PDA

View Full Version : Bf109-G6 vs Bf109-G2



GazzaMataz
10-21-2004, 03:26 AM
Having reached the end of the Stalingrad campaign in the original IL-2 I have moved on to the Kursk campaign and received a new mount - the BF109-G6.

Owww I thought, it has a better armament and is probably faster than my old Bf109-G2. Well, I was a bit dissapointed, not only was it slower but it had a real tendancy to keep on over heating. I think I prefered the Bf109-G2 it accelerated quicker and was faster even if it's armament was weaker€¦

Anyone else find this and got any suggestions on getting the most out of this bird?

F19_Ob
10-21-2004, 03:49 AM
Yes the early G6 is heavy and couldnt turn aswell as the G2. Also the difference in speed was marginal. (real LW pilots thought that too)
The later G6 were improved though and although slightly heavier they were faster and had the 30mm cannon and still could turn "almost" like
a G2.
The Gallandhood Improved view backwards in the later G6 variants and many pilots liked that.
There were still many G2's around late in russia.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

HansKnappstick
10-21-2004, 04:28 AM
The reason for changing G2 to G6 had nothing to do with dogfight abilities. Germans needed an airplane capable of taking on allied bombers, and the Mk 108 gun provided that capability.

jurinko
10-21-2004, 05:46 AM
there was minor speed decrease (worse aerodynamics) and minor weight increase for G-6 vs G-2/4. On the other hand, buch better machineguns and better radio balanced it. However, the top speed of G-6 in 1943 is mediocre at least to say. In original IL-2 it was really bad plane. In FB it is better but the difference is still too big IMHO, the G-6 feels like 2-300kgs heavier than G-2 or so. The overheating should not be higher for G-6 as the problems with oil leaks, engine fires etc. were solved on earlier Gustav versions in 1942.

BfHeFwMe
10-21-2004, 10:46 AM
You say your flying original Il-2, that G-6 was pooched so bad it's not funny. Only has a 600 kg brick shoved up it's back end extra. Was fixed in FB.

Stiglr
10-21-2004, 11:03 AM
The weight difference between a G2 and a G6 was not minor. Something on the order of 400kg or so, was it? Nor were the added fairings necessary to accommodate the new engine, higher caliber guns, etc. There was a reason why the Germans called the G6 "Beule" or "bulge". It was heavier, less aerodynamic and less maneuverable than the G2...all due to its new chief role as a bomber interceptor.

I find the upgunned engine makes it very powerful, though. Your moves are broader, but have power behind them. So, when I fly a G6 Standard or Late, or any G6 with the 30mm, I stow away my 109E and 109F subtle tricks and use more loops and swoops to get the job done.

The G2 (/4) and G6 are in some respects almost different aircraft. They should be flown very differently.

Atomic_Marten
10-21-2004, 12:02 PM
I'm currently playing DE fighter Center campaign (def.unit JG51). I switched from Fw190A5 to Bf109G6LATE just few missions ago. The thing I have noticed is that Bf109G2 is IMHO more manouverable and agile fighter than G6 series with exception of G6AS. But also you got better diving capabilities, and also what is extremely important much much better armament (7,62mm is a waste of time if you do not aim for the cockpit or engine - oil tank preferably, and also you must get close before opening fire from 7,62's).

Few missions that I have flown with G6L is bomber hunting with Mk108. Gunnery is fairly easy with 13mm+30mm in the nose about muzzle flashes I have no problem at all since it takes extreme short burst to down any plane (just few projectiles are required), and also because of recoil you can not make long bursts.

About overheating I do not really have that problem. 110% throttle is to be used ONLY in combat and also anything more than 80% throttle when flying in non-combat situations isn't advisable. Bf109 range is low so you have to lower your throttle in order to spend more time in the air especially caution is needed in missions that are on distances 100km> from your base.

WTE_Galway
10-21-2004, 07:34 PM
the g6 is a little more versatile

if you have progressed far enough through the ranks to choose armament for the whole staffel (i assume you never progress high enough for a gruppe) then leaving one schwarm default or mk108 nosie to take on fighters and giving the other schwarms the mk108 plus mg151 pods can be a very effective combination against incoming bomber streams

BfHeFwMe
10-22-2004, 12:37 AM
Apparently you've never flown an original G-6, otherwise you'd know the Il-2 original had no Mk-108 for an option with the G-6.

Grendel-B
10-22-2004, 02:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HansKnappstick:
The reason for changing G2 to G6 had nothing to do with dogfight abilities. Germans needed an airplane capable of taking on allied bombers, and the Mk 108 gun provided that capability. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Majority of all G-6 models were equipped with 20 mm cannon.

G-6 was about getting new engine and heavier mgs, as primary reasons. G-6 was also more versatile in regards of the various mods.

The differences between the two basic models of G-2 and G-6 were minor to the pilots, though. Seems most of them appreciated the heavier machine guns and therefore preferred G-6 to G-2.

Abbuzze
10-22-2004, 03:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
The weight difference between a G2 and a G6 was not minor. Something on the order of 400kg or so, was it?
[...]
The G2 (/4) and G6 are in some respects almost different aircraft. They should be flown very differently. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry to say this, but you are wrong.
the maximal take off weight increased, cause they build in a stronger gear which could withstand it... this are the +400kg if you compare the max TO weight- but this dont mean that the weight of planes increased dramaticaly!
Increasind the pressure in the tires of your car also allows you to load it more- but the air in the tires don´t increase the weight of your car... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

now a list of the minor differences between G2-G6

from the german forum, according the original il2 G6


Aus wastels "109analyse":

quote:Changes from G2 to G6:
Radio FuGVIIa replaced with the new FuG16Z
Bigger wheels, 650x150 replaced by 660x160
MG17s replaced with the MG131s->bulks
New inspection hatch added between frame 8 and 9



Empty: 2268 kg 2676kg are used in Fb for FM calculation
+ equipment
Equipped weight 2679 kg G6 weight according to an RLM sheet from 13.8.44.
+Fuel 296 kg But this is for the recon version, that was little heavier than the
Oil 33 kg fighter version
Pilot+chute 100 kg
Ammo MG131 38 kg
AmmoMG151/20 50 kg

Takeoff weight 3196 kg 3402kg are displayed in the FB FM numbers



quote:CONCLUSION: THE WEIGHT OF THE BF109G6 IN FB IS 408kg TO HEAVY IN EMPTY WEIGHT
AND 206kg TO HEAVY IN TAKEOFF WEIGHT
DEVELOPERS WRONGLY USED THE EQUIPPED WEIGHT FOR THE FM, NOT THE EMPTY WEIGHT

falco_cz
10-22-2004, 05:20 AM
Thanks Abuzze, and I wonder why Me109G6 l feels more slugish then should...

Jumoschwanz
10-22-2004, 10:10 AM
Yes, the G6 and G6 late, in AEP 2.04 are a couple of pigs compared to the earlier and later models. I dread the online server that makes me fly them against the spit9 or anything for that matter. If you are smart and do it right you can boom and zoom fine in them, but it is a lot of work to keep one alive in a low alt tussle.

I notice the G2 in AEP/PF 3.0 has been detuned so it runs slower and heavier feeling.
Well we have all been there before, the fortunes change with every patch.

I don't mind flight model changes in patches much. IF my favorite plane is not as uber this time, well maybe it is a little more realistic. Who knows except for those who flew them?
In past patches when the German planes were porked and everyone jumped on the Yak/La/Hurri/P39 bandwagon, I always stuck with them regardless, and will this time too. S!

Jumoschwanz

Stiglr
10-22-2004, 10:56 AM
Abbuze,

What's wastel's source? Everything I've ever read suggested a significant weight difference from the G2 to the G6, and there were aerodynamic differences (penalties) to adding those 13mm guns and fairings, which amounted to drag inducing bulges on the nose fairing and the wings.

Hey, I won't complain if it *shouldn't* be heavier, if in fact it wasn't... but I've always understood it to be the case.

NegativeGee
10-22-2004, 11:07 AM
Yes it would be interesting to know more about wastel's data source as if correct it is quite different to the usual weights for the G-6 in the literature.

Abbuzze
10-22-2004, 11:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
What's wastel's source? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can´t say it 100%, but if I remember correct, his work was the cause, why the G6 in FB isn´t the brick from il2 classic anymore.
He found enough sources, and sent them to Oleg.

like I wrote before, most people think the G6 is heavier cause the greater max.TO weight, but the only changes were the guns, the radio, bigger and stronger tires and gear (therefore the bulges in the wings!) and this stronger gear "causes" the higher POSSIBLE takeoff weight. The real difference in kg´s are just the few things Wastel mentioned...

BfHeFwMe
10-22-2004, 04:55 PM
There's simply no comparison between FB's 109G-6 and original Il-2's, it was corrected very well in FB losing it's massive brick, and is now back in the fighter class. It wasn't even much of a transport in original Il-2, the Il-2 itself could out fight it. You'd have better luck running a marathon with a heavy iron ball chained to your ankle.