Poll:What new planes would you like?

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 3:03 pm

Originally posted by Grisha:
Yogi,
My apologies regarding durability ratings. I didn't realize those were original values. You might want to change those to more realistic values too, and if you want assistance I'd be more than happy to offer mine in that respect <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> .

No need to apologise, you could not know that. I'd be happy to use any work you've done or plan to do on durability ratings in my air OOB.

You're of course entitled to your opinion regarding speed vs maneuver, but I'm afraid I'll stick with my fixation on speed/climbrate. If it was as you say, planes like the Me-262 or Fw-190D would never have gained a reputation as deadly fighters, since they were lousy turners but fast as lightning. In any case, I do have hard data on speed and rate of climb, I have nothing but opinion on maneuver, so I can't factor it into the formula. Now if somebody would hand me a set of consistent turn performance data for these aircraft, then we could perhaps include it into the formula somehow.

[ November 14, 2001: Message edited by: Yogi Yohan ]</p>

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 3:33 pm

OK, to sum this up, I belive the Ta-152H and Do-335 seem to be the most popular contestants to fill up the two empty German fighter slots.

I will also include the Ar-234 jet bomber and the Tu-2 long range bomber.

Unfortunately the game engine does not allow such fun propositions as the V-1 or V-2 and I'm afraid I do not dare to go into hypothetical models (such as early Me-262 fighters, He-112 fighters, Go-229 Stealth Jets etc).

Lokioftheaesir · Post by **Lokioftheaesir** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 3:36 pm

Originally posted by Yogi Yohan:

What the ##### is "the Tribefugal"?
<img src="confused.gif" border="0"> <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Yogi

The spelling is crap but phonetically OK.
Tribefugal was drawing board only. (concept)

Imagine a V2 shaped vehicle with little wheels at the outside edge of each fin(to stand on)
The entire vehicle is about 20 meters high and stands on it's tail for takeoff and landing.
Half way up was a free rotating collar with 3 hellicopter type blades. On the end of each blade was a small jumo turbine. Start up the turbines and the blades spin with the collar. You've a ballistic shaped vehicle with a jet powered hellicopter lift system 'round the center and the poor basterd sitting on his back near the top hoping the whole thing dos'nt fall over.
Give it to the germans for far out imagination but even today it would be quite a feat to get the concept to work.
Yes the nazis were self defeating idiots but in one sense they allowed unrestricted research that only tides of US defence funds in the 60's and 70's could match.

Boys and their toys

Nick

Ps. Think about the contest between the Ta152 and Do335. Game wise most will build the Me262 for sheer power and the Ta152 cant stand up to that, but the Do335 had great range(if i remember right) so might get included in some numbers for this factor alone. Including the AR234 is also a good move (love that plane).

[ November 14, 2001: Message edited by: Lokioftheaesir ]</p>

frank1970 · Post by **frank1970** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 4:09 pm

Don´t speak bad about this helo thing. I think I work for the son of the inventor.

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 4:25 pm

Originally posted by Lokioftheaesir:

Yogi

The spelling is crap but phonetically OK.
Tribefugal was drawing board only. (concept)

Imagine a V2 shaped vehicle with little wheels at the outside edge of each fin(to stand on)
The entire vehicle is about 20 meters high and stands on it's tail for takeoff and landing.
Half way up was a free rotating collar with 3 hellicopter type blades. On the end of each blade was a small jumo turbine. Start up the turbines and the blades spin with the collar. You've a ballistic shaped vehicle with a jet powered hellicopter lift system 'round the center and the poor basterd sitting on his back near the top hoping the whole thing dos'nt fall over.
Give it to the germans for far out imagination but even today it would be quite a feat to get the concept to work.
Yes the nazis were self defeating idiots but in one sense they allowed unrestricted research that only tides of US defence funds in the 60's and 70's could match.

Boys and their toys

Nick

ROFLOL! That's one career I'm happy I never had to pursue: Nazi German test pilot.

Actually, I belive the reaction powered helicopter spinner idea is being used for a new budget-class orbital rocket. Its supposed to land by deploying an unpowered rotor from its top wich will slow the descent. Shortly before takedown, small rockets at the tips of the rotor blades ignite, creating some lift which is supposed to slow down the contraption to a safe landing speed.

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 4:28 pm

Come to think of it, nobody has mentioned the He-162 Volksjäger. Would anyone like that one?

Tom1939 · Post by **Tom1939** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 6:03 pm

Originally posted by Yogi Yohan:
Come to think of it, nobody has mentioned the He-162 Volksjäger. Would anyone like that one?

Yes, good idea. It should cost less points then me262A, but I have no idea what it'avaibility time and data. Would you please tell me?

Tom1939 · Post by **Tom1939** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 6:07 pm

Maybe it's out of the topic but: could same tanks be changed? There are a lot of pzIII's and pzIV's but there are only one panther. Maybe more panther prototypes by skipping some pzIII or pzIV? Or the panthers version's did not differ enough to give them different stats?

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:04 pm

Originally posted by Tom1939:
Maybe it's out of the topic but: could same tanks be changed? There are a lot of pzIII's and pzIV's but there are only one panther. Maybe more panther prototypes by skipping some pzIII or pzIV? Or the panthers version's did not differ enough to give them different stats?

Only difference between early Panther D and later Panther A is that the A model had an engine that actually worked. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> But, alas, we cannot model unreliability in WIR. Panther G had slightly upgraded turret armour, but was otherwise the same that Panther A. However, we could have a Panther II coming into service in late spring 1945 - a Panther with an 88L71 gun (same as Königstiger). The problem is that there is not enough slots. I guess the PzKpfw-IVH and J models could be consolidated into a single one since they were as far as I know virtually identical - except the J model had lost its powered turret traverse. Then we could have one slot free for the Panther II.

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:19 pm

Originally posted by Tom1939:

Yes, good idea. It should cost less points then me262A, but I have no idea what it'avaibility time and data. Would you please tell me?

First delivery of production model was January 1945. Top speed was 521 mph at 19700 feet, 491 mph at sea level. Rate of climb was 4200 feet per minute, max range 606 miles. Standard armament was x2 20mm Mauser MG 151 cannons in the lower nose.

I guess this would be a cheap alternative to the Me-262, with much less firepower but roughly equal air combat stats.

SoleSurvivor · Post by **SoleSurvivor** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 11:14 pm

Is there any point in having such a latie?

Lokioftheaesir · Post by **Lokioftheaesir** » Thu Nov 15, 2001 12:21 am

Originally posted by Frank:
Don´t speak bad about this helo thing. I think I work for the son of the inventor.

Frank

I dont speak badly of it. I think it was an amazing piece of imaginative design. A bit too far ahead of it's time for the technology of the time however.
I would be proud if my father designed a machine like that.

Nick

GET TRANSPT · Post by **GET TRANSPT** » Sat Nov 17, 2001 2:47 am

Hi Yogi, I've been looking at your PlanesStats.txt and wonder how you (or anyone else) arrived at the durability ratings, particularly for the late war German planes, which were built under some material duress. The Me-262 with a durability of 28 looks like a flying tank to me. And the He-162 was built hastily with some wood parts, if I recall. I too read with interest the posts about cannon ratings, Soviet MG's and gun sights.

What did you take into account?

was it only airframe thickness?

composition of metals/wood in airframes?
mechanical breakdowns?
critical hits?
cockpit/engine/wing/tail design and protection?
flight tactics?
performance in inclement weather?
other things?

The above could also be used (has been used?) for tanks.

On tanks, I think WIR could simulate the early Panther's mechanical problems (and inability to get to the battlefield and defend german units) by decreasing its armor (defense). The Germans are getting off scot-free. If my car breaks down, I can't get to the store and buy food, and my "armor" (defense against disease) goes down as I slowly starve...

Not penalizing the Panther or aircraft that were notoriously unreliable (and unflyable) assumes everything works all the time. No machine ever has, especially in wartime.

On a related concept, do you know what a tort is? Torts are a way of applying hard numerical ratings to intangible human elements in law. And they are as widely criticized as they are prevalent.

Thank you for your effort!

Sergio

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Sat Nov 17, 2001 3:43 am

Originally posted by GET TRANSPT:
Hi Yogi, I've been looking at your PlanesStats.txt and wonder how you (or anyone else) arrived at the durability ratings

Sergio, I haven't changed the durability ratings, since I have no data to go on. They are exactly as in 3.101. The only one I have made up myself was the IAR-80 and I let that be similar to equivalent aircraft.

Regarding the Panther, that might be OK with the Panther D (part of the problem was that it was prone to catch fire, which could easily be interpreted as weak defence) but the following A and G models were as reliable as they come. So we would have to have two different Panthers, and one of them would only be produced for a very short time.

[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: Yogi Yohan ]</p>

Mist · Post by **Mist** » Fri Nov 23, 2001 10:32 pm

here I am testing what will happen with "empty" thread if I would post reply there. Just test.

Mist · Post by **Mist** » Fri Nov 23, 2001 10:34 pm

wow! cmon guys! go and revive your favorite threads!!!! ASAP! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

BvB · Post by **BvB** » Sun Nov 25, 2001 10:36 pm

For armor, I'd agree there is not enough difference between the PzIVh & j to list both in the game. But I don't think the Panther A & D are different enough to include in the game as two models either. Not sure what a good candidate would be for the PzIVj slot - maybe for captured T34's or something similar?
In planes, most mentioned candidates are so late in the war as to not get much game use. The TA152 could be considered similar to the FW190D for the game. I agree the Ju87B & D should be two slots. But since the D was already in production at the start of Barbarosa, maybe the B could be in an obsolete slot - like the Fokker holds. And the IAR80 could be considered part of mixed fighters. What about the FW200 Condor? I realize it was only used for recon, but had the potential as a 4-engine bomber. Or the Hs123A1 has somewhat wimpy stats, but was a well used ground support plane in the early war.
Another alternative is to have different plane sets for different campaign games. Many of the mentioned nominations would be good for a 43 or 44 campaign, but not so much so for the more often played 41 & 42 campaigns.
Just my two pfennigs... BvB

frank1970 · Post by **frank1970** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 2:54 pm

I would like to see a fighter bomber version of the Fw190A.
Would it be possible to "upgrade" some of the earlier fighters (Bf109e or Fokker) to late war interceptors as FW190a with added rockets or wing arment in the interceptor role?
The same would be good for the obsolete Me110.

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Mon Dec 03, 2001 4:26 pm

Originally posted by Frank:
Would it be possible to "upgrade" some of the earlier fighters (Bf109e or Fokker) to late war interceptors as FW190a with added rockets or wing arment in the interceptor role?

The late war increase in firepower from rockets, etc, is in the issues list, but I don't know if Arnaud has seen that entry or not.

frank1970 · Post by **frank1970** » Tue Dec 04, 2001 5:23 pm

Hmm, would it be possible to leave away the BF109e and create a plane "Fw190A interceptor" in 1944, with increased firepower and reduced bombload. Just a new planetype.