turn fight for 20 secs,and i got the shot,and he left straight down to the ground on one wing.

R_Target
10-28-2007, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
The entire movie on which all your hopes were is probably uploaded by a Mustang fan,which probably wanted to show "how well the Mustang can turn" it wasn't me who gave the link.

Can you show me where I said anything about the Mustang's turn rate?


I think that You->R_Target just went into the bottom of your hole!

Guess what I found down there? A 109 without gunpods. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif


AND if You call the Dogfights-"sloppily researched",maybe you're the creator of the universe or what???AND You know everything???
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif You make me laught on your foolish mind.
...You just blow up the entire Ponye stories

No, I don't know much, but I do know that Anderson's account(he was there you know) of the armament on the 109's that he fought against is more reliable than a 3D recreation.


So it's a "sloppily researched" clip,why we have to believe that the Mustang can turn tighter than the 109 by watching it???

We don't have to believe anything we don't want to believe. Like you don't want to believe Anderson when he says the 109's didn't have gunpods. Like you don't want to believe Frankyboy or Vike when they say that you cannot determine the model of nose cannon carried from an external view.


ps:Now all Musang fans can beat this guy for blowing up the Mustang whining for better turn.

Show me again where I said anything about P-51 turn rate.

Flight_boy1990
10-28-2007, 11:58 AM
You can't believe...
Now,show me where i FIRST showed this link?
You dude better watch the entire film from the "sloppy research" for Mr.Anderson's fight.
Or you maybe don't have ~50 box to buy the 1 season? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .
Watch it and when you see the 30 mm to appear there...shut up ones forever!

AND AGAIN Watch this movie.Can you tell me what this guys said,ah???Or maybe i should tell you,that the 109 have a way tighter turn???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFl8X4y9-94

R_Target
10-28-2007, 12:24 PM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
You can't believe...
Now,show me where i FIRST showed this link?
You dude better watch the entire film from the "sloppy research" for Mr.Anderson's fight.
Or you maybe don't have ~50 box to buy the 1 season? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .
Watch it and when you see the 30 mm to appear there...

Watch it and see that you cannot determine which weapon is mounted from looking at the blast tube.


shut up ones forever!

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Maybe you should calm down a little before you type.


AND AGAIN Watch this movie.Can you tell me what this guys said,ah???Or maybe i should tell you,that the 109 have a way tighter turn???

"AND AGAIN" show me where I said anything about turn rates. Is your reading comprehension as poor in your native language as it is in English?

horseback
10-28-2007, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
Dude...of course every side in the war want to say that their planes were the best,so you're trying to make me believe on 4 yankee pilots,that the Mustang is better.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif .

Look now...if you find me the entire movie from which we have a couple of scenes cut in the clip we have in the youtube/the clip in the YT is not the full version/,you'll see that a hell of important notes for the arming are missing.
Even the beggining of the combat is missing.
You'll see the 30mm in the nose...everything.And i hope that everyone who whin about the Ponye's turn will finnaly shut up!

ps:IF you find this movie,you'll proof your words above!I think you'll find it...if you REALLY found the info above. So, if I base my arguement on the book's original text (as posted by Kahuna) and the actual pilot's account of the combat, and you base your account on a TV show and computerized re-creation (put together by a techno-nerd gifted in creating cgi but not exactly knowledgeable about the 109 for TV producers more concerned about the bottom line than absolute accuracy), which were based on the book and an abbreviated interview with said pilot, who may or may not have had the right to approve the whole production...

You have yet to post a link to the 'true' video, but you think that we have to accept your word as Gospel. Sorry, son, it ain't gonna happen, because most of us here have a closer and longer association with the facts than you do.

The record shows that the Mustang was very competitive with almost everything in the sky, and better than most at high speeds and high altitudes. This was especially true in the first half of 1944 (subject combat took place in May of that year).

I don't know if you've ever been in an unpressurized aircraft over 8000m, but it required you to be sucking on an oxygen bottle, and is generally physically stressful. A fighter with heavy stick forces requires its pilot to work harder than you may realize; if you talk to guys who fly warbirds, most will tell you that it is a workout to make any kind of maneuver. Without hydraulic assists, the pilot of almost every WWII fighter had to move the control surfaces with his own muscle power.

At low speeds, an aircraft with medium to heavy stick forces would be more controllable, and precise maneuvers could be more easily achieved, although at the price of physical wear and tear. You could get very tired in a turning fight, and it is no surprise that most exceptional combat pilots of that period were often athletes of some note.

If you have medium to heavy controls at low speeds however, they tend to become even heavier at higher speeds. This is part of the reason that as the aircraft got faster and flew higher, there was progressively less extended hard maneuvering and jockeying for position. The other big reason of course is that the longer you spend flopping about trying to get on one guy's tail, the more likely one of his buddies is to come along and pop you while you're distracted.

This was a big part of the Mustang's success, coupled with its range. It could maneuver better at higher speeds, it didn't wear its pilot down, and it was very forgiving if the pilot knew his aircraft at all. The Mustang in this game is not like the real thing in that respect. It is more like the real life P-40 in its demand for constant trimming as speed or throttle position changes, and it makes the pilot work a LOT harder for his shots.

It had light control forces at low to medium speeds, and medium forces at high speeds, just like the Focke-Wulf. It wouldn't wear you out just flying to the target area. Unlike the Focke-Wulf prior to the Dora, it had an engine that thrived at higher alts.

By contrast, the 109G-6 had much heavier stick and rudder forces at higher speeds, and it was not at its best when forced to fly high and fast. It wore down its pilots faster, and required a more skilled operator to get the same percentage of its combat potential. A 109 driver had to be a better pilot and and work harder to succeed against a Mustang, even though the Mustang's pilot had already been in the air for two plus hours at high alts, sucking on oxygen and suffering from mild dehydration (or a full bladder).

Given the relative training levels of the LW vs the USAAF or RAF, the equation appears to me to generally favor the Mustang driver if he doesn't let himself get sucked into a low speed low level turn fight.

EVERY Mustang driver from that period that I have spoken to (and I've known dozens if not hundreds, of these men-my father was career USAF from 1950-1971, and he retired just as I was about your apparent age) and the sprinkling of 109 drivers I've had the fortune to talk to (a lot of wartime LW pilots who trained on F-86s and F-104s passed through the bases we lived on) all said largely the same thing: high altitude and high speed combats favored the Mustang over the 109G-6 models that were operational in the first half of that year.

The many books and articles I've read over the past 45+ years since I learned to read have confirmed these men's testimony.

By the way, I believe that the MK 108 30mm elephant gun wasn't the normal armament for the majority of 109Gs at that point in the war, and even if it were, it might not be as easy to hit with as the 20mm 151/20 at greater distances than 150-200m. I understand that it had a bit of 'loft' to its trajectory, which would be okay for hitting a large target like a bomber, but not so good for a smaller faster moving target like a fighter.

If I'm wrong about this, any number of 109 experten on these forums can correct me, but I doubt that they will need to.

As for you, young man, step away from that TV/computer monitor and read a few books!

cheers

horseback

Vike
10-28-2007, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by horseback:
elephant gun (...)
If I'm wrong about this, any number of 109 experten on these forums can correct me, but I doubt that they will need to.

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

IRL as in our sim,MK108 is indeed a gun harder to aim and hit with,concerning fighters...

*But*

Any good IRL/virtual Me109 flyer had learnt to get close before shooting a fighter,whatever the type gun is mounted into the nose and whatever the type of Me109 is concerned (E/F/G/K).

Because the "Spray and pray" tactic doesn't apply to the Me109s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- E.Hartmann fighting technics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Hartmann#Fighting_technique)
=>" His favourite method of attack was to hold fire until extremely close, then unleash a short burst at point-blank range. As opposed to long-range shooting, this technique allowed him to:
*reveal his position only at the last possible moment
*compensate for the low muzzle velocity of the slower firing 30 mm MK 108 cannon equipping some of the later Bf 109 models"

- MK108,high effectiveness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MK_108#History)
=>"A single hit to down a fighter."


Thus,within 0 to 400m,a good/average pilot will know he can hit with his nose canon,whether he has 20mm or 30mm. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BTW,from my readings,towards the end of War,most of the MK108 shells had their self-destruct system disabled in order to increase the range. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif
Also,towards 1945,the rate of fire was raised from 650rpm to 800rpm...
Even at 650 rpm,the fantastic MK108 canon had an equivalent (if not superior) ROF than most allied 20mm canons http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif
Unfortunately,those two little "details" are not modelled ingame. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif
A shame. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

To summary:
The best air gun of WW-II,plus a good pilot using the right fighting tactics,plus a well-maintained late Me109 = P51 dead. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

@+

Bremspropeller
10-28-2007, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by horseback: ...



Very well put! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

VW-IceFire
10-28-2007, 01:47 PM
Vike: Explain to me about the MK108 rate of fire in-game versus real life? I don't understand.

BfHeFwMe
10-28-2007, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:

History Channel including Dogfights series does present true facts.

As opposed to false facts....



I've watched these series and have a little game of "spot the error", how they present false
conclusions one after the other. These guys ain't geniuses by any stretch and their budget
including time isn't enough to get the full story.

We have a certified genius on board boys!! If nothing else with a **** load of free time.


And then there's the ones that about HAVE to be cherry pickers but I can't PROVE what they
don't know.

And you can provide the proof right after the PROVE of what what you know. LoL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


You want to believe it all word for word including the conclusions then go right ahead.

Oh my, but we'd rather know your conclusions... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Vike
10-28-2007, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Vike: Explain to me about the MK108 rate of fire in-game versus real life? I don't understand.

I meant we have a standard MK108 version ingame,which provide ~650 rpm as IRL (see here (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/7921011335?r=1071096335#1071096335))
While there were also a 800+ rpm version at the end of war,that we dont have...Even for the Me262-HG II http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://s76.photobucket.com/albums/j32/Vike01/th_Mk108test3.jpg (http://s76.photobucket.com/albums/j32/Vike01/Mk108test3.jpg)(clic to enlarge)

I just tested it in arcade mode.
A 1 second burst with 2 canons,i got 20 impacts on ground i.e. 10 shells fired by each canon
=> Still standard MK108,like on the G6-Early. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Anyway,that remains a really super-uber-Meister-gun once we master it! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

@+

HuninMunin
10-28-2007, 05:58 PM
Feck the 108 - what we need is teh Revolver !

Vike
10-28-2007, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by HuninMunin:
Feck the 108 - what we need is teh Revolver !

Yes, MK/MG-213 is what we need!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Mauser MG 213C (aka MK213):

"This was a revolutionary design:
It used a five-chamber cylinder, with the firing split in three actions. The MG 213C was never produced in series, but after the war it inspired the American Pontiac M39, the British Aden and the French DEFA cannon. Both 20mm and 30mm versions were developed. The 20mm had a rate of fire of 1400rpm and a muzzle velocity of 1050m/s. The 30mm version fired at 1200rpm, but muzzle velocity was down to about 550m/s."
(from here (http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/Secweap.htm))

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j32/Vike01/Mg213.jpg

@+ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

Clipper_51
10-28-2007, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
Hahaha,it's hard to believe,right yankee?
Watch..the answer is here.

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/8139/4251gu4.jpg

ps:Guncam movie probably from this day...Maaaan Anderson definitely had biiiig a luck that day...He's shooting like on his wedding day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-WVxB5MBdYE


Yeah, bad shooting. PArticularly the one shot that causes the 109 to erupt in vapor,smoke and flame, lol.

DKoor
10-28-2007, 08:18 PM
Game â‰* Reality

HayateAce
10-28-2007, 09:13 PM
POOOOOR Nancie?

Your Loftwiffie pilot got ownzorred by Bud Anderson, and you don't have to like it.

But you do have to live with it.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ElAurens
10-28-2007, 09:44 PM
Mk. 108 guns were installed in no more than 30% of Bf 109s. The MG151/20 was by far the most encountered weapon.

VW-IceFire
10-28-2007, 10:16 PM
Originally posted by Vike:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Vike: Explain to me about the MK108 rate of fire in-game versus real life? I don't understand.

I meant we have a standard MK108 version ingame,which provide ~650 rpm as IRL (see here (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/7921011335?r=1071096335#1071096335))
While there were also a 800+ rpm version at the end of war,that we dont have...Even for the Me262-HG II http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://s76.photobucket.com/albums/j32/Vike01/th_Mk108test3.jpg (http://s76.photobucket.com/albums/j32/Vike01/Mk108test3.jpg)(clic to enlarge)

I just tested it in arcade mode.
A 1 second burst with 2 canons,i got 20 impacts on ground i.e. 10 shells fired by each canon
=> Still standard MK108,like on the G6-Early. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Anyway,that remains a really super-uber-Meister-gun once we master it! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

@+ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh I see now. I get it! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Man a 800rpm version would just not be fair in the slightest! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

How many were equipped? Was it across the board in production (like how all Series II Tempests had a Mark V Hispano cannon flush mounted to the wing rather than the Mark II?) or just on some aircraft?

Bremspropeller
10-29-2007, 05:04 AM
The 20mm had a rate of fire of 1400rpm and a muzzle velocity of 1050m/s.


ZOMG!!!1!!

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


Mk. 108 guns were installed in no more than 30% of Bf 109s. The MG151/20 was by far the most encountered weapon.

True. Thatswhy ppl are begging Oleg to include G-14s, G-10s and K-4s with the 20mm instead of that jackhammer. Just make the 20mm a standard-loadout on those and create a Rüstsatz that features the 108.

DIRTY-MAC
10-29-2007, 06:38 AM
I think high altitude and high speed combats favored the Mustang over the 109G-6 models that were operational in the first half of that year. Lower speeds and close in dogfights favoured the Bf109.
But most of all the performance from these two fighters people are talking about, came from inside the cockpit, The pilots.

But it also seems like most of those pilots bouncing Bud and Co were pretty novice, They totally threw away their hight and E advantage