190F-8 r4m loadout and other questions/suggestions

Warplanes of the Luftwaffe, David Donald (ISBN :1 874023 56 5)

Says following...
"190F-8 which could carry...(several other loadouts here) or 24 R4M unguided rockets."

What might any other sources say about this?



More bombs for axis jabos.

How about 8x50kg loadout option for f-8? On ETC 501 rack one could apply adapter to fit 4xSC50 50kg fragmentation bombs. Same applies to other 190Fs.(Maybe A too?)
Also 500kg bomb is missing from 190A-4. (Which also had ETC501.)

And how about introing 190F-3/R1 in summer 1943? (aka. 190A-5/U17)
-centerline ETC 501. (250kg/500kg/4x50kg)
-2xSC50 in both wings. (4x50kg)
-MG/FF removed.
-ground attack armor added.

Opinions?

These changes would bring gold jabos to level with allied ones.

Adding rocket dispersion we might see little less of unrealistic sniping with rockets on individual acks.

 

W.Green, Wings of Luftwaffe, dunno ISBN
W.Green, Wings of Luftwaffe, dunno ISBN

Illo, I think that 8 R4M's on 115 FW.190F-8/Pb is a good compromise between reality and game.

The thing I think is possible is to raise number of R4M to 12 per plane.

 

sure, give more loads for 190!

 

I think i add 14xR4M loadout to 190F8.

 

Here illustration of sc50 adapter as used in 190F-2.

Im not sure about if it was used on 190A. But F-2->F-8 there are qite many photos with this 4x50kg rack in center.

 

Considering execs source 12 would be better.
I think we might better wait until we get some pics of those rocket racks.

 

2 x 'six to seven' mean 12-14, but ok, i make i it 12.

 

Hi Illo,

>Considering execs source 12 would be better.

On the same series of drawings that you took your bomb rack from, there's also a drawing of the Panzerblitz 2 rack with 7 rockets below one wing.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Really? Oh me, blind.
...i will mail whole illustration to rg.

[edit]double checked and didnt find anything about PzBliz on it. Something wrong with my eyes?

 

Hi Illo,

>double checked and didnt find anything about PzBliz on it. Something wrong with my eyes?

It's on the JPG showing the two propeller versions, lower right hand corner, very small. Hard to find, as I know from personal experience ("Damn, it must be somewhere - there's something wrong with my eyes!" ;-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Well, is this load (14xR4M) mean that i'll never see how WGr21 rockets hitting the ground targets?

 

Referring to another thread:

http://forum.wbfree.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12404&pagenumber=2

Unguided rockets:
R4M ~ 900..1100 KJ
RS-82 ~ 1000..1250 KJ
HVAR ~ 7000..8500 KJ
WGr.21 ~13000..15500 KJ

And the damage models shown on Nicaee central R4M's are pushed to destroy much more than Acks. Even then only for a short time.

Mind you 24xR4M's as a loadout would be pretty cool.

Malino

 

illo its old story

if u will find somewhere deep for example : "lagg3 could carry 24 RS-82 rockets" and wrote it here
then u have to be sure next day IVAN will put to LAGG some 48 RS-82 rockets.
but U find only some "Focke Wulf" info.. u know.. "its a game"

BTW: look what they did last upgrade with RS-82mm - even blind lame will always hit , just push the button...
and i remember german soldiers panicked for "katiucha" launcher
u know why illo ?
because they were never sure where those rockets hit
HUGE DISPERSION

 

Sure dispersion should be big with all rockets.

There are huge differences in rocket warhead sizes too. IE. WGr. 21cm had over 100x more explosive than RS-82. (40,8kg to 0,38kg)

So I think RS-82 in FH is "bit" overeffective. Im sure blast from WGr. 21cm isnt 100x heavier as it should.

 

to IVAN:

IVAN look

RED SIDE:

1. LAGG - 8x RS
2. I15 - 6x RS
3. I16 - 6x RS
4. P38J - 8x some rox type
5. P38L - 8x 5inch HVAR
6. P51D - 10x 5inch HVAR
7. P47D - 10x 5inch HVAR
8. Mosquito 6x 3inch HE RP
9. Typhoon 8x 3inch HE RP
10. Tempest 6x 3inch HE RP
11. F6F 6x 5inch HVAR
12. F4U 8x 5inch HVAR
13. IL2 16x RS

GOLD SIDE:
1. FW190A 2x 21cm
2. FW190D9 2x21cm
3. Me 110 4x21cm
4. FW190F 8x55mm
5. ME262 24x55mm (only last month big fields)

damn... put this 190F complete 24x and everybody will be happy
those rockets 55mm now are not so good, little hard to aim and hit, specially from safe distance
so whats a big deal? Red Army Forever syndrom?

 

After checking some details out I think this really needs a fix.

Here quick comparison:

name-diameter-HE warhead-(FH damage)

Код:

RS-82 82mm 0,38kg (ca.1200KJ)
R4M 55mm 0,5kg (ca.1050KJ)
RS-132 132mm 0,9kg (-)
RP(3inch) 76mm ?kg (?)
HVAR(5inch) 127mm 20,8kg* (ca.8000KJ)
WGr.21cm 210mm 40,8kg (ca.14000KJ)

*Not very reliable source. Didnt mention time so could be some Korean war 5inch aswell. However it was only warhead size i was able to find for HVAR.

Before we have much higher rocket dispersion and about realistic warhead sizes rockets are just plain cheat.

Consider something.

 

illo be sure you dont mistake total warhead weight with only explosives weight.
(i hope i use right terms)

They can differ by more then 2 times.

 

rgreat it is not really important (total warhead weight) , usually warheads contains some 40-60% explosive material to reach max explosion speed
most important thing is just explosives weight and we should keep it...

so.. any proofs RS-82 was more powerful than 3inch HE RP ?
because now its a little stronger
and even little better to handle and aim lol (last upgrade)
any proofs RS-82 were so easy and effective?
i hear lot of things about killing german tanks via allied rox (western front) , very famous and spectacular victories
ok ok i know air superiority
but eastern front... seems not so famous rocket-style hmm...
any details someone ? (without propaganda shit guys )
just such info

 

i repeat.
do not compare weight of 'explosive materials' with weight of 'warhead' as these are different things.
For example FAB-50 (50kg) bomb armed with only 18kg of explosives.

Also destructive effect having not linear dependancy on exlposives weight.
For example check your RS-82/132 data:
132 have near 3 times more explosives then 82, but only less then 30% bigger blast radius.