Me-109G upgrade to Fw-190 problem

[davewolf]

I noticed a few times that Me-109G squadrons will be upgraded to Fw-190A or D when there are enough of them in the pool although the regular upgrade path leads to the Me-109K. So if a axis player builds very many Fw's he simply cannot maintain any Messerschmitt squadrons during later years even if he wants to (for historical reasons or whatever).
The only way to avoid that AFAIK is to build not that many Fw's. Otherwise it doesn't make any sense IMO to build the Me-109G (or any Me-109) at all.

Any other solutions?

Dave

[Lokioftheaesir]

Originally posted by davewolf
I noticed a few times that Me-109G squadrons will be upgraded to Fw-190A or D when there are enough of them in the pool although the regular upgrade path leads to the Me-109K. So if a axis player builds very many Fw's he simply cannot maintain any Messerschmitt squadrons during later years even if he wants to (for historical reasons or whatever).
The only way to avoid that AFAIK is to build not that many Fw's. Otherwise it doesn't make any sense IMO to build the Me-109G (or any Me-109) at all.

Any other solutions?

Dave

Maciej

No solutions are needed. The FW190 was simply a better plane. Me go into design mode in 1943 untill the 262 is ready then they rise to ascendancy. This is only common sense, none of this equal opportunity rubbish.
Just because "the germans historically did thing 'a'" (or the allies for that matter) does not mean thing 'a' was the best path. (or the only one)
For example if the US had switched all production to the P51 and not used the P38 or P47 what would be the effect? More allied fighters in the air with a streamlined logistic tail.
The concept of companies producing different and in many cases inferior designs is a product of consumer ecconomics. This has no place on the battlefield where "only the best will do' is the axiom.
The words of the pilot should be gospel. How many would rather step into a Me109 or a P47 than a FW190 or a P51. The choice was made for them by REMF's, political choices.
Note that in the contemporary US AirForce there is only one LR airsup aircraft. the F22. (as there is only one MBT) Common sense has won the day.


Loki

[davewolf]

Originally posted by Lokioftheaesir
No solutions are needed. The FW190 was simply a better plane. Me go into design mode in 1943 untill the 262 is ready then they rise to ascendancy. This is only common sense, none of this equal opportunity rubbish.
Just because "the germans historically did thing 'a'" (or the allies for that matter) does not mean thing 'a' was the best path. (or the only one)

Loki

Thanks for the comment. Certainly I don't really need the Me's later on. But if I'm just a bit sentimental and would want to keep some Me-109 squadrons during all the game (:)) how can I keep them from being replaced by the Fw's automatically?

Dave

P.S. Are you busy these days? How about the chat at sunday?

[Lokioftheaesir]

Originally posted by davewolf


Loki

Thanks for the comment. Certainly I don't really need the Me's later on. But if I'm just a bit sentimental and would want to keep some Me-109 squadrons during all the game (:)) how can I keep them from being replaced by the Fw's automatically?

Dave

P.S. Are you busy these days? How about the chat at sunday?

Maciej

Why would you want that? Do you hate your pilots?


What is a 'chat at sunday' I do not use ICQ or any such.

Loki

[davewolf]

Originally posted by Lokioftheaesir
Why would you want that? Do you hate your pilots?

Loki

You never know. Harharhar (evil laugh)

What is a 'chat at sunday' I do not use ICQ or any such.

It's me, Dave. And I mean the chat with Heiks. I think it could be a good opportunity to talk a bit.

Dave

[Lokioftheaesir]

Originally posted by davewolf


Loki

You never know. Harharhar (evil laugh)



It's me, Dave. And I mean the chat with Heiks. I think it could be a good opportunity to talk a bit.

Dave

Sorry Dave i'd just sent my lattest turn to Maciej and i started the reply to you with his name.
You of course are dave and no other.

I'll look into MSN tonight and get back to you. Much as i lothe using MS products it might be the only way.

Loki

[davewolf]

Originally posted by Lokioftheaesir
You of course are dave and no other.

Sometimes I don't know who I am myself...

[Kensai]

Strange, the Russians considered the Me109 the much more dangerous dogfighter.

Many German aces on the eastern front also prefered the Me109.

[Ed Cogburn]

Originally posted by Lokioftheaesir
For example if the US had switched all production to the P51 and not used the P38 or P47 what would be the effect? More allied fighters in the air with a streamlined logistic tail.

The P-51 wasn't designed as a ground support aircraft, nor as a fighter-bomber. When the Korean War started, the pilots flying P51s wished they still had some P47s around, but they were all gone by then. Although the goal is to have one plane that does it all , in WWII the technology simply couldn't design one plane that could do everything. That's why more P47s were built than P51s, even though the P51 got more attention, similer to the situation with the British Hurricane and Spitfire planes. Even now the situation isn't much better. That's the reason why the Navy still has the F-14, the FA-18, and the AV8 Harrier, and why the Air Force continues to use the A10 and the F117s along with the F15 and F16.

Note that in the contemporary US AirForce there is only one LR airsup aircraft. the F22. (as there is only one MBT)

The Air Force isn't buying enough F22s to replace all the planes they have now. Besides the F15, you are forgetting the F16 and the Joint Strike Fighter, which is supposedly going to replace the F16, and serve along side the F22.

Common sense has won the day.

Its more a matter of time. The M1 tank was designed in the 70s, and has been through a significant series of updates and improvements, including main gun, armor, and fire control electronics. If you've got two and a half decades to test a system, including one war that was ideal for testing tank designs, its possible to settle on one design. None of the combatants in WWII had the luxury of 25 years of testing though.

[Ed Cogburn]

Originally posted by Kensai
Strange, the Russians considered the Me109 the much more dangerous dogfighter.

Many German aces on the eastern front also prefered the Me109.

Same with American pilots. One ace in the Pacific insisted on flying his beloved P38 instead of a shiny, brand new P51. Some prefered the "Jug" (P47) over the Mustang (P51) too.

[Lokioftheaesir]

Originally posted by Ed Cogburn



The P-51 wasn't designed as a ground support aircraft, nor as a fighter-bomber. When the Korean War started, the pilots flying P51s wished they still had some P47s around, but they were all gone by then. Although the goal is to have one plane that does it all , in WWII the technology simply couldn't design one plane that could do everything. That's why more P47s were built than P51s, even though the P51 got more attention, similer to the situation with the British Hurricane and Spitfire planes. Even now the situation isn't much better. That's the reason why the Navy still has the F-14, the FA-18, and the AV8 Harrier, and why the Air Force continues to use the A10 and the F117s along with the F15 and F16.
----------------
The Air Force isn't buying enough F22s to replace all the planes they have now. Besides the F15, you are forgetting the F16 and the Joint Strike Fighter, which is supposedly going to replace the F16, and serve along side the F22.
----------------
Its more a matter of time. The M1 tank was designed in the 70s, and has been through a significant series of updates and improvements, including main gun, armor, and fire control electronics. If you've got two and a half decades to test a system, including one war that was ideal for testing tank designs, its possible to settle on one design. None of the combatants in WWII had the luxury of 25 years of testing though.

Ed

Some valid points.
However i was basically talking in terms of AirSup Aircraft. I should'nt have brought the P47 into it. It was a tough machine but not really suited to AirSup/Bomber escort. (except as pointed out, in the hands of those most comfortable with it.)

The use of 'LR AirSup' was intentional. F16 is Short Range. You've got me on the Joint strike fighter, i hav'nt been following the lattest ideas for it's use.

The M1? Well maybe you need 25 years to smooth out such a complicated machine.(realistically it cound have been done a lot faster if the effort was put the task, this period in US arms development is squirely, look at the Bradley)
The 'relatively' simple designs of the early 40's (Pz111h) along with ample 'live combat' testing dramatically reduces such a process.

Really we simply diverge on production and deployment philosophy. You tend support the way it (mostly) actually occured (and still occurs) and i reply that yes, that worked. Though there was a lot of confusion on both sides of the war that lead to gross inefficiency.
But objectively production could have been rationalised to a far greater extent than it was.
The game gives me the (objectively possible) option to try out this sort of rationalisation.
There is great strength in diversificaton of concepts and ideas.
But in real terms rationalisation makes more sense in the field. (if new types needed testing then a squadron of such could easily be shoved into a hot zone. No shortage of them at the time. Elite pilots could quickly isolate problems or major flaws. This is what i mean by common sense)
Hence..

A plethora of different 'types' does not a better airforce make.
(unless of course these types are all near perfect)

All the best

Nick

[Ranger-75]

The ME-109 in addition to being inferior had such a narrow landing carriage that there were more operational mishaps than with the FW-190.

Pilots get used to a plane and they become able to bring out the best in it. That's why some preferred to stick with their Jugs, Lightnings and 109s. These were competent planes, just not as good as Mustangs and 190s.

The reason why the Me-109 remained in production for so long was soley to the influential position of Willy Messerschmitt, He was a close friend of Hitler and used that influence to keep his business flowing. This was just another example of the NAZI penchant for "empire building" within the economy & government.

In the US, the government did "spread adound" the procurement dollars for various types of aircraft, but also other contracted other companies to build the planes. This was even more true with tank manufacture in the US.

I always immediately stop building 109s and convert all but one factory over to 190s. Willy can sit and stew all he wants.:p

[czerpak]

Originally posted by Ranger-75

The reason why the Me-109 remained in production for so long was soley to the influential position of Willy Messerschmitt,

No, it wasnt. It was mainly the lack of engines for FW.
For Willy it wouldnt matter if he was given Reichsmarks for building Me109 or FW190.

[Mark_BookGuy]

__Note that in the contemporary US AirForce there is only one LR airsup aircraft. the F22. (as there is only one MBT) Common sense has won the day.__


Common sense has nothing to do with this. Military procurement has never, and never will be, based on common sense. The Leopard beat the pants off the M1 in the Army's original testing, but what Congressman was going to support losing thousands of (then) Chrysler jobs to the Germans? The Nazi government had the most inefficient, byzantine procurement system known to man. [Okay, maybe except for the Italians.] The Heer went off to war with dozens of truck and car models, tanks with almost no swappable parts, and 19th century model rifles. Ditto problems for the Luftwaffe. Folks forget that what really stalled the panzer groups was a huge breakdown rate, lack of parts and too few repair facilities. For a "hilarious" look at procurement run amok, see Macgregor Knox's "Hitler's Italian Allies." It's a hoot.

Ciao.

[davewolf]

All

The Me-109 had its qualities.

Anyway it may be a bit rude but how about returning to the initial topic?
My questions were:
1. Why will Me-109G's be replaced by Fw-190's even though the Me-109G's upgrade path leads to the Me-109K?
2. How could I avoid this effect (if at all) if I'd want so. (Maybe because I hate my pilots. Got too many of them. )

Dave

[Preuss]

Dave,
A theory if I may.....
1. Perhaps the game system (I know nothng about programming) sees the FW-190 as a superior aircraft and thereby "upgrades" the German fighter wings as they become available.
2. Produce less of the FW-190s...turn a plant or two into production of something else


Gary

[davewolf]

Originally posted by Preuss
A theory if I may.....
1. Perhaps the game system (I know nothng about programming) sees the FW-190 as a superior aircraft and thereby "upgrades" the German fighter wings as they become available.

An open question for the programming team...

2. Produce less of the FW-190s...turn a plant or two into production of something else

Hmmm, I've already been thinking about that.
But first producing less fighters doesn't seem to be a good solution to me regarding the capability of defending the Reich against the bombing raids during '43/'44.
And second if one produces i.e. more Me-109(G)'s, even though they will be replaced some day, sooner or later (if one builds enough Fw's to be able to protect your territory and to have some reserves). At the end one has several hundreds (or thousands?) of useless Me-109G's in the replacement pool and maybe not a single Me squadron.
So probably the only way is never to produce at least the Me-109G (as mentioned before). But how can I then show my hatred of my pilots?

Dave

[Ranger-75]

If you don't want to have a bazillion "useless" ME109s around in the pools, then stop building them right away and concentrate on FW190s. Give the Me109s to the minor axis air groups and leave one or two German groups with 109s until the pools are "lowered" That's what I also do with PZII and PZIII initially. Keep them in the battle lines and "use them up" I think you need to keep a few around to "convert" to Marders, but I'm not sure how that works. I'd rather have more PZIVs later than 800 PZIIs in the replacement pools.

Same thing with the fighters.

[Jeremy Pritchard]

This is the problem about War In Russia and Pacific War, there is no reason to produce 'bad' units, that were historically produced and used in large numbers.

The P-39 was used a heck of a lot by the USAAC in 1942, but all but the most novice of players would not change all P-39 production to P-40 production (which is better in all categories). The same with the Me109. Why produce it?

One thing that might be changed as to make an incentive to produce the Me109 is to modify its cost. Make it much cheaper then the FW190 (representing difficulty of engine production), then the player will know that they will produce more aircraft if they have both Me109's and FW190's then just FW190's which would cost more. Also, it was stated that the general Me109 frame can hold more weaponry, so have generic Me109's have realistically more cannon ratings then the FW190's (making them, as what they were, good bomber killers).

There are some upgrades that are hard coded in the game. Factory upgrades are one of those. No matter what you change actual aircraft upgrades to, factory upgrades will remain the same unless changed in the code.

[frank1970]

You can say much about the Me109, but it was never a bomber killer. the weaponary of the Me109 was to weak. The Me109 carried one 20mm cannon and two 1,3mm MG, later a 30mm gun. All this weapons had very little ammo.

The Fw carried much more firepower from the very beginning and what is more important the FWs had more ammo onboard.

In the fights against the Allied bombers Mes took the fighter escorts, the Fws the bombers.