P-63 KingCobra......again

[Karnak]

So the Ta152, which could be added cheaply, is a travesty you never stop wailing about, but you think the P-63, which would need 100% new art assets, should be added?

What line of "logic" leads you there?

[Megalodon]

So the Ta152, which could be added cheaply, is a travesty you never stop wailing about, but you think the P-63, which would need 100% new art assets, should be added?

What line of "logic" leads you there?

 Once again the ta 152 came from the a-3 airframe... do you see that in the game?

 or do you mean after stretching the FW into a 190d they only had to stretch it a littlemore for the ta-152?

 

[Saxman]

Having done a LOT of 3D modeling myself, I think you're DRASTICALLY underestimating just how much work is actually involved in altering a model that way. Even if you're just swapping out one part for another, you STILL have to model both sets of parts. Actually altering an existing mesh into a new shape is almost an even bigger pain in the bellybutton than just building it from scratch.

[LCADolby]

I did a little modelling years ago on an F1 sim, Stretching/Warping the textures was a real problem when re-modelling.

[Saxman]

I did a little modelling years ago on an F1 sim, Stretching/Warping the textures was a real problem when re-modelling.

Yeah, that's a BIG part of it. If you modify the mesh, you have to go through and fix your UV mapping which is an incredible pain to get right the first time as it is.

[Vinkman]

Thanks To all for the very good discussion, and to ACK-ACK and Megalodon for the all the great references and Information on the service record of the P-63.  

[Arlo]

LOL point me to all the research and books you have written on the subject

 You almost sound like Krusty 

Point me to yours, if you're gonna resort to that.    You're impressed with every source
that supports (or you think supports) your opinion, we get it. You're not impressed with
opinions that threaten yours, we get that even more. 

I would like to see proof just as you ask for "something concrete" that says "USSR don't use the P-63 against Germany"

Again, the 'If you can't prove that Nazi moon bases didn't exist then my claim of their existence stands until you can' logic.
You don't seem to get why that's backwards, do you? 

[LCADolby]

As to the Axis aircraft, I don't see how that is relevant.  What does it matter that it dominates an N1K2-J or Bf109K-4 anymore than it matters if it dominates a P-47M or Mosquito Mk VI?  In all cases the fans of those aircraft have a new predator in the tank with them and it matters not at all whether their pet aircraft is an Axis or Allied aircraft just as it doesn't matter if there is an Allied counter to the Me262.

I think it matters because it's how the air war works. The Spitfire was to balance/counter the 109E, the 262 to counter/balance the 8th AF and so forth.

I should've asked what was the P63 designed to counter, and what was designed to counter the P63 perhaps?

[Arlo]

I think it matters because it's how the air war works. The Spitfire was to balance/counter the 109E, the 262 to counter/balance the 8th AF and so forth.

I should've asked what was the P63 designed to counter, and what was designed to counter the P63 perhaps?

It supposedly addressed the deficiency in the 39's interceptor role from what I've seen in various sources.
I'm not sure what Germany or Japan had that the Soviet Union needed to intercept by the time they
received 63s.

[Vinkman]

I think it matters because it's how the air war works. The Spitfire was to balance/counter the 109E, the 262 to counter/balance the 8th AF and so forth.

I should've asked what was the P63 designed to counter, and what was designed to counter the P63 perhaps?

Good question. Bell's original mission for the P-39 was a maneuverable dog fighter, that could also climb high fast to intercept bombers. A lack of power forced compromises in the original airframe that prevented it from being upgraded to plane that could achieve those goals, when the power finally arrived. The P-63 was designed to correct those deficiencies, and hence achieve the original intent. But as the Russians became the primary customer, feedback from their use of P-39s against the Germans was incorporated. So one could say the plane was developed to to counter The FW-190 A8s, 109Gs and Ks. As such the 37mm seems to make little sense, but the Russians loved the gun.

While the La5 and La7 and Yak3 and 9U do that as well, the P-63 would offer longer range (with drop tanks) the ability to carry bombs, and superior High altitude performance.  

[Vinkman]

It supposedly addressed the deficiency in the 39's interceptor role from what I've seen in various sources.
I'm not sure what Germany or Japan had that the Soviet Union needed to intercept by the time they
received 63s.

True, but according to Loza, the russians loved the P-39 and found it very effective against the earlier german fighters. They used is exclusively as an air superiority fighter. The P-63 would just be a much better performing P-39. 

[Arlo]

True, but according to Loza, the russians loved the P-39 and found it very effective against the earlier german fighters. They used is exclusively as an air superiority fighter. The P-63 would just be a much better performing P-39. 

That it would. 

[Tank-Ace]

If for no other reason than the irrationality of your arguments, and that it would piss you off, I sincerely hope this is the last unit added.

[Megalodon]

Point me to yours, if you're gonna resort to that.    You're impressed with every source
that supports (or you think supports) your opinion, we get it. You're not impressed with
opinions that threaten yours, we get that even more.  

Again, the 'If you can't prove that Nazi moon bases didn't exist then my claim of their existence stands until you can' logic.
You don't seem to get why that's backwards, do you?  

 I not impressed with anything if it had turned out I couldn't find anything or if it came out different I would of posted it that way.

Have you ever been to Turkministan?

[Megalodon]

Having done a LOT of 3D modeling myself, I think you're DRASTICALLY underestimating just how much work is actually involved in altering a model that way. Even if you're just swapping out one part for another, you STILL have to model both sets of parts. Actually altering an existing mesh into a new shape is almost an even bigger pain in the bellybutton than just building it from scratch.

Yeah, that's a BIG part of it. If you modify the mesh, you have to go through and fix your UV mapping which is an incredible pain to get right the first time as it is.

 This is far from my argument... This is Karnaks argument. Karnak is the one that keeps saying the the Ta 152 was easy to add... My response to him is . If the ta152 was so easy to add the P-63 certainly would be just as easy to add.