Inaccurate performance data for BOB fighters in COD comparing to RL data

[TheGrunch]

I'd agree with that line-up wholeheartedly.

Going through ORBs now, and honestly sometimes it is hard to say. Often you can read about a squadron receiving a certain number of 'improved Hurricane aircraft from 5MU' and really there is little more information than that.

EDIT: Any comment on the phrase Me. Jaguars? Referring to aircraft dive-bombing? Maybe 110s?

[csThor]

Jaguar was the propaganda nickname for bomb-carrying Bf 110s.

@ Kurfürst

Right now we don't have more than incomplete hints about the presence of DB 601N-powered Emils. I certainly agree that equipping a full Gruppe would be more logic WRT supply issues but when looking at the numbers of Bf 109s involved in the BoB that number is still quite insignificant. Like I said modelling the Bf 109 E-7/N (or E-4/N for that matter) could have gameplay value if the campaign engine was more sophisticated.

On the other hand you're right about the Bf 110s since they had absolute priority for getting the DB 601Ns at first.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by TheGrunch

EDIT: Any comment on the phrase Me. Jaguars? Referring to aircraft dive-bombing? Maybe 110s?

A fictional Jabo variant of the 110, that made into the English press at the start of the war. From English Flight magazine illustration from 1939, the Germans cunningly made it look like exactly as the 110.

I suppose it was based on rumors of the Me 210 development (which indeed started out as a 110 with a bomb bay).

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Some (two?) Bristol Blenheim Squadrons also seem to have used it.

Was just about to mention this myself, yes.

Thanks for the info above Kurfürst, certainly the fact that the 601N could only use the C3 fuel does simplify matters considerably.

Moggy: Thanks for that info! Now we have to work out what 'operational' means! It's also worth considering whether it's a later edition of the manual, perhaps? It's definitely worth making sure we're 100% on the matter.

[Moggy]

Originally Posted by TheGrunch

Moggy: Thanks for that info! Now we have to work out what 'operational' means! It's also worth considering whether it's a later edition of the manual, perhaps? It's definitely worth making sure we're 100% on the matter.

The Lord giveth, the Lord taketh away. I've just checked the date on the top of Section 2 and it's January 1942.