PDA

View Full Version : Bf110 - Proberbly the most effected aircraft in the game.



LG1.Farber
Jan-22-2013, 12:16
Hey everyone,

I would just like to raise the awareness of what I believe is easily the most bugged and neglected flyable aircraft in clod. The Bf110 is much like the Hurricane to the spitfire.

Top speed
Minengeschoss round
structeral integrity
physics - try crash landing one and watch the washing machine effect
critical top speed
100 oct fuel engine type
c4 and c7 weight is the same - c7 should be heavier, extra armour, bigger engines etc...


I am sure others could be along with more information.

LG1.Klein
Jan-22-2013, 12:22
+1 to this. I would like to see some more 110 drivers come in and speak up. I have knowledge of the lack of M-geshoss, the engines are the same in both aircraft whereas the 110C-7 has the 100 octance DB601p engines. I believe the 110 also had kommandogerat, auto prop pitch. I'll do some more digging later.

9./ZG26Eicken
Jan-22-2013, 12:23
As a dedicated Bf 110 flyer I have to agree that we got no love from any of the developers during the bug squashing process. From certain items in the cockpit not working to having a vital ammo type missing in the ammo belt load out screens.

If you guys here at Atag are doing things with the game I implore you to take a look at this seriously underpowered and under cared for aircraft when of course you are able to do so.

If you need info the other pilots in 9./ZG26 are much more knowledgeable than I am on this lovely machine and I would be happy to pass on any info you need. No doubt though guys have your own lovers of the Bf 110 though :)

il_corleone
Jan-22-2013, 12:38
First they must fix the flight models,i think they will fix some of the errors we have now on the 110,s they are doing it in rigth direction, later the addons and implements will be here in more quantity Test-Fix-Add i think is a good idea, i dont mind in wait 1 year more to have a list of some patches, i waited 6 years of more and i think are worthy :thumbsup: , but yeah, the 110 is a beauty girl hope they get their hands on it soon., and dont worry, it will not be missed, the only thing we need to do is wait and see :)

ATAG_Bliss
Jan-22-2013, 12:46
Most of this is on the "to-do" list. I think the 110 is just starting initial work within the team (amongst 50 million other things :D)

But what helps the most is posting up as much supporting documents as possible. If you have source data for cockpit corrections, flight models, prop pitch or any other bugs, errors, and omissions, please try to post them in this thread. I guarantee if it's something new that hasn't been proposed amongst the documentation we have, it will be looked at.

Salmo
Jan-22-2013, 12:50
Hey everyone,

I would just like to raise the awareness of what I believe is easily the most bugged and neglected flyable aircraft in clod. The Bf110 is much like the Hurricane to the spitfire.

Top speed
Minengeschoss round
structeral integrity
physics - try crash landing one and watch the washing machine effect
critical top speed
100 oct fuel engine type
c4 and c7 weight is the same - c7 should be heavier, extra armour, bigger engines etc...


I am sure others could be along with more information.

FM's are being worked on for historical accuracy as much as the game will allow.

il_corleone
Jan-22-2013, 12:56
Most of this is on the "to-do" list. I think the 110 is just starting initial work within the team (amongst 50 million other things :D)

But what helps the most is posting up as much supporting documents as possible. If you have source data for cockpit corrections, flight models, prop pitch or any other bugs, errors, and omissions, please try to post them in this thread. I guarantee if it's something new that hasn't been proposed amongst the documentation we have, it will be looked at.

WOW! The team always chose the smartest and best option, this is why its going good all, i am VERY hapy whit you guys on the command,

some info from bugracker!

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/317

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/316

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/313

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/126

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/125

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/123

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/121

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/120

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/314

THECNICAL DATA

http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_messerschmitt_bf110_en.php

C2 Chart
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me110/Me110C_data-sheet.jpg

Engines
DB601 A-1
Up to 1,100 PS (809 kW) at sea-level with 2,400 rpm, up to 1,020 PS (750 kW) at 2,400 rpm and 4.5 km altitude, B4 fuel
DB601 Aa
Up to 1,175 PS (864 kW) at sea-level with 2,500 rpm, up to 1,100 PS (809 kW) at 2,400 rpm and 3.7 km altitude, B4 fuel
DB601 B-1/Ba
Same as DB601 A-1/Aa for use in Messerschmitt Bf 110 and/or bomber aircraft (different prop/engine ratio, 1:1.88 instead of 1:1.55)
DB601N
Up to 1,175 PS (864 kW) at sea-level and at 4.9 km altitude with 2,600 rpm, C3 fuel
Up to 1,270 PS (934 kW) at 2.1 km altitude with 2,600 rpm
DB601P
Same as DB601N for use in Messerschmitt Bf 110 and/or bomber aircraft (different prop/engine ratio, 1:1.88 instead of 1:1.55)
DB601E
Up to 1,350 PS (993 kW) at sea-level with 2,700 rpm, up to 1,320 PS (970 kW) with 2.700 rpm at 4.8 km altitude, B4 fuel
Up to 1,450 PS (1,066 kW) at 2.1 km altitude with 2,700 rpm

cant find better ones
Hope it helps!

Salmo
Jan-22-2013, 13:00
WOW! The team always chose the smartest and best option, this is why its going good all, i am VERY hapy whit you guys on the command, some info from bugracker! <snip>

"Nagerecht" panel label has been corrected to "Wagerecht", that's one down :)

il_corleone
Jan-22-2013, 13:04
"Nagerecht" panel label has been corrected to "Wagerecht", that's one down :)

Tally ho! :thumbsup:

9./ZG26Eicken
Jan-22-2013, 13:07
Wow, just wow at your attitude guys, it really gives me hope that Il2 can be made into something 10 times better or even 100 times better than what it is now. You have certainly given this Zerstorer pilot hope for the future :)

III./ZG76_Saipan
Jan-22-2013, 13:08
top fix has to be the tail gunner. ive never seen them hit anything and even go off the grid with a blenny on the six.

III/JG53_Don
Jan-22-2013, 13:12
speaking of il2bugtracker... wouldn't it be reasonable to reuse the bugtracker for your own purposes?
As all these listed bugs are laying there waste, why not just further use it as a perfect way for the community to report bugs now to YOU ;-) and you guys could easily report to/remove bugs on the list which are already fixed.
besides, the bugtracke is atm full of bugs which could be a nice guideline for you regarding bug/feature priorities etc

just a thought :-)

ATAG_Bliss
Jan-22-2013, 13:18
speaking of il2bugtracker... wouldn't it be reasonable to reuse the bugtracker for your own purposes?
As all these listed bugs are laying there waste, why not just further use it as a perfect way for the community to report bugs now to YOU ;-) and you guys could easily report to/remove bugs on the list which are already fixed.
besides, the bugtracke is atm full of bugs which could be a nice guideline for you regarding bug/feature priorities etc

just a thought :-)

We are using it for reference and even thought about creating our own. Perhaps we should get in touch with the admins there and see if we could get some special permissions to be able to edit forum posts / mark bugs as fixed etc.

ATAG_Bliss
Jan-22-2013, 13:25
Wow, just wow at your attitude guys, it really gives me hope that Il2 can be made into something 10 times better or even 100 times better than what it is now. You have certainly given this Zerstorer pilot hope for the future :)

We are lucky to have several "hard asses" running the show when it comes to flight model accuracy. Every plane is just as important as the next regardless of red or blue. There is absolutely no bias amongst those guys. They are all striving for accuracy.

9./ZG26Eicken
Jan-22-2013, 13:28
Haha, hooray for the hard asses who ever they might be :P

Don't let up, give em hell ;)

Osprey
Jan-22-2013, 13:40
I don't have anything useful to add about the Me110 but other than to lend my support from an RAF perspective about the importance of this type. I don't think I'm telling anybody anything new other than to underline the fact that it was a major player in the BoB and it's undermodelledness is certainly a reason why we don't see enough chaps flying them. As a Hurricane pilot I would like to shoot down a few more of the buggers online ;)

Tally-ho!

LG1.Klein
Jan-22-2013, 13:46
Be careful posting up the technical charts. The C4 had DB601b whereas the C7 had DB601p. Big difference in motor right there. The C1-C2 are not the same as the C4 either. Minengeshoss is pretty self explanatory. It doesn't have it, it needs it. I am having a hard time tracking down when the 110 got kommandogerat. I would imagine if the E4 has is with the DB601n and the DB601p is the same motor it would mean kommandogerat on both platforms. But that is a stretch. Let me find some more proof.

ATAG_Bliss
Jan-22-2013, 13:52
I don't have anything useful to add about the Me110 but other than to lend my support from an RAF perspective about the importance of this type. I don't think I'm telling anybody anything new other than to underline the fact that it was a major player in the BoB and it's undermodelledness is certainly a reason why we don't see enough chaps flying them. As a Hurricane pilot I would like to shoot down a few more of the buggers online ;)

Tally-ho!

There's internal testing going on with the fighters at this point in time. The RAF side will very much be in the fight. And the 109 drivers will most definitely have to learn about real CEM. Flying around full throttle with WEP on and rads open isn't cutting it anymore. Exciting times ahead.

LG1.Klein
Jan-22-2013, 13:54
I don't have anything useful to add about the Me110 but other than to lend my support from an RAF perspective about the importance of this type. I don't think I'm telling anybody anything new other than to underline the fact that it was a major player in the BoB and it's undermodelledness is certainly a reason why we don't see enough chaps flying them. As a Hurricane pilot I would like to shoot down a few more of the buggers online ;)

Tally-ho!

Be careful, we might not be so easy to shoot down once properly worked over. We should have edge on speed and instantaneous turn and climb. The hurri beat us on sustained climb and turn. But all in all should be a good fight between the two. Both should be extremely stable and accurate gun platforms. Given the environment of online play the hurri should still best the 110, but it should be a much closer fight and any 110 experten should have a decent chance in it.

il_corleone
Jan-22-2013, 13:58
There's internal testing going on with the fighters at this point in time. The RAF side will very much be in the fight. And the 109 drivers will most definitely have to learn about real CEM. Flying around full throttle with WEP on and rads open isn't cutting it anymore. Exciting times ahead.

Good luck! i hope the Realism beats the balance!

CanvasKnight
Jan-22-2013, 14:27
The most annoying problem with the Bf-110s is that the fuel system was never corrected. The reserve tanks don't properly pump into the main tanks like they should. I know that I have some reference material around somewhere (a Bf-110 manual in English), I'll report back once I find it. As it stands, there is no reason to take more than 60% fuel in a Bf-110 because it won't properly pump the last 40 % into your tanks when you tell it to. This reduces the range to about equal to that of the Bf-109, defeating the purpose of taking the bigger, longer legged bird.

Fast forward to the end of the video to see me encounter the problem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdF_f0SJOJY

ATAG_Bliss
Jan-22-2013, 14:34
That may or may not already be fixed :D

Foo'bar
Jan-22-2013, 14:40
Errors on Bf 110 dashboard?

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/126 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Pressluft-Druckbeh&#228;lter wrong tooltip
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/125 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Bombenz&#252;nder tag wrong description
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/124 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Heizung tag description
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/123 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: K&#252;hlerklappen switch
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/122 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Tankwahlschalter missing switch position
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/121 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Prop-pitch automatic switch
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/120 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Umschaltwarnung tag and lamps obsolet

CanvasKnight
Jan-22-2013, 14:41
There's internal testing going on with the fighters at this point in time. The RAF side will very much be in the fight. And the 109 drivers will most definitely have to learn about real CEM. Flying around full throttle with WEP on and rads open isn't cutting it anymore. Exciting times ahead.

The WEP on the Bf-109 automatically shuts off after 1 minute of use to prevent overheating, just FYI. It's not an infinitely running WEP.

CanvasKnight
Jan-22-2013, 14:42
That may or may not already be fixed :D

Don't tease me! You can tell me :thumbsup: If that means what I'm going to assume it means, then heck yeah!

VO101_Tom
Jan-22-2013, 15:23
The WEP on the Bf-109 automatically shuts off after 1 minute of use to prevent overheating, just FYI. It's not an infinitely running WEP.

This question is much more complicated than the wep on off (otherwise the wep is one problem, when turned off, you can turn back without disadvantages, engine damage). There is plenty of issues pro and contra. 1,4 ata, 1,3 ata, wep power increasing, freq. of wep using, cooling efficiency of radiators, engine overheats, caused damage of engine overhates, lack of boil valve of cooling, too warm engine, too cold egine, etc.
It would be superb, if the atag guys make the details public (bugtracker) BEFORE they do a lot of work with it. I'm sure, everyone want an accurate FM, based on original test documents, no reson to suspect the contrary.

CanvasKnight
Jan-22-2013, 15:58
Another problem with the Bf-110 that I noticed while playing with a friend in the gunner seat is that the gun locks up and won't shoot randomly through the flight. At first we thought it might be some poorly implemented G-force thing, but even after leveling off into perfectly level flight, the gun will remain locked up for a while. And its not like the gunner wouldn't be able to shoot during gentle turns anyway. Not quite sure what causes it, but it's worth looking into so that friends can fly together in the same Bf-110 or Stuka without the gunner feeling useless because he can't shoot.

Salmo
Jan-22-2013, 16:14
Attention Zerstorer pilots. The new bombs have finally arrived from the factory. See Bugtracker http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/314

1 x SC500 + 1 x SD500 bombs :D
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/5268/sc500sd500.jpg

Me110 C7 with 1 x SC-1000 bomb? You'll need a long runway for takeoff. :D
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/7521/me100sc1000.jpg

ATAG_Bliss
Jan-22-2013, 16:20
Photoshopped! :D

Salmo
Jan-22-2013, 17:18
Photoshopped! :D

Damn you Bliss, you gave it away. I wanted to get a reaction from the blue boys :devilish:

il_corleone
Jan-22-2013, 17:19
The one whit the 1000 will be epic xD!

III./ZG76_Saipan
Jan-22-2013, 18:38
a long runway for sure and 25% fuel, that might be nice the the British Parliament....

thee_oddball
Jan-22-2013, 19:32
nice breakdown of the 110 varient

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHiCqeNOkns

Salmo
Jan-22-2013, 23:16
OK, I've spent a good deal of time reading the Me110 loadout discussions on the 1C forums. Seems there is quite some conjecture about what was the historical loadouts for 1940. Me110 documentation/manuals suggest bomb loads of 1xSC1000kg or even 2xSD1000, but in reality the Zerstorer unit(s) only ever used 250kg & 500kg bombs in various combinations.

At the moment TF are testing these bomb loads:

1xSC250
1XSD250
1xSC500
1xSD500
2xSC250
2xSC500
2xSD250
2xSD500
1xSC250 + 1xSD250
1xSC500 + 1xSD500
1xSC250 + 1xSD500
1xSC500 + 1xSD250

Pending any definitive evidence that the Me110 actually did carry larger bomb loads on missions.

Continu0
Jan-23-2013, 02:36
Errors on Bf 110 dashboard?

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/126 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Pressluft-Druckbeh&#228;lter wrong tooltip
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/125 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Bombenz&#252;nder tag wrong description
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/124 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Heizung tag description
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/123 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: K&#252;hlerklappen switch
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/122 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Tankwahlschalter missing switch position
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/121 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Prop-pitch automatic switch
http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/120 Bf 110 C-4 and C-7: Umschaltwarnung tag and lamps obsolet

Afaik, Kodoss was doing some corrections of the 110 before Team Fusion started. As he is now member of TF, I guess it will be corrected if possible...

Oersted
Jan-23-2013, 04:09
As a dedicated Bf 110 flyer I have to agree that we got no love from any of the developers during the bug squashing process. From certain items in the cockpit not working to having a vital ammo type missing in the ammo belt load out screens.

I also think - in fairness to the developers - that their Bf-110 model is absolutely gorgeous, incl. dynamic and damage model. They made a splendid splendid Bf-110 which just needs a bit of sdditional work to be perfected. Saying anything else is a bit too harsh and not fair to the guys who obviously put a lot of love and hard work into the original model.

Foo'bar
Jan-23-2013, 05:01
Volle Zustimmung!

Tonester
Jan-23-2013, 06:47
I love , or used to, flying the 110...trim it right and you can just about go make a coffee...but for combat i found it pretty useless...so i look forward to seeing, and flying, the end result...

What id love to see is a squad of 110s go into the defensive circles that they used to protect themselves and each other...like a bunch of wagons being attacked by indians....that would be VERY cool...:thumbsup:

9./ZG26Eicken
Jan-23-2013, 11:28
I also think - in fairness to the developers - that their Bf-110 model is absolutely gorgeous, incl. dynamic and damage model. They made a splendid splendid Bf-110 which just needs a bit of additional work to be perfected. Saying anything else is a bit too harsh and not fair to the guys who obviously put a lot of love and hard work into the original model.

Well I would have to agree with you on that one Oersted. The Bf 110 model does it's real world counterpart justice, it looks sleek and amazing, the dynamics are what I would expect it to be bar a few things, not sure there is really anything you could change in the flight characteristics i.e turning and rolling etc as it was a very poor dog fighter. But I stand by what I said. While the spitfires were getting love [or hate] and the 109's were being fixed the 110 sat on the side like chopped liver wondering what the hell was going on. I'm not saying that love and hard work wasn't put into the 110 at the creation process because clearly it was, it just needed a little bit more later on. which I am happy to see is being put in by the guys at Team Fusion :)

RAF74_Buzzsaw
Jan-23-2013, 14:24
Afaik, Kodoss was doing some corrections of the 110 before Team Fusion started. As he is now member of TF, I guess it will be corrected if possible...

Kodoss is doing superb work with TF. :thumbsup: :D

GRAF
Jan-23-2013, 18:48
Oh please for the love of god correct the 110! :D

Without a doubt the 110 is my all-time favorite aircraft of WW2 and if anyone needs any information concerning variants and loadouts that served during BoB don't hesitate to ask. I have every avaialble book on the 110 and extensive knowledge on the subject in the ole' noggin. ;)

GRAF
Jan-23-2013, 18:53
BTW according to research done by Christer Bergstrom Bf-110 squadrons achieved 407 kills to 196 losses for a kill ratio of 2.07 to 1. Of course this is open to speculation but does show the 110 was far from "easy prey" as most would like you to believe. :)

Oersted
Jan-23-2013, 18:55
Hope you like my Zerstoerer porn, Graf... :-)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zPondFXv0w

GRAF
Jan-23-2013, 19:44
DROOL...

You know the way to my heart. ;)

LG1.Klein
Jan-24-2013, 09:06
Graf I'm so happy to see you around. I have a passion for the 110 but am far from experten like yourself. Glad you showed up to bring some knowledge and proof to this request of ours.

Answer me this, when did our beloved 110 get the kommandogerat? If there is any legwork you need done I'll help as able. I'm pretty free during my workday, it's when I get home I get busy.

Furious
Jan-24-2013, 12:16
Be careful, we might not be so easy to shoot down once properly worked over. We should have edge on speed and instantaneous turn and climb. The hurri beat us on sustained climb and turn. But all in all should be a good fight between the two. Both should be extremely stable and accurate gun platforms. Given the environment of online play the hurri should still best the 110, but it should be a much closer fight and any 110 experten should have a decent chance in it.


Roll rate with that wing and that engine on the 110 shouldn't be anywhere near a hurricane...

LG1.Farber
Jan-24-2013, 12:25
I think he was referrring to the purchase offered by the massive elevators in the first instance. :-)

LG1.Klein
Jan-24-2013, 14:12
Roll rate with that wing and that engine on the 110 shouldn't be anywhere near a hurricane...

Yes roll rate will suck and certainly will continue to suck. The big thing now is the speed difference for certain, and I should be able to heave to in a snap shot and continue on through the target better then it is in the current model. You move your stick in this current model and the aircraft basically turns into a huge sail, or anchor, whatever slow down analogy you want to use.

I have flown the 110 in many sims, and in all but this one as long as you stay about or above 300km/h and are gentle, sweeping with your controls she manages her E well. She is the epitome of boom and zoom with all that weight allowing nice E retention as long as you don't get bogged down in a sustained turn fight. She is a pig to get back to fighting speed.

I should be able to close with and destroy my enemy whereas now if I have to clear a wingmans six my wingman gets chewed up and all I can do is follow, watch, and await my turn lol.

I do not expect the 110 to be ahistorical.

machoo
Jan-24-2013, 16:09
The 110 is badass , the only thing holding it back is it's like chasing sombody in a van when everyone else has a small car.

GRAF
Jan-25-2013, 17:37
Graf I'm so happy to see you around. I have a passion for the 110 but am far from experten like yourself. Glad you showed up to bring some knowledge and proof to this request of ours.

Answer me this, when did our beloved 110 get the kommandogerat? If there is any legwork you need done I'll help as able. I'm pretty free during my workday, it's when I get home I get busy.

Thanks bud. ;)

I'll look into the initial use of the kommandogerat. I want to say it was first used in the D series batch but not 100% sure. I'll do some digging.

Dutch
Jan-25-2013, 20:28
'Re: Bf110 - Proberbly the most effected aircraft in the game.'

Point one - 'probably' (the internet spelling police just took me on).

Point two - 'effective' is probably (!) the word you're after.

Point three - Has anyone noticed that Shedilry Midweek Shopware is now a free download? Krupi? :D

sorry chaps, being disruptive as usual. :)

9./ZG26Eicken
Jan-25-2013, 21:15
Moving on.

Any luck on finding out when kommandogerat was used Graf?

LG1.Farber
Jan-26-2013, 12:22
'Re: Bf110 - Proberbly the most effected aircraft in the game.'

Point one - 'probably' (the internet spelling police just took me on).

Point two - 'effective' is probably (!) the word you're after.

Point three - Has anyone noticed that Shedilry Midweek Shopware is now a free download? Krupi? :D

sorry chaps, being disruptive as usual. :)

Only point... I dont give a single muck*. :)

EDIT: Gentlemen, this is a General - Family - Rated forum. We're also a member-friendly forum. Please keep this in mind in future posts.

Let the discussion on 110's continue.......:thumbsup:

Snapper :salute:

Sorry* - Farber,

No worries, mate! But what on earth was Dutch on about? On second thought -- forget I asked! LOL
-- Snapper

LG1.Klein
Jan-29-2013, 11:13
Thanks bud. ;)

I'll look into the initial use of the kommandogerat. I want to say it was first used in the D series batch but not 100% sure. I'll do some digging.

I really thought the kommandogerat(BMW or Focke Wulf proprietary name from what I understand) was more engine related. Seeing as how the 109E4 with DB601N had the auto prop pitch feature I naturally assumed the 110C7 with the DB601P(same engine just different name for 110's) would also have the feature.

Of course we all know what assuming does.

Dutch
Jan-29-2013, 15:06
Only point... I dont give a single muck*. :)

But what on earth was Dutch on about? On second thought -- forget I asked! LOL
-- Snapper

Heehee. :D 'Chivalry Medieval Warfare' was a free download for a few days, is all. Very OT, and so's this, for which I apologise. Ahem, you were saying about the 110 chaps?

GRAF
Jan-31-2013, 17:08
Sorry for the delayed response but I haven't found anything guiding me to any certainty that 110s had the auto-pitch feature during BoB.

If I had to take an educated guess I would assume few perhaps did but not many as they were becoming more readily available towards the end of 1940.

Mattias
Jan-31-2013, 17:50
There will be a "no-enforced-weathering" mod for the 110 as well soon :thumbsup:

Cheers/m

Ivank
Jan-31-2013, 19:01
KommandGerat belongs to BMW engines its a far more comprehensive system than that used on the DB601. The DB601 is AUTO not KG :) its a relatively simple system unlike KG.

As to which 110 version was the first to incorporate it. IMO it was the "E" model. Looking at various cockpit shots you can determine if AUTO is fitted by the addition of the Manual Auto switches just above the Prop pitch levers. Of course in CLOD both the C4 and C7 have these AUTO/MAN selection switches.

The 110 C5 that was part of the exhaustive assessment done by Vought was a BOB period aircraft and only fitted with Manual prop pitch.
The RAF evaluation of a C4 also had manual only.

Now if someone can provide concrete evidence of BOB period BF110 with Auto then post here.

According to Kurfursts data as of Jan 1941 the number of 601N equipped BF110s was:

Bf 110C-1 : 4 pcs, Bf 110C-4 : 40 pcs, Bf 110C-5 : 12, Bf 110C-7 : 14 pcs, Bf 110D-0 : 18 pcs, Bf 110D-2 : 20 pcs, Bf 110D-3 : 8 pcs, BF 110E-1 : 176 pcs, Bf 110E-2 : 14 pcs.

GRAF
Jan-31-2013, 19:59
Thats what I thought. I knew it was either the D-3 or E-1 in which it was introduced.

But...

The D-3 and E-1 both saw service during BoB, albeit in limited numbers. ;)

Mastiff
Feb-01-2013, 07:45
hey guys I noticed there is no engine modeled into the bf110 body, like the other models. you can clip through the body and see the engine in the model but not in the bf110.

LizLemon
Feb-01-2013, 09:31
hey guys I noticed there is no engine modeled into the bf110 body, like the other models. you can clip through the body and see the engine in the model but not in the bf110.

But does the engine show through when engine panels are blown off?

My memory is that it does.

III./ZG76_Saipan
Feb-01-2013, 12:18
ive seen the cover blown off, looks pretty cool.

GRAF
Feb-03-2013, 10:48
Just to let everyone know their favorite Destroyer is being re-done. I lost all my earlier work so had to re-start my template from scratch. I've made this one much more weathered and compatible with the current weathering scheme in-game.

Template is very near completion.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/lp54837/Bf110C_2.png

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/lp54837/Bf110C_4.png

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/lp54837/Bf110C_1.png

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/lp54837/Bf110C_5.png

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/lp54837/Bf110C_3.png

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/lp54837/Bf110C_6.png

Meaks
Feb-03-2013, 13:12
Hey.....this is fantastic news Graf,I loved all the 110 skins you created,and will look forward to many more.May I be cheeky and suggest some nice white nosed ZG26's from the summer of 1940 :thumbsup:........though whatever you have up your sleeve,will all be really welcome mate,glad your coming back to give us your superb 110 skins.

Sandy1942
Feb-03-2013, 14:18
Excellent work, GRAF. Very beautiful!

GRAF
Feb-03-2013, 14:40
Hey.....this is fantastic news Graf,I loved all the 110 skins you created,and will look forward to many more.May I be cheeky and suggest some nice white nosed ZG26's from the summer of 1940 :thumbsup:........though whatever you have up your sleeve,will all be really welcome mate,glad your coming back to give us your superb 110 skins.

You were saying? ;)

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/lp54837/Bf110C_7.png

9./ZG26Eicken
Feb-03-2013, 18:03
Bloody hell GRAF you do that big bird justice with those skins.

Bring on the Zerstorer.

Meaks
Feb-04-2013, 10:03
Wow.......beautiful Graf,love that mate:thumbsup:,will be keeping an eye out then buddy for some more of your skins in the future,CoD is alive and kicking!

92 Sqn. Folmar (QJ-F)
Feb-06-2013, 09:03
Very nice paint job!

ATAG_Snapper
Feb-06-2013, 09:30
Very nice paint job!


+1

[FFCW]Urizen
Feb-06-2013, 12:02
that looks superb Graf, im fappy with it :thumbsup:

TX-Gunslinger
Feb-06-2013, 19:29
Graf, those are stunning skins - weathering in particular is better than 1st class!

Thanks so much for your creations,

S!

Gunny

III./ZG76_Saipan
Feb-09-2013, 18:09
didnt the rear guy reload the cannon? i used to watch him do it. is that still working after the last pacth? i havent seen him do it in a while.

Siddich
Feb-10-2013, 21:21
"Nagerecht" panel label has been corrected to "Wagerecht", that's one down :)

Do you mean "waagerecht"? You spell it with two "a") - at least today

Salmo
Feb-10-2013, 21:42
Do you mean "waagerecht"? You spell it with two "a"

You've got to be kidding me. It's been on IL2 Bugtracker for months & no-one's picked that up? OK, more time spend changing cockpit graphics. I'm on it.

[Edit] Done .... The panel now reads "Waagerecht". It will be tested for bugs in the TF RC candidate.

Siddich
Feb-10-2013, 21:52
You've got to be kidding me. It's been on IL2 Bugtracker for months & no-one's picked that up? OK, more time spend changing cockpit graphics. I'm on it.

Oh, no, I'm sorry...it was old spelling just read it a few posts ago...
Sry...everything right with wagrecht ;-)

Salmo
Feb-10-2013, 21:58
Oh, no, I'm sorry...it was old spelling just read it a few posts ago...
Sry...everything right with wagrecht ;-)

Shit! I've just changed everything! Oh well, I'll change it back :(

[Edit] re-Done .... The panel now reads "Wagerecht". It will be tested for bugs in the TF RC candidate.

There is a lesson here. If you intend to request any change, then DON'T just post without actually thinking about it. You need to thouroughly research what you're asking for. TF aims to get things as historically accurate as possible.

Perhaps the German speakers in the flight community can confirm that "Wagerecht" is the correct german spelling for 1940.

Siddich
Feb-10-2013, 22:08
Shit! I've just changed everything! Oh well, I'll change it back :(

[Edit] re-Done .... The panel now reads "Wagerecht". It will be tested for bugs in the TF RC candidate.


I'm very sorry...I'll better think and read before I write...

mugen
Feb-11-2013, 04:52
Shit! I've just changed everything! Oh well, I'll change it back :(

[Edit] re-Done .... The panel now reads "Wagerecht". It will be tested for bugs in the TF RC candidate.

There is a lesson here. If you intend to request any change, then DON'T just post without actually thinking about it. You need to thouroughly research what you're asking for. TF aims to get things as historically accurate as possible.

Perhaps the German speakers in the flight community can confirm that "Wagerecht" is the correct german spelling for 1940.

Hi all, hi Salmo

"Wagerecht" seems right, but you may want to take a look by yourself.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/Schaltkasten/Schaltkasten.htm (scroll down where it reads "Fl.50869 ca.1944")

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/Schaltkasten/gross/Fl%2050869-1.gif

These are for 1944 Systems.

Hope this helps

greez mugen

II/JG53_Felix
Feb-11-2013, 20:55
Super to see you guys doing some work on the bf110!
My favourite ride, even if it does tend to be a one-way trip in the current config!

RAF74_Buzzsaw
Feb-11-2013, 21:11
Salute

You will see many changes in the 110's performance.

However, you will need to wait a little longer than the first release to see an engine ending with an N...

But it is coming. :salute:

[FFCW]Urizen
Feb-11-2013, 21:41
Shit! I've just changed everything! Oh well, I'll change it back :(

[Edit] re-Done .... The panel now reads "Wagerecht". It will be tested for bugs in the TF RC candidate.

There is a lesson here. If you intend to request any change, then DON'T just post without actually thinking about it. You need to thouroughly research what you're asking for. TF aims to get things as historically accurate as possible.

Perhaps the German speakers in the flight community can confirm that "Wagerecht" is the correct german spelling for 1940.

Nowadays its spelled Waagerecht, double-a, but from what i&#180;ve read and seen, back then Wagerecht was widely used.

GRAF
Feb-13-2013, 08:42
salute

you will see many changes in the 110's performance.

However, you will need to wait a little longer than the first release to see an engine ending with an n...

But it is coming. :salute:

why do you torture me!!!! Arrrrgggghhhh!!!!

SlipBall
Feb-16-2013, 12:20
Salute

You will see many changes in the 110's performance.

However, you will need to wait a little longer than the first release to see an engine ending with an N...

But it is coming. :salute:


Buzzsaw, are you guys working on bringing back the prop feathering of the 110 and others?...I've been on a campaign of awareness lately, since hearing some had not used it in the past because, thinking it unavailable.

ATAG_Bliss
Feb-16-2013, 16:30
Buzzsaw, are you guys working on bringing back the prop feathering of the 110 and others?...I've been on a campaign of awareness lately, since hearing some had not used it in the past because, thinking it unavailable.

I just posted something about this for TF. I miss the seeing the prop rotate for the pitch as well. Thanks to you it's on the radar :D

Ivank
Feb-16-2013, 19:48
Prop Feathering is an issue deep inside the game coding. Its been this way since the initial release. There are references to it in the keybindings but they just dont work. We know why this so. In short a lot of work needs to be done inside the engine to get this working. It is being looked at but don't expect a quick fix.

LG1.Farber
Feb-16-2013, 20:00
Thank you for your honest, open and clear answer, this was very helpful in understanding your task. For now lets hope the engines keep spinning! :)

SlipBall
Feb-17-2013, 03:41
Prop Feathering is an issue deep inside the game coding. Its been this way since the initial release. There are references to it in the keybindings but they just dont work. We know why this so. In short a lot of work needs to be done inside the engine to get this working. It is being looked at but don't expect a quick fix.

Sorry Ivank but your are dead wrong on this, I have been using it all along. You must use an axis control for it to function as intended in RL, not a key, reason being that is the way to have it locked/feathering...it will get you home if it can be reinstated in the game. :grrr: ...could you not look in the original files for an answer to the cure?

EDIT: I just tried using the 0% pitch key and that works just fine and is the same results as the axis method, the feather key has never worked in game, but it was never really needed considering.
Annaliese, people thought wrongly that a feathered prop should not spin at all, then assumed it was broken because the prop still turned slowly. If you want the lever in the down position for visual realism sake, then the axis method is needed to be used.

clearly fully feathered here:
1949

1951

1952

1954

Foo'bar
Feb-17-2013, 14:22
Perhaps the German speakers in the flight community can confirm that "Wagerecht" is the correct german spelling for 1940.

Wagerecht is absolutely right for those days.

Ivank
Feb-17-2013, 15:42
Thats a good find Slipball never even thought of using 0 pitch key ... just tried the Feather keybinding and tried to get it to work. You are in game terms just selecting 0 pitch ... in the end achieving the same thing if the "Feather" keybinding actually worked.

However WRT the code when props are setup both in the Engine files and deeper codes the only variable that the Sim will accept is "Nil" no other variable for Feathering exists. here is the applicable line in the Engine file for the 110:

"Pitch Slider Angle Min 26 deg Max 47 deg WEP 40 deg Feathering Nil"

the Variable "Nil' in this line is referred to in other compiled files. Trouble is the only variable associated with Feathering in these other files is "Nil". Any entry of any other variable associated with Feathering results in aircraft not showing in game as it wont spawn. looking at the error log you then receive a nastygram informing you that the only acceptable variable is Nil. So this is why any keybinding associated with Feather doesn't work.

Now as you have discovered you can get the prop to min drag by simply selecting 0 pitch then goodo that works and does the job anyway.


Sorry Ivank but your are dead wrong on this, I have been using it all along. You must use an axis control for it to function as intended in RL, not a key, reason being that is the way to have it locked/feathering...it will get you home if it can be reinstated in the game. :grrr: ...could you not look in the original files for an answer to the cure?

EDIT: I just tried using the 0% pitch key and that works just fine and is the same results as the axis method, the feather key has never worked in game, but it was never really needed considering.
Annaliese, people thought wrongly that a feathered prop should not spin at all, then assumed it was broken because the prop still turned slowly. If you want the lever in the down position for visual realism sake, then the axis method is needed to be used.

clearly fully feathered here:
1949

1951

1952

1954

SlipBall
Feb-17-2013, 15:58
Cool Ivan, I'm sure there is hope with you and your strategies on this, but remember that it is the older game with the 0% I referred too...a place that I would suggest that you look is the pitch clock. Current game is I think 8:30 as its limit, where as it was 2:45 for fully feathered in older game. Good luck bro!

@Bliss, yea good to get it on the radar, a necessity for the bomber crews :salute:

LG1.Farber
Feb-19-2013, 10:36
Most of this is on the "to-do" list. I think the 110 is just starting initial work within the team (amongst 50 million other things :D)

But what helps the most is posting up as much supporting documents as possible. If you have source data for cockpit corrections, flight models, prop pitch or any other bugs, errors, and omissions, please try to post them in this thread. I guarantee if it's something new that hasn't been proposed amongst the documentation we have, it will be looked at.

I translated this the other day for 9./ZG26:

http://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af321/farber82/bf110cenginesheet_zps51e4d2a2.png


Note the publish date at the top and the test date underlined in red at the bottom and also the fuel!

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Feb-19-2013, 10:52
I translated this the other day for 9./ZG26:

http://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af321/farber82/bf110cenginesheet_zps51e4d2a2.png
Note the publish date at the top and the test date underlined in red at the bottom and also the fuel!
nice,

What fuel is currently modeled in the 110c? Is it less than 87 Octane?
Does that test's documentation say where it was carried out?

LG1.Farber
Feb-19-2013, 11:22
nice,

What fuel is currently modeled in the 110c? Is it less than 87 Octane?
Does that test's documentation say where it was carried out?


About 74 octane :) and I think it does but why you wanna know?.

SlipBall
Feb-19-2013, 11:40
Cool!..another octane war :D

Robo.
Feb-19-2013, 11:40
74 Octane fuel modeled for 110s?

Maybe I don't understand the purpose of posting that document, the 110C in 1939 obviously flew at 87 Octane fuel with DB 601A engines, B3 fuel (E87 Kraftstoff). Could you please elaborate your post?

I am very glad the 110 is getting some attention by TF :thumbsup:

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Feb-19-2013, 11:47
About 74 octane :) and I think it does but why you wanna know?.

If it is only 74 octane in the game then that's a bit disappointing. Did they ever explain why only that fuel is used in the game? Was there a reason, or just an oversight?

LG1.Farber
Feb-19-2013, 11:51
Cool!..another octane war :ind:

Not at all.


74 Octane fuel modeled for 110s?

Maybe I don't understand the purpose of posting that document, the 110C in 1939 obviously flew at 87 Octane fuel with DB 601A engines, B3 fuel (E87 Kraftstoff). Could you please elaborate your post?

I am very glad the 110 is getting some attention by TF :thumbsup:

It was a joke, hence the smiliy. Bliss asked for docs and I had one, that is all. - that is the whole purposes of posting this document, nothing more. I was trying to be helpful not argue the toss over petrochemistry, I know you feel you are a top notch source of information in you beliefs but you dont have to ask every post some makes about blue aircraft for the ID papers. :) I noticed the report is pre bob and the test / data is even older, I was just drawing attention to the fact.

SlipBall
Feb-19-2013, 11:53
I meant to use a smile face, doh!

LizLemon
Feb-19-2013, 12:00
About 74 octane :) and I think it does but why you wanna know?.

Where are you getting this from?

LG1.Farber
Feb-19-2013, 12:01
Where are you getting this from?

Its a joke based on the poor performance of the FM in game...

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Feb-19-2013, 12:02
Where are you getting this from?

He was joking I think.

LG1.Farber
Feb-19-2013, 12:05
nice,

What fuel is currently modeled in the 110c? Is it less than 87 Octane?
Does that test's documentation say where it was carried out?

2 Questions!


About 74 octane :)
and
I think it does but why you wanna know?.

2 Answers!


JHC on a bike :ind:


Note the publish date at the top and the test date underlined in red at the bottom and also the fuel!

I pointed out the dates because it is rather a long time between the test, the report and the Battle. Were any major changes made in that time? I pointed out both dates to avoid confusion! I also pointed out the fuel to distinguish it from the the DB601 N engine variant and I am fairly sure that a different prop was used with the DB 601N. Just quite basic stuff that people can very easily find in books.

I did this because its quite easy for people to get their wires crossed especially when someone mentions an FM and then everyone freaks out an dashes to battle stations....

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Feb-19-2013, 12:19
I'd just like to add that I'm still enjoying "proberbly".

LG1.Farber
Feb-19-2013, 12:20
I'd just like to add that I'm still enjoying "proberbly".

Im not very good at spelling.

ATAG_Snapper
Feb-19-2013, 12:20
I'm glad the 110 is getting attention as well. At sea level/on the deck it is a challenge for even a Spit 1a 100 octane to overtake, which I hope continues with the patch. The 110's AI rear gunner is next to useless, from my perspective in a pursuing Spitfire. No way should I be able to sit at 6 o'clock and hammer away. Human rear gunners on 110's are a different matter.....

From my viewpoint strictly as a Red pilot (who has engaged numerous 110's), I feel that they are too sluggish in acceleration when their bombs are dropped/jettisoned. I've been nastily surprised sometimes by its unexpected nimbleness in evasive manuevres, but that may just be due to the 110 pilot being better at it than me! LOL

Its forward guns are devastating (as they should be), but no Spit or Hurri pilot would ever intentionally go head to head with a 110. I've recently seen boom & zoom tactics at relatively high altitudes (> 10 angels) being effectively done by 110's. I was a victim of one, instantly PK'd by the 110 I never saw. They certainly seem to dive well.

I wish the devs had seen fit to include flyable Beaufighters. I haven't researched any comparative specs, but it would've been fun to pit a 110 vs a Beaufighter just for smiles and giggles. I realize that Beaufighters did not play a pivotal role in the BoB, but neither did the BR.20M's or G.50's.

Robo.
Feb-19-2013, 14:54
It was a joke, hence the smiliy. Bliss asked for docs and I had one, that is all. - that is the whole purposes of posting this document, nothing more. I was trying to be helpful not argue the toss over petrochemistry, I know you feel you are a top notch source of information in you beliefs but you dont have to ask every post some makes about blue aircraft for the ID papers. :) I noticed the report is pre bob and the test / data is even older, I was just drawing attention to the fact.

Ok sorry I didn't get you were just joking.

I only asked about the document because I didn't find anything in ti that was not obvious already + I got confused with the joke. Yes I like to see any documentation on any planes (not just blue) in case I don't have it already so I can read it and learn something new. (what you call beliefs I call knowledge) The Feb 1940 Betriebsanleitung you posted is nothing unusual so I wondered why you posted it (e.g. what should we be looking at specifficaly ), that is all. Thanks for translating it, other than that just what Snapper is saying :thumbsup:

LG1.Farber
Feb-19-2013, 16:00
Ok sorry I didn't get you were just joking.

I only asked about the document because I didn't find anything in ti that was not obvious already + I got confused with the joke. Yes I like to see any documentation on any planes (not just blue) in case I don't have it already so I can read it and learn something new. (what you call beliefs I call knowledge) The Feb 1940 Betriebsanleitung you posted is nothing unusual so I wondered why you posted it (e.g. what should we be looking at specifficaly ), that is all. Thanks for translating it, other than that just what Snapper is saying :thumbsup:

Not everything is a battle. Knowledge never fades, gets contorted? If you have any tables or sources that are usual or unusual could you post them from your vast archive please?

SlipBall
Feb-19-2013, 16:35
We need some old days Sunoco 260 for the 110 :D

Robo.
Feb-19-2013, 17:18
Not everything is a battle. Knowledge never fades, gets contorted? If you have any tables or sources that are usual or unusual could you post them from your vast archive please?

I am not coming to forums to argue, just discuss the stuff that interests me and I like to learn new stuff. I am sorry I didn't get the 74 joke, I guess I am a bit thick today :D - if you're interested in anything particular re 110 just drop me a PM, I've got lots of PDFs, many of them from Tom actually. What I was trying to say is that the TF FM guys, as far I know them, already have the basic info regarding engine operations and limits (like the table you posted). I assumed you're pointing out at something specific with wrong fuel or the date or so. I hope that's clear now.

LG1.Farber
Feb-19-2013, 17:37
I am not coming to forums to argue, just discuss the stuff that interests me and I like to learn new stuff. I am sorry I didn't get the 74 joke, I guess I am a bit thick today :D - if you're interested in anything particular re 110 just drop me a PM, I've got lots of PDFs, many of them from Tom actually. What I was trying to say is that the TF FM guys, as far I know them, already have the basic info regarding engine operations and limits (like the table you posted). I assumed you're pointing out at something specific with wrong fuel or the date or so. I hope that's clear now.

I thought you had all the knowledge... Bliss asked for anything useful especially documentation... Post up.

Robo.
Feb-20-2013, 00:41
I thought you had all the knowledge... Bliss asked for anything useful especially documentation... Post up.

I am positive I don't have anything TF doesn't have already. I don't claim I have ''all the knowledge'' and I don't say my archive is ''vast'' (sorry I ignored your irony) but it's quite large as I've been collecting these materials for years, it's sort of a hobby. I bought quite a few of them for money (sites like machonemanuals and similar) and I am fluent in German (even Schwabach lol) so I am able to read them. If you're interested in something particular drop me a PM, I am happy to share.

[FFCW]Urizen
Feb-20-2013, 10:06
Sorry Robo ol&#180; chap, Schwabach is a City near Nuremberg, how you are able to speak that is beyond me :-)

GerritJ9
Feb-20-2013, 10:08
Schwabach is presumably also the Swabian dialect......

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Feb-20-2013, 10:18
Schwabach is presumably also the Swabian dialect......

I think Robo means Schwaebisch. Aus Schwaben.

palker
Feb-20-2013, 10:29
Urizen;32876']Sorry Robo ol&#180; chap, Schwabach is a City near Nuremberg, how you are able to speak that is beyond me :-)

He meant the sometimes unreadable ornamental font.
1981

Robo.
Feb-20-2013, 11:47
He meant the sometimes unreadable ornamental font.
1981

Yeah exactly. Some pre-war LW documents are printed in that old font style, luckily I had proper training from my Granddad's books (my family is what you'd call Karpatendeutschen) and from the Uni.

Urizen, but you're right it's called after that town. I am probably completely wrong with the English name of it though, it's not the actual medieval Schwabach font, but it's also difficult to read and similar - sorry about the confusion.

A pic:

1982

VO101_Tom
Feb-20-2013, 17:22
Most of the german documents use the "Fraktur" fonts:

uppercase is more misleading than the lowercase, need some time to get used to it :)
Fraktur.jpg (big) (http://www.pumaszallas.hu/Private/VO101_Tom/pics/Fraktur.jpg)

VO101_Kurfurst
Feb-21-2013, 05:52
Fraktur or Gothic fonts were banned by the Nazis in 1941 (they considered them to be "Jewish"... :doh: ) and officially Latin (Roman, classical, normal etc.) fonts were to be used afterwards.

Foo'bar
Feb-21-2013, 07:05
Reden hier Blinde ueber Farben? ;)

LG1.Klein
Feb-21-2013, 10:39
KommandGerat belongs to BMW engines its a far more comprehensive system than that used on the DB601. The DB601 is AUTO not KG :) its a relatively simple system unlike KG.

As to which 110 version was the first to incorporate it. IMO it was the "E" model. Looking at various cockpit shots you can determine if AUTO is fitted by the addition of the Manual Auto switches just above the Prop pitch levers. Of course in CLOD both the C4 and C7 have these AUTO/MAN selection switches.

The 110 C5 that was part of the exhaustive assessment done by Vought was a BOB period aircraft and only fitted with Manual prop pitch.
The RAF evaluation of a C4 also had manual only.

Now if someone can provide concrete evidence of BOB period BF110 with Auto then post here.

According to Kurfursts data as of Jan 1941 the number of 601N equipped BF110s was:

Bf 110C-1 : 4 pcs, Bf 110C-4 : 40 pcs, Bf 110C-5 : 12, Bf 110C-7 : 14 pcs, Bf 110D-0 : 18 pcs, Bf 110D-2 : 20 pcs, Bf 110D-3 : 8 pcs, BF 110E-1 : 176 pcs, Bf 110E-2 : 14 pcs.


Salute

You will see many changes in the 110's performance.

However, you will need to wait a little longer than the first release to see an engine ending with an N...

But it is coming. :salute:

This thread has become quite watered down and allow me to re focus a bit.

Ok so without any further evidence being put forward we can forget about the 110C4 or C7 having auto prop pitch?

Also, does this statement from buzzsaw mean that we have to wait for another variant to be introduced to see the DB601N, technically the DB601P for the 110, or is TF just not able to give the 110C7 the DB601N before release?

Also according to the above list it would appear that some C4 along with C7 had the N engine. Will that be a option in the future as well? A 110C4/N variant? I personally would love a 110C4 that is lighter and more streamlined then the C7 but has the more powerful uprated N engine.

Also, let's not forget about the 110C4b that had the uprated DB601Aa engine instead of the DB601A-1. So if the bomb carrying 110C4 got the uprated engines, same fuel but about 100 more hp per engine, then would the 110C7 a dedicated bomb carrying platform not have at the very least the DB601Aa(or Bb in 110 specific)? Though I believe the 110C7 had the DB601N which make the DB601Aa argument moot.

Let's really focus on the 110 here please and not spitfires, 109s, or german font. I not only appreciate TF's current work, but I would appreciate it if the community would let us 110 drivers at least have this thread to hash out information in without wading through 4 pages of muck.

Thank you all.

RAF74_Buzzsaw
Feb-21-2013, 15:14
Also according to the above list it would appear that some C4 along with C7 had the N engine. Will that be a option in the future as well? A 110C4/N variant?

Yes.

LG1.Klein
Feb-21-2013, 15:30
Yes.

INteresting. I will now proceed to hump your leg vigorously sir.

SlipBall
Feb-21-2013, 15:54
Snappers dog called first!! :P

RAF74_Buzzsaw
Feb-21-2013, 16:10
INteresting. I will now proceed to hump your leg vigorously sir.

:sick:

Last time I respond.

ATAG_Colander
Feb-21-2013, 16:11
:)

Osprey
Feb-22-2013, 04:20
lol, funny stuff :D

Jack Morris (Lucky)
Feb-25-2013, 11:50
*Affected* not effected.

ATAG_Snapper
Feb-25-2013, 12:02
*Affected* not effected.

Many of us realize that, Jack, but were too polite to point that out since the meaning was very clear. For many valued members on this forum English is not their first language. It would be regrettable if any of them hesitated to post for fear of being embarrassed publicly for a minor spelling error. Let's all focus on the content of a post and not worry about trifling spelling errors.

ATAG_Septic
Feb-25-2013, 14:25
This is a minefield for native English speakers.

There's no gramatical error using either. Affect is more comonly used as a verb and effect might be more commonly used as a noun. I got used to this whilst working with psychiatrists, who break the convention and use affect as a noun to describe mood.

Back to the game! :)

Septic the pedantic.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Feb-26-2013, 11:44
Hi all, just picked up this interesting point abut h rear gunners from this thread: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?3450-Defenceles&p=34161#post34161

It was posted by 1Lokos. I have paraphrased him thus:

The game models it so that the gunners have trouble firing when the aircraft is maneuvering (above 5m/s)?! It assumes that the gunner would be "holding on" to something in the cokpit and therefore, unable to freely operate the guns and fire..

I think this is a nice touch, but I'm not sure it's a good idea. In a Boeing B-17 I could understand that a waist gunner would have trouble, but sitting down in a bf-110..

I think the bf-110 rear gunner should be able to fire at least at low G. But MAYBE the machine guns should be hard to move at high-G - unless the aiming mechanism is entirely electrical?
What about the Stuka, is the rear-gunner's aim assisted mechanically/ electrically?
What is the gunner turret on the Blenheim like? Is it powered, or are the guns manipulated by the pilot directly?

LG1.Klein
Feb-26-2013, 13:55
Hi all, just picked up this interesting point abut h rear gunners from this thread: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?3450-Defenceles&p=34161#post34161

It was posted by 1Lokos. I have paraphrased him thus:

The game models it so that the gunners have trouble firing when the aircraft is maneuvering (above 5m/s)?! It assumes that the gunner would be "holding on" to something in the cokpit and therefore, unable to freely operate the guns and fire..

I think this is a nice touch, but I'm not sure it's a good idea. In a Boeing B-17 I could understand that a waist gunner would have trouble, but sitting down in a bf-110..

I think the bf-110 rear gunner should be able to fire at least at low G. But MAYBE the machine guns should be hard to move at high-G - unless the aiming mechanism is entirely electrical?
What about the Stuka, is the rear-gunner's aim assisted mechanically/ electrically?
What is the gunner turret on the Blenheim like? Is it powered, or are the guns manipulated by the pilot directly?


I'll put this here too.

Also, is the problem where if you switch to your gunner then back to pilot your gunner no longer is operational going to be looked at? Or does this bug already have a workaround. As it stands right now I just never switch to my gunner. If I were to switch to my gunner it's like the AI says ok he is yours now keep him and the AI never comes back.

ATAG_Septic
Feb-26-2013, 14:01
I'll put this here too.

Also, is the problem where if you switch to your gunner then back to pilot your gunner no longer is operational going to be looked at? Or does this bug already have a workaround. As it stands right now I just never switch to my gunner. If I were to switch to my gunner it's like the AI says ok he is yours now keep him and the AI never comes back.

Alt+F2 from the gunner seat, but don't do it from the pilot seat.

Cheers,

Septic.

VO101_Kurfurst
Feb-27-2013, 04:05
According to Kurfursts data as of Jan 1941 the number of 601N equipped BF110s was:

Bf 110C-1 : 4 pcs, Bf 110C-4 : 40 pcs, Bf 110C-5 : 12, Bf 110C-7 : 14 pcs, Bf 110D-0 : 18 pcs, Bf 110D-2 : 20 pcs, Bf 110D-3 : 8 pcs, BF 110E-1 : 176 pcs, Bf 110E-2 : 14 pcs.

Note that this was an engine count (number of "active" 601Ns in Bf 110s), so halve the above number to get the number of 110s (since it was a twin engine fighter).

ie. total : 306 engines, or 153 Bf 110s with DB 601N present in service on 1st January 1941 (or roughly 5 to 6 Gruppen).

Stigler
Feb-27-2013, 15:31
Here is some more info on the Bf-110c BoB era performance and comments vs Hurricane and availability of 100 octane fuel, ect.

delcyros posts a lot of good info.

WWII Aircraft.net

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/hurricane-vs-bf-110-a-16112.html

and here (Read the third post down on 12oclockhigh it is a wake up call for those saying the 110 should not be a match for Hurricane early Bob, I am not saying it is absolute fact, but it does contradict.)

12 Oclockhigh

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=15776&highlight=110

In clod the little things that do not go in the 110's favor like historical speed, climb, max dive speed, hardiness, ai gunner, ect and the fact the Hurricane did get attention made the overall gap quite large.
A Hurricane 1000m under you would come up like a rocket and close with no issue. (My experience w/ clod stopped with 1.08.18956) I am looking forward to the TF patch.

I also never had much luck exploiting a -g dive and max dive speed to evade a Hurricane, diving away from a Hurricane at same level firing at six, and the pings never ceased, more times than not.

The victor rewrites history, and while the bf110 was never the hvy fighter it was meant to be, until all hurricanes ran 100 octane w/12lb boost the 110 was an adversary, they even try to say the captured bf-110 performance must have been a fluke.(high speeds)

edit: There is a wealth of good info in those two threads and well worth the read.

Osprey
Feb-28-2013, 10:40
Here is some more info on the Bf-110c BoB era performance and comments vs Hurricane and availability of 100 octane fuel, ect.

delcyros posts a lot of good info.

WWII Aircraft.net

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/hurricane-vs-bf-110-a-16112.html

and here (Read the third post down on 12oclockhigh it is a wake up call for those saying the 110 should not be a match for Hurricane early Bob, I am not saying it is absolute fact, but it does contradict.)

12 Oclockhigh

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=15776&highlight=110

In clod the little things that do not go in the 110's favor like historical speed, climb, max dive speed, hardiness, ai gunner, ect and the fact the Hurricane did get attention made the overall gap quite large.
A Hurricane 1000m under you would come up like a rocket and close with no issue. (My experience w/ clod stopped with 1.08.18956) I am looking forward to the TF patch.

I also never had much luck exploiting a -g dive and max dive speed to evade a Hurricane, diving away from a Hurricane at same level firing at six, and the pings never ceased, more times than not.

The victor rewrites history, and while the bf110 was never the hvy fighter it was meant to be, until all hurricanes ran 100 octane w/12lb boost the 110 was an adversary, they even try to say the captured bf-110 performance must have been a fluke.(high speeds)

edit: There is a wealth of good info in those two threads and well worth the read.


I don't understand why you are giving some stick to 1C for patching up the Hurricane at the very end. This machine made up 66% of the RAF fighters and before the last patch it was totally unusable. If you have only X amount of time then of course it needs attention ahead of the 110. You seem to be suggesting that the Hurricane should have it's wings clipped again just because the 110 isn't up to spec - two wrongs do not make a right.

I don't understand your point about about top speeds anyway, I'm pretty sure I can't catch a 110 if he decides to shallow dive and run, I can just about manage 285mph @ sea level (which is quite accurate to RL actually). Plus, given that 90% of the online pilots are in Spitfires, not Hurricanes, just where are you encountering so many of them to become bothered by it?

The 110 was 'found out' in the BoB, I'm not sure how though given the high speed it possesses.

Stigler
Mar-01-2013, 11:13
I don't understand why you are giving some stick to 1C for patching up the Hurricane at the very end. This machine made up 66% of the RAF fighters and before the last patch it was totally unusable. If you have only X amount of time then of course it needs attention ahead of the 110. You seem to be suggesting that the Hurricane should have it's wings clipped again just because the 110 isn't up to spec - two wrongs do not make a right.

I don't understand your point about about top speeds anyway, I'm pretty sure I can't catch a 110 if he decides to shallow dive and run, I can just about manage 285mph @ sea level (which is quite accurate to RL actually). Plus, given that 90% of the online pilots are in Spitfires, not Hurricanes, just where are you encountering so many of them to become bothered by it?

The 110 was 'found out' in the BoB, I'm not sure how though given the high speed it possesses.

You misunderstand the nature of my post. I have not stated anything about "clipping" the Hurricanes performance. I have just presented information that shows that the Bf-110 was not as useless a dog as most seem to think. Also you have to understand that as a pilot that only flies ground attack, bombers and BnZ, that coming to Clod from IL-2 Ju-88/Bf-110/FW190(BnZ, Ground Attack)/Betty that Clod was just not cutting it with the sub par unhistorical performances and player AI gunners that are completely useless.

I love flying, I have owned an ultralight, taken some lessons ect.. but I am no fighter pilot, I spend entire weekends flying A2A B377 and B-17, and have no issues with flying DCS A-10/KA-50, so even though the 109/spit/hurricane are the more flown aircraft and had attention to their respective performances the bombers/twins suffered and the people that do enjoy specifically flying these type of aircraft have had to put up with it as the minority. Also it already appears that Team Fusion has addressed these things and for that I am happy.

As you know there are whole online squadrons based just around bombers and ground attack roles, and there are probably many that have not committed to Clod because of the disparities, and lack of more aircraft types. So yes for me to fly Clod again, these aircraft need at least the same historical differences in speeds if the historical speeds are not matched, and the damage model. The dive speed may be fixed, as I said I have been gone since 1.08...

So do not think that I wish for any consideration of "nerfing" anything about the RAF Fighters. The thread was about the "nerfed" Bf-110 and clarifying that we are not whining about OP RAF Fighters, but a nerfed unhistorical and fragile Bf-110 and the player ai gunners. Thus presenting as many facts as possible for our case. The Bf-110 was an adversary for Hurricane early Bob (pre 100 and 12lb boost, when 6lb then 9lb was max allowed) and also useful in N. Africa w/ uprated engines. In the end, us live bomber and twin pilots are still fodder for a good RAF fighter pilot, but at least we have a chance vs some random that points his plane straight at our six and sprays. That is what we are trying to say.

We also all agree we do not want "OP" IL-2 gunners, but at the same time the current player ai gunners are 99% useless, they should take out the engine of a plane flying on six at same level. (IE bad attack) If the historical gunners were as bad as the Clod , they would have pulled ALL the guns from all the bombers and 110 and 87. Truth be told, because we are flying an online sim with untrained pilots our gunners kill stats should be higher than historical value anyhow.

So in closing, my thread was only in support of Clod's Bf-110's flaws online with regard to the more historical RAF speeds and performance as instituted in Clod. It seems that the thread is irrelevant as Team Fusion has stated the performances of the Bf-110 and Ju-88 are more in line now with historical values, so the "player ai" gunner bug is the outstanding thing to be addressed. /salute

Osprey
Mar-06-2013, 06:30
You misunderstand the nature of my post. I have not stated anything about "clipping" the Hurricanes performance. I have just presented information that shows that the Bf-110 was not as useless a dog as most seem to think.

As you know there are whole online squadrons based just around bombers and ground attack roles, and there are probably many that have not committed to Clod because of the disparities, and lack of more aircraft types. So yes for me to fly Clod again, these aircraft need at least the same historical differences in speeds if the historical speeds are not matched, and the damage model. The dive speed may be fixed, as I said I have been gone since 1.08...

....The Bf-110 was an adversary for Hurricane early Bob (pre 100 and 12lb boost, when 6lb then 9lb was max allowed)


OK understood. Just to address these three items though
1. I don't think anyone said that the Bf110 is a dog in real life, but it under performs here. This thread has seen unanimous support for it from both sides too.
2. 9./ZG26 are a very active Bf110 crew within Air Combat Group which have the support of two Bf109 squadrons also in the group so I don't think you'd get a bad experience with them. It will never be easy in the 110 anyway, I think you know that.
3. There was never ever a 6lbs boost BoB Hurricane, even early in the BoB. There was in France, but ALL frontline fighters were using 100 octane in the BoB. I suspect somebody can find a squadron based in Montrose in mid July for a few days whilst under refit or something innocuous like that but I am really referring to the South East, which is what is mapped. There was also never a 9lbs max Hurricane, you are perhaps referring to the fully boosted Spit IIa which has not passed the gate on it's throttle? Regardless, the Bf110 is still faster than the 12lbs Hurricane anyway.

9./ZG26Eicken
Mar-06-2013, 08:03
*waves flag* Yup, we are still here and still trying to kick ass as much as possible :thumbsup:

Agree with Osprey here also, both sides, red and blue have both come together to show their support for this lovely, albeit under-performing aircraft, it's quite touching really :(

Kodoss
Mar-09-2013, 07:48
Ok so without any further evidence being put forward we can forget about the 110C4 or C7 having auto prop pitch?

Yes, forget about it. The auto prop pitch came with the E-series.

Regarding the engines:
The Bf 110 C-series used DB 601 A-1 without WEP (1 minute rating).
The D-series came with DB 601 A-1 with timer deactivated WEP (1 minute rating), so you could run it longer if you dare.

Since the D series and C-4/C-7 A/C were build at the same time, it is worth a discussion if the later C-4/C-7 had also WEP.

The E-1 series came with DB 601 N engines from the Messerschmitt production lines to fill up the losses of the 4 groups with N-engines.
Note: E-2 series build at Mtt till 1/41: 8 (active at 22.1.41 on the front: 7)

I haven't found any evidence for DB 601 Aa or any derivate of the DB601 B-series.
The manual for the C-1/C-2 says DB 601 A with 1:1,55 propeller/engine ratio and 3,1m VDM propeller (same as Bf 109).

Oh, and a little gimmick after wrecking 5 hours. Might not make it in our first patch, but is on the list.
2187

Kling
Mar-09-2013, 08:13
Oh, and a little gimmick after wrecking 5 hours. Might not make it in our first patch, but is on the list.
2187

Do you mean now that the new FM fixes might not make it into the first patch at all?!!! Or do you mean that new 110versions might not make in the first patch?!

ATAG_Colander
Mar-09-2013, 08:22
He means that we had to stop accepting new content for the first patch. Otherwise we would be forever testing and you will never see a release :D

FM changes are the main priority of the first patch but there will be others!

HolyGrail
Mar-09-2013, 08:44
This must have been one helluva of a FM ride with this crate :D

http://i888.photobucket.com/albums/ac90/HolyGrail_photos/1-Bf-110G-ZG1_2-S9IC-Nikoleijev-Russia-1943-01.jpg

Kodoss
Mar-09-2013, 09:08
Just wait for the patch and see... or better learn:D

But don't worry there is enough in the Bf 110 to bugfix for multiple patches.
(especially the complete wrong cockpit:grrr: )

Kling
Mar-09-2013, 09:19
He means that we had to stop accepting new content for the first patch. Otherwise we would be forever testing and you will never see a release :D

FM changes are the main priority of the first patch but there will be others!

Good I dont really care for new planes. I just want fixed FMs!! :)

LG1.Klein
Mar-19-2013, 09:41
With the new patch we certainly received a new 110. Thank you very much TF. Now might I request the documentation that you used or could it be confirmed that the doc Farber posted here, http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3055&p=32677&viewfull=1#post32677, is the reference doc used to correct the 110 FM? My squad has a pilots manual that is in dire need of updating and I would like to use what TF used to update it.

I still have concerns about engine options available but have no evidence at hand. Just previous knowledge of the discussions over a similar subject in World War 2 Online when the 110C4/b was released in game. It was argued that the 110C4/b had different engines. DB601Ba vs DB601B, which rated about 100HP more PER engine. This is supported by a quick google search on Wikipedia though I understand Wikipedia is a marginal source at best. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daimler-Benz_DB_601

Also Farber stated a concern which I share. The test was conducted July of 1939, a full year before the BoB started in earnest. Do we know if there were any changes or "upgrades" to the engines between that timeframe?

Thank you.

RAF74_Buzzsaw
Mar-19-2013, 14:09
With the new patch we certainly received a new 110. Thank you very much TF. Now might I request the documentation that you used or could it be confirmed that the doc Farber posted here, http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3055&p=32677&viewfull=1#post32677, is the reference doc used to correct the 110 FM? My squad has a pilots manual that is in dire need of updating and I would like to use what TF used to update it.

I still have concerns about engine options available but have no evidence at hand. Just previous knowledge of the discussions over a similar subject in World War 2 Online when the 110C4/b was released in game. It was argued that the 110C4/b had different engines. DB601Ba vs DB601B, which rated about 100HP more PER engine. This is supported by a quick google search on Wikipedia though I understand Wikipedia is a marginal source at best. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daimler-Benz_DB_601

Also Farber stated a concern which I share. The test was conducted July of 1939, a full year before the BoB started in earnest. Do we know if there were any changes or "upgrades" to the engines between that timeframe?

Thank you.

We have examined many original historical documents in determining performance, (including the one shown) most sourced from museums and historical depositories. The research resulted in the current 110 versions.

One aspect which is not historical, is the means by which propellor pitch is controlled. Historically this could only be controlled by a switch on the cockpit dashboard, which the pilot would have to take his hand off the throttle or joystick and reach forward to adjust. Unlike the 109's there was no toggle on the joystick which could be controlled by the pilot's thumb. This made changing pitch quite awkward and difficult in combat, especially during hi-G maneuvering. We have allowed players to control their pitch with a mapped key, (ie. with a thumb) although to really simulate the control difficulty, pitch would only be controllable with a mouse click, something which would be very awkward. We elected to compromise this because we know players would be unhappy with the restriction. Later models of the 110 had the thumb toggle.

Yes, there will be new versions of the 110 in our next release. We expect to release either a C-4N or a C-7N, with DB-601N engines, plus possibly a D or E model. (no guarantee on the two later versions)

9./ZG26Eicken
Mar-19-2013, 21:34
Yes, there will be new versions of the 110 in our next release. We expect to release either a C-4N or a C-7N, with DB-601N engines, plus possibly a D or E model. (no guarantee on the two later versions)

http://i.imgur.com/Ujw9MVI.gif

GRAF
Mar-19-2013, 23:25
So is the 110 we know and love fixed and ready for duty? I have yet found time to fly lately and need an update. ;)

LG1.Klein
Mar-20-2013, 09:11
So is the 110 we know and love fixed and ready for duty? I have yet found time to fly lately and need an update. ;)

She is relevant again. :thumbsup: