Wing mounted Gun Pods

[Magic Zach]

Gonna give this thread a new bump just in case.

[skywalker22]

Me too!

Is there any possibility to get wing cannons for this aircraft?

[Darkdiz]

Just bought the 109K, the ED manual clearly mentions gun pods, MK151/20. Where are they? How does one equip them?

[SilentOtto]

2 hours ago, Darkdiz said:

Just bought the 109K, the ED manual clearly mentions gun pods, MK151/20. Where are they? How does one equip them?

At the airfield call ground crew and rearm&refuel.

[razo+r]

19 minutes ago, SilentOtto said:

At the airfield call ground crew and rearm&refuel.

 

 

3 hours ago, Darkdiz said:

Just bought the 109K, the ED manual clearly mentions gun pods, MK151/20. Where are they? How does one equip them?

Gun pods are not implemented...

[SilentOtto]

10 minutes ago, razo+r said:

 

 

Gun pods are not implemented...

Thanks, good to know

[Ala13_ManOWar]

On 3/23/2023 at 11:35 PM, SilentOtto said:

Thanks, good to know

To clarify, yes, the real Me109K4 manual mentions them, but there's no single documental or photographic evidence of them ever used in K model 109. Hence, no gunpods in K model. The day we got a G model it must have it, of course.

[Krez]

On 3/25/2023 at 12:05 PM, Ala13_ManOWar said:

To clarify, yes, the real Me109K4 manual mentions them, but there's no single documental or photographic evidence of them ever used in K model 109. Hence, no gunpods in K model. The day we got a G model it must have it, of course.

There are no primary sources but there are secondary sources.

 

[Ala13_ManOWar]

15 hours ago, Krez said:

There are no primary sources but there are secondary sources.

 

Name them, please. A manual saying this can be used means nothing at all if it was never used. My car's manual also tells there're weird things in my car, they're there but I don't care nor ever used them. That means a module of my car should model those because it's an "historic" option even though whatever it is was never ever used? Define what means "historic" for you, please .

[Extranajero]

1 hour ago, Ala13_ManOWar said:

Name them, please. A manual saying this can be used means nothing at all if it was never used. My car's manual also tells there're weird things in my car, they're there but I don't care nor ever used them. That means a module of my car should model those because it's an "historic" option even though whatever it is was never ever used? Define what means "historic" for you, please .

Why don't you grow up ?

[Ala13_ManOWar]

3 hours ago, Extranajero said:

Why don't you grow up ?

Why don't you?  If anybody has any information good enough, pertinent, enlightening, whatever, just SHOW IT UP mate. I would like to see it, actually, it's not like I'm against any change in my mind. On the contrary, should any new info show up about whatever it is which used to be believed and now something proves it wrong, I'm always willing to know and learn. But if someone chimes in to a knives fight showing off your gun, you better make good use of it!! What are you seeking saying I know better yet now showing anything to support you? You tell a name.

The first one, BTW, is called good science, in case you wonder what kind of dark sorcery I'm talking about .

[Krez]

On 5/13/2023 at 11:58 AM, Ala13_ManOWar said:

Name them, please. A manual saying this can be used means nothing at all if it was never used. My car's manual also tells there're weird things in my car, they're there but I don't care nor ever used them. That means a module of my car should model those because it's an "historic" option even though whatever it is was never ever used? Define what means "historic" for you, please .

I assume you do not know the difference between a primary source and a secondary source. I do not know of any primary sources that definitively state or show that they were uses on the K4. If you comprehended what I posted, you would see that I am in agreement with you.

[peachmonkey]

10 hours ago, Krez said:

I assume you do not know the difference between a primary source and a secondary source. I do not know of any primary sources that definitively state or show that they were uses on the K4. If you comprehended what I posted, you would see that I am in agreement with you.

I believe he was asking you to provide any source at this point, primary or secondary. If you have a document/excerpt stating they were used, you can simply provide it to continue the discussion. There probably won't be a serious discussion if the secondary source happens to be some verbal "i heard from my grandfather, who was good friends with Jack who fought in Normandy and he saw a 109 with gun pods, which looked like a K4" or someone's post on some mil/sim forum from 20 years ago stating a similar "fact".

[Ala13_ManOWar]

On 5/17/2023 at 5:59 AM, Krez said:

I assume you do not know the difference between a primary source and a secondary source. I do not know of any primary sources that definitively state or show that they were uses on the K4. If you comprehended what I posted, you would see that I am in agreement with you.

I'm quite aware about what primary and secondary sources are, I was a science student but I've also studied History . But you didn't get what Peachmonkey explains. Just show it mate, just that.

[Krez]

It's from a book I read which was translated from a book Josef Priller wrote in 1956 named, JG 26: Geschichte eines Jagdgeschwaders. In that book, it mentions K-4's being delivered to III/JG 26. On page 522, it reads,

"The Focke-Wulf Gruppen’s base movements left the Third Gruppe temporarily the strongest fighter unit in the area. The pilots’ routine at Plantluenne was typical or the last period of the war. Their service day began with sunrise and continued until darkness. After breakfast in the pilots’ Casino, or common room, they went to their Staffel’s dispersal. They were informed about weather conditions and waited there at readiness. The operational aircraft were assigned to the pilots on duty; this late in the war, few pilots had their own aircraft assigned to them.  The Gruppe had received a number of examples of the last version of the Bf 109 to see service, the Bf 109K-4. This variant was very similar to the G-10, but a number of features that had been introduced in stages were standardized. Among these were a clear-vision canopy, an enlarged wooden tail assembly, a retractable tail wheel, and a 30-mm MK 108 or MK 103 nose cannon. The 30-mm cannon were extremely potent weapons, but they had a tendency to jam, and apparently all of the K-4s supplied to III/JG 26 were also equipped with 20-mm guns in the hated underwing tubs. Uffz. Georg Genth’s regular aircraft was a G-10, but on occasion he flew a K-4. He preferred the G-10 as a dogfighter, as the K-4’s bulky armament sharply reduced its maneuverability. Moreover, at high altitudes, above about 28,000 feet, the K-4 began to float. Genth found that during formation flight at high altitudes it was unnaturally sensitive and gave him the same signals that most aircraft give shortly before a stall. Formation flight had to conform to the speed of the lead aircraft, and a small change in its speed caused the pilots to start “swimming” in space in the very thin air at high altitudes."

One book translated from a book published 11 years after the war ended. It's possible Priller was mistaken regarding the wing pods on the K-4. I haven't read or seen any other book that mentions this without using his book as its source. Memory can fade after 11 years.

Edited June 3, 2023 by Krez