PDA

View Full Version : Grognards needed - how well do you know your FB?



clint-ruin
09-26-2004, 12:23 PM
There are a lot of planes in FB/AEP.

Lots more than there has ever been before.

A lot of planes in the game have interesting date-of-manufacture choices to select from in the game. This leads to things like, say, people throwing in the '1941' Spits against 1940/41 contemporary opposition and then wondering why things seem to be going so well for the Spits, without realising that the '41' version we have in the game comes with a 42/43 engine in it.

So.

I was wondering if we could somehow unite the combined power of anorak wearing nerdness present here to try to come out with a list of which month/year planes came out, in FB, as modelled in FB. Any other details that trip people up like say, the 1945 FW190-D9 using lower grade fuel than the 1944 model would be handy too. Or that the I-185 may have been designed in 1942, but really only flew in limited numbers in 43. Or that the fully automatic Bf109-E4 present in 1941 is marked as a 1940 model in FB. That kind of thing.

Any takers?

clint-ruin
09-26-2004, 12:23 PM
There are a lot of planes in FB/AEP.

Lots more than there has ever been before.

A lot of planes in the game have interesting date-of-manufacture choices to select from in the game. This leads to things like, say, people throwing in the '1941' Spits against 1940/41 contemporary opposition and then wondering why things seem to be going so well for the Spits, without realising that the '41' version we have in the game comes with a 42/43 engine in it.

So.

I was wondering if we could somehow unite the combined power of anorak wearing nerdness present here to try to come out with a list of which month/year planes came out, in FB, as modelled in FB. Any other details that trip people up like say, the 1945 FW190-D9 using lower grade fuel than the 1944 model would be handy too. Or that the I-185 may have been designed in 1942, but really only flew in limited numbers in 43. Or that the fully automatic Bf109-E4 present in 1941 is marked as a 1940 model in FB. That kind of thing.

Any takers?

Daiichidoku
09-26-2004, 01:29 PM
A large undertaking, to do a complete list..."be sure"

I myself am still looking for produstion numbers for the Ki841C...so far, I have only seen "produced in small numbers" for it in data files online...

Same for the La7 3xB20...seems it should actually be a 1945 model...

The Yak 3P was only really deployed in apprieciable numbers in 1946...

There was already a thread several months ago pertaining to the Mustang B and Cs and how they should be listed as 1944 models...

It is rather silly that a type that only first rolled off production lines in, say, Dec 43, should be included in a 1943 planeset....

carguy_
09-26-2004, 02:37 PM
The SpitIX is actually SpitXIV with climbrate little off. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Zooly235
09-26-2004, 03:04 PM
apparently the mig 3u was not a 1942 plane, it was produced in 'numbers' in 1943 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

KGr.HH-Sunburst
09-26-2004, 04:02 PM
wasnt the Mig-3U only in prototype state or experimental plane ? did it see any combat?

i mean i see the thing alot online in sort of "historical" plane set servers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

clint-ruin
09-26-2004, 04:35 PM
Mig3U was, as far as I know, tested in limited numbers in 43 but was not manufactured in greater numbers due to the lack of high-alt fighting taking place in the East, and that the whole AM-XX series factories were busy churning out 35,000 Il-2s. If you think the Mig-3U and the I-185 are the only two 'superplanes' the soviets had but didn't mass produce, there were a hell of a lot more. You needed to be in with the politburo, show substancial [say +10%] combat effectiveness over existing types, and most importantly, not interrupt production and skew some poor factory managers numbers out so badly he ends up in a GULag. Just not something either plane could do all 3 of. Lots of other countries went through the same thing - one day someone will finish off that He-100 model for FB and we can have some more flyoffs. For now Bf109Z vs I-185 M71 fights are pretty fun.

I just hope someone picks up making an SU-4 someday, myself. Why? Can you say: four NS-45 cannons up front? Want one now ? :>

Anyhow - since google is easy - why not knock one down:

B-239 - from http://hkkk.fi/~yrjola/war/faf/brewster.html


In 1935 U.S. Navy laid down specifications for a replacement for the Grumman F3F biplane equipping its four carriers. Brewster Aeronautical Corporation developed a design (by Dayton T. Brown, chief designer) for a modern monoplane fighter with an enclosed cabin and retractable landing gear. The first flight of the XF2A-1 prototype was on 2 December 1937. The prototype was equipped with a 950 HP Wright R1820-22 Cyclone engine and a Hamilton Standard variable pitch propeller. The Navy accepted the XF2A-1 during June of 1938 and ordered series production of the F2A-1 for its carriers.

...

Finland bought 44 Brewster B-239s in 16th, December 1939, but they were received too late to see any combat during the Winter War. Unit price was 54 000 USD plus packing and delivery costs, also 10 spare engines, 20 propellers and other spare parts were purchased for a total sales price of 3.4 million dollars (168 million Finnish Marks). To the purchasers surprise all US Navy "property" were removed at the factory from the Brewsters bought by Finland: guns, sights, instruments and carrier equipment. Initially separately purchased Aldis-optical (binocular) sights were used, but in the spring of 1941 before reflector sights (Finnish V¤is¤la T.h.m.40 sights which were based on Revi 3c) were installed in the Finnish Brewsters. Metric instruments were installed in Finnish Brewsters.

The Finnish B-239 "export"-models were equipped with refurbished R-1820 G-5 engines taken from DC-3 airliners.

The B-239s were designated from BW-351 to BW-394. Read more information about Brewsters to Finland at the Fighter Tactics Academy web-site.

During the war the single 0.30" machine gun was replaced with a 0.50" (12.7mm) and in 1943 all except one Finnish B-239s had four 0.50" machine guns. The wing guns had 400 rounds and fuselage guns 200 rounds each (0.30" had 600 rounds).

Pilot seat armor was installed to Finnish Brewsters (important difference for pilot safety compared to F2A-1 and dictated by the Winter War experience). There was a lot of other little fixes, changes and improvements to the B-239 that were made locally in Finland during it's career.

XyZspineZyX
09-26-2004, 05:03 PM
The sim is full of these "little oversights", and guess what? They're all to the benefit of the VVS and Allied forces.

Here's another: they have the P-39-N as a 1942 plane, which it was... in *American* service in the Pacific. Of course, you see them in the Kuban and Krimea in "1942" IL-2 scenarios when they didn't hit the front lines until Spring of '43.

clint-ruin
09-26-2004, 06:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
The sim is full of these "little oversights", and guess what? They're all to the benefit of the VVS and Allied forces.

Here's another: they have the P-39-N as a 1942 plane, which it was... in *American* service in the Pacific. Of course, you see them in the Kuban and Krimea in "1942" IL-2 scenarios when they didn't hit the front lines until Spring of '43. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Does that occurs to you while you fly around in your Ta-152 in 1944? Which one of the prototypes do you pretend you're flying? Do you switch to Hungarian markings for the Bf109K4 modelled in FB? Do you wipe the sweat from your brow as you dodge between the .50 cal, ShKAS, and UBS bursts, the ROF of which is some 60% lower than it ought to be?

Don't you dare go and park your bi-arse stuff in this thread. I asked for grognards, not ******s.

clint-ruin
09-26-2004, 06:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by carguy_:
The SpitIX is actually SpitXIV with climbrate little off. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Speaking of which, if Hop or some other knowledgable person could speak up about exactly what spitfire engines are in which model spitfires in FB that'd be great. I think some of the Spit9s [HF/LFCW] might actually be the '44 marks of those particular plane types too, but I'm not sure.

So anyhow - Isegrim, Butch2k, Skychimp, Hop, Bluto, MaxGuns et al - if you guys know the particular model you could point to of any particular plane and go 'that's the one that is in FB', or if you think something's in there that isn't right, please let us know about it.

please note: not a request for over/undermodelled 243214 page threads going forth over sentences with a microscope - I know people never set out to pound on anyone [except Stiglr] in these threads but it seems to end up that way a lot. Whatever we can achieve without beating people up will get collated and posted/hosted somewhere if you're fine with being quoted elsewhere.

VW-IceFire
09-26-2004, 08:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by carguy_:
The SpitIX is actually SpitXIV with climbrate little off. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Funny funny! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Too many would take that as a serious statement.

The Spitfire IX's I can speak to.

We've got:

Spitfire Mark IX LF (Merlin 66)
Spitfire Mark IX HF (Merlin 70)

Everything else is either clipped or with a different armament (beating a dead horse here: LF does not mean clipped http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif).

The LF's saw some service in 1943 and were commonplace by 1944. Only 300 of the F IX's (Merlin 61) were produced so the vast majority were the LF model (well over 1000 as I remember) and not all were with the pointed tip tail. So yes the Spitfires we've got here for the most part represent the 1944 versions. But they do lack some of the other things like higher boost pressure that came into being later on (not sure if that was after D-Day or not).

I'd match the IX's up with the Bf 109G-6 Late or the G-6A/S and then against the FW190A-6 or the A-8. Those are its prime opponents and not the earlier 109G-6 or the 190A-4. Thats where you see the closest parity with performance.

Tully__
09-26-2004, 10:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KGr.HH-Sunburst:
wasnt the Mig-3U only in prototype state or experimental plane ? did it see any combat?

i mean i see the thing alot online in sort of "historical" plane set servers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IIRC, there were only 6 MiG3U produced, but once the decision was made to close the development program all 6 were transferred to an active squadron along with all available spares. The saw active service for quite some time without losses and with a number of successes until they were retired when spare parts ran out.

crazyivan1970
09-26-2004, 11:13 PM
I think it was total of 9 planes T, 4 of them were built for field trials. But i could be wrong.

Tully__
09-27-2004, 12:25 AM
No problems Ivan. IIRC my sources were only a brief overview, but from a source that would at least have the gist correct. While I'm happy to accept they saw service, I wouldn't bet my life on any numbers or dates I recall from that source http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

carguy_
09-27-2004, 04:46 AM
bump with a tip that only late FW190 had the
bubble canopyhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Hence all bubble canopy FWs should be a year younger.

p1ngu666
09-27-2004, 07:10 AM
hurri mk1 is finnish spec with 100 less hp than raf one irrec
and a dodgy overheat

owlwatcher
09-27-2004, 10:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
There are a lot of planes in FB/AEP.

Lots more than there has ever been before.

A lot of planes in the game have interesting date-of-manufacture choices to select from in the game. This leads to things like, say, people throwing in the '1941' Spits against 1940/41 contemporary opposition and then wondering why things seem to be going so well for the Spits, without realising that the '41' version we have in the game comes with a 42/43 engine in it.

So.

I was wondering if we could somehow unite the combined power of anorak wearing nerdness present here to try to come out with a list of which month/year planes came out, in FB, as modelled in FB. Any other details that trip people up like say, the 1945 FW190-D9 using lower grade fuel than the 1944 model would be handy too. Or that the I-185 may have been designed in 1942, but really only flew in limited numbers in 43. Or that the fully automatic Bf109-E4 present in 1941 is marked as a 1940 model in FB. That kind of thing.

Any takers? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know other games that have done the same as you are attemping to do.
Squad leader has it rated by rarity (amount made) and avaliabilty.
Different theaters also would rate different on the same plane.
Your idea is needed in the game.