Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: mitchk on September 26, 2003, 05:59:19 PM
-
http://www.warbirdalley.com/f7f.htm
Look at the spesifications and tell me if you want it in AH, or if you are in the addministration tell us if we can or can't have it.
:)
-
looks good to me! Wouldnt mind the B24 either :)
-
Is a nice bird, but it didn't see combat in WW2. I wouldn't like it in a WW2 game. There are so many planes that where produced by the thousands and are not in AH.
-
Nope, doesn't belong in AH.
RTR
-
It would belong in a "What if 1946" scenario. Aces over The Pacific had an add-on like that, - quite much fun really. But I doubt that AH would be incorporating that in near future
-
For twin engined monsters, the DeHaviland Hornet might be a better choice.
-
the part about not seeing action before VJ day disqualifies it. but i like it, built the model when i was kid
-
Originally posted by Angus
It would belong in a "What if 1946" scenario. Aces over The Pacific had an add-on like that, - quite much fun really. But I doubt that AH would be incorporating that in near future
F7F-2N Nightfighters were flying combat sorties in the PTO just prior to VJ day. Any fighter operational, in squadron service, deployed to a war zone should qualify. By the term "squadron service", I mean in fully equipped, fully trained units. That would include the F7F, F8F and P-51H. Although I agree that these are low on the priority list with many other aircraft being needed first to fill out the plane set.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Id really like to see a craft like the C.a.c boomerag make the cut the gun set up might have to be altred however
-
if it had 1 day combat then it could be considered for the game..as it didnt have any combat its not a WWII plane, simple..
i would like to see b24 and beaufighter... any one else?
-
yup, id like the baufighter
-
Originally posted by SELECTOR
if it had 1 day combat then it could be considered for the game..as it didnt have any combat its not a WWII plane, simple..
i would like to see b24 and beaufighter... any one else?
I tend to agree with your logic, and if we do follow it then the F7F-2N and P-51H qualify simply because both were flying combat sorties during the last week of the war. One squadron of P-51Hs flew two B-29 escort missions that were unopposed by Japanese fighters. These missions were selected specifically to allow the squadron to wring-out the new fighters without heavy opposition being likely (although the Mustang pilots hoped for some action).
(Since the P-80A Shooting Star was in squadron service (with the 29th, 31st and 445th Fighter Squadrons) well before the end of the war, some might argue that it qualifies as a WWII fighter. With a 558 mph max speed (on the deck), a climb rate of better than 4,500 fpm, it would likely overpower the Me 262 in the MA (the P-80A weighs less than the 262 and has slightly greater wing area too). Therefore, I would imagine a perk price of 250+ to fly one of these babies. Alas, snowballs have a better chance in hell than we do seeing the P-80A in AH.)
Marine VMF(N)-533 F7F-2Ns flew two local night patrols during the evening of on August 14-15, 1945 and like the P-51H squadrons, encountered no opposition. No enemy aircraft were operating near Okinawa and the primary purpose of the flights were give pilots some orientation time. However, the aircraft were armed and available to be vectored to any incoming bogies.
Should these aircraft ever be added to the plane set (highly unlikely), they would require large perk prices to offset their very high performance. Indeed, the F7F-1 out-performs the Tempest in every catagory. Low-speed turning was viewed as being only slightly inferior the the F6F-5! Speed was an outstanding 445 mph @ 22,000 ft, and a scorching 397 mph on the deck! Wing loading was a bit less than the P-51D, both with 50% gas aboard. Armed with four 20mm cannon (Hispano type) AND four Browning .50 caliber MGs, it would be the most lethal aircraft in the plane set.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Hi Widewing,
>(Since the P-80A Shooting Star was in squadron service (with the 29th, 31st and 445th Fighter Squadrons) well before the end of the war, some might argue that it qualifies as a WWII fighter.
From "Fighter Pilot's Heaven" by Donald S. Lopez:
"After a great deal of testing and modifying, there were four P-80s overseas - two in England and two in Italy - in 1945, but a tragic accident involving one of them cause them to be grounded. Maj. Fred Borsodi, an experienced Wright Field test pilot, was demonstrating one of the 80s in England when, unknown to him, a fire started in the engine compartment. The aft section of the airplane burned off, and he was killed."
(I think for most of 1945 and '46, the P-80 was either grounded or subject to serious restrictions, getting hardly any air time.)
Lopez was an Eglin Air Force Base test pilot who was tasked with the operational suitability trials of the P-80. His first flight in the P-80 was in February 1946.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Widewing,
>(Since the P-80A Shooting Star was in squadron service (with the 29th, 31st and 445th Fighter Squadrons) well before the end of the war, some might argue that it qualifies as a WWII fighter.
From "Fighter Pilot's Heaven" by Donald S. Lopez:
"After a great deal of testing and modifying, there were four P-80s overseas - two in England and two in Italy - in 1945, but a tragic accident involving one of them cause them to be grounded. Maj. Fred Borsodi, an experienced Wright Field test pilot, was demonstrating one of the 80s in England when, unknown to him, a fire started in the engine compartment. The aft section of the airplane burned off, and he was killed."
(I think for most of 1945 and '46, the P-80 was either grounded or subject to serious restrictions, getting hardly any air time.)
Lopez was an Eglin Air Force Base test pilot who was tasked with the operational suitability trials of the P-80. His first flight in the P-80 was in February 1946.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
Heya Henning
Those four Shooting Stars that went to the ETO were YP-80s, not production P-80As.
In December of 1944, a pair of YP-80s were handed over to the 31st FS for operational trials. They received 17 the first P-80As in the spring of '45. As early as June of 1946, the 38th FS of the 55th Fighter Group went operational with P-80As in Germany. I believe 12 squadrons were operating the P-80A by the end of 1946, with another dozen or so actually involved in transition.
Most of the bugs had been ironed out by early '46. Many of the operational squadrons were in Groups that retained the P-51 for the remaining squadrons, simply because time was needed to sort out the new fighters, as well as train pilots and ground crews. For specifics, I'll have to visit my book shelves.
After Germany and Japan surrendered, the breakneck pace of the P-80 program slowed considerably. It is always better to de-bug a fighter without the added stress of doing so during combat deployment. Had the war dragged on for another 6 months, P-80s would have been deployed despite not being fully wrung-out.
Much the same as the P-38 was, and to a lesser degree the Merlin Mustangs which suffered serious issues with cracked heads and leaking water jackets during its first several months of combat operations.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Its not just the F7F that is eliminated by barely missing WWII.
As scary as Widewing makes the F7F out to be, the Hornet would be worse and it missed WWII by a similar margin, the first active squadron flying their Hornets over Berlin on VE day.
The F7F and Hornet would be too much for many. Hell, the Meteor, which was clearly in service and seeing usage, is thought to be inappropriate my many players.
-
I Beleave the Criteria is, or is preceived to be that they saw combat/Killed somthing or were killed, but as many have already mentioned their are a freaking ton of planes that have yet to be modeled that are desperatly neaded for the CT and for event's, and working on late war uber planes that saw no actualy combat sould be imo somthing that is not considered until much later in AH, we already have some planes that had very few kill's in AH, F4U-4, Ta 152, Me 163...
-
Hi Widewing,
>Most of the bugs had been ironed out by early '46.
The P-80 was not a WW2 fighter - it was a WW2 non-combattant.
Even in early 1946, not not all bugs had been ironed out yet, the type had to be pampered for quite a bit longer. And even with a war going in, it seems highly unlikely that it would have been flying combat missions in 1945.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
You need to pick up the dev kit for TargetWare and set up "Target: Almost fought in WWII"...
...has anyone seen my Ki84 lately?
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Its not just the F7F that is eliminated by barely missing WWII.
As scary as Widewing makes the F7F out to be, the Hornet would be worse and it missed WWII by a similar margin, the first active squadron flying their Hornets over Berlin on VE day.
The F7F and Hornet would be too much for many. Hell, the Meteor, which was clearly in service and seeing usage, is thought to be inappropriate my many players.
Which squadron was flying Hornets over Berlin? According to Green and Swanborough, the first production Hornet F.Mk.Is weren't delivered until April of 1945. The first squadron to be declared operational was 64 Squadron and that wasn't until May of 1946. Delivered doesn't mean operational. It take months to get the logistical base in place, train pilots and ground crews before being qualified as an operational unit. For example, the F4U-4 began reaching Navy depots in December of 1944, but the first squadron to go operational with the fighter wasn't until the end of February, 1945. And in this instance, they were previously flying F4Us, so pilot and maintenance training was minimal.
Grumman began deliveries of the F7F-1 in April of 1944, with deliveries of the F7F-2N beginning in October of 1944. First deliveries of the F8F-1 began on New Years eve, 1944.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Widewing,
>Most of the bugs had been ironed out by early '46.
The P-80 was not a WW2 fighter - it was a WW2 non-combattant.
Even in early 1946, not not all bugs had been ironed out yet, the type had to be pampered for quite a bit longer. And even with a war going in, it seems highly unlikely that it would have been flying combat missions in 1945.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
Virtually all of the "bugs" were in the GE built J-33 engine and sub-systems. Eventually, production was given to Allison where the last of these issues were resolved. That said, even the J-33-GE-11 engine was a wonder of reliability when compared to the BMW and Jumo turbojets.
I agree that the P-80 was not a WWII combatant. However, Hap Arnold stated in 1947 that had the German jet program been a larger problem than it was, the P-80 would have been deployed whether it was ready or not. He also stated that Field Engineers solved problems far faster than factory Engineers as was demonstrated with the P-38 and P-51. Regarding these aircraft, Field Engineers would develop fixes and the factory would incorporate them. Doolittle's Engineering staff working with Allison Field Engineers designed a revised intake manifold for the Allison V-1710-89 and -91. It cured the detonation problem by better distributing the fuel/air mixture. Allison incorporated the new manifold into the V-1710-111 and -113 engines going on the P-38L. This was the primary solution to the engine failure woes experienced with the P-38J (there were other issues relating to turbo regulators, over-efficient intercoolers/radiators and a lack automatic engine controls).
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by mitchk
Look at the spesifications and tell me if you want it in AH, or if you are in the addministration tell us if we can or can't have it.
:)
Nope, I think it's too late for a ww2 plane, and it would be like the same as the Boston or something like that; fast, but small payload and no defensive guns
-
Hi Widewing,
>That said, even the J-33-GE-11 engine was a wonder of reliability when compared to the BMW and Jumo turbojets.
Don't confuse MTBF and life cycle. The German jets had a short life cycle, but were reasonably reliable during this life cycle. The P-80 would have been a single-engined jet flying over enemy territory - you can sure that the USAF would only employ it after all of the bugs were cured.
>However, Hap Arnold stated in 1947 that had the German jet program been a larger problem than it was, the P-80 would have been deployed whether it was ready or not.
His opposite number Adolph Galland stated in 1943 that the Me 262 was ready for front-line service. Generals tend to have limited insights into the technological aspects of the air war.
>He also stated that Field Engineers solved problems far faster than factory Engineers as was demonstrated with the P-38 and P-51.
If the solution was turning over jet engine production from General Electrics to Allison, that's nothing Field Engineers could have done. It's a good trait in Generals to have faith in their troops, though :-)
The P-80 certainly wouldn't have turned up in the ETO as a serious combat force before 1946.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Originally posted by frank3
Nope, I think it's too late for a ww2 plane, and it would be like the same as the Boston or something like that; fast, but small payload and no defensive guns
LOLOLOL....
Read the thread Frank, the F7F was one the most formidable piston powered FIGHTERS ever built! It's the enemy that would need defensive guns! :rofl
My regards,
Widewing
-
"I Beleave the Criteria is, or is preceived to be that they saw combat/Killed somthing or were killed"
That's the criteria used by many who prefer flying Axis aircraft in these games/sims. It draws the line in the sand very much in thier favour.
-
Hi Westy,
>That's the criteria used by many who prefer flying Axis aircraft in these games/sims. It draws the line in the sand very much in thier favour.
Under all circumstances avoid saying it's about what might have been available in 1946, or the Axis guys will bury you in a pile of blueprints ;-)
But seriously, the criterion is rather reasonable, and in slightly different form, it was sort of the forum consensus for determining war entry dates:
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26235&highlight=service+entry
The squadron service criterion isn't bad either, but it gives more a picture of what was technologically feasible than of what was tactically sensible. Just the answer to a different question, in a way.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
"... bury you in a pile of blueprints"
Well there are worse things to get buried under ;)
I agree that the Axis had lots imagination laying on thier drafting tables IMO that's where most would have stayed or still have been in 46. Don't get me wrong though. *MY* line in the sand welcomes such fine aircraft as the HE-162, and even some Japanese late war developments into the war realm due to them being in regular production, and deployment even.
And I saw that other topic and IMO if the Allies had half the need driven by desperation that the Axis had then IMO the 47m/N, 51H, F8F, F7F, P-80 and others would have been in service a lot sooner. Just as they rushed the B-29 in before it's serious problems were worked out.
Oh. And before I get labelled a late war uber dork, I'd love to "fly" an I-16 just as much too :)
-
The F7F-1 was available for deployment in 4th quarter of 1944...strictly a "political" decision to delay it's deployment....same basic reasoning as M-26 tank.
Whats amazing about the F7F is it was designed as a ground support carrier based aircraft, it carries a huge bomb load.
-
...
-
Hi Westy,
>Well there are worse things to get buried under ;)
LOL! I have to agree :-)
>And I saw that other topic and IMO if the Allies had half the need driven by desperation that the Axis had then IMO the 47m/N, 51H, F8F, F7F, P-80 and others would have been in service a lot sooner. Just as they rushed the B-29 in before it's serious problems were worked out.
Well, I have my doubts about hastening up programs. The RLM history has seen many such attempts, and it's generally recognized as a history of bad mismanagement :-)
(Desperation can indeed be considered the enemy of innovation as it was the driver behind keeping the Me 109 as standard fighter.)
Technology doesn't lend itself easily to brute force approaches - the B-29 example where it worked it pretty unique, and the Boeing bomber still wasn't good enough to do the job it was designed for. If you look at it closely, Le May made it perform by making it do a different job!
Having a plane in front-line service isn't enough - it has to work well enough to perform effectively, and even efficiently. If it can't do that, it's not helping your cause - that's why it makes little sense to rush aircraft into service that aren't really ready yet.
(Though it's aimed at computer technology, "The Mythical Man-Month" by Frederick Brookes is an excellent book on why it's so difficult to develop cutting-edge technology, and why it's so difficult to deal with problems that arise during development.)
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Originally posted by Widewing
F7F-2N Nightfighters were flying combat sorties in the PTO just prior to VJ day. Any fighter operational, in squadron service, deployed to a war zone should qualify. By the term "squadron service", I mean in fully equipped, fully trained units. That would include the F7F, F8F and P-51H. Although I agree that these are low on the priority list with many other aircraft being needed first to fill out the plane set.
My regards,
Widewing
I dont agree entirely, I think an aircraft has to fight one or more of the enemies manned aircraft to qualify for AH.I dont agree with adding the meteor even, purely because it never met an enemy aircraft with a pilot in it but in AH it will and so, it then isnt a WW2 sim reallly.I would agree to them being added once we well and truelly run out of significant aircraft which DID see action from 1939 to 1945 VE day.The time will come when AH has done almost all the ones that saw action(at least the important ones) so I guess why not make other newer ones?.Theres plenty of time for the bearcats and seafury's and Mig15s and F86 sabres later :D
-
Hazed,
The a Meteor Mk III squadron engaged a Fw190 squadron in a fight, but had to run when some Spitfires showed up and started shooting at the jets.
Meteor Mk III: 0
Fw190: 0
That said, I do agree with you that the Meteor should, at beast, have the lowest priority of any aircraft.
-
But Karnak, the Meteor IIIs didn't have any bullets on target, hitting these manned 190s which were flying... in the air... during the war. Therefore they shouldn't be added.
The Meteor would be an interesting addition after the planeset is fleshed out a bit.
-
But a Meteor did shoot down a Fieseler Storch....so it must be included!:D
-
Heh. Was it flying in the air during the war and were there luftwaffles inside? This may change everything!
-
Originally posted by Dowding
But Karnak, the Meteor IIIs didn't have any bullets on target, hitting these manned 190s which were flying... in the air... during the war. Therefore they shouldn't be added.
The Meteor would be an interesting addition after the planeset is fleshed out a bit.
The Meteor was doing 'ground pounding'. Does that count?
-
Originally posted by Widewing
LOLOLOL....
Read the thread Frank, the F7F was one the most formidable piston powered FIGHTERS ever built! It's the enemy that would need defensive guns! :rofl
My regards,
Widewing
Puh...it still looks like a light bomber.....:o
-
So does the me110 but if flown well it is also a formidable fighter.:D
-
IMHO any plane that fired its guns in anger during WW2 does qualify. The Meteor was on the hunt, did ground strafing, and did shoot down doodlebugs as well.
How about the F7F and F8F?
BTW, saw an F7F on an airshow. Now that is a Beast! Looks big and bulky, but flies very very well :)
-
I DO NOT THINK THE METEOR SHOULD BE IN ACES HIGH BECAUSE IT ONLY FIRED 327 ROUNDS IN COMBAT AND I THINK THE LIMIT SHOULD BE 350 ROUNDS. PLUS IT WAS FIRING HIGH EXPLOSIVE BULLETS NOT ARMOR PIERCING WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS IT WAS NOT A AIR TO AIR COMBAT PLANE.
Lets get real super-dorks :) Aces High is so unrealistic that we should allow any plane that had at least 1 squadron equipped in. We have N1K2s dogfighting Fw-190s, P-51s fighting Spitfire MkXIVs. Aces High is not a World War II sim, its a hypothetical fight between aircraft produced between 39-45.
-
Hi David,
>Aces High is not a World War II sim, its a hypothetical fight between aircraft produced between 39-45.
Actually, there's no reason to draw a line in 1945 ... many interesting aircraft were built (or never built ;-) later than that!
I believe most players arguing about plane types are actually concerned about gameplay fairness, not about historical accuracy. Fairness undoubtly is a very important consideration for any game!
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Hi Widewing,
>With a 558 mph max speed (on the deck), a climb rate of better than 4,500 fpm, it would likely overpower the Me 262 in the MA (the P-80A weighs less than the 262 and has slightly greater wing area too).
To be fair, by 1946 the Luftwaffe jets would have had improvemed performance, too. Just mounting the upcoming BMW003D engine with 1100 - 1175 kp thrust on the existing aircraft would have given the following performance:
Me 262 - 570 mph @ sea level, 600 mph top speed, 5000+ fpm
He 162 - 575 mph @ sea level, 610 mph top speed, 6000+ fpm
The Ar 234B would have been replaced by the four-engined Arado 234C, which made 544 mph top speed with 4 x BMW003A and could be expected to reach 600 mph with 4 x BMW003D.
Then there was the Jumo 004E on the test benches, which featured an afterburner, the BMW003R which consisted of a BMW003A which a small rocket engine giving an extra 1250 kp (more than doubling the total thrust), and the diagonal-compressor He S011 which gave 1300 kp of thrust.
These three engines were completed and running in several examples at the end of the war. The only one going into production was the He S011, eight pre-series examples of which had to be completed for the US :-)
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)