Originally posted by Mino
Alright, now....
Why on earth did the LW call the P-38 the "Forked Tail Devil"?
By all accounts should it not have been referred to as the "Porked Tailed Panzie"?
Anyone have a plausible explanation?
it was named by the Ju52 pilots who few transport to north africa.P38s were most often the ones that shot them down , hense the name.
Oed you are quite offensive with your suggestion that i look at the info from one book and make my assesment from it.I am basing my opinion of the flaw in AH from flying ALL of the aircraft and shooting down ALL of the aircraft.
MY OPINION here is that the p38 sustains a lot more hits in AH than other planes.Lately ive been flying the p51 and my opinion is that i can take a lot more hits in it than when i fly 190s for instance.
its simple, I read books with accounts from pilots of all sides in the war and i formulate an opinion same as you have.You obviously feel that the aircraft/model represented in AH is correct and i feel it isnt.Theres no need to start claiming im asking for change based on a single account in a single book.
but what i am asking here is for you guys to show me accounts of p38s or p51s taking excessive hits in combat or statements from pilots that would suggest they are tough planes.
If our opinion of how AH planes seem too tough or too weak dont count then id really like to know what does.
Im being honest here, Im not some LW freak who wants an easy time of it like you annoyingly suggest.I want a game where i see behaviour that is consistent with the stuff i read about.what else is there to want from these sims?
I read about average number of hits it takes to down bombers and when that doesnt pan out in the game i tend to question it.
Id really like to know whether you consider the p51 was vulnerable to ground fire and then could you explain to me why ack in AH doesnt down the p51 as easily as it does other planes.but then i guess you dont agree with that either do you? even though many of us have film of our p51s taking loads more hits.
I just get fed up with it.I really dont know why i half hope some of you will just say 'ok they do take more hits than you'd expect'
I fly them and i find it quite laughable that you all claim it doesnt happen.
One thing i have noticed is that when i shoot planes after some 3 years(?) in AH is that theres a certain expectancy when you unload lots of 20mm into an aircraft.You hit with a bunch of shots on a nik or spit or whatever and you tend to break off 'knowing' thats enough to put them down.Well all too often i break off an attack on p38s or p51s and im amazed they are still flying.This is where this questioning comes from.Not some LW pilot love.
I dont get this behaviour with the other aircraft (apart from La7s) so why is it i get it with the p38 or p51 or la7?
Is my view totally wrong? you may claim it is but i think most people know what i mean.Its almost impossible to produce figures to prove one way or the other but i know what i thinkand what i notice often whilst playing AH.
it just gets annoying when i stumble upon even more accounts that point toward a flaw in the AH modeling and post them only to be told they are roadkill by someone who wasnt in the war and so has in my eyes has less credibility than those people whos accounts i read who WERE there.
its what we read vs what we see in AH.
'The P-38 was actually quite durable, the wing spar was stainless steel.(quick point here so was the 190's) There are reports of P-38s colliding with telephone poles and other planes, with the other planes and the telephone poles coming out on the losing end. Jack Ilfrey collided with a 109, and lost about six feet of wing, while the 109 spun in out of control, due to the loss of an entire wing, Ilfrey returned to base, and landed safely. A P-38 from the same group hit a telephone pole on a strafing run, cutting the pole in half, while the P-38 lost a prop and suffered engine damage, the pilot returned to base and landed safely. While the P-38 was not without its faults, being fragile was not one of them. It was common to have P-38s land even when they were so badly bent from overstress in dives or turns that the controls were nearly jammed, and the planes had to be scrapped. Many P-38s landed with holes in their wings you could stand in, missing wing sections, holes all the way through engines you could stick your arm through, and even a couple with one tail boom shot away.'
this sort of thing i find intersting and I would like to see where this all comes from.Maybe if i read these in a book id change my mind about them.However i certainly havent seen anything like it myself.Perhaps you can give us more info than a second hand recalling of this? for all we know it could be made up or like chinese whispers all complete nonsense.
p38 cutting down telephone poles? that is something id like to see in print before i believe

having said that, if i did see it Id immediately stop questioning what i often see in AH.Or at least it would cross off the p38.