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

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik > Daidalos Team discussions

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old 07-19-2012, 08:15 AM
_1SMV_Gitano _1SMV_Gitano is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lagarto View Post
By the way, wasn't Kittyhawk MK IA (P-40E) fitted with underwing bomb racks? The current model doesn't have them.
Many wartime pictures suggest that the use of small size bombs under the wings was widespread from the P-40F onwards. On the other hand, some references suggest that small bombs were used also by P-40s in the Phlippines campaign (1941) but it's not clear what version carried them as there were both P40B/Cs and P-40Es operating together (source: Bloody Shambles vol. 1 by C. Shores)
__________________
  #182  
Old 07-19-2012, 11:11 AM
Fighterace Fighterace is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 269
Default

Will the new P-40 models have an improved DM?
  #183  
Old 07-19-2012, 09:15 PM
Macwan's Avatar
Macwan Macwan is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 22
Default

Yes, they will. At least the 3D, texture and collision boxes are much more detailled.

Cheers !

Macwan.
  #184  
Old 07-19-2012, 10:08 PM
ElAurens's Avatar
ElAurens ElAurens is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Great Black Swamp of Ohio
Posts: 2,185
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _1SMV_Gitano View Post
Many wartime pictures suggest that the use of small size bombs under the wings was widespread from the P-40F onwards. On the other hand, some references suggest that small bombs were used also by P-40s in the Phlippines campaign (1941) but it's not clear what version carried them as there were both P40B/Cs and P-40Es operating together (source: Bloody Shambles vol. 1 by C. Shores)
14th. Air Force P 40s were often armed with the bazooka type rocket launcher, as seen on the P47 in IL2.
__________________


Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943.
~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov
  #185  
Old 07-19-2012, 10:37 PM
EJGr.Ost_Caspar EJGr.Ost_Caspar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IceFire View Post
The P-40 cockpit isn't too bad... yes the Bf109 one is pretty old and fairly awful in comparison.
I tend to disagree. While Bf109 do have awful texturing (old style), the 3D shape of the P-40 cockpits, especially the canopy frames, is really wrong.
So in summary, P-40 cockpits are wrong, while Bf109 ones are only ugly.
__________________

----------------------------------------------
For bugreports, help and support contact:
daidalos.team@googlemail.com

For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications:
IL-Modeling Bible
  #186  
Old 07-20-2012, 10:33 AM
Lagarto Lagarto is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar View Post
So in summary, P-40 cockpits are wrong, while Bf109 ones are only ugly.
Many people won't notice when something is wrong, for lack of expertise, but they will surely notice when something is ugly
  #187  
Old 07-20-2012, 12:26 PM
IceFire IceFire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar View Post
I tend to disagree. While Bf109 do have awful texturing (old style), the 3D shape of the P-40 cockpits, especially the canopy frames, is really wrong.
So in summary, P-40 cockpits are wrong, while Bf109 ones are only ugly.
That's quotable Both could use some tlc but super happy about the P-40 in general!
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com
  #188  
Old 07-20-2012, 07:14 PM
Phil_K Phil_K is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 16
Default

P-40 cockpit frames are wrong AND ugly.
  #189  
Old 07-21-2012, 01:00 AM
Fighterace Fighterace is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 269
Default

So, no more one shot knocking out the engine or damaging all control surfaces
  #190  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:45 AM
Macwan's Avatar
Macwan Macwan is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 22
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fighterace View Post
So, no more one shot knocking out the engine or damaging all control surfaces
Normally, no more. The following parts are separated : engine body (cylinders), radiator, carburator, oil tank, fuel tanks (x3), control cables (x4).
To my opinion, the radiator and wings fuel tanks are the less protected parts.
The other parts are pretty secured and well protected, actually.

Macwan.
Closed Thread


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 12:04 AM.


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