Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey

IL-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey Famous title comes to consoles.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 08-18-2009, 12:15 PM
Graham85 Graham85 is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Goalie_94 View Post
I only need a LANCASTER...then i will buy this game FOR SURE!!!!
That would be nice
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-18-2009, 12:29 PM
David603 David603 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: 6'clock high
Posts: 713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cydno View Post
I think I saw one in a trailer (the one with shorter wings)... This version of the spitfire was called by some of the RAF pilots as "clipped", "clapped" and "cropped" and was definitively not the pilot's choice.
The only Spitfires we know about in game are the IIb, the IXc and the XVIe. The IIb is the one in the demo, the IXc is the version with a pointed tail and the XVIe has the bubble canopy. I think the IX and XVI have an option for the wing type because I have see the IX with and without clipped tips.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-18-2009, 02:41 PM
xNikex xNikex is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Attacking from the sun
Posts: 656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buggins View Post
The 'tiny prop' was not to keep it stable. It was to power the onboard generator.
You are right. I totally confused it with something else.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-18-2009, 03:40 PM
mondo mondo is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 213
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cydno View Post
I think I saw one in a trailer (the one with shorter wings)... This version of the spitfire was called by some of the RAF pilots as "clipped", "clapped" and "cropped" and was definitively not the pilot's choice.
That refers to the MkVB when they were still in service in 1944 and were all approaching the end of both the airframe lives and engine lives i.e. clapped.

They had Merlin 45M with a cropped (the cropped bit )supercharger and a higher boost/octane fuel an to give them more power at lower altitudes so they could be used in the 2nd TAF. The lack of wing tips was to give a better roll rate at lower altitudes (clipped).

It was very much the pilots choice in 1941 but by 1944 it was scraping the barrel. Although they were just as good performers as the Spit IX at very low altitude where the 2nd TAF operated most of its aircraft. They only had 60 round drums for the Hispano MkII though.

Last edited by mondo; 08-18-2009 at 03:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-18-2009, 07:11 PM
cydno cydno is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 83
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mondo View Post
That refers to the MkVB when they were still in service in 1944 and were all approaching the end of both the airframe lives and engine lives i.e. clapped.

They had Merlin 45M with a cropped (the cropped bit )supercharger and a higher boost/octane fuel an to give them more power at lower altitudes so they could be used in the 2nd TAF. The lack of wing tips was to give a better roll rate at lower altitudes (clipped).

It was very much the pilots choice in 1941 but by 1944 it was scraping the barrel. Although they were just as good performers as the Spit IX at very low altitude where the 2nd TAF operated most of its aircraft. They only had 60 round drums for the Hispano MkII though.
Good and interesting speech mondo...
You are of course right in all this and I said this was not the pilots choice because of differents sets of RAF pilots memories from 1943 to 1945 that I have read.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-18-2009, 07:55 PM
Almighty Blighty Almighty Blighty is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: good 'ol blighty
Posts: 22
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David603 View Post
As a dedicated 109 pilot I'm not complaining.

You want a plane to be put in the game just so you can shoot it down? Okay, in that case I want the B24, B25, B26, Lancaster, Mosquito, more versions of the P51 and P47..........
You think that the mossie was easy to shoot down?

The germans were so annoyed by it they started to design a plane to specifically catch the mossie because no other planes could - the Heinkel HE 219.

Mossie=best plane of WW2 becasue of its speed and versitility
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-18-2009, 08:05 PM
David603 David603 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: 6'clock high
Posts: 713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Almighty Blighty View Post
You think that the mossie was easy to shoot down?

The germans were so annoyed by it they started to design a plane to specifically catch the mossie because no other planes could - the Heinkel HE 219.

Mossie=best plane of WW2 becasue of its speed and versitility
Its good, and it will give most mid and even some late war fighters a challenge just catching it, but when you can have a Bf109 with 50mph more top speed than a Mosquito the catching bit is considerably less of a problem.

Not that I want to detract from its WWII record, and its huge versatility and success in the fighter-bomber, bomber, night fighter and shipping strike roles, but against a faster single engined fighter the Mosquito just can't cut it.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-18-2009, 08:08 PM
Soviet Ace Soviet Ace is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Guarding the skies of the Motherland!!
Posts: 1,271
Default

That's why you need a Yak-3! Maybe a Yak-9 to deal with the higher altitude fighters (Me-109s).
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-18-2009, 08:15 PM
David603 David603 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: 6'clock high
Posts: 713
Default

Better, but still 35mph slower and about 1000ft per min worse off in climb rate than a 109K.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-18-2009, 08:17 PM
Soviet Ace Soviet Ace is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Guarding the skies of the Motherland!!
Posts: 1,271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David603 View Post
Better, but still 35mph slower and about 1000ft per min worse off in climb rate than a 109K.
Your just to biased against small nimble planes Always needing to get cheap shots at your opponent, rather than turn and burn with him LOL
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.