Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Old falsehoods getting repeated over and over again...

 

There were some 1600 K-4s and iirc 1800 D-9s produced. Not common, huh?

 

At the end of 1944, there was less than 150 operational K-4s with the JGs.

 

JGs that used the K-4

 

Unit - date introduced to unit (1944) - number of K-4s + other 109s at month end - (end of Dec)

 

III./JG1 - Nil 1944

II./JG2 - Nov - 2 + 56 - (9 + 20)

III./JG3 - Nov - 9 + 58 - (8 + 16)

I./JG4 - Dec - 2 + 26

III./JG4 - Oct - 15 + 38 - (26 + 2)

II./JG11 - Dec - 11 + 58

III./JG26 - Nov - 35 + 36 - (29 + 15)

I./JG27 - Oct - 57 + 1 - (14 + 1)

II./JG27 - Oct - 2 + 57 - (0 + 21)

III./JG27 - Oct - 55 + 2 - (26 + 0)

IV./JG27 - Oct - 4 + 58 - (0 + 32)

III./JG51 - Nil 1944

II./JG52 - Nil 1944

III./JG52 - Nil 1944

II./JG53 - Dec - 5 + 37

III./JG53 - Nil 1944

I./JG77 - Dec - 1 + 37

II./JG77 - Nil 1944

III./JG77 - Oct - 57 - (27)

 

JG list from Prien/Rodeike book Bf109F, G & K

 

The D-9 operational numbers would be similar.

Posted
They will have to fight Me262 in the future, so we need the 150octane. It is also realistc.

 

 

This prooves that P-47D Thunderbolt should get the 150octane to match those planes in combat.:)

 

It doesen't "proove" anything. I personally don't care too much about what fuel Jug will have but do you seriously believe 150 octane would help it to fight against Me 262? :lol:

CPU: Intel Core i7-2600k @3.40GHz | Motherboard: Asus P8P67-M | Memory: Kingston 8GB DDR3 | OS W10 | GPU: Sapphire R9 290x 8GBDDR5 | Monitor: Samsung Syncmaster 24" | Devices: Oculus Rift, MS FFB 2 joystick, Saitek X 52 Pro throttle, Saitek Pro pedals, Gametrix Jetseat

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted (edited)

Back on topic. We can start a new thread if you want discuss the effect of wastage on production and how military unit status reports work.

 

Our D-30 should have the paddle bladed propeller and running at 2535 hp with 64"Hg should hold its own and be competitive as fighter if flown to its strengths.

 

I think the stability and control issues in the design are more worrisome than the fuel.

Edited by NineLine
  • Like 1

Answers to most important questions ATC can ask that every pilot should memorize:

 

1. No, I do not have a pen. 2. Indicating 250

Posted (edited)
It doesen't "proove" anything. I personally don't care too much about what fuel Jug will have but do you seriously believe 150 octane would help it to fight against Me 262? :lol:

A little bit of power always helps. And Me262 is not alone. K4 and D9 with MW50 are all the time in the game I want to remind you.

 

 

Without 150octane fuel, the plane will be sealclubbed.

 

EDIT: The plane will already be outclassed... why beeing against it?

Edited by Solty

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]In 21st century there is only war and ponies.

 

My experience: Jane's attack squadron, IL2 for couple of years, War Thunder and DCS.

My channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyAXX9rAX_Sqdc0IKJuv6dA

Posted

As far as I am not adammant of this race for the higher fuel/boost variants and would be very happy with a D30 on 64inch HG version. On the other hand, if the D30 would be the most representative thunderbolt of the late 44 scenario a Kurfurst or a Dora can say the same regarding the 109 or the 190?

Posted
Again 150 octane fuel, oh no... :(

 

2600 D-30 were produced, how many of them were used by 8th AF (ONLY ONE unit which used 150 grade fuel!!!)?

Because D-30 reached units during late 44, we can suppose only handful of them...

 

So, 100/130 fuel will be right!

end

 

Yeah, 1 fighter unit, the remaining P47s in the 8th airforce inventory were ground attack units.

 

And the 8th airforce only had 150 octane fuel in their inventory by the end of 1944, I wonder what fuel they were using,hmn.......

 

The 9th airforce operated in italy, while P47s were rampaging throughout Europe, away from the range of p47 from italy, I wonder whose p47 those were....

Posted

2600 D-30 were produced, how many of them were used by 8th AF (ONLY ONE unit which used 150 grade fuel!!!)?

Because D-30 reached units during late 44, we can suppose only handful of them...

 

The number is 2520.

 

44-20308 - 21107 Republic P-47D-30-RE Thunderbolt

44-32668 - 33867 Republic P-47D-30-RA Thunderbolt

44-89684 - 90283 Republic P-47D-30-RA Thunderbolt

Posted
Yeah, 1 fighter unit, the remaining P47s in the 8th airforce inventory were ground attack units.

 

And the 8th airforce only had 150 octane fuel in their inventory by the end of 1944, I wonder what fuel they were using,hmn.......

 

The 9th airforce operated in italy, while P47s were rampaging throughout Europe, away from the range of p47 from italy, I wonder whose p47 those were....

 

Ninth Air Force first entered combat in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, then moved to England in 1943.

Posted

EDIT: The plane will already be outclassed... why beeing against it?

 

Well, i just don't believe fuel octane will change situation much to any direction. I'm just bit tired of that "because they have this and that, we need this" etc. Planes, or their fuels/equpment is not selected by us users but devs.

 

I'm probably going to buy every ww2 plane they'll release and will enjoy them all no matter what fuel is available.

CPU: Intel Core i7-2600k @3.40GHz | Motherboard: Asus P8P67-M | Memory: Kingston 8GB DDR3 | OS W10 | GPU: Sapphire R9 290x 8GBDDR5 | Monitor: Samsung Syncmaster 24" | Devices: Oculus Rift, MS FFB 2 joystick, Saitek X 52 Pro throttle, Saitek Pro pedals, Gametrix Jetseat

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted

9th AF operated above North Europe from spring? 44 and used 100/130 oct. fuel

during december 44 some 8th AF Mustang units, which were lent to 9th AF, asked for supply 150 grade fuel

this requirement was refused because of logistical trouble, one kind of fuel for 9th units and second fuel for another units was not accepted..

(this document is on wwiiaircraftperformance page)

 

in Italy operated 12 and 15th AFs and both were supplied with 100/130 ...

 

for D-30 is only 100/130 fuel historically right

F6F

P-51D | P-47D |  F4U-1D |  Mosquito FB Mk VI | Spitfire | Fw 190D | Fw 190A | Bf 109K | WWII Assets Pack

Normandy 2 | The Channel | Sinai | Syria | PG | NTTR | South Atlantic 

 F-4E | F-14A/B |  F/A-18 | F-86 | F-16C | A-10C | FC-3 | CA | SC |

Posted

Our D-30 should have the paddle bladed propeller and running at 2535 hp with 64"Hg should hold its own and be competitive as fighter if flown to its strengths.

 

And what strenght is that?

 

You can't use it's weight to BnZ because the LOD is 2km max, you can't use it's high altitude performance because nobody fight at 8km. What else can it use?

Posted
9th AF operated above North Europe from spring? 44 and used 100/130 oct. fuel

during december 44 some 8th AF Mustang units, which were lent to 9th AF, asked for supply 150 grade fuel

this requirement was refused because of logistical trouble, one kind of fuel for 9th units and second fuel for another units was not accepted..

(this document is on wwiiaircraftperformance page)

 

in Italy operated 12 and 15th AFs and both were supplied with 100/130 ...

 

for D-30 is only 100/130 fuel historically right

 

Yeah, how many K4 and D9 were fitted with MW50 system and EZ 42 by the end of 1944 compared to those who weren't?

 

Using your logic, K4 and D9 with MW50 and fitted with EZ42 as they are in game are not right. And those components should be removed.

Posted
Yeah, how many K4 and D9 were fitted with MW50 system and EZ 42 by the end of 1944 compared to those who weren't?

 

K-4 - all of them (or used C3 fuel)

D-9 i have foud info abot 60 from 240 in strenght at the end of 44 (but rest of D-9 was equiped wit "Ladedrucksteigerung-Rüstsatz" 1900bhp and they did not fly with 1750bhp)

and in 45, nearly all D-9 had MW...

in 45 no one D-30 flown with 150 fuel, 56FG was requiped with M-model P-47...

 

EZ42 does not increase engine power...

F6F

P-51D | P-47D |  F4U-1D |  Mosquito FB Mk VI | Spitfire | Fw 190D | Fw 190A | Bf 109K | WWII Assets Pack

Normandy 2 | The Channel | Sinai | Syria | PG | NTTR | South Atlantic 

 F-4E | F-14A/B |  F/A-18 | F-86 | F-16C | A-10C | FC-3 | CA | SC |

Posted
Yeah, how many K4 and D9 were fitted with MW50 system and EZ 42 by the end of 1944 compared to those who weren't?

 

Using your logic, K4 and D9 with MW50 and fitted with EZ42 as they are in game are not right. And those components should be removed.

 

MW50 system was fitted most of K4's.

 

edit. ninja'd by saburo

CPU: Intel Core i7-2600k @3.40GHz | Motherboard: Asus P8P67-M | Memory: Kingston 8GB DDR3 | OS W10 | GPU: Sapphire R9 290x 8GBDDR5 | Monitor: Samsung Syncmaster 24" | Devices: Oculus Rift, MS FFB 2 joystick, Saitek X 52 Pro throttle, Saitek Pro pedals, Gametrix Jetseat

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted
.

in 45 no one D-30 flown with 150 fuel, 56FG was requiped with M-model P-47...

 

What was the 56th flying in late '44?

 

What does 1945 have to do with 1944 > DCS WWII: Europe 1944 Project Discussion

Posted

this topic is about DCS P-47D-30 I think

and DCS WWII: Europe 1944 Project is already death, it was kickstarter...

F6F

P-51D | P-47D |  F4U-1D |  Mosquito FB Mk VI | Spitfire | Fw 190D | Fw 190A | Bf 109K | WWII Assets Pack

Normandy 2 | The Channel | Sinai | Syria | PG | NTTR | South Atlantic 

 F-4E | F-14A/B |  F/A-18 | F-86 | F-16C | A-10C | FC-3 | CA | SC |

Posted (edited)

The P-47D-30

 

The number is 2520.

 

44-20308 - 21107 Republic P-47D-30-RE Thunderbolt

44-32668 - 33867 Republic P-47D-30-RA Thunderbolt

44-89684 - 90283 Republic P-47D-30-RA Thunderbolt

 

 

Not that it matters too much but I show a few more being produced in my materials.

 

Farmingdale P-47D-30's:

44-20308 to 44-21107

 

Evansville P-47D-30's:

44-32668 to 44-33867

44-89684 to 44-90283

 

2,597 total

 

Edit: Misspelling

Edited by Merlin-27

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

[Dogs of War] WWII COMBAT SERVER | P-51D - FW190-D9 - Me109-K4

Visit Our Website & Forum to Get More Info & Team Speak Access

Posted
Not that it matters too much but I show a few more being produced in my materials.

 

Farmingdale P-47D-30's:

44-20308 to 44-21107 > 800

 

Evansville P-47D-30's:

44-32668 to 44-33867 > 1200

44-89684 to 44-90283 > 520

 

2,597 total

No it doesn't really matter.:)

Posted
I don't really understand why the suggestion of tuning up Allied planes to a high standard like their axis cousins causes so much commotion.

 

That is a good question. Seems to me it is more like an erroneous perception that the axis planes are tuned up and every allied airplane should be using 100/150 grade.

 

That is just me. :smilewink:

 

Maybe when they add the "special fuels" versions we will get a 100/150 grade P-51, C3 1.98ata Bf-109K4 and the C3 2.02ata FW-190D13? Maybe I shouldn't have said that because it will turn into a 50 page fuel whinefest nobody cares about....:doh:

 

Personally, it is about as far down on my list as you can get. I would rather time spent on maps, bombers, other fighters, and a good campaign than time wasted on special fuel variants.

Answers to most important questions ATC can ask that every pilot should memorize:

 

1. No, I do not have a pen. 2. Indicating 250

Posted (edited)

I thought it was fairly common knowledge that a well-maintained Me 109 wasn't quite the standard late in the war, when German was facing serious logistical difficulties, such as material shortages and quality control problems. Hence my perception that our Me 109K in the sim is an above-average example, even if it isn't running at the highest boost pressure that any Me 109K ever ran at. Meanwhile, even though not "every Allied airplane" used the high-grade fuel, boosting them higher than factory settings (with or without high-grade fuel) was commonly practiced, to the point that the average WEP rating on the P-38, P-47, and P-51 was higher than factory. (How much higher than factory was the average, of course, is questionable, since we don't have, AFAIK, hard numbers of how many ran which settings; or, if we do, it isn't an easy job determining such, but it was unarguably higher than the factory setting.)

 

I agree that trying to model everything in the sim on its best historical example is neither representative nor even competitively balanced. However, I see no reason to avoid modelling the fighters on both sides on the most historically-representative, "middle of the road" examples, when doing so has the added bonus of naturally improving the competitive balance, and in this case, this means using the normal, somewhat-higher-than-factory WEP ratings on the U.S. birds (especially given that we're already using a rather idealized Me 109K). It doesn't make the sim any less realistic, it doesn't make the sim any less historically representative, and it can make the sim better balanced competitively.

 

Current situation is this:

 

Medium/high-end Me 109K

Low-end P-51D

Low-end P-47D

 

Are you now seeing why I have a problem with this? It's neither fair from a competitive balance standpoint (given that the factory P-47D is significantly inferior to the high-quality Me 109K below 20,000 feet or so), nor is it historically representative of how things usually were. Look, I'm not asking for a 75", ~1900 hp. P-38L. That would be uncalled for, unless we were facing the 1.98 ata Me 109. I'm just asking for comparable, historical, representative, fair, balanced horsepower ratings. Why is this such a problem? Why are some people so insistent that the aircraft on the German side be based on higher-end examples than the aircraft on the U.S. side, when the end result of this is a situation is both less well-balanced and less historically-representative than choosing similar examples for both?

Edited by Echo38
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...