PDA

View Full Version : Moscuito - What to expect?



F16_Sulan
04-21-2005, 09:16 PM
Hello!
HaveÔ┬┤nt followed the news on v.4.0 too much, but is there going to be a flyable moscuito?

If so: What to expect of it?
Armament/loadouts?
Which version? From which year?

ETC ETC and so on and so fourth...

Spank you / Sulan

Shakthamac
04-21-2005, 09:47 PM
i would expect it to come with a 2 ton bombload capability, plus rockets, and I would expect it to be fast.

p1ngu666
04-21-2005, 09:59 PM
43 for flyable

4 500lb's

8 rockets and 2 x500lb

1000rounds per 303
max load for cannon, 283 each http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

should be fastest thing at 43, on the deck. maybe a6, p51 smidge faster

p1ngu666
04-21-2005, 10:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shakthamac:
i would expect it to come with a 2 ton bombload capability, plus rockets, and I would expect it to be fast. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

nah, we got IV early, so no cookie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

incidently, pic of me looking particulary ******ed by a cookie
http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666//pinguandcookie.jpg

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

a cookiecarrier and me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

btw, mossies visited berlin, 27times in march 45, also did a tour of other cities, to set off the air raid alarms and piss everyone off http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

0.6% loss rate for mossies in bomber command operations. same bomb load as a b17 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Hristos
04-21-2005, 11:55 PM
More wood to burn ! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Charos
04-22-2005, 12:10 AM
A great Allergy to Incendiary ammunition. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

msalama
04-22-2005, 12:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>a cookiecarrier and me <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, the Mossie sure looks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif Not sure about U though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

(Just joking of course...)

msalama
04-22-2005, 12:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>0.6% loss rate for mossies in bomber command operations. same bomb load as a b17 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, the Mossie definitely is one of the most brilliant aircraft designs ever. It couldn't IMHO really have been better, if you think about it in the general context of the times (its intended/factual usage, available resources, war situation etc.). Just make a comparison with the Lancaster ops f.e., where the loss rate was - what? Some 1/2 of all aircraft or more?

So all in all, perhaps the best plane DeHavilland ever did!

Sturmvogel66
04-22-2005, 01:18 AM
Its huge!!!

msalama
04-22-2005, 02:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Its huge!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The heavy bomber loss rate? Unfortunately, yes.

Bomber Command - and its leader, Commander Harris - thought at the time that "the bomber will always get trough". Sadly, they were very wrong, and did thus receive some harsh - albeit at least partly founded! - critique after the war for their chosen strategy.

Which of course leads us to the question of "what if they had used Mossies / some other light & fast planes instead"? Well I'll be hecked if I knew, but at least the personnel losses would've probably been smaller...

anarchy52
04-22-2005, 02:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F16_Sulan:
HaveÔ┬┤nt followed the news on v.4.0 too much, but is there going to be a flyable moscuito?

If so: What to expect of it?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I expect it to be spelled 'mosquito' http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hristos
04-22-2005, 02:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by anarchy52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F16_Sulan:
HaveÔ┬┤nt followed the news on v.4.0 too much, but is there going to be a flyable moscuito?

If so: What to expect of it?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I expect it to be spelled 'mosquito' http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, DeHavilland is not Grumman http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

F19_Olli72
04-22-2005, 03:04 AM
Sulan, go here:

[URL=http://www.ijeremiah.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mossie/Prangster's Mossie page.htm]

I give up, each time i try to edit my post UBI C R A P forums takes ages letting me back in. Just copy/paste the frickin' d@mn adress, why dont ppl know to avoid spaces in url's!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

alert_1
04-22-2005, 03:41 AM
Flyable Mosquito in 4.x? Really? I HL was said (betatesters?) that there is NO flyable Mosquito/Tempest in 4.x patch...
Maybe "they" are wrong and in final release of 4.x we get all that and Ju88A4/Do335 as well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Lucius_Esox
04-22-2005, 04:47 AM
alert_1
I do hope your registration date gives a clue to the validity of your comments!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Vipez-
04-22-2005, 05:34 AM
I guess your friend has tried 4.00 beta, but let me say the final product is likely to be very different, than these early betas.. It does not yet mean, that Mossies won't be included...

OT: Any confirmed information about including the JU-88 ?

Tooz_69GIAP
04-22-2005, 06:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F19_Olli72:
Sulan, go here:



I give up, each time i try to edit my post UBI C R A P forums takes ages letting me back in. Just copy/paste the frickin' d@mn adress, why dont ppl know to avoid spaces in url's!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Olli, the correct syntax for urls is as follows:

[url]*type http here* (http://www.ijeremiah.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mossie/Prangster's Mossie page.htm)

or

Mosquito Page (*type http here*)

F19_Olli72
04-22-2005, 08:08 AM
I know Tooz http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Just that the code gets borked when there is spaces in the url. Thats what i tried to fix, but i gave up. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

carguy_
04-22-2005, 08:41 AM
Very cool plane.Almost as cool as the Me110 only it can take it all alone.

Best expectations?Don` expect it in 4.0 I recommend.

p1ngu666
04-22-2005, 09:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by msalama:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>0.6% loss rate for mossies in bomber command operations. same bomb load as a b17 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, the Mossie definitely is one of the most brilliant aircraft designs ever. It couldn't IMHO really have been better, if you think about it in the general context of the times (its intended/factual usage, available resources, war situation etc.). Just make a comparison with the Lancaster ops f.e., where the loss rate was - what? Some 1/2 of all aircraft or more?

So all in all, perhaps the best plane DeHavilland ever did! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

after war, it was revealed a lanc would do a average or 23sorties per loss. losses of lancs where lightish till battle or berlin time.

think it was 40ish sorties per loss for the entire command, over the war

p1ngu666
04-22-2005, 09:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Charos:
A great Allergy to Incendiary ammunition. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

no more than any other bomber really.
the wings where filled with fuel tanks, which is really big disadvantage in FP if the fuel leak bug remains.
ofcourse, u haveto catch it, and u could really chuck a mossie about too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

also the mossie was a strong aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
PR aircraft where attacked by 262's, and some made it home..., they would have been attacked deep into germany and being the only aircraft for miles about.

average df'er will only worry about it vulching and getting the odd bounce on him. for coops and online wars, objective based dogfight servers, itll be a VERY potent weapon for the allies

msalama
04-22-2005, 10:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>losses of lancs where lightish till battle of berlin time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pingu - I'll put up a new thread called "Lancaster losses" or something OK? So's we can continue this discussion there...

3.JG51_BigBear
04-22-2005, 11:06 AM
It would be completely unrealistic, but fights between Mossis and Do-335s should be a lot of fun. Two fast bombers modified with heavy cannons. Should be one heck of a slugging match.

p1ngu666
04-22-2005, 11:12 AM
indeed
mossie vs 110, ju88 would probably be one sided pretty much, like irl.

in 3months, a group of 100 german night fighter pilots, 50 where shot down, or crashed due to mossies.

the germans would fly very low trying to avoid mossies, with the obivous consicence, some didnt avoid bulidings, hills, the ground etc http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Aaron_GT
04-22-2005, 12:56 PM
"after war, it was revealed a lanc would do a average or 23sorties per loss. "

It was something like 98 sorties per loss for the Mosquito in Bomber Command, and a better record of bombs on target (the mission profiles and crew training tended to be a bit different, so perhaps a bit unfair on the Lanc and B17 crews this is compared with).

Aaron_GT
04-22-2005, 01:08 PM
"PR aircraft where attacked by 262's, and some made it home."

Some made it home with bits of German buildings or telegraph poles still stuck in them!

p1ngu666
04-22-2005, 01:57 PM
yeah http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
i was trying to point out it was very strong, agile and fast aswell http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

pranger modeled mossie with the exhaust covers, im hoping we get exhaust cover free performance, a extra 6-10mph. exhuast covers where to stop/lessen exhaust glow and sparks at night, which ofcourse we dont have in FP http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

stathem
04-22-2005, 06:31 PM
I don't suppose it'll come with a navigator's position selectable in co-op's? It'd be cool to look around for bogeys whilst someone else does the driving. Or am I just a bit odd?

p1ngu666
04-22-2005, 06:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stathem:
I don't suppose it'll come with a navigator's position selectable in co-op's? It'd be cool to look around for bogeys whilst someone else does the driving. Or am I just a bit odd? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

pilot only, like teh beu http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

funny, some guy on HL wouldnt accept mossies took 4000lbs of bombs to berlin http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

"No, i don't believe your web sites.
I have authorative textbooks saying your wrong on all counts.

Regrettable I am turning the ignore on, i am busy and don't want to be bothered."

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

"No way to range to berlin from Britian, I have the facts here as well.

a b-17G with no mods could carry 17,900 lbs of bombs.

But not to Berlin."

really hope he looks into it further and finds out about the berlin express or whatever it was called http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Aaron_GT
04-23-2005, 01:20 AM
All the books on the Mosquito I have indicate that the Cookie could be carried all the way to Berlin by various marks of Mosquito. Typically it required wing tanks to be fitted.

6 500lbers and wing tanks were possible on some Mosquito versions.

What is thin on the ground is information on the Avro bomb carrier which allowed 6 500lb bombs to be carried internally. I see references to it, but none on how common it was, whether it needed a bulged bay, etc.

p1ngu666
04-23-2005, 03:37 AM
probably would need a bulged bomb bay. think the cookie was the prefered loadout http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

and yes, most mossies could get to berlin and back even with a cookie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif
infact in march of 45, they visited the big city on 27 occasions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

mynameisroland
04-23-2005, 09:05 AM
Pingu Ive read a few books on the Fw190 - mainly from the Osprey aces series that tell the tales of some Wilde Sau pilots one Fw guy in particular who made something of a speciality of shooting down mossies. I agree it had the best survivabilty rate of and bomber of the war but if caught by a single engine fighter (probably only G6 would have tough time cathcing one) it was in for a rough ride. Thats not to say they werent good but in IL2-FB-PF context dont get these guys hopes up that they'll be taking of on a bombing mission and will rtb intact very often. Too many 108's around and for the smart guys who try and get a bit of alt and avoid the main hurly burly of the dogfighting grid coordinates there will always be some guy waiting in a Fw 190 waiting to intercept you as you sneak round the outskirts.

Heck I know I will be ! I cant wait nice high speed targtets that I can sneak up on dead 6 without having to worry about getting pkilled by a nasty rear gunner http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

stathem
04-23-2005, 09:44 AM
To put the cat among the pidgeons:

This;
"Gradually, various engineering refinements, such as the jet-boost exhausts and improved engines, increased the gap between the Mosquito and the FW-190. Pilots also learned they could shake the FW.190 by going into a shallow dive and performing a corkscrew maneuver, since the Focke Wulf's controls tended "freeze up" at high speeds more quickly than those of the Mosquito."

from here

http://www.vectorsite.net/avmoss2.html

and with quad hispanos and quad brownings, you want to hope you don't overshoot, Roland. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Should have a similar or better turning performance to the FW too..

Platypus_1.JaVA
04-23-2005, 10:18 AM
I had the luck to come across a mosquito on an airshow once, many years ago. It was a **** impressive aircraft. It was one with the glass nose.

Flydutch
04-23-2005, 11:07 AM
It is A shame that the Poll reads what is your favorite A/C for the next patch...And then you can only choose between Aircraft that have been decided on already, Even worse the big favorite The Fighterbomber Mossie, would have lost more votes to its older brother The more Stylish Bomber version if that would have been not just AI I'm Sure!

SeaNorris
04-23-2005, 11:33 AM
What to expect?

Them To Spell it: Mosquito and not Moscuito

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

p1ngu666
04-23-2005, 11:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Pingu Ive read a few books on the Fw190 - mainly from the Osprey aces series that tell the tales of some Wilde Sau pilots one Fw guy in particular who made something of a speciality of shooting down mossies. I agree it had the best survivabilty rate of and bomber of the war but if caught by a single engine fighter (probably only G6 would have tough time cathcing one) it was in for a rough ride. Thats not to say they werent good but in IL2-FB-PF context dont get these guys hopes up that they'll be taking of on a bombing mission and will rtb intact very often. Too many 108's around and for the smart guys who try and get a bit of alt and avoid the main hurly burly of the dogfighting grid coordinates there will always be some guy waiting in a Fw 190 waiting to intercept you as you sneak round the outskirts.

Heck I know I will be ! I cant wait nice high speed targtets that I can sneak up on dead 6 without having to worry about getting pkilled by a nasty rear gunner http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yep, 190 is a aircraft with a decent chance of getting a mossie...
ingame, i think it will depend on icon settings, because a mossie pilot will not cruise at 300-350kph like he111-b25, no, he will cruise at 500kph or more, and at low level too as we only get FB mossie, which is pretty quick really.

ive read lots of mossie books, mossie should be slightly faster than 190's at certain heights, 190 is faster at others. and IF its incepted mossie is alot more chuckable and faster than other bombers, and vs a 190 i can blaze away for ages and not kill its engine. the best thing about the mossie it was VERY hard to intercept effectivly. your wilde sour pilot would probably get them over target with searchlights and the fires below silouting the mossie, so in the darkness of the way back and to target, its got no radar, its got little chance of getting a mossie.

ppl who shot down mossies where hailed because it was a very rare thing.

mossies turn should be between 109 and 190, probably able to latch onto 109 briefly.
109 climbed, turned and accelorated better, but mossie was faster.

mossie will be one of the fastest, most potent strike aircraft ingame. easly faster than beu, p38. 190F8 and A series with bomb are probably slower than mossie

Arm_slinger
04-23-2005, 12:10 PM
How does 370mph at 5000 feet sound to everyone? Sounds mighty good to me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

darkhorizon11
04-23-2005, 12:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
It would be completely unrealistic, but fights between Mossis and Do-335s should be a lot of fun. Two fast bombers modified with heavy cannons. Should be one heck of a slugging match. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It'll remind me of when I was in high school. Getting baked after school playing 007 Goldeneye on N64 on golden gun mode. Pretty much whoever gets in the other guys sights first is toast! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

No601_prangster
04-23-2005, 04:19 PM
Don't no when we will get the Mossie but we will get it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I didn't make the Bomber version flyable because of time and I didn't have enough reference for the British bombsite. Anyway the Fighter-bomber version had the best missions such as the Amien prison raid.

Mossies weren't any more vulnerable to incendiary round than metal skinned aircraft but fatigue problems were usually sudden and fatal.

http://www.ijeremiah.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mossie/mossie.htm

Daiichidoku
04-23-2005, 07:46 PM
pingu sent me alink foi ra mossie video, which in the first few minutes shoes what appears to be actually footage from the Amiens raid...WOW

goshikisen
04-23-2005, 08:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by No601_prangster:
Don't no when we will get the Mossie but we will get it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Prangster... do you know if anybody has created any Mossie skins using the templates you've provided? Can't wait to see what the talented folks out there can do with the Mosquito.

Regards, Goshikisen.

p1ngu666
04-23-2005, 08:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by goshikisen:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by No601_prangster:
Don't no when we will get the Mossie but we will get it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Prangster... do you know if anybody has created any Mossie skins using the templates you've provided? Can't wait to see what the talented folks out there can do with the Mosquito.

Regards, Goshikisen. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

MS_Siwarrior
04-24-2005, 12:14 AM
Expect alot of whining about how the Mossie is better then the P51 and the P47.
Thats where my money is http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Aaron_GT
04-24-2005, 02:11 AM
'I didn't make the Bomber version flyable because of time and I didn't have enough reference for the British bombsite. "

I still need to go and photograph that Mossie for you for future reference (lots of stuff going on in my life). Do you know what sight the B.IV had - there might be a version of it in another plane I could look at, although that wouldn't help with exact details of how it was mounted.

DeerHunterUK
04-24-2005, 05:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by No601_prangster:
I didn't make the Bomber version flyable because of time and I didn't have enough reference for the British bombsite. Anyway the Fighter-bomber version had the best missions such as the Amien prison raid.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Of course your decision to make the Mk VI flyable had nothing to do with my powers of persuasion or threats of violence to your favourite teddy Prangster. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

mynameisroland
04-24-2005, 06:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stathem:
To put the cat among the pidgeons:

This;
"Gradually, various engineering refinements, such as the jet-boost exhausts and improved engines, increased the gap between the Mosquito and the FW-190. Pilots also learned they could shake the FW.190 by going into a shallow dive and performing a corkscrew maneuver, since the Focke Wulf's controls tended "freeze up" at high speeds more quickly than those of the Mosquito."

from here

http://www.vectorsite.net/avmoss2.html

and with quad hispanos and quad brownings, you want to hope you don't overshoot, Roland. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Should have a similar or better turning performance to the FW too.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Think that the info in that source may have cofused the Fw190 with the Me109 as it is pretty much accepted universally that the Fw190 had amongst the best if not the best response at high speed of any prop fighter. The Mosquito will not handle remotely as well as the Fw at 400mph - how could it? Its air frame is not stressed to accept the same g loads and its roll rate for example would be snail like compared to a single engined fighter.

I also think that per year the equivalent Fw should be able to intercept its contemporary Mosquito model. I think that he Mosquito will be dangerous to a single engined fighter when it has an altitude and speed advantage but this will be counterable by a roll revesal and scissoring.

As to it being faster than the P38 lightning? clean or loaded , at what alt? Lightning was very fast and immo a better match for Lw fighters than the Mossie which is a great bomber but not uber in any respect.

Regarding the corksrew as an evasive manuver - the RAF used that in Lanc and Halifax also but please explain how this manuver can be performed at low level and in a high speed chase? There would not be enough altitude to perform it effectively and the controls of a mossie at high speed would be a little dull at such speeds during a high speed shallow dive to make the manuver work . If an Fw can stick with a diving spitfie that is pulling evasive manuvers then the manuvering of the mossie should not prove a problem.

Again it was a great plane , great bomber but I wouldnt say it could fight a contemporary fighter on anything approaching equal terms.

Aaron_GT
04-24-2005, 07:32 AM
"I also think that per year the equivalent Fw should be able to intercept its contemporary Mosquito model."

Apparently at various points in the war, and at various altitudes, Fw190s really did have problems catching Mosquitos.

"explain how this manuver can be performed at low level and in a high speed chase?"

Mosquitos operated at various altitudes depending on mission profile and version, not just a low level.

Of the versions we are getting, max speed of the B.IV was 385 mph (without bombload) which was pretty much the same as the maximum speed of the 190A. FB. VI is similar. By the advent of the B.XVI top speed had improved to a maximum of 408 mph at 28,000 feet whilst loaded with a cookie bomb. This is the same as the maximum speed of the 190A8, although at a different altitude. This speed also compares very well with the P38L's maxiumum speed of 414mph without bombs.

p1ngu666
04-24-2005, 08:24 AM
later mossies could do over 400mph with a 4000lb cookie onboard.

mossie controls should not stiffen up like a yak, atleast not from what ive read, which is alot about mossie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

a 44 dora and a8-9 have a chance, but its not gonna be like catching a b25, speed difference wont be much between mossie and fighters.

btw the mossie airframe was tough, AND light, so loading up of G wont be so bad because less weight tobe increased...

mossies where abit faster than p38, and no contrarotating engines, so itll handle better in FP http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

itll be a better strike aircraft than p38, because of the 4 cannons, with tons of ammo..

mynameisroland
04-24-2005, 11:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
"I also think that per year the equivalent Fw should be able to intercept its contemporary Mosquito model."

Apparently at various points in the war, and at various altitudes, Fw190s really did have problems catching Mosquitos.

"explain how this manuver can be performed at low level and in a high speed chase?"

Mosquitos operated at various altitudes depending on mission profile and version, not just a low level.

Of the versions we are getting, max speed of the B.IV was 385 mph (without bombload) which was pretty much the same as the maximum speed of the 190A. FB. VI is similar. By the advent of the B.XVI top speed had improved to a maximum of 408 mph at 28,000 feet whilst loaded with a cookie bomb. This is the same as the maximum speed of the 190A8, although at a different altitude. This speed also compares very well with the P38L's maxiumum speed of 414mph without bombs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fw 190's speed of the earlier A3, 4 , 5 and 6 was actually faster than the Fw A8 they lay betwen 414mph and 421 mph depending on sources. this is significantly higher than the 385 you quoted for the Mosquito B.IV

Look at the quote I responded to - Mosquito can dive at high speed and perform the corkscrew. This manuver eats up altitude especially at the altitude we will be playing athttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Also a major argument was that the Fw's controls would lock up at speed quicker than the Mossies ? again how?

mynameisroland
04-24-2005, 11:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
later mossies could do over 400mph with a 4000lb cookie onboard.

mossie controls should not stiffen up like a yak, atleast not from what ive read, which is alot about mossie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

a 44 dora and a8-9 have a chance, but its not gonna be like catching a b25, speed difference wont be much between mossie and fighters.

btw the mossie airframe was tough, AND light, so loading up of G wont be so bad because less weight tobe increased...

mossies where abit faster than p38, and no contrarotating engines, so itll handle better in FP http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

itll be a better strike aircraft than p38, because of the 4 cannons, with tons of ammo.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pingu I have read a buttload http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif on the Fw 190 and no where does it state that the Fw's controls tended to 'lock' up at speed. Which was quoted in the post i replied to. Can you forward me to a reliable source that states the Mosquito is more manuverable at high speed than a Fw?

The A8, A9 and D9 have a very favourable chance of catching contemporary Mosquitoes as do the A4, A5, A6 of catching their year equivalents agree? This factor will be mulitiplied in the online game conditions which we experience.

I agree the Mossie is better as a strike aircraft than the Lightning but better as a fighter? I dont think so

rgrhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
04-24-2005, 12:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
later mossies could do over 400mph with a 4000lb cookie onboard.

mossie controls should not stiffen up like a yak, atleast not from what ive read, which is alot about mossie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

a 44 dora and a8-9 have a chance, but its not gonna be like catching a b25, speed difference wont be much between mossie and fighters.

btw the mossie airframe was tough, AND light, so loading up of G wont be so bad because less weight tobe increased...

mossies where abit faster than p38, and no contrarotating engines, so itll handle better in FP http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

itll be a better strike aircraft than p38, because of the 4 cannons, with tons of ammo.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pingu I have read a buttload http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif on the Fw 190 and no where does it state that the Fw's controls tended to 'lock' up at speed. Which was quoted in the post i replied to. Can you forward me to a reliable source that states the Mosquito is more manuverable at high speed than a Fw?

The A8, A9 and D9 have a very favourable chance of catching contemporary Mosquitoes as do the A4, A5, A6 of catching their year equivalents agree? This factor will be mulitiplied in the online game conditions which we experience.

I agree the Mossie is better as a strike aircraft than the Lightning but better as a fighter? I dont think so

rgrhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

u just need "sufficent" control authority http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

the early 190s have a slight speed disadvantage, and later ones probably have a slight speed advantage.
its close enuff so itll depend on olegs modeling http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Aaron_GT
04-24-2005, 12:30 PM
"Fw 190's speed of the earlier A3, 4 , 5 and 6 was actually faster than the Fw A8 they lay betwen 414mph and 421 mph depending on sources. this is significantly higher than the 385 you quoted for the Mosquito B.IV"

I have some Mosquito books that have various figures for Mosquito versions, but the only figure for a 190A series I had in a book was for the A8, so I used that.

With regard to the A8 it achieved its maximum speed some 6000 ft lower than the Mosquito. On high altitude runs (say 25,000 feet) the 190A8 would have no chance of catching a Mosquito without superior altitude. I doubt the margin of safety for a fully bombed up B.IV was as pronounced over the A4-A6 series 190s. With the D series I would expect it to be able to catch a loaded B.XVI at most if not all altitudes.

As I noted before (as did pingu) there would be some altitudes at which the 190 would definitely be faster than the Mosquito.

stathem
04-24-2005, 12:31 PM
Lol, I knew you'd bite...

That quote was provided 'as is' from a respected site about actual Mosquito tactics. Who are we to gainsay what the guys with their a** on the line actually did?

Maybe the fabric ailerons ballooned?

I think that that reference was regarding unarmed bomber variant tactics, which would be likely to be operating between 30,000 and 40,000. How quick is your A-series up there?

The Mossie will be hampered in FB. IRL, there would be 2 sets of eyes looking for Bandits

Aaron_GT
04-24-2005, 01:12 PM
"I agree the Mossie is better as a strike aircraft than the Lightning but better as a fighter?"

As a day fighter, the P38 would have the edge in terms of manoueverability. The Mossie has somewhat heavier armament. Speed depdends on version. The Mossie proved a good nightfighter. The Mossie wasn't designed as a bomber so it doesn't do too badly as a fighter, but unless the Mossie got in a first pass victory I think the P38 would probably have the edge.

p1ngu666
04-24-2005, 01:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stathem:
Lol, I knew you'd bite...

That quote was provided 'as is' from a respected site about actual Mosquito tactics. Who are we to gainsay what the guys with their a** on the line actually did?

Maybe the fabric ailerons ballooned?

I think that that reference was regarding unarmed bomber variant tactics, which would be likely to be operating between 30,000 and 40,000. How quick is your A-series up there?

The Mossie will be hampered in FB. IRL, there would be 2 sets of eyes looking for Bandits <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

mossie, had full metal alirons, i think http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

bomber mossies operated at 20,000ft +, so past where 190 is at its best really. also without radar 190 is unlikely to intercept, if its at night.

FB mossies have cropped superchargers, similer to spit VB LF.

also, with new clouds gives mossie a advantage, being able to hide in them, or limit the height of enemy fighters, so they cant get so much speed up in a dive

VW-IceFire
04-24-2005, 01:54 PM
The trouble FW's had with intercepting Mosquitos has more to do with operational considerations.

Mosquitos, on bombing raids, usually flew at night at high altitude, and at high speeds. They were also difficult to detect (wooden construction absorbed radar).

So, by the time that German radar had a fix on a Mosquito group, the response time for FW190s (or other interceptors) to scramble, climb to altitude, and gain speed, identify and shoot down the targets, the Mosquitos would often be gone. The Mossie wasn't immune to interception but it was very difficult.

In-game, I can't see them being quite as wonderous as none of those factors really come into play. But what we do get is a very capable, very fast, attack bomber. I don't see it being the greatest of fighters but I see it as being much more flexible than a conventional bomber and not as easily caught as a B-25.

Aaron_GT
04-24-2005, 01:57 PM
"mossie, had full metal alirons, i think"

According to my copy of Hardy's book they did. Initially wooden flaps AFAIK, later metal too I think.

F16_Sulan
04-24-2005, 03:35 PM
Sweat!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Im looking forward to it!

ps. Ok Mosquito not Moscuito http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Tazzers1968
04-24-2005, 05:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stathem:
To put the cat among the pidgeons:

This;
"Gradually, various engineering refinements, such as the jet-boost exhausts and improved engines, increased the gap between the Mosquito and the FW-190. Pilots also learned they could shake the FW.190 by going into a shallow dive and performing a corkscrew maneuver, since the Focke Wulf's controls tended "freeze up" at high speeds more quickly than those of the Mosquito."

from here

http://www.vectorsite.net/avmoss2.html

and with quad hispanos and quad brownings, you want to hope you don't overshoot, Roland. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Should have a similar or better turning performance to the FW too.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Think that the info in that source may have cofused the Fw190 with the Me109 as it is pretty much accepted universally that the Fw190 had amongst the best if not the best response at high speed of any prop fighter. The Mosquito will not handle remotely as well as the Fw at 400mph - how could it? Its air frame is not stressed to accept the same g loads and its roll rate for example would be snail like compared to a single engined fighter.

I also think that per year the equivalent Fw should be able to intercept its contemporary Mosquito model. I think that he Mosquito will be dangerous to a single engined fighter when it has an altitude and speed advantage but this will be counterable by a roll revesal and scissoring.

As to it being faster than the P38 lightning? clean or loaded , at what alt? Lightning was very fast and immo a better match for Lw fighters than the Mossie which is a great bomber but not uber in any respect.

Regarding the corksrew as an evasive manuver - the RAF used that in Lanc and Halifax also but please explain how this manuver can be performed at low level and in a high speed chase? There would not be enough altitude to perform it effectively and the controls of a mossie at high speed would be a little dull at such speeds during a high speed shallow dive to make the manuver work . If an Fw can stick with a diving spitfie that is pulling evasive manuvers then the manuvering of the mossie should not prove a problem.

Again it was a great plane , great bomber but I wouldnt say it could fight a contemporary fighter on anything approaching equal terms. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is a pretty good appraisal with regard to my own expectaions. For instance the P38 was designed as a fighter first and formost. When we read about Mosquito 'fighters' we are reading about night fighters and don't forget the JU88 was also used in this role. The Mosquito and the JU88 are similar, if accidentally, in what the were. Very vesatile, they had enough performance to act in the air to air role, albeit more effectively at night. They both made good light but fast bombers with a good radius of action. The Mosquito may act and perform a little more fighter-like than the JU88 but it ain't no P38; not in the air to air role.

Phil http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

mynameisroland
04-24-2005, 07:27 PM
My only real point of argument is that Mossie will be catchable by Lw planes but they will be tougher to intercept than other bombers. Their weakness will be that once their speed card is used they have no defensive armament and just to survive they will need to drop bombs to fight.

No Mossie would ever match the Fw for manuverability at speed, to be under that misconception is wrong.

Lastly we will fight at above 20,000ft around 10 % of our playing time unless we get air starts so speeds above that are pretty much meaningless other wise Ta 152 would rule the roost.

Any way I really cant wait to fly this plane i think it will be a great addition !!!

p1ngu666
04-24-2005, 08:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
My only real point of argument is that Mossie will be catchable by Lw planes but they will be tougher to intercept than other bombers. Their weakness will be that once their speed card is used they have no defensive armament and just to survive they will need to drop bombs to fight.

No Mossie would ever match the Fw for manuverability at speed, to be under that misconception is wrong.

Lastly we will fight at above 20,000ft around 10 % of our playing time unless we get air starts so speeds above that are pretty much meaningless other wise Ta 152 would rule the roost.

Any way I really cant wait to fly this plane i think it will be a great addition !!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ah, good to know u will be at 20,000 or higher, cos ill be at 50feet or so in my mossie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

the mossie should be fairly chuckable, and a 190 u cant do much with defensive guns, its a rock at the front, but paperlike at the back http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

No601_prangster
04-25-2005, 01:50 AM
Patch 4.0 should give the Mossie it's one largest defensive asset, a true northern European overcast. Mossie bombers flew just above or below the overcast and at the first sign of a fighter they would duck down in and loss it. Overcast covers Europe for 80% of the time so it was usally fairly safe.

Tooz_69GIAP
04-25-2005, 02:26 AM
Yeah, those overcast screens I saw at SimHQ rock!!! But I bet they screw with fps something rotten!!!

But I'm upgrading RAM, and possibly card soon, so hopefully it wont make it unplayable for me too much.

tanimbar
04-25-2005, 02:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by No601_prangster:
Patch 4.0 should give the Mossie it's one largest defensive asset, a true northern European overcast. Mossie bombers flew just above or below the overcast and at the first sign of a fighter they would duck down in and loss it. Overcast covers Europe for 80% of the time so it was usally fairly safe. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Prangster is correct. My Father flew Mossies during the war. We don't talk of his experiences, but I know he trained Mossie pilots in South Africa for a couple of years before returning to the UK to join a pathfinder squadron(s). Anyway, I once mentioned that people in the flight sim community were speculating on how a mossie would have coped in a dogfight. He chuckled and essentially said that you would run away; extend away loosing elevation slowly to gain speed, or, if you were already very low, hit the deck and extend away hoping to find some nice thick clouds. I got the impression that he thought a Mossie pilot who engaged German fighters would have been a dead fool.

anarchy52
04-25-2005, 03:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
'I didn't make the Bomber version flyable because of time and I didn't have enough reference for the British bombsite. "
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Khm...is it me or B-25 and He-111 bombsites are identical in the game? So why not mosquito?

p1ngu666
04-25-2005, 09:47 AM
if it has the old non optical sight, u will see why prangster didnt make it, ill find a picy

p1ngu666
04-25-2005, 09:52 AM
http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666//rafbombsite.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666//rafbombsite2.jpg

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

bit mad really
we did have optical sights, similer to loft sight later http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Aaron_GT
04-25-2005, 01:09 PM
"they will need to drop bombs to fight."

Speed is the defensive asset of the bomber versions and maximum speed was almost identical loaded with bombs or unloaded. Acceleration and climb were affected but weight didn't seem to be a limit on level speed in the Mossie. Losing the drop tanks might help, of course.

Kurfurst__
04-27-2005, 03:54 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
indeed
mossie vs 110, ju88 would probably be one sided pretty much, like irl.


Don`t expect so much, especially from the MK IV and Mk VI. Both are rahter slow at ca380mph, and will be easily caught, and outmanouvered by any single engined fighter. MkIV doesn`t even has guns, the Mk VI doesn`t have bombsight, still, probably most will go with the FB Mk VI.

And don`t get high on Ju88/Me110 either... the 110 will be a strong opponent with similiar speed, firepower and manouveribilty. We don`t have heavy fighter Ju88s yet, but there was a Ju 88C pilot who shot down 3 Mossies in a single sortie over the Bay of Biscay, so don`t underestimate.

Otherwise, pretty much what Icefire said, the Mossie`s (and add to that the similiar planes, Jabos, 410 etc) greatest advantage that it left little TIME for interception. Once intercepted, it could be easily caught by fighters, it cannot fight back. But with the MkVI, we get a very good ground pounder/bomber chopper. Just stay away from fighters. It will be the similiar as the 110G we have in the game.

JG53Frankyboy
04-27-2005, 04:14 AM
i expect a good and fast ground attack plane with the FB.VI . also it will be lethal to enemy bombers.
but not an "├╝ber"fighter. i still belive it will have less chances in a fight against correct flwon sinlge engine fighters.

one of its bad points will be most propably its bad rearview - due to gameengine limitations. i doubt you will much more see than your headrest.

mynameisroland
04-27-2005, 07:13 AM
Id be much happier intercepting a Mossie in my Fw 190 D9 or A5/6 than a B25 , A20 or even an IL2 for that matter. It will be like intercepting a low and fast P38 - difficult but not impossible.

The best thing is that there will be no sniper in the tail waiting to score a pilot kill or kill my engine. I reitterate that the Mossies best defence is to avoid combat (this was its origional tactic after all) but in our FB-AEP-PF environment even with new clouds its going to get intercepted rather a lot and it will suffer accordingly. What options do you have once spotted? with a bomb load you wont be able to run and with a lesser E state than your attacker you wont be able to get an angle to fire your own nose guns if the attacker knows what he's doing.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 08:11 AM
Don`t expect so much, especially from the MK IV and Mk VI. Both are rahter slow at ca380mph


Kurfurst, they were introduced in 1941. That's actually a pretty competitive speed at that point and is faster maximum than any single engined LW fighter at the time. Obviously you really need a series of speeds relative to altitude for the full picture, but the Mosquito was pretty fast. As the war increased, so did the speed.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 08:14 AM
but in our FB-AEP-PF environment even with new clouds its going to get intercepted rather a lot and it will suffer accordingly.

If flown appropriately (very low with no warning, or at high altitude) then it would be no problem. What we are getting (flyable) is the workhorse FB.VI rather than the pinnacle of the range such as the B.XVI flying at 25,000 ft or the NF30 flying around at night at up to 425mph.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 08:15 AM
"one of its bad points will be most propably its bad rearview - due to gameengine limitations. i doubt you will much more see than your headrest."

That's a shame. Perhaps a 'fix' would be a rear view mirror type view to simulate the navigator looking to the rear? (Ditto for Beaufighter).

mynameisroland
04-27-2005, 08:17 AM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Don`t expect so much, especially from the MK IV and Mk VI. Both are rahter slow at ca380mph


Kurfurst, they were introduced in 1941. That's actually a pretty competitive speed at that point and is faster maximum than any single engined LW fighter at the time. Obviously you really need a series of speeds relative to altitude for the full picture, but the Mosquito was pretty fast. As the war increased, so did the speed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

380mph 1941 in a Mossie ,1941 in my Fw 190 A3 414 mph

please pleasae explain to me how you guys think the Mossie is faster than single engined LW fighters? Maybe faster than Spit VB but not faster than Tiffie.

VW-IceFire
04-27-2005, 08:19 AM
I think the Mosquito will be best used on servers like Warclouds. There's alot of room to work with and a pair or trio of organized Mosqutios will be able to fly low to target drop bombs, launch rockets, and return. Unless the enemy latches on right away, the Mosquito is likely to be able to run away...or evoke a high speed chase...long enough to call for fighter backup.

And if it were 3 Mosquitos against one fighter, I'm sure they could give it a go and fight.

JG53Frankyboy
04-27-2005, 08:20 AM
well, remebering the Ki-43-I that should have a perfect riearview i doubt it.

rearview aspects are sometimes very different handled in the game.
THE example are the P-51D vs P-47-D27 .
it should be the same , but the headrest in the Mustang is much lower than in the Thunderbolt - very strange.

darkhorizon11
04-27-2005, 09:18 AM
I can't wait. This aircraft is going to be a lot of fun to fly. I'd expect to even catch a couple of LW-only guys flying this one around! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 09:50 AM
380mph 1941 in a Mossie ,1941 in my Fw 190 A3 414 mph

From what I've read the A1 and A2 were delivered in the autumn of 1941, but the A3 wasn't introduced until Spring 1942. The A2 had a maximum level speed of 388, (Figures I've seen for the A3 vary from 382 to 410 mph, though, 414 seems unusually high. So I stand corrected, the LW did have something with a higher max level speed than the B.IV in 1941 - just. However an A2 would have 22 mph on an FB.VI.


Maybe faster than Spit VB but not faster than Tiffie.

Noone's claiming otherwise. If you are inferring such a claim it isn't one that is being suggested. But the Mosquito was a fast plane by 1941 standards.

Mosquito speeds improved over time - e.g. BXVI - 408 loaded, NF30 - 425. Even the speed of the B.IV series II was improved by reterofitting new engines. By that time (mid 44) 425 wasn't quite so remarkable, though and by late 1944 435-450 was possible for single engined prop types.

Pingu: I checked my copy of Hardy's books and the Avro bomb rack was an option for the B.XVI and all but the first dozen or so XVIs had bulged bays. I infer from the text that this means that the rack is for bulged bays only (which makes sense). I can't remember if the XVI had external wing bomb racks to in addition to the drop tanks. Apparently during development they showed that a Mosquito could take off with a simulated 10,000lb bomb load.

mynameisroland
04-27-2005, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">380mph 1941 in a Mossie ,1941 in my Fw 190 A3 414 mph

From what I've read the A1 and A2 were delivered in the autumn of 1941, but the A3 wasn't introduced until Spring 1942. The A2 had a maximum level speed of 388, (Figures I've seen for the A3 vary from 382 to 410 mph, though, 414 seems unusually high. So I stand corrected, the LW did have something with a higher max level speed than the B.IV in 1941 - just. However an A2 would have 22 mph on an FB.VI.


Maybe faster than Spit VB but not faster than Tiffie.

Noone's claiming otherwise. If you are inferring such a claim it isn't one that is being suggested. But the Mosquito was a fast plane by 1941 standards.

Mosquito speeds improved over time - e.g. BXVI - 408 loaded, NF30 - 425. Even the speed of the B.IV series II was improved by reterofitting new engines. By that time (mid 44) 425 wasn't quite so remarkable, though and by late 1944 435-450 was possible for single engined prop types.

Pingu: I checked my copy of Hardy's books and the Avro bomb rack was an option for the B.XVI and all but the first dozen or so XVIs had bulged bays. I infer from the text that this means that the rack is for bulged bays only (which makes sense). I can't remember if the XVI had external wing bomb racks to in addition to the drop tanks. Apparently during development they showed that a Mosquito could take off with a simulated 10,000lb bomb load. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The A3 is the equivalent of the A4 pretty much - we wont be getting A1 or A2 in upcoming patch will we? So maps with Mossie present will have A4 present (A3 is similar in performance to A4 thats why I mentioned it ). This aircraft historically had a max speed of around 414mph depending on various sources 1700hp in a clean airframe with few obtrusions its noot too hard to imagine. Mustang achieved more with less.

the 425 mph you are quoting for mossie is for recon version is it not? Not for a bomber version with 4000lb/2000lb. Also the tactical situation you will be faced with online will entail that rarely will any Mosquito pilot be bombing from 6000m where its top speed is relevant more likely it will be low amongst clouds below its opponents.

Bull_dog_
04-27-2005, 11:42 AM
I don't think the Mosquito was faster than the Fw190 ever...maybe at exteme altitudes but certainly not below 25,000ft.

I wouldn't expect it to be that way in game either...now it should be faster than the unboosted versions of the Me-109 like the F and G2/6 versions at many altitudes and I'd expect weight of ordinance to factor in this heavily.

The skeeter was fast and reasonably manueverable for a big plane and will be a tough intercept but not impossible for Fw's. I'm looking forward to it because its the kind of plane you can circle around the enemy base and hit it from a shallow high speed dive with your nose pointed towards your own base and have a high likelyhood of making it back to your home.

RedNeckerson
04-27-2005, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
the LW did have something with a higher max level speed than the B.IV in 1941 - just. However an A2 would have 22 mph on an FB.VI.




Also, the 109F-4 was in the 392+ mph range. I believe certain ones were capable of over 400mph.

Not to take anything away from the Mossie which was one of the all-time greats no doubt http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
04-27-2005, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
I don't think the Mosquito was faster than the Fw190 ever...maybe at exteme altitudes but certainly not below 25,000ft.

I wouldn't expect it to be that way in game either...now it should be faster than the unboosted versions of the Me-109 like the F and G2/6 versions at many altitudes and I'd expect weight of ordinance to factor in this heavily.

The skeeter was fast and reasonably manueverable for a big plane and will be a tough intercept but not impossible for Fw's. I'm looking forward to it because its the kind of plane you can circle around the enemy base and hit it from a shallow high speed dive with your nose pointed towards your own base and have a high likelyhood of making it back to your home.

you is wrong http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
mossie was slightly faster than 190 on the deck, later ones will likely be faster.

ingame, we get only FBVI, teh IV is AI. so u wont encounter a mossie pilot up high, the VI has a low full throttle height. its also in the 350-360mph range on the deck, which IS fairly fast. topspeed doesnt always tell the full story, u need the graph of speed and height http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

also kurfy, the lw night fighter units got a real scaring and spanking by mossies.

in terms of mossie performance, mostly it needed just tobe really fast at certain heights.

fw190 was 5mph faster than mossie at 20,000ft, where first mossie raids flew at about that height, they changed the height to one where they was faster soon http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

PR and cookie mossies, in basic terms where fairly similer. later PR mossies had the bulged bay, filled with fuel... flew some increadibly long missions in the pacific area with them.

Aaron, i dont think mossie could take wingbombs and droptanks, used the same mounting. seen drop tanks and two rocket rails. sometimes rocket rails had 2 rockets on http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

stathem
04-27-2005, 12:22 PM
Just found this quote from Goering. It's nonsense, obv., but FAF.

"Shortly after he was politically and personally humiliated by the Mosquito bombing raid on Berlin in January 1943 Reichmarschall Herman Goering had this to say about the aircraft...

"In 1940 I could at least fly as far as Glasgow in most of my aircraft, but not now! It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy.

The British, who can afford aluminium better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is building, and they give it a speed which they have now increased yet again. What do you make of that?

There is nothing the British do not have. They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops. After the war's over I'm going to buy a British radio set - then at least I'll own something that has always worked." "

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

p1ngu666
04-27-2005, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by stathem:
Just found this quote from Goering. It's nonsense, obv., but FAF.

"Shortly after he was politically and personally humiliated by the Mosquito bombing raid on Berlin in January 1943 Reichmarschall Herman Goering had this to say about the aircraft...

"In 1940 I could at least fly as far as Glasgow in most of my aircraft, but not now! It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy.

The British, who can afford aluminium better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is building, and they give it a speed which they have now increased yet again. What do you make of that?

There is nothing the British do not have. They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops. After the war's over I'm going to buy a British radio set - then at least I'll own something that has always worked." "

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

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

think albert spear, the guy who did so mmuch to increase production, he feared mossie the most, dont remmber the quote tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 01:33 PM
the 425 mph you are quoting for mossie is for recon version is it not?


No, the NF30 - 4 20mm cannon and radar. 408mph is for a fully loaded (4000lb load, wing tanks) B.XVI.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 01:35 PM
Also the tactical situation you will be faced with online will entail that rarely will any Mosquito pilot be bombing from 6000m where its top speed is relevant more likely it will be low amongst clouds below its opponents.


If we had a B.XVI and cookie flyable that's where I'd be bombing from if not higher.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 01:35 PM
Also, the 109F-4 was in the 392+ mph range

Most say 376mph.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 01:44 PM
350-360mph range on the deck,


I just checked my copy of Hardy and the FB.VI is actually 378mph max speed (13,000 ft), 361mph at 5,500 ft (the figure I was mistakenly remembering as the max speed. It doesn't give a sea level speed, but doing a bit of extrapolation it was probably about 340 to 350 mph. I think the Merlins were actually set to give the maximum power at 5000ft.

p1ngu666
04-27-2005, 01:47 PM
ive heard of 360 indicated on the deck. exhaust covers removed could give 6-10mph extra speed.

hope oleg models them without exhaust covers, as theres only 1 reason to have them in fb.

that is the give the LW a chance http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 01:53 PM
Aaron, i dont think mossie could take wingbombs and droptanks


Right you are, my misreading of some text on some of the long range versions.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 01:59 PM
ve heard of 360 indicated on the deck. exhaust covers removed could give 6-10mph extra speed.


It's possible - I just don't have anything in writing to confirm it. I just read about the experiements of nitrous injection- an extra 47mph at 20,000 ft!!! Tests only, sadly. I've also seen suggestions that removing the exhaust stubs could gain up to even 12 mph.

Plus it all depends on boost levels.

I might have better figures in my other Mossie books but where they are on my shelves is another matter...

hop2002
04-27-2005, 02:59 PM
I've also seen suggestions that removing the exhaust stubs could gain up to even 12 mph.

According to A&AEE tests, at 9 lbs boost removing the ducted exhausts increased speed by 13 - 15 mph.


I just read about the experiements of nitrous injection- an extra 47mph at 20,000 ft!!! Tests only, sadly.

According to tests for using Mossies to chase V-1s, "nitrous oxide has been used very successfully on night-fighter Mosquito aircraft to give an extra 30 mph speed above 18,000ft altitude".

They then give figures for the NF XIX with Merlin 25 engines using both 150 octane fuel and NO2 injection, at low level. Speed is 394 mph at 2,000ft, dropping to 393 at 5,000ft.


ive heard of 360 indicated on the deck.

Again from an A&AEE test, 353 mph at sea level using 150 octane fuel, but with ducted exhausts and drop tanks fitted. Ejector exhausts would push that up to close to 370, removing the wing tanks something over 370 mph. (The NF XIX, with the same engines, managed 374 mph at 2,000ft with 150 octane fuel).

So a 1944 FB VI running on 150 octane, clean with ejector exhausts, should be doing about 370 - 380 mph at sea level.


Plus it all depends on boost levels.

One thing to watch out for is the engine type. Early FB VIs had the Merlin 21 or 23, later versions the Merlin 25. The 25 allowed for much more power.

p1ngu666
04-27-2005, 03:08 PM
i hope we get early and late versions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

think the exhaust covers save alot of polys on the 3d model, which is very tempting for 3dmodeler's.

btw, to mostly smash kurfys thing of 110 vs mossie
il2c says 508 or so kph max at SL for 110G2

c4, 482ish kph @ SL, il2c isnt the best source, but its what ive got to hand and what we have ingame http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

p1ngu666
04-27-2005, 03:19 PM
hm
370=595kph, so faster than k4 by some 12kph

6-7 faster than 190A9

2-3 slower than D944
7ish slower than d945

375ish would make us about equal with d9, mossie has advantage because of trim on rudder, and aliron too i think, while germans haveto hold some correction. germans would probably accelorate faster, atleast till the speeds where really high perhaps.
mossie has plenty of fuel too, so extending should be ok http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
also 2 merlins maxxed out low level would sound mega http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 03:25 PM
ve heard of 360 indicated on the deck. exhaust covers removed could give 6-10mph extra speed.

So a 1944 FB VI running on 150 octane, clean with ejector exhausts, should be doing about 370 - 380 mph at sea level.

That should be faster than the 190As and 109Gs of the same period, I think?

And you are right, hop - lots of upgrades on engines.

Rereading the bit on NO2 (I've been popping in an out this evening, book next to the computer) fifty NF XIIIs were fitted with NO2, so it is more extensive than I first thought. Plus a few NF30s (no exact numbers) were fitted.

I need some Mosquito books with more data, really.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2005, 03:28 PM
The 109s and 190s would have a lot of advantage is sustained climb, although in combat zoom climb would be more the issue, and I am not sure how the 109 and 190 would stack up against the Mossie. No surprise that the 190D is the best of the bunch - good plane. The Ta152 would give the Mossie a serious run for its money up high!

p1ngu666
04-27-2005, 03:39 PM
yeah ta152 would be potent. biggests threats to mossie, in terms of potentical, was he219, me163(ordered/designed intercepting PR aircraft, but was ironicaly too fast if PR aircraft saw it in time) 262, 190 was the constant worry for mossie crews, most likely to run into it, and close performance. 109 also fast at some alts, more for the PR aircraft.

p1ngu666
04-27-2005, 03:47 PM
props able to catch uber mossie
i185-71
La7
dora
ta152 (close, maybe wrong not sure robban?)
tempest
p51mkIII
tb3, with teleporter technology http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif
im going of il2c and what i know about tempest and p51mkIII

mynameisroland
04-27-2005, 07:05 PM
cant wait to see you guys reaction when your Mossie (fastest of all planes in the world down low) gets overhauled by LW single engined planes.

Your posts disregard important info ie Fw equivalent speed at alt you are quoting. Do you really believe that Fw is slower? I cant wait to test this.

p1ngu666
04-27-2005, 07:36 PM
do u really belive a unarmed bomber is a workable concept, if its not atleast very fast? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

typhoon and tempest, p51mk3 with 25lb boost are all faster probably.

mossies, for the most part where able to ease away from pursuing fighters http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

F19_Olli72
04-27-2005, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
cant wait to see you guys reaction when your Mossie (fastest of all planes in the world down low) gets overhauled by LW single engined planes.

Your posts disregard important info ie Fw equivalent speed at alt you are quoting. Do you really believe that Fw is slower? I cant wait to test this.

Its not all about speed. Remember G├╝nther Rall's words: "You dont always get the opportunity to choose your position, your in. You have to see how to get out" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VW-IceFire
04-27-2005, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
cant wait to see you guys reaction when your Mossie (fastest of all planes in the world down low) gets overhauled by LW single engined planes.

Your posts disregard important info ie Fw equivalent speed at alt you are quoting. Do you really believe that Fw is slower? I cant wait to test this.
Again...the Mosquito wasn't so much as fast as it was a combination of factors.

In a situation where a FW190 spots a Mosquito...it can be run down...the Mosqutio were getting maxes out at 370 something mph at best speed. I'm not sure what low alt performance is in comparison to other types and it may be faster than whats intercepting it at some altitudes but during the war...the Mosquito was fast compared to other bombers, nearly invisible on German radar and once they did detect a Mosqutio raid...scrambling fighters to intercept was hard.

p1ngu666
04-28-2005, 07:07 AM
topspeeds swapped with altitude, but FBVI was just abit faster on the deck/low alt, where itll be as its a fighter bomber.

so its like looking at tempest and going, ppppfff 420mph only?

but at low, alt, it was stupendously fast. could overtake v1's in level flight http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

VW-IceFire
04-28-2005, 08:56 AM
Ok...so whats the speeds for the FB.VI based on height. I think that will be extremely telling.

I realized recently that the Beaufighter achieves its best top speed at very low altitudes...something like 500m or something like that. I know the Mosquito isn't like that but if its got a great low altitude top speed then it doesn't matter if the other planes are fast up top...still have the potential to run away.

mynameisroland
04-28-2005, 09:51 AM
Alas does it develop full speed at 0m to 500m? In game Lw fighters are very fast - compared to their contemporaries - at low altitudes. I understand that Rolls Royce developed cropped superchargers on Merlin to pumpout more Hp low down - this was a reaction to the superiority of the BMW 801's huge displacment advantage and that it developed its grunt below 20,000 ft. The Fw still remained faster at low levels especially the boosted models. Are we going to see a Mosquito in game tearing along at 570kmh - 600kmh at low level? I can maintain over 600kmh in a D9 and over 570kmh in an A5/A6. Also Fw acceleration at this top end speed is very good. Once spotted I think Mossie will have to dump bombs and run If I can catch a Mustang , La5FN or a P38 at low level that decides to run a Mosquito will not be a problem.

I will eat my hat if a Mosquito (whatever the contemporary model compared to that years Fw) outruns me.

Tempest will be mega fast down low that is not the point. What I am getting at ( I know some of you have noticed) is that Mossie will not achieve the same degree of survival rate or escape success on line. Even less so on servers that allow all or some icons and externals.

Aaron_GT
04-28-2005, 10:21 AM
Once spotted I think Mossie will have to dump bombs

Internally carried bombload didn't seem to have much effect on the top speed. Acceleration of the 190 and 109 will be better than the Mosquito, as will sustained climb, and quite possibly zoom climb too.

The FB.VI was optimised for lower level operations, with its max speed being at 13,000 feet and not much down on this at sea level. Other Mosquito versions were optimised for different altitudes. 570 kph at sea level is probably attaintable for the stock FB.VI. 600 might be pushing it without later war boost and engines, but if you are in a D9 then it is a late war situation and the FB.VI should, in real life, have been a later version running with higher boost and/or later engine versions anyway.

With regards to the Mustang and P38 versions in the game remember that these are optimised for high altitude and in the case of the Mustang, relatively low boost level. If we get the +25lb Mustang III in the patch I don't think the Fw will be chasing that one down...

You are right about issues online - there is still a gulf between the correct performance numbers and the correct behaviour which is based on operating procedures and a whole host of factors not modelled online.

mynameisroland
04-28-2005, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Once spotted I think Mossie will have to dump bombs

Internally carried bombload didn't seem to have much effect on the top speed. Acceleration of the 190 and 109 will be better than the Mosquito, as will sustained climb, and quite possibly zoom climb too.

The FB.VI was optimised for lower level operations, with its max speed being at 13,000 feet and not much down on this at sea level. Other Mosquito versions were optimised for different altitudes. 570 kph at sea level is probably attaintable for the stock FB.VI. 600 might be pushing it without later war boost and engines, but if you are in a D9 then it is a late war situation and the FB.VI should, in real life, have been a later version running with higher boost and/or later engine versions anyway.

With regards to the Mustang and P38 versions in the game remember that these are optimised for high altitude and in the case of the Mustang, relatively low boost level. If we get the +25lb Mustang III in the patch I don't think the Fw will be chasing that one down...

You are right about issues online - there is still a gulf between the correct performance numbers and the correct behaviour which is based on operating procedures and a whole host of factors not modelled online. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Historically , due to operational , tactical and strategic situations (on top of being a great design) the Mossie was a tough bomber to track down and tougher to intercept effectively. Unfortunately some of the parameters which made it so survivable will not be relevant such as its low radar cross section conferred by its wooden construction ect.Online we find equal numbers on both sieds , both side know the targets they have to protect / destroy ect so it gets to the stage where you cannot fly a bombing sortie and expect to achieve surprise and only alert the defenders once you've dropped your payload and you halfway back to England. I fly Jabo nowadays quite a lot I like taking a Fw with a 500kg bomb for a spin and after youve dropped it off you still are a very effective figher that can support other Jabo's or just do a Frei Jagd sortie shooting up any targets.

I respect the Mosquito - more importantly so did the Germans, I still cant wait to engage one.

With regard to speeds in game there are some discrepancies. I hope we dont get 25lb boost RAF aircraft I have read of the Merlin and its various development stages and versions. I bet the Germans must've been sick that they were stuck with 87 octane for their inline engines (BMW got 100 octane) and had to resort to MW50 and other boosting devices while Rolls Royce had the luxury of higher compression ratios and detonation temperatures thanks to excellent fuel.

p1ngu666
04-28-2005, 10:36 AM
probably drop the wingbombs, internal bomb bay so the internal ones wont make much difference to speed.

ofcourse, with right timing and bomb delay
poof no 190 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

p1ngu666
04-28-2005, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Once spotted I think Mossie will have to dump bombs

Internally carried bombload didn't seem to have much effect on the top speed. Acceleration of the 190 and 109 will be better than the Mosquito, as will sustained climb, and quite possibly zoom climb too.

The FB.VI was optimised for lower level operations, with its max speed being at 13,000 feet and not much down on this at sea level. Other Mosquito versions were optimised for different altitudes. 570 kph at sea level is probably attaintable for the stock FB.VI. 600 might be pushing it without later war boost and engines, but if you are in a D9 then it is a late war situation and the FB.VI should, in real life, have been a later version running with higher boost and/or later engine versions anyway.

With regards to the Mustang and P38 versions in the game remember that these are optimised for high altitude and in the case of the Mustang, relatively low boost level. If we get the +25lb Mustang III in the patch I don't think the Fw will be chasing that one down...

You are right about issues online - there is still a gulf between the correct performance numbers and the correct behaviour which is based on operating procedures and a whole host of factors not modelled online. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Historically , due to operational , tactical and strategic situations (on top of being a great design) the Mossie was a tough bomber to track down and tougher to intercept effectively. Unfortunately some of the parameters which made it so survivable will not be relevant such as its low radar cross section conferred by its wooden construction ect.Online we find equal numbers on both sieds , both side know the targets they have to protect / destroy ect so it gets to the stage where you cannot fly a bombing sortie and expect to achieve surprise and only alert the defenders once you've dropped your payload and you halfway back to England. I fly Jabo nowadays quite a lot I like taking a Fw with a 500kg bomb for a spin and after youve dropped it off you still are a very effective figher that can support other Jabo's or just do a Frei Jagd sortie shooting up any targets.

I respect the Mosquito - more importantly so did the Germans, I still cant wait to engage one.

With regard to speeds in game there are some discrepancies. I hope we dont get 25lb boost RAF aircraft I have read of the Merlin and its various development stages and versions. I bet the Germans must've been sick that they were stuck with 87 octane for their inline engines (BMW got 100 octane) and had to resort to MW50 and other boosting devices while Rolls Royce had the luxury of higher compression ratios and detonation temperatures thanks to excellent fuel. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

tbh i think mossie should get 25lb boost as speed is everything to it, more than any other aircraft imo..

25lb boost IX and VIII would be the bain of dogfight servers, for sure.

with mustang, its a wait and see thing, only 4 50cal, but 640kph at SL http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

also, most players ignore mission objectives in onwhine dogfights http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

mynameisroland
04-28-2005, 10:49 AM
If we get 25lb boost it should only be for RAF Mustangs , Spit IX / VIII with 25lb boost how fast will that be Pingu?

The LW had squadrons that operated with higher octane fuel if you check Kufurst's link he posted reg DB 605 you can see how improved their HP levels were with higher boost to and also that it did see service.

http://www.axiomdigital.com/db605.htm

Id rather have c4 fule and higher boost as a LW flier than have Go 229 or Me163.

p1ngu666
04-28-2005, 11:59 AM
think i have a graph...
25lb boost and the current mw50 109s are roughly the same period, like within a few months http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

think the k4 u speak of is a 45 plane, with really limited use i imagine, given fuel situation.

iirec the k4 we have performs like that 2.0ata in some respects atleast? dont know too much about 109s in the last days

p1ngu666
04-28-2005, 12:15 PM
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/merlin66_18_25.jpg

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/jl165.html

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/jl165rr.html

think i have a excel doc with some calculated and mashed together figures.
basicaly ill stick it in 109 mw50 flat out territory. also increase climb, accel, maybe turn cos of extra power, with slight weight increase.
basicaly, scary if its after u http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

JG53Frankyboy
04-28-2005, 12:47 PM
changing the Spitifre Mk.IXe s of the game to a 25lb boost plane for 1944 would be realy nice http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

but as a mostly LW flyer , pls no MkXIV with 25lb http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

faustnik
04-28-2005, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
If we get 25lb boost it should only be for RAF Mustangs , Spit IX / VIII with 25lb boost how fast will that be Pingu?

The LW had squadrons that operated with higher octane fuel if you check Kufurst's link he posted reg DB 605 you can see how improved their HP levels were with higher boost to and also that it did see service.

http://www.axiomdigital.com/db605.htm

Id rather have c4 fule and higher boost as a LW flier than have Go 229 or Me163.

Uhhh, LW pilots were lucky to get fuel for their cigarette lighters let alone C4 fuel for their aircraft. That's just not comparable to the RAF getting 150 octane in '45. At the end of '44, the 150 octane was frequently available to RAF pilots and planes. You can't compare the C4 LW planes to the +25 RAF planes, one was on rarity, one was common.

p1ngu666
04-28-2005, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
If we get 25lb boost it should only be for RAF Mustangs , Spit IX / VIII with 25lb boost how fast will that be Pingu?

The LW had squadrons that operated with higher octane fuel if you check Kufurst's link he posted reg DB 605 you can see how improved their HP levels were with higher boost to and also that it did see service.

http://www.axiomdigital.com/db605.htm

Id rather have c4 fule and higher boost as a LW flier than have Go 229 or Me163.

Uhhh, LW pilots were lucky to get fuel for their cigarette lighters let alone C4 fuel for their aircraft. That's just not comparable to the RAF getting 150 octane in '45. At the end of '44, the 150 octane was frequently available to RAF pilots and planes. You can't compare the C4 LW planes to the +25 RAF planes, one was on rarity, one was common. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hm, two things id like to know. sortie rates of lw, and where did they get there tobacco from? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Aaron_GT
04-29-2005, 05:24 PM
Ok, checked my other books - FB. VI at sea level did 336 mph with Merlin 21/23 at +9 boost. That doesn't sound very impressive, but that is mid war boost, and a long way short of +25 on a Merlin 25.

I also found some figures for the B.35 (essentially a B.XVI with the Merlin 7x series replaced with 113/114s). An unimpressive sounding 326mph loaded at sea level, but it was tuned for high altitude at 425mph with +18 boost. No indication of what altitude that is, but I'm guessing around 25,000 ft given the way the FS gear in the 113/114s worked.

p1ngu666
04-29-2005, 06:14 PM
aaron, +9lb's boost is really low
think the early ones had 12lb boost, but they could push thru the gate and get upto 14lb.

later ones should do 16,18,21(maybe) and 25 lb boost

336 is a smidge faster than spit IX, with just 9lbs (vs 18 on spit)
not bad http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Aaron_GT
04-30-2005, 01:49 AM
aaron, +9lb's boost is really low
think the early ones had 12lb boost, but they could push thru the gate and get upto 14lb.

That's the figure from Ed Bishop's book. The book I really want is by Bowyer and Sharp - 500 pages - but it is very hard to find http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

ploughman
04-30-2005, 04:26 AM
P1ngu666, good site there with lots of primary sources.

Some of it seems to be copyrighted by Mike Williams, the guy Kurfurst has a really big problem with (specifically noted the Spit XIV/109K4 comparison). Kurfurst has a site rebutting MW's anaylsis, it's pretty conclusive.

p1ngu666
04-30-2005, 07:07 AM
kurfy can put together a really good arugument that 109 was best at pretty much everything, ever http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

people who look deeper often expose things with kurfys arguements.

just take what he says with a pinch of salt http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

the site has lots of info and is good, think i have some of the reports in a spitfire book of mine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

ploughman
04-30-2005, 08:55 AM
For sure.

Aaron_GT
05-03-2005, 01:33 PM
Copy of Bowyer and Sharp's book here:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8303248214&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

I just secured a copy elsewhre.

Yog_Shoggoth
05-03-2005, 08:41 PM
I like to think of the mossie as the anti-hinkle.

p1ngu666
05-03-2005, 09:56 PM
thanks for teh link aaron, ill try and get it with my limited budget http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LEBillfish
05-04-2005, 01:07 AM
GOOD NEWS!!! I just heard from a reliable source they're not adding the Mosquito instead giving us the long overdue IL2-type 3 special field mod which adds more external bomb racks!!...WOOHOO! I'm sure you all have been more anxious for that like I have been....very happy now http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

ploughman
05-04-2005, 02:00 AM
Praise the Lord! The world needs more externally mounted bomb racks, improvised or factory fitted. The Mossie would've sucked anyway.