PDA

View Full Version : mossie...



p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 11:11 AM
its too slow.
366mph should be ENTIRLY achivable

i can get 550-560, 555kph seems the maxium, higher is from slight up and down from trimming

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

ill add abit more in a sec.

crazyivan1970
02-09-2006, 11:14 AM
Ohhhh boy. Here we go http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Bremspropeller
02-09-2006, 11:29 AM
Track ?

lrrp22
02-09-2006, 11:32 AM
Hmm. An early '44 Tempest V and an early '43 Series I Mossie FB VI.

LRRP

stathem
02-09-2006, 11:36 AM
The Tempest appears to have the Mossie's rocket loadout...

I don't care i still love her.

Thanks Prangster http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif and Oleg

KRISTORF
02-09-2006, 11:45 AM
Still wicked though, its a start point that can be improved on.

Thx Prangster, Oleg and Co

Hawgdog
02-09-2006, 11:45 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHA
The first whiner!

I won 20 paypal bucks, too bad it wasn't gib or jumo, i'd have 75 USD!!

Thanks!

jagdmailer
02-09-2006, 11:49 AM
ROTFL....

Jagd


Originally posted by Hawgdog:
HAHAHAHAHAHA
The first whiner!

I won 20 paypal bucks, too bad it wasn't gib or jumo, i'd have 75 USD!!

Thanks!

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 12:18 PM
http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666//mossiedoc1.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666//mossiedoc2.jpg

from the book day bomber, theres another bit where hes hit by flak at 366mph, but i cant find the soddin book, luckily i had taken those pics awhile ago.

perhaps they've modeled it correct, but with the worst engines (not merlin 25's) and with every drag producing thing possible stacked onto it.

OldMan____
02-09-2006, 12:19 PM
Culdnt you give oleg a single night of sleep thinking he had made everyone happy? Don´t denies a man´s dream.. that is evil..

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 12:27 PM
oleg said he wouldnt czech the forums and only email, i havent emailed yet http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Aaron_GT
02-09-2006, 12:29 PM
Depends on engine version and boost, Pingu. We have the same Mossie books, pretty much so we can both look it up. 346mph at sea level would be fine for the first FB.VIs. By 1944 it should be much faster, though. Really we need a FB.VI 1943, 1944, and 'late' (+25). At least we have a Mossie for 1943 missions, though. It's a welcome beginning! So we can be grateful for that.

Wolfred
02-09-2006, 12:48 PM
im grateful, but still i cant fly the mossie
with only one engine

lrrp22
02-09-2006, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
Depends on engine version and boost, Pingu. We have the same Mossie books, pretty much so we can both look it up. 346mph at sea level would be fine for the first FB.VIs. By 1944 it should be much faster, though. Really we need a FB.VI 1943, 1944, and 'late' (+25). At least we have a Mossie for 1943 missions, though. It's a welcome beginning! So we can be grateful for that.

Agreed. It sure would be nice to have the later version(s) for the upcoming Norway map.

LRRP

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 12:56 PM
hm
340mph is top speed in FS gear

also i think merlin 25's where used from the start, or only a small batch of 20~ of the first ones wherent, gonna look it up

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 01:00 PM
page 236
"the first production FBVI emerged in feb 43, 418 intruder sqn at ford was in may, 43, equipped with mkVIs, fitted with merlin 25's to increase low altittude speed"

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

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 01:22 PM
do335 reaches 370mph tas at SL
use do335 for realistic mossie missions

do335 maybe too slow

luftluuver
02-09-2006, 01:24 PM
The first FBVI came off the production line in Feb 1943.

The HX series Mossies were built before 11-11-1943.

The HJ series were built between 12-3-1943 and 20-5-1943.

FBVIs had Merlin 25 engines which produced 1640hp @ 2000'.

Lrrp, Series I Mossies had the short nacelles. These had gone the way of the Dodo by 1943.

Sorry p1ngu, did not intend to duplicate what you said. Was researching when you posted. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

One13
02-09-2006, 01:25 PM
On the Crimea map I get 560kph (348mph) at sealevel and 585kph (363mph) at 1,700m (5,577ft).
These figures seem right on the money.

Viper2005_
02-09-2006, 01:28 PM
Well we've got Merlin 25s because flat out I get +18.

It flies very nicely on one engine and it seems pretty quick down on the deck too. Heck I feathered one on downwind, turned into it, feathered the other other on final and made a nice smoothe landing after at the first ever attempt.

Pingu, the chart you posts shows a top speed of 354 mph TAS at sea level using MS gear. 366 mph is attained at 8000 feet in FS gear.

Gear change should be at 4500 feet.

Now converting into Metric:

354 mph = 569 km/h
366 mph = 589 km/h
0 feet = 0 m
4500 feet = 1372 m
8000 feet = 2438 m

Time to do some testing. However, my general flying thusfar suggests that it's performing as well as one might hope.

Results to follow...

luftluuver
02-09-2006, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Ohhhh boy. Here we go http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Would not have to if the a/c were done correctly. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif Is not any basic testing done to confirm the inputed data?

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 01:42 PM
viper
that graph is "with droptanks"

last time i czeched, even droptanks caused drag
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VV_Holdenb
02-09-2006, 01:53 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif @ : p1ngu666 Did you have all this
ready before the patch was out - just in case...?

Great work Prangster, Oleg and Co. = Thankyou.
beautiful model. I http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif Mossie

Viper2005_
02-09-2006, 02:03 PM
According to the manual, there should be no boost cutout with the Merlin 25 engine; you should just get +18 boost with full throttle. We have Merlin 23 engine handling with Merlin 25 boosts which is strange...

Top speed at sea level appears to be about 557 km/h with 100% fuel.

S/C gear change height is "ˆ 2800 m which is about 9200 feet.

I get about 575 km/h at 2400 m.

So it appears that the aeroplane is roughly 14 km/h too slow at low altitudes.

However, its full throttle heights are out of this world.

With ram effect you can expect +18 at about 4 km.

At 4100 m (ie about 13,000 feet) I can hold 610 km/h quite happily.

I suspect that what has happened is that we've got incorrect engine models.

The Full Throttle Heights are too high when compared with the boost pressures on the gauges, and the performance is too low when compared with the boost pressure on the gauges.

However, the effect is not all that massive (a pretty constant 14 km/h) and it does allow higher altitudes to be obtained.

In other words, hopefully this will be fixed in the next patch, but I don't think that it's a show stopper.

BTW, Mosquito was never anything like as fast as Do-335; you'd need a Hornet for that!

<span class="ev_code_RED">As for drop tanks, post a graph showing performance without them and then we might have a case.</span>

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 02:21 PM
i dont have such a graph http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

with 25lbs of boost the mossie should be very quick, similer to a 25lb mustang

do335 was very fast, no doubt

IIJG69_Kartofe
02-09-2006, 02:54 PM
Mosquito as moddeled has external bomb pods.

Causing drag enough to slow the plane ?

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 03:07 PM
kartofe, what u think the droptanks fitted too? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

PF overmodels the rack drag by alot tho...

we just have a slow mossie at the height that matters to it most, low level.

ImpStarDuece
02-09-2006, 03:15 PM
I haven't finished my 4.03 download yet, but a few small questions:

1. What exhaust are modelled? Do we have manifold exhausts (large solid exhaust) or mulit-ejuctor exhausts (Spitfire type). Multi-ejector exhausts added about 12 mph speed.

2. What altitude are you testing speed level speed. The Mosquito history page Mossie Page (http://www.home.gil.com.au/%7Ebfillery/mossie02.htm) puts the FB IV with Merlin 25s and manifold exhausts at 378 mph top speed at 13,500 feet.

3. The graph Pinggu has is for a FB VI with DROP TANKS. Hanging two 100 gallon drop tanks of the wings is going to hurt performance. The Mosquito should be faster than shown on the graph on the first page.

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 03:49 PM
the 3d model has the shrouds. so useful cos we fly 98% in daytime, oh and we no exhaust flames apart from on jets http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

im still puzzled about the ammo loadouts aswell...

Crop-Duster.
02-09-2006, 05:21 PM
We're flying the early 1943 Mk. VI version 1 Mossie sir...

No rockets till version 2(1944) I believe.

"FB.VI Fighter bomber. Developed from the NF.II with Rolls- Royce Merlin 22, 23 and 25 engines. Same armament as the NF.II plus two 50 gallon jettisonable wing tanks or two 500lb bombs (or extra tankage in the fuselage behind the cannon). Provision was made in 1944 to carry four 60lb rockets under each wing in place of the wing tanks or bombs for attacks on shipping."

http://www.mossie.org/Mosquito_var.htm

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 05:45 PM
yep thats possible

the ammo loadouts are wrong too

default is 600 cannon rounds (150rpg), and 2000mg (500rpg)

"extra" ammo, 624cannon, so 156rpg, and 3196 rounds, 799rpg

if u take bombs, u get default loadout.

thats just a tiny, iccle, smidge away from the maxium load of 283rpg for cannon, and 1000rpg for 303 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif 303's also seemed synced

it blows up very very easily too.

is anything right with the mossie? and the IV has droptanks, on all the time too i think...

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 06:08 PM
we have postwar ammo loadout

LEXX_Luthor
02-09-2006, 06:29 PM
"is anything right with the mossie?" ~pingu666

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


Get this sorted out for us pingu. This is YOUR plane. GO !! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 06:55 PM
nah, its not my plane luthor, you is wrong there http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

the mossie was a plane for everyman, woman and child http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

a ambassidor to those of occupied europe, as it roared past u and the crew waved, mear inches from the ground http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

unless your the enemy. then it quickly introduces u to a lovely man with a scythe http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

incidently about 98% of writtings and video footage of mossie, sounds like what kurfy qoutes ppl about 109, or what p38fans quote http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif.

luftluuver
02-09-2006, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by Crop-Duster.:
We're flying the early 1943 Mk. VI version 1 Mossie sir...
Version 1?

Crop-Duster.
02-09-2006, 07:59 PM
Yes the 1942 FB -first version (Series one) of the Mk VI

p1ngu666
02-09-2006, 08:13 PM
there was no 42 FB, well a prototype...

luftluuver
02-09-2006, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by Crop-Duster.:
Yes the 1942 FB -first version (Series one) of the Mk VI Series 1 a/c were the ones with the short nacelles. These nacelles were long gone by the time the FB VI appeared. NF IIs had long nacelles. The BIV had short and long nacelles.

stathem
02-10-2006, 02:19 AM
Post-war also gives Vne of 400 mph - does anyone have any info. on what it could be dived to in war-time?

In-game she breaks up about 430mph indicated -gotta be careful with those dive bombing attacks.

Was it ever cleared for 2x500lb (ie did they fit) in the bomb-bay? (FB VI version)?

AWL_Spinner
02-10-2006, 02:40 AM
Yeah, she breaks up (or comes "unglued", I guess) quite quickly in a dive, I'd concur at between 430-450mph depending on attitude and G.

If you should ever end up duelling with a Ju88, don't try and follow it in a dive: I've been testing the Ju and you can hammer that downhill at up to 530mph without issue. Although I suppose that type was strengthened for dive-bombing.

The Mosquito is wonderful to fly though - also interesting to note it's ground handling which feels "new" for PF. She's certainly heavy on the ground and requires careful use of throttle and brakes.

The Mosquito also appeared to be the most popular air-test on the servers I visited last night!

Alexi_Alx_Anova
02-10-2006, 03:07 AM
From Prangster's own mouth (I hope he won't mind me quoting him to help sort this out);

"Oleg has modeled the early Merlin 21 engines so the speed is correct. When the Norway map is released we should get a Rocket armed Merlin 25 powered version that will be 25 mph faster."

So while we wait for the next version, why not whine about the lack of landing lights for the Mossie?

stathem
02-10-2006, 03:11 AM
Thanks for the info, Alexi.

I was just pondering about whether to relay your post at SimHq across

Philipscdrw
02-10-2006, 03:28 AM
I like the Mossie. It has the most lethal armament of any aircraft in-game, IMO - 4 cannon, 4 machine-gun on the centreline...

mothyp
02-10-2006, 04:12 AM
i cant beleive there is so much *****ing going on, if you whiners realised how much work goes into producing these aircraft you would surely shut up and just be grateful that someone has the time and dedication (and obviously a thick hide to ignore the complete *****ing) to provide you with some fantastic third party aircraft, Prangster is a Tangmere Pilot so we have been party to his work and its taken over a year to do plus almost that long for it to be released, this is another free patch so why ***** just enjoy it.

Not everything in life can be perfect but i would rather have a flyable mossie that may need a few things ironing out than no mossie at all

I say thank you Prangster, Oleg et al for taking the time to create these things and especially to Oleg for doing all this work for no profit

Crop-Duster.
02-10-2006, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by stathem:
Thanks for the info, Alexi.

I was just pondering about whether to relay your post at SimHq across

Already done http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

p1ngu666
02-10-2006, 07:06 AM
Originally posted by Alexi_Alx_Anova:
From Prangster's own mouth (I hope he won't mind me quoting him to help sort this out);

"Oleg has modeled the early Merlin 21 engines so the speed is correct. When the Norway map is released we should get a Rocket armed Merlin 25 powered version that will be 25 mph faster."

So while we wait for the next version, why not whine about the lack of landing lights for the Mossie?

thanks alex
so, just the ammo loadouts to clear up

ImpStarDuece
02-10-2006, 08:18 AM
Just did a speed test on Crimea map at 5 m altitude.

Fastest sea-level speed was 556 kph or 345 mph!

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

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

Ok, so it doesn't sound THAT fast. Well, not until you realise that its 25 mph faster than a Merlin 61 engined F. Spitfire IX, and 10 mph faster than a Merlin 66 engined L.F. IX. It's only 11 mph/ 18 kph slower than the sodding +25lbs boost Spitfire IX http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

If we get a later serise, with the Merlin 25s, we can expect a rough performance increase of about 15-25 mph on the deck. That puts the Mossie up towards 370 mph at sea-level!

lbhskier37
02-10-2006, 08:23 AM
Yeah if you fly the mossie historically in missions it should be just about untouchable, even in latewar servers. Just run low altitude with the balls to the wall towards target, drop and get the heck back home without turning. If you start turning, you are in trouble though, I got owned by a bunch of BF110s last night because I thought I could turnfight them. (was outnumbered too)

jds1978
02-10-2006, 09:54 AM
Yeah if you fly the mossie historically in missions it should be just about untouchable, even in latewar servers. Just run low altitude with the balls to the wall towards target, drop and get the heck back home without turning. If you start turning, you are in trouble though, I got owned by a bunch of BF110s last night because I thought I could turnfight them. (was outnumbered too)

Ouch! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

personally, i like this plane. try tearing into a wermacht armored column with it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

p1ngu666
02-10-2006, 10:13 AM
u should be able to turnfight 110

NF mossies did to the nighttime fighter pilots, what p51,47,p38 did during the daytime

NF mossies outperformed 110s easily, from everything ive read

Viper2005_
02-10-2006, 10:30 AM
If we've got Merlin 21s then why are we getting +18 boost? It seems to me that we've got Merlin 21 performance and engine handling (ie a boost control cutout), but the boost obtained on the gauges is too high.

Merlin 21s should only give about +14 with the boost cutout (this is certainly the case for the Merlin 23 according to the pilot's notes - available on zeno's site).

AustinPowers_
02-10-2006, 10:45 AM
Oleg has stated before the guages don't mean too much...

Regardless of the boost in the cockpit, aslong as it is a Merlin 21 Mossie, and flies like a merlin 21 mossie.. it's all good.

quiet_man
02-10-2006, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
u should be able to turnfight 110

NF mossies did to the nighttime fighter pilots, what p51,47,p38 did during the daytime

NF mossies outperformed 110s easily, from everything ive read

then throw away what you read! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

nighttime fight is not about turning and the 110 could "turn" (sustained turn) very well, it just had slow roll and speed (deadly for an heavy fighter) compared to single engined fighters

I doubt the mossie can roll faster and much less it could turn with fighters, use your speed and firepower and you are fine

maybe take some leasons with 190
(sorry, couldn't resist http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif )

quiet_man

p1ngu666
02-10-2006, 02:07 PM
the wingloading of mossie is similer to 190.

the mossie was a very formidable aircraft, very rare for a mossie to struggle to stay with 110, ju88 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

some german NF pilots didnt spend any time when not in bomber stream corkscrewing without reason http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

carguy_
02-10-2006, 04:36 PM
uhuh lets see uuuuummmkay

mossie was fastest - mossie is not the fastest

mossie was maneuverable - mossie is not maneuverable

mossie was tough - mossie is not tough

few pages from a book,some fonts with speeds uhuh

Since Mr.TAGERT isn`t here I will say it for him

GOT TRACK?

Col._King
02-10-2006, 04:39 PM
S!
I will not add to this discussion, as seem here we have a lot of experts on the matter.

Want only to point out that the markings ON issue in the sim is brbed out for the mossie. Squadron codes appearing twice on port side of the fuselage, and the individual letter of the plane appears two times on the starboard side. This is obviously a bug.
Now, it is a very pleasant plane to fly...Will make some skins for it.

lbhskier37
02-10-2006, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
u should be able to turnfight 110

NF mossies did to the nighttime fighter pilots, what p51,47,p38 did during the daytime

NF mossies outperformed 110s easily, from everything ive read

Well I didn't have trouble staying with them in a turn, but I commited to turning with one not noticing his buddy that had altitude on me. Once you commit to turn fighting with BF110s is very dangers, especially with the gunner. And the forward guns in those things are just as devastating if they connect with you.

p1ngu666
02-11-2006, 08:14 AM
ah yeah

Beirut
02-11-2006, 03:53 PM
I'm loving the Mosquito. Great stuff. And thanks to Oleg and all for bringing it to us. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

If we could get the model with the 4000lb bomb and the one with the 6 pounder cannon for anti-shipping, that would just be lovely.

Thanks again for the great new toys.

timursz
02-12-2006, 12:31 AM
But what about B.Mk.IV?

As far as I know its maximal speed in Il-2 is 540 km/h.

Is it true?

Crop-Duster.
02-12-2006, 05:17 AM
Originally posted by timursz:
But what about B.Mk.IV?

As far as I know its maximal speed in Il-2 is 540 km/h.

Is it true?

We have it as AI for now(notice the skin folder for Mk IV)

Will probably get it later as the guy who did they Mk VI also did the Mk.IV

Viper2005_
02-12-2006, 06:34 AM
Mosquito B.IV = Cookie.

If and when it arrives I may well become The Cookie Monster. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ImpStarDuece
02-12-2006, 06:35 AM
Maximum empty sped (18,000 lbs) for a Mosquito B. Mk IV Serise I was 385 mph/ 620 kph at 14,500 feet. Full load should knock about 10 mph/15 kph off this speed.

luftluuver
02-12-2006, 08:04 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Mosquito B.IV = Cookie.

If and when it arrives I may well become The Cookie Monster. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Only 23 out of the 300 B VIs were 'cookie' a/c which required the bulged bomb bay doors. It was the B XVI that was the real 'cookie' bomber.

Philipscdrw
02-12-2006, 09:46 AM
There's one particular thing I find strange about the Mossie - that's the canopy frame above the gunsight. It looks like it's been shifted upwards by an inch or two (or 5cm), and that looks a bit strange with the interaction with the other sections of canopy frame.

And there's that piece of damage model above the right-hand wing. If a cannon shell hits it it can cause serious damage to the aircraft.

Platypus_1.JaVA
02-12-2006, 10:41 AM
I have problems with my mossie too. After I gently had put her down on the earth, she won't move anymore. I cannot taxi this aircraft!

http://x7.putfile.com/2/4211274532-thumb.jpg (http://putfile.com/pic.php?pic=2/4211274532.jpg&s=x7)

Viper2005_
02-12-2006, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by luftluuver:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Mosquito B.IV = Cookie.

If and when it arrives I may well become The Cookie Monster. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Only 23 out of the 300 B VIs were 'cookie' a/c which required the bulged bomb bay doors. It was the B XVI that was the real 'cookie' bomber. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

An insignificant detail next to the fact that <span class="ev_code_RED">ME WANT COOKIE!</span> http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Anyway it seems that we're unlikely to get a B.XIV, so the B.IV is probably the best chance I've got of getting my cookie...

CHDT
02-12-2006, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by lbhskier37:
Yeah if you fly the mossie historically in missions it should be just about untouchable, even in latewar servers. Just run low altitude with the balls to the wall towards target, drop and get the heck back home without turning. If you start turning, you are in trouble though, I got owned by a bunch of BF110s last night because I thought I could turnfight them. (was outnumbered too)


Untouchable!!!!!

On Warclouds server, I couldn't fly faster than 460 km/h, at O meter, with my Mosquito (full wep, rad closed, 50% fuel, two 250lbs bombs).

So basically, I was a flying target for all the fighters around.

Was the real Mossie a flying target?

mothyp
02-12-2006, 11:47 AM
if the mossie was at 0 ft and flat out it was still very vunerable to an axis EA which had the height to catch up especially if it was able to bounce the mossie,

the mosie was a fine aircraft but plenty got shot down by EA.

p1ngu666
02-12-2006, 03:37 PM
it was MUCH better than any other bomber about tho, and it isnt ingame.

the merlin 21 gives u good speed up pretty high, but thats pretty useless for us. the merlin 25's would give us really good speed down low.

but the DM is a joke its so fragile. id use it for bomber intercept but tis really fragil http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

IRL the low alt flying made them much harder to track by radar and ground observers, and much less flak too as not many can see u to shoot at u.

ingame flak just kills mossie really really quick, plus slight damage takes off TONS of speed 50mph maybe..

mossies on the phillips raid noticed 190s, and they (mossies) caught the 190s attention, then they drew them away from the other bombers, lost the 190s and returned and bombed teh plant.

one of the mossies had previously hit a bird and had a smashed canopy http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif.

IRL the difference between mossie and say, a20/blehium. ud basicaly need tobe near mossie to have a pratical hope of intercepting them, or be lucky and be on one of there routes. ud then need tobe just the right height to see them come skipping across the fields, to low and u wont be able to get the speed up, too high and u wont see them.

ofcourse if u chase after them, u will probably be outrun. u could luck into a head on, but then 4 20mm might luck into your face. and with 28seconds of cannon ammo in the real one, fire like rambo http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

turrets just mean u might hurt the enemy aircraft, or drive them off. a detrimined attacker will just charge in and he has bigger guns, so u loose. plus the gunner turret has much harder time aiming.

i could post some stuff that would make me seem like something written about the 109 by kurfy, just replace 109 with mossie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

98% of all mossie material is like that, so its either all overblown propaganda, or true http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

SnailRunner
02-12-2006, 10:57 PM
Well, for a plane made out of plywood i actualy think its strong.

Its not made to be a fighter, and doent have armour as a fighter. It was a bomber scout recon plane they added a few guns and bombs to it and came up with a werry fast plane with pretty good guns, and with a radar in the nose you had the perfect nighfighter...

For interceptor and ground pounder i take the Beufighter anyday.....

My 2 Euro

Kurfurst__
02-13-2006, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by CHDT:
Untouchable!!!!!

On Warclouds server, I couldn't fly faster than 460 km/h, at O meter, with my Mosquito (full wep, rad closed, 50% fuel, two 250lbs bombs).

So basically, I was a flying target for all the fighters around.

Was the real Mossie a flying target?


Untouchable, LOL. I guess what is happening here is the shocking contrast between WW2 propaganda about 'invincible' aircraft vs. their actual specs.

Perhaps some people should think about what's the reality behind, and why did the 'uncatchable' Mossies suffered 8% loss rate when first employed in the daylight, TWICE the rate of normal bombers. Or why they were predominantly used during the night later on.

As for it's plane vs. plane capabilities, of course it's meat on the table vs. s-e fighters. Nothing suprising in that, those are faster, and vastly more manouverable. Multi-engine, it's simply isn't salient in anything, certainly not enough to 'doh-mih-nate' as some would expect based on those old british stories http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I think there was one guy in KG 40 who downed 3 Mossies in a row on a single mission, in a lowly, sorry Ju88C-6... hardly the best heavy figher by far, yet it happened..


PS : And the 110G, well, it's just a hairtouch slower, and it's otherwise a very good wingloading plane btw.

Mossie IV speeds

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/ju88a-5.jpg

timursz
02-13-2006, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Mossie IV speeds


This is data of tests in NII VVS - Soviet airforce recearch center. They supposed the speed of new plane 10 km/h higher.

HamishUK
02-13-2006, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Untouchable, LOL. I guess what is happening here is the shocking contrast between WW2 propaganda about 'invincible' aircraft vs. their actual specs.

Perhaps some people should think about what's the reality behind, and why did the 'uncatchable' Mossies suffered 8% loss rate when first employed in the daylight, TWICE the rate of normal bombers. Or why they were predominantly used during the night later on.


What rot! June 1941 saw the first flight of the Mosquito I photo-reconnaissance aircraft and the following month this was handed over to the Photographic Reconnaissance Unit at RAF Benson. By September, two more had joined the unit and the first operational sortie, a high-altitude reconnaissance over the enemy harbours of Brest and Bordeaux was flown. No losses were incurred!

The first bomber variant, the B.IV, flew in September 1941, and during initial trials it was discovered that the aircraft could be modified to carry four 500lb bombs instead of the intended 250lb, doubling the aircraft's firepower before it entered service. The type made its operational debut on May 31, 1942 when four aircraft of No 105 Squadron based at RAF Marham joined a 1,000-bomber attack on Cologne. Barely six months later, Mosquitos destroyed the Gestapo Headquarters at Oslo in a daring precision raid that was to become the trademark of Mosquito attacks throughout the war. Only one aircraft was lost, and it became clear that the Mosquito's high speed countered any need for defensive armament.


FACT: The Mosquito suffered fewer losses than any other plane attached to Bomber Command.

FACT: The first Mosquitoes were powered by two 1,250 horsepower Merlin engines. To enhance its aerodynamics, all tail surfaces were elliptical and the wings were sharply tapered. The first flights of the Mosquito confirmed what the design team had hoped for €" the fastest operational plane of its day. The Mks II, III ands IV could fly at 380 mph - 19 mph faster than the Battle of Britain Spitfire and 50 mph faster than the Hawker Hurricane.

To go with its speed, the Mosquito also had an excellent operational range (1,800 miles) and ceiling (the Mk XV had a ceiling of 44,000 feet). With such qualities, the Mosquito was an excellent plane for photo reconnaissance and it started this task in September 1941. With its greater range, the Mosquito outperformed Spitfires converted for the same task.

In May 1942, bomber versions were introduced. The increased power of the Merlin engines allowed the Mosquito to carry heavier and heavier bombs. Later versions of the Mosquito could fly at 415 mph with a 4000 lb bomb load. Such a speed made it very difficult for the Luftwaffe€s fighters to attack it successfully. The only plane that would have had a chance against the Mosquito was the Me 262.

The RAF often flew at night as it made operational sense and also decreased losses. Just as modern wars are also fought at night!

The Mossie was by no means invincible but she caught attention of the Luftwaffe! So much so that the Germans developed their own 'Moskito'.

Instead of clouding this with your opinion lets looks at the facts!

Stafroty
02-13-2006, 03:30 AM
i like where mossie has its radiators. looks like space craft http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
02-13-2006, 04:02 PM
the early daylight mossie ops did have high losses, two main reasons.

1 they where doing deep penitration raids for the most part, other bombers didnt go as far in.

2 they often flew at 20,000ft, which unknow at the time, the 190 was 5mph faster. a few 1000ft higher and they would have been much safer.

mossies undertook some of the most dangerous sorties. berlin was visited by mossies on MANY occasions. if im remmbering correctly it might have been 60odd conseceutive nights http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

they often overflew towns on purpose too, to set off the air raid alarms. all this was done with a tiny loss rate.

the germans thought it was such a terrible aircraft they wanted to copy it, with the moskito, ju88 S types, and finaly the do335, there where probably other types too.

if anyone can suggest a better aircraft than mossie for the bombing, and heavy fighter\ground attack roles, and why, please do http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Tooz_69GIAP
02-13-2006, 04:43 PM
Do-335 development began in 1937, it was not built as a counter to the Mossie.

However, Goering hated the mossie so much, he gave rewards for every Mossie shot down. There was one german pilot (forget his name) who ended the war flying 262's who shot down like 25-30 Mossies in night fighter 190's and 262's. He was quite famous for his Mossie hunting. Although his claims over Mosquitos have come into question over the years.

The Mosquito was one of the fastest prop driven aircraft in the war on any side. That is a known fact.

p1ngu666
02-13-2006, 07:31 PM
do335, highspeed jabo http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Arm_slinger
02-13-2006, 07:39 PM
Can someone with good information explain how the Mozzie should handle in terms of roll and turn? I was under the impression that it was rather light on the controls and nice and responsive. At high speed the ailerons became a bit heavy.

For me it handle's a like a bus.

Also there is the speed, we have learnt that its slower than it should be.

could graphs and such be posted as well please?

jagdmailer
02-13-2006, 07:57 PM
Kurfurst does have a point though.

Victor nation's aircrafts which attained god-like status in the Western world after the war such as the Mustang, the Mosquito and several others really "most of the time" were nothing that special. Pretty much average or just above average aircrafts, produced in massive quantities and flown by an equal massive number of pilots who were also probably average as a whole.

I got fed the same BS throughout my upbringing as a westerner. Does not surprise me at all that aircrafts such as the Mustang and Mosquito, which when all of flight parameters entered into an accurate combat flight sim do rather poorly in single numbers against Axis aircrafts cause they were really no all that "special" in the end. Welcome to the real world.

Of course there are exceptions in every cases, both men and material, but realistically and historically literally, "history" always remember who won and forgets who finishes second or last for that matter.

Some food for thought.....

Jagd

p1ngu666
02-13-2006, 10:02 PM
it shouldnt be too bad arm slinger, they had metal control surfaces from the start, and it was intended for highspeed flight right from the start.

109s suffer cos when it was designed, 250mph was considered tobe pretty damn quick, it ended some years later reaching 450mph or so.

the mossie was just a damn site better than anything else avalible. its not invincible, but really potent http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

other allied bombers where pretty slow, german ones wherent much quicker.
theres blenhiem mmm pants, battle = omG pants, a20 average, b25 slower, but much better guns

ju88, speedyish, do17, medicore, he111 average also, stuka, really acurate but really vunrable to fighters.

a proper mossie VI (merlin 25) would have similer low level performance to a do335 that we have ingame.

i survived a run to the enemy base on the 334th server, and back again doing jabo with the do335. a a20, b25 wouldnt of made it back, 75% chance it wouldnt make it to target.

the theory is sound, heck its what nearly every bomber type aircraft after ww2 was designed around http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ImpStarDuece
02-13-2006, 11:12 PM
Do-335 will still be faster Pingu.

Currently the Mosquito FB IV does 345 mph/ 555 kph on the deck. That isn't slow by any measurement.

Compared to the 1942 Merlin 61 Spitfire F. Mk IX, it was some 25 mph faster below 5,000 feet. Compared to the Spitfire L.F. Mk IX we have in the game it is still 10 mph faster at sea-level. The only British plane faster down low until mid 1944 was the Typhoon, which was regularly used to chase down Fw-190s at low level.

So, its British reputation as a very fast bomber is not undeserved, because it gets compared against British aircraft.

A Mosquito FB VI Serise II with Merlin 25s and multi-ejector exhausts should be arond 25 mph/ 40 kph faster below 5,000 feet. So, we're looking at absolute maximum of 370mph/595 kph on the deck, for a properly tweaked Mosquito.

I've done a little testing of the twins in the game.

At 95% throttle with a full internal or half external bombload sea level speeds are:

Do-335-A0 (1000 kg internal) 575 kph
Mosquito FB Mk VI (1000 lbs internal) 490 kph
Beaufighter Mk 21 (500 lbs external0 475 kph
A-20 (2200 lbs internal) 435 kph
G4M1 (1000 kg internal) 380 kph
B-25 (3000 lbs internal) 380 kph
Ju 88-A4 (2000 kg external) 375 kph
He 111 H6 (2000 kg external) 355 kph
He 111 H2 (1500 kg internal0 350 kph

Kurfurst__
02-14-2006, 02:49 AM
Originally posted by Tooz_69GIAP:
The Mosquito was one of the fastest prop driven aircraft in the war on any side. That is a known fact.

Fact?

The Mossie IV is picted as capable of doing a 580kph in flight tests. The most common FBMkVIverison, could do little over 600kph, 611kph iirc. That's hardly the fastest. The fast late-types with high altitude engines did not appear much later on and were used to terror bomb German cities from extreme altitudes - NUISANCE raids. And that's what is the best description I've read for the Mosquito : "a high profile nuisance".

The contemporary Bf 110G, which has awfully bad press, probably the worst of all WW2 aircraft, could do 595 kph, yet pilots scored 120+ victories in it.. The Me 410, which was very much the same role as the Mossie, did 624 kph and was around from early 1943, and was, btw, considered by the Russians a better plane. Ju 88S, also 600+. We can go on several Soviet types as well.

I can hardly see anything special about the Mosquito. It was MUCH slower than any of the s-e fighters it faced, and could and was easily catched and shot down if intercepted. All it could hope for is not being intercepted, for it's higher speed allowed less time for the defenses to respond, or to hide under the darkness. Bomb load was rather small.

The Mosquite is just the same 'invicible super plane' -myth the british developed for themselves, like fetishing the Spitfire, with god-like capabilities, and of course supplied by numberless 'stories' how it just trashed to poor Luftwaffe planes, conviniently forgetting about the actual operational facts. It wasn't that. What it was a rather good, versatile, fast LIGHT bomber, born out of desperation and lack of light alloy resources. But people expect those 1940ish proganada god-like attribitues, somehow they expect that physics will be defied. When they are not, they are disappointed.

Kurfurst__
02-14-2006, 02:53 AM
Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
Do-335 will still be faster Pingu.

Currently the Mosquito FB IV does 345 mph/ 555 kph on the deck. That isn't slow by any measurement.

It aint, especially given the real one could do only 505 kph on the deck, our one is 50kph faster than it should, yet people still whine about it...

Maybe it should be overmodelled 100, no, by 200kph..

luftluuver
02-14-2006, 03:36 AM
Kurfurst if your hobnailed jack booted heros did not start WW2, there would have been no bombing of German cities. The Germans were good teachers on how to bomb cities. Now, what was terror bombing was the V1 and V2.

Like you, the Russians did not like British a/c.

A loss rate of 0.4% from May 43 to May 45 for Mossie bombers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif Shows how incompitent the Germans were and how good the Mossie was.


Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
Do-335 will still be faster Pingu.

Currently the Mosquito FB IV does 345 mph/ 555 kph on the deck. That isn't slow by any measurement.

It aint, especially given the real one could do only 505 kph on the deck, our one is 50kph faster than it should, yet people still whine about it...

Maybe it should be overmodelled 100, no, by 200kph.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Dispite Kurfurst's http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gifing, if the Mossie FB VI only gets 345mph it is too slow. The testing of HX802 <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">with drop tanks</span> did 355mph(570kph) @ SL.

ImpStarDuece
02-14-2006, 04:12 AM
Luftluuver: different engines and different configurations between that Mossie and our one. I don't mind having a 1943 Mossie FB VI. It goes well with the L.F. Vb, L.F. IXc and the Hurricane IIc. Throw in a Tyffie and I'd be beside myself.

I'm running Banff Strike Wing FMB missions at the moment, with Mossies and Beaufighters, and the occasional Spit Mk VIII (as a Mk VII stand-in) and P-51Cs as escorts. In and out at high speed (475 kph +) and let the escort worry about the occasional 190 or 109.

Kurfurst, I'll go by British testing rather than Russian testing when I'm researching data for the Mosquito, if you don't mind.

I'm sure you wouldn't accept TSAGI speed and climb data for a 109 if it didn't match RLM data. It's a similar case here.

How about we use British data for British planes, German data for German planes, American data for American planes, Russian data for Russian planes and so on.

If the A & A.E.E says the B Mk IV could do 385 mph/ 620 kph at 14,500 feet with exhaust shrouds fitted, then that's the data i'll accept. Why would a lighter, more streamlined unarmed bomber be SLOWER than the fighter bomber version?

In that graph you posted the Ju-88A6 speeds are about 20mph too slow as well.

luftluuver
02-14-2006, 04:45 AM
Luftluuver: different engines and different configurations between that Mossie and our one. I don't mind having a 1943 Mossie FB VI. ISD, HX802 is an early production Mossie being delivered before Nov 1943 so unless someone can show what engine of Merlin was fitted, would say it was one of the lower powered ones.

Kurfurst__
02-14-2006, 08:02 AM
Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
Kurfurst, I'll go by British testing rather than Russian testing when I'm researching data for the Mosquito, if you don't mind.How about we use British data for British planes, German data for German planes, American data for American planes, Russian data for Russian planes and so on.

I don't mind at all, in fact I very much like the idea.


I'm sure you wouldn't accept TSAGI speed and climb data for a 109 if it didn't match RLM data. It's a similar case here.

Actually the TSAGI has very good figures for the 109...

[/QUOTE]If the A & A.E.E says the B Mk IV could do 385 mph/ 620 kph at 14,500 feet with exhaust shrouds fitted, then that's the data i'll accept. Why would a lighter, more streamlined unarmed bomber be SLOWER than the fighter bomber version?[/QUOTE]

Variation between individual aircraft for example. Of course, the game tends to model Western Allied aircraft very optimistically in *perfect* conditions (the +25 Spit is even after with 200lbs less weight...), while LW and Soviet aircraft are modelled more conservatively in speed etc.

I think the better question is, was the boost used in the in-game Mossie, or for example special stuff like No2 as so on ever used inreal life? Guys like NeilStirling are full of such very optimistic, but little used stuff...

So what boost/conditions is our 1943 Mossie running at, and how does that match the documentation, when was it cleared and how much was it used?

Then if the boost was actually used in service, we can proceed to compare to real life docs, wheter if it's undermodelled or overmodelled, or both in certain areas...

Then we have something more constructive instead of "my in-game mossie doesn't match the stories of stories from '40s propaganda ministry"... just fact vs. measurements. Now wouldn't that be grand?

So, bring the docs and let's test! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

luftluuver
02-14-2006, 08:34 AM
Variation between individual aircraft for example. Of course, the game tends to model Western Allied aircraft very optimistically in *perfect* conditions (the +25 Spit is even after with 200lbs less weight...),

And what about the 2cd test of JL165 which flew at 7400lb? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/jl165.html

Western a/c could be maintained in very good condition compared to German a/c.

Since the engines in the FB VI are based on the Merlin XX, putting out some 1480hp, they would be using at least 15/16lb boost.


Guys like NeilStirling are full of such very optimistic, but little used stuff... Like you and your 1.98 K-4. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

p1ngu666
02-14-2006, 09:17 AM
the sh1t hot mossies, well FB ones had merlin 25's.

like the LF engine in the VB it sacrifices high alt speed for low alt speed.

366mph at sea level on operations is rather slow admitidly.

thats 589kph
terribly slow compaired to luftwaffe aircraft.
A series 190s are outrun, apart from a9 which is about equal.

the slower 109s are (relivant ones) g2,g6,g6late,g6as,g10,g14. k4 is close tho, not sure either way. think the mossie has the edge tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

the fabled 110, does indeed go faster, up high
touching nearly 600kph, at 7000metres~
does a impressive 510kph~ at sea level.

one of the first squadrons to equip with teh FBVI had merlin 25 mossies. low alt speed is what fighter bombers need, hence most of them used merlin 25's.

merlin 25's on night fighters used 25lb boost with the equivilent of gm1 during the v1 period. some kept it after, some didnt.
3 sqd's where using 25lb on FBVI in the eto at wars end, dont know how long for tho. entirely reasonable to assume it was as much as some 1.98ata k4's http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

at 25lb's speeds in the 620-30kph range could be expected http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

mossies wherent the fastest at all heights, but at certain heights http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WOLFMondo
02-14-2006, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
The Mosquite is just the same 'invicible super plane' -myth the british developed for themselves, like fetishing the Spitfire, with god-like capabilities, and of course supplied by numberless 'stories' how it just trashed to poor Luftwaffe planes

Like you and your hungarian built BF109's, thinking they had god like capabilities, mythical performance, all written down on scraps of barely legible paper which are optimistic at best and certainly little used. :P

I don't know whats worse, your selective data picking or your blatant hate towards the Brits.

Dude, I don't know what tree you pick your cherries from but you really should find some other trees so you get a more balanced choice in your cherries.

AustinPowers_
02-14-2006, 12:45 PM
Amusing photo..

http://www.mossie.org/images/donated_images/Buzinc/RSF3.jpg

That's G¶ering btw.

p1ngu666
02-14-2006, 02:23 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

he must have been listening to kurfy and has gone on a diet so he can fit in 109 cockpit http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

The-Pizza-Man
02-14-2006, 05:18 PM
I can hardly see anything special about the Mosquito. It was MUCH slower than any of the s-e fighters it faced, and could and was easily catched and shot down if intercepted. All it could hope for is not being intercepted, for it's higher speed allowed less time for the defenses to respond, or to hide under the darkness. Bomb load was rather small.

Assuming the germans have a single engine fighter that can make 450mph/724kph at 30,000' it would have to be vectored to be within 2 or 3 km to acutally have any chance of catching the predominant late war bomber mosquito (B.XVI, the most produced bomber variant).

I wouldn't call 4000lb small either, it is as much as B-17 carried.

p1ngu666
02-14-2006, 05:50 PM
they flew mostly at night

so single engine fighters with reasonable performance would find it really hard to find mossie
at night

the night fighters have the radar, but not the performance apart from a few..

The-Pizza-Man
02-14-2006, 05:59 PM
DH Hornet would be nice.

Arm_slinger
02-14-2006, 07:46 PM
Ok so a pissing contest is happening once again.

Can someone give me the engine types the in game mossie has, and whether they are low/ high alt ratied etc etc. Ands also the exact type of mossie we have.

It would seem i'm not going to get a constructive answer while certain people stir up things without hard proof....

ImpStarDuece
02-14-2006, 09:15 PM
According to Prangster, the currently modelled FB VI has Merlin 21/23 engines (they were essentially similar except), and is based on a FB Serise I, which account for about the first 300 production airframes. Initially they were limited to around 1,230 hp at +12 lbs boost, but this was quickly upped to +14 lbs in automatic and +16 lbs with boost cut out engaged, delivering around 1480 hp at 6000 feet.

After the first 300 airframes, production swithced to the FB Mk VI Serise II. The major changes were the switch to 1635 hp Merlin 25s operating at +18lbs, internal bombload boosted from 500 to 1000 lbs, external bombload boosted to 1000 lbs and the ability to carry auxiliary drop-tanks under each wing. The large manifold exhaust shrouds were also done away with at some point in the Serise II production run, conferring and additional 6-10 mph in level speed.


Curiously, the Mossie we have seems to be a hybrid of the Serise I and Serise II specifications.

We have Serise I engines and performance, but we have Serise II loadouts (with the exception of the droptanks). The all out boost reading on the cockpit gauges is for +18lbs which would indicate a Merlin 25, but it is around 20-25 mph slower than a Merlin 25 engined Serise II. The all-out boost rating for a Merlin 21/23 was +16lbs.

A proper Serise II should be on the order of 20-25 mph faster at all heights below 6000 feet and about 10 mph faster at best height if its modeled with multi-ejector exhausts instead of the large manifold type we have at the moment.

There is some hope that we can get the multi-ejectors on a FB Serise II, as you can shoot of manifold exhaust off the FB VI and te model actually has multi-ejector types in the DM.

AustinPowers_
02-15-2006, 06:31 AM
Someone already mentioned that we will get the series 2 Mosquito in the same patch as the norwegian map.. although I haven't seen Oleg mention this

luftluuver
02-15-2006, 06:50 AM
Originally posted by Arm_slinger:
Can someone give me the engine types the in game mossie has, and whether they are low/ high alt ratied etc etc. Ands also the exact type of mossie we have.

It would seem i'm not going to get a constructive answer while certain people stir up things without hard proof.... The Mossies engines were based on the single stage/2 speed supercharger of the Merlin XX. They had reverse flow cooling. The M21 was a MXX. The M25 was from the M24 which was fitted with the anti-g device and some other improvements.

Mr_Nakajima
02-15-2006, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
I think there was one guy in KG 40 who downed 3 Mossies in a row on a single mission, in a lowly, sorry Ju88C-6... hardly the best heavy figher by far, yet it happened..

...except of course that it didn€t.

The action where Lt Gmelin of KG40 claimed four (reduced to three) Mosquitoes occurred on 11 April 1944 and is described in detail in Chris Goss€ book €œBloody Biscay€ (ISBN 0-947554-87-4).

U-255 was approaching St Nazaire with five surface escorts and 10 Ju 88s of KG 400 as cover. They were attacked by a total of 11 Mosquitoes, two being tse-tse variants armed with 6 lb guns instead of cannon. Four Mosquitoes provided top cover as the others went in. The Ju 88s bounced the lower Mosquitoes but were in turn bounced by the top cover.

Lt Gmelin claimed three Mosquitoes and one for his bordfunker. Uffz Josef Horvath also claimed one but his claim was dis-allowed, which even when being interviewed for the book still left considerable bad feeling from his surviving crew. (Horvath's plane was shot down and he was killed).

Total Mosquito losses were three shot down by the combined fire of the Ju 88s, U Boat and five surface vessels. It is most unlikely that Gmelin€s claims were all accurate and the other Ju 88s and flak from a total of six vessels all failed to score.


A second engagement took place that afternoon when four Mosquitoes, looking for downed crew from the morning€s action, encountered 12 Ju 88s. These turned for home, but the Mosquitoes had seen them first and so had a speed advantage. In the ensuing fight four Mosquitoes were claimed by the Germans, but only one failed to return.


German losses for the day where seven Ju 88s shot down and two damaged, but records are not precise enough to allocate losses accurately among these actions.

So the net result of the day was seven Ju 88s lost against four Mosquitoes, with an unknown number of the latter succumbing to flak rather than (or as well as) air to air combat. Additionally, one surface escort (a sperrbrecker) was left burning and dropped out of the convoy, this coming from U 255€s Captain€s diary.

Mr_Nakajima
02-15-2006, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by jagdmailer:
Kurfurst does have a point though.

Victor nation's aircrafts which attained god-like status in the Western world after the war such as the Mustang, the Mosquito and several others really "most of the time" were nothing that special. Pretty much average or just above average aircrafts, produced in massive quantities and flown by an equal massive number of pilots who were also probably average as a whole.

I got fed the same BS throughout my upbringing as a westerner. Does not surprise me at all that aircrafts such as the Mustang and Mosquito, which when all of flight parameters entered into an accurate combat flight sim do rather poorly in single numbers against Axis aircrafts cause they were really no all that "special" in the end. Welcome to the real world.

Of course there are exceptions in every cases, both men and material, but realistically and historically literally, "history" always remember who won and forgets who finishes second or last for that matter.

Some food for thought.....

Jagd

A good post Jagd, but there are some aircraft which live up to their reputation when examined objectively, and the Mosquito is one of them.

All nations during WWII produced some avearge aircraft, some poor ones and some excellent ones.

For the British the Mosquito, Spitfire and Lancaster represented the very hight of what their aircraft industry could produce. For the Germans it was the excellent Fw 190, the Me 262 and the Ju 88. These are aircraft that fully live up to their reputations - they often have those reputations simply because they genuinely were that good.

Mr_Nakajima
02-15-2006, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
I can hardly see anything special about the Mosquito. It ... was easily catched and shot down if intercepted.

And the easiest way to catch a blackbird is to put salt on its tail.

To shoot it down, you have to catch it. And to catch it means getting a fighter sufficiently close to it that it can engage. Easily done if you are intercepting several hundred B-24s moving slowly through the sky leaving contrails behind them, much, much harder to do if your quarry is flying an erratic course, at very high speed and at low level.

And this is only during the day of course. At night the lumbering Me 110s and their ilk had the greatest trouble catching the Mosquito. Gebhard Aders history of the German night fighter force, 'Geschichte der drutschen Nachjagdn1917-1945', translated into English as 'A History of the German Night Fighter Force', ISBN 0-947554 21 1, lists only 50 Mosquitoes claimed during the entire war by night fighters, and of those nine were claimed in 1945 by Me 262s.

So the Mosquito was not invulnerable, but especially at night it was very, very hard to catch.

stathem
02-15-2006, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by Mr_Nakajima:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
I think there was one guy in KG 40 who downed 3 Mossies in a row on a single mission, in a lowly, sorry Ju88C-6... hardly the best heavy figher by far, yet it happened..

...except of course that it didn€t.

The action where Lt Gmelin of KG40 claimed four (reduced to three) Mosquitoes occurred on 11 April 1944 and is described in detail in Chris Goss€ book €œBloody Biscay€ (ISBN 0-947554-87-4).

U-255 was approaching St Nazaire with five surface escorts and 10 Ju 88s of KG 400 as cover. They were attacked by a total of 11 Mosquitoes, two being tse-tse variants armed with 6 lb guns instead of cannon. Four Mosquitoes provided top cover as the others went in. The Ju 88s bounced the lower Mosquitoes but were in turn bounced by the top cover.

Lt Gmelin claimed three Mosquitoes and one for his bordfunker. Uffz Josef Horvath also claimed one but his claim was dis-allowed, which even when being interviewed for the book still left considerable bad feeling from his surviving crew. (Horvath's plane was shot down and he was killed).

Total Mosquito losses were three shot down by the combined fire of the Ju 88s, U Boat and five surface vessels. It is most unlikely that Gmelin€s claims were all accurate and the other Ju 88s and flak from a total of six vessels all failed to score.


A second engagement took place that afternoon when four Mosquitoes, looking for downed crew from the morning€s action, encountered 12 Ju 88s. These turned for home, but the Mosquitoes had seen them first and so had a speed advantage. In the ensuing fight four Mosquitoes were claimed by the Germans, but only one failed to return.


German losses for the day where seven Ju 88s shot down and two damaged, but records are not precise enough to allocate losses accurately among these actions.

So the net result of the day was seven Ju 88s lost against four Mosquitoes, with an unknown number of the latter succumbing to flak rather than (or as well as) air to air combat. Additionally, one surface escort (a sperrbrecker) was left burning and dropped out of the convoy, this coming from U 255€s Captain€s diary. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That would be 151 Sq. providing the covering flight?

A record of that engagement here with pilot accounts:

http://www.151squadron.org.uk/

You'll probably have to navigate to WW2, 1944, April.

Well worth the time to read. And great site.

Low_Flyer_MkVb
02-15-2006, 03:42 PM
"April 11


This was to be one of the finest days for victories in the history of 151. Squadron, in which a total of six Ju 88's were destroyed, one Ju 88 was probably destroyed, three Ju 88's were damaged, and one flak ship damaged. Unfortunately, the memorable day was marred by the loss of two valuable crews in the actions which took place. They were:-

P/O Kemp & F/Sgt Maidment,


W/O Penman & Sgt Stevenson. "



Nice site. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Mr_Nakajima
02-16-2006, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by stathem:
That would be 151 Sq. providing the covering flight?

A record of that engagement here with pilot accounts:

http://www.151squadron.org.uk/

You'll probably have to navigate to WW2, 1944, April.

Well worth the time to read. And great site.

Hello Stathem,thanks for the link.

Yes, it was 151 Squadron providing the top cover and taking part in the afternoon combat as well. 248 Squadron provided the striking power for the morning's operation.