Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser TrailerDeal of the Week Alea Jacta Est
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

OT: What if?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> OT: What if? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
OT: What if? - 1/27/2012 11:51:41 PM   
Footslogger

 

Posts: 739
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Washington USA
Status: offline
I. Could the Germans have developed the Panther tank in 1939?
II. What if the FW190 was used instead of the Me109?
III. What if the Germans were ready for a winter battle?
IV. With 3 million men, could the Germans have made more Divisions prior to Barbarrosa?
V. Could the Germans have reworked thier supply system better prior to Barbarossa?

Post #: 1
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 1:48:58 AM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
The rest is merely window dressing. This is what WW2 was motivated by!


(in reply to Footslogger)
Post #: 2
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 2:55:39 AM   
parusski


Posts: 4591
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: Wyoming, Even Liberals Welcome
Status: offline
All could well have changed the outcome of the War in the East. But you are left with one insurmountable problem-Hitler would have still been Hitler. So you would need to change how Hitler thought and controlled things(and general's)!

_____________________________

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."- W.T. Sherman

(in reply to Footslogger)
Post #: 3
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 3:21:54 AM   
Tentpeg

 

Posts: 45
Joined: 1/6/2012
Status: offline
1. The Axis had nothing even close to a Panther design in 39 or 40 or 41. Hitler was not interested in anything long term. The only improvement he wanted was a long 50mm on the PZIII.
2. Nothing was wrong with ME-109 except they did not have enough of them. Hitler was interested in bombers and produced them at the expense of fighters.
3 & 4. Hitler disbanded units ( entire Divisions) after the fall of France. Those units could have proved useful if Hitler was willing to increase production to properly equip them, he wasn't because he thought the war would be over by October.
4. Hitler saw no problem with the supply system. The war would be a quick one. Why create winter stores and equipment for units returning to warm barracks and Xmas leave.

Remove Hitler and you remove the war. With Hitler in charge you lose the war.

(in reply to parusski)
Post #: 4
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 5:07:20 AM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
Yeah, number 2 isn't a good one. The ME 109 was the single most outstanding fighter of the era for doing what it did before long before comparable fighters showed.. And nothing bested it in the European theater except for the Yak - 3. The 109 had a few deficiencies, they were more than balanced by what remained one of the wars most nimble fighter planes.

(in reply to Tentpeg)
Post #: 5
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 8:25:13 AM   
Tarhunnas


Posts: 3123
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wulfgar

Yeah, number 2 isn't a good one. The ME 109 was the single most outstanding fighter of the era for doing what it did before long before comparable fighters showed.. And nothing bested it in the European theater except for the Yak - 3. The 109 had a few deficiencies, they were more than balanced by what remained one of the wars most nimble fighter planes.


Yep, it is a common misconception that the Fw 190 was a better fighter than the Me109, but they were really suited to different roles. Even late in the war, the Luftwaffe used the 109 to take on the escorts while the 190s concentrated on the bombers, that says something!

If the 109 had a weakness, I would say it was its limited range, especially in early models, but all designs are a compromise.

(in reply to wulfgar)
Post #: 6
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 9:31:42 AM   
glvaca

 

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline
The 190 & 109's are both excellent planes, they just need to be used/flown differently.
The main advantage of the 190, was speed and firepower but it had reduced performance up high (5000+) and was as such not well suited in the high interceptor role for example against the Western Allied heavies and as such they needed to be protected by 109's who had excellent high altitude performance.
However, in Russia, the Russians hardly ever went above 3000m altitude in part because their performance above that altitude was bad. This was the main (but off course not only) reason the Germans could achieve till the end of the was such astounding exchange ratio's. They simple came in around 4000-5000m, swooped down, attacked, climbed up again. Repeat.
The LA5-FN, LA-7, Yak3 and others where excellent fighters below 3000m. They were fast, climbed very well, could turn well but could not compete in a dive (wooden construction). In a turn fight and climbing contest below 3000m, equal Energy,, the Germans did not have a chance in a 1v1 situation. Off course the trick is to make sure you don't get into that situation by staying high, or having a wingman. But anyway.

Anyway, in the right hands, the butcher bird (190) is deadly, 2x or 4x 20mm cannons, plenty of ammo, speed, dive, great elevator control, superb role but really bad sustained turn. It's not for nothing that when it was first introduced in the spring of 1941 on the Western front, the Spitfires good their butt kicked big time.

(in reply to Tarhunnas)
Post #: 7
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 10:40:12 AM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 640
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
I think ultimately that all these what ifs are irrelevant. They might've extended the war a few months, maybe more than a year, even perhaps a stalemated eastern front but the cold hard reality was that Germany had no chance in a two front war.

The one factor that would've made any of the given what ifs remotely possible, would have been a total-war production setup in 1939, not 1943. Given that German war production was essentially half-hearted until Speer started turning things around in 1942, even having the Panther in 1939 probably wouldn't get you much more than 20 vehicles a month until 1942. Having 400 Panthers in June 1941 might have allowed the Germans to advance a little bit further (although they were limited by supply anyways) or inflict larger losses, but probably wouldn't have changed the overall outcome.

< Message edited by Schmart -- 1/28/2012 10:44:22 AM >

(in reply to glvaca)
Post #: 8
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 11:28:11 AM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
Yes, we scratch number 2. The 109 had the edge on everything it came across in the early phase of the war, including the overrated Spitfire. The Germans had the superior fighter until planes like the Mustang showed late in war. Fantastic at altitude and more nimble than most of the opposition at low level.
quote:

I. Could the Germans have developed the Panther tank in 1939?


Probably more the question is if somebody in Germany worked out that ballistic armor, high velocity gun and large road wheels was going to be the way to go. However the Mark 3 & 4 where superior concepts to the vast majority of soviet armor they initially faced.

quote:

III. What if the Germans were ready for a winter battle?


Well I don't know if street-fighting in Moscow would be a good thing at any time of year. I suspect the OKW wanted to avoid it and the hope was the Kiev encirclement would collapse the Russian will to fight. Certainly without hindsight I would have done the same thing as Hitler. Note they sensibly avoided storming Leningrad, then they go and make the mistake at Stalingrad.

Always head down the path of least resistance.

The Russians just weren't go to give up! That spoiled everything!






< Message edited by wulfgar -- 1/30/2012 12:06:37 AM >

(in reply to Tarhunnas)
Post #: 9
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 4:59:01 PM   
barbarrossa


Posts: 359
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: Shangri-La
Status: offline
Perhaps if the Germans had gotten a look at the T-34 prior to the opening of hostilities they might have thought twice. Maybe. That would be an interesting scenario for WiTE a 1943 Barbarrossa without a Western front. Panthers and Tigers oh my.

The Bf-109 had some flaws. Narrow landing gear caused many crack-ups, short-legged in fuel and an extremely thin wing that made the addition of wing-mounted cannon problematic in later mods.  The cannon changed flight dynamics mightily.


_____________________________

"It take a brave soldier to be a coward in the Red Army" -- Uncle Joe

"Is it you or I that commands 9th Army, My Fuhrer?" -- Model

(in reply to wulfgar)
Post #: 10
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 6:09:47 PM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Footslogger

I. Could the Germans have developed the Panther tank in 1939?
II. What if the FW190 was used instead of the Me109?
III. What if the Germans were ready for a winter battle?
IV. With 3 million men, could the Germans have made more Divisions prior to Barbarrosa?
V. Could the Germans have reworked thier supply system better prior to Barbarossa?




If the human will were everything Hitler made it out to be, surely the 'what if theorists' who substitute understanding of historical processes with their own fantasies, could rewind history with a result more to their liking. Only they might not like it so much when they get it.

At the very least, the desire to posit historically baseless scenarios as posible alternative histories or even food for thought, indicates a lack of interest in the real world. As for myself I find the truth much more incredible and marvelous, if laced with frequent tragedy, than any fiction.

Get a life.

_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to Footslogger)
Post #: 11
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 9:04:57 PM   
barbarrossa


Posts: 359
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: Shangri-La
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring


quote:

ORIGINAL: Footslogger

I. Could the Germans have developed the Panther tank in 1939?
II. What if the FW190 was used instead of the Me109?
III. What if the Germans were ready for a winter battle?
IV. With 3 million men, could the Germans have made more Divisions prior to Barbarrosa?
V. Could the Germans have reworked thier supply system better prior to Barbarossa?




If the human will were everything Hitler made it out to be, surely the 'what if theorists' who substitute understanding of historical processes with their own fantasies, could rewind history with a result more to their liking. Only they might not like it so much when they get it.

At the very least, the desire to posit historically baseless scenarios as posible alternative histories or even food for thought, indicates a lack of interest in the real world. As for myself I find the truth much more incredible and marvelous, if laced with frequent tragedy, than any fiction.

Get a life.


Troll, back under the bridge with you.


_____________________________

"It take a brave soldier to be a coward in the Red Army" -- Uncle Joe

"Is it you or I that commands 9th Army, My Fuhrer?" -- Model

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 12
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 9:06:43 PM   
randallw

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline
The existence of problem #5 created ( or made moot? ) problem #3.  The supply system was under strain, and moving winter clothing to forward positions would have sacrificed something else, such as food or ammo.

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 13
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 9:33:55 PM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: barbarrossa


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring


quote:

ORIGINAL: Footslogger

I. Could the Germans have developed the Panther tank in 1939?
II. What if the FW190 was used instead of the Me109?
III. What if the Germans were ready for a winter battle?
IV. With 3 million men, could the Germans have made more Divisions prior to Barbarrosa?
V. Could the Germans have reworked thier supply system better prior to Barbarossa?


So sorry to interrupt your fatuous musings.
So sorry to interrupt fatuous musings


If the human will were everything Hitler made it out to be, surely the 'what if theorists' who substitute understanding of historical processes with their own fantasies, could rewind history with a result more to their liking. Only they might not like it so much when they get it.

At the very least, the desire to posit historically baseless scenarios as posible alternative histories or even food for thought, indicates a lack of interest in the real world. As for myself I find the truth much more incredible and marvelous, if laced with frequent tragedy, than any fiction.

Get a life.


Troll, back under the bridge with you.




< Message edited by Mehring -- 1/28/2012 9:34:23 PM >


_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to barbarrossa)
Post #: 14
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 9:35:51 PM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline


quote:

ORIGINAL: barbarrossa



Troll, back under the bridge with you.



Forgive my interruption of your fatuous musings

_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 15
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 9:38:47 PM   
barbarrossa


Posts: 359
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: Shangri-La
Status: offline
You are forgiven. 

_____________________________

"It take a brave soldier to be a coward in the Red Army" -- Uncle Joe

"Is it you or I that commands 9th Army, My Fuhrer?" -- Model

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 16
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 10:11:57 PM   
Ron

 

Posts: 485
Joined: 6/6/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Footslogger

I. Could the Germans have developed the Panther tank in 1939?
II. What if the FW190 was used instead of the Me109?
III. What if the Germans were ready for a winter battle?
IV. With 3 million men, could the Germans have made more Divisions prior to Barbarrosa?
V. Could the Germans have reworked thier supply system better prior to Barbarossa?




All food for thought over a pint or two, and all points likely a considerable short-term advantage. :) However, I think any serious discussion cannot overlook the repeated trait of the Nazis to systematically rob Peter to pay Paul, rendering all null and void in the end, or overlook the self-destructive influence of a Hitler in power.

(in reply to Footslogger)
Post #: 17
RE: OT: What if? - 1/28/2012 10:13:09 PM   
Ron

 

Posts: 485
Joined: 6/6/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring



quote:

ORIGINAL: barbarrossa



Troll, back under the bridge with you.



Forgive my interruption of your fatuous musings



Pretentious, yet still a troll.

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 18
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 10:32:52 AM   
AFV


Posts: 371
Joined: 12/24/2011
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring


quote:

ORIGINAL: Footslogger

I. Could the Germans have developed the Panther tank in 1939?
II. What if the FW190 was used instead of the Me109?
III. What if the Germans were ready for a winter battle?
IV. With 3 million men, could the Germans have made more Divisions prior to Barbarrosa?
V. Could the Germans have reworked thier supply system better prior to Barbarossa?




If the human will were everything Hitler made it out to be, surely the 'what if theorists' who substitute understanding of historical processes with their own fantasies, could rewind history with a result more to their liking. Only they might not like it so much when they get it.

At the very least, the desire to posit historically baseless scenarios as posible alternative histories or even food for thought, indicates a lack of interest in the real world. As for myself I find the truth much more incredible and marvelous, if laced with frequent tragedy, than any fiction.

Get a life.


How odd, on a forum dedicated to a wargame, which in itself by definition is a what-if of a historical scenario, someone would post this, which in effect says its foolish to even consider what-ifs.

If you can't wrap your mind around hypothetical situations, this likely is not the best forum for you. As has been pointed out, troll.

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 19
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 11:09:14 AM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AFV


How odd, on a forum dedicated to a wargame, which in itself by definition is a what-if of a historical scenario, someone would post this, which in effect says its foolish to even consider what-ifs.

If you can't wrap your mind around hypothetical situations, this likely is not the best forum for you. As has been pointed out, troll.

Is it?

What if, in 1941, Germany had disappeared in a giant sinkhole?
What if the US had developed a giant lazer in 1943?
What if Hitler's coprophilia had been proven to the German people in 1938?

All may sound more fantastic perhaps, but in fact, none are more far fetched than the questions opening this thread. None of them have any basis in what was historically possible.

The only difference is that while all of the what if scenarios opening this thread muse scenarios more promising for the Nazis, none of mine do.

The question is, are the supporters of this thread neo nazis or just a bunch of neo Spinal Tap fans given to confused sexual fantasies of invasion and destruction so easily transferred onto the Nazi experience?

Pathetic, either way.

_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to AFV)
Post #: 20
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 11:31:35 AM   
AFV


Posts: 371
Joined: 12/24/2011
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring


quote:

ORIGINAL: AFV


How odd, on a forum dedicated to a wargame, which in itself by definition is a what-if of a historical scenario, someone would post this, which in effect says its foolish to even consider what-ifs.

If you can't wrap your mind around hypothetical situations, this likely is not the best forum for you. As has been pointed out, troll.

Is it?

What if, in 1941, Germany had disappeared in a giant sinkhole?
What if the US had developed a giant lazer in 1943?
What if Hitler's coprophilia had been proven to the German people in 1938?

All may sound more fantastic perhaps, but in fact, none are more far fetched than the questions opening this thread. None of them have any basis in what was historically possible.

The only difference is that while all of the what if scenarios opening this thread muse scenarios more promising for the Nazis, none of mine do.

The question is, are the supporters of this thread neo nazis or just a bunch of neo Spinal Tap fans given to confused sexual fantasies of invasion and destruction so easily transferred onto the Nazi experience?

Pathetic, either way.



Actually, it was far more likely the Germans could have prepared for a winter battle than all of Germany had fallen into a giant sinkhole.

I guess if I play the German in the game, I am a Neo-nazi, because I am trying to win?
For that matter, if I play the Russian am I a Stalin supporter?
Or does it mean nothing since its just a game?

Again, since you cannot wrap your brain around hypotheticals without having a conniption fit, any wargame forum is really not for you.
And, for your information, I am quite glad that Germany was defeated (and Japan for that matter). However, that does not prevent me from engaging in intellectual thoughts on what-ifs, and that extends to any war, from Ancient Rome to Viet-Nam. Don't mistake such musings for any perceived allegiance to any side, because it simply does not exist.

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 21
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 12:24:24 PM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
When knowledge is pursued with purely practical aims it is termed "sophistry". However if one pursues knowledge for the sake of simply "knowing", this is termed "philosophy".

Actually the best scholarship was produced by the philosophers because their dedication to the refinement of knowledge is greater.

Of course if we reject philosophy, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.......we never would have got past the Bronze Age.

So yes, strangely there are Human Apes that indulge themselves in speculative thought purely for artistic motives.

(in reply to AFV)
Post #: 22
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 2:43:42 PM   
barbarrossa


Posts: 359
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: Shangri-La
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring


quote:

ORIGINAL: AFV


How odd, on a forum dedicated to a wargame, which in itself by definition is a what-if of a historical scenario, someone would post this, which in effect says its foolish to even consider what-ifs.

If you can't wrap your mind around hypothetical situations, this likely is not the best forum for you. As has been pointed out, troll.

Is it?

What if, in 1941, Germany had disappeared in a giant sinkhole?
What if the US had developed a giant lazer in 1943?
What if Hitler's coprophilia had been proven to the German people in 1938?

All may sound more fantastic perhaps, but in fact, none are more far fetched than the questions opening this thread. None of them have any basis in what was historically possible.

The only difference is that while all of the what if scenarios opening this thread muse scenarios more promising for the Nazis, none of mine do.

The question is, are the supporters of this thread neo nazis or just a bunch of neo Spinal Tap fans given to confused sexual fantasies of invasion and destruction so easily transferred onto the Nazi experience?

Pathetic, either way.



Seriously? Really?

You must be a barrel of laughs to hang out with.

_____________________________

"It take a brave soldier to be a coward in the Red Army" -- Uncle Joe

"Is it you or I that commands 9th Army, My Fuhrer?" -- Model

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 23
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 5:40:04 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6239
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
I would be nice to see some non Nazi Germany what ifs every once in a while. Most of these are neither very interesting nor plausible.

Here's a neat one: what if the Soviet Union had won the Battle for Warsaw in 1920?






< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 1/29/2012 5:42:07 PM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to barbarrossa)
Post #: 24
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 6:23:03 PM   
Tarhunnas


Posts: 3123
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I would be nice to see some non Nazi Germany what ifs every once in a while. Most of these are neither very interesting nor plausible.

Here's a neat one: what if the Soviet Union had won the Battle for Warsaw in 1920?


Good point! Almost all what ifs have Nazi Germany doing this or that differently.

The Warsaw thing, that is an interesting one. But it poses several other wat ifs like would world revolution have spread to Germany, or would the Germans on the contrary have rallied to stop the Soviets? A Russo-german war in the 1920:s... Not that I suppose the Germans would have had the stomach for it after WW1, but OTOH the Russians went right on fighting, so why not the Germans...

Another intersting what if is what if Stalin had not purged his officer corps? How much would that have affected initial Soviet effectiveness?

_____________________________

Read my AAR:s ye mighty, and despair!
41Ger
41Sov
41Ger
42Ger
42Sov

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 25
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 11:23:00 PM   
Wild


Posts: 307
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I would be nice to see some non Nazi Germany what ifs every once in a while. Most of these are neither very interesting nor plausible.

Here's a neat one: what if the Soviet Union had won the Battle for Warsaw in 1920?







Yet more evidence of the complete pro Soviet bias of the playtesters. It's not enough to give the Soviets every advantage and to deny the Germans anything fun like production, now people aren't even allowed to speculate on anything German.

What a joke.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 26
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 11:35:04 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2021
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I would be nice to see some non Nazi Germany what ifs every once in a while. Most of these are neither very interesting nor plausible.

Here's a neat one: what if the Soviet Union had won the Battle for Warsaw in 1920?







Yet more evidence of the complete pro Soviet bias of the playtesters. It's not enough to give the Soviets every advantage and to deny the Germans anything fun like production, now people aren't even allowed to speculate on anything German.

What a joke.


Don't worry troll, the WhAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmbulence is on the way.

Even if by some miracle Baku was taken. A: It would of been completely wrecked. B: Given their logistical constraints, just how would they have gotten the oil out if and when they ever repaired it.

(in reply to Wild)
Post #: 27
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 11:41:19 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2021
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wulfgar

Yeah, number 2 isn't a good one. The ME 109 was the single most outstanding fighter of the era for doing what it did before long before comparable fighters showed.. And nothing bested it in the European theater except for the Yak - 3. The 109 had a few deficiencies, they were more than balanced by what remained one of the wars most nimble fighter planes. Not as nimble as a Spit or Zero. I wouldn't call it very nimble by 43. And adding underwing cannon made it less so.


"In a meeting with Willy Messerschmitt, the head of the Technical Office of the Luftwaffe pointed out that while the speed of the Me 109 was perfectly within requirements, that the Luftwaffe needed was a fighter ‘with the same speed plus greater range and a better rate of climb’.

Willy Messerschmitt, it has been reliably reported, reacted with a flash of temper. ‘What do you want?’ he is said to have shouted, ‘A fast fighter or a barn door’?

… Two years later, these same individuals were forced to run for shelter in Augsburg, which had come under attack by a swarm of Thunderbolt Fighters of the Eigth Fighter Command. At the sight of the powerful fighters strafing deep within enemy terriroty, the official of the Technical Office turned to Willy Messerschmitt with this acid reply:

'Well, there are your barn doors!”

Source: Martin Caidin, Me 109: Willy Messerschmitt’s Peerless Fighter, (New York: Ballantine, 1968), pp. 113-14.


< Message edited by Aurelian -- 1/29/2012 11:47:59 PM >

(in reply to wulfgar)
Post #: 28
RE: OT: What if? - 1/29/2012 11:59:20 PM   
Footslogger

 

Posts: 739
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Washington USA
Status: offline
Now thats enough!! I am not a Neo-Nazi!! (slime of the earth)

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 29
RE: OT: What if? - 1/30/2012 1:20:35 AM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Me 109: Willy Messerschmitt’s Peerless Fighter


The argument is.....

quote:

II. What if the FW190 was used instead of the Me109?


So we are talking about the war up until 1941.

Battle of France had the outnumbered 109's wiping all opposition....that's good enough for me. The battle of Britain has the 109 fighting at extreme range against the Splutterfire. Dowding very cleverly never deployed the Splutterfire on more even terms in France, he just let everything else the Brits had get shot down in droves.
The 109 was equaled later on but continued to give good account right to the end of the war.

(in reply to Footslogger)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> OT: What if? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.117