Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Karnak on October 12, 2000, 08:47:00 PM
-
After much thought, I have come to the conclusion that there are no late war RAF fighters that would be appropriate to add to AH non-perk. The Spitfire F.MkXIV, Tempest MkV and Meteor MkI or MkIII (Meteor is here to add depth to late war RAF fighters, not to impinge on the aircraft of the country so beloved of the LW fans{BTW, Meteor WAS the first combat jet in active service by 1 week, Me262 WAS the first jet to see actual combat and by a lot more than a week}) would all dominate the current plane-set. At the very least, they would displace a huge chunk of the current set. In addition, every guy who simply grabs the most powerful ride would be flying whichever of the three were added. I don't want to see an arena of nothing but Spits, I'd prefer to keep the arena of F4U-1Cs.
As compared to the current planeset:
Spitfire F.MkXIV:
Faster than all but the Bf109G-10 (down low the Mustang can outrun it)
Climbs better than all but the Bf109G-10
Can easily outrun anything that it can't out turn
Comparable manueverability to the Spit IX with better high speed handling
Tougher than a Spitfire MkIX (Strengthend MkVIII airframe, which was already stronger than the MkIX, and more armor)
Firepower is good, 2 20mm and 2 50 cals or 2 20mm and 4 .303s
1000lbs of bombs or 8 rockets give it a decent loadout
More fuel and better drop tanks more than make up for its thirstier engine, end result is that it can fly further than the Spit IX
Tempest MkV:
Faster by 20mph on the deck than any plane currently in the AH plane-set, peak speed at 17,000ft, below which most fighting occurs
Initial climb of 4,400ft and better zoom climb than most aircraft in AH
Like the XIV it can outrun anything that can out turn it
Very tough fighter, might even give a P-47 a run for its money
Armed with 4 Hispano MkV cannon, need we say more
1000lbs (2000lbs?) of bombs and 8 (16?) rockets equals good strike aircraft
Range is about the same as a Tiffie
Meteor MkI or MkIII:
Its a jet, it'll out run anything in AH at any altitude
Climbs at about 4,000ft per minute and would out zoom climb everything in AH
Can easily outrun everything, so it fights on its terms like a 'Stang, only worse
Reportedly handled very much like a Tempest, which is to say much better than the Me262
Armed with 4 Hispano MkII 20mm cannon with 195rpg, 'nuff said
No idea about its loadout
Range about like a Tempest
My conclusion is that none of these should be added. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
We RAFantics will have to soldier on with the MkIX and MkIb so that its fair to the Americans, Germans, Russians, Japanese and the poor Italians.
Dang, but the MkXIV is fun to fly in combat sims. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) Ah well.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
In keeping with your opinion (which is the subject of this thread).....
If you feel that the Tempest and Spit 14 are too good for the MA (and your post does have valid points), there are other late-war British planes.... I am not too familiar with British designations though.
For example, there was a version of the Spitfire which was basically a Mk 9, except it was upgraded with more fuel, a slightly better engine, and a bubble canpoy. I think it appeared sometime in 1944.
Basically, it was applying the "Spit 14" improvements to a Merlin-powered spit.
Such a plane would keep all the good features of the Spit 9--namely, great turning ability, good climb, and easy handling (plus Hispanos), and combine it with greater endurance and better visibility, and slightly more performance. Maybe greater armor too; I'm not sure
*IF* the Spit 14 and Tempest are perk material (and they very well might be), then something like the model of Spitfire I described would definately be an improvement over the current plane. Not a huge improvement, but a considerable one
nonetheless.
J_A_B
[This message has been edited by J_A_B (edited 10-12-2000).]
-
J_A_B,
You're refering to the MkXVI.
It doesn't offer enough to be worth HTC taking the time to model. All that it offers is a bit more fuel. The engine was a Packard Merlin 266, which is an American built Merlin 66, which is what the Spitfire MkIX had. The bubble canopy didn't show up on the MkXVI until 1945.
Basicly the Spitfire MkXVI is a Spitfire MkIX with an American engine. They even posted the same top speed, 408mph.
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 10-12-2000).]
-
How about Mk. XII ? Griffon 61 engine, not as good as XIV but good.
-
Bring the Spit XIV, bring the FW-D9... Bring whatever you want, I will fly my P47 as a main ride hehehe.
Note: I'm already used to not being able to outurn, nor outclimb, nor outrun, nor outdive other planes (especially the mighty Spit9).
Note2: Not a whine, a remark. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
As mentioned above, the Mk XII Spitfire perhaps? I don't know the stats offhand, but I do recall a passage in "Wing Leader" where Johnston talks about a Spit XII wing/sqn that flew at 12k, because their planes lost performance over 15k - they'd lure the FW's down to their alt to fight.
Cheers
-
Karnak. I dont know. A late mk IX with bubble canopy. Maybe the option to clip the wings. People would fly it and its a great looking plane. The XIV will be here. Just perked.
Dont underestimate the importance of that bubble hood.
-
Nath-BDP and Vosper,
I don't know. The XII would probably introduce a very large amout of the 'They shouldn't have modeled it because they only built 100 of them (actual number built)" typ complaints. That said, I'd not have a problem with it, but I wouldn't use it much. Never liked the clipped wings.
Good idea though.
SFRT - Frenchy,
Yeah, a lot of guys are like you and I. we'll fly our plane, even if there is something distincly better (in fact I think that the vast majority of the guys who post on this board are in the group). The problem would be the mass of guys who'll just fly the 'best" kite. I don't want to see one REALLY dominant aircraft. I feel at this point that the XIV would make the F4U-1C plague look tame.
Pongo,
I really consider the MkXVI too be a 1942 aircraft. It just doesn't offer enough to call it a late war fighter. Same speed, same climb and same armament as the MkIX. The bubble canopy makes a bit of a difference, but not much and we'd have to set the uncomfortable precedent of reaching into 1945 to get it. A Spitfire MkIX with a Malcolm hood would be just about as good (many American pilots said the visibility out of a P-51B with the Malcolm hood was better that the visibility out of the P-51D's bubble canopy).
They could add the MkXVI, I just don't think it'll add anything to the game.
I'm just depressed by my conclusion that I won't get to fly the Spitfire MkXIV (still my favorite kite) in AH. I don't play enough to earn a perk in a single tour, unless guys like Citabria get to fly a perk every other mission. But given my conclusions, I'd rather have it perked and me not able to fly it than to have it ruin the MA. That or never introduced. Same for Tempest.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
If HTC added the Spitfire Mk XIV, F4U-4, P-47M, Fw 190D-9, Tempest Mk V and La-7 all in one version - which one do you think you would see the most of in the arena? Well, below 30k anyway. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
As for another Spitfire - forget about the Mk XII. It didn't do anything until the V-1's started, and it wasn't that much better than a LF.IX really.
No difference between a Mk XVI(Or Mk VIII) and the F.IX? Lets see. Initial climbrate is at least 700fpm better, speed below 20k is 10-20mph better, carries more fuel, can have RCAF or RAAF markings...
I keep saying the current Mk IX needs those rockets and that 300l german droptank removed, and the 30/90 gallon slipper tanks added. Add a bubble-canopy RCAF Mk XVI with a 50 gallon torpedo drop tank, rockets etc. Or maybe a RAAF Mk VIII.
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 10-13-2000).]
-
If you are into US planes, then AH is the sim for you. They simply dominate here.
RAF or Luftwaffe have that little "...but..." attached to the planeset. HTC will probably fix this disbalance soon, but still the taste will stay bad.
IMO, Spit XIV and Tempest should not be perked. By not perking them, the dweebs will be kept away from the mighty Dora.
But Meteor ? Same as C-Hog. Not historically accurate. If we had V1s and if it could take off only from rear fields to intercept them, maybe.
Karnak, did Meteor shoot down anything except V1 ? Does that tell something ?
-
I gotta agree with karnak's assesment.Other than that: if the D9 had as large an advantage on the rest of the planeset as the Spit XIV, I wouldn't want it introduced. If it proves to be superior or a dweeb ride; perk it.
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Not historically accurate?! LOL! Since when was AH ever a historical recreation?
You're right though, the F4U-1C isn't historically accurate. It should have 8 rocket rails, not 4. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
How about mustang mkIa or a mkIII. Could even give it polish markings, Poland after all had the 5th largest air force in wwII, yet only has one plane in AH so far . Of course those aren't late war fighters .
-
"I'm just depressed by my conclusion that I won't get to fly the Spitfire MkXIV "
You must have been horrible as a kid in the months before Christmas.
How some people can talk themselves into something is beyond me.
Granted HTC is not adding aircraft at the rate I though they were going to. But I see no reason that your favorite Spitfire won't be included. I think your reasoning is full of holes and only thought out in context of what we have available today in the arena.
But feel free to wallow in sorrow due to an imagined neglect if you must.
At least you got yet ANOTHER Spit XIV topic going.
-Westy
-
I feel at this point that the XIV would make the F4U-1C plague look tame.
Unfortunately, I think your correct.
There is only one plane (*MAYBE*) that I can think of that could compete with the Mk.XIV on somewhat equal terms, and thats the Yak-3 with the VK-107 engine (approximately 100 built). And even then, the Yak is going to suffer horribly from weak guns and lack of range/droptanks. Plus the Spit could probably outturn the Yak.
I'm not sure there is a good solution. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Just start serving realistic food in the Brit's mess hall, and NO ONE will want to fly Spits. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
popeye
-
Once again... If HTC added the Spitfire Mk XIV, F4U-4, P-47M, Fw 190D-9, Tempest Mk V and La-7 all in one version - which one do you think you would see the most of in the arena? Hell, throw in the F8F too.
-
Juzz, even if you introduced every single one of them at the same time, most people would fly the Spit MkXIV
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Until they realise they have to climb to 25k to be faster than anything else, where they will proceed to be BnZ'd by hordes of Jug groupies in their P-47M's... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Amen Juzz!! <Westy genuflects at the utterance of the "M")
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
juzz,
All of those aircraft except the Fw190D-9 (I don't know enough about the La-7) fall into my category of "Should not be introduced as non-perks". Why? Because they would all completely negate the earlier aircraft in their line. Why fly and P-47D-30 when you can grab a P-47M or an F4U-1 when you can grab an F4U-4? I don't think that they should be introduced as non-perks even if they were introduced simultaneously.
I have to agree with Vermillion on what would be flown. Assuming they don't add the F4U-4C, it would be mostly Spit XIVs and Tempests. The P-47M just doesn't offer enough to make it easy for your average pilot. You still can't turn with the Spit or Tempest and while you're faster, you're not that much faster. If the speed made that much of a difference people would be flocking to the current P-47, rather than the Spitfire MkIX (easier for new players) or the F4U-1C (the equivilent to the F4U-4C in our current plane-set), but the're not.
Hristo,
Originally posted by Karnak (me) in the first post of this thread:
(Meteor is here to add depth to late war RAF fighters, not to impinge on the aircraft of the country so beloved of the LW fans{BTW, Meteor WAS the first combat jet in active service by 1 week, Me262 WAS the first jet to see actual combat and by a lot more than a week})
I placed this chunk of text in my original post just for you. Apparently it wasn't enough. I already answered your question, but I'll do it again. Perhaps I should have eleborated what I meant by "by a lot more than a week". What I meant was by more than 3 years.
You really need to come to terms with the existance of the Meteor, Hristo. The mention of it gets you to bite like mentioning the MkXIV used to get RAM to bite.
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 10-13-2000).]
-
So IOW; the arena would remain the same, except that the numbers after the plane names would be higher...
-
juzz,
Except that things like the C.202, Bf109F-4, A6M5b and Spitfire MkVb would be even less competitive.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
I think lots of people would be estatic with the Spit XVI.
But whatever.
-
Yep, a Merlin 66(Or Packard-Merlin 266) engined Spitfire would be more competitive at low altitude than the current Merlin 61 F.IX. Maximum climbrate somewhere in the region of 4500-4800fpm. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Plus, it could bring a Canadian/Australian/Sth African, etc. marked plane into AH.
-
in what performance area is a yak 9u better than a spit XIV?
-
dive
------------------
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/SturmJG3whitesofeyes.gif)
IV.(Sturm)/JG 3 "Udet"
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 10-14-2000).]
-
Would the Tempest be any more Uber than the F4U1-C?
I don't know enough about the performance of the 2 planes to judge, but it seems to me the Tempest would be a bit faster, but not have any other clear performance advantages.
Can someone please tell me why the Tempest is too good when the Hog isn't?
-
Nashwan,
Tempest will easily out run and out climb an F4U-1C at the altitudes where most fighting occurs. The fastest "down low" aircraft we have is the Typhoon at about 375 on the deck. The much requested Fw190D-9 with MW50 will do 380 on the deck. The Tempest will do 400 on the deck.
It has 4 Hispano MkV cannon as opposed to 4 Hispano MkII cannon, admittedly with less ammo.
At worst, its manueverability would be about the same, except it would accelerate much better.
Those are the reasons why the Tempest would be too powerful.
In my opinion the Tempest would be more imbalancing than the Spitfire MkXIV and I continue to think it silly that the LW fans are suggesting that the RAF receive Tempests as our late war fighter. The whinning about Tempest dweebs that would follow the introduction of the Tempest into AH would be deafening.
As I stated in my first post, I do not believe that there is a true (not a slight refinement of a 1942 aircraft) late war (1944) RAF aircraft that should be added to AH. Thay are all too good for the current planeset and to bring the rest of the planeset up to their level would mean the absolute obsoletence of the Bf109F-4, Spitfire MkVb, C.202 and A6M5b as well as any similar aircraft.
So bring on the Spitfire MkXVI, Mosquito B.MkIX, Mosquito FB.MkVI and Hurricane MkIIa and IIc.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Juzz said:
If HTC added the Spitfire Mk XIV, F4U-4, P-47M, Fw 190D-9, Tempest Mk V and La-7 all in one version - which one do you think you would see the most of in the arena? Hell, throw in the F8F too.
I think you'd continue to see a good mixture. Those planes are all monsters and would be very competitive with each other. Dogfighting in those babies would be a blast. Anybody who doesn't see this fact probably needs to learn more about these planes.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 10-15-2000).]
-
"Mosquito B.MkIX" - Somehow I doubt we will ever see a Mossie with 70-series Merlins, it's too uber. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
As long as it is historical, it is OK, IMO.
Any Spitfires, Tempests, Mosquitos, but 262s, Doras or even Ta 152s as well. Of course, one should try to take their historical availability into account. While perking the Dora would be a favor to the Mustang crowd, perking the Ta 152 is surely a must.
In a duel, Dora would almost always lose against Spitfire XIV. That is, if there is not an option to disengage, you have to stay and fight it out.
However, in the arena Dora can always outdive Spit XIV and outrun it on the deck. Guess which plane will be better arena fighter (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Tempest ? Tough, but Dora would probably roll better. Might be interesting.
But Meteor, come on. There are dozens of other planes which deserve to get modeled before it. 262 deserves that way before the Meteor. Those two are never in the same league. One fought and fought hard. The other one just buzzed after flying bombs.
Did Meteor fight against other planes ? Did it shoot down anything ? Was it shot down ?
How about this idea ? Make 262 a perk plane for (and only for) Luftwaffe pilots. You want to fly 262 ? Prove yourself with 109 or 190. As in real life.
Wanna play EZ mode gunnery with C-Hog ? Fine, but do not expect to get a chance to fly a 262. Maybe some late war P-47 or F4U-4, but that's it.
-
In real life many of the 262 pilots proved themselves in the Ju88 series. Many others were rookies.
-
Originally posted by Hristo:
How about this idea ? Make 262 a perk plane for (and only for) Luftwaffe pilots. You want to fly 262 ? Prove yourself with 109 or 190. As in real life.
Keep dreaming Hristo.
If the 262 gets added, and it certainly has a much more compelling case than the Meteor to be added, there is no reason to force sombody to fly aircraft that they don't like in order to fly the most uber of fighters.
BTW Hristo, I wasn't suggesting that HTC add the Meteor, I was looking for a 3rd late war RAF fighter and it was the only thing that I could come up with. I would not be surprised, however, if HTC adds the Meteor MkIII at the same time as they add the Me262 (just so you can whine about it). Keep in mind that if the Germans had been significantly more successful with the 262, the Allies would have started to escort B-17s with Meteors. Meteors WERE deployed to the continent in March of 1945 to counter the 262, but they never met. I'd rather not see any jets in AH.
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 10-16-2000).]
-
Karnak, you say 262 is uber? I recall you saying it is just a nice buff hunter some months ago (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Anyway, why would a C-Hog dweeb get a chance to put his dirty hands on that beauty ? Let him fly LW only before he gets that chance.
And your IF, IF, IF, regarding the Meteor is just another IF. You prove that Meteor is an what-IF plane in your mind, just reread your post. B-17s escorted by Meteors is the biggest IF I have read on this board. Luftwaffe has many IF issues too. If DB could be fitted to 190, IF Ta 152 came earlier, IF 262 wasn't delayed, IF there was more high quality fuel. But they are just IFs.
Keep dreaming (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
-
Going by its armement. The Meteor could be one hell of a plane. Might make it better then the 262.
-
Exactly.
But, it did not fight (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
It did fight, but by then the Luft rarely put up a fight. The Meteor has as strong (or weak) a case for inclusion as the Ta152.
-
Hristo,
Read my post. I said "NO JETS."
As far as the Meteor goes, I reported its factual historical use in WWII and what they WERE preparring to use it for, not an excuse for them to add it to AH. You're the one who is stuck on the Meteor being added, I don't want the thing in AH.
262 is that powerful because it is immune to fighters if the pilot has any SA at all. It CAN get fighters, but if they see it a hard break will make them basiclly immune and the 262 shouldn't bother with a 2nd pass. Just go look for some other prey. Certainly it'd be the best bomber killer though.
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 10-17-2000).]
-
Karnak Said:
> Certainly it'd (the 262) be the best bomber killer though.
> Sisu
> -Karnak
In one of the "other" games I found a bombless light A-26 to be the best bomber killer. Takes one to know one I guess :-)
MC202
Dino in Reno
[This message has been edited by MC202 (edited 10-17-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
It did fight, but by then the Luft rarely put up a fight. The Meteor has as strong (or weak) a case for inclusion as the Ta152.
Where did Meteor fight ? Against what ? Please inform us. Somehow I don't believe that.
Ta 152, OTOH, fought. There is well known story from W. Reschke.
-
Here's my take on everything. The Meteor... All it ever did was chase down V1s, the same job the P-61B in British hands did. Should it be added as a Perk Plane? Yep. The round and round argument basically boils down to this: For every aircraft the Luftwaffe put up, the Allies had something slightly better. This is true in EVERY case. The D9 would get chopped to pieces by any competant Spit 14 driver. So in order to fly any German aircraft with even remote effectiveness, you have to know how to fight.
A Spit with an altitude advantage is a nightmare for me, and I drive 109s. I agree that most any late war RAF aircraft have to be Perked. The same goes for the Ta-152 series and the jets. If a Komet shows up, Perk the sucker. As it stands now all I see in H2H games are C-hogs, Nikis, Mudstains and 109-G10s. Early war would cease to exist when those aircraft [perks] show up. Instead of getting a G10 with full fuel + drop tank to hit that Lanc, you'd grab a Komet. If enemy fighters are swarming in, you'd saddle up in a Spit 14.
It's the same old round and round arguments. 1.05 WILL change this, and those changes MUST be factored in to your debates. Strat is horribly under-used. 1.05 will add in more targets that HAVE to be hit. A ship parked 2 grids from your field means one of two things.
1) Possible bombardment
2) Enemy carrier fighters
I've read about most of these aircraft you're discussing. Any Spit beyond a Mk X would mean at least a G10 required to kill it. Put an experienced pilot in the cockpit and you'd better grab what he's driving. Why? There's no other way to kill him. Tempests, D9s, Meteors, Spit 14s, Ta-152s; this debate could go on forever.
What do you feel would drastically change current conditions in the Main? What should be done to make things better, NOT worse? First, check the gun calculations to see if something was missed or a typo snuck in. Then do the same for the Flight Modeling. Torque, spins, roll rates; check it all. Once that's done, and broken things have been repaired, find a solution to the current problem. That problem being, the lack of early war aircraft.
If all you want to do is scream around in a P-51H or Ta-152, then go offline and have at it. Raid a H2H game where only '44-'45 aircraft are allowed. Hit a Late War arena for all I care. What is needed in the MA is balance. A Spit V versus a 109 F4 is balance. The same goes for a Zeke versus an F6F, or an La-7 against a 109 G2. Want ground attack? Throw in an Il-2, Hs-129, Panzer V Panther, Sherman, Churchill Mk.4; what ever floats your boat.
Bottom line: Should jets be allowed in Aces High. Answer: Yes. Why? They were built and in combat. I don't care if that combat was blowing up V1s or killing B-17s. The same goes for ANY other aircraft. If it saw combat in WW2, it should be included.
Perk Planes: I define this as any aircraft that would completely unbalance either A) this board or B) the game. Included in both categories are:
Spit 14
Ta-152, any model
Any Jet
Komet
Tempest, any mark
P-47M
P-51H
P-61C
That list alone could be expanded to well over 100 aircraft of various models. So, if you've got an idea on how to work a Meteor or Spit or P-51H or a Ta-152, let's hear it. Instead of going round and round on the subject, I'd like to hear some ideas on HOW to work those aircraft in to a given arena. If this means a rolling plane set, then it means an RPS. As long as your solution fixes the problem and does not cause any of its own, run with it.
------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
"My art is the wings of an aircraft through the skies, my music the deep hum of a prop as it slices the air, my thrill the thunder of guns tearing asunder an enemy plane."
Flakbait
19 September 2000
[This message has been edited by flakbait (edited 10-18-2000).]
-
Meteors were based in Holland in 1945 and flew offensive sweeps and ground attack missions over Germany. They never encountered Luft aircraft, but they did attack German military ground targets.
I don't think the P61 was ever used by the RAF. It wsouldn't have been suitable for intercepting V-1s because it was a lot slower than Mosquito night fighters.
The problem with perking the Spit 14 and Tempest is it leaves rthe RAF with nothing better than the Spit 9. That's bad enough now, but if the D9 comes out unperked...
-
Flakbait, I agree on one thing. Put a newbie in Spit XIV and a newbie in D-9 and Spitdweeb will win all the time. HMMV.
However, if both Spit and D-9 pilot know what to expect out of their rides, you might have a different picture. In HTH, Spit dweeb still wins. In big arena vulchfest, hmmm. Dora might just be a better plane.
Ability to disengage by pointing the nose down is by far more useful in the arena than turn or climb advantage. High speed control and good cockpit visibility also aid to that.
Generally, I would say that D-9 pilot has to be better than average to be successfull. Not so for a Spit XIV jock. But D-9 offers advantages over Spitfire not instantly visible to a newbie.
But than again that's all the fun when picking the LW ride. The challenge (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
[gotta love Joe Baugher's work]
P-61A and B models did indeed shoot down V1s. Proof? Got it right here (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p61_9.html) just scroll down to European Theater.
The first P-61 arrived in Europe on May 23, 1944. The Black Widows were initially based in England,
and their first assignment was to chase night-flying V-1 "buzz bombs". The Black Widows would be
vectored to intercept approaching V-1s by ground control. Since the V-1 was a little faster than the
P-61, the Black Widow had to approach the V-1 from behind and go into a slight dive in order to catch
up with it. The first Black Widow V-1 "kill" took place on July 16, 1944, credited to pilot Herman
Ernst and radar operator Edward Kopsel of the 422nd Night Fighter Squadron. One of the greatest
dangers involved in killing V-1s was the possibility of getting too close to the flying bomb when one
fired at it, running the risk of damage to your own plane if the bomb exploded when hit.
I did goof on one part; the British never got any Black Widows for combat use. They tested a few, but found the Nightfighter Mosquito better for the job.
Hristo, any ideas on how to work these aircraft in to the game, yet not cause a firestome in the process?
------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
"My art is the wings of an aircraft through the skies, my music the deep hum of a prop as it slices the air, my thrill the thunder of guns tearing asunder an enemy plane."
Flakbait
19 September 2000
[This message has been edited by flakbait (edited 10-18-2000).]
-
flakbait:
The Meteor was an inferior plane to the ME-262 in all regards except engine longevity. At least according to the documentaries I've seen on the thing. British pilots who'd flown both said the ME-262's flight performance was way better suited for air combat than the Meteor's.
I'll go look for comparisons on the net, I'm sure the data is available somewhere.
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Take any perk plane you wish (as long as its period).
Me I will take the F2G Super Corsair.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Nothing that anybody has said has changed my opinion. The following aircraft should not be added, and based on HiTech's description of the perk system, I don't think that they should be added as perks either.
IMHO, the following aircraft should not be added to AH.
P-80
P-51H
P-47M
F4U-4
F7F
F8F
B-29
Spitfire F.MkXIV
Tempest MkV
Meteor MkIII
Ta152
Me262
Ar234
Do335
Me163
La-7
I have no problem with the Fw190D-9 with MW50 being added, but I don't think anything beyond it should be. It is quite likely that the Fw190D-9 would be the best MA fighter. No Italian or Japanese aircraft are listed on my "should not be added" list because I have not heard of a Italian or Japanese aircraft that would be imbalancing.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Why the La7 ?
Its top speed, its SL speed, its climbrate, its accelerations, its handling, firepower, and all other aspects, fall within what is considered "normal" within the arena's currently.
I don't see whats uber about it in the least.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
spit LF Mk. IX
-
Karnak said:
Member
> No Italian or Japanese aircraft are listed
> on my "should not be added" list because I
> have not heard of a Italian or Japanese
> aircraft that would be imbalancing.
> Sisu
> -Karnak
For the end of the war you are right, but in mid '43 the Re2005 would be hard to beat. As close to "uber" or "perk" for the late war would be the Re2007, prototype not finished, or the Umbra M.B. 902, prototype not finished.
The Re2007 was a jet (following the Italian engine import theme, a German one) single seat fighter.
YEAR: 1945
WINGSPAN: 9,50 m
LENGTH: 9 m
MAX SPEED: 1050 km/h
ARMAMENT : 4 x 20 mm cannons
The Umbra M.B. 902
YEAR: 1944
WINGSPAN: 47feet 1 1/4"
LENGTH: 47 feet
MAX SPEED: 429 mph
ARMAMENT :two 20mm cannon, four 12.5mgs in the nose
MC202
DIno in Reno
[This message has been edited by MC202 (edited 10-18-2000).]
-
I'm confused =(
Why is everyone so obsessed with late war planes. I would much rather see 109-E Spitfire MkI Hurricane MkI, Blenheim, Wellington, etc.
Maybe I'm missing things.
Maybe they won't get much use in the main arena as it stands, but I for one would really like to see something like WarBirds Historic Arena which was great fun.
Oh and when it comes to being effective in the current main arena, I'm currently flying the Spitfire MkV in preference to the MkIX, it's much more effective, especially against MkIXs (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
No good american planes for early-war... thats why theres no early war planeset here.
-
La-7 should already be here. Get a clue Karnak.
-
About the La7,
All I know about it is what has been posted here, which has been along the lines of "Just wait till we get the La7, it'll wipe the floor with your planes". I was looking for a non-German, non-American and non-British plane to include in the list.
If that is not accurate, and it would be competitive with the P-51D and Fw190D-9, but no more, I see no reason not to have it.
I see no reason to insult me over it.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Nath-BDP said:
Member
> No good american planes for early-war...
> thats why theres no early war planeset here.
Hum, P-35 (1938), P-36 (1938), P-40A/B (1940), F2A/A2 (1939), P-39 (1941), P-38D/E (1941), F4F-2/3 (1940),F4U-1 (1942 o.k.a bit late).
How early do you want?
MC202 (glad to meet a Bf109D/E/F in most of the above)
Dino in Reno
-
The la7 was basically just a lightened la5 with an extra 20mm. This gave it some 8 mph better top speed and a little extra firepower. Currently the la5 is little used (I use it A LOT though). The la5 below 10k is an amazing aircraft which can outclimb and outaccelerate all but the g10. (It's very close though.) It can turn pretty well and its rate of roll is above average. Basically it's an ideal low altitude interceptor. It's main weakness is aiming difficulties, visibility, and ammo load. Landing a snapshot is basically shooting blind, due to the long nose. Compared to most other planes, it's 2 20mm with 200 rpg is average at best. I fly it because of the surprise factor; not many people have fought against it and are unaware of it's acceleration and climb down low. It's also quite tough, I once absorbed a 30mm from a 109 directly into the nose and survived. I then proceeded to shoot the 109 down in 2 turns. The la7 is, at best, on par with the majority of the planes in the arena already.
(I'm actually surprised the la7 hasn't been added already, it would be an easy one for HTC to do.)
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
are you joking? F4U1 1942? F4U1 scored its first kill on Febuary 14th 1943 with VMF 124.
Kenneth Walsh.
and I said GOOD, all those pre-41 planes you mentioned are outclassed by the 109E or Spit1.
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 10-20-2000).]
-
P38 August 42.
-
Karnak, given Pyro's past modeling decisions on Soviet aircraft, expect the La7 to look something like this.
Speed at SL: 380.9 mph
Speed at Alt: 410.7 mph at 19,750 ft.
Climb to 5k meters (16,400ft): 5.1 mins
Service Ceiling: 37,000 ft
Turn Time: 20.5 seconds
Armament: either x2 (or x3) 20mm ShVak Cannons (B-20 cannons)
The La7 is literally a La5FN that is aerodynamically cleaner, and its within 100 pounds gross loadout of the La5FN depending on loadout. Other than a change to its max speed, and the additional armament option, it should be identical to our existing La5FN.
An Uber Perk Plane? I think not.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Nath-BDP said:
> are you joking? F4U1 1942? F4U1 scored its
> first kill on Febuary 14th 1943 with VMF 124.
and
> P38 August 42.
"On June 30, 1941, an initial contract for 584 F4U1's was signed and the first PRODUCTION aircraft appeared on October 30 of the following year." (that's 1942)
I am working off the date that REAL production airframes were on hand.
"...210 P-38E's (the first major production version, with heavier armament and IN SERVICE [caps mine] from November 1941.)..."
That's what the book said, so that's what I said.
< and I said GOOD, all those pre-41 planes you
> mentioned are outclassed by the 109E or Spit1.
That is what a full plane set will prove, till then, all that our guesswork is "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". Used properly a P-40B or Wildcat is a good fighting machine.
Ask the Finns about one or two of the others :-)
MC202
Dino in Reno
[This message has been edited by MC202 (edited 10-20-2000).]
-
Vermillion,
With those stats, I wouldn't have any thing against the La7.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Umm... go by when it first saw service, that works better.
-
That is what a full plane set will prove, till then, all that our guesswork is "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". Used properly a P-40B or Wildcat is a good fighting machine.
Ask the Finns about one or two of the others :-)
And the 109E used properly is the best fighting machine.
-
Adolf galland flew both the me-262 and the gloster meteor(argentinian airforce)
his comment was he liked the me-262 better it handled better only the engines of the meteor where better.
It was today on discovery channel the highest number in fighteroperations used was 59 crates for 7 days or so it shot down 700 allies. It was a very misused plane .It's engines where very unreliable and could set on fire hen opening the throtle too suddenly.
-
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
The first "GOOD" US plane was given to the RAF in February 1942. Is that early enough?
-
Early war is 39-40
Mid 41-43
Late 44-45
-
Nath-BDP said:
>Early war is 39-40
PRE-WAR and START- 35-38 overall, U.S. view 38 to 41.
EARLY- 39-41 overall, U.S. view 41 to mid 42
> Mid 41-43
MIDDLE- 42 to mid/late 43 overall, U.S. view mid 43 to late 44
> Late 44-45
LATE- 44 to mid 45 overall, U.S. view late 44 to late 45.
We all have our own thoughts, and the one that counts is the game developer's. I'm a Yank, so I see through a Yank's eyes. If we all use dates, some of the "fog of war" fades.
MC202
Dino in Reno
-
Early war aircraft are a given. We'll see most all of them in due time, but currently we're stuck with a lateish war plane set. You won't see any Polish PZL P.7 or P.11c aircraft, since everything older than a 109B can kill it. Again, it's about balance. The MA could get Me-262s, Meteors, Ta-152s, Tempest Vs, Spit XIVs, P-51Hs; every aircraft made in 1945. You know what? Aside from historical nuts like us, not a peepe would be raised. The MA isn't a historical match arena [I shot down an Fw-190A5 in a Bf-109 G6 yesterday] it's simply a free for all. 3 on 3 with no holds bared.
If we ever got a Historical Arena, I'd be standing right here screaming for an RPS. Only aircraft from one country, per country [Rooks are Allied, Bishs are German, Knights are Russian]. Yes I classify Russians as another side. Until something along these lines happens, we're stuck. You'll see A6M2s trying to down P-47Ds, maybe even JS-II tanks rolling over a Panzer III. Who knows.
So for right now HTC is filling the plane/vehicle set. The Navy shows up in 1.05 along with a host of new targets and challenges. We'll see ships and carrier-based aircraft first, then most likely one new aircraft, vehicle, ship, ground target, and whatever else per version. Or HTC might put in vehicles, ships, and ground targets in one version, and three or four aircraft in the next.
It's all up in the air.
------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
"My art is the wings of an aircraft through the skies, my music the deep hum of a prop as it slices the air, my thrill the thunder of guns tearing asunder an enemy plane."
Flakbait
19 September 2000
-
I really understand why HTC doenst put a historical arena (two arenas will drop the numbers on MA and that's not good for HTC).
But it is sorely missed. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
-
quite frankly this is just ANOTHER argument about the same thing.."I want my favourite ride to make me king of the arena"
The MA is like the WWF, a bit of everything and it ain't terribly real.
Perhaps when there are more fleshed out a/c and earlier war types..then we could see a proper Historical Arena..with 2-3 sides Allied (or even just RAF till '41 planeset), German, and Japanese.
I would rather see a real historical planeset (marked with something more than just stars'n'bars or black crosses..like a RNZAF marked Avenger,SBD,P-40,F4u!)than a mess of exotics in that arena.
But till then the MA could be a collection of misfits. It wouldnt bother me if there was a whole arena of SpitXIV's or Ta-152, as long as I knew one day something new was on the horizon to counter it..like an Arado 234B,or B-29 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif))
After all "historically" plenty of novices were given exotic rides..but doesn't mean they lasted long in them!
-tronski-
(http://www.egroups.com/files/Skyrats/486.gif)
[This message has been edited by -tronski- (edited 10-21-2000).]
-
I agree RAM. If we had the aircraft modeled, I would LOVE to see a historical arena with a rolling planeset (I know many, MANY people loathe rolling planesets).
Ah well.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
The problem with the RPS is that it provides historical matchups but with no limits on proportion. Ie: WarBirds' infamous "jet day".
Imagine what will happen in the middle of 1942 along comes that first "good" US plane in RAF markings. The Luftwhiners will be working overtime! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)