P-38 Lightning - Page 4 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-14-2020, 08:31 PM   #31
pmiceli
Member
 
pmiceli's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 233
Default

As my signature makes very obvious, a well modeled P-38 would be a dream come true in DCS.

As a bonus, the counter rotating engines would make the lack of appropriate torque effects in propeller driven DCS aircraft pretty much a non-issue, except when single engine where the torqueless FM would make it easier than real life.
__________________
pmiceli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 03:29 PM   #32
CaptJodan
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 165
Default

I could certainly understand the need for something like a Zero before the P-38 (to have some foes), but this aircraft should probably be near the top of the WWII development list. It would certainly round out the top 3 late war US land-based aircraft used during the conflict.

A childhood favorite of mine, to be sure.
CaptJodan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 03:40 PM   #33
Ercoupe
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 126
Default

"(to have some foes)"
As has been pointed out, already, the airplane does not need a Zero to have an oppponant in here. It was used in Europe. It was used in North Africa. It was used in Italy. It has "foes." The 109 and 190. Why would we have to wait for a Zero before we can fly a P-38 in here?
Ercoupe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 04:58 PM   #34
ac5
Senior Member
 
ac5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,073
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eviscerador View Post
Come on, the last one of the american "Pursuit trio" and the fighter with most japanese air kills in the Pacific Theatre. Also one of the few WW2 fighters to be produced along the whole war.

Twin turbosupercharged engines, unmistakeable profile, deadly nose armament and capable of either long range fighter sweeps, interception, bombing and strafing, all on the same package.

It needs to be in the game.

Completely agree!
__________________
Mainboard: ASUS Maximus X Hero Intel Z 370
CPU: Intel Core i7-8086K @ 4.0 GHz
Memory: 32GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4-3000
Graphics Card: ASUS NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB
Monitor ASUS PA 329 32" @ 4K
1 SSD Samsung 860 PRO 256 GB
1 SSD Samsung 860 PRO 1 TB
Windows 10 - 64
CH Pro combatstick, throttle and pedals
ac5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 05:50 PM   #35
alado
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 110
Default

I want one
alado is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 06:58 PM   #36
Jester986
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ercoupe View Post
"(to have some foes)"
As has been pointed out, already, the airplane does not need a Zero to have an oppponant in here. It was used in Europe. It was used in North Africa. It was used in Italy. It has "foes." The 109 and 190. Why would we have to wait for a Zero before we can fly a P-38 in here?
Because we're talking about the Pacific theater here. While it would be great that it can pull double duty in both theaters and its fair to mention that, a conversation strictly about its European merits belongs in that sub forum. Because of the maps we have inbound and the likely focus on carrier combat priority for Pacific aircraft should be given to the most influential of that campaign. Otherwise it would be like if I went on the European subforum and said we needed the F4F because they flew off British carriers and did fleet protection during the invasion.
Jester986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 04:39 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.