Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Vermillion on January 30, 2000, 12:56:00 PM
-
Lets take a look at our Current Planeset.
US (7): B-17, B-26, C-47, P-51D, F4U-1C, F4U-1D, P-38 (in production, possibly multiple variants)
Germ (5): Fw190A8, Bf109F4, Bf109G2, Bf109G6, Bf109G10
UK (2): Spit IX, Spit Vb (in production)
Italy (2): C.205, C.202 (in production)
USSR (1): La-5FN
Japan (1): N1K2-J
Strong Rumors/Heavy Favorites:
Germ: Fw190F/G, Fw190A6
UK: Tempest
USSR: Yak-9T
Any I have missed?(please don't put your favorite here)
The point is pretty obvious, the USSR/Japanese planeset is sorely lacking. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
And its even worse for you Russian VVS pilot types. Not only are you limited to only one aircraft, its a midwar variant that is taking a severe beating in the arena right now.
Now don't get me wrong, the La-5Fn is outstanding in its appropriate time period. But with all the late war, fire breathing beasts we have in AH (and I love each and every one of them), it just can't realistically compete on that level.
Yes, the Yak-9T has been mentioned by HTC employees, as being "worked on". But have many of you looked at what it can do? Its basically a Spit Vb with a 37mm cannon. And while BFG 37mm's sound great, WB's pilots can tell you that it takes an experten pilot to get much out of one. In other words, it won't be anymore competitive in the arena than the La-5Fn. No wait... the La5 is twice the plane that the Yak-9T is.
Pyro, would you please consider the addition of a late-war VVS aircraft? A La-7, a Yak-3 (VK107),a P-63, or even a Yak-3P. These are all moderate to high production aircraft that played a significant part in the war(Yak-3P excepted), and are quite realistic in the current planeset.
The Japanese also are sorely in need (but they do have a late war plane at least). But at least consider the Ki-84, the A6M5, the Ki-61, or the Ki-44 that Funked and Wells suggested.
I'm sure this post will illict a storm of posts yelling "Where is my Spit XIV, the P-47M, my Fw190D9 and Ta 152 !!!!". **Yawn**
US aircraft supporting types, get a grip, the US is very well represented. And while the Brits may have an arguement, at least the Spit IX is quite competitive. Admittedly, the Luftwaffe crowd does need the Dora, but their planeset is quite developed, especially if the 190F/G and A6 is implemented soon. So take a deep breath, realize that you will get your favorites real soon, and support the aircraft from other countries for a slight change (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) You might be suprised and actuall like them.
Could the VVS and the Japanese aircraft get a little equal treatment here please? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
"Could the VVS and the Japanese aircraft get a little equal treatment here please? "
OF course. I'm an equal opportunity root for plane XXXXX kind of guy.
I personally would like to see the Yak-3/K107 and a KI-61-II. Or maybe the Yak-9! It's just so darn butt ugly though (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-Westy
-
Verm,
You missed the UK Lancasters now in production for AH. Thats the next bomber according to the powers that be.
MiG
-
What I remember, rumour was about Fw190A-5, not A-6.
Also, I am not screaming after Fw190D-9, I WANT MY D-12 or D-13!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/cool.gif)
Japanese plane lacking? ehh....
N1K2 is better than you can wish for...
Turns, has guns, too fast, too tough... (maybe toughest armours of all fighters)
(even Ki-84 would be better, at least it doesn't seem to turn as well as N1K2.. according to WB models)
(god, heavy pig as n1k2 turns better than Ki-84...)
La-5FN is very fast (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) mixes up with the speed of late war planes..
If japs gets another super plane, i want to have one LW super plane..
-
Well, if we were to get a late war VVS aircraft that was actually in serial production, then my choices would be the La-7 or the Yak-9U (which was slightly better than the Yak-3).
------------------
leonid
129 IAP VVS RKKA
-
Guys;
Take this from a guy who spent a lot of time waiting for FA2 to properly model airplanes in the country with various airplanes mind set they have and then found that the P51 couldn't outclimb my old Cessna 150. The most important thing is not which airplane but that the aircraft be modeled as accurately as possible. This is the good thing about the AH idea of Rooks, Knights and Bishops. Everybody can fly an airplane which is suited to the mission at hand. Be grateful you've got people working at AH that seem to understand that principle.
Beeg
-
Personally I would like to see some(or all) of these Japanese Army aircraft:
Ki-44-IIb, -IIc
Ki-61-Ib, with two MG151/20 option
Ki-61-IIa, -IIb
Ki-84-Ia, -Ib and -Ic
Ki-100-Ia, OR -Ib with different canopy
And the J2M3 for the Navy too.
-
Fishu, chill out a little (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I didn't say there was a problem with the N1K2, I was pointing to the size of the different plane sets.
American Planes: SEVEN
German Planes: FIVE
Japanese Planes: One
Russian Planes: One
And I don't know where you get that the N1K2 is fast. Its one of the slowest planes in the set, and its definitely the slowest of the late war planes.
And the La5FN is very fast? Please go do some flight tests and prove it too me. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) The Spitfire IX and the 205 are the same approximate speed, and I don't think you would call either of them "very fast". Its just that the La5 accelerates very well, which is different from fast. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Did Mannock leave any of his meds lying around when he left?? I think I hear Fishu starting to mumble something about a "Anti-Luftwaffe Conspiracy" again. Must be some variant of paranoid delusions. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Seriuosly tho, I personally think the G10 is one of the best planes in the game. I would fly it myself, but I find that its gun package doesn't fit my style. I dont' know where you guys get the idea that you don't have a good aircraft.
My point was that it would be nice to have a planeset that would represent a broad spectrum of the planes that flew in the war. Not one where we have 23 American planes, 18 German planes, and one or two from every other country.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
Eh? The Spitfire F.IX in AH does like 425mph! That's slower than only the Bf109G-10, P-51D and maybe the F4U, and about 20mph faster than it should be! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Something to keep in mind is that the 37mm in the Yak-9T(NS-37) is a far better gun than one in the P-39(M4). Fires heavier shells, with a faster ROF and MV.
It would be nice to have a bomber for each country(Tu-2, Ki-67, Ju88/188, Lancaster, SM.79 etc.) as well as some twin-engined fighter-bombers(Pe-2/3, Bf110, Beaufighter, etc.) as soon as possible.
-
Ok Leonid you got my curiousity up (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Maybe you can fill me in on why you think the Yak-9U is better than the Yak-3.
Here is what I can find from my brand spanking new "Soviet Combat Aircraft of the Second World War", by Yefim Gordon and Dmitri Khazanov. Great book btw.
It seems that both the Yak-9U and the Yak-3 are derivatives of the Yak-1M project, and were in production in 1944. They both share the same Vk107A engine. The -9U was an improvement of the existing -9 airframe combined with the new engine, while the -3 was a ground up project.
Here are their important Specs (production aircraft #'s were used for both aircraft):
................Yak-9U.....Yak-3
Empty Weight.....5,537.....5,171
(lbs)
Wing Loading...... 30 ..... 32
(lbs/sq.ft)
Power Loading.... 3.69..... 3.44
(lbs/hp)
Speed at SL....... 357 .... 380
(mph)
Speed at Alt...... 418 .... 447
(mph at x ft).....16,500 .. 18,750
Climb to 5km ...... 5.0 ... 3.9
(16,400ft)
Service Ceil......35,000 .. 38,750
Turn Time......... 20 ..... 18
(360 degrees)
Range............. 419 .... 658
(miles)
Armament.......... 1x20mm.. 1x20mm
................ 2x12.7mm.. 2x12.7mm
Both are quite respectable, but my money is on the Yak-3. True the -9U has a better wing loading, but it seems that the -3 still out turns it. And its superior in every other category.
Plus we know Pyro has the data for the -3 and knows how to make a great model of it.
And Damn isn't it a truely beautiful fighter (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/cool.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/cool.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/cool.gif)
(http://www.aviation.ru/Yak/3/Yak-3_G.jpg)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
There's always going to be a plane imbalance to some extent. Larger at first, maybe not so bad later. The U.S. had a lot of different major types. Since we're just starting, the emphasis has been on arena play. Special events will start to factor in a lot more in what we choose to do.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
"If it's stupid but works, it's not stupid."
-
Originally posted by Vermillion:
And I don't know where you get that the N1K2 is fast. Its one of the slowest planes in the set, and its definitely the slowest of the late war planes.
And the La5FN is very fast? Please go do some flight tests and prove it too me. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) The Spitfire IX and the 205 are the same approximate speed, and I don't think you would call either of them "very fast". Its just that the La5 accelerates very well, which is different from fast. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Did Mannock leave any of his meds lying around when he left?? I think I hear Fishu starting to mumble something about a "Anti-Luftwaffe Conspiracy" again. Must be some variant of paranoid delusions. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Seriuosly tho, I personally think the G10 is one of the best planes in the game. I would fly it myself, but I find that its gun package doesn't fit my style. I dont' know where you guys get the idea that you don't have a good aircraft.
My point was that it would be nice to have a planeset that would represent a broad spectrum of the planes that flew in the war. Not one where we have 23 American planes, 18 German planes, and one or two from every other country.
La-5FN should be as fast as spitfire.
Also it should accerlate better.
N1K2 .. if it aint fast, is it supersonic?
It can catch 109F4 - 109G2s at low, fairly easy.
-
Verm,
Your average Yak-3 housed a VK-105PF2, whereas the Yak-9U had the more powerful, yet capricious, VK-107. Hence, while the Yak-9U was a better performer, the Yak-3 was more reliable. Of course, engine reliability is not modelled in AH, so the Yak-9U will be the better of the two.
Oh, and a La-5FN will pull away from a Spit & niki both in level flight, as long as it's not too high.
------------------
leonid
129 IAP VVS RKKA
[This message has been edited by leonid (edited 01-31-2000).]
-
Leonid what about Yak-3U?
-
"Special events will start to factor in a lot more in what we choose to do."
Sigh, Pyro is whispering sweet nothings into my ears...
LOL
-
The 3U was not a production line plane I believe, it was a rare model like the VK-107 powered Yak-3. Plus, don't forget the Yak-9 was all aluminum control surfaces, and had better ability to turn than the wood and canvas models.
------------------
If your in range, so is the enemy.
-
I think the 3U was the VK-107 powered model.
-
Guess what, the Yak-9U is better than you give it credit for Vermillion. You list a top speed of 417 mph at altitude for the Yak-9U, however this is incorrect. The Yak9/M-106 does fit all of you stats, however the 9"U" had the wing moved forward by 100mm and with other upgrades, could achieve a top speed of 433 mph, according to two sources I have in front of me. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Guns were two 12.7 mm UB MGs, and either a 20 mm ShVak or a MR-23VV cannon. This is the varient we need. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
We are actually going to get a La-7. It is being worked on right now at HTC.
------------------
mp-ten
2nd Lt. "The Haze" 100th Fighter/Bomber Group
-
funked:
You're correct about the Yak-3U, although what Sorrow states is correct.
Actually, forget about the Yak-9U! I remembered about the Yak-9UT. Same plane except it had two B-20 20mm cannons in the nose, and an NS-23 23mm cannon in the spinner. It was in serial production in WWII, but very very late. But it did see combat, compiling a good victory tally.
Rendar:
I think you're right about the La-7, though I got a little confused in the thread where it was stated, because I also mentioned the Yak-9T too. In any case, I'm sure the VVS will have a nice set of planes in time. My only concern is their ability to compete with all these high flying 'vulchers'. But, time will reveal all (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
... At least I can fly NOE now, since HTC reconfigured the icon range for low flying aircraft.
------------------
leonid
129 IAP VVS RKKA
[This message has been edited by leonid (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
Fishu: The N1K2 should easily catch a 109F4/G2. Your talking a late war plane versus a midwar plane, or 2000hp vs 1450hp I believe. I could go further into numbers like powerloading but I don't think I need too.
Leonid: I'm just going by this one source, but according to it, the first two prototypes of the Yak-3 had the 105, but the next prototype was tested with the 107 and the 107 was chosen. However due to shortages of the 107, the 105 was used in early production runs during early 44, but from mid44 on the 107 was used almost exclusively.
Funked: Yes the Yak-3U had the VK107, but it was a different and later model of the standard Yak-3/Vk107.
Bloom25: Guess what, your wrong (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) The numbers you are quoting are the performance numbers for the prototype of the Yak-9U. And note that I said I was quoting production performance numbers. Production aircraft performed significantly worse than the prototype, due to poor quality control in the factories, much to the concern of Yakolev. The book that I took the numbers from lists both side by side, and discusses the issue in depth.
Leonid (again): Ok, we agree on one thing (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) the Yak-9UT would be my personal preference, I just didn't think that Pyro would introduce this bird.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
Enough Yak chat! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Typhoon or Tempest? That is the question!
-
*sigh* (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) the more I research the Yak-3, the more I find that not a single source duplicates the exact information that any other has. Which is actually typical of information on both Japanese and Russian aircraft.
Basically, from my different sources, it looks like the early production runs of both the Yak-9U and the Yak-3, had the VK-105PF-2 engine, due to shortages of the more powerful VK-107. And then at some point in production during 1944, they each switched over to the VK107.
How many of each were equiped each way and when? None of my sources really say. All I can find on production numbers is that approximately 4,800 Yak-3's of all variants were produced. Including the Yak-3, Yak-3/Vk107 (sometimes refferred to as Yak-3M/107), Yak-3/Vk108 (Yak-3M/108), Yak-3P, Yak-3T, Yak-3PD, Yak-3RD, and the Yak-3U. Of those, 4,800 approx. 700 were manufactured after the war.
Leonid, you know of any good sources? The Yefim Gordon and Dmitri Khazanov book (supposedly written from Russain archives, instead of Western sources) is easily the best I have, and it is even lacking in this regard.
PS: Funked, I was incorrect. The Yak-3U had the ASh-82FN, radial engine. The same engine as in the La5FN/La7.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
The quantity argument of 5 LW planes holds no water. I'd say LW has only 2 planes. Here's why:
Only G-10 and slightly less the A-8 are competitive. The rest are just underperforming variants. Sure some of them turn better, but they are useless against properly flown 1944 planes.
So, in my opinion, the number of LW planes is actually two. And even those two are not the best that were available in numbers in 1944.
How would US crowd feel if they get P39, P40 or something similar modeled, and whenever they ask for new planes, they are silenced with "...but you already have XXX planes modeled..." replies ?
I agree about more VVS and Japanese planes. Brits need 1944 planes too, but surely so does the Luftwaffe. 262 for starters (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 02-02-2000).]
-
Hristo, it seems like you're implying that the 190A8 and 109G10 are analogous to if the Yanks had the P40 and P39 at the same time? Pshaw!!
They, of course, aren't... unless you're talking about 1942 and the comparison vis-a-vis the P40/P39 and the FW190A4.
Come on... say it... you want a 190D.
Of course, that's pretty much the same as if the Yanks complained about the P39/40 being outclassed by the FW190 in 1942, and then demanding that they be given a 1943 aircraft (like the F4U, F6F, or P47) as compensation.
Now, of course, to improve the numbers game a 109E, 109F, and 109G2 should be modeled at some point. A 190A4 and 190F/G would be nice too.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
Snake Eyes, seems you missunderstood me. Let me put it simple for you then:
109G-10 + 190A-8 in 1944 = P 51D + F4U in 1944
All competitive.
109F-4 + 109G-2 + 109G-6 in 1944 = P 40 + P 39 in 1944
Would you fly them in 1944, Snake Eyes ?
Luftwaffe got mid war planes to fight in late war. Judging by the numbers only, Luftwaffe is now on the bottom of the priority list of adding new fighters. And even the new ones to be added aren't the 1944 planes.
190D-9 + 262 = 1944
No, I would not fly the Dora. I can't fly it effectively. The only plane I would trade my 109 for would be the 262.
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 02-02-2000).]
-
Verm:
I think with reference to the VK-107, it was an engine that took a long time to get the bugs out. So as not to interupt production, the Yak-3s were almost all 105PF/PF2 engines. The Yak-9Us to come out at about August 1944 were generally 107 engines. Unfortunately, the 107 was not quite ready, but by 1945 it was mostly reliable.
------------------
leonid
129 IAP VVS RKKA
-
Hristo,
Yes I would fly the Bf 109G-2 against '44 - '45 planes. Thank you very much. I'll fly the Brewster Buffalo against them too.
//fats
-
Because it is competitive against 'properly' flown 1944 bird ?
Or because the Finns used it ?
I like to take 109F-4 too, but it is pretty frustrating since everyone manages to run away from me. Or I get gang banged in a slow plane.
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 02-02-2000).]
-
Agree Fats (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I'll fly 109-G2 against anything (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Bring it on (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Chain
Aki Holopainen
aki.holopainen@quicknet.inet.fi
*Überfinns Perkeleet & The Flying Finns*
-
Ahh, how things have changed in one year...
-
Yes its so refreshing the changes that a year has brought (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
Maybe if we try real hard we can talk Pyro into a Tu-2. But of course it would have to be missing one wheel, has one cyclinder completely dead in the #1 engine, and the number #2 engine is running rough. With two or three of the access panels open during the flight testing (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 02-23-2001).]
-
.mode Bait On:
Remember, they won't model the P61B anytime soon since they may not be up to the ability of such a difficult A/C to model in regards to lofting. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
.mode bait off