Author Topic: P-63 Performance  (Read 5703 times)

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #30 on: March 31, 2012, 06:03:15 PM »
The scarce Soviet planeset already has two "very late in the war" fighters. It is the early/mid war part which is missing/needs to be fleshed out badly.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline icepac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6996
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #31 on: April 01, 2012, 08:39:08 AM »
Yak7b and Mig3 would be cool.

Offline colmbo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
      • Photos
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #32 on: April 01, 2012, 09:25:35 AM »
Quote
"Pinball" operations
Its main use in American service was the unusual one of a manned flying target for gunnery practice.[16] The aircraft was generally painted bright orange to increase its visibility. All armament and the regular armor was removed from these RP-63 aircraft, and over a ton of armored sheet metal was applied to the aircraft. This was fitted with sensors that would detect hits, and these hits were signaled by illuminating a light in the propeller hub where the cannon would have been. This earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname of Pinball.[16] Special frangible rounds made of a lead/bakelite combination were developed that would disintegrate upon impact.[16] These were known as the "Cartridge, Caliber .30, Frangible, Ball, M22." Ivan L. Hickman, a veteran Pinball pilot, eventually authored Operation Pinball in 1990.

Columbo

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."

Fate whispers to the warrior "You cannot withstand the storm" and the warrior whispers back "I AM THE STORM"

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #33 on: April 01, 2012, 10:39:59 AM »
Yak7b and Mig3 would be cool.

Cool, but would generally end up as hanger queens.... Yak-3 and Pe-2 would see lots of use.

I'd still like to see a P-39Q-30 (in VVS or Free French colors) and someday, the P-63A.
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #34 on: April 01, 2012, 10:41:29 AM »
I don't think the Pe-2 would get much use.  It is relatively fast, but it has a light bomb load, no bombsight (as far as I know) and very light guns.  The Tu-2 would probably see a lot of use though.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline icepac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6996
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #35 on: April 01, 2012, 11:11:45 AM »
Cool, but would generally end up as hanger queens.... Yak-3 and Pe-2 would see lots of use.

I'd still like to see a P-39Q-30 (in VVS or Free French colors) and someday, the P-63A.

I'm curious how you would know this.

I've been flying them for years on another sim.

By your suggestions, we should only add late war cannon monsters that probably were never fielded at combat strength.


Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #36 on: April 01, 2012, 11:15:26 AM »
no bombsight (as far as I know)

It has one.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #37 on: April 01, 2012, 11:28:35 AM »
It has one.
I thought that was only on a early Pe-2s, but was found to be so inaccurate or difficult to use that it was removed and bombing was simply done by slope bombing.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #38 on: April 01, 2012, 11:39:21 AM »
I tried to research the P-63 over Manchuria, I am drawing a blank.
JG 52

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #39 on: April 01, 2012, 03:21:24 PM »
I'm curious how you would know this.

I've been flying them for years on another sim.

By your suggestions, we should only add late war cannon monsters that probably were never fielded at combat strength.



I suppose that playing Aces High for more than a decade leads me to draw conclusions based upon previous additions I've witnessed. The P-40B we had, was a hanger queen. Poor performance, and relatively lower firepower were the causes. The MiG-3 was a seriously under-gunned, evil handling, high altitude fighter that the Soviets dropped early in the war. The Yak-7 is a dog relative to the late war arena. It may do well enough in the mid-war arena, but it's no improvement over the Yak-9T. Both would get a fair amount of use for a week or two, and then become a rare sight in the late-war arena. The C.202 is a better performer that either the MiG or the Yak at the altitudes we fly at, and it's basically a hanger queen.

The Yak-3 was very common on the east front from 1944 on.... The Pe-2 saw even more usage, and it's certainly not a "late war cannon monster". The Yak-3, while no better armed than the -9U, will offer better maneuverability and climb. The Pe-2, while lightly armed in terms of guns, can carry 1,600 kilos of bombs and would see a lot of use killing armor, ala the A-20G.
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9423
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #40 on: April 01, 2012, 04:19:00 PM »
The C.202 is a better performer that either the MiG or the Yak at the altitudes we fly at, and it's basically a hanger queen.


Hey!

- oldman

Offline Tilt

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
      • FullTilt
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #41 on: April 02, 2012, 02:35:58 AM »
Pe-2's glass nose gives the pilot a good view of target. It was (unlike the Il2) a pucker dive bomber... I would see it used in attack role very much as our A20 is.

Earlier versions had dive brakes.
Ludere Vincere

Offline icepac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6996
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #42 on: April 02, 2012, 07:55:31 AM »
Widewing.......I've been flying most every plane mentioned in another sim for a decade.

They aren't hanger queens there.

It seems your only qualifier for a plane is that it must dominate the late war arena.

There are many other arenas in aces high and I would not have trouble beating most with these so called hanger queens.

Offline drgondog

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 326
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #43 on: April 02, 2012, 09:11:04 AM »
Considering that the P-63A was really a mid-war fighter (1943), it would offer fearsome low to medium altitude performance that would be great fun in Aces High... Check out this chart. The La-7 will have met its match. 384 mph at sea level with water injection.... Add to that a 5,000 fpm climb rate at sea level, 4,750 fpm at 5k... With a lower wing loading than the P-39Q, it should turn well too.

(Image removed from quote.)


Widewing - what is Max CL for the P-63 laminar flow wing?
Nicholas Boileau "Honor is like an island, rugged and without shores; once we have left it, we can never return"

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9423
Re: P-63 Performance
« Reply #44 on: April 02, 2012, 09:13:29 AM »
It seems your only qualifier for a plane is that it must dominate the late war arena.


In fairness to Widewing, voting over the past few years has convinced many of us that the majority of AH players are not interested in new planes which would not be competitive with the 1945 plane set.

- oldman