Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
Sorry SnakeEyes, P51H never saw combat thus it shouldn't be in AH.
I have noticed that you have stated several times that the P-51H never saw combat. This is incorrect. On August 8, 12 and 14 1945, P-51H fighters attached to the VII Fighter Command were in action against Japan. In each instance, they were used as escorts for B-29 bombing missions over Japan. On only one of these missions did Japanese fighters attempt to reach the bombers. Three Ki-44 Tojos were clobbered by P-47Ns, also flying escort. The fact that no Japanese aircraft fell to the new Mustangs does not eliminate the fact that they were there, fully prepared to deal with any enemy activity.
Nonetheless, I also feel that the P-51H had a minimal effect on the war effort, and therefore, is probably not a good choice for this sim without some reasonable methodology of usage. In other words, this sim would soon boil down to Ta 152s vs the P-51H. No good for historical realism. Neglecting the historical accuracy will turn off many players.
Perhaps, HTC should consider 'rationing' late war fighters of marginal effect. In other words, allow no more that two or three in the arena at any given time. I would include the Ta 152H-1, P-51H, F7F-1, and He 162 as being within this category. Likewise,
the F4U-1C was a limited production aircraft (just 200 manufactured). Therefore the number available should reflect that fact. Likewise, if the P-47M ever makes this show, it too should only be available in very limited numbers.
While we're discussing possible inclusions in the 1.07, how can anyone rule out the P-47N? It was quickly becoming the primary long-range escort in the Pacific as the war wound down. With its 1,000+ mile combat radius, combined with very high speed, high altitude performance, it undoubtably was the best performing, 'high volume' fighter deployed by the USAAF during the war. Where is the F4U-4? Many more of these were in service than the F4U-1C. The F4U-4 was in high demand for CAP duty, where its excellent speed and climb were ideal for intercepting incoming suicide raids.
Other useful additions have been mentioned many times on this BBs. The Spitfire Mk.XIV, Ki-84, B-29A, B-25H, B-24H, P-61B, P-63A (in Russian colors), Yak-3, Ki-61 and its radial powered brother, the Ki-100. The Il-2, G4M, Bf 110 and 410, the Mosquito B.IV, P-40N, A-20G , A-26B, Me 262 and Ju 87 are all required to have a plane set that offers the kind of diversity that one comes to expect in a simulation of this kind. Compare the A-26B to the Arado 234. The Arado is much faster. However, it is virtually defenseless and must be considered rather weak wristed in bomb load. On the other hand, the A-26B was as fast as the best early-war fighters. It had a low level turning radius comparable to the P-47D. With as many as 16 (that's right, 6 in the nose and up to 10 more in underwing packs) forward firing .05 caliber MGs, and a bomb load up to 4,000 lbs internally with another 2,000 under the wings, it could deliver the goods. Not only did it offer devastating firepower, it was an order of magnitude more durable and reliable than the Arado 234. Where's the A-26B? God knows, Invaders flew more combat sorties in any given month than all combat sorties flown by every operational Arado combined during its entire deployment.
Here's a tip for those folks who never seem to have much opportunity to enjoy the high altitude preformance of their fighters. Use your heavy bombers at altitudes above 25,000 feet. There's an old saying, "where the bomber fly, the air war is fought." The higher the bombers fly, the worse the Japanese and Russian fighters perform. The best way to eliminate the low altitude performance of the N1K2, is make it come up to 28,000 feet to tackle the heavies. Up there, the George is a real pig. Never fight the way your enemy fights best.
I realize that including all of the above aircraft will require serious time and effort. However, wouldn't it be that much more enjoyable if all the major combat aircraft were represented? I think so.
My regards,
Widewing
[This message has been edited by Widewing (edited 03-12-2001).]
