Author Topic: F8F Bearcat  (Read 2535 times)

Offline -lynx-

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 340
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #45 on: April 20, 2000, 11:12:00 AM »
Snake - which one of the 37 335s built would you like to fly? .

Let's bring in the jets but lets go full realism - blowing up engines, fires, crashes "just because they didn't know enough about this'n'that when they built this thing". Without realism the whole thing "I want this plane" is just a daft show off exercise.

How many 262s were built? Now divide that by 35,000 109s and lets have them in the arena - this would show top all 262 fans the actual impact this plane had during WW2. Don't get me wrong - 262 is leap forward in aviation development and all that on top of being a very pretty plane (unlike the whole lot of the early jets) but it just did not have a chance to prove itself.

Plus: c'mon people, this is supposed to be fun. 262 was not a fun plane to fly with poor acceleration/manoeuverability but they didn't build them for fun. Any sim has to have a balance of reality and fun hence 262 IMHO is not a good idea...

As for F8F - I saw it at Duxford, it's ugly but it radiated power and performance - they flew it with a SeaFury and it walked all over Hawker... It was faster, it zoomed vertically from the ground level for what looked like bleeding miles (I'd say 5-6K at least) at 300-odd mph (4,750fpm my a**!!!) it was an ultimate prop driven fighter and it clearly demonstrated just that. It's a summary of American experience with WW2 fighters but it surely is no WW2 plane, so let's leave it out and get the fun back into AH, shall we?

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

Offline SnakeEyes

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #46 on: April 20, 2000, 01:08:00 PM »
The F8F was coming off the production lines in March 1945, and the only thing that prevented it from seeing combat was the fact that America wasn't desparate.  I don't know 'bout you folks, but if it's designed, tested, manufactured, and equipping squadrons during WW2, I'd tend to say that it is a WW2-era aircraft.

In any case, I knew it was only a matter of time before the Numbers & Impact Crowd (TM) showed up here to stifle doing anything fun or fantastic.

The point that bugs me (both in WB and now here, apparently) is that the Numbers & Impact crowd gives no merit to the desires of those of us who want F8Fs, Ta152s, etc.  We understand the desire of those who want Beaufighters, Hawks, and Defiants... we might not agree about the prioritization, but we'd acknowledge the desire (and we don't demand that these aircraft are consigned to the dustbin of being "Last").  That the reverse understanding isn't forthcoming is what chaps my ass.

------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=

Offline Staga

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5334
      • http://www.nohomersclub.com/
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #47 on: April 20, 2000, 01:58:00 PM »
Close enough ? http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/images/wrg0238.jpg

Me-410/b-17

[This message has been edited by Staga (edited 04-21-2000).]

Offline Kieren

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #48 on: April 20, 2000, 02:16:00 PM »
Just because people don't agree doesn't mean opinions are disrespected.

The planes being proposed here are way above the performance bands of earlier types. It isn't a matter of adding these types, but its resultant removal of the rest of the list.

I'm all for adding anything anything that adds to play. I would relate my experience in DoA was similar to this topic. The Sopwith Camel, historically a great dogfighter, was tweaked to the point of being vastly superior to anything else in the plane set in any area you chose. BnZ, TnB, damage, firepower, it was the plane to fly. And for the most part (and people) that's all people flew. If you think the Spitfire of WB was bad, the Camel was that times ten. Easily 85% of the arena at any given time was in a Sopwith. I do not wish to see this happen to AH.

Sorry that you have your feelings hurt and all, but I just can't see adding an F8F to this plane set (and my argument has nothing to do with numbers). Of course you don't mind if anyone flies early war; how could that impact your play? The reverse cannot be said.

In the end the line must be drawn somewhere. Seeing endless streams of little blue rockets buzzing around the arena is neither fun nor fantastic to me. I feel the inclusion of such a plane would be a restriction.

Offline SnakeEyes

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #49 on: April 20, 2000, 02:55:00 PM »
I would contend that a P-51D or B is going to be far more competitive with a P-51H or F8F than a Spit I or V is with a FW-190A4.

Uber-plane-ism is a relative thing.  Compared with a P-36 the Spitfire and bf109 are uberplanes.  Compared with the Spit V, the 190 is an uberplane.  Compared with the 110, the P-51 is an uberplane.  Compared with the A6M3, the F6F is an uberplane.

Does anyone seriously think that AH is going to model a Spit I and toss it into the same arena with an 109G10 or P-51D?  Right now you've got a 1944 planeset, and the majority of these aircraft would be able to at least fly in the same arena with a F8F.  They might be at a disadvantage, but that disadvantage is probably less than some of the ones I've already mentioned.

------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #50 on: April 21, 2000, 12:11:00 AM »
Stick it in. The jets; the F8F; the F7F; the lavochkins; the stormoviks; the stukas the nakajima bipes; p40's; Komets; TA152's; Hortens, P51H's; Mustang B/C's with Malcom hoods, Mustang I's and II's; Arado's... B29's, Marauders, PBY's and PBMS and TBM's. Why mess around with just dribs and drabs???

And ground resources.. mein gott; zee bridges!! Veee must protect zee bridges!!!

Lets have all of em. At once. Just fer a week. Or two. And believe me; we'll all have a ball. Or most of us. The rest will squeak ta high heaven.  

Hehhehhehheee... mayhem.

Then we can do Korea next. Muahahhahaaa.

F86F vs Mig 17 anyone???  

Fact: No matter what they put in; next or last; there's gonna be howling. So stick em all in; one year or time span at a time.

Suggestion: Why not 3 arenas?? Early; middle and late war? Surely the server resources will expand with the customer base, yes?? And wouldn't flyin in the the early war arena be a pleasure after playin tag with jets fer a coupla hours in late war arena??

Somethin fer everybody... just think BIGGER.

 

Hang (see what dreck I can come up with when the servers are down??)
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline juzz

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 193
      • http://nope.haha.com
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #51 on: April 21, 2000, 01:04:00 AM »
Yeah - lets just push AH into the Korean era, that way we can have all the 1945+ props and early jets...sounds good, except for all the whining!  

EG:

Jet fighter pilot: Waah! My .50's suck! The Mig's cannon are 1 ping killers! The props keep going HO with me! Mig pilots are alt monkeys flying at 50,000ft!

Prop fighter pilot: Waah! All the jets won't turn with me! Then they complain when I HO them with my 4x20mm!

Bomber pilot: Waah! Even when I climb my B-29 to 40,000ft the jets still kill me easily!

ETC...  

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #52 on: April 21, 2000, 03:31:00 AM »
votes with hang.
Hawker Hunter!

------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew

Offline Vermillion

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #53 on: April 21, 2000, 07:33:00 AM »
Sounds like Juzz has it right to me  

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"

Walrus

  • Guest
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #54 on: April 21, 2000, 12:18:00 PM »
Why do you say Spitfire XIV and Tempest are 1945 planes when they started operations in 1944?
And why do you say the Bearcat is faster than the Sea Fury when the Fury can do 460mph, much faster than the Bearcat?
I would like the Spitfire XIV because it is faster than the Bearcat, and has better wingload, and has better hp loading than the Bearcat.
If I had a Spitfire XIV I may be capable of killing other planes, as long as they are not SPitfire XIV's to.  

[This message has been edited by Walrus (edited 04-21-2000).]

Offline Kieren

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #55 on: April 21, 2000, 07:49:00 PM »
 
Quote
If I had a Spitfire XIV I may be capable of killing other planes, as long as they are not SPitfire XIV's to.

Keep re-reading this line to yourself until it becomes clear.  

Offline Vermillion

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #56 on: April 21, 2000, 09:48:00 PM »
And if I had a F-15, I could kill TONS of you guys... as long as you didn't have one too.  

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"

funked

  • Guest
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #57 on: April 21, 2000, 09:53:00 PM »
Jochen it is funny that you put the Fw 190D-9 earlier than the the Spit XIV and Tempest V which were shooting down planes 6 months before the dora was delivered to units.  

Offline Minotaur

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 130
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #58 on: April 21, 2000, 11:05:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Vermillion:
And if I had a F-15, I could kill TONS of you guys... as long as you didn't have one too.  


I wonder what would happen if you buzzed a Spit XIV in a F-15 at mach 2.3?  



------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew

Bloody

  • Guest
F8F Bearcat
« Reply #59 on: April 22, 2000, 03:41:00 AM »
 
Quote
I wonder what would happen if you buzzed a Spit XIV in a F-15 at maI wonder what would happen if you buzzed a Spit XIV in a F-15 at mach 2.3?

Thornton's tea and crumpets would be all over his lap and cockpit floor.    Then, he'd be on the radio to report a UFO.  hehe

Bloody
| | |AirWolves| | |



[This message has been edited by Bloody (edited 04-22-2000).]