PDA

View Full Version : BoB Messerschmitts



jagdmailer
03-07-2005, 09:33 AM
Anyhow, for those which this may concern & those who are interested, Butch2K confirmed that the Bf 109E-4/N (w/ DB601N) was available in numbers during BoB. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

At least one wing, JG26 was partially equipped with it and they participated in combat missions over England at least as early as Sept 1st or thereabouts.

Jagd

JG53Frankyboy
03-07-2005, 09:46 AM
i will hate flying the 109Es in BoB with only that manual popeller pitch control http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG52_Meyer
03-07-2005, 10:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
i will hate flying the 109Es in BoB with only that manual popeller pitch control http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Hmm I think most Emils had the auto pitch already...

Finkeren
03-07-2005, 12:09 PM
I'm really looking forward to flying the E-1 (propably with no pitch control) and I really look forward to a game where the Bf 109 will be the fastest and most stable fighter.

karost
03-07-2005, 12:15 PM
Wow.... Is this topic for BoB Messerschmitts ?

well,I like to ask about negative G drive in Emils , "that time" Hurricane and Spitfire cannot apply negative G drive like Emils did... right ?

did anybody has info.document show how fast for negative G drive and normal drive for Emils ?

... this is dev's home work http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG53Frankyboy
03-07-2005, 12:25 PM
well, the DB601 off all Emils had fuel injection, so , in general no neg G proplem.

about outo pitch.
the JG53 got its first few in september 1940. and with that automatical system they were "pregnant ducks" in combat . the system wasnt realy combat ready

Kurfurst__
03-07-2005, 12:50 PM
An Emil E-1 and E-3 manual dated 1939 already mentions that the auto prop pitch is present in some planes, so it was available from the start of the war, but probably not all planes were fitted with them yet.

What Emils do we get in Bob ? I hope for E-1, E-3, E-4, E-4/N or E-7/N.

BTW, the first 601N equipped Emils were available shortly after the Battle of France, unlike some sites that say they were few and late.

karost
03-07-2005, 01:12 PM
Well I have more question... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

in BOB do you think we can see manual CEM like , throttle, RPMs , fuel mixture, cooling flaps , superchargers, fuel tank selection , fuelcock same like a history we read. ?

seem german take more advantage for excellent german engineering design for first period of BOB right ?

do you think BOB's dev. will cut this german's benefitted to balance the game like they did in IL2 FB again ? we know they don't want to do like that , but marketing reason foce them to do. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

anyway, I like to read all this history-engineering details it is very good education for us.

regards.

Chuck_Older
03-07-2005, 03:37 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif The Germans got the fuel injection idea from the Brits...shhhhh!


Well, we already have most of those things like supercharger stage selection, cooling flaps, throttle, RPM management, etc., in FB, so really the only thing you mention would be fuel tank selection and fuel dump. I am hopeful that the very intricate internal modelling means that at the least, fuel tank selection will be offered- could be key on German escort flights

stubby
03-08-2005, 08:06 AM
I think the way manual prop pitch was modeled for German in the earliest versions of Il2 were awesome. Something got porked along the way because now you can fry a German engine in a matter of seconds when attempting to manual prop pitch. The allied planes don't have this issue and you have a lot more forgiveness. This sucks because you can get more bang for your buck going manual in MEs/FWs using manual but the risk of engine sieze forces me to stick with the lest effecient automatic. Wish they would fix it.

kubanloewe
03-08-2005, 08:58 AM
in Rowans "BoB" its not big problem to fly a Emil with man Pitch and the clock in the cockpit help to set it right or look at the rpm´s.

in the SpitI and HurriI there are only 2 settings; fine for landing and start and coarse when flying.

I think the Emil had 5 or 6 Pitch settings including gliderposition. So it wasn´t to much work to fly this Plane accept in a Dive or steep climb i think. And this could be a little advantage reffered to the SpitI or HurriI Propeller; isnt it?

Stefan-R
03-08-2005, 09:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kubanloewe:

I think the Emil had 5 or 6 Pitch settings including gliderposition. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The pitch was on a slider (in early versions in the pit and in later versions next to the throttle) so there were "unlimited" pitch settings.

kubanloewe
03-08-2005, 09:42 AM
thx Stefan; as on my Stick http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jaws2002
03-08-2005, 09:48 AM
The IAR-80/81 had exactly the same system as the early 109's. Unfortunately in this game was changed with a useless constant speed prop. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif
That manual pitch control in the 109's in BOB will separate the boys from the men. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Chuck_Older
03-08-2005, 10:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stubby:
I think the way manual prop pitch was modeled for German in the earliest versions of Il2 were awesome. Something got porked along the way because now you can fry a German engine in a matter of seconds when attempting to manual prop pitch. The allied planes don't have this issue and you have a lot more forgiveness. . <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They aren't the same systems, though. Maybe I'm confused...do you think that the Bf 109 should have the same type of arrangement as say, the P-51 has regarding pitch?

stubby
03-08-2005, 11:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stubby:
I think the way manual prop pitch was modeled for German in the earliest versions of Il2 were awesome. Something got porked along the way because now you can fry a German engine in a matter of seconds when attempting to manual prop pitch. The allied planes don't have this issue and you have a lot more forgiveness. . <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They aren't the same systems, though. Maybe I'm confused...do you think that the Bf 109 should have the same type of arrangement as say, the P-51 has regarding pitch? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand they are different planes but the pitch was so radically altered for the 109E4/7 between versions that something I had complete comfort and confidence (ie CEM), I can long utilize. I don't expect the prop pitch to be exactly the same across all planes but lord, they way it's done now is just to over the top. I base this on my opinion, no fancy journals our pie charts. I mean do you really seem to right to you that you could blow a E4 egine in a second just because you had the throttle at 90% and decided to toggle to manual prop? Russian and American planes are night and day different in this regard.

lbhskier37
03-08-2005, 11:31 AM
Stubby its because the prop pitch in the 109 controls completely different things from the prop pitch in other planes, even the 190. In the 109 your prop pitch control actually controls the angle of the prop blade, its kinda like controling what gear you are in. If you drop it into first gear (100% prop pitch is like first gear) in your car when you are going 100mph you will blow up your engine. In planes other than the 109, the 190 or P51 for example your prop pitch is actually controlling an RPM governor. So if its set at 100% you will get 100% of the RPM the engine is allowed to pull. This is why it is much easier to use than the 109s where you have to constantly adjust the pitch to keep the RPMs where you want them. CEM was switched to this I think when FB came out, not to put the 109 at a disadvantage, but because thats how it really worked.

stubby
03-08-2005, 12:13 PM
Copy that Killa. Thanks for the knowledge. I guess I just got spoiled by those early day 109s modeled in the pre-FB Il2. Back in the day, I could work that manual pitch and spiral climb to safety. Now, I'm just one dead Hun flyer should I desparately try to use manual props in the 109E.

p1ngu666
03-08-2005, 01:18 PM
109 system allows u to over rev engine to get more power, hence the "get so much more off manual"

think i read that the automatic adusts engine rpm and manifold pressure to keep it matched for best performance.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gifmeans little in the full power turning fights over teh fb tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

p1ngu666
03-08-2005, 01:19 PM
oh, and spits and hurris had fixed pitch, 2-3 varible pitch, and full cps http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif