Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: 1K3 on March 23, 2007, 11:00:09 AM
-
It would be best if they introduce some "gap filler" planes first.
Ki-43-II-ko
- Early war version, armed with 2x 12.7mm guns, maximum speed of 330mph
(http://www.ipmsdeutschland.de/Flugzeuge/Freckmann/Ki-43_Rotchina/Ki-43II_4.jpg)
Ki-43-III-ko
- Late war version (december '44). It had Individual exhaust stacks to provide a certain amount of exhaust thrust augmentation. Armed with 2x Ho-5 cannons, maximum speed of 360mph.
(http://www.modellbau-universe.de/uploadfiles/original/aml_72030.jpg)
P-39D
- US Version
See more info
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p39_4.html
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/P-39d5.JPG)
P-39Q-30
- USSR Version
See more info
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p39_15.html
(http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/pokri2.jpg)
Brewster B-239 (Finland)
- Finnish fans have been waiting for this plane for a looong time.
(http://www.ipmssyracuse.org/kthomas-B239_web.jpg)
-
Just my opinion but I would rather not see any new Rice Paper. I would prefer the P-39 or Brewster anything over any Rice Paper.
Just my thoughts on it :cool:
Later,
kaybayray
-
IMO, the 43-II would be a hanger queen. It would only be usefull in scinarios. The 43-III may be somewhat affective but it would still be a very low usage plane.
The sane with the brewster, Outclasses in the LW's.
Now of the numbers started growing in the EW and MW arenas it may be worth the effort.
The P39 could be an effective plane in the right hands but again for the most part it's usefullness would be in EQ/MW arenas and in scinarios.
As far as rice paper goes, what we really need are IJA heavy bombers like the Betty. While it's true the Betty is a burning death trap I'd hate to get caught behind one with 999000 controlling those 20mm in the tail.
-
Ki-44-II-Otsu would be fun.
Also, G4M3s were not nearly so flamable. They had a fully protected fuel system. I recall one squad of Hellcats shot one down and one pilot commented that it went down due to the weight of all the .50 cal rounds added to it. They were shocked that it didn't light up.
Now the G4M3 was also late war and built in smaller numbers. The unprotected G4M2 would be the one to add to AH.
-
Just because it's been asked for for years doesn't mean it really needs to be in the game. B-29 has been asked for more than the Brewster, but doesn't mean it deserves to be in the game any more than, oh P-39 or Me410. (for example)
Brewster had smaller wing area than the F4F-4, much less power in the engine, less firepower. Less power + smaller wing area = less turn capability compared to the F4F-4. It was very slow, and unless you model the version with armor (weighing it down more) it would light up faster than an a6m2.
I really think that the only reason the Finns want it is national pride, and hell I can sympathize, but they make it out to be some super plane where it wasn't, IMO. The performance was all based on the Finn fighters, not the aircraft used.
The Ki-43 would definitely be a good addition. As long as it was modeled properly. The early models had 2x 7mm MGs and a top speed (at alt) of 309mph. Heck a spitV does this at sea level. Anyway, they produced a clipped wing version the IIb with some armor after a few nasty run-ins with allied fighters. The IIbs had 2x 12.7mm MGs with 250 rounds each, but a top speed of only 320mph at alt. Very few examples of the IIIb were made, and it wouldn't be very accurate to include the IIIb if you're looking for a mid-war gap-filling aircraft.
I'd hit it. But then, I can get kills with 2x 50cals, I know a lot of other folks can't :) The main problem would be flying 100+ mph slower than every other plane around you :aok
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Ki-44-II-Otsu would be fun.
I think it would be better than the Ki43 because it had 4x 12.7mm MGs instead of just 2.
-
I've killed quite a few F4F-4s using the the two 7.7mm guns on the A6M2.
Even 7.7s can kill.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
I think it would be better than the Ki43 because it had 4x 12.7mm MGs instead of just 2.
It wouldn't turn nearly as well, but it would be a lot faster, climb better, dive WAY better and be vastly more durable.
-
Yes, to be sure, but you must admit it takes 500-1000 rounds fired to get a kill, as compared to about 200 or so of the 50cal variety :cool:
EDIT: it would be interesting to have a good Japanese diver. The closest we have today is the N1K2 and that's still not as good as P51D or P47.
-
Well, I don't recall how many rounds, but I got three F4Fs with just the 7.7s so it had to be less than 1000/kill.
That said, an A6M2 out of 20mm ammo and low on fuel can stick to an F4F's tail like glue and land a grossly disproportionate number of rounds fired.
EDIT: The Ki-61 was designed to dive too.
-
Meteor III.
-
Originally posted by Clifra Jones
IMO, the 43-II would be a hanger queen. It would only be usefull in scinarios. The 43-III may be somewhat affective but it would still be a very low usage plane.
The 2x HO-103 12.7 machine guns on Ki-43-II are not that bad. Think of this as the machine guns on late war Bf 109s. Since they are nose mounted you can shoot down at least 3-4 planes.
Now if we get Ki-43-III-Ko this plane will put A6Ms to shame.:aok
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Brewster had smaller wing area than the F4F-4, much less power in the engine, less firepower. Less power + smaller wing area = less turn capability compared to the F4F-4. It was very slow, and unless you model the version with armor (weighing it down more) it would light up faster than an a6m2.
I really think that the only reason the Finns want it is national pride, and hell I can sympathize, but they make it out to be some super plane where it wasn't, IMO.
The FAF stripped the B-239 of excess fat when recieved it in 1941. Think of this plane as the FM2. Before Finland sided with Germans the FAF B-239 was very competitive against I-16s, LaGG-3s, and lend-lease p-40s and hurricanes.:aok
(http://www.llv32.org/koneet/brewster.jpg)
-
There wasn't much to strip down, when they got it IK3. They got the early versions that the USN rejected. USN took 11 then promptly said "no more!".
Which, by the way, makes me question that Boyington quote. He never had any time in a Brewster, that I've ever read about.
Anyways, it was not like the FM2. It was more like the F4F-4 than it was the FM-2, and even then it was inferior to the F4F-4. FM-2 totally out-classes the Brewster, which is why it's so wrong to use FM-2 as a brewster sub in AvA setups.
EDIT:
Originally posted by Karnak
The Ki-61 was designed to dive too.
D'OH! How could I forget??
-
Originally posted by 1K3
The FAF stripped the B-239 of excess fat when recieved it in 1941. Think of this plane as the FM2. Before Finland sided with Germans the FAF B-239 was very competitive against I-16s, LaGG-3s, and lend-lease p-40s and hurricanes.:aok
Just a thought.
You do realize it will be the standard B-239? Although lighter than the us navy version. It will probably not be a "stripped" version.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Brewster had smaller wing area than the F4F-4, much less power in the engine, less firepower. Less power + smaller wing area = less turn capability compared to the F4F-4. It was very slow, and unless you model the version with armor (weighing it down more) it would light up faster than an a6m2.
I really think that the only reason the Finns want it is national pride, and hell I can sympathize, but they make it out to be some super plane where it wasn't, IMO. The performance was all based on the Finn fighters, not the aircraft used.
Krusty,
This bit right here demostrates your complete lack of understanding even the most elemental factors which affect to the turning ability of an aircraft.
You are totally ignoring wing loading.
Wingloadings:
B-239: 126.7 kg/mē
F4F-4: 149.2 kg/mē
You were talking about power, lets look at the powerloading:
B-239: 2.6 kg/hp (with continious power, 950hp)
F4F-4: 3.0 kg/hp
Brewster would climb and turn better than the F4F-4 and would have a better roll rate. Brewster would also be clearly slower than F4F-4.
So your statement is (once again) complete nonsense.
Finns got their fuel tanks shot up and leaking but I haven't heard a single case where they caught fire, maybe soviets used mostly full metal jackets instead of incendiary rounds but that is the case anyway. Even if it would caught fire that doesn't prevent the Zeke being in AH either.
In higher altitudes it would be around 50km/h slower than A6M2, on the deck the speeds would be virtually identical (265,4 mph for the Brewster). I don't remeber seeing anyone disputing the fact that it would be the slowest fighter in the game so far.
National pride? Well, Gianlupo wants his G.55, Americans want P-39, B-25 and A-26 and so on. I don't see anything bad in wanting to fly the planes of one's country used during WWII.
Find me one quote where a finn on this board seriously claimed Brewster being "some super plane". I challenge you to find it. I don't see anyone claiming it was a super plane. It would be the slowest fighter in the game but a damn fun one at that.
EDIT/About the firepower, it would have the same guns but better placed than certain escort fighter over Berlin during '44/EDIT
-
I'd go with:
late oscar
jack
b-25
p-39
IJA definitely needs a little expansion. so could VVS (but data hard to acquire).
the tojo is just a ija FW in the sense it was designed to, heh, intercept the b-29's.
brewster... meh... too limited in scope...
-
Ki-44 was designed WAY before B-29s were even a hint to Japan.
-
Originally posted by Wmaker
Krusty,
This bit right here demostrates your complete lack of understanding even the most elemental factors which affect to the turning ability of an aircraft.
You are totally ignoring wing loading.
Wingloadings:
B-239: 126.7 kg/mē
F4F-4: 149.2 kg/mē
You were talking about power, lets look at the powerloading:
B-239: 2.6 kg/hp (with continious power, 950hp)
F4F-4: 3.0 kg/hp
Brewster would climb and turn better than the F4F-4 and would have a better roll rate. Brewster would also be clearly slower than F4F-4.
So your statement is (once again) complete nonsense.
Finns got their fuel tanks shot up and leaking but I haven't heard a single case where they caught fire, maybe soviets used mostly full metal jackets instead of incendiary rounds but that is the case anyway. Even if it would caught fire that doesn't prevent the Zeke being in AH either.
In higher altitudes it would be around 50km/h slower than A6M2, on the deck the speeds would be virtually identical (265,4 mph for the Brewster). I don't remeber seeing anyone disputing the fact that it would be the slowest fighter in the game so far.
National pride? Well, Gianlupo wants his G.55, Americans want P-39, B-25 and A-26 and so on. I don't see anything bad in wanting to fly the planes of one's country used during WWII.
Find me one quote where a finn on this board seriously claimed Brewster being "some super plane". I challenge you to find it. I don't see anyone claiming it was a super plane. It would be the slowest fighter in the game a but a damn fun one at that.
EDIT/About the firepower, it would have the same guns but better placed than certain escort fighter over Berlin during '44/EDIT
I ask you plz...for the love of the game.....vote with practicality rather than sentiment....I know u guys are smarter than that. IMHO the Brewster, although fun, would ultimatley bring very little to the game.
-
Wmaker, it's useless to tell anything to this K dude.
IMO He IS a self promoted specialist of every area. Something like : My room AH2 h2h were a big suck because HIS PII CPU didn't make it... and so on. Just look to the this board.
K, blow some more air in that 'duck' of yours...
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Ki-44 was designed WAY before B-29s were even a hint to Japan.
i still think the jack would have a more versatile role over the tojo.
-
Originally posted by Shane
i still think the jack would have a more versatile role over the tojo.
Probably true. It has cannons.
-
Originally posted by Xjazz
Wmaker, it's useless to tell anything to this K dude.
IMO He IS a self promoted specialist of every area. Something like : My room AH2 h2h were a big suck because HIS PII CPU didn't make it... and so on. Just look to the this board.
K, blow some more air in that 'duck' of yours...
OMFG... dude... for 1: you warped whenever I joined. Others didn't. For 2: My GOD man that was years ago!
Dude. Talk about holding a grudge.
EDIT: And I only made 1 comment about your hosting. Then I stopped joining your room. End of story. I moved on. You, apparently, have harbored a grudge -- what? -- more than 2 years after the fact?
-
you see plenty of EW planes in the LW arena....
No question the late war Ki-43 would be a quick favorite for some. 2 cowl mounted 20mm.... Ki-61 is already drastically underestimated by many. The P-39Q would be a pretty dominant plane at the normal altitudes MA combat takes place at. The plane was an excellent turner with good low alt performance overall. Should easily out perform the F6F....
-
Originally posted by humble
you see plenty of EW planes in the LW arena....
He's right. Just because it's an early plane doesn't mean it won't kick arse in the LWA's.
-
Why has'nt anyone mentioned that the Oscar would outturn anything else in the game, including the Zeke???
This thing would be a mean machine in a Low-alt furball, such as those between a CV and a land field.
-
Originally posted by Wmaker
Wingloadings:
B-239: 126.7 kg/mē
F4F-4: 149.2 kg/mē
You were talking about power, lets look at the powerloading:
B-239: 2.6 kg/hp (with continious power, 950hp)
F4F-4: 3.0 kg/hp
I used a bit too high weight for the Brewster and G-5 Cyclone's WEP (1000hp) actually is usable for 5 minutes. So here are the corrected values, the difference is even clearer:
Wingloadings (with normal takeoff weight):
B-239: 124.5 kg/mē
F4F-4: 149.2 kg/mē
Powerloading:
B-239: 2.4 kg/hp
F4F-4: 3.0 kg/hp
Peak climbrates:
B-239: 2530 ft/min (with MIL power)
F4F-4: 2450 ft/min