P-43 Lancer

[Karnak]

This is a wishlist, why bother arguing?

We are a small portion of the player base who, thinking we have more influence than we do, like to tell HTC what we think the priorities should be.  In my case, I think the P-43 shouldn't even be mentioned until a great number of other aircraft have been added.  In some other cases, apparently, the players think our great dearth of American aircraft needs to be addressed before anything non-American is added.

-1 for both due to the fact neither are particularly special or great.
+1 for PBY-5A that would be special unique and could be used as medium bomber and torpedo bomber.
      

If you were asking for a flying boat that would be useful in the MA I could understand your request, but the PBY-5 would bring no more than the Sunderland or Emily and be far, far less usable.

Ki-43, Pe-2, Beaufighter, Wellington and He111 were all produced in mass numbers and, the Ki-43 in particular and in my opinion, ought to have been added to AH long ago.  Fighter vs Fighter performance being a far more significant aspect of AH than Bomber vs Bomber performance.

[DemonFox]

I I'm not so sure Karnak. I think that as long as the PBY stays the only flying boat it would be used often. As much as I love the PBY I agree though that most people would rather the Sunderland or H8K. That still doesn't stop me from being completely devoted to the PBY and would only fly it in place of any bomber for any role. I am aware that it's not suited to all rolls but I would really only fly it compared to any other aircraft

[Karnak]

Why would they use it?  It is a very slow, free kill.  Just being a flying boat, a gimmick, won't sustain use once it is realized how helpless it is and how useless it is compared to even a Ju88 or G4M1.  There is no inherent reason to use a flying boat, particularly when you take such a hit on performance, armament and ordnance to do so.

[alpini13]

i asked for this and others to added last year.....+1  and wtg Karnak...thanks for adding in to the wish the G-55 and re-2005

[Stoney]

Ki-43 would be vastly more relevant and useful rather than finding some reason to eek in an extremely rare aircraft.  Ki-44 would also be more relevant.

Heck, G.55 and maybe ever Re2005 would be more relevant.

I didn't think we could accurately surmise the relevance of the G.55?  But, the P-37 would be waaaaaaaay down my list of priorities.  The only thing it would add would be for dedicated AVG/CBI special events. 

[hgtonyvi]

it kinda looks like a fm2 but little bigger.

[Pigslilspaz]

-1 for both due to the fact neither are particularly special or great.
+1 for PBY-5A that would be special unique and could be used as medium bomber and torpedo bomber.
      

Don't bring that godawful thing into this thread...

[Seadog36]

The P-43 Lancer thread has been officially hijacked. Some people are too embarrassed to repost their tired retreaded PBY Ki-43 threads yet again. The TA-152 had 43 examples delivered and the P-47M 130 examples produced of which very few saw active duty yet they are active in the game. As a dedicated Republic fan, I still think it would make a great early war addition.

[Karnak]

Seadog,

Do you not understand why those two were cheap variants to add?  It is nothing like adding an entirely new airframe.

[Guppy35]

And do you understand why the P43 didn't get into combat with the USAAF?  Keep in mind the P39 went, and the 39s were considered dogs.  You mention the P47M.  You have an entire fighter group in the big leagues in the ETO flying it.  Still looking for that P43 that showed up in the PTO, MTO or ETO?

Interesting history, but pointless in terms of AH.

[Seadog36]

Seadog,

Do you not understand why those two were cheap variants to add?  It is nothing like adding an entirely new airframe.

Considering only 42 TA-152s saw limited service, they did require major work, new wings/tail lengthened, engine model~ the point is, they were both very minor players that got slots. The P-43 fulfills the criteria of having seen combat just as well as either of them. Not to mention the ridiculous over-modeled Brewster of which there were only 300 built. These also required a completely new design and airframes~ Karnak, your argument does not hold water. If HTC feels like producing a new aircraft they do it~ regardless.

Guppy~ the P-43 was an intermediate design for the XP-47. the Lancer had advocates who preferred it to the P-40 because of it's speed and service ceiling, though there were many more and newer variants of P-40 already in production which were used instead. And hello, they did serve in the CBI w the CAF and the AVG, as well as in the PTO w the RAAF, I even provide sources. Furthermore, in regards to the P-47M, because of the numerous bugs in the M which kept them out of service, the 56th FG was never fully equipped w them until April 1945~ the War in Europe was over one month later in May, they hardly saw any meaningful combat flying Ms from the battered Luftwaffe, and yet they just another example of the silly uber everything figter that predominates LW. You are not looking very hard and you need to read up on your facts before you chime in.

[Guppy35]

Considering only 42 TA-152s saw limited service, they did require major work, new wings/tail lengthened, engine model~ the point is, they were both very minor players that got slots. The P-43 fulfills the criteria of having seen combat just as well as either of them. Not to mention the ridiculous over-modeled Brewster of which there were only 300 built. These also required a completely new design and airframes~ Karnak, your argument does not hold water. If HTC feels like producing a new aircraft they do it~ regardless.

Guppy~ the P-43 was an intermediate design for the XP-47. the Lancer had advocates who preferred it to the P-40 because of it's speed and service ceiling, though there were many more and newer variants of P-40 already in production which were used instead. And hello, they did serve in the CBI w the CAF and the AVG, as well as in the PTO w the RAAF, I even provide sources. Furthermore, in regards to the P-47M, because of the numerous bugs in the M which kept them out of service, the 56th FG was never fully equipped w them until April 1945~ the War in Europe was over one month later in May, they hardly saw any meaningful combat flying Ms from the battered Luftwaffe, and yet they just another example of the silly uber everything figter that predominates LW. You are not looking very hard and you need to read up on your facts before you chime in.

Trust me, a few floating around China is just that.  A hand me down leftover, and very few.   And as one who doesn't fly LW rides, I'm hardly against early-midwar stuff.  I know what a Lancer is, and I know how they were used or not used as the case may be.  As I said previously, you can make a much better case for the Hawk 75/P36 if you want to add an early war bird.  That on makes much more sense considering the number of participants who used it, and the different places it saw combat with them. 

[gyrene81]

seadog...i don't know what resources you have but, for digital content these 2 articles appear to coincide with others i've found and give a fairly good picture of it's use:

http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/p43.html

http://www.warbirdforum.com/richdunn.htm

[Vinkman]

Ki-43 would be vastly more relevant and useful rather than finding some reason to eek in an extremely rare aircraft.  Ki-44 would also be more relevant.

Heck, G.55 and maybe ever Re2005 would be more relevant.

Karnak, you been warned before about injecting your pet Ki-43 request into every other Wish, and hijacking the thread. You are now banned from replying to Wishes.

Vinkman

[Vinkman]

I don't know if this has been requested before~ They saw combat w the AVG, China and The Royal Australian AF. Would be a good early war addition. And twice as many of them were built than the P-47M.
(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)

Length: 28 ft 6 in (8.7 m)
Wingspan: 36 ft 1 in (11.0 m)
Height: 14 ft 1 in (4.3 m)
Wing area: 222.7 ft² (20.7 m²)
Empty weight: 5,982 lb (2,713 kg)
Loaded weight: 7,418 lb (3,365 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 8,460 lb (3,837 kg)
Powerplant: 1× Pratt & Whitney R-1830-49 14-cylinder air-cooled radial piston engine, 1,200 hp (895 kW)
Performance
Maximum speed: 356 mph (573 km/h)
Range: 650 mi (1,046 km)
Service ceiling: 35,990 ft (10,970 m)
Rate of climb: 2,500 ft/min (13 m/s)
Wing loading: 33 lb/ft² (163 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.16 hp/lb (0.27 kW/kg)
Armament
4 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M2 Browning machine guns

I'm for any plane that offers a different flying experience than we have now. The stats look like Wildcat stats. Cockpit visibility, armorment, and performance look the same. What does this plane offer that is different from a playablility standpoint? BTW it's a eally ugly plane. 

Can't say I'm waiting for this one. + 0