Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 03-01-2011, 02:10 PM
fruitbat's Avatar
fruitbat fruitbat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S E England
Posts: 1,065
Default

my point is simple.

surely having a plane that fought in much larger numbers (the E1) in the Battle of Britain is more important than other sub types (E4N) which fought in much lesser numbers, if you want an as accurate as possible BoB (although having all the variants would be nice).

yes/no?

Last edited by fruitbat; 03-01-2011 at 02:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 03-01-2011, 02:46 PM
addman's Avatar
addman addman is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vasa, Finland
Posts: 1,593
Default

There are more than 1 version of the Bf109E? LOL! All look the same to me!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 03-01-2011, 03:00 PM
Matt255 Matt255 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fruitbat View Post
like the E1 you mean.
Exactly.

Now of course, they could keep the same cockpit (would be wrong), cut the barrels of the cannons and say those are machineguns (would be wrong too) and then pretend it's a E-1.

I don't think people would like that, even those that want the E-1 in CloD.
Quote:
Its weird how the usual lufty whiners don't seem to be concerned about that, yet they are concerned about which type of 20mm cannon they get (and upset it's not the better of the two).
Maybe they are concerned that they won't get the more common, historical variant in a realistic flightsim.

Also because the E-3 is so similar to the E-4 and the E-4 was more common, it is a bit surprising, that the developers decided to only model the E-3 instead of the E-4.


But whatever, i'm still hoping for E-1, E-3 and E-4 (and E-7, but then that's a bit too unlikely).
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 03-01-2011, 03:45 PM
fruitbat's Avatar
fruitbat fruitbat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S E England
Posts: 1,065
Default

As i said earlier in the thread, an E1 and an E4 makes by far the most sense to me.....
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 03-01-2011, 04:58 PM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TUSA/TX-Gunslinger View Post
And your sources? Please list. I'd like to know more.

Everything I have access to shows that across the extent of deployed Geshwader, both early in BoB and late in Bob E-1's - were minority - only assigned to some Enlisted pilots. Galland was in JG26 not 2.

I think also that Galland, Wick, Balthasar and other 'Kannon' mainly had E-4/N's. Look at the Octane rating on their aircraft in profiles. The issues is a bit confused by E-1's/E-3's with E-4 canopy and E-3's which had ben upgraded to E-4 standard.

BTW, my main JG26 source "JG26 Top Guns of the Luftwaffe - Donald Caldwell".

S!

Gunny
Dang, yes JG26. This is from Stienhilpers book, he was in the BoB under Galland and said that they had few decent types, and those they had 'the Spaniards' got them. Steinhilper had an E-1 I recall.

I have also read Gallands "The First and the Last", but he barely mentions equipment apart from numbers produced, and spends the book complaining about how they lost and what he wanted to do.

Last edited by Osprey; 03-01-2011 at 05:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 03-01-2011, 05:05 PM
fruitbat's Avatar
fruitbat fruitbat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S E England
Posts: 1,065
Default

Hooton in Eagle in Flames gives the percentage losses of 109s by subtype:

July
E1 - 44%
E3 - 30%
E4 - 20%

August
E1 - 40%
E3 - 8%
E4 - 52%

September
E1 - 38%
E3 - 1%
E4 - 61%

October
E1 - 36%
E3 - 2%
E4 - 62%

and from Kurfust, over at ubi a while ago,

"I have some actual numbers. On 31 August 1940, fighter units (excluding JG 77) reported 375 E-1s, 125 E-3s, 339 E-4s and 32 E-7s on strength, indicating that most of the E-3s had been already converted to E-4 standard. JG 77 had around 100-125 aircraft with it, but for the rest of the units, its 75% cannon E-3/4/7, the rest are all MG E-1s. The E-1 and E-3 were produced parallel and in about equal numbers from the end of 1938, but by mid-1940, the production of the E-1 stopped, replaced by the E-4 and then the E-7."

and

In Ulrich Steinhilper's book 'Spitfire on My Tail', he relates quite clearly that they, JG52 didn't get there first cannon armed 109's until mid september , and then only 2, which were hand me downs from another unit. Rest of the unit bar these 2 planes was still in E1's.

Its pretty clear that the E1 and E4 were the most common variants by far and that around SEPTEMBER sometime, the E4 became more prevalent than the E1, which had been the most common type until then, but even it October a third of the losses were still E1's.

which makes the E3 choice mystifying to me.

Last edited by fruitbat; 03-01-2011 at 07:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 03-01-2011, 07:22 PM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TUSA/TX-Gunslinger View Post
I only used the term E4 canopy for convieniance sake.

Any idea of a better term?

The RAF called them "squareheads"
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 03-01-2011, 07:31 PM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Banks View Post
IMHO the consistent wing type letter system was "applied" late war or even post war.

When the Spitfire I came into service there was only one wing type, hence there was no letter for it. In 1940 the letter "A" and "B" were added to distinguish between the machine gun armed and the canon armed version.
Spitfire II and V used the same system, "A" meaning machine gun armed, "B" canon armed. Then there was introduced the "universal wing" and machines with it were given the "C" letter.
Sounds like the wing type letter system, but then the Spitfire IX with Merlin 60, 61, 63 came in service, and the wing type system wasn't used initially! They all had the "universal wing" but they were simply called Spitfire IX without the "C" letter. When the Spitfire IX with Merlin 66 was introduced they were given the name Spitfire IXB - simply to distinguish between the different engines. Obviously not the wing type letter system.

After this the wing type letter system must have been "applied" retroactively to all marks.
The 'universal wing' was the 'c' wing, ie it was able to fit cannon or mg's or both. The naming convention was probably thought up afterwards as soon as they had 2 wing types and needed to tell the difference.
The different engine types were designated by letter as an indication of the blower fitted, since all of these used the universal wing then it didn't matter, but it was a 'c' wing anyway. I've never heard of 'B' being used, that's very strange, LF and HF were used.

Now I have to look it up in my massive definitive Spitfire book........
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 03-01-2011, 07:35 PM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fruitbat View Post
In Ulrich Steinhilper's book 'Spitfire on My Tail', he relates quite clearly that they, JG52 didn't get there first cannon armed 109's until mid september , and then only 2, which were hand me downs from another unit. Rest of the unit bar these 2 planes was still in E1's.

Its pretty clear that the E1 and E4 were the most common variants by far and that around SEPTEMBER sometime, the E4 became more prevalent than the E1, which had been the most common type until then, but even it October a third of the losses were still E1's.

which makes the E3 choice mystifying to me.

Yes, this is the reference I was talking about. He was always complaining that they had old types and the only new ones went to Galland. He did get an upgrade towards the end if I remember.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 03-01-2011, 07:44 PM
fruitbat's Avatar
fruitbat fruitbat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S E England
Posts: 1,065
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
Yes, this is the reference I was talking about. He was always complaining that they had old types and the only new ones went to Galland. He did get an upgrade towards the end if I remember.
Yep, plane he was shot down in was a cannon armed emil (he was one of the lucky 2 to get one)

I've been to see it, it's now on display at the museum at Hawkinge, after it was dug up in the 70's about 5 mile from where i live.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.