p40e and yaks improved performance.......a6m slight improvement....So we forget all about the jap planes and just keep upering up some prime canidate red planes?.....those be some skrewed up priorities.
Also, was it really the zeke's high speed handling that needed seeing to? I thought the issue was more the zeke's totally (ahistorical) lousy low speed handling? (course I might be wrong .... not really a zeke flier here)
Ooooh, cool. This means I can still sucker TnB zekes, while I am low and slow in my Chaika? I bet, if given choices what to fly, if given a choice of ANY plane that was produced in ww2, many Japanese pilots in that era would have FLOWN SOMETHING ELSE. At least they would have after it became apparent the Allies were producing some fine birds and the OTHER axis powers were also. I don't see much whining from Hurrican pilots due to the fact the fuckin' things were OBSOLETE after 1939. Why all the whining from Zeke pilots becuase they JUST CAN'T COMPETE in a BnZ contest? - or a TnB contest against my chaika. In a zeke, ya can't run, so TnB until ya got no e and count on ALL the red planes being shit - in yer dreams.... At least some of the golds fly a plane that doesn't do CONSTANT sickening BnZ. Suggestion for zeke lovers: get voice coms and fly with wingman
You have to be kidding me!? Your not serious right? Jappanese pilots declaired the zeke a modernation to the samurai sword......Its performance broke the barrier on the original jap fighter requirements and totally outclassed the p40 p39 and other planes it incountered in all aspects but top speed and diving speed....... Besides, do some history, find out that your butterfly is higly overmodled here and your lucky you get its late war high powerplant... Plus to say the ki61 doesnt need improovement couldnt even be decalaired by someone on acid trip........ Please dont let your personal opinions blind history.
Yes, chaika is overmodelled. I would still fly it if it's powerplant were more historically accurate. It WAS a good dogfighter, regardless. I never try and climb when in a dogfight with it. Sustained turning in a BIplane, power isn't nearly as nessesary to haul it around as it is for high wingloaded planes. It still falls apart when you try and BnZ with it. As it should, when putting the nose down at full throttle [even WITH a downgraded powerplant, the wings would fold, right?] If all the planes here were more historically accurate [I know, I know.......] I would still fly my favorites, but they would be different favorites, right? Anyway, P40E YEEEEHAWWWWWW
Biles why bring up the fact that the Japanese planes cannot out turn an I-153 if they cannot even out turn a Spitifre9? That is what this thread is about. There has been a lot of good data posted on this thread. Read it, it tells you all you need to know.
This coming from someone who still ignores requests to prove that he can get a Spitfire to climb vertically after 50 foot roll.
ozemale, Ill tell you the same thing I tell the other whiny lil she-whores. You PM me, You set a time, and I will meet you and we will conduct a test.....otherwise, you can shutup as you have done nothing to defend that a spitfire CANNOT take off aster a few baby steps forward.... My offer stands, anyone think they have any plane even with flaps that can take off with 100 fuel and climb to 300m before the spit? Anyone? THEN SHUTUP.
You choose to admite defeat by entirely ignoring the subject.....amazing. Your statement was that YOU could get a spitfire off the ground and climb almost vertical after 50ft. Nothing about reaching 300m or any other shit before anything. So, I guess this will continue to haunt you until you either retract your verbal diarrhea, or you give us all proof. Simple, hey?
But that was not your claim...You spouted that the spit could take off and climb vertical after only 50 feet of runway all i want is to see the track that proves it or for you to retract the statment...
You wont get that track though, simply because it cant happen. And Allsop will still piss about around the fringes of this argument, making laughable claims about not being able to send email attachments, etc.
P-40E handling at high speed improved I'm so happy finally PS. mb now time to think about screwed dead brick called P-38
I CANT SEND TRACKS! I only have e-mail through yahoo and I cant even get pictures loaded into the damn thing! I still offer to be the spit pilot, but if you want to talk about "diarhea" mouth, then glas, why dont you show us how the 109g2 can take off BEFORE the spitfire and get to 300m faster? That was your claim, but I have seen no proof of it....... and no one here seems to be able to proove my claim is wrong. Anytime, if you see me in the arena, ask, ill land, we will take it private.....My theory, you dick reds are so addicted to the spits "anti gravity' abilities you would simply have withdrawls if you didnt have its excessive performance........ Im not even asking that its handling be decreased, I simply ask 1 of 2 things take place. 1. Spitfire starts respecting that 100 fuel means it cant run like it has 20% 2. The fw190 "specificly" is remodelled to outclimb the spitfire at all speeds to 20k feet like history says it did. Please, If you have any more ressistance to the idea, show me proof that any spit untill the arival of the xiv could outperform a 190 in anything but flat turning....You wont, but Im sure you will just be like "ah! he cant have a track posted!" and be no better twords resolving the conflict....... oh, and besides glas, I belive about a week ago I offered while you were in the arena to go to MA with me and prove your 109g2 results, and for over an hour you wouldnt....Dont tell me you were in the air for an hour because I kept asking and other FH members had said you landed.....you know your wrong so avoid anything other than picking on the fact I cant post a track.
wtg Ledada But isn't it easier to take (and forget after one use) an account to hotmail (f.e.) since apparently one can't send .trk files via PM? Yes, I know they can be altered to .txt, but (again f.e.) with my computer skills it's easier to send them as .trk attachment. airfax @allsop: for what comes to sending mail via Yahoo....I have approx 7 e-mail adresses. Why the hell do you use such crappy mail, if you can't send attachments with it? Internet is full of free e-mails.....pick one and learn how to use it....
yahoo can send attachments if see all the spamshit in my inbox btw - simply zip that file to send it...