168 Wish list.....

Discussion in 'Warbirds International' started by -ALW-, Sep 18, 2010.

  1. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    Anyone have more ideas to put up?
     
  2. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    Find a full magazine and an ak47 to point at the developers so they will be more comfortable. :p
     
  3. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    have you tested misc.fh already?
     
  4. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    I tested that misc.fh last month, and that was just for the P38G.
     
  5. Jacobe

    Jacobe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2002
    Messages:
    3,340
    Location:
    Suomi,Finland
  6. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    and vanished in silence...
     
  7. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    A thought I have here is to create a new set of help pages for the new release of 1.68 geared for new users. It would basically have the current in-game help pages (F4 key) reduced to maybe one page by combining the data and shrinking the text/images into organized lines rather than the 7 pages of poorly organized and messy help pages. And if we can come up with some frequently asked questions to put in there too like, drop menu shading, hotkeys, macros, WBFH features, WBFH commands and what they do (.time, .ver, .ottos, .plane ##, .pos, .ros, .move commands, V2 missile commands, etc). If the F4 (in-game help pages) menu buttons on top could be changed/added, that would be awesome as well.

    Comments, devs? :shuffle:
     
  8. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    1.69 on the way, this week. rps will be modiefied.
    btw, p-38g 1942-08?
     
  9. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    :super:
     
  10. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    Oh! Cool! What about the P-38G? What do you mean 1942-08?
     
  11. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    what's the date of g? so far i know yamamoto kill date.
     
  12. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    August 1942 for the RPS? That would be great. :D
     
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2011
  13. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    They were delivered into service in July, 42.
     
  14. looseleaf

    looseleaf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Messages:
    5,026
  15. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    actually, we use "first combat" when the country is fighting.
    for countries outside the war we use "first regiment declared combat ready".

    between "delivered" (where to, btw? at factory for adopting committee, qc? from industry to forces? from forces to end users in regiments? regiments transported to the theatre?) and "enters combat" sometimes up to 6 months happens.

    in overall, us has a strange history: authors write about revolutionary p-47d-25, but never mention entry date.
    authors state entry date of p-47d-1-re, but notice that p-47d-1-re is equal to p-47c-5-re.
    authors write that 1942-06 p-38f from alaska met midway disguise manoeuvre of japanese fleet.
    but in book running 100 pages completely about lightnings, 1082 p-38g always have 1, max 2 paragraphs. and usually about mixed g/h, just several words.

    wtf is p-47d-1-re that has nothing new upon p-47c-5-re?
    wtf is p-38j that is almost equal to p-38h.
    and why write about p-38l when it is equal to p-38j-25-lo?


    ehm... sorry. that was not needed.

    back on topic.

    i'd avoid using "delivered" date for p-38g.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2011
  16. Red Ant

    Red Ant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    4,946
    Location:
    Germany
    Are you worried that august '42 is too early to introduce the P-38G? Only getting the P-38J in late '43 is pretty bad if you ask me. The F model has a very hard time competing against the fighter types available to gold by 1943, pretty much all of which out climb, out accelerate and out run the P-38F with ease. Well okay, there are some that don't, but the most prominent gold fighters do.

    Warren M. Bodie's "The Lockheed P-38 Lightning" cites the following delivery dates for these P-38G batches:

    Code:
    model          contract #    # delivered       engine          delivery dates
    P-38G-1-LO     AC-21217          100           V1710F-10   Aug 42 - Oct 42
    P-38G-3-LO     AC-21217          80             V1710F-10   Sept 42 - Oct 42
    P-38G-5-LO     AC-21217          12             V1710F-10   Aug 42 - Oct 42
    P-38G-10-LO   AC-21217          548             V1710F-10   Oct 42 - May 43
    P-38G-13-LO   A-242/AC-31707     174           V1710F-10     Nov 42 - Jan 43
    P-38G-15-LO  A-242/AC-31707     200            V1710F-10     Jan 43 - Mar 43  
    
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2011
  17. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    p-38j set to date of p-38h from 55fg escorted 8af.
    could not be any earlier.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2011
  18. allpay

    allpay Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    268
    Location:
    TURKEY/Eski┼čehir
    waiting hopefully my friend :cheers:
     
  19. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    1.69 gets new damage model, right? :shuffle:
     
  20. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    I understand. IMHO, however, it is such a hit and miss, inaccurate method to use "combat reports" when the production line of P-38s already saw thousands produced, delivered, put into service, and months/years prior to the G variant. Many of these aircraft saw patrolling/surveillance/strafing/bombing/escort missions where there was no combat encountered, and I would imagine there are thousands of missions that were never documented into books or onto the internet, except for the colorful ones that are famous. :rolleyes: Many of the F variants were updated with G improvements and continued to be used. My thought concerning application right now in WBFH would be the G model represents it's early delivery date available only at medium/large fields. :)

    Most people are interested in the specifications/production/performance. If this were a decision when to release the first P-38 variant that saw combat action, I would understand but, if it's about later production variants, I will still dispute it. :deal: :D