Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Schlageter
And if the DB601N was having troubles in the 109 then there must have been trouble with the 110 as well.
|
Your original quote mentioned problems with the installation, not the engine itself. The way i read this is that there was probably some redesign needed under the cowling and shuffling around the engine accesories, not that the engine was faulty per se.
If that's true, then it actually means it would be easier to install in a 110 as it's a bigger airframe with more available space.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZaltysZ
As talks begin to wander towards personals things, I want to point out one thing. This thread was created for discussions about inaccuracies between FM and RL data, however later it took the course of debating if planes present in game are suitable for BoB period.
Although Kurfurst doesn't agree that all Spitfires MK.I were on 100 octane, I think he won't disagree that Spitfire MK.I on 100 octane were not such rare and exotic breed (ala I-185, Mig-3U and so on), which would not be worth to be modeled. I think both sides would agree that we need 2 additional Spitfire MK.I models: CSP and CSP+100 octane. This is what is required from devs now. Everything else (debates about how much 100 octane were available) would be more helpful for mission designers and not to devs (somehow I don't think they would invest much time correcting campaigns).
|
Exactly, best post in the entire number of threads concerned with the octane issue. Give us all the Spit Mk.I variants that were relevant in the timeframe of BoB and BoF, then it's the mission designer's/server admin's job to decide what to do with them. If people don't like it they fly another offline campaign, modify it to include their preferred ride or fly on a different server, problem solved.