Author Topic: p-63 (Read 1514 times)

angelsandair · « **on:** January 16, 2008, 05:31:08 PM »

i know this is kind of stupid to say, BUT, if we get the p-39, i think it should be the p-63 version thats got all of its prolbems together, cuz if we got it, i wouldnt wanna have to fly with the old p-39s prolbems instead of the later war p-63 that didnt have as many, kind of a stupid post but i hope some people agree with me

Anaxogoras · « **Reply #1 on:** January 16, 2008, 05:37:27 PM »

This topic has been covered before I think. Doubtless it is that the P-63 would be more competitive in the arenas, the P-39 is far more important for scenarios and other historical matchups.

splitatom · « **Reply #2 on:** January 16, 2008, 07:50:45 PM »

the main reson people want it is because of the 37 for gv work and for sanarios but i hope they releses the p-400 with the p-39 because it is the same thing but with a 20mm it would be a better fighter

Anaxogoras · « **Reply #3 on:** January 16, 2008, 08:37:30 PM »

Commas, periods, and capitals please!:furious

moot · « **Reply #4 on:** January 16, 2008, 08:50:08 PM »

What was that you were saying about AHBB users giving newbies the cold shoulder?

Squire · « **Reply #5 on:** January 16, 2008, 11:08:13 PM »

P-39N would be a fine ride below 5000 feet. More capable than the early P-400s and P-39Ds.

...P-63 is an interesting a/c, but its use in WW2 was very limited.

Anaxogoras · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2008, 12:43:09 AM »

Quote

What was that you were saying about AHBB users giving newbies the cold shoulder?

I think he's played AH for far longer than I have, and I'm not giving him crap for being new, but for his infuriating lack of punctuation!:rofl

DaddyAck · « **Reply #7 on:** January 17, 2008, 03:57:36 AM »

LOL the AHII BBS Gramar Patrol LOL

(Im just pickin' witcha man)

hubsonfire · « **Reply #8 on:** January 17, 2008, 10:06:13 AM »

Grammar!

Get used to it, Anax; very few of the kids who frequent this board speak English.

On topic: I'd much rather see a few common P-39 variants than a later refined model, if only because they would seem to fit in more scenarios and events. We don't have any aircraft problems modelled in game- every airplane is a shining example of the type, and as such, I don't think that's really a concern.

DaddyAck · « **Reply #9 on:** January 17, 2008, 11:09:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Grammar!

I intentionally did that... part of the joke....

But yeah, several versions of the earlier models would be good for senarios and FSO events. Even without the P-63 there are enough P-39 variants to fill gaps in the USAAF and VVS plane sets.

humble · « **Reply #10 on:** January 18, 2008, 12:21:02 AM »

Dont underestimate the P-39....

It's going to suprise the snot out of most people. When the british tested the D model they found it better then anything they had in the horizontal turn, but inferior in the vertical with performance that obviously got worse at realistic combat alt in the west. It could handily out turn a 109E taking on two revolutions to fly completely around the 109 if the 109 started on its tail (British testing).

If we look at its combat record in the PAC it actually did much better them most people think. It actually had better numbers then the spitfires that replaced it vs the zekes(port Morseby). Many of its pilots said it could even outperform the zeke in a narrow window between 8-12k.

So basically you'd have a plane with handling similiar to the Hurricane 2c thats roughly 45-50 MPH faster with 4 x .50 and a 37mm in the nose (using the Q). Obviously handling is a guess till its actually here but at normal AH alts it'll be a tough plane to beat.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #11 on:** January 18, 2008, 01:23:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by humble
Dont underestimate the P-39....

It's going to suprise the snot out of most people. When the british tested the D model they found it better then anything they had in the horizontal turn, but inferior in the vertical with performance that obviously got worse at realistic combat alt in the west. It could handily out turn a 109E taking on two revolutions to fly completely around the 109 if the 109 started on its tail (British testing).

If we look at its combat record in the PAC it actually did much better them most people think. It actually had better numbers then the spitfires that replaced it vs the zekes(port Morseby). Many of its pilots said it could even outperform the zeke in a narrow window between 8-12k.

So basically you'd have a plane with handling similiar to the Hurricane 2c thats roughly 45-50 MPH faster with 4 x .50 and a 37mm in the nose (using the Q). Obviously handling is a guess till its actually here but at normal AH alts it'll be a tough plane to beat.

Yep. I think the key if we ever get the 39 is that AH is a low alt airwar where the 39 did much better. The MTO 39 drivers out fought the 109s down low. They just weren't any good at altitude.

DaddyAck · « **Reply #12 on:** January 18, 2008, 01:41:05 AM »

Oh, I am not underestimating it. I have flown against it in IL2 in my 109F4, G2, and G6. As I have said before it is a killer of a plane at low to mid altitude but up high is another story. Up high my 109 had the upper hand.

humble · « **Reply #13 on:** January 18, 2008, 07:37:41 AM »

But I wont be up high:)....at least not for long. In the end 90% of the action in AH is at 12k or less.

angelsandair · « **Reply #14 on:** January 18, 2008, 06:05:36 PM »

well guys, ive been playing for 2 years, and i honestly think that IF we get a p-39, we prolly need atleast like 2 or 3 different versions for different things, and if we get 1 version, we should get the best version (not being greedy, just wouldnt want new plane to be a blowout) (o and kind of a stupid post i kno, but people have been talking about the p-39 for a while and just was hoping i wasnt the only person who wanted the best one if we get it)