Warbirdsim Mustangs For FSX!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jan Kees: What unit is Topper III from? I'm dashed if I can find a USAAF unit that used AO, A0 or OO as a code...
 
Topper iii

IanP said:
Jan Kees: What unit is Topper III from? I'm dashed if I can find a USAAF unit that used AO, A0 or OO as a code...
Click to expand...
This Aircraft was flown byCaptian Edward Toppins of the 99th Fighter squadron, one of the Tuskegee Airman with four enemy kills to his name, this aircraft was given to toppins after his fourth kill Serial number unknown.

P.s Thankyou jankees for this repaint!!!!
 
Although it's an RAF style code, they never operated from the UK and the code was not allocated by the RAF (most 8th and 9th AF unit codes were) - hence I can't find it. Thanks. :)
 
IanP said:
Although it's an RAF style code, they never operated from the UK and the code was not allocated by the RAF (most 8th and 9th AF unit codes were) - hence I can't find it. Thanks. :)
Click to expand...

The 99th fighter group were based in Rametelli Italy in 1944 no Tuskegee airman as far as I know were based in England hennce they would not have had RAF markings on them.
Look on google and you will find a book by Chris Bucholtz about the 322nd fighter group which the 99th was part of
 
The problem wasn't the history of the Tuskegee Airmen - that I know, as I do the fact that they weren't based in the UK, which was why I was intrigued by seeing an RAF style coding as they weren't usually used outside of the UK except by RAF units. The only reason that the USAAF units in the UK used them was purely because they were allocated by the RAF, the USAAF saw no need for them.

Hence my slightly perplexed look when I saw an aircraft I never thought operated in the ETO, wearing an RAF style code structure. :)
 
IanP said:
The problem wasn't the history of the Tuskegee Airmen - that I know, as I do the fact that they weren't based in the UK, which was why I was intrigued by seeing an RAF style coding as they weren't usually used outside of the UK except by RAF units. The only reason that the USAAF units in the UK used them was purely because they were allocated by the RAF, the USAAF saw no need for them.

Hence my slightly perplexed look when I saw an aircraft I never thought operated in the ETO, wearing an RAF style code structure. :)
Click to expand...

eeehh, the 31st and 52nd FG's operated in the MTO, but also had RAF style codes, WD*, VF* & QP* for the 52nd, WZ*, HL* & MX* for the 31st.
I assume they were allocated by the RAF too, hence the similarity to the 4th & 78th FG, but am not sure about that...
 
Most US units operating in the MTO used numerical codes, similar to those operating in the PTO.

Maybe there were some slated to move from the bottom of Europe to the top at some point? I don't know. I've got my answer as to why I couldn't find it, though. Thanks guys.
 
Great repaints!

And im amazed - i had to completely reinstall FSX and had no problems loading the this warbirdsim mustang again!
 
The 31st and 52nd Fighter Groups were originally assigned to the 8th Air Force based in the UK before being transferred to the 12th AF in the MTO and thus were issued RAF-style codes. Pilots from both groups actually flew a few combat missions over France before the transfer. They retained the codes after reaching the MTO.
 
gatlin7 said:
The 31st and 52nd Fighter Groups were originally assigned to the 8th Air Force based in the UK before being transferred to the 12th AF in the MTO and thus were issued RAF-style codes. Pilots from both groups actually flew a few combat missions over France before the transfer. They retained the codes after reaching the MTO.
Click to expand...

Thank you, I didn't know that!
No more takers for Topper?
I also have a link for #591.
 
FSX P-51B/C/Mustang III Update Anouncement

Here is what Warbirdsim has outlined for a free update to the FSX P-51B/C/Mustang III release. These updates cannot happen over night, nor will they likely be available as soon as you and I may wish them to be. However, the updates will be made in progression with the current development of Warbirdsim's P-51D, utilizing newly available resources, resulting in the majority of the aircraft’s interior and exterior components built directly to original North American engineering drawings. This, along with the help of a few well known Mustang restorers and Mustang aficionados, who have contributed a huge base of information and visual resources to raise the accuracy of the product, not to mention more than a year of further experience since having done the original work.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:p></o:p>
The update will entail the following:<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
- New, redesigned higher resolution exterior textures.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
- New, higher-poly landing gear and wheel assemblies, front and rear.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
- New gear bays with complete modeled details.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
- New propeller blades and overall updated exterior model.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
- Pilot figure updates + animated head<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
- New, more accurate and more refined cockpit components - replacing old parts and incorporating completely new parts – throughout the interior.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
- New, redesigned gauges, and interior texture updates.<o:p></o:p>
 
Well that's like a whole new plane Bomber! I am anxious to see if this will draw me to buy. This is a long shot but will the price be dropped at all?
 
Ryan, that is true. From the work I have going into the update thus far, it is already looking much like a different product all together, with a complete going-over. There has been a lot of time between when I built it originally and now, and I felt in order for it to fly alongside the next release, it should come up to, or at least come close to the same standard. I cannot answer the second part of your question just yet.
 
I dare say my resolve will weaken and I will buy this package at some point. The activation business does put me off though as I tend to steer clear of such things if I can. I usually reformat every 3 months so I'd probably run out of activations pretty quickly. I know this doesn't bother everyone but past experience of chasing the likes of Captain Sim for a new activation tells me this could be a real pain. I fully understand a company wanting to protect their product but I still believe there would be more sales without such measures.

The quality of this Mustang package is beyond doubt though. I have watched it's development right from the early WIP screenshots on this forum and it was always high on my shopping list. I held off purchasing the FS9 edtition, deciding instead to hold out until the FSX release. That was torture. Then I ended up holding off this FSX version for the reasons already mentioned. Now that there is a P-51D in development I think further resistance will indeed be futile. The updates for the B/C model, especially the high res textures, will most likely push me over the edge too. Oh well...
 
John,

will the update/new D model also come in a version without the exhaust shrouds? I notice that on a lot of WWII pics, the aircraft do not have those shrouds, but have just the exhausts sticking out.
Here's an example:
lc-b.jpg
 
Jankees, it will in fact include this option, as I built the inner parts only seen when the exhaust shrouds are removed - thus with a key command you will be able to remove them if you desire, and they look exactly as seen in that photo, since the exhaust stubs and exhaust heat plates have been creafted according to original spec. You will also have the option, when selecting the aircraft, if you want to fly with 108-gal. paper tanks, 75-gal. metal tanks, or G.P. bombs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top