THE WWII Civ Team (units, mods and other)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by Pablostuka
nonnob3...If you want, you cant edit the first post of this thread, and replace it with the unit's index. If you agree, I'll post the code of the messager in a .txt file, to copy-paste:rolleyes: . tell me your opinion, please

I can move it? Tell me how?

And thanks for posting the instructions:D for me
 
Ok. All you have to do is go to the first post, edit it, and remove the text. After that, select all the text of the .txt file, copy it, and paste in the post edit. After that, save changes. i hope it will work:) .
I would like to remove the index I posted, but I can't delete the post, only a moderator can do the work...:rolleyes:
Bye!!!:king:
 
Originally posted by Pablostuka
Ok. All you have to do is go to the first post, edit it, and remove the text. After that, select all the text of the .txt file, copy it, and paste in the post edit. After that, save changes. i hope it will work:) .
I would like to remove the index I posted, but I can't delete the post, only a moderator can do the work...:rolleyes:
Bye!!!:king:

It worked buddy!

Thanks! :goodjob:

TEAM WORK DOES THE JOB! :D :D :D
 
are you sure torpedo planes were going to be on the german aircraft carrier?I heared that hitler didn't like torpedo's some thing about truble they had with them at the start of the war.
 
Originally posted by PC Commander
are you sure torpedo planes were going to be on the german aircraft carrier?I heared that hitler didn't like torpedo's some thing about truble they had with them at the start of the war.

well they were supposed to be assigned to the carrier, but as we all know, the Graf Zeppelin was never completed...

didn't like torpedoes? what, did Doenitz's U-boats use machine guns underwater? :rolleyes:

ok ok, i don't know if the TB's had problems in the beginning... however after Taranto, i'm sure the Nazis would have been compelled to weed out any problems and make their own TBs... or not.
 
didn't like torpedoes? what, did Doenitz's U-boats use machine guns underwater?

Come to think about it I think german U-boats had machine guns not torpedoes:rolleyes: :crazyeye:

well any way I was talking about torpedoe bombing not torpedoes on U- boats :rolleyes:

hear's where I saw it........
Hitler thought Torpedo bombers to be ineffective and with the torpedo problems that the Germans had in the beginning of the war, there was to be no torpedo bomber on the Graf Zeppelin. It is possible that the Ju-87 could have carried a torpedo, but is highly unlikely with Hitler's stance against torpedo bombing
see thats what I was talking about :D
 
Originally posted by PC Commander
see thats what I was talking about :D

hm where did you get that information, i've never heard about that angle of Hitler and TB's... interesting... but i'm almost certain that they WERE going to have TBs on board the Graf Zeppelin, just not the JU-87s... those were going to be strictly dive bombers, just like the SBD Dauntless...

well this is the Nazi TB I was talking about, the Fi 167

To meet a requirement for a ship-based two-seat torpedo bomber/reconnaissance aircraft, both Arado and Fieseler submited proposals to the RLM. Prototypes of both aircraft were built, but testing in late 1938 soon showed that Arado's AR 195 could not meet the requirements, whereas the Fieseler Fi 167 could not only meet but considerably exceed the specification. In configuration the Fieseler design was a two-bay foldable wing biplane, primarily of metal construction but with some fabric covering, fixed tailwheel landing gear with tall jettisonable main units, a conventional braced tail unit and a Daimler Benz DB 601 engine. The two-man crew was accommodated in tandem, beneath a long canopy that was designed to allow for operation at the rear of a machine-gun on a pivoted mount.

As with the Fi 156 Storch, Fieseler's new aircraft had exceptional low-speed characteristics, achieved in this case by both wings incorporating ailerons and full-span automatic leading edge slats, and the lower wing having large area trailing-edge flaps. Their effect, allied with the lift of the biplane wings, made it possible for the aircraft to sink slowly and almost vertically under complete control.

The Fi 167 was intended for service aboard the German aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin, launched on 8 December 1938, and following the completion of a second prototype a pre-production batch of 12 Fi-167 aircraft was built. These differed little from the prototypes, but incorporated some refinements considered desireable after service testing, including the addition of a two-man dinghy. When construction of the Graf Zeppelin was stopped, in 1940, the role for which the Fi 167 had been designed no longer existed. However, it was expected that when construction resumed, manufacture of the Fi 167 would also go ahead; this was not to be the case for when, in 1942, orders were given for construction of the aircraft-carrier to be resumed, it was decided that the Ju87C would amply meet requirements, and no further examples of the Fi 167 were built. Erprobungsstaffel 167 was established in the summer of 1940 for a series of evaluations, based in Holland. A number of tests were undertaken, including those of various overwater camouflage schemes. The unit remained there until early 1943, when the Fi 167s were dispersed: three to an undercarriage testing unit and the rest to Romania.

Engine:
Model: Daimler-Benz DB601B
Type: 12-Cylinder liquid cooled inverted vee
Number: One Horsepower: 1,100 hp

Performance:
Maximum Speed (Recon): 202 mph (325 kph)
Maximum Speed (Bomber): 199 mph
Normal Cruise: 155 mph
Range (Recon w. drop tanks): 932 miles
Range (Max. Payload): 808 miles (1300 km)
Initial Climb: N/A
Service Ceiling: 24,600-26900 ft.

Armament:
One 7.9mm MG 17 machine gun, forward firing, fixed in starboard forward fuselage with 500 rounds.
One 7.9mm MG 15 machine gun on flexible mount in observer's cockpit, 600 rounds carried.

Bombload:
Normal Load:
Four 110 lb. SC 50 bombs & One 551 lb. SC 250 or 1,102 lb. SC 500 bomb.

Maximum Load:
One 2,205 lb. SD 1000 bomb or one 1,685.5 lb. LT F5b torpedo.
 
Originally posted by Jagdpanther


hm where did you get that information, i've never heard about that angle of Hitler and TB's... interesting... but i'm almost certain that they WERE going to have TBs on board the Graf Zeppelin, just not the JU-87s... those were going to be strictly dive bombers, just like the SBD Dauntless...


Think outside the box...:D The issue at that time was that bombardement from above could pierce through the relativly thin armour of British Battleships- the German Flaggship Bismarck had a reinforced magazine after the German's had learned from the Jutland battle, where ships literally exploded due to a mere few lucky shots at high distance- the impact being from above...

It actually took torpedo bombers a long time to aid sinking the Bismarck in the end- actually they disabled the ships manouverability by damaging (and this is the funny part) the thinly armoured rudder- while the Bismarck was plated on top, some bits had been left out, a design flaw never tested out since the Bismarck's design had dissappeared in some drawer
eversince the end of the first WW... ;) sooo basically the built of British and German ships was diametrically opposed, as far as the armouring is concerned, since the British designs from the last war were still floating around :p :p :p

When thinking of the design of a weapon- always think of the particular target it is designed to destroy...
 
Originally posted by W.i.n.t.e.r


Think outside the box...:D The issue at that time was that bombardement from above could pierce through the relativly thin armour of British Battleships- the German Flaggship Bismarck had a reinforced magazine after the German's had learned from the Jutland battle, where ships literally exploded due to a mere few lucky shots at high distance- the impact being from above...

It actually took torpedo bombers a long time to aid sinking the Bismarck in the end- actually they disabled the ships manouverability by damaging (and this is the funny part) the thinly armoured rudder- while the Bismarck was plated on top, some bits had been left out, a design flaw never tested out since the Bismarck's design had dissappeared in some drawer
eversince the end of the first WW... ;) sooo basically the built of British and German ships was diametrically opposed, as far as the armouring is concerned, since the British designs from the last war were still floating around :p :p :p

When thinking of the design of a weapon- always think of the particular target it is designed to destroy...

uh that wasn't what PC comm and i were discussing... I think?
 
Originally posted by Jagdpanther


uh that wasn't what PC comm and i were discussing... I think?

I just mentioned the issues that were the cause for the dispute between the admirality and Hitler...

The armament had never been decided upon, neither on that to be carried on the Graf Zeppelin nor on its scheduled sister ship, the Peter Strasser. That means that whatever U put on it- Stukas or TBs- should be fine ;)... Hitler wanted bigger bombs- the admirality in turn wanted TBs with acustic torpedos that were being developed- and the Luftwaffe didn't want to have to hand over any of its planes whatever the result of the dispute...
 
I didn't know why hitler thought TBs to be "ineffective" but W.I.N.T.E.R. made a good point so I think this.........
Think outside the box... The issue at that time was that bombardement from above could pierce through the relativly thin armour of British Battleships- the German Flaggship Bismarck had a reinforced magazine after the German's had learned from the Jutland battle, where ships literally exploded due to a mere few lucky shots at high distance- the impact being from above...


It actually took torpedo bombers a long time to aid sinking the Bismarck in the end- actually they disabled the ships manouverability by damaging (and this is the funny part) the thinly armoured rudder- while the Bismarck was plated on top, some bits had been left out, a design flaw never tested out since the Bismarck's design had dissappeared in some drawer
eversince the end of the first WW... sooo basically the built of British and German ships was diametrically opposed, as far as the armouring is concerned, since the British designs from the last war were still floating around
is why hitler thought TBs to be "ineffective"
 
Originally posted by W.i.n.t.e.r


I just mentioned the issues that were the cause for the dispute between the admirality and Hitler...

The armament had never been decided upon, neither on that to be carried on the Graf Zeppelin nor on its scheduled sister ship, the Peter Strasser. That means that whatever U put on it- Stukas or TBs- should be fine ;)... Hitler wanted bigger bombs- the admirality in turn wanted TBs with acustic torpedos that were being developed- and the Luftwaffe didn't want to have to hand over any of its planes whatever the result of the dispute...

They were going to have both. Like I said before, they were to complement each other. Also the TBs could be used for recon because they had a great(er) range. So yeah, whatever... nothing was set in stone. But what I mentioned is what it was SUPPOSED to be like.

Originally posted by PC Commander
I didn't know why hitler thought TBs to be "ineffective" but W.I.N.T.E.R. made a good point so I think this.........

is why hitler thought TBs to be "ineffective"

okay, supposing thats true, why use the example of the Bismarck, a GERMAN ship, to argue that BRITISH ships had thin armor that would be especially vulnerable to torpedoes???

And like I mentioned before, after Taranto, I'm sure even the Germans would have seen the usefulness of TBs and rushed to develop them if they hadn't already...

Also if IRC, out of all of the branches, Hitler interfered with the Kriegsmarine the least. Left it to Doenitz and Raeder mostly.
 
Originally posted by Jagdpanther

okay, supposing thats true, why use the example of the Bismarck, a GERMAN ship, to argue that BRITISH ships had thin armor that would be especially vulnerable to torpedoes???


(1) Explanation:
Looking at shipbuilding designs of the time it is only logical that HITLER wanted to go with what was more likely to kill the immediate designated target- a British WWI (!) designed ship- with a BOMB !!!!

(2) Misunderstanding:
The fact that British designs until then had thin armour plating makes them vulnerable to BOMBS piercing the armour from high velocity guns- not torpedos. The admirals were looking ahead at what they new was being developed: TOP plating- in war the idea is to stay ahead in weapon technology/training/tactics to preempt any move the enemy may make (if armoured use TORPEDO)

*Hence the explanation of Y the dispute of what planes and payload to use

http://members.tripod.com/EFaust/aircraft.htm

-----------


Also if IRC, out of all of the branches, Hitler interfered with the Kriegsmarine the least. Left it to Doenitz and Raeder mostly.

Uhm- why do you think all admirals were complaining about Hitler changing supply priorities for naval projects during campaigns on land- the different branches of the navy (submarine, high seas, destroyers, etc) had to take whatever they could get when Hitler's land campaigns swallowed up resources for tanks and the like??? Also Hitler wanted more capital ships to be built instead of following Doenitz' advice to go for submarines in the early stages of conflict... prove may be found in the fact that along with many other naval projects (including the Peter Strasser and three escort carriers to be converted from liners, a second delivery of 2 to 3 Bismarck typed Battleships, as well as a row of 6 more advanced Heavy Cruisers H-M never saw service- again after Hitler needed resources elsewhere)

http://members.tripod.com/EFaust/grafzepp.htm

Soooo, I didn't really get your point- just use both Stukas and TBs- although naval reconaisance was to be carried out by the condor (and a newer, similar plane especially designed for the task I forgot the name of)...
 
Been away awhile(2 jobs, car broke down)!! So sorry haven't been helping out at all!!

Anyway I'll have some time this weekend( I think) so if any unit creators has something I can do for them let me know!!!

Kentonio your T-34 & Sherman are awesome:goodjob:

All these new units keep making me start my games over! Haven't completed a game in like a month!!
 
Originally posted by W.i.n.t.e.r
(1) Explanation:
Looking at shipbuilding designs of the time it is only logical that HITLER wanted to go with what was more likely to kill the immediate designated target- a British WWI (!) designed ship- with a BOMB !!!!

(2) Misunderstanding:
The fact that British designs until then had thin armour plating makes them vulnerable to BOMBS piercing the armour from high velocity guns- not torpedos. The admirals were looking ahead at what they new was being developed: TOP plating- in war the idea is to stay ahead in weapon technology/training/tactics to preempt any move the enemy may make (if armoured use TORPEDO)

*Hence the explanation of Y the dispute of what planes and payload to use

http://members.tripod.com/EFaust/aircraft.htm


I never said that the Ju-87C was going to carry torpedoes.

Torpedoes are ineffective against WWI British BB's??? Or just less effective than bombs???

And your example still makes no sense (arguing that torpedoes would have a difficult time sinking a WW1 British BB when you gave the modern WW2 BB BISMARCK as an example).

Originally posted by W.i.n.t.e.r
Uhm- why do you think all admirals were complaining about Hitler changing supply priorities for naval projects during campaigns on land- the different branches of the navy (submarine, high seas, destroyers, etc) had to take whatever they could get when Hitler's land campaigns swallowed up resources for tanks and the like??? Also Hitler wanted more capital ships to be built instead of following Doenitz' advice to go for submarines in the early stages of conflict... prove may be found in the fact that along with many other naval projects (including the Peter Strasser and three escort carriers to be converted from liners, a second delivery of 2 to 3 Bismarck typed Battleships, as well as a row of 6 more advanced Heavy Cruisers H-M never saw service- again after Hitler needed resources elsewhere)

Ok, I meant that he directly interfered with the Kriegsmarine less, compared to the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe. About the supply thing, he did that to every service, not just the KM. But on that point at least, he was at fault.

But your part about Hitler and more capital ships is misleading. It was Raeder who wanted more capital ships and convinced Hitler the same, but the other top guy Doenitz was opposed. This case is different from most other times he interfered with military affairs in that he actually took the recommendations of the top leadership (Raeder), instead of just making arbitrary decisions like he would later do. So he actually took the advice of his top advisers this time.

Z-Plan was intriguing, but the Germans needed more time. And Doenitz had no faith in it.

Originally posted by W.i.n.t.e.r
http://members.tripod.com/EFaust/grafzepp.htm

Soooo, I didn't really get your point- just use both Stukas and TBs- although naval reconaisance was to be carried out by the condor (and a newer, similar plane especially designed for the task I forgot the name of)...

The page you linked conveniently omitted the fact that by the time the Graf Zeppelin was almost done, there had been prototype testing with the TB Fi-167. Its trials were very successful and the KM was pleased with its performance. In fact the testing went beyond the prototype stage and various models of the plane had been built. The page only listed information about the Ju-87C. The only reason that more Fi-167s were not built was because the Graf Zeppelin itself was scrapped. So it could be argued that the GZ WAS GOING to have both TBs and Dive bombers.

Even though the FW-200 had the primary recon role, it was land based. The Fi - 167 was a carrier based plane. So it could still have a significant recon role.
 
Hi, buddies. Now I have little time, and I've worked in my Flammenwerfer.Also I've changed the palettes (thanks to nonnob3).Here is a little preview of the attack animation in SW direction.
 

Attachments

  • flammenattacksw.gif
    flammenattacksw.gif
    6.7 KB · Views: 200
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom