PDA

View Full Version : Let us reflect upon the P38



ZG77_Nagual
05-20-2004, 08:27 AM
Seems less control intertia, better acceleration, better climb (shallow climb tactic works much better) and overall greater agility up till you hit compression - which is the same. I also think dispersion may be tighter but I'm not sure.

ZG77_Nagual
05-20-2004, 08:27 AM
Seems less control intertia, better acceleration, better climb (shallow climb tactic works much better) and overall greater agility up till you hit compression - which is the same. I also think dispersion may be tighter but I'm not sure.

WWScout
05-20-2004, 11:36 AM
Sounds about right. It still has the same problem with torque and compression. I thought that all aircraft had problems with compression. Does it set in too soon on this plane? I have noticed it doesn't take near the damage it had before, so the problems with the guns seems to have been fixed. Still my favorite plane in the game and I'm sure a lot of people online like me flying it, gives them an easy 200 points http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

geetarman
05-20-2004, 12:10 PM
My favorite ride - until yesterday. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
I flew the L off and online for about an hour each last night. I don't see the roll rate improved that much. But, if accurate, that's enough. The guns do hit harder though.

The only other real, tangible change I noted was slightly better control at low speeds. Again, if all this is accurate- so be it.

Now, turning to the P-47. If the "corrections" made to that plane, particularly the roll rate, are correct, I can now see what Robt. Johnson was talking about in his testimonials.

The P-47 feels almost like a new plane; the P-38, a little better.

NegativeGee
05-20-2004, 01:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It still has the same problem with torque and compression. I thought that all aircraft had problems with compression. Does it set in too soon on this plane?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to what has been said, the torque cannot be completely eliminated, it is already set as alow as the game engine can allow.

As to compressability in a dive, from what I've seen it comes on quickly about 600-630 TAS. As the speed rises the nosing down starts and you have zero elevator control, so unless you are in the L version things start looking grim http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Is this speed accurate? don't ask me, I only fly here http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

http://www.invoman.com/images/tali_with_hands.jpg

Look Noobie, we already told you, we don't have the Patch!

ZG77_Nagual
05-20-2004, 01:18 PM
rumor is the speed is accurate - you can counter compression in the J with trim - just set it when you know you are going into a long dive. but the P38 accelerated fast in a dive and entered compression early. The L's dive flaps work just fine so you don't need the trim with that one.
There should be some torque under certain conditions in the p38.

PlaneEater
05-20-2004, 04:57 PM
Out of curiosity (since I'm not at home right now to test it), when you hit compressibility in the J, does rolling inverted and shoving the yoke forward help remedy the situation at all?

WWScout
05-20-2004, 06:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PlaneEater:
Out of curiosity (since I'm not at home right now to test it), when you hit compressibility in the J, does rolling inverted and shoving the yoke forward help remedy the situation at all?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's a great question. I've read something to that effect in some of my books. I'll give it a try and get back to you.

p1ngu666
05-20-2004, 06:58 PM
i do that in the bi1. it works btw http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
u get a strange black/red out at same time tho http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
&lt;123_GWood_JG123&gt; NO SPAM!

VFA-195 Snacky
05-21-2004, 05:25 AM
Something that puzzles me about the torque on the P38 is why the P38 requires some rudder trim to cancel out torque, but yet the P51D (both NA and NT) requires no rudder trim whatosever to stay level.
The P51D had a natural "twist" built into the airframe to help counteract torque and I always assumed this was a nice little realism feature that is recreated in FB.

If the P51D can maintain level flight and counter the torque by default without any trim whatsoever then why can't the same be done to the P38??

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."


**Opinions expressed are not those of UbiSoft or Eagle Dynamics**

gates123
05-21-2004, 03:10 PM
One aileron click to the left and one left rudder trim click on the p-38 and she flys perfect with no torque roll, whats the big deal?

http://www.flightjournal.com/images/index_photos/gunslinging.jpg
Did anyone see that or was it just me?

Tetrapharmakoi
05-21-2004, 03:36 PM
geetarman said :<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> "The P-47 feels almost like a new plane; the P-38, a little better."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes i noticed that too , the Jug has a better roll rate , so maybe we need people to confirm it , because i am not sure if it's psychological or did Oleg really changed it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bull_dog_
05-21-2004, 06:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PlaneEater:
Out of curiosity (since I'm not at home right now to test it), when you hit compressibility in the J, does rolling inverted and shoving the yoke forward help remedy the situation at all?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have found that in a steep dive angle, the J model did want to tuck nose under and I had to use elevator trim and flaps to pull out...at shallower angles, the nose tucking is not pronounced.... moral of the story...watch your dive angle closely lest become a lawn dart

Hunde_3.JG51
05-21-2004, 09:50 PM
The P-47 is a whole new plane IMO. It rolls better, turns better, is more forgiving, etc. I'm sorry but one of the reasons I like the planes like the 190, P-38, P-47, etc., is because they felt real and had character. I felt a kinship with P-47 drivers because they had to put up with a tempermental aircraft with obvious drawbacks. I'm sorry but the new P47 doesn't feel as real to me anymore. I may be off and others will disagree but that is my opinion. I hope to see more of them online though, too many P-51's flying around http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Sat May 22 2004 at 12:30 AM.]

VW-IceFire
05-22-2004, 09:20 AM
The P-47 is still a tempermental beast but it can roll well now...it was always a half decent turner compaired to the FW190 and it seems to retain energy more than before. Not to mention that it doesn't light on fire when hit by a rifle bullet anymore...

I think it still has alot of character...but yes I hope to see it more!

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

VMF-214_HaVoK
05-22-2004, 10:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
The P-47 is a whole new plane IMO. It rolls better, turns better, is more forgiving, etc. I'm sorry but one of the reasons I like the planes like the 190, P-38, P-47, etc., is because they felt real and had character. I felt a kinship with P-47 drivers because they had to put up with a tempermental aircraft with obvious drawbacks. I'm sorry but the new P47 doesn't feel as real to me anymore. I may be off and others will disagree but that is my opinion. I hope to see more of them online though, too many P-51's flying around http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Sat May 22 2004 at 12:30 AM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is still far easier to get kills in LW a/c with MK108 and now that 20mms are fixed its even more simple.

Fly US planes and you are still at a disadvantage so you can take some comfort in that http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

www.vmf-214.net (http://www.vmf-214.net)
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)

dadada1
05-22-2004, 11:42 AM
I really love the P38 now' its my favourate US aircraft. Now I can do a 360 roll in around 3 seconds, turns well and its very fast. Don't know how accurate this all is but P38 fans have got to be happy with the changes made, haven't they?

ucanfly
05-23-2004, 08:27 PM
Wow - a 360 in 3 seconds? It takes me 5 (still). The thing I really feel is different is the ammo count (much appreciated that this was fixed).

VFA-195 Snacky
05-23-2004, 09:52 PM
Well I guess what my point was that you shouldn't have to do this at all. If it's a IL2 engine limitation then so be it discussion over, but I'm interested in how they could get the P51D level without a need to trim but they cant do this for the P38?? It may not be a big deal but it could help the P38.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gates123:
One aileron click to the left and one left rudder trim click on the p-38 and she flys perfect with no torque roll, whats the big deal?

http://www.flightjournal.com/images/index_photos/gunslinging.jpg
Did anyone see that or was it just me?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."


**Opinions expressed are not those of UbiSoft or Eagle Dynamics**

WWScout
05-24-2004, 11:07 AM
Is it me or does the one compass still not work on this bird? Also, the fuel guage doesn't go down, your leaking fuel and at 25% then all of a sudden it's 0% Dispersion still seems everywhere but let's not get into that one http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ZG77_Nagual
05-24-2004, 11:41 AM
I've been mostly flying the J and very much enjoying it. Theres a bit to making it work right but it is far an away the most fun as far as I'm concerned. P47 seems more in line with pilot reports - won't track with a 109 or even a 190 flown right, but a much nicer ride across the board and very fast.

Maple_Tiger
05-24-2004, 12:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
The P-47 is a whole new plane IMO. It rolls better, turns better, is more forgiving, etc. I'm sorry but one of the reasons I like the planes like the 190, P-38, P-47, etc., is because they felt real and had character. I felt a kinship with P-47 drivers because they had to put up with a tempermental aircraft with obvious drawbacks. I'm sorry but the new P47 doesn't feel as real to me anymore. I may be off and others will disagree but that is my opinion. I hope to see more of them online though, too many P-51's flying around http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Sat May 22 2004 at 12:30 AM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



I fly it quite a bit, and it doesn't turn better then before.

It finaly gets it's roll rate fixed, and now it's over modeled?

Good thing your not in charge of flight models. If you where, every American plane would have no advantage what so ever. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

Das_alte_leid
05-25-2004, 02:13 PM
Hey all.

Just thought I'd point out that she has been made a hell of a lot more stable when firing.
ANyone else notice this?

Or is it just me? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

Z

Zwitter raus...

Hunde_3.JG51
05-25-2004, 03:29 PM
Whatever Maple, I don't see why you insist on being such a ****. I am trying to be respectful but you are just too damn annoying. I'm sorry you don't like my opinion, tough one. I don't have a problem with the roll, in fact if you search back I have supported increase in roll for P-47 several times and stated that I had alot of respect for P-47 drivers. You are trying to make me look like a luftwhiner but you are just making yourself look ignorant.

Perhaps the wording of my post was bad, I'm not trying to say it is overmodelled just that it doesn't "feel" right anymore. This has more to do with game physics (now that I have more time with the patch) than what the P-47 is doing, and perhaps I should have made that clearer. The P-47 is much more forgiving than before, but that goes for all planes to some degree. I think the P-47 has a tough time in FB for three reasons. One, high altitude modelling is not so great in FB and that is where the P-47 was strong. I have said before that in a Western front sim I would not be toying with P-47's up high because I know how strong it is up there. Two, most fights take place at low altitude online where the P-47's performance was historically not as strong. In fact, if you search hard enough I previously said that P-47 drivers are screwed worse than any other plane type because of online characteristics. Third, FB does not model dive and zoom that well IMO, and if you search you will find that I stated that planes like the P-51, P-47, and FW-190 suffer the most.

So you can keep trying to paint me as an USAAF hating luftwhiner but my past posts speak for themselves so no worries.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

patch_adams
05-25-2004, 04:10 PM
Whatever hunde, you insist that you are not a "luftwhiner" but it can be deduced from your posts that you are, and if you arent, you are definately a "fockewulf" whiner. Any plane that presents a threat to your fockewulf now you deviously try to slander/neuter/nerf with biased tests and slanted acounts and facts. You disguise your posts and claim they are objective, but any intelligent human being can see your hidden agenda. Look at your last couple of posts, all questioning the performance of american aircraft. This forum needs less people like you.

ZG77_Nagual
05-25-2004, 04:38 PM
Well, pilot skill aside - as a long-time fock-wulf pilot I can tell you neither of these planes - the 47 or the 38 are particular threats.
The 190s are all great - particularly the a4 and the dora.

Lately I like flying the p38 red, the dora blue. I see no agenda in Hunde's post and the 47 still takes quite a bit of skill to win in - it just rolls better than it did.

Hunde_3.JG51
05-25-2004, 05:04 PM
Patch, I'm sorry you feel that way. I simply asked if speed boost was appropriate for P-51D at SL. People posted good info and I agreed that the change is probably accurate. As for P-47 I never ONCE said anything is overmodelled. I said it doesn't "feel" as real to me, but this now goes for all planes. When I posted about P-47 I didn't have enough time with patch so in that sense I was wrong. I have no problems with P-47 at all.

And my post about Spitifre is a pretty legitimate concern, having a plane run at those speeds indefinitely without overheating is certainly worth looking at IMO.

And that is the reason I posted this stuff, was for discussion. I don't need to discuss things here, I could just send tracks to Oleg as I normally do whenever it is appropriate, I just wanted to see what others thought. Minus the garbage posted there the P-51 thread was informative to me and I'm glad I asked about it.

The fact is, you don't know anything about me. My post history has been very friendly towards USAAF aircraft. I have sent tracks to Oleg concerning P-51's lack of high altitude speed, and about P-47's super fragile damage model in AEP (Hurricane ripped it apart in seconds from 300m). I have said that .50 cals should hit harder and have less dispersion. I have said that the FW-190 was way too tough in term of DM awhile back. I have said that roll-rate was too high at high speeds for 190 when it was an issue. I have talked about lack of dive and zoom for P-47, P-51, and the 190. I have talked about excessive vibration of P-38 when firing. I have talked about how dark P-51 canopy is, and if it was accurate. I never made an issue out of "the bar" for FW-190. I posted about fragility of P-40, and encouraged others to look into top speed as it seemed slow. And I do just fine online and I don't need anything nerfed.

And nevermind that it took me almost an hour each to type two articles from a book that I have about how to fly the P-40 and P-47 in combat. Still haven't got to P-38 one yet but I will someday. Feel free to look them up and see how much typing was involved. I guess I had a hidden agenda?

I admit my posts as of late may appear as luftwhining, but they were either misread and made into a big deal (P-51 thread), mistook for something else which I am mostly to blame for (P-47 remark), or are a serious game concern that I am curious about (spitfire thread). Again, I'm sorry you feel that way but my post history does not bear this out. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, I'm done anyway. I've had enough of defending myself to those who do not read carefully or have not read enough of my posts. Its simply not worth the effort anymore http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Tue May 25 2004 at 04:36 PM.]

Spectre-63
05-26-2004, 12:40 AM
There's a couple of things that I've noticed post patch that don't make a lot of sense to me:

The biggest one is damage modeling: did we step back to some point in time where we had a hit-box instead of location-specific damage modeling? A good friend and online flying buddy who currently has a track showing hits from a I-16 7.62MG impacting the far end of the right wing (verified by using arcade mode to view the track) and he lost 3 machineguns, rudder and aileron control. I could understand the aileron, but the rudder and machine guns?? He has another track where he again takes hits from an I-16 on the right wingtip and, on that occasion, he got damage notification for the Hispano, two machineguns, fuel tank leak, rudder and aileron control and the LEFT engine took damage and quickly caught fire. HUH?!?

Other than that, there have been a number of significant improvements to the 38: most notably the flight model. Compressibility onsets at EXACTLY the right time (according to a 38-driver he spoke to recently) and virtually everything else is correct....the damage models seem to have gone to a hitbox???

PLEASE don't misunderstand me - I don't want to be classified as some kind of "Ameriwhiner". I've loved FB and it's dedication to accuracy. Some of the stuff, like the damage model things, just don't make sense.

http://home.comcast.net/~mjmcmahon672/images/Sig_Small.gif

BigKahuna_GS
05-26-2004, 01:38 PM
S!
__________________________________________________ ______________________
ZG77_Nagual

posted 20-05-04 07:27
Seems less control intertia, better acceleration, better climb (shallow climb tactic works much better) and overall greater agility up till you hit compression - which is the same. I also think dispersion may be tighter but I'm not sure.
__________________________________________________ ______________________


I agree with Nagual. For some reason the P38J seems more nimble than the L model--maybe it is weight, I dont know. What is interesting is the P38L had better egines than the J and an increased WEP/Boost rating of 1,725hp per engine. The P38L actually had a higher top end than the J model. I sent info about the engines to Oleg but heard nothing back.

The guns are better on the P38 because of the 20mm not the .50cals. The .50cal dispersion has stayed the same.


The P47D-27 roll rate was improved by Oleg to that of the P47D-30. The prior F/M of the Jug --in my opinon was very poor according to pilots accounts on both sides. What seems to be troubling the P47 still is the very wide bullet spread it has. In my opinon, the 47 is affected the most advervsely by the dispersion issue than all other planes with .50cals.

Turn on arcade mode or simply do a strafing run and see where the dust is kicked up---it's kicked up all over the place. The dispersion issue reduces the firepower of the 47.

I am still waiting for the P47M to show up. It saw more combat than the Ta152
and speed along at 470+mph @ 30,000ft.


_______

CCJ: What do you define as the most important things a fighter pilot must know to be successful, relating to air combat maneuvering?

Robert S. Johnson :
It's pretty simple, really. Know the absolute limits of your plane's capabilities.
Know its strengths and weaknesses. Know the strengths and weaknesses of you enemy's fighters. Never fight the way your enemy fights best. Always fight the way you fight best. Never be predictable.

In "Fighter Aces," aviation historians Raymond Tolliver
and Trevor Constable compared Johnson's record with that of two German aces.
Werner Molders was the first ace to score 100 aerial victories and Erich Hartmann is the top scoring ace of all time with 352.

The authors noted that
Johnson "emerges impressively from this comparison." He downed 28 planes in 91 sorties, while Molders took 142 sorties to do the same, and Hartmann, 194.
________



http://www.warplaneswarehouse.com/planes_lg/MS1AOO_LG.jpg

"Angels of Okinawa"

Gibbage1
05-26-2004, 04:13 PM
Have you sent Oleg those tracks? I notice that on both the P-47 and P-38 that you can get hit in odd places with small cal MG's and it will damn near disable the aircraft. I was hit in the tail of my P-38 by a 7.62 in a 109 and it disabled all 4 of my guns and my aileron! Also small MG's tend to disable the P-47 in 1-3 hits were the P-47 will take 20-30 20MM and quite a few Mk-108 hits. Maybe the armor on the P-38 and P-47 have 8mm holes that the 7.62's just slip through, and it blocks the rest?

Gib

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spectre-63:
There's a couple of things that I've noticed post patch that don't make a lot of sense to me:

The biggest one is damage modeling: did we step back to some point in time where we had a hit-box instead of location-specific damage modeling? A good friend and online flying buddy who currently has a track showing hits from a I-16 7.62MG impacting the far end of the right wing (verified by using arcade mode to view the track) and he lost 3 machineguns, rudder and aileron control. I could understand the aileron, but the rudder and machine guns?? He has another track where he again takes hits from an I-16 on the right wingtip and, on that occasion, he got damage notification for the Hispano, two machineguns, fuel tank leak, rudder and aileron control and the LEFT engine took damage and quickly caught fire. HUH?!?

Other than that, there have been a number of significant improvements to the 38: most notably the flight model. Compressibility onsets at EXACTLY the right time (according to a 38-driver he spoke to recently) and virtually everything else is correct....the damage models seem to have gone to a hitbox???

PLEASE don't misunderstand me - I don't want to be classified as some kind of "Ameriwhiner". I've loved FB and it's dedication to accuracy. Some of the stuff, like the damage model things, just don't make sense.

http://home.comcast.net/~mjmcmahon672/images/Sig_Small.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Most P-39's were sent to the Russians - so I guess that was an American secret weapon against our Russian allies."

Stan Wood, P-38 pilot who also flew the P-39.

Hunde_3.JG51
05-26-2004, 05:00 PM
Gibbage, I sent track to Oleg with Hurricane destroying P-47 in seconds after AEP. I sent it along with Hurricane shooting Lagg-3 which took about 300 hits with no damage, not even smoke. I did this to point out the extreme difference. Haven't tried it after patch but P-47 was VERY vulnerable to small mg's before, much more so than 20mm's as you said. Sounds like maybe this is still the case.

What I think happens is there are critical areas on certain planes that are virtually unarmored against small caliber mg's. I could set a P-47 or FW-190 on fire with a single 7.62mm round. The P-38 may be the same. Just my guess and I haven't done as much testing since latest patch but ti seems there are times when a small mg round will penetrate straight through to a critical area whereas a larger caliber round would be stopped.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

Spectre-63
05-26-2004, 05:16 PM
Gibbage -

no, those tracks have not been submitted as yet. They, along with some other research (corroborated by a -38 pilot), will be submitted in the coming weeks.

http://home.comcast.net/~mjmcmahon672/images/Sig_Small.gif

Gibbage1
05-26-2004, 05:39 PM
Cool. Thats what I like to hear. Thanks for doing the footwork.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spectre-63:
Gibbage -

no, those tracks have not been submitted as yet. They, along with some other research (corroborated by a -38 pilot), will be submitted in the coming weeks.

http://home.comcast.net/~mjmcmahon672/images/Sig_Small.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Most P-39's were sent to the Russians - so I guess that was an American secret weapon against our Russian allies."

Stan Wood, P-38 pilot who also flew the P-39.

PzKpfw
05-26-2004, 10:12 PM
Just to give an idea on the P-38 & P-47s passive protection.

The P-38s armor protection consisted of* armor plate mounted aft of the bulkhead off the armament compartment, bullet proof glass, 2 pieces of armor plate at the back & bottom of the pilot seat, a single piece above the seat for additional rear protection. And armor plate on the inboard sides of both turbosuperchargers.

*See: Dean Francis H. America's Hundred-Thousand. p.186


The P-47 armor consisted of* a 3/8" face hardened armored steel plate running from the top of the main fuel tank to the bottom of the windsheild. A 1.50" thick bullet resistant glass panel behind the forward windsheild (on the bubble canopy modesls) and a 3/8" face hardened armored steel plate behind the pilot at the rear cockpit.

*See: Dean Francis H. America's Hundred-Thousand. p.319

Regards, John Waters

---------
Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

----
The one that gets you is the one that you'll never see.
-----

----

"After 44 we called the new models the 'bumps', because every new model had another bump or hump on the fuselage, which naturally was particularly bad for the flight characteristics of the aircraft."

Walter Krupinski: on the Bf 109...
----

-----
"The damn Jerries have stuck their heads in the meatgrinder, and I've got hold of the handle."

Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. December 26, 1944.

------
"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".

Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

------
For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-Jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary period, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which is likely to be the more ominous for the Axis--an American decision that this is sport, or that it is business."
--D. W. Brogan, The American Character

VMF513_Sandman
05-27-2004, 05:59 AM
3/8" is very thick...get a tape measure and see. is just an 1/8" under 1/2". that should at least minimize the damage from flak unless obviously u wind up gettin a direct hit from a 88......then u die LOL

VW-IceFire
05-27-2004, 07:15 AM
Not to get myself too involved in the discussion but the P-38 is a nicer plane to fly these days. Its still a bit tricky sometimes but after having learned how to fight with it in 2.0 its a very nice ride in 2.01. Its not nimble but when you push the throttle forward the plane response so capably...the speed picks up at a fantastic pace and you just feel the aircraft wanting to push forward. Its a nice feel and amazing to get from a flight sim.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

ZG77_Nagual
05-27-2004, 08:40 AM
I've really been enjoying this plane lately. I have noticed some spotty weirdness with the DM - but also now you can take a hit to an aleron and it will blow off - but you still have half aleron control - which we didn't have before. I've also had the whole tail assembly blown off and still had rudder control - so there are some bugs. But they've done wonders with the Flight model and she conforms very well to the bulk of skilled pilot accounts.