WWII Tricycles.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

I really dislike tail draggers. OMG! Not only do I suck in ground handling of tail draggers, I really dislike them. After countless hours of practice, I only get worse. In RL I'd be a washout, dead, or be called "Ground Loop Dmitri". 

How about a nice safe WWII tricycle gear type.

P-38

P-61

P-39

A-20

A-26

F7F Tigercat

 

[Qiou87]

Hi,

 

I'm going to skip the obvious "just learn how to fly" response, that's not really fun or related to the wishlist.

 

Instead let's look at those aircraft:

- P-38: hell yes! I've long thought it would be a great addition to DCS WWII, it was widely used in Europe and Pacific (for the "Marianas" theatre as well), it's different compared to the other ones we have, yet it could be a bit similar to the Mosquito.

- P-61: a bit specific for now imho (due to the exclusive night attack role)

- P-39: nobody apparently wanted this plane in WWII so the US gave them to the French, Italians and Russians. Doesn't seem to fit to the theaters we have or will have, and doesn't seem to be very good either.

- A-20: why not? It seems to be different, though again, maybe a bit redundant with the Mosquito. Same for A-26 although was very late in the war.

- F7F: sorry but if we are going with a Grumman carrier based fighter I want an F6F Hellcat before this. The F7F never even fought in WWII.

 

I was trying to see what the Germans produced in WWII in good numbers with a tricycle landing gear, doesn't seem to be any. Same for Japan. A shame really! You might need to learn how to handle those taildraggers after all...

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by Qiou87

[Flanking Moustache]

"Ground loop Dmitri", I love it 

 

Seriously though, I'd love to see an airacobra at some point!

[rkk01]

Re German aircraft with tricycle undercarriage...

 

- He 219 Uhu... very advanced. Even given the NF role it would be incredible to fly in DCS. Like many Luftwaffe aircraft, the lack of flying examples is a major hurdle

 

- Me 262

-Ar 234

Edited February 1, 2021 by rkk01

[Mars Exulte]

1 hour ago, Qiou87 said:

- P-39: nobody apparently wanted this plane in WWII so the US gave them to the French, Italians and Russians. Doesn't seem to fit to the theaters we have or will have, and doesn't seem to be very good either.

 

  The P-39 was passed over because it didn't have the range for the Pacific or the high altitude for the European bomber escorts (or range). But production lines were already set up so they gave them to Russia. By American popular reasoning, the P-40 wasn't ''good'' either, but was popular in British service (particularly in North Africa) and the Soviet Union at low altitudes where it (and the P-39) were at their best.

 

  The notion there was anything ''wrong'' with either of them is one of the most bandied about BS ''common knowledge facts'' of WWII along with ''the Sherman was garbage'' and ''German wundartech'' @@

[reece146]

I can get behind the P-38 and P-39. And the A-20 and A-26 - might as well throw in the B-25 while we are at it.

 

On the German side the Do. 335 would be freakin' awesome. Here's some cool "sim" images instead of grainy B&Ws or colour ramp queen pics:

 

https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?204612-Dornier-335-WWII-Heavy-Fighter-German-Luftwaffe

Edited February 1, 2021 by reece146

[DmitriKozlowsky]

4 hours ago, Qiou87 said:

Hi,

 

I'm going to skip the obvious "just learn how to fly" response, that's not really fun or related to the wishlist.

 

Instead let's look at those aircraft:

- P-38: hell yes! I've long thought it would be a great addition to DCS WWII, it was widely used in Europe and Pacific (for the "Marianas" theatre as well), it's different compared to the other ones we have, yet it could be a bit similar to the Mosquito.

- P-61: a bit specific for now imho (due to the exclusive night attack role)

- P-39: nobody apparently wanted this plane in WWII so the US gave them to the French, Italians and Russians. Doesn't seem to fit to the theaters we have or will have, and doesn't seem to be very good either.

- A-20: why not? It seems to be different, though again, maybe a bit redundant with the Mosquito. Same for A-26 although was very late in the war.

- F7F: sorry but if we are going with a Grumman carrier based fighter I want an F6F Hellcat before this. The F7F never even fought in WWII.

 

I was trying to see what the Germans produced in WWII in good numbers with a tricycle landing gear, doesn't seem to be any. Same for Japan. A shame really! You might need to learn how to handle those taildraggers after all...

 

 

P-61 Black Widow served as night fighter, and picked up ground attack mission in Pacific and CBI.

P-39 was great as anti-tank platform, because of the large through prop cannon. Soviets who flew it, liked it.

CBI THeater looks as a basket for air types rejected by ETO and PTO air bosses.

[Mars Exulte]

19 minutes ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

P-39 was great as anti-tank platform, because of the large through prop cannon.

 

  You think a low velocity, snub-nosed, 37mm HE round was good for ''anti-tank''? It was an air superiority fighter. That cannon, and for example, what was slung under some Stuka versions have exactly nothing in common.

Edited February 1, 2021 by zhukov032186

[DD_Fenrir]

I'm with Zhukov - that P-39 = Russian tank buster fallacy has been thoroughly demolished in the past 15 years. The Russki's used the P-39 and it's cannon for in general air to air. If they ever even strafed a panzer then it was a chance encounter by an opportunist Soviet pilot and certainly not by specific aircraft doctrinal decree.