PDA

View Full Version : Another 190 topic (the A-8, something rather simple)



meh_cd
08-17-2004, 08:56 PM
Alright! Another 190 topic, right?

While in the QMB I found something strange, well strange to me anyway.

The A-8 and A-9 do not have the option to carry a drop tank.

Is there a reason for this? I think the drop tanks look awesome on the Focke Wulfs. I realise that neither of the D-9s have any kind of loadout options, but since the late Antons have the options for everything but the drop tanks is strange.

meh_cd
08-17-2004, 08:56 PM
Alright! Another 190 topic, right?

While in the QMB I found something strange, well strange to me anyway.

The A-8 and A-9 do not have the option to carry a drop tank.

Is there a reason for this? I think the drop tanks look awesome on the Focke Wulfs. I realise that neither of the D-9s have any kind of loadout options, but since the late Antons have the options for everything but the drop tanks is strange.

robban75
08-17-2004, 11:25 PM
Also, pilots would somwtimes fly the D-9 without MG131's mounted aswell, to save weight and increase performance. I'd like to have that option aswell. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://members.chello.se/unni/D-9.JPG

Oberleutnant Oskar-Walter Romm thoughts on his aircraft.

"I found the Fw 190D-9 to be greatly superior to those of my opponents. During dogfights at altitudes of between about 10,000 and 24,000ft, usual when meeting the Russians, I found that I could pull the D-9 into a tight turn and still retain my speed advantage. In the descent the Dora-9 picked up speed much more rapidly than the A type; in the dive it could leave the Russian Yak-3 and Yak-9 fighters standing."

WaffenKatze
08-18-2004, 12:01 AM
shoot whole ur mg131 bullet before take off http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif. but not sure this affect on performance.. I don't care remove mg131 option on Dora, But Antons....

[This message was edited by Kazimiera on Tue August 17 2004 at 11:32 PM.]

polkku
08-18-2004, 01:16 AM
I actually asked Oleg about this reducing armament and removing the bombrack to increase performance. His reply was something like this:

The bombrack was so time consuming to remove that it was very rarely removed, also by removing it you would get only very little increase in performance (some 6 - 9 km/h). So the bombracks will stay because they were almost always strapped to the plane in reality.
As for reducing armament of Antons, this was done ONLY to reduce weight so that the plane could CARRY A DROP TANK. Removing the outer cannons AND the bombrack will not be possible in this game because of that.

(P.S. THIS IS NOT A QUOTE, but the general idea is the same)

In conclusion, according to Olegs sources, the bombracks and some of the guns were very rarely removed to increase performance, because removing them didn't have a big effect or was too difficult for the ground crew.

Personally I don't buy that http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

CHDT
08-18-2004, 01:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>As for reducing armament of Antons, this was done ONLY to reduce weight so that the plane could CARRY A DROP TANK. Removing the outer cannons AND the bombrack will not be possible in this game because of that.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

On 190A-8 or A-9 fitted with 30mm wing cannons, the fuselage MG's were not fitted in order to reduce wheight.

No need to mention also the 190A without external wing cannons.

I would like too to get these options which were historical and really not so rare.

Cheers,

LEXX_Luthor
08-18-2004, 04:39 AM
Oleg's response sounds more realistic than anything posted here, unless we have some sources Quoted here rather than interpreted. Would be interesting to see.


Did F~8 have drop tanks?


__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 04:53 AM
yup config of it could be:

drop tank and 4*50kg bomb
drop tank and panzerblitz2

like it was in the tamiya kits hehe

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

LEXX_Luthor
08-18-2004, 05:00 AM
Then we need droptank...not that anybody is going to use it on these maps. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

CHDT
08-18-2004, 05:06 AM
No fuselage MG's on this A-8 fitted with 30mm wing canons (notice the short tubes).

http://img30.exs.cx/img30/6207/7096.jpg

robban75
08-18-2004, 06:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by polkku:
The bombrack was so time consuming to remove that it was very rarely removed, So the bombracks will stay because they were almost always strapped to the plane in reality.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And VVS fighters almost always flew with their canopy opened in order to aim properly because the gunsight was mounted too high.


http://members.chello.se/unni/D-9.JPG

Oberleutnant Oskar-Walter Romm thoughts on his aircraft.

"I found the Fw 190D-9 to be greatly superior to those of my opponents. During dogfights at altitudes of between about 10,000 and 24,000ft, usual when meeting the Russians, I found that I could pull the D-9 into a tight turn and still retain my speed advantage. In the descent the Dora-9 picked up speed much more rapidly than the A type; in the dive it could leave the Russian Yak-3 and Yak-9 fighters standing."

robban75
08-18-2004, 06:10 AM
Also, a picture of an A-8 without the rack.

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/images/fw190cr_3.jpg

http://members.chello.se/unni/D-9.JPG

Oberleutnant Oskar-Walter Romm thoughts on his aircraft.

"I found the Fw 190D-9 to be greatly superior to those of my opponents. During dogfights at altitudes of between about 10,000 and 24,000ft, usual when meeting the Russians, I found that I could pull the D-9 into a tight turn and still retain my speed advantage. In the descent the Dora-9 picked up speed much more rapidly than the A type; in the dive it could leave the Russian Yak-3 and Yak-9 fighters standing."

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 06:15 AM
lol for the short tube oleg said it will nver changed it why i don't know but it will be more accurate and permit identification of Fw armement for opponent(if they go close hehe)

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 06:21 AM
photos like those one are everywhere on the web lol

here a fw190a8 with no outer guns:
http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A8-15.jpg

here some A3/4:
http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A3-5s.jpg
http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A4-26.jpg

here a model of late war Fw(a8/9,F8/9) drop tank:
http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW3/fw190-004.jpg

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

JG53Frankyboy
08-18-2004, 06:22 AM
no, oleg said long time ago, in IL" times, the short barrels of the MK!08 would need a totaly new 3D modell for the Fw190A8 , but he didnt wanted put that in a patch because of patch sice !
he announced it for the FB-adon http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

well, we all know .................. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 06:24 AM
here a strange A7,no bomb rack,no outter guns but a drop tank(whitout the use of the rack!!!)

http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A7-43.jpg

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 06:26 AM
here a fwa4/5 whithout outter guns(i stop posting photos there is too much of them indeed lol the last one so):
http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A5-44.jpg

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 06:27 AM
http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A4-48s.jpg

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

JG53Frankyboy
08-18-2004, 06:34 AM
it has do be a missunderstanding that a Fw190 HAD to delete its wingarmament to be able to carry a drop tank http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

its so clear that it could carry both.
close to all Reichsverteidigungs interceptions were flown with Droptanks - range was always critical, ask a P-51 pilot.

and about remove of MG-FF/MG151 in the wings.
sure , a lot of pilots removed them , for the sake of better performance, 2 MG151 looked like to be enougj in reality http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif .
maddox just have not enough time to make that - for the last 2 years http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

VW-IceFire
08-18-2004, 06:56 AM
I'd rather have panzerblitz rockets as an added armament option than a drop tank. Especially since we have few maps that would seriously burden the range for any fighter.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RAF No 92 Squadron
"Either fight or die"

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 07:09 AM
me too ice and a 500kg bomb on FwD9 for bodenplatte hehe

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 07:13 AM
anyone can explain the FwA7 picture with a fuel tank but no rack lol ?

it seems to me that they removed both outter cannons and rack for better performance so that when he drop fuel tank he haven't the drag of rack,but was it made often?

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-18-2004, 07:28 AM
that's a field-mod rack (don't remember the name) it was very light compared to the ETC and could be removed pretty quickly (removing the ETC was a lot of work)

The pilots liked it because the perfomance of the plane increased compared to the standard-ETC-Rack.

but there was one backdraw, it could not carry bombs only droptanks. (but who needs bombs, when engaging bombers)

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/other%20Stuff/we%20rule%20your%20world3.jpg (http://www.hell-hounds.de)

JG53Frankyboy
08-18-2004, 07:59 AM
http://www.franky.fliegerhospital.de/Fw190TANK.jpg

ECV56_Rolf
08-18-2004, 08:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/6207/7096.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One very interesting thing on this photograph.

Olegs Point: MK108 and bombrack installed simultaneously.

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-18-2004, 08:16 AM
that is plain wrong, the biggest pice of BS i ever heared.

why the hell do you need a BOMB-rack when engagin Bombers ?
this is plain BS, when droptank was needed, this field-mod version was prefered by the pilots.

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/other%20Stuff/we%20rule%20your%20world3.jpg (http://www.hell-hounds.de)

JG53Frankyboy
08-18-2004, 08:25 AM
nevertheless , the most pictures i have from Reichverteidigungs Fw190s , the planes are equipted with the more standart mutlirole (bomb ORE droptank) ETC .

and BlackSheep, i think its now a missunderstandment from you, because oleg looks like to say that to carry a Droptank outer wingguns had to be removed http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
wich is obviously not the fact, not in real , not in game (a SC500 is heavier than a 300litre tank http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

meh_cd
08-18-2004, 08:37 AM
Wow, I'm glad to see how fast this topic took to the air. :P

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 08:52 AM
nice pic frankyboy,not knowing that kind of field moded rack

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

Hunde_3.JG51
08-18-2004, 03:37 PM
Just my opinion.

-ETC-501 rack was standard equipment starting with A-7. though there were field mods I have no problem with ETC-501 always being on A-8 and A-9 because that was the case most of the time.

-Outter cannons were removed for increased performance and this should be an option for A-4, A-5, and A-6 without adding bomb-rack.

-The fact is you can find stuff about outter cannons being removed, and about machine guns being removed commonly in field. I have never heard of inboard 151/20's being removed though. Robban is correct and you can even find a plate or 2 IIRC in FW-190 Aces of the Western Front where late model FW-190's had 131(13mm) mg's removed. Also, you can find stuff on mg-17's being removed as well as they were considered ineffective for the most part. Still, its hard to say what should and should not be implemented, though I think the option to remove outter-cannons for slight increase in performance would be nice for A-4, A-5 , and A-6 without adding bomb-rack. I think this would be accurate as well.

-I would love Panzerblitz rockets, just plain cool. Btw, does anyone know how they were fired? Were they fired in one salvo like R4M air to air rockets or could they be fired in pairs?

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

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

meh_cd
08-18-2004, 04:00 PM
I keep hearing about these Panzerblitz... does anyone have a picture?

NN_EnigmuS
08-18-2004, 04:41 PM
about panzerblitz:
http://www.luftarchiv.de/flugkorper/blitz.htm
http://balsi.de/Waffen+Gebaeude/Sonderwaffen/panzerblitz.htm
http://net.bialystok.pl/~hess/foto_p/panzerblitz2_r4m_pb2_pb3_foto_01.jpg

yes panzerblitz2 can be shoot two by two(one by wings like typhoon)or all the same time(as typhoon too)
it's seems easy to understood why they will spend all their panzerblitz for one target if a direct hit destroye a tank lol
anyway some war reports of panzerblitz attack must show that

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

meh_cd
08-18-2004, 04:50 PM
Awesome! Now I know why people want them in the game.

NN_EnigmuS
08-19-2004, 02:08 AM
hehe yes and it was well used and quite often in late 44 and 45 on eastern front

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-19-2004, 04:17 AM
actually we already had them...but no one noticed it...


Me262, patch &lt;1.22 where they were only fired in pairs.

make 2 rockets hit a tank and it was gone (including Sherman and T34)

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/other%20Stuff/we%20rule%20your%20world3.jpg (http://www.hell-hounds.de)

NN_EnigmuS
08-19-2004, 05:08 AM
never notice but r4m and panzerblitz had not same penetration and blast effect in real but it's quite an easy had to the game i think lol

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

JG53Frankyboy
08-19-2004, 05:22 AM
Q: "- Panzerblitz I rockets ?"

maddox: "Its too hard for now"

dadada1
08-19-2004, 06:20 AM
Has anyone ever noticed/mentioned that the F8 we have still has the outer wing blisters despite not having any Mg 151/Mk108 there?

robban75
08-19-2004, 08:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dadada1:
Has anyone ever noticed/mentioned that the F8 we have still has the outer wing blisters despite not having any Mg 151/Mk108 there?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not all F-8's had the "clean" wing. Some flew with the wing blisters fitted. So it's actually correct. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://members.chello.se/unni/D-9.JPG

Oberleutnant Oskar-Walter Romm thoughts on his aircraft.

"I found the Fw 190D-9 to be greatly superior to those of my opponents. During dogfights at altitudes of between about 10,000 and 24,000ft, usual when meeting the Russians, I found that I could pull the D-9 into a tight turn and still retain my speed advantage. In the descent the Dora-9 picked up speed much more rapidly than the A type; in the dive it could leave the Russian Yak-3 and Yak-9 fighters standing."

jeroen_R90S
08-19-2004, 10:50 AM
Hasn't anyone noticed as well, that the inner gear doors on A-8, F-8, A-9 and both D-9 are removed on a winter map?

Don't really know for sure, but it'll probably he historically correct. (jamming?) I'm sure someone does know for sure here. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

However, in summer maps, if you load a SC 500 on the centerline, the doors protrude through the bomb if you lower the gear. Looks really ugly on an otherwise cool plane http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Mailed it to Oleg some time ago, but it problably can't be fixed I think, since it's been there since several patches.

Jeroen

==============================
Ah you LaGG, my lightened LaGG,
why don't you wish to fly?
Over the wild Black Sea water
your cockpit you made me leave.

NN_EnigmuS
08-19-2004, 11:07 AM
you're right never notice,i found evrytimes new things in this game lol
also they can removed the gear doors near the road because of the snow

like the one at left:
http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-48.jpg

and this one:
http://oldwolf.myrice.com/ww2aircraft/images/Fw190-23.jpg

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

DangerForward
08-19-2004, 05:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NN_EnigmuS:
me too ice and a 500kg bomb on FwD9 for bodenplatte hehe

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think only droptanks were carried by D9s during Bodenplatte, due to the range. From what I've read the AB250 is the most commonly mentioned bomb carried by the 190D9. This was in service with II JG26.

DangerForward

Hunde_3.JG51
08-19-2004, 05:52 PM
Jeroen, I posted this somewhat recently, about lower undercarriage doors being removed on winter maps but not on summer. And yes, this is accurate and became common practice, the reason is that mud/dirt/snow, etc. would build up around wheel and struts in harsh conditions, removing the wheel covers meant the grime just fell away instead of building up.

And as usual Robban is correct, not all 190's with outter-cannons removed had clean wing, the blisters were often still there.

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

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

dadada1
08-21-2004, 02:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
Jeroen, I posted this somewhat recently, about lower undercarriage doors being removed on winter maps but not on summer. And yes, this is accurate and became common practice, the reason is that mud/dirt/snow, etc. would build up around wheel and struts in harsh conditions, removing the wheel covers meant the grime just fell away instead of building up.

And as usual Robban is correct, not all 190's with outter-cannons removed had clean wing, the blisters were often still there.

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

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the info and i'm glad it's correct. I was just thinking that they'd overlooked this so I'm glad that attention to detail has been meticulous.

NN_EnigmuS
08-21-2004, 04:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DangerForward:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NN_EnigmuS:
me too ice and a 500kg bomb on FwD9 for bodenplatte hehe

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think only droptanks were carried by D9s during Bodenplatte, due to the range. From what I've read the AB250 is the most commonly mentioned bomb carried by the 190D9. This was in service with II JG26.

DangerForward<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yup your right just,i was misunderstood by a picture i ve shown with a d9 taking off but it's an sc250 and it s a picture of a d9 on the eastern front lol
thanks for correct me

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

jeroen_R90S
08-24-2004, 09:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
Jeroen, I posted this somewhat recently, about lower undercarriage doors being removed on winter maps but not on summer. And yes, this is accurate and became common practice, the reason is that mud/dirt/snow, etc. would build up around wheel and struts in harsh conditions, removing the wheel covers meant the grime just fell away instead of building up.

{snippetysnap}
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the explanation -suspected it must have been somthing like that. It would indeed be *really* awesome if the outer strut doors/plates had the lower ends removed like in the pictures of Enigmus as well as the inner doors like we have now. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

It still looks ugly if you use that (dreaded) bombrack for the purpose it was made... Since I'm more of a ground pounder, I always get to look at doors protruding through the bomb in summer maps... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Jeroen

PS Is it just me, or do the SC50/70 wing racks REALLY degrade performance much worse than the centerline rack on the A-4/5/6?

==============================
Ah you LaGG, my lightened LaGG,
why don't you wish to fly?
Over the wild Black Sea water
your cockpit you made me leave.

Willey
08-24-2004, 01:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
-I would love Panzerblitz rockets, just plain cool. Btw, does anyone know how they were fired? Were they fired in one salvo like R4M air to air rockets or could they be fired in pairs?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They ALL could be fired in pairs, but usually R4M were fired in one salvo and PB in 2 salvos (=2 times 6 rockets).
BTW WGr.21 could even be launched one by one, afterwards the tubes could be released.

Hunde_3.JG51
08-24-2004, 03:10 PM
Thanks Willey, I remember reading that they even tested firing the WGr.21's rearward to be used after a strafing pass at bombers but this was not done operationally IIRC. I have also seen pictures of FW-190 with vertical tubes in wings that would have fired mortars downwards on top of tanks, vehicles, etc., but again this did not see use. And then there was the flamethrower they tested.....http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif.

Btw Jeroen, you are correct that the wing-racks severely effect performance in-game, even moreso than the centerline rack IMO, at least as far as handling is concerned.

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

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

Willey
08-24-2004, 04:10 PM
http://rafiger.de/Homepage/FBMuseum/Info-JG3Udet/Bilder/JG3-Yellow17.jpg