Author Topic: New Variants (Read 1651 times)

Sikboy · « **Reply #15 on:** May 14, 2005, 08:34:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Guppy35
Now now Spit entered service 5 years before the 190 and we only have 4 versions with one perked. The latest unperked Spit we have is a bastardized version resembling the 1942 model.. Seems to me before we'd see more 190s you'd see an accurate LFIX, a VIII and potentially an XII or LFXVI.

Seems to me the 109 fanatics have a better case then the 190 guys too.

Just sayin

Oh and of course the Mustang was in operation in 42 with the Allison versions operated by the RAF and the USAAF

Dan/CorkyJr

So when the spit and 109 models are redone, I hope we'll see more variants. Until then...

-Sik

Rino · « **Reply #16 on:** May 14, 2005, 01:00:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kweassa
What'd you expect? The 190 entered service 2 years before the Mustangs and stayed until the war's end.

The Mustang came very late in '43, and still contended with the P-38 or the P-47 until the USAAF finally switched most of its assets to the P-51s in '44.

The only 'pony' that served in the war, in overall generalization, is essentially the B and the D, which we have both.

If any USAAF fighters need a new variant, it would be the P-47C.

Bout what I expected from the LW fans, cause god forbid you
might have a USAAC plane that can catch a Dora

Wotan · « **Reply #17 on:** May 14, 2005, 02:35:19 PM »

The Mustang wasn't as widely utilized as long as the FW so it stands to reason that there would be more FWs. There has to be to make ToD viable.

What other P-51 could you want?

The two main variants are there (D and B; even if they add a C its still just a B).

A P-36 or P-51A maybe but there should not (and I suspect wont be) an 'H'.

Where in a '43 ToD theater will you have to 'out run a Dora'?

As for the P-47s what's the point of an M (especially the M) or N? What P-47 can't out perform the best Japanese plane now?

If HT wants ToD to be a success and draw new players then he can't afford to play 'substitution roulette' or play withe made up aircraft match ups like you see in the other events or in the CT.

He will need an earlier (A3 or A4) FW, and an A6 (4 X MG151/2cm). He will need an earlier P-47 etc...

He will need a Spit LF.MK IX. He will need a whole host of Russian and Japanese planes. Like early yaks, laggs, A6m3 and any number of planes you wont ever see in the main.

The type of folks who will have an interest in ToD aren't necessarily the players HT has now. These folks will be coming from the box games. Where the planes are o'plenty. Where they can set up a 'believable' on line war with out all the hocus pocus need to pull an event off in AH.

I am not sure what HT has planned or is thinking but as some one who knows and games with a lot of these types of players I know they won't be convinced to give it a try unless it is decently put together.

Some of you may only think about what you can fly around in the main (and there's nothing wrong with that) but the average main player won't be too excited over ToD just like he/she isn't interested in the CT or other events.

Just putting together a 'code' (scoring, tracking, missions etc) to make ToD work won't be enough. Any number of box games offer this type of 'code' already.

rogerdee · « **Reply #18 on:** May 14, 2005, 03:25:40 PM »

with the planes hiteck has now making new versions of them will be easier and speeded up but we do need new aircraft altogeather,new bombers new fighters russian german bombers italian japanese and some new tanks,not just german tanks

personaly id like to see for RAF a wellington bomber or stirling or halifax,for germany do217 or he111 ,pe2 for russia some migs a lagg3 and some italian stuff

rogerdee

NoBaddy · « **Reply #19 on:** May 14, 2005, 03:59:22 PM »

NB pulls out his crystal ball....

Hmm, I see a 51B with a Malcolm Hood and an A36.

bunch · « **Reply #20 on:** May 14, 2005, 10:41:28 PM »

Überstudmuffins

IK3 · « **Reply #21 on:** May 15, 2005, 12:34:04 AM »

Our stop-gap spitfire Mk. IX (1942) is no match in 1944 era.

Yes we need spitfire LF Mk. IX and VII or VIII

btw what's the difference between spit marks VII and VIII?

Guppy35 · « **Reply #22 on:** May 16, 2005, 02:48:26 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by IK3
Our stop-gap spitfire Mk. IX (1942) is no match in 1944 era.

Yes we need spitfire LF Mk. IX and VII or VIII

btw what's the difference between spit marks VII and VIII?

Spitfire VII was a specialty high alt version. Pressurized cockpit, extended wings etc. 104 built if memory serves. Not something I'd put high on the list for AH. The LFVIII with normal wings and the LFIX/XVI with clipped wingswould be head of my Spit list both for the skinning possibilities and their viability in the MA as well as scenario use.

Dan/CorkyJr

Widewing · « **Reply #23 on:** May 16, 2005, 09:49:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kweassa
What'd you expect? The 190 entered service 2 years before the Mustangs and stayed until the war's end.

The Mustang came very late in '43, and still contended with the P-38 or the P-47 until the USAAF finally switched most of its assets to the P-51s in '44.

The only 'pony' that served in the war, in overall generalization, is essentially the B and the D, which we have both.

If any USAAF fighters need a new variant, it would be the P-47C.

I would argue that the P-51 was in combat service well before late 1943. They were used (P-51A and A-36) in the MTO more than a year before. There's no doubt that Mustang Mk.I fighters could easily fit into TOD if the scenario was 1941-42.

Personally, I would very much enjoy an Allison Mustang, both in the MA and TOD.

In addition, we are limited to the standard P-51B, when more than 50% of them were converted to the Malcolm hood. That would be a legitimate varient.

My regards,

Widewing

Wotan · « **Reply #24 on:** May 16, 2005, 02:40:06 PM »

I made this post in the Gen Discussion forum thread abou this same topic:

Quote

The A-36 didn't fly its first combat sorties until the attacks on Pantelleria in the Med on June, '43.

The first A-36A flew on Sept '42 but deliveries of the A-36A weren't completed until March '42.

The 27th and 86th Bombardment Groups (Dive) were equipped with the A-36A.

The 27th and the 86th arrived North Africa in April '43 They didn't see combat until the attacks on Pantelleria in June.

In late '41 the RAF ordered 150 Mustangs.

RAF designated them as Mustang IA's (4 x hispanos) but only received 93. The other 57 were kept by the USAAF and had 4 50s.

I think all the RAF IA's were assigned to recce groups.

The first Mustang (Mk1, no hispanos) aerial victory didn't occur until Aug '42 over or near Dieppe. IIRC it was a Recce group that claimed the kill.

The XP-51B didn't fly until Nov '42 and it wasn't until mid '43 that P-51Bs and Cs arrived in service.

So I would think that for ToD we would see something like:

P-36A - June '43 (Med / North Africa)

P-51 Mk1 - late '42

P-51 B / C - mid '43

There's no reason to perk a malcolm hooded P-51 that I see. However I can envision the perking of the D if they add more variants of P-51.

For the record I think the D-9 and G-10 (if we get a G-14 at some point) ought to be perked as well.

I had always thought that as the number of planes increased the perk plane list would expand to cover the late and / or rare aircraft.

I don't see how you squeeze a P-51 MK 1 until late '42, let alone '41.

What have basically is RAF Recce variants that saw no combat and claimed no kills until Aug '42.

So I would think that no P-51s woul dbe necessary in an theater or scenario prior to Aug '42.

The P-36A not until they first saw combat in June '43.

Widewing · « **Reply #25 on:** May 16, 2005, 05:09:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wotan
I made this post in the Gen Discussion forum thread abou this same topic:

I don't see how you squeeze a P-51 MK 1 until late '42, let alone '41.

What have basically is RAF Recce variants that saw no combat and claimed no kills until Aug '42.

So I would think that no P-51s woul dbe necessary in an theater or scenario prior to Aug '42.

The P-36A not until they first saw combat in June '43.

As far as I can determine, the first operational mission flown by Mustang Is was on May 16, 1942, when #2 squadron raided a Luftwaffe airfield in France.

A-36 units (two squadrons) went operational in April of 1943. First combat was on June 6th, 1943.

So, TOD missions for any time after April of '42 could use the Mustang Mk.I.

MTO missions would have to be after May of 1943 to include the A-36.

My regards,

Widewing

Guppy35 · « **Reply #26 on:** May 16, 2005, 05:52:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
As far as I can determine, the first operational mission flown by Mustang Is was on May 16, 1942, when #2 squadron raided a Luftwaffe airfield in France.

A-36 units (two squadrons) went operational in April of 1943. First combat was on June 6th, 1943.

So, TOD missions for any time after April of '42 could use the Mustang Mk.I.

MTO missions would have to be after May of 1943 to include the A-36.

My regards,

Widewing

Found mention of the first RAF Mustang operational flight on May 10, 1942 as a solo offensive recce flight to the airfield at Berck-sur-Mer on the French coast by F/O G.N.Dawson of 26 Squadron taking off from Gatwick.

First Mustang loss was July 14, 1942 when one from 26 squadron collided with a ground target it was strafing.

Four Squadrons operational during Dieppe on August 19th. 26, 239, 400 and 414. Flying Officer Hollis Hill, an American flying with the RCAF scored the Mustang I's first kill that day when he downed a 190.

June 43 saw the 27th FG USAAF take the A36 into combat followed by the 86th FG in July 43.

Dan/CorkyJr

Wotan · « **Reply #27 on:** May 16, 2005, 06:30:44 PM »

I have the exact same info Guppy has.

I think these dates are more accurate, certainly nothing in '41.

There's no need to push up their dates. I would lean toward first kill claim but if some one else wants to lean toward first loss (or which ever comes first) it seems much more in line with history rather they deciding a single Recce flight constitutes 'in combat'. I could make that justification for many aircraft.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #28 on:** May 16, 2005, 09:54:20 PM »

It seems to me that you guys are being silly about this, arguing over which variants were common, which plane served longer, etc. The answer is quite simple. Give us all of them. Surely it wouldn't take more than a few years...

Magoo · « **Reply #29 on:** May 18, 2005, 12:19:26 PM »

If it's to be a simple process of adding a few variants (because that's easy to do, unlike adding new models), then the A-36 might not make it. It had dive brakes that need to be modelled, both graphically and functionally. Also the Allison sound will be different(may not be a big deal, don't know) along with drastically different performance characteristics.

I'm not a software guy so you tell me...is this a big deal?

Magoo