P-39 Aircobra

[Blixen]

Krusty did u even read my 2 post`s D.520`s were used by several differnt
countries during and even after the war
its climb rate is remarkable and will out manuever most planes
and 329 mph is qite fast in ww2 era

brewster was also used by the americans was a slow durable fighter

as for any variant of the P-39 it was a very good plane used in every theater

try doing some research b4 u open ur negativity mouth and spew insulting
and bogus info

let me be the first to challenge u to a duel if and when these plane arrive
i promise u i will open ur eyes to their worth in adding......end my rant on the bbs negative leader

Krusty Qoute Of The Year

We need no french fighters because they played no role in the war, essentially. No offense to French folks on the board, but it's true

[Krusty]

I'm blunt and I oversimplify, but that does not negate the tone of truth in what I say.

Sure D.520s served, but the Bulgarians flew in the war too! Doesn't mean they were anything but a token force. I mean this on the grand scale of the entire war, you see, and not the individual efforts micro-scale.

When you consider WW2's air forces as a whole, France wasn't present.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Krusty
I'm blunt and I oversimplify, but that does not negate the tone of truth in what I say.

Sure D.520s served, but the Bulgarians flew in the war too! Doesn't mean they were anything but a token force. I mean this on the grand scale of the entire war, you see, and not the individual efforts micro-scale.

When you consider WW2's air forces as a whole, France wasn't present.

Your argument doesn't wash for the P39 Krusty.  Used throughout the war in large numbers in every theater of the war outside of by the USAAF from England.

As posted before, the 350th FG was flying the 39 in combat in the MTO into August of 1944 in a ground attack role.

Within the framework of the low alt Tac war that the MA is, the P39 would perform well as it wouldn't be expected to be fighting at alt.  Down low the 39 held it's own against the LW.

Represetative French AF aircraft from 1939-40 would be a nice addition as well for scenario use etc.

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by Karnak
Pretty sure we're set on Spitfires.  Not as sure on Bf109s and pretty sure we need another Fw190 or two.

Still think eventually we'll get -

The 'old' V back as a clipped 1943 Vc (with uber boost)
XII
Perhaps F.21 for 1945.

Krusty - I would suggest the Ta-152 has set the standard for how low a plane had be in production (67 manufactured) to be included in AH2.

Thats produced, how many actually saw combat?
All the "H's" were grounded before the end of the war, only 2 "C's" were still flying at the end of the war.

So I would say anything over 67 is "fair game" for inclusion.

[EagleDNY]

Back to the idea of the P-39, frankly I'd rather see the improved P-63 KingCobra myself.  The made plenty of them (the russians bought like 2,400), and for you folks who like the French Colors, the free-french air force even had 300 of the P-63s operating.  

EagleDNY
$.02

[Debonair]

I wonder if western Europe had rolled over like Austria & Czechoslovakia did, could the Battle of Britain have gone differently?  What were LW losses in May-June 1940?

[Krusty]

Guppy, perhaps so, but I still feel folks that shout for a P39 will be sorely disappointed in how it flies WHEN they get it (i am sure we'll get it some day).

Kev: I wasn't talking about scarcity so much really, but you've got a point.

[Kev367th]

CC Krusty -
I've always thought for the 3 major planesets (US, UK, German) there should be a MINIMUM level set for what would constitute in-service or even production.

I guess the minimum limit for production at the moment is 67 (Ta-152).
If there were set limits it would prevent half the threads asking for planes that are as rare as rocking horse poopoo. (not suggesting it applies to P39, meant in general).

This would have to given a lot of leeway for other planesets though.

[Kweassa]

I guess the minimum limit for production at the moment is 67 (Ta-152).

 The "minimum limit" is;

1) not experimental or prototype, but a production plane
2) officially started service as a squadron fighter
3) historical significance and represantativeness, or even symbolic value
4) in-game need

 Though HT or Pyro never officially drew a line, judging by their past comments in the boards the above four conditions seem to be what is currently standing with AH.

[Furball]

Originally posted by Kweassa
The "minimum limit" is;

1) not experimental or prototype, but a production plane
2) officially started service as a squadron fighter
3) historical significance and represantativeness, or even symbolic value
4) in-game need
 

Meteor Mk.III!!

[Kev367th]

No chance its RAF.

[Mr No Name]

Originally posted by Karnak
You don't think the likely 450-600 perk point cost for a formation of B-29s would have that effect?

Why on earth would it be perked so heavily?  The service ceiling was 4K LOWER than the B-17

[Rino]

Originally posted by Mr No Name
Why on earth would it be perked so heavily?  The service ceiling was 4K LOWER than the B-17

Speed, payload, range, defensive fire..gee..have no idea why it would be
perked heavily

[Widewing]

Originally posted by EagleDNY
Back to the idea of the P-39, frankly I'd rather see the improved P-63 KingCobra myself.  The made plenty of them (the russians bought like 2,400), and for you folks who like the French Colors, the free-french air force even had 300 of the P-63s operating.  

EagleDNY
$.02

The Soviets didn't buy anything...They were GIVEN vast amounts of equipment, material and food. If you research the type and volume of lend-lease "stuff" sent to the USSR, you will be astounded.

Here's some examples of what the USA supplied to the Soviets:

77,900 Jeeps
151,000 light trucks
202,000 2 1/2 ton trucks
956,000 miles of telephone cable
380,000 field phones
35,000 command radio sets
99% of all locomotives used
95% of all railroad rolling stock used
95% of all railroad rails and switches
70% of all avgas of 100 octane or higher
Enough food to feed one daily meal to every soldier that served during the entire war.

This list is huge. Critical steels and rare metals, the vast majority of machine tools and manufacturing equipment. Enough M4 Shermans to fully equip two full armored divisions.

I haven't even mentioned aircraft, or medical supplies, or gun powders and explosives... The US manufactured and delivered 495 million rounds of Soviet small arms ammunition.

The USA basically supplied the Soviets with their industrial base for the first 10 years of the cold war.

Britain contributed as well, but only a small fraction of what the US sent over.
 
Like I said, research the incredible volume of "stuff" given to the Soviets and you will find it simply jaw dropping.

My regards,

Widewing

[MIShill]

Need a D520 with accordion music for engine sounds. Model the pilot with a funny little beret. Nose art could be "Run Away!, Run Away!"
-MI-