Jump to content
dkoor

So who else is looking forward to P-38 ?

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Psyrion said:

@Ehret You sound like a broken record.

 

You sound like you accept lower simulating standards and broken/handicapped models. If the argument is "it is the manual" then why other parts of it are totally ignored in the "sim"? Perhaps, you like that for some reason but me and others do not.

 

Some repeatedly spam topics with pictures of 108 shells tests - are going to tell them they sound like broken records, too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Ehret said:

Some repeatedly spam topics with pictures of 108 shells tests - are going to tell them they sound like broken records, too?

Yes

I for one am very much looking forward to flying the p-38. I´m sure it will be a joy to fly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Psyrion said:

@Ehret You sound like a broken record.

Well, it is a problem, and its just going to get worse as the game adds nations.

 

It was a compromise that was necessary at the time, but the variability of nations and manufacturers' guidelines and the devs will need to develop a way to simulate the engines to keep growing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Psyrion said:

I for one am very much looking forward to flying the p-38. I´m sure it will be a joy to fly. 

 

A joy to fly - sure. To fight in the MP considering game realities? - borderline masochistic.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/31/2018 at 7:26 PM, =27=Davesteu said:

 

Well, out of the ten BoBP aircraft I'm definitely looking forward to the P-38 the most!

Personally I'm glad they decided to change to the J model instead of the L. Hopefully not only for historical reasons, but also because they want to add the "Droop Snoot". :happy:

I at least genuinely hope we get it as a modification.

Not sure what is so historical about having "J" model in BoP (Jan 1945).  The references I've read indicate that all "J" models had been withdrawn from the ETO  before the end of '44.  I believe only one P-38 squadron remained in the 8th AF after Dec '44, and that was P-38L model.

 

That said, they should at least be the P-38J-25-LO that had boosted ailerons and dive brakes.  With those, compressibility is solved and she will out roll all other fighters.

 

I will continue to hope, but I fear we will get a 1943 A/C vs 1945 GE A/C.  Not a good prospect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BSS_Stel said:

Not sure what is so historical about having "J" model in BoP (Jan 1945).  The references I've read indicate that all "J" models had been withdrawn from the ETO  before the end of '44.  I believe only one P-38 squadron remained in the 8th AF after Dec '44, and that was P-38L model.

 

 

 

You do realize this release deals with 9th Air Force units?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, BSS_Stel said:

I believe only one P-38 squadron remained in the 8th AF after Dec '44, and that was P-38L model.

You believe wrongly. No P-38 groups were left at that time. All P-38's were gone from the 8th Air Force inventory by September of 1944.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BSS_Stel said:

Not sure what is so historical about having "J" model in BoP (Jan 1945).  The references I've read indicate that all "J" models had been withdrawn from the ETO  before the end of '44.  I believe only one P-38 squadron remained in the 8th AF after Dec '44, and that was P-38L model.

 

That said, they should at least be the P-38J-25-LO that had boosted ailerons and dive brakes.  With those, compressibility is solved and she will out roll all other fighters.

 

I will continue to hope, but I fear we will get a 1943 A/C vs 1945 GE A/C.  Not a good prospect.

 

Oh my goodness:

  • The ETO was more than just the 8th AF.
  • Bodenplatte is covering more than just January 1945 (it covers Market Garden to the Rhineland Offensive)
  • USAAF units on the map being created were predominately 9th AF units.
  • All the L models in Europe were in the MTO.
  • It's been known for a while now that the J-25-LO is the model being created.
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I like the P-38 it does seem like an odd choice for this time period, especially over a workhorse like the Typhoon, or a more powerful and relevant fighter like the XIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game needs to appeal to all sides, and peoples likes... Plus, in the time period depicted and not just for Bodenplatte, it was in theatre. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

As much as I like the P-38 it does seem like an odd choice for this time period, especially over a workhorse like the Typhoon, or a more powerful and relevant fighter like the XIV

 

For the Typhoon, it was a choice between the Typhoon and the Tempest, and the devs felt that there was not another good battle to include the Tempest in. 

 

For the Spitfire, it was a choice between the IX and the XIV. The IX saw more service over a wider array of battles, so that was the one they picked. 

 

The P-38J-25 despite being a bit off for the specific battle, has the advantage of filling out the last major USAAF fighter type of the war. If they'd just done a 2nd Spitfire or second Hawker stormplane, that would not have been the case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The P-38 also has the advantage of being able to use in other theaters, some very far away from Europe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

The P-38 also has the advantage of being able to use in other theaters, some very far away from Europe.

So does the p40 and p39 two 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, =621=Samikatz said:

As much as I like the P-38 it does seem like an odd choice for this time period, especially over a workhorse like the Typhoon, or a more powerful and relevant fighter like the XIV

 

What do IX TAC P-38's that served in the theater have to do with the relevance of British aircraft?

If your answer is "nothing", well you're on the right track.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Voyager said:

The P-38J-25 despite being a bit off for the specific battle, has the advantage of filling out the last major USAAF fighter type of the war.

 

Huh? What on Earth are you talking about? The J-25 is entirely relevant for the specific timeframe / battle. 

 

Goodness, the ill-informed replies are filling up in this topic. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 4:19 AM, Ehret said:

 

And wonder why it's like that? The P-47, late P-51s and the Lighting need high altitude objectives. No such thing in BOBP (so far) and low you are facing short-range late war LW's point interceptors in numbers. Even if you will have (for the Tempest, the P-51D should be competitive somewhat) rough performance parity the next differentiating factor will be the boost endurance. After 5m minutes of being competitive you will be forced back not even to combat but nominal (emergency eats into combat power unlike LW's planes) when the enemy will have another 5m of full power to easily finish you off and practically unlimited strong combat power after that.

 

In Allied planes in the game you can not do: shallow climb tactics, longer chases, cruise faster, keep covering an objective without being handicapped after few minutes. All those are direct results of artificial (gamey even) mechanism of boost timers where no such thing had place IRL. Yet, we don't have basics like detonation physics - in the sim you can open throttle 100% when the engine is at low RPM and nothing bad will happen...

So do you want the detonation thing modeled or not? LW planes aren`t concerned by that.

 

No matter which side people fly on, the engine performance limit modelling is in dire need of an intelligent and practical resolution. Avoiding that only hurts the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mac_Messer said:

So do you want the detonation thing modeled or not? LW planes aren`t concerned by that.

 

Of course! The same for the turbo failure modes in the P-47. I have read manual and how to manage it only to find that they are absent. It was disappointing...

 

All piston engines are concerned by the detonation even it's unlikely controls could allow it to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2019 at 4:31 AM, LukeFF said:

 

Oh my goodness:

  • The ETO was more than just the 8th AF.
  • Bodenplatte is covering more than just January 1945 (it covers Market Garden to the Rhineland Offensive)
  • USAAF units on the map being created were predominately 9th AF units.
  • All the L models in Europe were in the MTO.
  • It's been known for a while now that the J-25-LO is the model being created.

Negative Luke.  was not aware that time period covered was from Sep-44 on.  Also, was not tracking that release was going to be J-25-LO which, I believe had the boosted ailerons and mods for the dive brakes applied.  Appreciate the info.  I don't get to these boards very often and didn't see anything in the Dev updates talking P-38 variant to be modeled.

 

Looking forward to flying this as most others here.

 

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2019 at 2:48 PM, Mac_Messer said:

So do you want the detonation thing modeled or not? LW planes aren`t concerned by that.

 

No matter which side people fly on, the engine performance limit modelling is in dire need of an intelligent and practical resolution. Avoiding that only hurts the series.

The LW was not  concerned by it because the they did not use as 130 nor 150 octane fuel. See link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTD7DqXfRno

Additionally it appears the gentleman in the vidieo calls  out the Devs. without naming them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frequent_Flyer said:

The LW was not  concerned by it because the they did not use as 130 nor 150 octane fuel. See link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTD7DqXfRno

Additionally it appears the gentleman in the vidieo calls  out the Devs. without naming them.

 

 

I don't think you understand detonation.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2019 at 4:30 AM, =475FG=DAWGER said:

I don't think you understand detonation.

 

I mean, why would LW planes running engines at lower boost and a higher compression ratio ever be concerned with detonation?

 

...I rest my case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to say this LP1888, as I am mostly an Allied pilot, but you sir are dreaming.

The 190D will eat the P38 for breakfast, lunch, and, dinner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, LP1888 said:

CANNOT WAIT FOR P-38 DORA KILLER!!!!!!!

 

lol... I'm mainly an allied flyer too... but you are in for a rather large shock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

 

lol... I'm mainly an allied flyer too... but you are in for a rather large shock.

Tempest will be a good matchup, probably.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Tempest will be a good matchup, probably.

 

I just hope it isn't the only..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

 

lol... I'm mainly an allied flyer too... but you are in for a rather large shock.

Properly modeled, the only thing the Dora does better than the P-38J-25-LO is top speed and dive speed. The P-38 turns better, accelerates better, and climbs better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, =475FG=DAWGER said:

Properly modeled, the only thing the Dora does better than the P-38J-25-LO is top speed and dive speed. The P-38 turns better, accelerates better, and climbs better.

 

People overlook that the Dora is heavy for a single V12. The usual mod to take for the P-39L is to remove wings' 0.30"s which results in 3316kg standard weight. The D9 standard weight is 4289kg - almost 30% difference. This almost equalize power-loading (1550hp @ 3.3t vs 2130hp @ 4.2t) and from I have experienced so far it's not too difficult to stick to the D9' six in the Cobra including climbs to 3000m.

 

That's for quick 1vs1 engagements, only. In actual sorties the c****py "you know what" will ensure that you (probably) lose in any American plane...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hunting down locomotives with this bird should be fun. Also general groundpounding. If we would be able to do something like hunting down 109s like 1Lt. James L. "Pappy" Doyle of the 428th FS, 474th FG. did when killing Walter Oesau in 1944, we will see.

 

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=3168

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The zoom climb should be amazing. P-38 was known for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ehret said:

This almost equalize power-loading (1550hp @ 3.3t vs 2130hp @ 4.2t) and from I have experienced so far it's not too difficult to stick to the D9' six in the Cobra including climbs to 3000m.

 

Have the Dora climb away at the Airacobra's max level-speed at alt and there goes your little hypothesis...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 8:07 AM, Ehret said:

 

A joy to fly - sure. To fight in the MP considering game realities? - borderline masochistic.

 

I enjoy shooting down FW190s in my P40. I’m sure the P38 will surprise some naysayers. 

 

But of course, you’re right. The engine mechanics need additions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People will be least surprised when they acknowledge that all the late-war crates are very similar in performance and most is down to pilot skill.

 

The P-38 will hold some surprises to people who think a twin is a sure kill.

It won't be the "final solution" to fighter-design either, though.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, =475FG=DAWGER said:

Properly modeled, the only thing the Dora does better than the P-38J-25-LO is top speed and dive speed. The P-38 turns better, accelerates better, and climbs better.


For what I could find the climbrate is similar between the D-9 and P-38, both with full fuel and the P-38 using 70" with 150 octane fuel. With 100 octane fuel and 60" the D-9 mantains a higher climbrate. You can take less fuel with the P-38, that might give it some advantage but I don't know how much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a feeling they are going to model all allied fighters with the 100 octane fuel for now as a base, then come in after and add 150 octane to them. If they start adding 150 from the start to the remaining planes the old ones might not ever receive it. Having both is better to me. 

It covers more time period that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

A lone USAAF officer walks through the gate at RAF Westhampnett, and saunters to the operations building...

"Lt. EL reporting for Spitfire transition training sir!"

Edited by BlitzPig_EL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Have the Dora climb away at the Airacobra's max level-speed at alt and there goes your little hypothesis...

 

I wrote "climbs to 3000m" - it was at Belroga from about co-velocity well under 600km/h and starting alt lower than 1000m. You can compute power-loading to see that the D9 is not that hot when lower. And who was in that P-39L? From what I have seen most don't even open throttle fully because of fear of engine seizing. That's what awfully sluggish prop gov and 1m 45s before "emergency exceeded" did to popular opinion of the P-39L. Both artificial.

 

Thought, top level speed of the P-39L is high enough and still last long enough to keep the D9 in a gun range for about 20-30s and score hits.

 

8 hours ago, Field-Ops said:

I have a feeling they are going to model all allied fighters with the 100 octane fuel for now as a base, then come in after and add 150 octane to them. If they start adding 150 from the start to the remaining planes the old ones might not ever receive it. Having both is better to me. 

It covers more time period that way.

 

I have a bad feeling that fuel octane is not a controllable variable in engine models. It could be that the change to 150 will need a new FM... We had a discussions before and there was an opinion that timers could be part of eng-modelling+FM thus changing them isn't straightforward as one would hope. Indeed! - the very short timer in the P-40 could mask some issues at +50" boost (check what happens in QMB and unbreakable flag set - Kittyhawk becomes BOBP material when throttle is 100% open). The Airacobra could have a similar issues but this is masked by auto MP governor which conveniently limits it to 60" but IRL the auto-MP wasn't that common for L.

Edited by Ehret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...