please some NEW fighters

[Karnak]

My "order of importance" for British aircraft goes something like this:

Historical need:
Beaufighter
Wellington

MA need:
Fairey Firefly
Meteor Mk III

Minor historical need:
Barracuda
Battle
Beaufort
Blenheim
Gladiator
Halifax
Hampden
Skua
Sterling
Swordfish
Whirlwind
Whitworth

Bad idea:
Defiant


When you come right down to it, the Gladiator was not a significant participant in WWII, so I really wouldn't contest it with the Firefly.

[MrMeanie]

Pfft you don't need any more planes to bomb are tanks

[Tank-Ace]

wouldn't mind the meteor. Slower speed means the 20mm's could be effective, where the 262's high speed means that you'll likely land a lot of assits if you had 20mm's.

[Karnak]

I suspect that the Me262 would be far, far more effective with four 20mm cannons than it is with four 30mm cannons due to how hard it is to hit with the MK108 at those speeds.

Also, the Meteor III isn't that much slower, ~50mph.

[Rich52]

British carriers were used around the world.  The last dogfight of WWII was Seafire Mk IIIs against A6M5s near Tokyo bay.  Obviously the Royal Navy was tertiary to the US Navy and Imperial Japanese Navy in terms of carriers, but they were significant.

Most of all in the Med, which even today war historians underestimate the importance of. Luckily Hitler was a fool, Mussolinil wasn't any smarter , and short changed the theatre without ever realizing its importance. Thanks to the RN, its CVs and aircraft, Rommel's supply lines were always stressed, Italy's major warships wbasicallycaly expensive scrap "Taranto", and even Vichy France had very little navy to Lend to uncle Adolf. They should be honored with more then one Brit made carrier airplane.
http://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignRoyalNavy.htm

[Tank-Ace]

I don't know about that. Most fighters can still easily evade the 262, which means it has to rely on stupidity, pilots unaware of its presence, and dumb-luch shots.  The Meteor on the other hand would probably be like a faster Tempest. I have trouble seeing it used in the same fashion as the 262, mostly due to the vastly inferior snapshot capability.

[Slash27]

I don't know about that. Most fighters can still easily evade the 262, which means it has to rely on stupidity, pilots unaware of its presence, and dumb-luch shots.  The Meteor on the other hand would probably be like a faster Tempest. I have trouble seeing it used in the same fashion as the 262, mostly due to the vastly inferior snapshot capability.

You might be surprised.

[Karnak]

I don't know about that. Most fighters can still easily evade the 262, which means it has to rely on stupidity, pilots unaware of its presence, and dumb-luch shots.  The Meteor on the other hand would probably be like a faster Tempest. I have trouble seeing it used in the same fashion as the 262, mostly due to the vastly inferior snapshot capability.

Fly a Mossie VI a bit.  The snapshot is pretty dang lethal to fighters.

[Tank-Ace]

I consider a snapshot to be when a fighter flys through your line of fire, lasting no longer than 1 second. No doubt you CAN kill with that shot, but 30mm cannons are really gonna reduce the chance anything survives.

[Karnak]

I consider a snapshot to be when a fighter flys through your line of fire, lasting no longer than 1 second. No doubt you CAN kill with that shot, but 30mm cannons are really gonna reduce the chance anything survives.

1 second is pretty sustained fire.  The Mossie VI will amputate major parts of your airframe if you are in most fighters.  On Friday night I hit a P-38G with about .2 seconds of fire and removed its left wing, for example.

Against bombers, yes, the 30mm will do noticeably better, but against fighters the greater chance to hit with the nose mounted quad Hispanos is much more useful than the slightly higher lethality of hit.

Also keep in mind that the Meteor III would turn much better than the Me262.

[Tank-Ace]

The damage done by a 30mm is not "slightly" higher. However, I will admit that I've been annoyed many many times as fighters thread the needle between my shells, or when I give the 30mm's just a tad to small of a lead.

[Karnak]

The damage done by a 30mm is not "slightly" higher. However, I will admit that I've been annoyed many many times as fighters thread the needle between my shells, or when I give the 30mm's just a tad to small of a lead.

In terms of hitting fighters it is "slightly higher" as anything over the damage needed to amputate the part is wasted.  Seriously, fly the Mossie.  You are talking about the quad Hispano as though you need to saddle up on the target and give it a long tracking shot, as though it were a P-51B.

[Tank-Ace]

I'm aware of its snapshot capabilities, I'm just leery because I've had many aircraft survive a heavy pasting with a typhoon or F4U-1C back when I used to fly them.

[Karnak]

I'm aware of its snapshot capabilities, I'm just leery because I've had many aircraft survive a heavy pasting with a typhoon or F4U-1C back when I used to fly them.

They aren't nose mounted.  That is why I am specifying the Mossie VI.  The Tiffie in particular spreads its hits out.

[Tank-Ace]

True, but even at convergence, I've had many a plane slip away. For some odd reason I've been getting a lot of mirical shots with the crap guns lately though. I shot my 7.92s in the 190A5 and took out a 109K4 from D1000 out with a pilot kill.