Request for more FW-190D9 liveries

[zerO_crash]

Seeing how the Bf-109K4 got some love (the new liveries are splendid :thumbup: ) , I was wondering it it`s possible to add more liveries to the FW-190D9. It seems that those currently in are very similar with rather few differences (mostly on detail level) and a few slightly different, but still with the same color nuances. Here are some examples which would seems great, considering them looking altogether different than the current ones:

 

#1 Museum livery, kinda pretty with that blue nose and sky-white/blueish theme:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Fw_190_D-9_Silhouette.jpg

http://media.defense.gov/2006/Feb/23/2000567411/-1/-1/0/060223-F-1234P-001.JPG

 

#2 A darker grey/blackish

https://www.google.no/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.wp.scn.ru%2Fcamms%2Far%2F456%2Fpics%2F2_8.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwp.scn.ru%2Fen%2Fww2%2Ff%2F456%2F2%2F2&docid=S1yZtAQMWQGO5M&tbnid=QpEqI0xYYuRHDM%3A&w=932&h=347&bih=716&biw=1440&ved=0ahUKEwi83rS1jOzOAhWClxoKHTfNAU8QMwgdKAIwAg&iact=mrc&uact=8

 

#3 Not sure who´s FW-190D9 it is, but certainly looks great with that overall "battle wear" on it, would be gorgeous for simulating late war situations, where planes tended to look more grim + lack of proper maintenance/cleaning

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db/FW190-D9.jpg

 

#4 This livery is really a FW-190D13 one, however I would imagine that it`s a nice one to have nevertheless:

https://www.google.no/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-e_xfZlWhOb0%2FVB3oowDzXwI%2FAAAAAAAAHhM%2FV2ur5Vj1inU%2Fs1600%2FFW190D_Stab-JG26_Goetz.png&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fluftwaffeprofiles.blogspot.com%2Fp%2Ffocke-wulf-190-d9-profiles.html&docid=JAnpGykY2zM-OM&tbnid=SV4zZWZy7gPzSM%3A&w=1500&h=750&bih=716&biw=1440&ved=0ahUKEwiqp8qzjezOAhWIHxoKHYEDA04QMwhBKB4wHg&iact=mrc&uact=8

http://www.flyingheritage.com/images/Slideshows/plane/FockeWulfFw190D-13Dora-03.jpg

http://www.flyingheritage.com/images/Slideshows/plane/FockeWulfFw190D-13Dora-01.jpg

 

Really hope you guys (ED) can expand some more in this field for the FW-190D9. :)

[cthulhu68]

There are quite a few good user created skins here

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/index.php?arrFilter_pf%5Bfiletype%5D=6&arrFilter_pf%5Bgameversion%5D=138&arrFilter_pf%5Bfilelang%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Baircraft%5D=&arrFilter_DATE_CREATE_1_DAYS_TO_BACK=&CREATED_BY=&sort_by_order=TIMESTAMP_X_DESC&set_filter=Filter

[Art-J]

With crapload of excellent custom liveries made by JST, I think ED won't bother with spending time on making a few more of their own. I think they could make a skin-competition, however, for community members, like they did for Bf-109, and choose and include some best ones into the sim.

[zerO_crash]

I know about custom made skins, that is not in discussion here. This requests is for devs because of a good reason, using custom skins in MP is cumbersome, impractical. Custom skins are therefore a no go in that case.

 

@Art-J, I disagree with that, they have added a lot of skins to BF-109K4`s inventory, thus I see no problem with adding more to K4. And not all skins added were made by users, example being last two added.

Edited September 1, 2016 by zerO_crash

[Weegie]

Isn't #1 similar to the Udet Skin in the list already?

 

Number 4 is absolutely EPIC!! I'd love to see that done (if only I had the skill)

 

I do agree I'd love to see some more skins for the Dora, skin competition seems a good idea.

 

I agree an awful lot of the skins are similar & IMHO not exactly lookers..............then again I'm a scruffy git with no artistic taste, so what do I know?

[Ala13_ManOWar]

I see there some really historically inaccurate profiles. If we got those you point out we'll end up in a circus parade more than an air force :lol:. I know it can be mind blowing, but #1, 2 and 3 should be quite a similar, if not the same scheme. #1 and 2 are plainly and awfully wrong. #4 is sadly quite inaccurate in colours, that last "restoration" gave her a Christmas tree looking, again something closer to #3 would be better. BUT, #3 pic is quite dark in shades, don't be fooled by the lack of light in the negative, still those are relatively dark colours of course.

 

Current skins can be more or less pretty, but most of them just follow real schemes and those schemes were usually a few. Old times books with their colourful profiles out of a drawer's mind with no idea about history and just looking at black & white pics was really harmful.

 

S!

[zerO_crash]

@Weegie, correct, that is the UDET skin, not exactly accurate historically wise, but since one exists painted like that, I see no problem in including it as a type of skin simulating "flying museum relic" ;) Oh that blue nose... love at first sight :love:

 

@Ala13_ManOWar, I cease to notice the "flying circus"...? Don`t take the livery taken from a cross-angle too literally, they are always off colorwise. However, it`s certainly not the same as #1, haven`t seen a blue nose on any other Dora, or FW-190 for that matter... #4 is indeed imaginary, as it was used on D13, that is true. I don`t take that option for too serious, if they do it, awesome, if not, well meh...

 

#3 is shown more for the record of a FW-190 that seems to have been through it`s fair share of combat, and you can notice in the background something that looks an awful lot like a P40, mustang maybe, and the colors on the nose (red, yellow) seem to be reproduced quite well. So I ain`t quite sure about whether this picture is "that" bad for displaying camo.

 

Point in case, I don`t post these as a means of what "should" be in, more as examples to what is being meant with color nuances and overall different liveries. I love the current ones, but they simply look very similar to one another.

 

EDIT: btw, here are two pics showing the same FW-190D9 from #3, notice that bullet holes on the tail strut and 13mm gun covers match, though here it seems to be taken care of:

http://hyperscale.com/features/2002/images/fw190d9black12mt_3.jpg

http://hyperscale.com/features/2002/images/fw190d9black12mt_2.jpg

Edited September 1, 2016 by zerO_crash

[JST]

I see there some really historically inaccurate profiles. If we got those you point out we'll end up in a circus parade more than an air force :lol:. I know it can be mind blowing, but #1, 2 and 3 should be quite a similar, if not the same scheme. #1 and 2 are plainly and awfully wrong. #4 is sadly quite inaccurate in colours, that last "restoration" gave her a Christmas tree looking, again something closer to #3 would be better. BUT, #3 pic is quite dark in shades, don't be fooled by the lack of light in the negative, still those are relatively dark colours of course.

 

Current skins can be more or less pretty, but most of them just follow real schemes and those schemes were usually a few. Old times books with their colourful profiles out of a drawer's mind with no idea about history and just looking at black & white pics was really harmful.

 

S!

 

I wouldn't be so quick to judge. #1 is definitely a disgusting abomination, but #2 is very close in pattern and markings to the photographs of Romm's machine (Colours need a review). #3 is a very well known Dora "Blue 12", and one thing that is absolutely certain is that none of these schemes are similar. Whether it's colour, markings or pattern.

 

The restoration of the D-13 is not off much, just painted rather lazily.

[MAD-MM]

Was D13 not at some point rebuild after it was also use unhistorical camo pattern for a long time?

[JST]

Was D13 not at some point rebuild after it was also use unhistorical camo pattern for a long time?

 

Yes. The bird is currently the most accurate representation of what it was before it's capture. Loosely, but still.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

@Ala13_ManOWar, I cease to notice the "flying circus"...? Don`t take the livery taken from a cross-angle too literally, they are always off colorwise. However, it`s certainly not the same as #1, haven`t seen a blue nose on any other Dora, or FW-190 for that matter... #4 is indeed imaginary, as it was used on D13, that is true. I don`t take that option for too serious, if they do it, awesome, if not, well meh...

 

#3 is shown more for the record of a FW-190 that seems to have been through it`s fair share of combat, and you can notice in the background something that looks an awful lot like a P40, mustang maybe, and the colors on the nose (red, yellow) seem to be reproduced quite well. So I ain`t quite sure about whether this picture is "that" bad for displaying camo.

 

Point in case, I don`t post these as a means of what "should" be in, more as examples to what is being meant with color nuances and overall different liveries. I love the current ones, but they simply look very similar to one another.

 

EDIT: btw, here are two pics showing the same FW-190D9 from #3, notice that bullet holes on the tail strut and 13mm gun covers match, though here it seems to be taken care of:

http://hyperscale.com/features/2002/images/fw190d9black12mt_3.jpg

http://hyperscale.com/features/2002/images/fw190d9black12mt_2.jpg

Yes, I get the more variety available point, that's fine for sure. I just point out all those schemes so apparently different were indeed and as a matter of fact more or less the same schemes (and that's the reason why you see quite close all of the currently available). #3 pic is a quite good one provided we don't often has the opportunity to look at colour images, anyhow those Kodachrome negatives were quite dark as it needed an awful lot of light to be impressed, that's what I mean and that's the reason why it appears to show so dark colours even though being a fully sunny pic. Those P-47s in the background shows it :smilewink:, but being a bare metal ones they doesn't help. Colour shades in #3 aren't way off (a bit of course) but that RLM 81 just looks a bit dark because kodachrome negative.

 

 

I wouldn't be so quick to judge. #1 is definitely a disgusting abomination, but #2 is very close in pattern and markings to the photographs of Romm's machine (Colours need a review). #3 is a very well known Dora "Blue 12", and one thing that is absolutely certain is that none of these schemes are similar. Whether it's colour, markings or pattern.

 

The restoration of the D-13 is not off much, just painted rather lazily.

Well, #2 should be at least a RLM 75/81 scheme, I don't trust profiles as a system and that doesn't look any good for sure. #4 has imaginary colours even though an actual (B&W) pic of the machine was used for the scheme. One thing that is absolutely sure about all that three schemes is that patterns are probably the same as it is throughout the whole Luftwaffe, or quite close, and sides mottling in different styles shouldn't be taken as "pattern differences". Also different colours using in the same patterns, RLM 75/81, RLM 81/82, with some slightly different shades in later colours as they weren't consistent towards the end of the war. Furthermore, differences in RLM 76/83 shades can't be taken as differences in pattern/schemes, when not unpainted underwings. Also we have to bear in mind also the "engine eggs" used at factories, pre-mounted eggs were brought to factory already painted, so usually it didn't matched colours or pattern of the aeroplane fuselage.

 

With all those variables, different colours schemes over official Luftwaffe patterns (those patterns sometimes had a couple of versions, just mirrored ones), pre-painted engine eggs, hand mottling at fields, and of course weathering, all of that makes them appear very different, but they weren't in a deep sense.

 

 

S!

 

Sources:

 

[rrohde]

Apparently ED still "owes" us the Erich Brunotte skin, no?

 

[JST]

Well, #2 should be at least a RLM 75/81 scheme, I don't trust profiles as a system and that doesn't look any good for sure. #4 has imaginary colours even though an actual (B&W) pic of the machine was used for the scheme. One thing that is absolutely sure about all that three schemes is that patterns are probably the same as it is throughout the whole Luftwaffe, or quite close, and sides mottling in different styles shouldn't be taken as "pattern differences". Also different colours using in the same patterns, RLM 75/81, RLM 81/82, with some slightly different shades in later colours as they weren't consistent towards the end of the war. Furthermore, differences in RLM 76/83 shades can't be taken as differences in pattern/schemes, when not unpainted underwings. Also we have to bear in mind also the "engine eggs" used at factories, pre-mounted eggs were brought to factory already painted, so usually it didn't matched colours or pattern of the aeroplane fuselage.

 

With all those variables, different colours schemes over official Luftwaffe patterns (those patterns sometimes had a couple of versions, just mirrored ones), pre-painted engine eggs, hand mottling at fields, and of course weathering, all of that makes them appear very different, but they weren't in a deep sense.

 

What exactly is wrong with the D13 colours? "Light grey" and "light green with dark green splotches" as described in a rough drawing in Crandall's book Dora vol. 2 (cant post pic as i write this from work on a phone.)

 

Of course different mottling (like does markings etc) matters, as theyre most often consistent throughout production blocks and manufacturers. I don't ID and group together wildly different Doras by some vague "Luftwaffe camouflage".

 

And update your sources to the 21st century with Crandall's and JaPo's Dora books, volumes 1 and 2 for both.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

What exactly is wrong with the D13 colours? "Light grey" and "light green with dark green splotches" as described in a rough drawing in Crandall's book Dora vol. 2 (cant post pic as i write this from work on a phone.)

 

Of course different mottling (like does markings etc) matters, as theyre most often consistent throughout production blocks and manufacturers. I don't ID and group together wildly different Doras by some vague "Luftwaffe camouflage".

 

And update your sources to the 21st century with Crandall's and JaPo's Dora books, volumes 1 and 2 for both.

D13 is wrong since those aren't any close to RLM 81/82/76 as they intended it to be, specially that awful green I don't know were or how they figured out.

 

 

Mottling matters as it does change final appearance, but don't be silly, a pic on a grounded aircraft where it only shows sides hence mostly mottling doesn't mean overall appearance is so different. If we could take an upper view they all are almost the very same. Mottling weren't mostly applied at factories but at front line fields, specially towards the end. Luftwaffe camouflage were anything but "vague", they are pretty square minded and everything is stated in official papers, they don't go pissing without filling a request. Come on mate try harder.

 

And look closer, those books are pretty XXI century, that's not the 80's Merrick book :smilewink:.

 

 

S!

[JST]

Why bother?

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Why bother?

Whatever :smilewink:.

 

S!