P-63 King Cobra

[Karnak]

It never fails that if you make a post, some snob will come out of the woodwork and call you stupid over a factoid not related to the point. It seems irrelevant how many people YOU THINK know about Typhoons and Ki-61s (do you have the data on that?)  Is that supposed to prove they belong in the game and the P-63 doesn't, or that I am ignorant? Hmmm.

No need to be so didactic in your tone, it helps no one.

So you are the kind of person who thinks knowing what you are talking about is being a snob?  Well, I think talking about things you don't know about makes you a fool.

you are correct, I mistyped that. I meant to say the WILDcat IS plastered all over the media.

Not nearly to the degree that the Hellcat and Corsair are hyped.  The Wildcat also has the advantage of being American, which on those shows is a huge advantage.  Not many Americans might have heard of the Typhoon, but a great many Brits have.

[Motherland]

Most likely not. The Kingcobra is a ridiculously obscure aircraft that barely saw combat and the Typhoon was Britain's main fighter-bomber and one of the best of the war.

Anyone who's heard of the Typh, Tempest, and Ki61, has heard of the Kingcobra.

[Vinkman]

So you are the kind of person who thinks knowing what you are talking about is being a snob?  Well, I think talking about things you don't know about makes you a fool.

What is it with you?

[Vinkman]

Most likely not. The Kingcobra is a ridiculously obscure aircraft that barely saw combat and the Typhoon was Britain's main fighter-bomber and one of the best of the war.

Total production of Typhoons =  3330
Total production of Kingcobras = 3300, entering service in 1943

Perhaps the KingCobra was as obscure as the Typhoon, or vice versa, which was my original point I believe.

[Karnak]

What is it with you?

You came in here making wild claims, and then when you were shown to have been full of crap, you made further wild claims to cover up your lack of knowledge.  After that you started insulting the people who do know about the subject you were talking about.

You posted hyperbole like the following despite knowing nothing of either aircraft's history.  You freely make statements of fact based on your lack of knowledge and instead of learning from those who do know, you attack them.

In other words, one would have to dig far into the bowels of the internet to find the battle history of the Tempest or the Typhoon, and yet the are all over the LW arena in proportions that far outpaced their real world impact.

[Karnak]

Total production of Typhoons =  3330
Total production of Kingcobras = 3300, entering service in 1943

Perhaps the KingCobra was as obscure as the Typhoon, or vice versa, which was my original point I believe.

The Typhoon saw heavy combat through most of WWII.  The Kingcobra may have seen a small amount of combat at the very end.  The Typhoon played a significant part in the outcome of the war in Europe.  The Kingcobra played no role in the outcome of any war.  Suggesting the Kingcobra might be as obscure as the Typhoon is sheer idiocy.  The two are incomparable in service or history and it is the Typhoon that had a role.

[Vinkman]

The Typhoon saw heavy combat through most of WWII.  The Kingcobra may have seen a small amount of combat at the very end.  The Typhoon played a significant part in the outcome of the war in Europe.  The Kingcobra played no role in the outcome of any war.  Suggesting the Kingcobra might be as obscure as the Typhoon is sheer idiocy.  The two are incomparable in service or history and it is the Typhoon that had a role.

I never said Typhs were obscure. You said P-63 were obscure, and I posted their production numbers. Apparently just as many P-63 were in service in the war as Typhoons. But of course they were flown by Russians which is why they are not as well known, which I think to your point should not be the definition of how obscure the plane is. I was using your agument against you. Not calling the Typh Obscure. The P-63 was secretly, widely, used by the soviets to great success. Perhaps the fact that they participated in the assault on Berlin elevates the P-63 out of Obscurity.

From Wiki

 
USAAF P-63A USAF photoAir Transport Command ferry pilots, including U.S. women pilots of the WASP program, picked up the planes at the Bell factory at Niagara Falls, New York, and flew them to Great Falls, Montana and then onward via the Alaska-Siberia Route (ALSIB), through Canada, over Alaska where Russian ferry pilots, many of them women, would take delivery of the aircraft at Nome [6] and fly them to the Soviet Union over the Bering Strait. A total of 2,397 such aircraft were delivered, out of the overall 3,303 production aircraft (72.6%).[7]

By a 1943 agreement, P-63s were disallowed for Soviet use against Germany and were supposed to be concentrated in the Soviet Far East for an eventual attack on Japan. However, there are many unconfirmed reports from both the Soviet and German side that P-63s did indeed see service against the Luftwaffe. Most notably, one of Pokryshkin's pilots reports in his memoirs published in the 1990s that the entire 4th GvIAP was secretly converted to P-63s in 1944, while officially still flying P-39s. One account states they were in action at Königsberg, in Poland and in the final assault on Berlin. There are German reports of P-63s shot down by both fighters and flak. Nevertheless, all Soviet records show nothing but P-39s used against Germany.
In general, official Soviet histories played down the role of Lend-Lease supplied aircraft in favor of local designs, but it is known that the P-63 was a successful ground attack aircraft in Soviet service. The Soviets developed successful group aerial fighting tactics for the Bell fighters and P-39s scored a surprising number of aerial victories over German aircraft, mostly Junkers Ju-87 Stukas and bombers but including many advanced fighters as well. Low ceilings, short missions, good radios, a sealed and warm cockpit and ruggedness contributed to their effectiveness. To pilots who had once flown the tricky Polikarpov I-16, the aerodynamic quirks of the mid-engined aircraft were unimportant. In the Far East, P-63 and P-39 aircraft were used in the Soviet invasion of Manchukoku and northern Korea, where a Soviet P-63A downed a Japanese fighter aircraft, an Army Nakajima fighter, Ki-43, Ki-44 or Ki-84, off the coast of North Korea. Sufficient aircraft continued in use after the war for them to be given the NATO reporting name of Fred.

[straffo]

Now I've never hear dof the Typhoon!

I will attempt to state this for the rio Linda croud. Anyone who's heard of the Typh, Tempest, and Ki61, has heard of the Kingcobra. Good enough? 

The typhoon/Tempest/Ki61 have operational record not the P63 you can throw away your unconfirmed claim ,or I will pretend several He 113 were shot down

[Saxman]

Most notably, one of Pokryshkin's pilots reports in his memoirs published in the 1990s that the entire 4th GvIAP was secretly converted to P-63s in 1944, while officially still flying P-39s. One account states they were in action at Königsberg, in Poland and in the final assault on Berlin. There are German reports of P-63s shot down by both fighters and flak. Nevertheless, all Soviet records show nothing but P-39s used against Germany.

Actually, this shows precisely why the P-63 should NOT be added. Soviet records indicate only P-39s were used against Germany. This is because part of the deal that lead to their being sent to the Russians was that they would ONLY be used against Japan.

The only evidence of combat in Europe is a handful of reports of victories against P-63s (not exactly reliable unless the Germans recovered wreckage with serial numbers, as the P-63 DOES bear a superficial resemblance to the P-39 and misidentification of aircraft was VERY common) and ONE Russian pilot claiming they secretly switched over. Anecdotal evidence of this sort is not sufficient when it is completely discounted by the official record.

[straffo]

as a compromise I suggest the RP-63 as a substitute of the P-63

[Enker]

For god sakes the Breuster is in the game because a hand ful of Fins flew it against...rheindeer.

I almost laughed. But then I cried. Here is something to help you understand:


FYI, the Brewster was also flown at Midway, although the model flown at Midway is not the model we have here. Also, the Dutch flew the Brewster in the Burmese/China theater against Japan. Very VERY different from a plane that has little evidence of its actual combat usage.

[Vinkman]

Actually, this shows precisely why the P-63 should NOT be added. Soviet records indicate only P-39s were used against Germany. This is because part of the deal that lead to their being sent to the Russians was that they would ONLY be used against Japan.

The only evidence of combat in Europe is a handful of reports of victories against P-63s (not exactly reliable unless the Germans recovered wreckage with serial numbers, as the P-63 DOES bear a superficial resemblance to the P-39 and misidentification of aircraft was VERY common) and ONE Russian pilot claiming they secretly switched over. Anecdotal evidence of this sort is not sufficient when it is completely discounted by the official record.

Why does action against Japan disqualify the P-63?

[Vinkman]

You came in here making wild claims, and then when you were shown to have been full of crap, you made further wild claims to cover up your lack of knowledge.  After that you started insulting the people who do know about the subject you were talking about.

You posted hyperbole like the following despite knowing nothing of either aircraft's history.  You freely make statements of fact based on your lack of knowledge and instead of learning from those who do know, you attack them.

I made no wild claims and have been shown to be quite accurate.

So instead of arguing about what the rest of the world might or might not know about the service records of various aircraft, perhaps you can comment on whether you'd like to see the P-63 in the game.

[Vinkman]

Actually, this shows precisely why the P-63 should NOT be added. Soviet records indicate only P-39s were used against Germany. This is because part of the deal that lead to their being sent to the Russians was that they would ONLY be used against Japan.

The only evidence of combat in Europe is a handful of reports of victories against P-63s (not exactly reliable unless the Germans recovered wreckage with serial numbers, as the P-63 DOES bear a superficial resemblance to the P-39 and misidentification of aircraft was VERY common) and ONE Russian pilot claiming they secretly switched over. Anecdotal evidence of this sort is not sufficient when it is completely discounted by the official record.

Saxman I'm surprised. Why write off the Russian pilot's account of the use of the P-63? that's sertainly more than a handful of reports? no? And if this is backed up by German records of plane wreckage, doesn't that complete the picture.

[Karnak]

I made no wild claims and have been shown to be quite accurate.

You claimed the P-63 was an upgraded P-39.  That is false.  They are entirely different aircraft.

You claimed that the Typhoon and Ki-61 were obscure aircraft that one would have to dig deep into the bowels of the internet to find any information about them.  That is false.

You claimed that the P-63 saw heavy combat.  That is false.  It saw little combat that can be verified.

You inferred that the Typhoon was more obscure than the P-63 and that their services were similar in scope.  That is false.

You have claimed more falsehoods that not.

So instead of arguing about what the rest of the world might or might not know about the service records of various aircraft, perhaps you can comment on whether you'd like to see the P-63 in the game.

Obviously I don't think it has a place in the game.  There are far, far more significant aircraft to add to the game than a fighter that shot down one Japanese aircraft and might have been used in the taking of Berlin against a Germany that had already lost the war.