Planes
 

Does anyone know if there are more planes then they list on the website, because i would like to fly the P-38 and also B-17 bombers.

Its said over 40 on the official website, P-38 is not available this time, Said by Anton.

The B-17 is spotted in the multiplayer video.

The website gets updated every week or so so more info and planes are added everytime so just wait and keep checking. If you spot new planes before we do, be sure to tell us!:)

Yes ! I get to relive my old intellivision days. Anyone remember B-17 Baaaaummer for the intelivision ?? :grin:

I don't care about the P whatever, i want to flatten the landscape in my LANCASTER!!!!! Behold the wrath of my BOMBS!!!!!

I wish there was one - that'd be awesome!! :o

The P-38 is the second greatest war plane of WW2 behind the P-51 mustang.

Ju-87
 

I wish there was the tank-hunter version of the Stuka.

Hard to measure the term 'greatest plane'. My favourites are the Spitfire and the Bf-109. But the P-38 is surely a great plane - loved the ground attack missions in that Jane's WWII fighter sim a few years ago on the PC.

P.S.: He-111, the Stuka is in the game - maybe we get the tank hunter version as DLC ;)

If only the Fieseler Fi 103 was in the game. For those who don't know what it was: It was a V-1 rocket, that was piloted. As if the survival rate of pilots in WW2 was bad enough, the Germans came up with this.
http://greyfalcon.us/restored/myPict..._tomas_500.jpg

I see thats the german version of the ohka?

You've obviously never heard that kill ratio between P-38's and Me-109's. Unless it was piloted by a good well trained and knew how to handle the plane well pilot, the Me-109's tore through P-38s. That's why most were transfered to the Pacific theatre.

If you want to know the best planes in WW2, it would have to be the Yak-3 which could take on a FW-190 in an even fight at low to mid-altitudes. And for a plane that could take on a Me-109 in a fare fight would be the Spitfire Mk 9.

All i want is the Yak 3 :-)

In what respects are you referring ? fighter vs fighter ? ground attack? bomber attack? I hate to say it but the P-38 was not the "greatest" in any of these categories

I want to see a P40.

Ah yes the old "What plane is Best" argument. Basically there is no such thing as the best plane. There are those that are specialized and therefore better than most in one specific area and there those that were decent in all areas but not spectacular in any one area. Depending on the amount of money available to any given airforce to devolop and manufacture aircraft the big money forces like the USAAF could develop multiple spceialized aricraft whereas the Germans were somewhat limited espcially towards the end and would therefore find more value in a good all around ship. The FW190 would be a good example, a good fighter that also worked well as a ground attack aircraft. It could easily out turn a 109 but could not climb as well. Therefore the 109 worked well for guys like Hartmann who would use the dive, attack and flee tactic that the 109 excelled at, 352 kills, hard to deny it worked. The FW190 worked well for guys like Nowotny who didnt do anything spectacular in the 109 but blossomed in the 190 as he was more of a true dogfighter, 205 kills in a 190, hard to deny this works as well!

I have "favourites" as well, the Fw 190D9, the Ta 152 and pretty much any Spit but I wouldn't say anything was the best just different!

I for one would like to see the B-25. Such an awesome plane especially when they slapped the 75mm(correct me if i'm wrong) cannon underneath it. Another plane that i'd like to see is the mosquito. Really neat plane, and made out of wood.

Purely if you want the best dogfighters, a late model Corsair or a Spitfire XIV would walk all over either of those planes, and the Corsair had a pretty good range too. Even the older Merlin engined Spitfires like the VIII, IX and XVI could outclass either plane in a dogfight, even if the P51 is faster by around 30mph. The later Russian fighters like the Yak 3 and La7 would be all over a P38 and more than a match for a P51 once the fight slowed down slightly.

The P38 was withdrawn from Europe because it could not hold its own against the Bf109 and Fw190, and sent to the Pacific where its speed advantage over the slow Japanese fighters allowed safe use of BnZ tactics all day long and ensured a good kill/death ratio.

Edit: I see a lot of other people have also responded to this post. Should have checked the next page of posts before I replied.

It's blowing my mind that none of you have mentioned the P-47 Thunderbolt or the ass-whoopin' F6F Hellcat from the PTO.
Both of these planes have insane kill ratios and are well known for their effectivness versus the FW 190's/Me 109's and the Zeroes respectively.

P47 is quite good, but only at high altitude and it suffered from having the manoeuvrability of a barge, and the F6F worked well against Zeros but would be too slow to see effective use in Europe.

If I'm flying a Bf109 in Il2 1946 and I see a P47, the only part of the combat I'm worried about is getting past the 8 .50cals if the pilot tries a head on pass. Once I'm past these the only way a P47 is going to survive is either having a pilot far better than me or by using its weight to dive for the deck, and if I can spare the time and don't have to fight anyone else I will get him when he starts to climb back up to altitude again.

The F6F was certainly a good plane in its place and time, but it isn't even a contender for best fighter.

That's interesting. Thanks for the post. I have much to learn about the planes of ww2 and it seems like this will be a great place to do it.

Also, this forum has an alarming lack of douchebags ;)

Obviously the P47 is call the "Jug" not because of the way it looks. The plan was a monstrosity! It often, like the P38, fell victim to both Me-109's and FW-109's. Many USAAF Pilots said that they disliked the P-47, and when the P-51 came into action, they all were jumping for a try. The P-47 fell victim in two VERY important categories.

1. Slow climb rate.

2. Turning was a problem.

What it did excel in was: 1. Diving (That thing fell like a stone) and 2. Armament, and Weaponry.

So against the Me-109 and FW-190, the P47 was a very eaten up plane, unless it was flown by a fairly good pilot (ie Gabby Gabreski).

That's very true ;)

My knowledge of the P-47 is entirely from the book "Thunderbolt" so I may only know the good stuff. Regarding the nickname "Jug", it apparently is from the way it looks. The pilots named it that as it looked like a milk jug.

Yep, I wholehartedly support the superiority of yak-3s especially yak-3P she is my lover :grin:

Now, I'm not very knowledgeable with planes so most of this conversation is going over my head. But the Yak 3 looks a lot like the Spitfire (I don't know which model numbers). Is that intentional, or is the Spitfire design suitable for an all-around plane. A response with out starting like:
"Oh the little you know," or " God, you are a moron," would be much appreciated.

There is a certain superficial similarity between the Merlin engined Spitfires and the Yak 3, mostly around the engine and cockpit, but I don't think this was intentional, and the rest of the design is dissimilar. In particular, the wings are very different shapes.

not forgetting in all theatres the pilots were good at counteracting their planes weakness with group tactics, learnt mainly from the inflexibility of the RAF in the early parts of the war....and it does need saying again how STUPIDLY TOUGH the P47 was...
jug for juggernaut?
________
Ford trimotor

The P47 had a pretty good roll rate. Its extremely agile in a rolling scissors.

Thats not true at all! It excelled as a fighter, its only problem was range and low altitude speed (which was still on par with a Spitfire IXLF). Just look at its loss record. It had one of the best of the entire war. Above 20,000ft where they operated in 1943 they held all the cards over the 109G6's and 109A5's. Even later on when it was moved to ground attack it still excelled as a fighter due to its excellent roll rate and ability to hold its energy.

If you get into the scissors flying a P47 with me in a Bf109 I will let you slow down, then break out and leave you struggling to regain energy, and don't even think about anything dependent on rolling abilities against a Fw190.

I'll let you slow yourself down and break off If I didn't immediately have the advantage by the 2nd pass.

At 25,000ft or in a high speed rolling scissors? Any P47D would be able to gain its energy back easily and certainly out zoom a mid to late 109G (possibly even a K4) at that height. Not to mention at high speed the elevator response on a 109G would let it down horribly if it tried to follow a sharp zoom. Any 190, even the D9 has problems up high too. At an escort height of 25 to 30,000ft even a 190A9 or D9 is at a distinct disadvantage with the P47D. There is a quite a high chance that a 190 would just stall out at that height in a rolling scissors if not be left behind due to its power band being crap at that height.

At low speeds + low altitude I'd agree but then you have to fly to the planes best heights and abilities and down and low isn't the P47's forteit. 7 years of online IL2 has taught me that!

I guess its not entirely related to real life fighting, but when flying in Il2 I tend to fight lower down than the P47s peak altitude, which has probably biased me to a certain extent against the Thunderbolt. I like light, powerful fighters with a good climb rate and decent firepower, which usually means a Bf109 for me although the Spitfire XIV has become a firm favourite of mine since the mod for it came out.

If I'm trying to kill B17s or B24s with a fighter, which is about the only place you are likely to go up against P47s in their element, I will almost always be flying a late model Bf109 with the centreline 30mm cannon and no gun pods. The Mk108 isn't really a gun for dogfighting, but over time I've become quite proficient at hitting fighters with it, and even one hit will ruin the day of any enemy fighter pilot. It helps to set the gun for long range, around 800-1000m, because not only does this mean you can shoot bombers from outside the effective range of return fire, but the upwards angle of the gun helps correct the low muzzle velocity which usually makes shells go behind where you would be aiming to pull a deflection shot on a fighter.

In their favour, P47s are one of the few aircraft that can survive a 30mm round without having to be very lucky, but even they will often be crippled by it.

I can't say I'm a fan of the 30mm 108. I much prefer the MK103 for bomber killing but the gun pods do horrible things to the plane! I agree, the XIV is awesome for a late war fighter.

The D_late is still quite good lower down though, at 10,000 its a tough opponent and prety fast in a straight line. I guess at that height its more about who see's who first and who has the height/energy advantage. Still, I'd take a D9 for fighter on fighter at that sort of height. Depends on which side I'm flying for.

I try to fly more co-ops though with realistic scenarios although on some DF servers like Warclouds you'll get high altitude fights which are always good fun.

Well like most Soviet fighters during WW2, they weren't exactly meant for high altitude. The Red Air Force saw fighters as basically low to medium altitude fighters, that could support ground forces if needed. The Spitfire on the other hand, was almost the complete opposite. It could if needed assist ground troops, but was mostly meant to deal with medium to high altitude aircraft.

About the engine and cockpit, those are probably just a coincidence. I don't recall the Soviet's taking the Merlin and making their own. Though they did do that with some of the Aircobra's and P40's they were given.

Unless your fighting at a fairly high altitude, and are not in a turn and burn dogfight; the P47 was chewed up. Me-109's whether it be a "F" or a "G" model, the P47 was given a good work over. Now if your flying a Me-109G6, then it's more of an even match since both planes are heavily weighed down, and aren't very turn and burn. But against the faster more nimble 109's the P47 was worked over.

Kill/Loss records from both the Luftwaffe and USAF would disagree with your opinion ;) The P47 was by far the safest combat aircraft of the war. Its loss rate to enemy aircraft is quite ridiculously low!

Thats a completely inaccurate blanket statement. The performance differences between say a G2 and G14 were extreme and the F2/4 model was outclassed completely by 1944. And by then P47's were using 150 grade fuel which gave a major performance boost at low and medium altitude and gave them a similar top speed and acceleration to match 109's used at that point like the G10 at any altitude. The 190 was more of a threat...as JG2 and JG26 were both equipped with them and very few 109's and met much of the initial threat posed by aircraft from the UK in 43/44.

You need to stop watching history channel and read some combat reports and some books based on official records.

When picking a 109 to fly, you are always trading speed for manoeuvrability, or vice versa. There is only one point in the 109s history where the next version was both faster and more manoeuverable than its predecessor, and that is the jump from the E to the F, which is rightly regarded as the point in the Bf109s history where it was most competitive compared to its contemporaries.

Well, I haven't watched the History Channel for some years (Got rid of cable/satellite), so I couldn't tell you what they've been saying about the P47. Most of my knowledge about P47's either came from interview/documentaries with actual P47 Pilot(s) (i.e. Gabby Gabreski and a couple of others) or from several books about the P47. So if your not taking an actual P47 Ace's now how of how the plane was, then I just don't know?

All I was saying, was that against a smaller more nimble plane, the P47 would be chewed up. Not that it couldn't defend itself, just that in a turn and burn dogfight, the P47 was out of it element.

But it wasn't, the P47 relied on power/energy fighting and roll rate which was good throughout the speed range. Of cause if you start turning with a plane thats good at turning your going to end up in trouble unless you have a plan (again, something like a high speed yo yo would favour a P47D over a late 109G). Its as much about the pilot and the situation prior to combat as anything else but on an equal footing such a blanket statement is completely incorrect.

Every other plane is came up against was smaller than it yet it has the by far the best record of any plane during the war with the possible exception of the F6F which totally outclassed its opposition (again, a large aircraft vs a much smaller and better turning but poor rolling A6M).

I don't recall hearing that the A6M Zero had a bad roll rate. From the book I read: Samurai, about the highest scoring japanese Ace: Saburo Sakai. He said that the Zero was a great plane all around, just that without armor and heavy guns, it was in trouble. But he took on 6 F6F Hellcats during Iwo Jima, and out turned and rolled onto their tales before they could get a good shot at him.

My love for the 47 stems from SWOTL, I could fly a mission moderately far into enemy lines and do some fun ground raids and inevitability get shot up by the defending AI planes and still make it back to home base. With the 51 the engine would die on me after only being lightly damaged.