P-38 Lightning

[DD_Fenrir]

Now that looks better!

 

Back onboard! FlyingIron P-38 gets a preliminary thumbs up from me.

[Ercoupe]

I might have to pick this up. If someone comes out with a Zero for MSFS it might be fun to chase each other around, online, over some South Pacific Islands. Even if we can't hurt each other. 

[Ercoupe]

I just read that Flying Iron has a BF109 G-6 in the works. So we can chase each other around over Europe, instead. That works.

[GUNM.4N]

+1 day one purchase 

 

[Vettefan]

+1 insta-buy / day one purchase as well  

[upyr1]

On 10/10/2021 at 9:40 AM, KomandorAdam said:

Please feel free to spam in the comments on the FlyingIron Simulations website that we want the P-38 to DCS! Link to their website: https://flyingironsimulations.com/blogs/news/msfs-p-38-lightning

Will do

[NoodI]

If it does come its a insta buy

[ddc196]

Tell me it's coming and I'll preorder it now!

[Evoman]

On 1/13/2022 at 5:38 AM, Ercoupe said:

I might have to pick this up. If someone comes out with a Zero for MSFS it might be fun to chase each other around, online, over some South Pacific Islands. Even if we can't hurt each other. 

Hope fully those chases become heated enough for one of the pilots that also flies DCS to invite the other pilot for a more realistic battle on DCS once all these aircraft become available in DCS. I for one would be tolling MSFS in a Hellcat looking for a chase that can endup being decided in DCS. lol

[TCW_Rickske]

I can't wait for the P-38 to come to DCS. Fly it a lot in MSFS2020.

[Merro]

+1 for the P38 in DCS, love it in Il2

[t_hedlund]

+100, bring on the forked tailed devil. 

[Angelthunder]

I would love the Lightning because i researched the French ALG airfields in Normandy and quite a few P-38 squadrons were stationed there for the Overlord campaign along with the Hawker Typhoon and B-26 Maruder which are still missing as AI Assets.

[Ahogephilia]

+1

[vgilsoler]

Yes please, it will be a must buy

[Slippa]

Yes please, I'd have it.

[vgilsoler]

I wonder the lack of information about adding (or rejecting) this airframe to DCS.

Have ED or 3rd parties evaluated that? FlyingIron, for example, has developed it for XP and MSFS.

I don’t want to discuss the bussiness decisions in DCS, but is there any insurmountable reason to reject it? Like legal issues with Lockheed IP? 

 

[Gunfreak]

11 minutes ago, vgilsoler said:

I wonder the lack of information about adding (or rejecting) this airframe to DCS.

Have ED or 3rd parties evaluated that? FlyingIron, for example, has developed it for XP and MSFS.

I don’t want to discuss the bussiness decisions in DCS, but is there any insurmountable reason to reject it? Like legal issues with Lockheed IP? 

 

Can't possibly imagine lack of information for most American made ww2 fighters. There are generally many flying of each type. And I doubt documentation is missing.

 

[Silver_Dragon]

26 minutes ago, vgilsoler said:

I wonder the lack of information about adding (or rejecting) this airframe to DCS.

Have ED or 3rd parties evaluated that? FlyingIron, for example, has developed it for XP and MSFS.

I don’t want to discuss the bussiness decisions in DCS, but is there any insurmountable reason to reject it? Like legal issues with Lockheed IP? 

 

Building modules on DCS has totaly diferent with other products. A funny 3D model dont make a Full Fidelity module, you need recreate propper system, engines, damage model, weapons, etc. The problem of DCS has make the propper aircraft, with as with its benefits and drawbacks, and with its capabilities and defects. Let us remember that the P-38 had stability, compresibily, speed and other problems. And you need build two versions, the ETO, and PTO to mach with the scenery.
 

Quote

The P-38 performed usefully but suffered from a number of problems. Its Allison engines consistently threw rods, swallowed valves and fouled plugs, while their intercoolers often ruptured under sustained high boost and turbocharger regulators froze, sometimes causing catastrophic failures.

Quote

 

Some of those criticisms were warranted, while USAAF worked some of them out. The compressibility problem was eventually resolved by combat dive brakes, and the excellent range made P-38 a good escort fighter and strafer. Good tactics enabled to overcome some of the weaknesses.

But the ergonomics problem plagued P-38 in the ETO. Colonel Harold Rau wrote a not-so-nice report, blaming the complicated systems for the unnecessary aviator losses in combat.

 

 

[Art-J]

I guess once FlyingIron guys are done with their A-7 project for DCS, they'll see how it sells and re-evaluate if going for third software platform was profitable enough for them. Maybe they'll think about porting their Lightning to DCS then? We can only wait and see, with fingers crossed.

[vgilsoler]

43 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Building modules on DCS has totaly diferent with other products. A funny 3D model dont make a Full Fidelity module, you need recreate propper system, engines, damage model, weapons, etc. The problem of DCS has make the propper aircraft, with as with its benefits and drawbacks, and with its capabilities and defects. Let us remember that the P-38 had stability, compresibily, speed and other problems. And you need build two versions, the ETO, and PTO to mach with the scenery.
 

 

Of course, I already understood it is not a copy & paste task, but it seems FlyingIron already did some job on about it (quoted from their website)

• Detailed & Extensive simulations of the Lightnings core systems, including accurate, code-driven replications of the Lightnings Fuel, Hydraulic, Propeller, Cooling and Electrical Systems. All systems are programmed to function virtually identically to the real-world P-38 Systems. Almost all default X-plane systems have been overridden and/or enhanced significantly.
• Incredibly realistic Flight Model made possible with carefully data-matched simulations of the NACA 23016 & NACA 4412 Airfoils. Flight performance has been verified against real-world Performance & handling tests to ensure extensive realism. We’ve gone so far as to model the drag from individual coolant flaps!
• Custom heat & thermodynamics modelling, extensive engine management simulation
• Realistic Engine Start-up modelling (don’t forget your checklists!)
• Realistic External Tanks Integration

 when a plane in DCS needed different versions to match the theatres? 

 

[ddc196]

With the Pacific theater coming into focus for DCS in the near future, this is a good time for this aircraft to enter this game. It's number one on my wish list!

[Ercoupe]

"And you need build two versions, the ETO, and PTO..."

You actually think that there were Pacific versions of the Lightning and European versions!? There was no difference which theater an airplane was sent to. They were rolled out of the factory and sent to wherever they were needed. Neither Lockheed, or any other aircraft manufacturer, had a Pacific and a European assembly line.

[AG-51_Razor]

I'm pretty sure that Silver Dragon was referring to the livery of birds assigned to ETO vs those assigned to the PTO.

[upyr1]