Dev's, for pete's sake do something about the P-38!!

That's great stuff, Helrza!

 

I think the p38 is just fine. But have common sense when flying it. Obiously the p38 offers ALOT of surface area so in a turn you should expect to loose alot of E. But while I flew the p38 I LOVED IT, its fast "especially at its intended altitude which i bet you dont even get close too" and has wonderfull control, not to mention an awesome gun platform.....p38 also has a very good prolonged climb rate. Size is the only real problom I see with the p38.

 

I have to say that when im flying as a Gold pilot, the only plane which I know im sure to kill if it is under me is a P38

As Allsop said, its just so damn big that you cant fail to hit it up close.

Its been a long time since I viewed the P38 as a massive threat. I think the best P38 pilots have left FH now.

 

I still love to fly the p38 when I venture to fly red. Infact the P51b, P38, some other small oddball planes are my favorites to fly.

All I can suggest to p38 pilots is that they should fly high, which means take the time to climb, they should fly energy conchious, dont be ammo conchious "you got 2k rounds of 50 in your nose....use it!" and just stay fast...If your at 15k feet or higher, you can dive to the point a 190 isnt really effective cause their controls have basicly frozen while your still able to get moving side to side...

Using flaps "not full, but 3/4" you can make some impressive turns.....but you should be near half or lower on fuel, and turning flat isnt a smart idea in almost any plane as it blows all youre energy.

Dont make yourself a large target, if someone is stuck to your 6, dont make a huge climb or something stupid like that, I mean, what happens when you pull up? You allow a MASSIVE surface area pilot side up just laying wide open to your opponent, and when the p38 is naturally big, its just stupid, but a low angle sustained climb is a good escape....

Common sense can pull you a long way, but I ask you, was the p38 ever a dogfighter that got down and dirty with a good success rate? From what I can read and tell p38's were good for long range and high alt operations, and that you had to play with brains to do well.....you wont to turn and burn, go for a shitfire, but thats all I can really suggest.

 

....no I shouldn't say that.

 

That WAS real and true fact when I flew it (under a different ID). It went from a formidable foe to contend with, to an easy target. I found the B25, LI2, Mossie, and the F4F/Spitfire like IL2 much better. But the stats don't add up, obviously.

 

See what happens? And I blame the demise on one person, not a gloating either......-alw-- He just flew it too well, and it displeased particular people in decision making places, thus the final result exists, wether logical or not.

(Can't wait to see the gravity defying spits/yaks/P51s/P40s changed.)

 

Easy fix.....change it back to what it was BEFORE!! Why can't that be done?? I've seen the same done on many aircraft!!...but not this one...wonder why. I've seen many many improvements with other aircraft, making it more and more difficult for the Allied or Axis aircraft while the P38 is ignored. I wonder if the original configuration of the P38 here would still compete with the Axis planes now?!?! Just change it back to what it was before. We can still shoot it down.

 

I have to differ on that....I think the 190 flies well....it just depends on what "kind" of flying you are doing.

 

Well, did IEN have the "added" aircraft that we have here? I think also you must consider aircraft that have been upgraded a WHOLE lot in performance such as the I16, P40, P51, and the amazing F4F slug that is an awsome plane now! (let's see, how much did that thing weigh, hp, P/W ratio, wing area...hmm.)

 

Umm....and did the I153/I16 have trim tabs, plus autopilot?....another issue for another topic though.

 

This is a response (problem) that comes from the FH people and other users. I know why, it's because they fly those aircraft effectively enough and their world comes crashing down when they can't win against something bigger than their plane. I could shoot down a P-38 in a 109T, (check that aircraft statistic) or any other. It's about the pilot and how well he can plan the shots, on a rather large target. This reminds me of Nascar and Sprint car racing where they put restrictor plates over the carburators to cut down performance....except it was done to all cars on the track in the race.

This is about the P-38 being able to fly on it's own and perform normally.
We DO need to stay on the subject of what the aircraft can and can't do, rather than comparing apples with oranges. We CANNOT sit here and argue about what other planes can do better than the P-38 and what the P-38 can do better than the others. This is a mistake. Why? Because those planes you compare with are not accurate in their specs ANYWAY.

 

This isn't the way to fix the problem. If FH programmers will change BACK to what it was before we will see what happens.

 

All variants of the FH P-38s here have poor performance.

 

Whatever that means.

 

Yes, I've seen that one...and have a copy of it on my computer. I'd like to see people's opinion after watching it!!

 

Not yet. -- () --

 

Points that caught my attention in helrza's link and what I think aren't properly modelled in WH (except turn... which indeed wasn't very good unless flapped)

aircraft would lift off the runway between 100 to 110 mph, and required very little effort to pull it up in the air.
- In WB without flaps and load somewhere between 140 and 150

Without employing the MANEUVER flaps, the P-38 did not turn as well as most other US planes. It had the largest minimum turning radius of all fighters. For comparison, it's minimum turning radius was about twice that of the FM-2 Wildcat. The flaps helped decrease turning radius at the expense of speed. The MANUEVER flaps helped, but still did not make the P-38 into legendary dogfighter.

The P-38 had perhaps the fastest linear acceleration of all US propeller planes during WW2 (This was true to for all variants for their respective times) .
- not so true in WB
Between 250 mph and 300 mph IAS, the rates were similar for both earlier and later models, and were approximately 70 - 80 degrees per second (4.5 - 5 second roll).

Once airborne and "clean" (gear retracted, etc.), many pilots said that the the P-38 would climb like a "homesick angle."
- not so true in WB

The early P-38s could climb from sea level to 20,000 ft in about 8 minutes. Later variants (H+) could reach 20,000 ft in 7 minutes. The original design goal was six minutes.

 

The interesting thing about this comment is that while it was designed as a high altitude escort, it's best speed is at sea level for all throttle settings. Check the bottom section of the FOIC attached.

regards, Oz

 

See, thats misleading. The plane performs best 'speed' at sea level, and that does little to say for any other performance other than 'speed'. And we all know 'speed' is relitive. Its known that the higher you go, the less "ressistince" there is, but its also harder for an engine to pull you along as the air is thinner...its a trade off...But at 15k, feet im more than confident that the p38 could hold its own against anything...Just fly smart, sometimes its hard to do, but if you want to burn it up, fly a spit........The only true drawback to the p38 IMHO is its visibility, which was a true factor IRL, so i dont see much use complaining about it.

If anyone remembers, about 6 months ago I was flying red almost non stop just because I couldnt get enough of the p38, I thought it was amamzing and couldnt imagine why everyone thought it was so bad. Only problom is that one day I got frustrated because a pilot was sitting at 15k feet and for some reason I never saw his 190 diving on me and 18x20mm latter I was ejected.....just take your time, I mean, the things good on fuel, no rush.