Warplanes
- Thread starter Barbas
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I wonder how accurate War Thunder is.zumbledum said:what risk did for geography , warthunder has done for plane recognition
Myself being English and in full knoledge the hurricane was actually a lot more responsible but im going for any spitfire there just so damn sexy looking.
Because if it's fully accurate then all hail the Soviet Airforce.
At least coming from a former British player, I loved the Hurricane to bits but I only ever got shot down by Russians in that plane, which made me change sides to see what it's like and honest to god it's glorious.
I used to like the traditional choices, like the Spitfire (Mk. Vb ftw), the Mustang etc, but if we're going on aesthetics, two really stand out for me- the first being the P-39. While it was actually pretty crap at anything other than ground striking, and not even close to being the best performing fighter of the war as someone said above, to this day it looks unlike any other WW2 fighter. It's like the alternate universe WW2 fighter with it's car door and trike undercarriage.
true to the Italian's impeccable style, they made some truly beautiful fighters. Some say the MC. 202 was the most gorgeous plane of the war, but for my money, I'd say the sexiest bird of prey of them all was the Reggiane Re. 2005:
[wolf whistle]
As for best performance? I'm going to really annoy all those kids that grew up watching the History Channel and say it wasn't the Mustang, and it sure as hell wasn't the Corsair (that only got famous by shooting down rookie pilots), but in fact this beast right here:
Interestingly, much of Japanese fighter design focussed on lightly armoured, highly maneuverable fighters that could outperform their opposites. The KI-84 was different. This thing was heavy, well protected, and very powerful. It could get up to the B-29s and take on the Superfortresses, and was found to be a match in performance for any fighter the Allies could throw at it. It was fortunate for the Allies that their strategic bombing severely hampered the construction and maintenance of these fighters, because they were a real thorn in the side of Allied pilots as the war moved in on the Japanese homeland.
I do still love the Mustang though, at least once they put the British Merlin in it and it got that classic Spitfirey sound.
true to the Italian's impeccable style, they made some truly beautiful fighters. Some say the MC. 202 was the most gorgeous plane of the war, but for my money, I'd say the sexiest bird of prey of them all was the Reggiane Re. 2005:
[wolf whistle]
As for best performance? I'm going to really annoy all those kids that grew up watching the History Channel and say it wasn't the Mustang, and it sure as hell wasn't the Corsair (that only got famous by shooting down rookie pilots), but in fact this beast right here:
Interestingly, much of Japanese fighter design focussed on lightly armoured, highly maneuverable fighters that could outperform their opposites. The KI-84 was different. This thing was heavy, well protected, and very powerful. It could get up to the B-29s and take on the Superfortresses, and was found to be a match in performance for any fighter the Allies could throw at it. It was fortunate for the Allies that their strategic bombing severely hampered the construction and maintenance of these fighters, because they were a real thorn in the side of Allied pilots as the war moved in on the Japanese homeland.
I do still love the Mustang though, at least once they put the British Merlin in it and it got that classic Spitfirey sound.
Tanks are more accurately portrayed than the planes in terms of relative strength and such. Damn Russian planes are a bit OP, but still can be outperformed by better aircraft. Its mainly the armaments that still need some tweaking.Politrukk said:I wonder how accurate War Thunder is.zumbledum said:what risk did for geography , warthunder has done for plane recognition
Myself being English and in full knoledge the hurricane was actually a lot more responsible but im going for any spitfire there just so damn sexy looking.
Because if it's fully accurate then all hail the Soviet Airforce.
At least coming from a former British player, I loved the Hurricane to bits but I only ever got shot down by Russians in that plane, which made me change sides to see what it's like and honest to god it's glorious.
Well what a lot of people don't realise about russian planes is that they're very squishy, they just don't immediately bleed out like British planes do for example.Imperioratorex Caprae said:Tanks are more accurately portrayed than the planes in terms of relative strength and such. Damn Russian planes are a bit OP, but still can be outperformed by better aircraft. Its mainly the armaments that still need some tweaking.Politrukk said:I wonder how accurate War Thunder is.zumbledum said:what risk did for geography , warthunder has done for plane recognition
Myself being English and in full knoledge the hurricane was actually a lot more responsible but im going for any spitfire there just so damn sexy looking.
Because if it's fully accurate then all hail the Soviet Airforce.
At least coming from a former British player, I loved the Hurricane to bits but I only ever got shot down by Russians in that plane, which made me change sides to see what it's like and honest to god it's glorious.
I can't remember how many times I've spent flying a Yak that had part of its wing shot off or how a stray bullet had my engine damaged (which will lead to a crash, just later on).
In terms of firepower they're pretty good but you definitely need to learn how to use them optimally.
I guess the issue might be that Russian planes get better with better pilots due to the fact that their weakness lies in base manouvres and armour which better pilots start to cancel out.
I'm not sure what to pick as my favourite plane though.
Aw man, you're making me choose? But there's so many awesome designs! Well okay, I'll try to narrow it down to a handful.
ME-262. World's first operational jet fighter. I love its predatory, shark-like appearance.
A6M Zero. Light, agile Japanese fighter that dominated the skies in the early years of World War II. I had the privilege of witnessing a rare flyable one at an airshow years ago, and pictures simply do not do the plane justice. Here's one anyway, though.
MiG-21. Ubiquitous Soviet jet fighter from the 1960's that has stood the test of time thanks to continual upgrades. Still in operational use in some parts of the world.
A-10 "Warthog." Treated as the red-headed stepchild of the U.S. Air Force for years, this plane has proven itself time and again as the world's premier ground attack aircraft. "Shark mouth" paint job optional, but highly preferable.
Airco DH-2. Single-seat "pusher" design that helped bring an end to the "Fokker Scourge." Whenever I see this plane it reminds me just how brave WWI pilots had to be to willingly go up in such monstrosities (with no parachute, no less!)
Lastly I have to mention the I-16, simply because it reminds me of a wind-up toy.
Sadly the sole prototype was destroyed when an engine caught fire on its ninth flight, forcing the crew to bail out.
ME-262. World's first operational jet fighter. I love its predatory, shark-like appearance.
A6M Zero. Light, agile Japanese fighter that dominated the skies in the early years of World War II. I had the privilege of witnessing a rare flyable one at an airshow years ago, and pictures simply do not do the plane justice. Here's one anyway, though.
MiG-21. Ubiquitous Soviet jet fighter from the 1960's that has stood the test of time thanks to continual upgrades. Still in operational use in some parts of the world.
A-10 "Warthog." Treated as the red-headed stepchild of the U.S. Air Force for years, this plane has proven itself time and again as the world's premier ground attack aircraft. "Shark mouth" paint job optional, but highly preferable.
Airco DH-2. Single-seat "pusher" design that helped bring an end to the "Fokker Scourge." Whenever I see this plane it reminds me just how brave WWI pilots had to be to willingly go up in such monstrosities (with no parachute, no less!)
Lastly I have to mention the I-16, simply because it reminds me of a wind-up toy.
The B-17 is a good looking plane, but have you ever seen the XB-38? It was a B-17 outfitted with Allison inline engines for testing. It's amazing how such a relatively simple change made the plane look a whole lot sexier:Barbas said:Every time I look at a Flying Fortress, I wonder how something that heavy can possible be soaring through the air.
The wooden wonder really was a wonder. The fuselage shells were mostly made by furniture companies, rather than in the factories where most aircraft were built. Almost every part in the whole aircraft was made from wood (other than the engines of course!). It was used as a Fighter, a Medium Bomber, a Reconnaissance Aircraft, a Ground Support aircraft, an Anti Submarine platform, and a Night Fighter - it had about 40 different variants built because it was such a versatile aircraft. The Tse-Tse variant mounted a 6 pound cannon in the nose for ground attack, whilst some of the reconnaisance models carried no weapons at all - amazing to have a design that just worked, and worked well, in all those situations with all those different loadouts. Very under-rated aircraft.albino boo said:
Since most peole already have WW2 covered, I will do planes from later on:
A pain in the ass to fly, but still the plane every Navy man wanted in Vietnam. If for no other reason than Vought didnt listen to others and decided that by god, the Gun still had a place in the modern dogfight, so they put 4x20mm cannons in while the F-4 and others had nothing. Also one of those "So ugly it looks good" kind of planes
For when those ground targets must absolutely be turned into a smoking crater. There is really nothing else like this beast on the planet, and it is one of the things that has lead to the US ability to kick the ass of everyone they fight. 1 20mm gatling gun, 1 autocannon (40mm on older models, 25mm on the newer ones), and a freaking 105mm artillery piece. Oh, and did I mention the back ramp still works and there have been pilots who have carried big bombs like the Daisy Cutter and MOAB into battle in addition to their cannons? Leaves nothing alive that isnt friendly.
.jpg)
If you see one, you might as well surrender because the sight of these things mean the skies now officially belong to the US Air Force. These babies will ensure US air superiority for the next 15 years at least and they are absolutely gorgeous to look at. And unlike other planes, that beauty is from function before form (the stealth needs of the plane).
Yet another plane that is easy on the eyes. Also was and still is the only plane that could carry the AIM-54 Phoenix missile (the longest range conventional Air-to-Air missile ever built). While her flying days are over and she has since been retired, she will continue to live on the what is her most famous role. We all know what I am talking about, but just in case, I will leave this here. [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=siwpn14IE7E]
A pain in the ass to fly, but still the plane every Navy man wanted in Vietnam. If for no other reason than Vought didnt listen to others and decided that by god, the Gun still had a place in the modern dogfight, so they put 4x20mm cannons in while the F-4 and others had nothing. Also one of those "So ugly it looks good" kind of planes
Weather you could call it a warplane or not is questionable given that it spent most of it's time flying at heights and speeds that prevented it from either engaging or being engaged in warfare but end of the day it is still an amazing piece of tech
The SR71 Blackbird
I've got a pretty good track record with taking down Russian planes. The biggest issue is that in Arcade they have a bigger advantage due to being able to pull maneuvers that they shouldn't be able to do without losing vital parts to stress. So people tend to take advantage of the lack of risk and whip those bastards around without damaging/destroying their craft.Politrukk said:
Its actually harder for me to play in Arcade because I fly with physics restrictions in my head and I forget that I can pull off things that I shouldn't be able to.
They're not super OP, just annoying enough to seem like they've a larger advantage over unskilled pilots. I love the hell out of WT though, more than WoWP and have sunk about 400 hours into it, and yet managed not to spend more than $20 on it over the near 3 year span I've had it. Love the hell out of that game.
I always try to manouvre as daringly as possible so I absolutely get what you are saying.Imperioratorex Caprae said:
I suppose at the moment due to War Thunder and my lower-tier dominance preference my favourite plane has got to be the LaGG 3-8.
But that's just because I'm best with that plane I suppose haha.
I should give realistic a try again soon though
Edit: realistically that would be the LaGG 3-8 with the old armament as compared to the counterparts of the time, not with the later weakened armament.
The Russian bias in that game isn't as bad as a lot of people like to complain about on the forums... But I think that, yeah, in general the Russian planes tend to have much more forgiving flight models. The Yak-3's in particular are especially bullshit on that front. I've had a Yak-3 follow my Fw-190 D through a dive once (in realistic mode D: ), and I've seen them outperform P-51's up high.Politrukk said:I wonder how accurate War Thunder is.zumbledum said:what risk did for geography , warthunder has done for plane recognition
Myself being English and in full knoledge the hurricane was actually a lot more responsible but im going for any spitfire there just so damn sexy looking.
Because if it's fully accurate then all hail the Soviet Airforce.
At least coming from a former British player, I loved the Hurricane to bits but I only ever got shot down by Russians in that plane, which made me change sides to see what it's like and honest to god it's glorious.
I think the biggest issue is that they just *feel* unfair. No nation does snap-shots better than the Russians, so they almost always seem to hit you once, out of nowhere, and then your plane is broken in half.
On the bright side, Russian teams tend to be the worst, so it sort of evens out sometimes.
Some of the German pilots wore parachutes. Allied commanders outright forbade their pilots from using them though. They were worried that having that tiny bit of security would make men more cowardly in combat.Neverhoodian said:
Indeed, though I seem to remember reading that it took some convincing on the Germans' part. In any case, it's certainly a difficult mindset to understand by modern standards.rcs619 said:
The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25 Foxbat. The second fastest military aircraft in the world.
The design just screams Russian so hard that it hurts.
filthy sell out !Politrukk said:I wonder how accurate War Thunder is.zumbledum said:what risk did for geography , warthunder has done for plane recognition
Myself being English and in full knoledge the hurricane was actually a lot more responsible but im going for any spitfire there just so damn sexy looking.
Because if it's fully accurate then all hail the Soviet Airforce.
At least coming from a former British player, I loved the Hurricane to bits but I only ever got shot down by Russians in that plane, which made me change sides to see what it's like and honest to god it's glorious.
well i have no idea myself but i watch a lot of war thunder vids, squire becasue hes funny and saves having to re watch black adder and red dwarf. and magz tv, and magz seems to be a huge aviation buff according to him a lot of it is very accurate some less so , have to go on a plane by plane basis. but the yak3 and yak 9 which is what im guessing your wrecking face with ... well yeah dont think they actually had that stalinium paint in the real world. don't think you'll find many people denying there brokenActually I loathe the Yak-7 apparently it doesn't suit my flying style?zumbledum said:filthy sell out !Politrukk said:I wonder how accurate War Thunder is.zumbledum said:what risk did for geography , warthunder has done for plane recognition
Myself being English and in full knoledge the hurricane was actually a lot more responsible but im going for any spitfire there just so damn sexy looking.
Because if it's fully accurate then all hail the Soviet Airforce.
At least coming from a former British player, I loved the Hurricane to bits but I only ever got shot down by Russians in that plane, which made me change sides to see what it's like and honest to god it's glorious.
It's a lot more complicated than that. During the BoB the limit to the number of Spitfires wasn't really airframes, it was a choice to balance the hurricanes/spitfires that way due to taskings. Spitfires kept the fighter screen busy, allowing the slower Hurricanes to deal with the bombers. Inspite of it's 2:1 numbers advantage over the |Spitfire at the outbreak of the BoB it only accounted for 55% of German losses to the Spitfires 42%. The reason for such taskings was simple, speed, the hurricane was noticeably slower than either 109 or spitfire, so wasn't suited to the task of occupying the escorts till the bombers were dealt with. It was however at least on par with either when it came to turning. In reality all were so close in dogfighting performance that it was usually down to who started off in the better position.09philj said:Hawker Hurricane. Everyone always goes on and on about the Supermarine Spitfire, but this was the real workhorse of the RAF in World War 2. It was cheap and easy to manufacture, and extremely rugged and reliable. It's not the most exceptional fighter ever made, but it damn well saved our bacon.
To much coverage marginalises one or the other when in reality both were vital.
On topic the Spitfires I, V and IX, the Mossie, Hawker Hunter and the Vulcan. The latter is not only the prettiest jet aircraft ever, but for a while held the longest distance bombing mission (surpassed by US B52 attacks on Iraq in 91). The mark XI Spitfire however deserves honourable mention for achieving the fastest speed of a piston engined aircraft, an eyewatering mach 0.92....
The English Electric Lightning deserves mention for its absurd acceleration, climb speed and service ceiling. During an exercise it managed to intercept a U2 at a height believed to be safe from fighter aircraft interceptions 66,000 feet ( a height reached upon after previous tests by a lightning and a U2) and on one occasion managed to get up to (admittedly in ballistic climb not normal flight) 88,000 feet, not bad for an air-breathing engine. While a one trick pony in many ways, it did its one trick very well (wiki uses a dismally low reading for it's climb speed, one of the few pilots to have flown it and the F15C gives it's climb speed is more in the region of thats 50,000 feet/min).
