The problem with the A4E is the fact that the A4B is at the same BR, yet the A4E has better flight performance, flares and much better ground ordinance. The A4B is balanced at 8.7br, so I feel like 9.0br would be fair to the A4E.
If we look at the A4E in terms of ground battles, its very undertiered considering it gets a wide variety of ordinance and gets TV-guided bombs.
Though this is practically why we need dynamic BRs, so many planes have busted ordinance but can’t be moved up too high else they are fodder in air rb
8.7 and 9.0 would be in the same match also the a4 is not meant to be a fighter, in fact in matches I only ever use it as a base bomber. And yes it can be OP in ground rb but i dont bring jets to ground rb matches
wholely agree, it’s funny how even my card proves it, that the best planes are the ones i score worst with while the worst ones are the best ones i’m better with. Why? Because I play the best planes to have fun, flow with the brainrot, dogfight and die, while I play the bad planes to follow the cult of kill battle kill death ratio. My highest kill games have been with very bad planes. That’s why you don’t see me crying about mig21 smt, spitfires or 109s and calling them bad planes.
the xp50 and j5n1 should switch BRs and still the j5n1 would still suck at 3.7.
@DaGreenBolt i agree except with the part of the f-5’s. The F-5C is fine at 10.3, it’s the slowest 10.3 and only thrives if people dare engaging it or by third partying. The F-5E was very good when it got added because it had no competence and if it had some, it could simply missile it because such competence like the mirages and drakens that would out dogfight it or outpace it, didn’t have any flares. The MiG21 SMT is superior to the f-5e in every single aspect other than brute energy retention and sits at 10.3. More flares, a properly positioned dispenser, radar missiles, a great radar that works better at low altitude than that of the f-4e, great dogfighter and insane engine power, faster. F-5E now has fallen from grace since 10.7 is constantly uptiered to 11.7 because 11.3 keeps seeing 12.0 constantly. If we have to consider that the f-5e was once 11.0 against MiG29s with two mid 20g missiles and only 20 flare pops in an awfully placed dispenser against the j7e which is faster, MUCH better armed, a much better climber AND dogfighter is crazy. But that’s becaus j7e is popular among (insert questionable thing) and thus it gets too low in BR. The F-5E is unpopular now and only the few players that use it are the good ones, while the j7e gets spammed and dies on the first phantom that manages to aim7e2 it because it didn’t bring chaff at 7km of altitude.
It was not designed to fight jets…It was designed as a long range bomber escort fighter. The design doctrine was combating FW-190s, 109s, and 110s. All prop planes. They did encounter jets (MEs for example) but it was not their design purposes.
The first me262 was spotted by bombers and p51d’s, the ongoing development of aircraft such as the sea fury, f8f, f7f, spitfire mk20+ and stuff like that was specifically designed to intercept jets and the p51h was designed along these “super props” that served as multirole purpose aircraft with an enhancement for speed and energy retention over maneuverability precisely to deal with the incomnig jets that attacked the bombers or raided the troops.
No. That’s a broad interpretation of history. The P-51 was designed as a long range fighter bomber escort. It did encounter jets, but that was not it’s design purpose. History does not support your assertion.
To add since you are making more shit up. The explicit changes in the P-51H were because the designer was curious why British fighters were so much lighter. The changes made in the H model were due to him learning more about their weight.
Just look into the facts (who asked for what reason the Mustang was developed) and distinguish between initially developed and later optimized and used as - otherwise you qualify for this quote:
Next:
Frankly spoken: You might think about what you are writing here.
Applying reverse logic you say the American engineers were brain dead compared to every other nation and realized very late that their planes were too heavy.
Insane claim.
If you look at aircraft designed to meet actual specifications of the USAAC/USAAF (like P-36, P-38, P-39, P-40, P-47) you might realize that the weight of US aircraft was a result of those requirements and not because their designers were incompetent the years before.
You might take a look at the parameters which lead to the F8F Bearcat - light weight, able to use smaller escort carriers with insane performance up to 4 km - able to intercept hordes of incoming kamikaze aircraft.
That’s the main reason why US players get clapped whilst flying them - they are not able to win a fight vs a plain 109 G-6 AS, G-14, G-10 or K-4 as soon as they try to fight above 5 km due to lack of a more capable supercharger as there was no need for high alt combat in the Pacific.
The way gaijin has modeled the bearcat is infuriating because it is producing way less power than it should due to them screwing up the power curves with and without ram air, as well as its energy retention being piss poor for some reason when by all accounts it is very good in that field.
Although i followed these discussions and gaijin has imho a “special” way to look at certain aspects of certain aircraft (if they are not USSR) - the lack of engine power at higher alt was seen as acceptable sacrifice to get the lower alt performance.
So even if i am with you - the conceptual disadvantage at higher alt was a result of design choices - and not because US engineers became suddenly smart over night and found out that a lighter aircraft with a stronger engine might better perform. And that was the claim i answered to.
I wasn’t trying to say that the bearcat was optimized for high altitude. The problem is that 5 km isn’t a high altitude at all. It is 16,400 feet, which is an altitude that was regularly fought at in the Pacific, and an altitude the bearcat was designed for. If you look at speed charts, the bearcat starts to slow down at above 20,000 feet. Which makes perfect sense for the Pacific. The bearcat in war thunder should be in its element, given the design sacrifices work into its favor. Its just that gaijin refuses to fix it.
I am not sure if your claim “specifically designed to intercept jets” is actually backed by evidence. Imho you can come to this conclusion, but the main driver for high performance prop aircraft was imho the logical consequence of following some basic rules:
A speed advantage is essential for the classic decision fight or flee and allows to dominate a fight by giving the option to engage or disengage at will.
In order to make an aircraft faster you need more hp available as improved aerodynamics alone won’t make it. So they added more powerful engines to increase speed. And besides some very smart engineering the main factor of the increase of hp available was the high octane fuel (100-150 octane) and nothing else.
Imho the decisions leading to those aircraft you mentioned were made long before jets became an operational threat. And if you read combat diaries from all involved parties - the only promising tactic to fight jets was to attack them during landing / take-off. Based on the pure numbers advantage all airfields with jet fighters were under constant surveillance during daylight hours. In WT terms: Camping the enemy airfield.
Based on which source you prefer: It boils down that the LW never had more than ~ 50-100 Me 262s operational at any given day - considering the few planes of KG (J) 54 using the fighter-bomber variant.
Whilst the actual decisive HP drop was at 4.700 meters:
I am fully aware that you are fan of USN stuff, but imho we had a similar conversation last year - and from a holistic view the Bearcats are simply non-WW 2 combat stuff - like the P-51 D-30 or H-5…
Don’t forget the total lack of engine cooling. The F8F IRL had NACA analysis docs showing it was too effective at cooling the engine. The docs were forwarded to devs too. It was a conscious choice to make the F8F have engine cooling issues in game.
`In July of 1943, U.S. Army approved a contract with North American Aviation to design and build a lightweight P-51. Designated NA-105, 5 aircraft were to be built and tested. Edgar Schmued, chief of design at NAA, began this design early in 1943. He, in February of 1943, left the U.S. on a two month trip to England. He was to visit the Supermarine factory and the Rolls Royce factory to work on his lightweight project.
Rolls Royce had designed a new version of the Merlin, the RM.14.SM, which was proposed to increase the manifold pressure to 120 (from 67 max) and thus improve horsepower to 2,200. Schmued was very eager to use this powerplant. The new Merlin was not heavier than the earlier models. Schmued visited with the engineers at Rolls Royce and they answered his many questions. Schmued left the Rolls Royce factory very satisfied with their cooperation.
Brittish fighters were lighter than U.S. fighters. Schmued ask for detailed weight statements from Supermarine on the Spitfire. Schmued wanted to know why the Spitfires were so much lighter than the P-51. Supermairne did not have such data on the Spitfire, so they started weighing all the parts they could get a hold of and made a report for Schmued. The Brittish had design standards that were not as strict in some areas of design as the U.S. Landing gear, angle of attack and side engine design loads were higher in the U.S.
When Schmued returned, they began a new design of the P-51 Mustang that used Brittish design loads. They shaved weight on any part that could yield. They were able to reduce the empty weight of the P-51 by 600 pounds. This would translate into more performance.`
Whilst the actual decisive HP drop was at 4.700 meters
Looked at the manual. My mistake.
and from a holistic view the Bearcats are simply non-WW 2 combat stuff
The bearcat was put into service with a squadron on May 21st, 1945. It is absolutely a WW2 aircraft. The bearcat’s problem is that its gimped to hell. Looking at the power, speed, and climb charts, it is clearly equivalent to the 109’s in terms of performance up to about 6000 meters.
What cooling issues?
On military power F8F has no cooling issues in War Thunder.
WEP causes issues, but that’s cause it’s WEP.
Even on WEP you can open radiator and manage heat.