PDA

View Full Version : Ki-84 isn't invincible after all. The King Cobra Bites back



Osirisx9
03-14-2004, 03:40 AM
I've been flying a certain mid engined plane since I loaded the AEP on my rig and all I can say is that in that thing I have no problems shooting down that blasted UFO or any other aircraft. (Well that Ta-152 is pretty tough if he escapes to high altitude) I was looking forward to flying the much hyped P-38, but she just doesn't feel right to me. I'm not saying the the P-38 is a bad aircraft...It's just that the way it is modeled, it doesn't fight my flying style. So instead I decided to fly this certain mid engined diamond-in-the-rough and its almost as if I saw the face of the god of simfighting himslef. I still have yet to fly the trusted pony . I'm too addicted to that P-63. I admit that she gets annoyed when you dont use the stick the proper way and dont hit the sweet spot but once you use the right technic she is indeed a pleasure. I even had a Ki-84 driver call me a cheater .He was dismayed that I was able to High yo yo inside of him and put a 37mm in his canopy. ( Thats the only way to kill that d@mn Ufo with one 37mm The wings and rear fuselage are made out of kevlar). He tried to outrun me... That didn't work. The King Cobra does reach its advertised speed at sea level. He tried to out climb me... That didn't work. Going into a zoom climb after turning in 570 Kph is an experience. He tried to out turn me... That did work, at first, but then it dawned on me that I should use a couple of High Yo Yo's. Eventually I maneuvered enough to put a 37mm through his canopy and Boom. Its a good thing that most of the pilots who fly Ki-84s are noobs or they depend more on the aircrafts abilities rather than learning the maneuvers and tactics in a more challenging aircraft. I believe that if that pilot were more skilled it would have been a tougher fight or different outcome. If you have a little patience and you learn to tame the spin, the P-63 is a worthy aircraft.

Osiris_X9

Osirisx9
03-14-2004, 03:40 AM
I've been flying a certain mid engined plane since I loaded the AEP on my rig and all I can say is that in that thing I have no problems shooting down that blasted UFO or any other aircraft. (Well that Ta-152 is pretty tough if he escapes to high altitude) I was looking forward to flying the much hyped P-38, but she just doesn't feel right to me. I'm not saying the the P-38 is a bad aircraft...It's just that the way it is modeled, it doesn't fight my flying style. So instead I decided to fly this certain mid engined diamond-in-the-rough and its almost as if I saw the face of the god of simfighting himslef. I still have yet to fly the trusted pony . I'm too addicted to that P-63. I admit that she gets annoyed when you dont use the stick the proper way and dont hit the sweet spot but once you use the right technic she is indeed a pleasure. I even had a Ki-84 driver call me a cheater .He was dismayed that I was able to High yo yo inside of him and put a 37mm in his canopy. ( Thats the only way to kill that d@mn Ufo with one 37mm The wings and rear fuselage are made out of kevlar). He tried to outrun me... That didn't work. The King Cobra does reach its advertised speed at sea level. He tried to out climb me... That didn't work. Going into a zoom climb after turning in 570 Kph is an experience. He tried to out turn me... That did work, at first, but then it dawned on me that I should use a couple of High Yo Yo's. Eventually I maneuvered enough to put a 37mm through his canopy and Boom. Its a good thing that most of the pilots who fly Ki-84s are noobs or they depend more on the aircrafts abilities rather than learning the maneuvers and tactics in a more challenging aircraft. I believe that if that pilot were more skilled it would have been a tougher fight or different outcome. If you have a little patience and you learn to tame the spin, the P-63 is a worthy aircraft.

Osiris_X9

SeaFireLIV
03-14-2004, 03:47 AM
EXACTLY, Osiris9. It`s the Man, not the plane.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/storm.jpg
Soon... Very soon....

WUAF_Badsight
03-14-2004, 03:55 AM
ill go 1 v 1 with you in the KI-84

heck ill go 1v1 against a P-63 with the P-39

basically i dont think the P-63 is better

the P-39 is the better TnB ...... the KingCobra might be faster when it gets close & personal its worse

thew the P-63 that Osirisx9 was flying off my six in a Yak9U & Yak1b & in a KI in BP_gemini's server

locked pit is ALL about the pilot : ))))) http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Osirisx9
03-14-2004, 04:05 AM
Sure Badsight , I'll take you up on the Challenge. That should be an intresting fight. I think we took turns shooting each other down a couple of days ago. I would like to see what the P-63 can do against the P-39. I would also like to see how the King Cobra would do agaist the Ki-84 when there is a excellent pilot like yourself holding the stick. I know for sure that the P-39 would turn rings around a well flown Ki-84 thats if the Ki-84 doesn't use his speed to get away. The P-63 would be allot different because the Ki-84 wont be able to run. Salute

Osiris_X9

JG27_Arklight
03-14-2004, 04:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
EXACTLY, Osiris9. It`s the Man, not the plane.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/storm.jpg
Soon... Very soon....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



....and the 37mm.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

Ark

There are no stupid questions, only stupid people.
------------
2.4C @ 3.6 Default Volt.
ASUS P4C800-E (Rev. 11)
1GB Mushkin PC3500 LvL2 Black @ 2-2-2-5
Radeon 9800XT (Cat. 3.10)
SB Augigy Gamer
Antec True550
Zalman 7000A-CU HSF
4 Case fans/1 120mm Blowhole

Extreme_One
03-14-2004, 04:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Osirisx9:
Sure Badsight , I'll take you up on the Challenge. That should be an intresting fight. I think we took turns shooting each other down a couple of days ago. I would like to see what the P-63 can do against the P-39. I would also like to see how the King Cobra would do agaist the Ki-84 when there is a excellent pilot like yourself holding the stick. I know for sure that the P-39 would turn rings around a well flown Ki-84 thats if the Ki-84 doesn't use his speed to get away. The P-63 would be allot different because the Ki-84 wont be able to run. Salute

Osiris_X9<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why not record a track and make it available for us to see the mighty Clash of the Titans... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

S! Simon
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''
Download the USAAF & RAF campaign folders here (http://www.netwings.org/library/Forgotten_Battles/Missions/index-9.html).

Download "North and South" including the Japanese speech-pack here (http://www.netwings.org/library/Forgotten_Battles/Missions/index-11.html). *NEW*

http://server6.uploadit.org/files/simplysimon-raf_sig.jpg

Heavy_Weather
03-14-2004, 06:14 AM
patience is the key. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

"The wise man is often the man who plays dumb."

jensenpark
03-14-2004, 06:28 AM
funny, this is the first I've seen of anyone really going on about the P63 (course I could have missed some threads).

I was expecting alot more "P63 is god" type talk - especially considering how many '39 drivers there are out there. Maybe everyone is still trying out the fantasy planes...

http://www.unicover.com/images/G6A876.JPG

SeaFireLIV
03-14-2004, 06:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jensenpark:

Maybe everyone is still trying out the fantasy planes...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Probably, it may seem longer, but AEP`s only been out 2 weeks...

Osirisx9
03-14-2004, 07:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jensenpark:
funny, this is the first I've seen of anyone really going on about the P63 (course I could have missed some threads).

I was expecting alot more "P63 is god" type talk - especially considering how many '39 drivers there are out there. Maybe everyone is still trying out the fantasy planes...

http://www.unicover.com/images/G6A876.JPG <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dont think that the aircraft will be too popular because it does have a couple of vices that cant be over looked . The one that gets me from time-to-time is the landing qualities of the aircraft. Even though it does have a nosewheel, the P-63 is very difficult to land. I lost allot of points online due to bent aluminum on landings. This alone would be enough to turn some pilots off, especially after they get through with a 30 minute 4-5 kill run and RTB to collect their reward only to crash and burn on landing. I know why it is so tricky to land however. The nose gear strut is so long that the aircraft has a pretty extreem nose high attitude when it is resting on its gear. Because of this one can be fooled into flying the aircraft like its little brother the P-39 durring landing. If you try to land the P-63 like you would land the P-39 you are going to land on the nosewheel first and bounce until you stall just above the runway and pancake into the runaway and break off your gear or beak off a wing. If I'm patient and there are no unfreindlies around I would just firewall the throttle clean up the gear and flaps and do a go-around. The approach speed over the fence seems to be around 104 mph( 170 Kph)in landing configuration. The aircraft has to be landed with power because the even more extreem nose high attitude to prevent the nose wheel from touching the runway first. Another vice is the P-63 stall charactor. There is virtually know warning that she is going to stall except for the sluggish ailerons and a slight shaking of the airframe. The p-63 is allot heavier in feel then the P-39 so as in any aircraft you have to always be ahead of the aircraft but even more in the P-63. It is not as forgiving. But all said and done we will see what will happen as far as the aircrafts acceptance is concerned. Those who take the time to master the aircraft will grow to love it but those who want instant success will become turned of by the aircraft.


Osiris_X9

Hristo_
03-14-2004, 07:52 AM
Tried the Ki84 online. Man, that thing is unstoppable. Point & shoot plane. Sometimes I as myself where the brakes are http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Yak above me.... shot it down. Spit on my 6 - no problem, 20 seconds later he's dead !

That thing sure is great Lame-7 equalizer http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

p1ngu666
03-14-2004, 08:03 AM
i had a good fight wid a 109z in p63, 109z has edge in acceloration but once u going quick p63 claws it back http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg

ZG77_Nagual
03-14-2004, 08:19 AM
I spoke with Oleg a bit about the P63 - I know his team was doing a bit of testing on it. He said the p39 will and should definitely outturn it however. I like it but I've been enjoying the p38 more. I'm amazed how well it is modeled. My first online foray didn't go well, so I practiced - next flight I got a couple of Ki84s, a 109k4 and some zeros - all pretty well flown.

Anyway - While the p63 is fast, and loses less with the .50 pods than the q1 - I think the p39 is still the more agile dogfighte.

VW-IceFire
03-14-2004, 08:21 AM
P-63C I'm highly looking forward to although I hardly think I need a 37mm cannon to take out a Ki-84. They are paper and can be heavily damaged with a short sustained burst http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Even so...a 37mm cannon ensures that you can take out any target quickly, effectively, and with a small degree of precision at short range.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

mortoma
03-14-2004, 10:11 AM
Osirisx9 I don't think the King is any harder to land than any other plane. The first night I had AEP I flew a QMB in it and landed it afterwards and it was simply what they call a "greaser" landing. Are you flying the proper approach speed in it?? I don't remember what speed I touched down at. I think that all the landings I've done in the nose-heavy 172 Skyhawk makes any sim landing easy. I have always thought that any sim landing is easy compared to landing a real aircraft, even a baby plane like the Skyhawk. Learn to fly real planes and you'll never have a hard time in sim planes. Of course I always seem to be unlucky and the days I fly I end up landing in a crosswind gusting to 24knots!!

noshens
03-14-2004, 12:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Ki-84. They are paper and can be heavily damaged with a short sustained burst http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not in this game, yesterday I did head on with la7 3x20b. got 3 hits on my engine, I got visible holes but the engine didn't smoke or anything whatsoever and I shot him down in the next 5 min.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Even so...a 37mm cannon ensures that you can take out any target quickly, effectively, and with a small degree of precision at short range.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'd trade that cannon for any 20mm. That gun definately doesn't do one shot one kill anymore. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

ucanfly
03-14-2004, 01:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mortoma:
Osirisx9 I don't think the King is any harder to land than any other plane. The first night I had AEP I flew a QMB in it and landed it afterwards and it was simply what they call a "greaser" landing. Are you flying the proper approach speed in it?? I don't remember what speed I touched down at. I think that all the landings I've done in the nose-heavy 172 Skyhawk makes any sim landing easy. I have always thought that any sim landing is easy compared to landing a real aircraft, even a baby plane like the Skyhawk. Learn to fly real planes and you'll never have a hard time in sim planes. Of course I always seem to be unlucky and the days I fly I end up landing in a crosswind gusting to 24knots!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just an archair pilot, but doesn't that exceed the demonstrated crosswind component of the 172?

What airport are you doing this at?

Mitlov47
03-14-2004, 01:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jensenpark:
funny, this is the first I've seen of anyone really going on about the P63 (course I could have missed some threads).

I was expecting alot more "P63 is god" type talk - especially considering how many '39 drivers there are out there. Maybe everyone is still trying out the fantasy planes...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Check my sig. I love the KingCobra.

There are two reasons why the P-63C hasn't gotten more attention:

1) It doesn't already have a cult following in general culture, like the P-38 does.

2) It's very capable, but it has weaknesses. Its tendency to fall into an unrecoverable flat spin is a serious Achilles' heel. And it's a jack-of-all-trades aircraft, which means it's a master of none. It's a capable all-rounder but not uber.

---------------------------

"I hear the roar of a big machine; Two worlds and in between.
Love lost, fire at will; Dum-dum bullets and shoot to kill.
I hear dive bombers and Empire down, Empire down..."
--Sisters of Mercy

P-63C -- "Jackie's Strength"

Osirisx9
03-14-2004, 01:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ucanfly:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mortoma:
Osirisx9 I don't think the King is any harder to land than any other plane. The first night I had AEP I flew a QMB in it and landed it afterwards and it was simply what they call a "greaser" landing. Are you flying the proper approach speed in it?? I don't remember what speed I touched down at. I think that all the landings I've done in the nose-heavy 172 Skyhawk makes any sim landing easy. I have always thought that any sim landing is easy compared to landing a real aircraft, even a baby plane like the Skyhawk. Learn to fly real planes and you'll never have a hard time in sim planes. Of course I always seem to be unlucky and the days I fly I end up landing in a crosswind gusting to 24knots!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just an archair pilot, but doesn't that exceed the demonstrated crosswind component of the 172?

What airport are you doing this at?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ucanfly you are exactly right...I think Mortama never flew a skyhawk in his life. And Mortama I am a commercial rated pilot BTW I fly real aircraft. Also for your information the maximum demonstrated crosswind component is 15 knots and thats pretty much at the limit of the cessna 172. Also the Cessna Skyhawk AKA 172 has never been known as a nose heavy aircraft. I know this for a fact I have over 300hrs alone in skyhawks. Now lets talk about this crosswind thing. Any wind that is not directly lined up with the runway can be called a crosswind so lets not fool anyone here. But a direct 90 degree cross wind gusting to 25 knots I doubt your claims. So maby you you had a 5 degree crosswind component with winds gusting to 25 knots and got confused. Cessna 172s are very easy to land in that situation. A 172 would be extreemly unstable durring Taxi much less landing in a direct 90 degree 25 knot gusting crosswind. The aircraft would be very difficult to control.Just my 2 cents

Osiris_X9

[This message was edited by Osirisx9 on Sun March 14 2004 at 02:31 PM.]

mortoma
03-15-2004, 10:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Osirisx9:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ucanfly:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mortoma:
Osirisx9 I don't think the King is any harder to land than any other plane. The first night I had AEP I flew a QMB in it and landed it afterwards and it was simply what they call a "greaser" landing. Are you flying the proper approach speed in it?? I don't remember what speed I touched down at. I think that all the landings I've done in the nose-heavy 172 Skyhawk makes any sim landing easy. I have always thought that any sim landing is easy compared to landing a real aircraft, even a baby plane like the Skyhawk. Learn to fly real planes and you'll never have a hard time in sim planes. Of course I always seem to be unlucky and the days I fly I end up landing in a crosswind gusting to 24knots!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just an archair pilot, but doesn't that exceed the demonstrated crosswind component of the 172?

What airport are you doing this at?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ucanfly you are exactly right...I think Mortama never flew a skyhawk in his life. And Mortama I am a commercial rated pilot BTW I fly real aircraft. Also for your information the maximum demonstrated crosswind component is 15 knots and thats pretty much at the limit of the cessna 172. Also the Cessna Skyhawk AKA 172 has never been known as a nose heavy aircraft. I know this for a fact I have over 300hrs alone in skyhawks. Now lets talk about this crosswind thing. Any wind that is not directly lined up with the runway can be called a crosswind so lets not fool anyone here. But a direct 90 degree cross wind gusting to 25 knots I doubt your claims. So maby you you had a 5 degree crosswind component with winds gusting to 25 knots and got confused. Cessna 172s are very easy to land in that situation. A 172 would be extreemly unstable durring Taxi much less landing in a direct 90 degree 25 knot gusting crosswind. The aircraft would be very difficult to control.Just my 2 cents

Osiris_X9

[This message was edited by Osirisx9 on Sun March 14 2004 at 02:31 PM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

clint-ruin
03-15-2004, 10:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EMitton:
Check my sig. I love the KingCobra.

There are two reasons why the P-63C hasn't gotten more attention:

1) It doesn't already have a cult following in general culture, like the P-38 does.

2) It's very capable, but it has weaknesses. Its tendency to fall into an unrecoverable flat spin is a serious Achilles' heel. And it's a jack-of-all-trades aircraft, which means it's a master of none. It's a capable all-rounder but not uber.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd agree with that. It's definitely higher performance than the 39 but the price you pay for that is less stability, and you need a lighter hand on it - it's nowhere near the low speed acrobatics plane the 39 can be turned into with a skilled pilot.

The advantage of the 63 comes in when you realise that the speed/high speed handling now allows you to take the 39s low/medium "energy fighter" combat style to much higher altitudes and speed ranges. You can dictate engagement terms rather than having to 'stand off' and be ready for an attack.

Probably not something that is appreciated by terribly many pilots here :&gt;

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

mortoma
03-15-2004, 10:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Osirisx9:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ucanfly:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mortoma:
Osirisx9 I don't think the King is any harder to land than any other plane. The first night I had AEP I flew a QMB in it and landed it afterwards and it was simply what they call a "greaser" landing. Are you flying the proper approach speed in it?? I don't remember what speed I touched down at. I think that all the landings I've done in the nose-heavy 172 Skyhawk makes any sim landing easy. I have always thought that any sim landing is easy compared to landing a real aircraft, even a baby plane like the Skyhawk. Learn to fly real planes and you'll never have a hard time in sim planes. Of course I always seem to be unlucky and the days I fly I end up landing in a crosswind gusting to 24knots!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just an archair pilot, but doesn't that exceed the demonstrated crosswind component of the 172?

What airport are you doing this at?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ucanfly you are exactly right...I think Mortama never flew a skyhawk in his life. And Mortama I am a commercial rated pilot BTW I fly real aircraft. Also for your information the maximum demonstrated crosswind component is 15 knots and thats pretty much at the limit of the cessna 172. Also the Cessna Skyhawk AKA 172 has never been known as a nose heavy aircraft. I know this for a fact I have over 300hrs alone in skyhawks. Now lets talk about this crosswind thing. Any wind that is not directly lined up with the runway can be called a crosswind so lets not fool anyone here. But a direct 90 degree cross wind gusting to 25 knots I doubt your claims. So maby you you had a 5 degree crosswind component with winds gusting to 25 knots and got confused. Cessna 172s are very easy to land in that situation. A 172 would be extreemly unstable durring Taxi much less landing in a direct 90 degree 25 knot gusting crosswind. The aircraft would be very difficult to control.Just my 2 cents

Osiris_X9

[This message was edited by Osirisx9 on Sun March 14 2004 at 02:31 PM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Sorry, you are wrong, I got my license in 2000 and have flown mostly the Skyhawk. I would have to check my logbook but I would guestimate that I have about 60 hours in a Skyhawk. As for the Hawk not being a nose-heavy plane, if you have a 250 pound instructor in the front with you it certainly is. And even without, it certainly is
more nose-heavy than anything. I always trim back quite a bit during the approach in one so I have plenty of back elevator authority. I also read an article in Plane & Pilot where an expert with far more experience than any of you guys was talking about the slight nose heaviness of the Skyhawk and the even worse heavy nose of the Skylane. So you don't know what you are talking about. I also had a conversation with my Doctor who gives me my medical about Skylanes and Skyhawks and he also complained about the nose-heavy nature of his Skylane and he said he trims back a lot too!!
By the way, I fly out of Glenndale airport in Indiana. I may be remembering the crosswind wrong, it may have been in the teens, not the twenties. You guys are only giving me a hard time because you can't even land sim planes!!!!
Besides, I never stated in any way, shape or form that I landed in 90 degree crosswinds of 24 knots!! They were probably more like 40 degrees at most.

[This message was edited by mortoma on Mon March 15 2004 at 10:29 AM.]

crazyivan1970
03-15-2004, 10:46 AM
From my experiance P-63 is ultimate blue side killer. I`m surprized there are only couple of them could be found in the air... but IMO, It`s a best all-around plane on red side right now...on any altitude. speed, manuver, climb and firepower... all in one package. Can you wish for more? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

mortoma
03-15-2004, 11:00 AM
Almost forgot, if I land at neutral trim in the Skyhawk that I fly, I end up with the yoke all the way back to the stops on the flare. If that's not nose-heavy, I don't know what else to call it.
I also fly a Cherokee 180 and it has no such tendencies. It has plenty of backward yoke travel left upon flaring, even if landed in neutral trim.

Gibbage1
03-15-2004, 11:27 AM
What is great is how well it climbs. I was at 1500M and a Yak 3 passed me at 3000M. I did a 1/2 loop and was 1000M behind him. In no time, I was .30 and sinking 37MM's into him. He had no chance.

I always flew the P-39. But the key problem with it was I could not catch anything in 1944-45 unless they turned. People quickly figured out that you dont want to turn with a P-39 and just ran when they saw me. Now, there is NO running. You will be hunted down and dispatched properly. On my skin on both my P-38 and P-63 it says "Dont run, you will only die tired.". I love the P-63.

Gib

ElAurens
03-15-2004, 11:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Can you wish for more? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I already have it Ivan... The Gladiator.
Got a Zeke, a Spit, and a Ki84 yesterday, all in one hop. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I'm still amused at all the hubub over the Ki84. Sure the new models have great guns, but they are far from invincible. A couple of well placed shots to the wing will totally cripple them.

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/avatars/Curtiss_logo.gif

BlitzPig_EL

crazyivan1970
03-15-2004, 11:31 AM
I haven`t tried that one yet EL... a true killer eh?

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

BpGemini
03-15-2004, 11:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
From my experiance P-63 is ultimate blue side killer. I`m surprized there are only couple of them could be found in the air... but IMO, It`s a best all-around plane on red side right now...on any altitude. speed, manuver, climb and firepower... all in one package. Can you wish for more? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



1. Thereā's a museum load of planes on Red that are more ā˜uberā' than the P-63.

2. I donā't get to fly her as much as Iā'd like because everyone and their brother joins to fly the P-38. I find myself going blue to even team quite too often.

:P

http://www.blitzpigs.com/images/P-39_BlitzPig_Sig_01.jpg
IL-2 original P-39 vet soon to be P-63 vet.

CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25)

crazyivan1970
03-15-2004, 11:37 AM
Allow to disagree Gem... i don`t think Red has something that can perform up high as P-63 does. Just my observation.. i didn`t have too much time in it... for the same reason lol... P-38 is the plane of the day. Quiet capable one too. Blue side needs pilots more then 90% of the time lol... well, unless 109Z is avail hehe

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

BpGemini
03-15-2004, 11:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Allow to disagree Gem... i don`t think Red has something that can perform up high as P-63 does. Just my observation.. i didn`t have too much time in it... for the same reason lol... P-38 is the plane of the day. Quiet capable one too. Blue side needs pilots more then 90% of the time lol... well, unless 109Z is avail hehe
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


109Z and the 110!! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


If Red includes all of the allied planes then you have the Spitfires and Yaks that can dominate turn fights and P-51s, P-38s and P-47s that can dominate in the B&Z game. To me the P-63 is a slightly less nimble P-39 but has the speed to keep the fights going which means it can call the shots more than the P-39 could.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://www.blitzpigs.com/images/P-39_BlitzPig_Sig_01.jpg
IL-2 original P-39 vet soon to be P-63 vet.

CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25)

TgD Thunderbolt56
03-15-2004, 12:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Blue side needs pilots more then 90% of the time lol... well, unless 109Z is avail hehe

V!
Regards,

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Agreed Ivan. Funny how things change. When the G2 was determined to be the penultimate dogfight machine Blue was never short of pilots.

Now, most of the new planes in Aces (aside from the "freak" planes: Go229, 109Z and the He jet) are for Red. So, it's understandable people want to fly them.

I liked the P-39 in IL2 because it was a difficult "crap" plane and success required patience and lots of practice. In FB that changed and it became a real knife-fighter that most could fly effectively with reduced requirements on the practice side.

The P-63 is NOT "uber" but it is a good all-around performer that somewhat neutralizes the weaknesses of its predecessor the P-39. It flies higher with less resistence, dives better and just plain goes faster. Tactics which were commonly employed to escape the P-39...will no longer work against...the KING!



http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/il2sig2.jpg

mortoma
03-15-2004, 12:02 PM
Well the P-63 is really great and some of you guys like Gibbage surely will tear up the skies with them. But as for some people who can't even land them, well, I fear them not.

crazyivan1970
03-15-2004, 12:11 PM
Are they land any different from P-39s... or any other "3 point" planes? Kinda of didn`t pay attention to it.

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

ZG77_Nagual
03-15-2004, 12:17 PM
Aspects of it's handling are a tad less crisp than I'd anticipated - but I quite like the P63.
I have to admit the p38 has really captured my attention though - it's so challenging to fly! And once you get used to those sniper guns it's hard to switch.

I've noticed the blue side dillema too lately - and have found myself in doras, a4s and a9s online frequently. Having to get back my 190 chops. Problem is the gunsight bug - which I know will be fixed soon - but a couple nights ago I had to dogfight a mustang and a few others in an a4 and a dora with no gunsight - talk about adding insult to injury.

BpGemini
03-15-2004, 12:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Are they land any different from P-39s... or any other "3 point" planes? Kinda of didn`t pay attention to it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


It nervously bounces around like a virgin at a pickle factory (until you get used to it).

http://www.blitzpigs.com/images/P-39_BlitzPig_Sig_01.jpg
IL-2 original P-39 vet soon to be P-63 vet.

CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25)

mortoma
03-15-2004, 02:02 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Are they land any different from P-39s... or any other "3 point" planes? Kinda of didn`t pay attention to it.

V!
Regards,

Well Ivan, you'd have to read some of the older posts in here. Apparently some complained of not be able to land the King. If they can't land the P-63, maybe they should give up simming entirely?? Then some of them had the gall to accuse me of lying about flying Skyhawks due to some comments I made about how easy it should be for even a 4 year old to land any plane in FB. And I do mean any plane. I told them that it's harder to land a real plane. It is not my fault they lack even basic sim piloting skills. I may be a low-time pilot but I still know more than they do. I think I will go back to the SimHq forums where you don't experience so many weirdos that accuse you of lying and insult you. They are nicer over there and more sane and mature.

[This message was edited by mortoma on Tue March 16 2004 at 07:05 AM.]