Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Wingnutt on February 18, 2008, 12:23:24 PM
-
1: easy to add,, used the D30 airframe
2: R-2800 C producing 2800HP with H2O
3: 473MPH top speed
4: went operational with the 56th FG in april 1945, by the end of the war the entire 56th was equipped with Ms
5: scored kills during the war, most notably against several 262s
it saw action, and enitre FG used them during the war, it got kills during the war
would be a piece of cake to add the M variant to the line up, no new model needed.. just the necessary changes to the FM, and a skin.
it would need to be perked of course, carry about the same prices at the Spit14 or there abouts I would think
PLEEEEESE!!
:)
-
whats the difference between an "n" and a "m" model?
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
whats the difference between an "n" and a "m" model?
I dont have the stats and writeups for both in front of me at the moment..
but IF I recall correctly, the main purpose of the N was not sheer performance, bu t range for the Pacific theater bomber escort where missions were typically of greater distance (ironically the first Ns saw service in the Eu theater not the pacific as intened)
the N used the same powerplant as the M, but was tuned and propped more for endurance than performance. In the M the engine was "turned loose" with an emphasis on sheer performance, not range. also the M used a different prop, the Curtis -B40 (cant recall off hand what prop the N used)
the M was the fastest thunderbolt ever produced that saw combat.
-
The M was a cheap hot rod version of the bubble top late D jugs. This was a compromise of the more radical changes tested on the XP47J. The main difference from regular D jugs is a higher boosted engine (slightly different model). Since the 56th already had their Jugs over boosted, this was not a radical improvement.
The N was a cross bread of a P47 and an ocean oil tanker. It uses the same engine as the M, so you can imagine how the M would handle - much like the N, only lighter. The M would be a 5 minutes WEP monster and just another D jug without it.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-47_Thunderbolt#P-47M
http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Seversky-Republic7.html
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p47_12.html
Gee, seems they got there too late to do much of anything. A few kills in the closing days, only 130 ordered (out of 15000+ total production -- FYI that's 0.8% -- not even 1%!)
-
Originally posted by Krusty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-47_Thunderbolt#P-47M
http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Seversky-Republic7.html
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p47_12.html
Gee, seems they got there too late to do much of anything. A few kills in the closing days, only 130 ordered (out of 15000+ total production -- FYI that's 0.8% -- not even 1%!)
the 262 "got there too late to much of anything" aswell
the 47M:
saw active service during the war
attained kills during the war
an entire FG was outfitted with them
meets required criteria IMO
-
I wouldn't compare it with the 262, which was equipping units in early-to-mid 1944 and as many served as 190Ds.
I agree it meets the criteria, but still, like the He-162 or the Meteor Mk.III, it's really stretching to think it had much of an impact on the war.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
I wouldn't compare it with the 262, which was equipping units in early-to-mid 1944 and as many served as 190Ds.
I agree it meets the criteria, but still, like the He-162 or the Meteor Mk.III, it's really stretching to think it had much of an impact on the war.
I never said it really had an impact on the war..
again the 262 had no real impact on the war either..
-
There are far, far, far more important aircraft that need to be added then the P-47M. The US stable is hardly lacking.
I'd put the P-47M in the same category as the Re.2005 or Spitfire F.21.
And for what it is worth, the Me262 saw a great deal more combat than the P-47M. Saying it didn't change anything is silly. Since the Axis lost we could easily claim the Bf109 or A6M didn't change anything.
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
the 262 "got there too late to much of anything" aswell
the 47M:
saw active service during the war
attained kills during the war
an entire FG was outfitted with them
meets required criteria IMO
Off the top of my head, I can think of 2 Geschwaders that were equipped with the Schwalbe, JV44 and JG7. Also, it was a very radical design that encorperated a lot of advancements and new technologies (the jet engine and the swept wing, among others). Quite a few kills were scored in the Schwalbe (I beleive the highest scoring 262 ace had 19 kills in it?). Despite the fact that it was a radical design being produced by totaled industry, 1200 262's were manufactured, almost 10 times that of the P47M.
The 262 and the P47M are in two totally different leagues.
-
Originally posted by Motherland
Off the top of my head, I can think of 2 Geschwaders that were equipped with the Schwalbe, JV44 and JG7. Also, it was a very radical design that encorperated a lot of advancements and new technologies (the jet engine and the swept wing, among others). Quite a few kills were scored in the Schwalbe (I beleive the highest scoring 262 ace had 19 kills in it?). Despite the fact that it was a radical design being produced by totaled industry, 1200 262's were manufactured, almost 10 times that of the P47M.
The 262 and the P47M are in two totally different leagues.
kind of a moot point..
the plane meets the required critera to be in the game...
the "best" p47 we have now, the N, is the worst.
we need an "uber jug"
you say the 262 was a radical design, which is true.. which gives it merit.. and thus (apparently) helps it "belong" here..
well the 47M was the fastest jug in the war, which puts among some of the fastest propeller driven planes in the war.. probably very near the top..
it was in many ways the culmination of the development of one of the most versatile and effective fighters of the war.
-
A bit off topic, but wasn't the N able to take off of a Carrier? I know it was only specially fitted and never saw combat off a CV...but still. :cool:
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
we need an "uber jug"
Why?
BTW, I just realised, 300 Me 163's were produced IIRC... less P47M's were produced than Me 163s.
-
P.S. IMO the -N is the uber jug. We've got it.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
P.S. IMO the -N is the uber jug. We've got it.
the N is inferior to the D40 in every single way except for top speed under WEP..
slower max speed under mil power, slower climb even under wep till 17K, poorer turning radius under flaps..
aside from a single aspect (top speed when using WEP) its worse off than the other jugs..
well unless you go over 30.. even rooks dont go that high... and even then the advantages of the N are minor.
not only is it not the best, its the most limited, and ill suited for MA combat of all the Jugs.
-
Why do we need the P-47M?
We don't need the Spitfire F.21.
We don't need the Re.2005
What makes the P-47M so special?
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Why do we need the P-47M?
We don't need the Spitfire F.21.
We don't need the Re.2005
What makes the P-47M so special?
why do we have the 51B when we have the D?
why have the spit 9 when we have the 5, 16.. etc etc..
why do we have the 190 a8 AND F8?
yea, you could use that argument for virtually any plane in the game..
the M is special because it was the BEST P47 produced in terms of raw performance. its what the -4 is to the corsairs, what the 14 is to the spits..
we had good corsairs, so we got the -4 the fastest corsair.. as a perk plane,..
we had the spitfires, so we got the spit 14, the fastest spit, as a perk plane..
people ***** and cry about people wanting to add "hangar queens" planes that have no hope and competing in the MA..
well here is an addition that Will.
-
Not everyone wants only the late '45 dragsters. There is a great deal that is missing, and I think many would prefer to see the planes that actually faught in numbers, having an effect on the outcome of the war. To me, and I know some others, those missing planes are a loy more interesting than some late war variants of already well represented types that only saw limited action for brief periods.
-
I might add, that adding it would take next to nothing as far as time/effort on the part of the developers..(compared to adding most other new rides) we already have the model for it, a different skin and tweaked FM is about it..
and yea, alot is missing, alot of stuff to scroll past in the hanger really..
I would like to see a Mig3, Lagg, and a few other mid to early war rides added..
but the fact of the matter is they would be for scenario and novelty only..
the M would be very easy to add and would get flown.
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
why do we have the 51B when we have the D?
why have the spit 9 when we have the 5, 16.. etc etc..
why do we have the 190 a8 AND F8?
You know the answer. And if you dont, well, there not much good trying to explain the answer is going to do for you.
-
All those Spitfires fill gaps. You drop one out, save perhaps the Mk XIV of which 957 were built, and you leave a large gap in the Spitfire's upgrade paths.
P-51B is the same. Same with the Bf109s. And F4Us. And 190s. And P-38s.
The P-47M fills no gap at all.
Try using some thought rather than just "I want it!"
-
I think the P-47M fills the gap of being the fastest uber jug. We could be lacking an oppurtunity to bring out the Jug's full potential in the MA. For all we know it could be like the new tempest. As fast as it is and with the 8 .50 cals. We could give it a try
-
Originally posted by Widewing
I read a story about the P-47M that you may find interesting. I photocopied the story for my archive. The story is attributed to Maj. George Bostwick.
Flying over Britain during a test hop of a P-47M, Bostwick was putting the new fighter through its paces. This was one of the Ms that had its reliability issues fixed and he was checking out a new motor.
At about 10,000 feet, Bostwick found himself flying near a formation of four RAF Tempests. He slid his Jug in alongside and waved. The nearest pilot waved back. Bostwick eased up military power and the P-47 began to pull ahead. Having taken the bait, Black smoke poured out of the exhaust stacks of the Sabre's in the Tempests. All four surged ahead of the P-47. Bostwick let the Tempests pull out ahead about 100 yards. He then pushed up the throttle into WEP. "My Thunderbolt literally leaped forward, quickly overtaking the Tempests. As I rushed past, I gave them a thumbs up." Bostwick then eased back the stick and zoomed up in a climb leaving the Tempest pilots to "wonder what the hell kind of P-47 that was."
A P-47M using 150 octane avgas could pull up to 80" of MAP. State side tests with 44-1 avgas showed a max speed of 381 mph at SL, 411 mph at 10k and 485 mph at 32k. Using this same fuel, a P-47D-22 managed 444 mph using 72" MAP (2,600 hp) at 23,600 feet.
We would not get 150 octane fuel (maybe for a perk in the distant future, but I doubt it). Nonetheless, the P-47M would be a beast in the MA.
Also, more P-47Ms saw combat than did Ta 152s..... Three full squadrons were active over the last month of the war in Europe.
My regards,
Widewing
I think I just made a mess....
As for not needing it or whatever, the Jug was the second most produced aircraft of WWII second to the Liberator. We have 4 whole models of it. The M would make an excellent version to add to the game. How many 3 cannon LA7s were made? The whole "It was super rare so it shouldn't make it into the game" argument is lame. Yeah, I'd love to see a lot of early A/C as well but it would be nice to have a Jug that would compete with other high performance models out there. Most of our fights are down low which was not period correct just as much as 30 163s upping to destroy HQ raids. The M made it into combat so therefore meets the requirements to be added. How many F4U-4s were made? Just because it's not a biplane doesn't mean it shouldn't be added.
This is a game, some of you guys take it WAY too seriously. Yeah it'd be nice if we could all have every plane we wanted or that was made (I still want a Black Widow but not holding my breath).
Plus having an M model Jug would possibly make them a tad more feared (or make the M more surprising when engaged, kinda like a F4U-4)
I'd add it to my list of planes I'd like to see added. And it wouldn't take much to bring it in either, just use an existing Jug frame & remodel the flight characteristics a bit & ta-da, SUPER JUG!!
And the argument about not having one of the Spit models because it would take out part of the chronology could be applied here...
-
Yep
:D
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
why do we have the 51B when we have the D?
why have the spit 9 when we have the 5, 16.. etc etc..
why do we have the 190 a8 AND F8?
yea, you could use that argument for virtually any plane in the game..
the M is special because it was the BEST P47 produced in terms of raw performance. its what the -4 is to the corsairs, what the 14 is to the spits..
we had good corsairs, so we got the -4 the fastest corsair.. as a perk plane,..
we had the spitfires, so we got the spit 14, the fastest spit, as a perk plane..
people ***** and cry about people wanting to add "hangar queens" planes that have no hope and competing in the MA..
well here is an addition that Will.
Because it's not all about the LWAs. Also those so called hangar Queens played a larger roll in the war.
If the EWA/MWA had a more filled out plane set more people would fly them.
Edit: I'm not saying it shouldn't be added at some point. There are just more significant ac to be added.
-
Well the Spitties got the Spit Mk. XVI and the XIV
The F4Us got the -4 hog and the -1c hog
Why not let the P-47s have the P-47M super jug??
It could be perked and it would be a great plane to fly. Going like 475 mph, man thats outstanding for a prop plane. I think the only plane that could outrun that would be a tempest (could it out run a temp??)
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
Why not let the P-47s have the P-47M super jug??
It fills no gap. Only 130 were made. The P47's we have are fast and turn great. Why do we need an M?
-
It fills the gap of the fastest Jug, the -N jug was no good except for long range, plus add the fact that there were only 300 Me-163s and 1/3 were likely to crash and we still got that...
We have the 3 cannon option on the La-7 and that was very very rare to see in regular combat.
The -M jug was the fastest and was made for all out performance. Lets bring in the M jug!!!
-
That isn't a gap. You seem to fundamentally not understand what a gap is.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
That isn't a gap. You seem to fundamentally not understand what a gap is.
It's not so much a gap as it is a solid addition to the -47 family in the Late War Arena.
Not everyone flies a -4 hog, not everyone is gonna fly a M 'bolt.
-4 filled no gap, but it adds a terrific plane for those who want it.
There's no reason to NOT add it, really. It's simple, it's easy, as I understand it it'll be significantly less effort then an entirely new model.
Bring it on, slap a perk on it, call it done, and give the Jugheads a late war monster to contend with the best everyone else has to offer in the most populated arenas in the game.
**edit** an entire FG was outfitted with these things- that in and of itself is reason enough to add it- for the WOLFPACK!
-
what gap does the C hog and the -4 fill?
they are just better versions of the F4U that carry a perk price..
no different than what the M would be..
the "gap" to be filled is the same gap that existed before then N came around..
the N was apparently expected to be the "next step" for the jugs.. but insted its actually a step back in more ways than not considering its inferior performance in MA type combat..
so I guess the gap to be filled is rather obvious..
the M would be what people were hoping for from the N.
-
The P-47M fills no gap. Period.
There are some aircraft in AH that also fill no gap, but the only ones comparable to the lack of gap that the P-47M would fill are the Me163 and the Ta152. The fact that there are non-gap fillers in the planeset does not justify the addition of yet another when there are huge gaps to fill. Even the C.205 and F4U-1C were produced in higher numbers than the P-47M.
Sure, add the P-47 M, but it should be way, way,way[/i], WAY[/i] down the priority list.
-
I dont understand what the deal is with "it doesent fill a gap"
as if we have plane A and C but not B..
well.. thats dumb..
we have the middle of the pack jugs..
compared to the spitfires where we have the worst, middle, and best..
same for the corsairs...
we have the best corsair, the best Spit, the best 190 (arguably)
so having the best jug aswell makes sense..
also, i think what should also carry some weight is the fact that its a plane people will actually want to fly, and will be competitive in the MA..
its no like some of the planes that are a MUST HAVE because they played some important role in the war, but in the MA they collect dust..
also, as stated the jug was among the top produced aircraft in the war, and one of the most versatile.. the M model being the icing on the cake of the lineage..
the cake must have icing dammit.
-
Okay, karnak- what do you think should be #1 on the priority list?
I don't see why this is such a huge issue, honestly- it's a minimum effort "nice to have" addition.
Are there other planes that could be added? Oh hell yes- He111, P-63, P-61, a number of Japanese planes, the MiG-3...the list goes on.
What's the biggest gap that we have in the current planeset, in your opinion?
-
no rebel, hes right, what we REALLY need are obsolete bombers and other novelty aircraft that nobody will fly except on rare occasions or scenarios because they are utterly useless in the MA.. those should be high priority..
I mean look how many AWSOME rides we have that every one flys all the time and enjoy so much..
like the C202, the 109E4, 190F8, P-40B, SBD, F4F-4, TBM, spitty I,
Hurricane I, A6M2, B5N2, D3A1..
you seldom see any of those rides in the MA.. they are as rare as a rook below 20K.
but here we have the M which would be not only goof enough to hand with the best, but would be good enough to be perked.. a VIABLE MA fighter capable of hanging with the big dogs that dominate the MA.
there has been no argument against the M that holds a drop of water..
any stated argument against that has been made for its ineligibility regarding its rareness, or impact on the war, reliability, or otherwise... are moot, considering many aircraft already in the game were equally rare, had minuscule impact, or were less reliable.
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
there has been no argument against the M that holds a drop of water..
any stated argument against that has been made for its inelegibility regarding its rareness, or impact on the war, reliability, or otherwise... are moot, considering many aircraft already in the game were equally rare, had minuscule impact, or were less reliable.
if you were to take all of the "reasons" for the M not being worthy of being in the game, and filter the existing plane set according to the same standards..
impact on the war
reliability
rareness/production numbers
you would find many of the rides we already have dont "fit the bill" by the standards..
That we have 4 versions of the Jug would suggest that other birds would come first.
I'd love a Spitfire XII. All the logic used to justify the M fits even more for the XII. 1943-44 bird. Tangmere Wing flew it and was high scoring wing in the fall of 43. 100 built and saw combat etc etc.
But as much as I'd love it, I understand it's not top of the list as there are comparable Spits. It's my all time favorite bird, but I wish for others first to fill out the 'gaps', not just to add another hotrod for the late war.
Might as well argue for the Spit 21 then since it was operational. Can you imagine the whines with a 4 cannon Griffon Spitfire? :)
-
C202, the 109E4, 190F8, P-40B, SBD, F4F-4, TBM, spitty I,
Hurricane I, A6M2, B5N2, D3A1..
all of these "fill gaps"
in the MA,... all of them are worthless..'
filling gaps is really only useful for.. filling gaps..
it doesn't necessarily make the game any better, doesent give the vast majority of players anything to really look forward to...
-
Well, the M jug probably see alot of use and it is probably reliable anyways.
This post is smarter than my one about a jug having 4 or 6 20mm hispanos
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
there has been no argument against the M that holds a drop of water..
This should be
Originally posted by Wingnutt
I completely ignored or totally didn't understand on any level the argument(s) against the M that hold noticable weight..
-
Originally posted by Krusty
This should be
wow thats clever..
no really, kudos.. you showed me..
every argument for why the M should not be in the game doesn't hold any water because there are plenty of planes already in the game that "violate" he same "rules" (opinions) that are stated..
rareness?
3 cannon LA7
unreliable?
262 and 163
didn't make a difference in the war?
163, 262 + LOTS of other planes
those are the 3 main knocks against the M that keep coming up.. though in various different, long winded ways.. but its all the same arguments over and over.. and its not really an argument..
you cant say a plane doesnt belong based on conditions that would also aleniate about 1/4 of the current existing plane set. doesnt make any sense
-
I also find it interesting, reading some of the other threads started in this forum..
it seems when someone wants a new plane, the same people always pop in on the thread telling the thread starter they are an idiot for wanting such a [INSERT BIASED OPIONATED ASSERTION HERE] in .. what is presumably THEIR game..
since nobody want the "RIGHT" planes added, maybe re-route some of the time and energy you people spend pissing on other people's ideas, and come up with some of your own.:aok
-
The only reason that is even kind of reasonable that I have heard was from like 10 ppl
"ONLY LIKE 130 WERE ISSUED!!!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!"
Well The 163 was worse on those terms with the fact that 300 were issued and 1/3 would blow up
-
we don't have the best spit or 109 modelled, so i'm not sure you can use that as an argument.
-
Might as well argue for the Spit 21 then since it was operational. Can you imagine the whines with a 4 cannon Griffon Spitfire?
Now you're making me slobber all over myself.....wtg man.....:cry
:D
-
Wingnutt- sorry bro, but ya need to calm down a little bit buddy ;)
We're on the same side here, but getting emotional ain't gonna solve anything.
I understand the limited numbers argument, and I understand how people can sit there and think "oh wow! another American ride! Grrreat!".
All I'm saying is that a high performance P-47 that's viable in the MA as a perked plane would be pretty damn cool.
-
A p-47M would be a cool ride to have. But, we need planes that will fill gaps. He-111 should be high up on the list along with the Yaks, Japanese Aircraft. And what about... (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p47_3.html)
And don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of the Jug.
-
Originally posted by Redlegs
A p-47M would be a cool ride to have. But, we need planes that will fill gaps. He-111 should be high up on the list along with the Yaks, Japanese Aircraft. And what about... (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p47_3.html)
And don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of the Jug.
Oh, i totally agree- He-111 would be uber cool.
Why would you want a C Jug though? Why not a D-15 razorback?
Heck, how about a D-5? The C didn't see all that much action, IIRC.
It's not really a question of priority per se, it's more of a "why the heck not, it doesn't seem like all that much work to introduce". Seriously, all they have to do is slap the N engine in a D-25/40 frame, tweak the weight a little to get it balanced right (the numbers are very available), slap a perk price of like 50 on it, and say "voila!".
Of course, I've never ever introduced a "new" a/c into the Aces High inventory so I could be grossly underestimating the effort needed to perform said act.
-
I say, go for it. It should take a short time to do.
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
The only reason that is even kind of reasonable that I have heard was from like 10 ppl
"ONLY LIKE 130 WERE ISSUED!!!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!"
Well The 163 was worse on those terms with the fact that 300 were issued and 1/3 would blow up
First of all, the 163 should never have been added IMHO.
Second, counting that "1/3 blew up", that still leaves you with 70 more 163's than P47M's.
By the way, something leads me to beleive that this is harder than the sounds. That 'something' is that the Ta152 wasnt remodled with the rest of the 190's. Now, by conventional thought, you would only have to take the Dora, tweak the engine (I think) and slap those beautifully long wings on it. Which, you'd think, would take no more than a couple of hours. But they never did it, even though they were already working on the other 190's.
Food for thought...
-
First of all, the 163 should never have been added.
Just a guess from out in left field here....but I'd say Pyro and HiTech disagree. ;)
-
Which is why I added IMHO :aok
-
Originally posted by JeepinAZ
I think I just made a mess....
Yeah, I'd love to see a lot of early A/C as well but it would be nice to have a Jug that would compete with other high performance models out there.
We already have one, the P-47N. The problem is that players are trying to fight in the Jug at altitudes where it suffers and not at where it was meant to be flown. You'd have the same issues with the M model.
As for adding the M, why? I'd rather have planes added that actually bring something to the game and not just another late war fast ride that isn't really needed.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
It fills the gap of the fastest Jug, the -N jug was no good except for long range...
Do you read anything about the planes or you just parrot what the other ignorant posters write?
Please, provide any sort of data that the P-47N wasn't a capable aircraft and a failure in everything except long range sorties.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
C202, the 109E4, 190F8, P-40B, SBD, F4F-4, TBM, spitty I,
Hurricane I, A6M2, B5N2, D3A1..
all of these "fill gaps"
in the MA,... all of them are worthless..'
filling gaps is really only useful for.. filling gaps..
it doesn't necessarily make the game any better, doesent give the vast majority of players anything to really look forward to...
Strange, I see those planes quite a bit in the MA. I guess when you're flying in a hord, it's hard to see the roses
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Do you read anything about the planes or you just parrot what the other ignorant posters write?
Please, provide any sort of data that the P-47N wasn't a capable aircraft and a failure in everything except long range sorties.
ack-ack
hes just "parroting" what all the available data says.
A quick trip to Gonzo's will tell you all you need to know about the Ns performance, or lack there of.
slecte it and the D40, see for your self how it stacks up.
below 25~ K it is either equal or inferior to the D40 in every way except top speed when using WEP.
climb(even under WEP) , and turn radius are actually worse than the D40.
I would say the N is just a D40 with added range, but it isnt even that.
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Strange, I see those planes quite a bit in the MA.
no you dont.,
I guess when you're flying in a hord, it's hard to see the roses
ack-ack [/B]
yea, im a loser because most of my flying is in goal oriented squad missions..
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
no you dont.,
Maybe it's the time you fly, but I see anyone of those planes pretty much each night I fly, especially the D3a, TBM and Wildcat being the majority out of the group.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
We already have one, the P-47N. The problem is that players are trying to fight in the Jug at altitudes where it suffers and not at where it was meant to be flown.
Players are fighting where the fight actually is- at altitudes 15K and below.
You'd have the same issues with the M model.
Not so fast, buddy. The M was an entirely different beast from the N. It weighed a LOT less, and it went a LOT faster.
]As for adding the M, why? I'd rather have planes added that actually bring something to the game and not just another late war fast ride that isn't really needed.
ack-ack
That's a very valid point. But "bringing something to the game"- it depends on what "game" you're talking about- the main (i.e. late war) arena, the AvA, the Midwar, special events...?
The M would give the P-47 enthusiasts a terrific perked model. It'd be the real "super bolt".
I dunno, I'd kinda like to have it.
In the interest of CT, however, I'd have to say bring on the D-15. Wing racks, bigger drop tanks, longer range and increased Jabo capability while still retaining the razorback performance. Yes please :D
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
the -N jug was no good except for long range...
The N Jug is a beast. If you don't realize that you don't fly it right. Ask Wolfala who can routinely land 10 kills a sortie in it. 2800 HP for 5 minutes is awesome--there's no other way to state it. Manage your WEP and weight in the November, and it will shine. No, it doesn't turn as well as the D-11 or climb as well without WEP as the D-40. But, if you're planning on using the Jug, those two elements aren't facets of the aircraft you rely upon to get you out of a tough fight. I know its hard to imagine an 8 ton aircraft being a bird that works the vertical, but the N Jug can, as long as you have the go juice (WEP). At 1/4 tank of fuel and 1000 rounds total, the November begins approaching LA/Spit/109 type power loadings on WEP.
I'll caveat that by saying that the M, IMO, is a plane that should be in the game, albeit, probably the next time the Jug is revised, which should be in the distant future, after most of the obvious holes in the plane set are filled, and even then, probably as one of the last revisions. I have even proposed in a thread around a year and a half ago that it would seem the M would be fairly easy to include, given its similarity to the D-25/D-40. I suppose in an ideal world, HTC would like to have every single aircraft that saw combat in WWII modeled, and I'm sure that it will take a while to do so. So, the M can wait until its time to be included, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm one of the P-47 fanboi's here.
Personally, I think the D-22/23 is a much more historically relevant version that should be included, even before the M. There are a couple of other tweaks I'd like to see, but even then, given the amount of aircraft missing, it should be taken care of later.
-
What I'm seeing here from the less then reasonable, is:
"Give me what I percieve to be the airplane I can't lose in, while flying in latewar."
It's that or it's the classic, I'm never gonna be satisfied no matter what HTC does.
There is more to the game then Latewar. Clearly HTC is trying to work towards a more complete plane set, not just late war monsters.
But as I said, give me the Spit XII for midwar and the Spit 21 for latewar, and you can have your P47M
Oh and about that P38H :)
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostwind http://www.achtungpanzer.com/flak4.htm
45 built the most commonly spotted AAA GV in all arenas that its permitted use in.
Yet in the game.
http://www.aviastar.org/air/russia/la-7.php
3 cannon LA7 only build in limited numbers in ONE factory.
Yet in the game
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Ta_152
Ta-152 uncertain production numbers 150ish
Yet in the game
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_bf_109K.html
109k lots produced 90% never left the ground intact.
Yet in the game
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Lancaster
Majority of lancasters carried .30 cal machine guns for defense.. our bird was placed with the after factory modified .50 cal machine guns to "improve its survivablility in the MA." HTC
Yet in the game
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20651420@N00/379821377
http://www.vectorsite.net/avar234.html
AR234 rear aiming sight not modeled into game.
The list is nearly endless.
Face it HTC will add or subtract as they see fit.. your ideas are welcomed here but, none of it is law
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_bf_109K.html
109k lots produced 90% never left the ground intact.
Yet in the game
Source?
Everything Ive read said that 'nearly every Kurfurst was used' more or less.
Plus, just because they added other 'rare' fighters, thats no justification to add another.
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Lancaster
Majority of lancasters carried .30 cal machine guns for defense.. our bird was placed with the after factory modified .50 cal machine guns to "improve its survivablility in the MA." HTC
Yet in the game
When did HiTech say that? You have a link to the thread he made that comment in? The guns on the Lancaster aren't .50 caliber machine guns, they are the same .303 machine guns they had when they were introduced. It's even in the plane description on the main website.
Country of origin: Britain
Crew: Seven crew
Type: Bomber
Normal loaded weight: 68,000 lbs.
Dimensions: Wing span 102'
Length 68'10"
Height 20'4"
Internal fuel: 2587 gallons
Armament: 4x303 Browning
500 lb bomb
1000 lb bomb
2000 lb bomb
4000 lb bomb
If you're going to post a rant, make sure you have the facts straight in your post, otherwise you'll just come out looking like a fool...oh wait, too late.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
The guns on the Lancaster aren't .50 caliber machine guns, they are the same .303 machine guns they had when they were introduced.
(...)
If you're going to post a rant, make sure you have the facts straight in your post, otherwise you'll just come out looking like a fool...oh wait, too late.
ack-ack
(http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/8353/lancasterqm0.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
-
:lol
-
Dear ack-ack.
since you obviously don't pay any attention to this game at all.
and the screenshot that Luche was so kind as too provide is obviously wrong perhaps your right.. ALL the guns on the lancaster must be .30 caliber.
Wow your intellect is truely amazing gosh i hope after my next 20 or so head injuries I can one day reflect the intelligence you possess.
Oh and ack-ack to quote your reply.
"If you're going to post a rant, make sure you have the facts straight in your post, otherwise you'll just come out looking like a fool...oh wait, too late."
-
Gotta give him credit.. He doesn't have anything but P38s on his clipboard.. Probably doesn't shoot at lancasters enough to have noticed the 50cal hit sounds.
-
So in reality that makes your reply moot then doesn't it Moot?
-
Im still interested in you backing up your 109K statement.
-
I provided a link to a source.. since your the master 109K pilot I would sudgest you find one that discredits mine.
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Lancaster
Majority of lancasters carried .30 cal machine guns for defense.. our bird was placed with the after factory modified .50 cal machine guns to "improve its survivablility in the MA." HTC
Yet in the game
The .50 cal turrets were factory standard. Most Lancs were built with quad .303s, true, but all service turret variations were factory built.
-
Valid point this link supports that statement http://www.solarnavigator.net/aviation_and_space_travel/avro_lancaster.htm
-
Originally posted by moot
Gotta give him credit.. He doesn't have anything but P38s on his clipboard.. Probably doesn't shoot at lancasters enough to have noticed the 50cal hit sounds.
never fly bombers, so I stand corrected. My hit sounds have been replaced with Homer's "Ouch!" sounds (no joke) but I also rarely get hit from bombers when I make my attacks on them.
ack-ack
-
Thank you for admitting your error.. actually im impressed.
and my hats always off to a good p38 stick. :)
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
Valid point this link supports that statement http://www.solarnavigator.net/aviation_and_space_travel/avro_lancaster.htm
Again, that link says no such thing, and is in any case nothing like primary source documentation.
Whilst 8 .303 in machine guns were the most common Lancaster armament, twin .50 turrets were later available in both the tail and dorsal positions. A Preston-Green mount was available for a .50 cal mounted in a ventral blister, but this was mostly used in RCAF service. Some unofficial mounts for .50 cal or even 20 mm guns were made, firing through ventral holes of various designs.
-
I always thought that the Tail gun had 2 or 4 20mms in it, thats what i had always heard.
-
the 20mm was deemed inappropriate for turret use by the british.. the majority of early and mid war lancasters fielded a quad .30 caliber rear turret for defense.. later models where refitted with two .50 caliber guns in the rear turret. To my knowlege only five or six aircraft carried defensive 20mm cannon, ki-67, B-29, He-111, FW-200 ect..
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
the 20mm was deemed inappropriate for turret use by the british.. the majority of early and mid war lancasters fielded a quad .30 caliber rear turret for defense.. later models where refitted with two .50 caliber guns in the rear turret. To my knowlege only five or six aircraft carried defensive 20mm cannon, ki-67, B-29, He-111[/b], FW-200 ect..
all the more reason why we need the Heinkel!!!
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
the 20mm was deemed inappropriate for turret use by the british.. the majority of early and mid war lancasters fielded a quad .30 caliber rear turret for defense.. later models where refitted with two .50 caliber guns in the rear turret. To my knowlege only five or six aircraft carried defensive 20mm cannon, ki-67, B-29, He-111, FW-200 ect..
The Brits worked to get a Hispano in a bomber turret, but didn't get one that worked until the war was almost over and there was no time to get it into service.
Many aircraft mounted 20mm cannons as defensive weapons however.
Most Japanese bombers had one or more with the H8K2 mounting five. Many German bombers had one or more, with one version of the Ju290 mounting thirteen of them. The Russian Tu-2 had two fixed in the wings as did the American Helldiver.
Originally posted by Gowan
all the more reason why we need the Heinkel!!!
Why? Any likely He111 we'd get, i.e. a Battle of Britain one, would be defended by five 7.92mm machine guns. And the 20mm arguement could be used for almost any later German bomber and almost any Japanese bomber.
-
A bomber that would actually plug a hole, the G4M2a, mounted a Type 99 20mm cannon in the tail and dorsal turrets and a 7.7mm machine gun in the nose and each beam position.
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
So in reality that makes your reply moot then doesn't it Moot?
:lol ... err huh?
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
I provided a link to a source.. since your the master 109K pilot I would sudgest you find one that discredits mine.
Your source says that fuel shortages limited the time the Luftwaffe could spend in the air (which is true). If you got 90% of 109K's never left the ground out of THAT, well, you have quite a wild imagination.
-
Originally posted by Motherland
Your source says that fuel shortages limited the time the Luftwaffe could spend in the air (which is true). If you got 90% of 109K's never left the ground out of THAT, well, you have quite a wild imagination.
Having wasted my time fully reading both of his Lancaster "sources" I have concluded that he doesn't actually read the links he posts.
1) They are never primary source documentation.
2) In the case of the Lancaster and Bf109K-4 claims, none of the three links actually backed up his claim in any way.
-
Either way you've yet to prove me wrong.
-
Originally posted by Gowan
all the more reason why we need the Heinkel!!!
The 20mm was a MG/FF (same cannon as in 109E-4) mounted in the nose, so it's no big threat to any fighter.
(And personally I would be dismayed if we get another helpless early war axis bomber instead of a more survivable one first)
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
Either way you've yet to prove me wrong.
You are the one making an unsupported claim. You are putting the cart ahead of the horse, bucko.
-
I provided what could be termed as a source there snookums. Find a source that counters my point and ill agree with you.. before then bucko your just making noise.
-
err back on topic though pleeze
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
I provided what could be termed as a source there snookums. Find a source that counters my point and ill agree with you.. before then bucko your just making noise.
You like wiki as a source, I assume... From wiki here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_109)
"Most of the Bf 109K "Kurfürst" series saw duty. This series was the last evolution of the Bf 109. The K series was a response to the bewildering array of series, models, modification kits and factory conversions for the Bf 109, which made production and maintenance complicated and costly — something Germany could ill-afford late in the war. The RLM ordered Messerschmitt to rationalise production of the Bf 109, consolidating parts, types etc to produce a uniform, standard model with better interchangeability of parts and equipment. This was to have started in the later models of the G series, but things went in quite the opposite direction. The RLM told Messerschmitt, in effect, to try harder, and the K series was born. Work on the new version began in 1943, and the prototype was ready by the autumn of that year. Series production started in August 1944 due to delays with continuous changes and the new DB605D powerplant. Operational service began in October 1944, and large numbers — approximately 200 — were delivered to frontline units by the end of the month. By the end of January 1945, despite continuous heavy fighting, over 300 K-4s — about every fourth 109 — were listed on hand with the 1st line Luftwaffe units.
Only the K-4 saw action in numbers, with approximately 1,700 being delivered by factories before the end of hostilities."
Even with attrition, 300 were on hand in combat units at the end of January. That alone is 18% of the total manufactured available at that time. If you add the 200 delivered to combat units in October of '44, you already have 30% of the total being issued. So, even without looking at the balance of deliveries, your "90% never left the ground intact" statement is shot to hell.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Bucko? :lol
Snookems? :rofl
Step back boys, looks like the gloves are comin off on this one!!
Is this kind of extreme language allowed?
Seems kinda harsh.
Before ya know it somebodies feelings are gonna get hurt!
That is all,
Boner
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
no rebel, hes right, what we REALLY need are obsolete bombers and other novelty aircraft that nobody will fly except on rare occasions or scenarios because they are utterly useless in the MA.. those should be high priority..
I mean look how many AWSOME rides we have that every one flys all the time and enjoy so much..
like the C202, the 109E4, 190F8, P-40B, SBD, F4F-4, TBM, spitty I,
Hurricane I, A6M2, B5N2, D3A1..
you seldom see any of those rides in the MA.. they are as rare as a rook below 20K.
but here we have the M which would be not only goof enough to hand with the best, but would be good enough to be perked.. a VIABLE MA fighter capable of hanging with the big dogs that dominate the MA.
there has been no argument against the M that holds a drop of water..
any stated argument against that has been made for its ineligibility regarding its rareness, or impact on the war, reliability, or otherwise... are moot, considering many aircraft already in the game were equally rare, had minuscule impact, or were less reliable.
I'm a rook that rarely goes above 7k. I OFTEN fly the Spit 1, Ki-61 or P-38 in the LWA. If you want to continue your straw man argument by spewing your drivel, we can meet in the DA. I'll show you what a Spit 1 is capable of.
As for your continued WHINING about the 47M, you've yet to deliver a concise reason on why we need it. This closes NO GAP in the Jug planeset.
Also you made the asinine comment earlier of:
Originally posted by Wingnutt
again the 262 had no real impact on the war either..
You're kidding right? If you're serious in this statement, you should rethink your logic strategies for future "debates".
We DO NOT need the 47M, it serves absolutely, positively, unequivocally, without question, no purpose of being added. With the exception of being able to get a tougher plane to catch when running.
funny on how by the middle of page 2, you are WAITING for other's to "fight the fight" for you. Then in desperation, you bring "rooks" into it. It definitely shows your insecurities in life.
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_bf_109K.html
109k lots produced 90% never left the ground intact.
Yet in the game
So you're telling us this rediculous site is "gospel to the Kürfurst"? LMFAO, some of the info on that site is so wrong, I had to email the site admin.
Your quote of "109k lots produced 90% never left the ground intact." is wrong.
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
C202, the 109E4, 190F8, P-40B, SBD, F4F-4, TBM, spitty I,
Hurricane I, A6M2, B5N2, D3A1..
all of these "fill gaps"
in the MA,... all of them are worthless..'
"Worthless" because you are inept in them? or "worthless" because you are crying like a baby?
-
Originally posted by skyctpn
I provided a link to a source.. since your the master 109K pilot I would sudgest you find one that discredits mine.
No link needed, you need to read more skycptn.
More than 1,700 Kurfursts were produced from August 1944 to Surrender. Nearly every Kurfurst saw combat. The reason it was delayed after the prototype was NOT due to "bombings". It was delayed because of the DB-605D engine.
At the end of the ETO one of every four 109 in action, was a Kurfurst.
I'll put down the gauntlet now. Amazing what you can actually find out from a book though, ain't it?
(edit) - I actually had to pull these out of mothballs downstairs. For a 34 year old, I've amassed a VERY significant "WWII Library" that even WW or Corky would be impressed with.
The Messerschmitt Bf.109 - James F Craig New York: Arco Publishing Company, 1968
German Combat Planes: A Comprehensive Survey and History of the Development of German Military Aircraft from 1914 to 1945. - Ray Wagner and Heinz Nowarra New York: Doubleday, 1971.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
"Worthless" because you are inept in them? or "worthless" because you are crying like a baby?
well hot shi!t, lets look why I think they are worthless..
and by worthless I mean THEY ARE NOT USED..
stats for Wingnutt so far this tour..
53 hours of play thus far.
I have NO kills of, and have never been killed by an A6m2
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an 190E4
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an B25N
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an C202
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an D3A1
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an Hurri MK 1
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an SBD-5
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an Spitfire Mk I
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an TBM-3
I have NO kills of and have never been killed by an P-40B
I have NO kills of and have been killed ONCE an F4F-4
I have NO kills of and have been killed ONCE an 190-F8
playing 53 hours.. almost all of it in aircraft, most of it as a fighter.. out of all those aircraft, ive logged a grand total of 2 encounters..
im sure other people have different experences, but im basing my statment on mine..
so my statment is based on my experence, not me being "inept"
*******.
-
Ahh, nice circumvention of the language buffer.
You're all bravado and not much else. Now go play pick-up-stix.
They are used. You hide in a horde. Poles apart.
-
This is Aces High by Hitech Creations, not 47Ms High by Wingnutt Creations.
-
Wingnutt i dare you to tell schatzi that the hurri is inpet in the ma, I have a squaddie who only flys the spit 1 and he does dam well in it, loads of zekes out there, i personaly use the 190f8 religously for ground attack along with another squaddie, D3a HUH- you neva heard of candy mountain :) Emils are great for furballs
And for tbms talk to widewing, p40b-filth
See, to each his own, and just because you have a limited view doesnt mean everyone else doesnt enjoy the current planeset.
cheers,
freez
-
I dont hide in a "horde" I usually fly solo unless squaddies are on then we fly missions with 5 to 15 planes..
thats about it..
funny thing is these planes are indeed so rare.. that you know off the top of you head, by name the people who fly them with success.
besides that, the 47M is in a different kind of catagory, if you will..
there are the "historic necessity" (i.e. filler) aircraft the game needs for events, and era related play (ava, midwar/early war, scenario.. etc
that need to be here because they were there..
then there are.. I guess you would call them "useful" planes.. the aircraft that make up the bulk of what your average joe subscriber flies.. the 51D, LA7.. all the dweeb planes..
the aircraft that are EFFECTIVE and can hold their own in the hands of even newer players.. sure there are people who can win in anything because they have been playing 10 years.. but thats the exception not the rule.
the M would be a plane that would be competitive on equal terms in equal hands with the "big dogs" that dominate the MA.
yea the .202 etc etc lesser rides.. yea people fly them, yea they have success.. but to be successful in those rides you need to have an extreme advantage over your opponent in either situation, or skill..
which is why they are flown and used regularly and successfully by probably less that 5% of the user base
-
and masher, yes, im saying the 262 had no impact in the war..
why?
because it didnt..
it was too late in coming, and thus had no real impact on anything.. any show/book/historian will tell you that.
in regards to its overall impact in the outcome of the war, beyond stating what and how many aircraft it shotdown.. there is nothing to be said... it didnt turn the tide of even a single bomber raid it was involved in.. much less anything beyond that scale..
it would be one thing if there was even one single account of a bomber mission being turned back due to the intervention of 262s.. but there is none.
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
well hot shi!t, lets look why I think they are worthless..
and by worthless I mean THEY ARE NOT USED..
stats for Wingnutt so far this tour..
53 hours of play thus far.
(...)
so my statment is based on my experence, not me being "inept"
You fail to take into account that your own experience can rarely give you the whole picture, as the planes one will encounter vary very much by playing style. (For example the are so few La-7's in my kill list that you could think they have fallen into disuse, while M3's & C-47 are pretty much on top of my list)
Tour 96 LW Arenas:
Total Kills by:
717 A6M2
443 109E4
466 B2N5
248 C202
117 D3A
654 Hurri Mk 1
177 SBD-5
357 Spit Mk I
574 TBM 3
220 P40B
694 F4-F
2141 190F
A total of 6808 kills. Not much when compared to overall kills, but far from being "worthless" or even "not being used"
(I still brag occasionally about my own 300 kills in Hurri I in tour 92) :D
-
Originally posted by Lusche
A total of 6808 kills. Not much when compared to overall kills,.
see :D
Originally posted by Lusche
(I still brag occasionally about my own 300 kills in Hurri I in tour 92) :D
:huh
Hell I would too.
-
Early this Tour I shot down a P-47N while flying a D3A1. Before you get started, if he'd been flying a P-47M he still would have gotten shot down as he tried to turn with me.
-
well karnak, that was because he was a nub who cant fly a jug if it were to save his life
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
well karnak, that was because he was a nub who cant fly a jug if it were to save his life
You've seen first hand what a Spit1 is capable of. Are you saying yer a "noob"?
Bottom line is still this, we DO NOT need the 47M.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
You've seen first hand what a Spit1 is capable of. Are you saying yer a "noob"?
Bottom line is still this, we DO NOT need the 47M.
we dont "need" half the planes in the set..
but thats moot anyway because "need" in respect to the planeset of this game differes from person to person.. so does "want"
I WANT a 47M.. so do some other people..
I see you fly the 38L alot more often than not, if there were a later model 38 that met the requirements, and was a superior to the L.. (better in a dive, better turning, top speed.. etc) you wouldent want the chance to fly it?
bottom line is, this section of the forum is for people to post their "WISH LIST"
not for you to piss on them..
but people do what people do.
:aok
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
You've seen first hand what a Spit1 is capable of. Are you saying yer a "noob"?
Bottom line is still this, we DO NOT need the 47M.
Did you read the text right??? dont get in turn fights when in a jug, simple.
And yes i know what a spit 1 can do, also what a hurri1 can do, i fly hurri1s alot.
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
we dont "need" half the planes in the set..
but thats moot anyway because "need" in respect to the planeset of this game differes from person to person.. so does "want"
I WANT a 47M.. so do some other people..
I see you fly the 38L alot more often than not, if there were a later model 38 that met the requirements, and was a superior to the L.. (better in a dive, better turning, top speed.. etc) you wouldent want the chance to fly it?
bottom line is, this section of the forum is for people to post their "WISH LIST"
not for you to piss on them..
but people do what people do.
:aok
Nope. I'd rather have the I.A.R. 81c in the game. It'd be the only plane in the set I would fly.
I'm tired of "Redundant planes".
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
And yes i know what a spit 1 can do, also what a hurri1 can do, i fly hurri1s alot.
No, you don't fly them alot.
-
I vote yes. RAF has two perked planes, so does the USN and Luftwaffe, Soviet Union has one plane that SHOULD be perked, the Army Air Corps is left out. P47M would fill the niche as a perked P-plane, not quite on the level of a Tempest or a F4U4, but something fun to play with.
Or one could just fix the P51D so that its turning radius with flaps is smaller than the P47s or a FW190!, then perk it, that would also work. Unless it lost too many new customers because they couldn't fly the PonyD right away.:O
-
They should add another la version, and perk the7 all together.
maby not a ubber perk, granted its about the only plane that you can up and defend a base with any real chance.
as to what version inbetween, i dunno, i only say this because they are being worked on right now* if we are to voice it, nows that time.
that way the ruskies gotta perkie.
-
Originally posted by Wingnutt
we dont "need" half the planes in the set..
but thats moot anyway because "need" in respect to the planeset of this game differes from person to person.. so does "want"
I WANT a 47M.. so do some other people..
I see you fly the 38L alot more often than not, if there were a later model 38 that met the requirements, and was a superior to the L.. (better in a dive, better turning, top speed.. etc) you wouldent want the chance to fly it?
bottom line is, this section of the forum is for people to post their "WISH LIST"
not for you to piss on them..
but people do what people do.
:aok
It is also a forum where people will discuss the merits of other people's wishes.
And not everybody wants the best of the best. I prefer the Spit VIII to the Spit XVI. If they add the Mosquito NF.30 I'll still take the Mosquito FB.Mk VI.
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
well karnak, that was because he was a nub who cant fly a jug if it were to save his life
I will try and turn with any plane I encounter 1on1 when flying the jug. "Smart flying" is not always fun and beating the other plane in his own game, most often is. Even if I die, at least I got a decent fight and didn't die to some cherry picker. Perhaps the guy just wanted the challenge.
-
bump.
-
Don't bump this.
-
Off the top of my head, I can think of 2 Geschwaders that were equipped with the Schwalbe, JV44 and JG7. Also, it was a very radical design that encorperated a lot of advancements and new technologies (the jet engine and the swept wing, among others). Quite a few kills were scored in the Schwalbe (I beleive the highest scoring 262 ace had 19 kills in it?). Despite the fact that it was a radical design being produced by totaled industry, 1200 262's were manufactured, almost 10 times that of the P47M.
The 262 and the P47M are in two totally different leagues.
KG51 "Edelweiss" flew the bomber version of the 262. :aok
-
Which had few modifications from the fighter variant, only removing 2x 30mm guns because the bomb racks blocked the shell ejection chutes. Other than that, the plane was almost no different from fighter versions.
-
so how come daveyj hasnt come down saying this is the fault of the uber spixteen?
-
:noid
-
Don't most guys want access to perkie juggs? ;) (8 pages and nobody said this?)
Perhaps a future arena for limited, mythical, experimental and user generated aircraft to do battle? Aces High version of battlebots?
-
Don't most guys want access to perkie juggs? ;) (8 pages and nobody said this?)
Perhaps a future arena for limited, mythical, experimental and user generated aircraft to do battle? Aces High version of battlebots?
P-47M wasn't experimental. It saw squadron service in WW2.
-
"Limited" to one figther group. ;)
-
"Limited" to one figther group. ;)
Not totally unlike the Ta 152 ;)