AB Fighter Plane Reviews

[Kuchi_Kopi 1,458]

nice vids; (though too many high BR for my taste :)

 

but in once of your videos you answered the question if engines can overheat in arcade; the version stated is 1.37. i'd like to add a link to one of the topics i created a few month ago in the "Questions to the Team" section of the forum; at the time I asked the question, there had been a major patch, and after that I (and many other players, according to forum posts) lost more Spitfires and Yaks to a dead engine than to the enemy; Spitfires where boilers that, once in the red, could not be cooled again, not even 0% throttle and a 700kph dive brought the temp down just 1 degree; it was especially annoying since there was no timer like in realistic battles, and also apparently it was only possible on some planes.

it has become a lot better since that - but I think the answer to my question is still valid, see here:

http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/196939-engine-overheating-in-arcade/#entry3781881

 

the official answer was

 

Yes, it can be damaged. If you use too much WEP your engine can overheat and your plane indicators nose starts to become red and when it turns black your plane dies. Of couse different planes have different cooling system and the instructor can open radiators and turn down the WEP, but on several planes killing the engine is possible.

 

Regards!

 

though it has been a long time since that happened to me (I'm watching my engine's temp carefully now, even in arcade).

 

(the "test flight" featue in the hangar is btw pretty useless to test anything; at the time Spitfire engines reached 130+ degrees within 3 minutes after the battle had started (using WEP only once or twice to climb at the start), the same planes in "test flight"-mode showed a completly different FM and engine behaviour; constant WEPing and flying circles at low speed didn't even reach the red temp at all in test flights... )

[tx141 815]

nice vids; (though too many high BR for my taste :)

 

but in once of your videos you answered the question if engines can overheat in arcade; the version stated is 1.37. i'd like to add a link to one of the topics i created a few month ago in the "Questions to the Team" section of the forum; at the time I asked the question, there had been a major patch, and after that I (and many other players, according to forum posts) lost more Spitfires and Yaks to a dead engine than to the enemy; Spitfires where boilers that, once in the red, could not be cooled again, not even 0% throttle and a 700kph dive brought the temp down just 1 degree; it was especially annoying since there was no timer like in realistic battles, and also apparently it was only possible on some planes.

it has become a lot better since that - but I think the answer to my question is still valid, see here:

http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/196939-engine-overheating-in-arcade/#entry3781881

 

the official answer was

 

though it has been a long time since that happened to me (I'm watching my engine's temp carefully now, even in arcade).

 

(the "test flight" featue in the hangar is btw pretty useless to test anything; at the time Spitfire engines reached 130+ degrees within 3 minutes after the battle had started (using WEP only once or twice to climb at the start), the same planes in "test flight"-mode showed a completly different FM and engine behaviour; constant WEPing and flying circles at low speed didn't even reach the red temp at all in test flights... )

 

Thank you, additionally thank you for clarifying the situation concerning engine overheating in Arcade. I shall definitely throw a replacement video up sometime soon to illustrate this. :)

[tx141 815]

Update 10.04.2015:

• I must apologize for the lack of a review this week until now, I have had a poor spell as of late (as is discussed here) and so I decided to slow down for a bit just to get my mojo back per se.
• I am glad to say that I am now back on form, and so here is my review of the Hurricane Mk. IIB:

[media='315x420']http://youtu.be/9Jkj5oXP2ys[/media]

• Coming up next, my review of the P-36G as of next week. I am also working on reviewing the P-39N-0 (SU).

Remember folks, we all have our good and bad days; it is how we bounce back from our bad days that defines us in the skies.  :salute:

[Maj_Fox@psn 521]

Nice to see the Hurricane, only watched the intro at the mo, looking forward to the rest.

 

It's a shame it gets overlooked due to the Spitfires fame. Might be the wrong place to ask this question but I will anyway.

 

If the Spitfire had been cancelled and with the issues around the Whirlwind. Would the RAF have won, (or rather not lost), the BoB if it was an all Hurricane force? As in Spitfire squadrons replaced with Hurricane Squadrons.

 

Cheers

[NZRedBaron1985 286]

Well, from what I remember from reading some pilots' recollections, the Hurricane was a very steady gun-platform, so it could latch on to bombers and heavy fighters like Bf-110's and stay on target. And on top of that, it was surprisingly maneuverable, able to turn inside a Bf-109E and get on his tail within a few turns.

 

And let's not forget, about 60% of all confirmed kills in the BOB are attributed to Hurricanes, rather than Spitfires, Gladiators, anti-aircraft guns, etc. Whether or not that can be attributed to there being a lot more Hurricanes than Spitfires, I couldn't say.

Edited April 10, 2015 by NZRedBaron1985

[long5hot 7,302]

If the Spitfire had been cancelled and with the issues around the Whirlwind. Would the RAF have won, (or rather not lost), the BoB if it was an all Hurricane force? As in Spitfire squadrons replaced with Hurricane Squadrons.

I honestly don't think it would have made any difference, as the RAF won largely because the Luftwaffe stopped attacking their airfields & instead switched their focus to bombing cities, because downed (but not killed) Spitfire pilots were over friendly soil & could fly again, and because Bf109s only had about 10 minutes of combat time over England due to fuel capacity.

The Hurricane had real shortcomings in its design though, whereas the Spitfire was able to be continuously developed throughout the war to counter whatever the Luftwaffe threw at them.

[t3rm1nAt0r 40]

The Battle of Britain was a serie of strategic mistakes by the Luftwaffe, and the Brits would have probably won it without spit. But battle after the Battle of Britain would have been heavily in favour of the Germans without the spitfire around

[tx141 815]

Nice to see the Hurricane, only watched the intro at the mo, looking forward to the rest.

 

It's a shame it gets overlooked due to the Spitfires fame. Might be the wrong place to ask this question but I will anyway.

 

If the Spitfire had been cancelled and with the issues around the Whirlwind. Would the RAF have won, (or rather not lost), the BoB if it was an all Hurricane force? As in Spitfire squadrons replaced with Hurricane Squadrons.

 

Cheers

 

No problem, I hope you enjoy the review! :)

 

Concerning your question, and to touch upon your point regarding the overlooking of the Hurricane by comparison with the Spitfire's fame.

 

Whilst the Spitfire was the RAF's thorough-bred fighter for the Second World War, I have a huge amount of respect for the Hurricane as a fighter and I do find it sometimes a little upsetting that the plane is practically left in the dark. It was by no means as potent as the BF 109 (Emil in particular here) in terms of its overall performance, but it could hold its own against what was technically the superior aircraft when flying at lower altitudes.

 

This brings me onto your question: from reading multiple interviews with Hurricane pilots during the Battle of Britain, they emphasized time and time again how the Hurricane, despite its inadequacies (with increasing altitude usually), could catch BF 109 pilots by surprise by being able to turn tight and come around onto target faster than the Spitfire in certain situations. Plus, its stability over agility (by comparison with the Spitfire Mk. Ia if we talk about the Hurricane Mk. I and Mk. IIA) made it a more accommodating aircraft for when the pilot had a shot on a given target.

 

So, let us say that the Spitfire never took part in the Battle of Britain, what must we consider bar a comparison of our triumvirate of fighters?

 

Well, it is important to note that as the Battle of Britain progressed, so did the development of the Hurricane's performance as highlighted in my review. The Merlin XX engine provided the Mk. IIA variant of the Hurricane with improved higher altitude performance thanks to the two-stage supercharger.Whilst I doubt this would have made the Hurricane the "equal" of the BF 109 E, I would say that this would have made the Hurricane more competitive than its induction variant: the Mk. I.

 

We should also realize that the Hurricane in general was a much easier aircraft to repair thanks to a number of the Hurricanes featured in the Battle of Britain still having the fabric-covered wing structure which was mid-transition to the metal-covered wings, plus the Hurricane was not an all-metal construction unlike the Spitfire if my memory serves me well, making it the more durable aircraft. Ergo, the ability to continue to service and send Hurricane fighters back up into the skies would potentially out-weigh the lack of the Spitfires in the skies.

 

Finally, we should emphasize (as both long5hot and t3rm1nAtor have stated) that the change in tactics by the German Luftwaffe over the course of the Battle of Britain handicapped the damage that the BF 109s could potentially deliver to the RAF. As the Battle progressed and the inadequacy of the BF 110 as an escort heavy fighter for the He 111 bombers was highlighted, the BF 109s were drafted into the escort role rather than being given the freedom to "hunt" the RAF Fighters which had been highly effective in the opening stages of the Battle of Britain. I would like to quote Adolf Galland here concerning this point:

 

"We fighter pilots certainly preferred the free chase during the approach and over the target area. This gives the greatest relief and the best protection for the bomber force."

 

So in considering these factors, I would conclude that the RAF would have still won the Battle of Britain, but the battle would have gone on for longer due to the lack of an "equal" fighter (i.e. the Spitfire) to the BF 109 and the attrition effect on the RAF would have been far more severe. To me, the presence of the Hurricane in the skies, with Hurricane pilots accounting for ~60% of all aerial victories, is what enabled the RAF to win the Battle of Britain along with the negative shift in Luftwaffe tactics.

 

At the same time, I emphasize my respect here for all the pilots on both sides who sacrificed their lives in this conflict, regardless of the planes they flew. Apologies for the long response.  :salute:

 

Well, from what I remember from reading some pilots' recollections, the Hurricane was a very steady gun-platform, so it could latch on to bombers and heavy fighters like Bf-110's and stay on target. And on top of that, it was surprisingly maneuverable, able to turn inside a Bf-109E and get on his tail within a few turns.

 

And let's not forget, about 60% of all confirmed kills in the BOB are attributed to Hurricanes, rather than Spitfires, Gladiators, anti-aircraft guns, etc. Whether or not that can be attributed to there being a lot more Hurricanes than Spitfires, I couldn't say.

 

Indeed, I concur with your opening statement.

 

There were significantly more Hurricanes than Spitfires in the skies with the prioritization of producing Spitfires being emphasized over the course of the Battle of Britain. I would say that the 60% kill contribution was not just attributable to the number of Hurricanes in the sky, but also the fact that the plane was more integrated into the RAF as a mainstay fighter leading up to the Battle of Britain rather than the Spitfire.

 

I honestly don't think it would have made any difference, as the RAF won largely because the Luftwaffe stopped attacking their airfields & instead switched their focus to bombing cities, because downed (but not killed) Spitfire pilots were over friendly soil & could fly again, and because Bf109s only had about 10 minutes of combat time over England due to fuel capacity.

The Hurricane had real shortcomings in its design though, whereas the Spitfire was able to be continuously developed throughout the war to counter whatever the Luftwaffe threw at them.

 

Yes, the ability for downed RAF pilots to return to the sky by comparison with the situation for Luftwaffe pilots is also a critical consideration here.

 

To be honest, I feel that the Hurricane was the right plane at the right time for the Battle of Britain despite, as you say, the continuous development of the Spitfire over the war. The rapid fade-away of the Hurricane's role as a Fighter post-Battle of Britain emphasizes this very well.

 

The Battle of Britain was a serie of strategic mistakes by the Luftwaffe, and the Brits would have probably won it without spit. But battle after the Battle of Britain would have been heavily in favour of the Germans without the spitfire around

 

I believe the attrition rate on the RAF was significantly higher than on the Luftwaffe by the Battle of Britain's end?

Edited April 12, 2015 by tx141

[Kazumi_ 6,575]

Had the battle of britan been a few minutes longer, the RAF would have lost. It was literally that close of a call.

[Maj_Fox@psn 521]

I don't think you can underestimate the importance of Hugh Dowding either. His drip feeding of the RAF squadrons helped to keep the RAF in the fight. The big wing may have played into the German hands. 

 

That's a debate for another thread.

 

Sorry to highjack this one, back to plane vids.

 

Cheers JTF

[tx141 815]

Had the battle of britan been a few minutes longer, the RAF would have lost. It was literally that close of a call.

 

I can see the merit in your argument, personally I feel that the switch in the Luftwaffe's tactics outweighs this to an extent.

 

I don't think you can underestimate the importance of Hugh Dowding either. His drip feeding of the RAF squadrons helped to keep the RAF in the fight. The big wing may have played into the German hands. 

 

That's a debate for another thread.

 

Sorry to highjack this one, back to plane vids.

 

Cheers JTF

 

Very true, although it is a shame how bitter things became for Dowding after the Battle of Britain. :(

 

No problem, it is always nice to fly off on a tangent for a brief period.  :yes:

 

Here's one for you I believe...

 

Update 15.04.2015:

• A little bit later than usual (as I was unhappy with my original review footage), here is my review of the P-36G Hawk; an exemplar little fighter despite its Battle Rating of 3.3:

[media='315x420']http://youtu.be/ZVYA1HUZUu8[/media]

• Next up? Well I will be making in-roads into the "Head on" video this weekend. Review wise, the next one is a surprise!

I wish you all a pleasant week once more!  :salute:

Edited April 15, 2015 by tx141

[Kazumi_ 6,575]

Please review the Fw 200... And the Ju 88. :3 good planes.

All the monoplane italians are good too, but the 202 I've given the name of the "Teir 1 Jet" since it can hit 600km/h maxed out upgrades... and that's its top speed.

 

However...

 

You can use it to dogfight JETS so long as you turnfight them and keep them low.

[Maj_Fox@psn 521]

Another excellent review.

 

I enjoy using the P36 aircraft but find it hard to find a home for the G variant it in my line up. The BR is to high for to mix with the other T1 aircraft and if I put in my T2 line up it tends to be the back up to the F6 and P400 etc.

 

I think a BR of 2.7 would be more like it. A top T 1 or low T2.

 

Cheers JTF

[tx141 815]

Please review the Fw 200... And the Ju 88. :3 good planes.

All the monoplane italians are good too, but the 202 I've given the name of the "Teir 1 Jet" since it can hit 600km/h maxed out upgrades... and that's its top speed.

 

However...

 

You can use it to dogfight JETS so long as you turnfight them and keep them low.

 

I assume your first line contains an element of sarcasm? :P

 

I will definitely consider reviewing the MC 202 in the near future, I keep hearing great things about the plane's performance despite its underwhelming firepower. Thank you for the suggestion.  :yes:

 

Another excellent review.

 

I enjoy using the P36 aircraft but find it hard to find a home for the G variant it in my line up. The BR is to high for to mix with the other T1 aircraft and if I put in my T2 line up it tends to be the back up to the F6 and P400 etc.

 

I think a BR of 2.7 would be more like it. A top T 1 or low T2.

 

Cheers JTF

 

Thank you. :)

 

In all honesty, I can appreciate your sentiment concerning the P-36G's Battle Rating, alas for me I find the BR justified simply because the P-36 in general is so different from the fighters that follow it (even the P-40E in many respects). In my opinion, it is a "specialist" plane, not in terms of the calibre of player able to fly it, but in terms of how it embodies a very tight and aggressive play-style by comparison with the P-40E or the F4F-4 (if we take two planes at the same BR as a reference point). The BR of 3.3 essentially gives off the statement: "If you enjoy the P-36, here is the go to variant, but remember, this is a once in a lifetime fighter within the US line".

 

Update 19.04.2015:

• I have recently been practicing my head-on passes in a number of aircraft and so I am starting to write the script for the tips video this week.
• I am really starting to enjoy the Yak-9U again, it is a highly under-rated plane in my opinion which goes unnoticed it would seem.
• Should have a review up sometime during the week, taking it easy tomorrow.  ;)s

[Kazumi_ 6,575]

 

I assume your first line contains an element of sarcasm? :P

 

I will definitely consider reviewing the MC 202 in the near future, I keep hearing great things about the plane's performance despite its underwhelming firepower. Thank you for the suggestion.  :yes:

 

 

Thank you. :)

 

In all honesty, I can appreciate your sentiment concerning the P-36G's Battle Rating, alas for me I find the BR justified simply because the P-36 in general is so different from the fighters that follow it (even the P-40E in many respects). In my opinion, it is a "specialist" plane, not in terms of the calibre of player able to fly it, but in terms of how it embodies a very tight and aggressive play-style by comparison with the P-40E or the F4F-4 (if we take two planes at the same BR as a reference point). The BR of 3.3 essentially gives off the statement: "If you enjoy the P-36, here is the go to variant, but remember, this is a once in a lifetime fighter within the US line".

 

Update 19.04.2015:

• I have recently been practicing my head-on passes in a number of aircraft and so I am starting to write the script for the tips video this week.
• I am really starting to enjoy the Yak-9U again, it is a highly under-rated plane in my opinion which goes unnoticed it would seem.
• Should have a review up sometime during the week, taking it easy tomorrow.  ;)s

 

I was not being sarcastic. those are damn good bombers.

(albiet the Fw 200 is a bit fragile, still a base killer.)

[tx141 815]

I was not being sarcastic. those are damn good bombers.

(albiet the Fw 200 is a bit fragile, still a base killer.)

 

Apologies, there has been a running joke between myself and a couple of squad mates about achieving an Ace in a Day in a Wellington and so I thought your post may have been related to that.  ;)s

 

The Ju 88 A-4 with the 1000kg + 500kg combination is rather smashing (excuse the pun), and the bomber is quite fast in a dive!

 

Update 22.04.2015:

• Sorry for no uploads so far this week, been grinding away on the Yak-9U. The good news is that I have the plane spaded, so a review is due for this weekend.

[tx141 815]

Update 26.04.2015:

• And here we go, my review of the Yak-9U: a highly under-rated fighter made for the pilot who can pick their fights.

[media='315x420']http://youtu.be/GVI26-urkgQ[/media]

• I am now going to start working on the sister plane to the Yak-9U at Tier IV BR 4.0 within the Russian line: the La-7. 

Enjoy the rest of the weekend folks!  :salute:

Edited April 26, 2015 by tx141

[t3rm1nAt0r 40]

Update 26.04.2015:

• And here we go, my review of the Yak-9U: a highly under-rated fighter made for the pilot who can pick their fights.

[media='315x420']http://youtu.be/GVI26-urkgQ[/media]

• I am now going to start working on the sister plane to the Yak-9U at Tier IV BR 4.0 within the Russian line: the La-7.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend folks! :salute:

hey I appear on the video even though I die :D . I 'be must say that when I was climbing with the zero at the start, I did believe I was the highest figther. Then I see a yak 9u, then I see that tx is flying that aircraft and then I realise I'm dead. I've must say that it was quite an interesting match, and that is good to see matches were both team are reduced to a few players.

As for the review, I agree with all of what is said. I used the yak in a BNz mode and their are quite good planes.

PS: why do you fly with the auto squad disabled? I don't see advantages from that

[tx141 815]

hey I appear on the video even though I die :D . I 'be must say that when I was climbing with the zero at the start, I did believe I was the highest figther. Then I see a yak 9u, then I see that tx is flying that aircraft and then I realise I'm dead. I've must say that it was quite an interesting match, and that is good to see matches were both team are reduced to a few players.

As for the review, I agree with all of what is said. I used the yak in a BNz mode and their are quite good planes.

PS: why do you fly with the auto squad disabled? I don't see advantages from that

 

That Domination match was quite an enjoyable one, both teams acquitted themselves rather well. My reaction when I saw your name pop up on the side of my screen was: "I swear I know that guy from somewhere!" :)

 

As a BnZ plane, the Yaks are temperamental in my experience due to the concentrated armament in the nose. You can have a lot of fun in them, but I have bumped into the back of a lot of planes in the past trying to line up the kill-shot!

 

I have the auto-squad turned off for the following reasons:

1. I feel that I fly to the best of my own abilities when I fly alone.
2. To prevent the higher likelihood of being saved by my own team-mate when I make a mistake that I should either try to get out of myself, or run to friendlies. I have had instances in the past where auto-squad friendlies have stuck to my tail like glue and cleared my back as soon as someone has come within 1.0km of me. I am grateful for their help, but I need to learn from my mistakes.

Apologies for the odd reasoning.  :salute:

 

Update 27.04.2015:

• All the upgrades (minus the armoured glass and plating) are in place for the La-7.
• I should have the La-7 review up by Friday at the latest.

[quaccks 17]

I think you should do the fw190 d13

[Kazumi_ 6,575]

Dreadnought battles in SC-

They are so full of eye candy they will make your eyes explode.

Sadly it's also a game of "who can rush and cap the fastest".

GG.

 

Also, they will be added a seafire with counter rotating props in 1.49. Yay?

[Maj_Fox@psn 521]

Hi tx141.

 

"there has been a running joke between myself and a couple of squad mates about achieving an Ace in a Day in a Wellington"

 

I’ve always thought the British T1 line was missing a Heavy Fighter with only the Light Bomber version of the Blenheim available. As an Englishman I’ve been a bit jealous of the German T1 line up with the Bf 110 in it.

 

I have though been reading up on the Havoc and it appears with have access to the Night Fighter version in the form of a Premium buy at 400 GE.

 

Well I treated myself and I have to say at BR 1.7 I’m pretty pleased.

 

I was flying figure 8s over an armoured car column doing strafing runs and she responded well with no hint of stall and good speed retention.

 

In another game I was chased all over the map by a MiG 3-15 (BK) and was able to maintain over 400km/h at ground level while taking a number of hits before going down. Terry Turret and Vincent Ventral scored some hits and later in the game I was awarded an Assist.

 

With the 4xMGs in the nose and ground target ammo you can do damage to other plane due to the lack of armour at this BR level.

 

The HAVOC MK I is my recommendation for your attempt at an “Ace in a Day” using an attacker/bomber aircraft.

 

Cheers JTF

 

PS You might need to start a poll if this catches on.

Edited April 28, 2015 by JT_Fox

[Blastmaster1972 1,235]

Hi Paul,

 

Haven't seen you around much, here or on the youtube, hope you are OK mate!

 

Kind regards,

 

Jos

[tx141 815]

I think you should do the fw190 d13

 

I have taken a look at it twice (pre-patch 1.35 and post patch 1.35 where its flight model received a noticeable buff). In patch 1.47, the D-13 received a minor drop to its climb rate in my opinion, yet my thoughts on the plane from the post 1.35 video still stand:

 

[media='315x420']http://youtu.be/PXSGWAu1sn0[/media]

 

If you would like me to take another look at the D-13 as of 1.70 (or future patches), I am happy to do so, but I am currently prioritizing my time around the head-on video and reviewing a number of Japanese planes, as well as higher tier fighters that are non-premium (the BF 109 G-10 in particular).

 

Thank you for your suggestion.  :good:

 

Dreadnought battles in SC-

They are so full of eye candy they will make your eyes explode.

Sadly it's also a game of "who can rush and cap the fastest".

GG.

 

Also, they will be added a seafire with counter rotating props in 1.49. Yay?

 

SC? Star Citizen? :S

 

I am holding fire on reviewing the new British fighters as of 1.70, merely because I expect a lot of Battle Ratings and Flight Models to be altered in the near future (I have heard that the Firefly is out-turning Hurricanes at the moment, this is the opposite of what I have read historically, even if this is Arcade...).

 

Hi tx141.

 

"there has been a running joke between myself and a couple of squad mates about achieving an Ace in a Day in a Wellington"

 

I’ve always thought the British T1 line was missing a Heavy Fighter with only the Light Bomber version of the Blenheim available. As an Englishman I’ve been a bit jealous of the German T1 line up with the Bf 110 in it.

 

I have though been reading up on the Havoc and it appears with have access to the Night Fighter version in the form of a Premium buy at 400 GE.

 

Well I treated myself and I have to say at BR 1.7 I’m pretty pleased.

 

I was flying figure 8s over an armoured car column doing strafing runs and she responded well with no hint of stall and good speed retention.

 

In another game I was chased all over the map by a MiG 3-15 (BK) and was able to maintain over 400km/h at ground level while taking a number of hits before going down. Terry Turret and Vincent Ventral scored some hits and later in the game I was awarded an Assist.

 

With the 4xMGs in the nose and ground target ammo you can do damage to other plane due to the lack of armour at this BR level.

 

The HAVOC MK I is my recommendation for your attempt at an “Ace in a Day” using an attacker/bomber aircraft.

 

Cheers JTF

 

PS You might need to start a poll if this catches on.

 

Hello JTF,

 

Thank you for the suggestion, I am definitely considering working on some more of the Heavy Fighters/Attackers once I have got the "Head-on" video and my review of the BF 109 G-10 out of the way.

 

I am normally adverse to purchasing Premium aircraft, yet due to the brilliant customer service I have had from War Thunder, and the joy this game continues to bring to me, I am considering starting to purchase a Premium account and some Premium aircraft in the near future.

 

Keep your eyes peeled. ;)

 

Hi Paul,

 

Haven't seen you around much, here or on the youtube, hope you are OK mate!

 

Kind regards,

 

Jos

 

Hello Jos,

 

I have had a lot of trouble with my PC in the last two weeks (replaced my old NVIDIA 560GT graphics card with a GTX 970, yet I lost one of my hard-drives in the process due to the sheer size of the new GPU and trying to make it fit, so I had to re-install everything onto a new Windows 7 64-bit build) and work has kept me extremely busy, meaning at most I have only had an hour a day to actually play online.

 

I personally prefer to play War Thunder over longer stints (2-4 hours), so I have been playing some World of Tanks in the meantime which has actually helped me to become a calmer player in War Thunder. Yet more on that in my next WoT video! :)

 

Otherwise, I am doing perfectly fine, and things should be picking up now!

 

Update 17.05.2015:

• I am back folks, and things are better than ever!
• Let us kick-start this revival with a review of the newly arrived J2M2 Raiden, a fighter that is fast becoming one of my favourite planes!

[media='315x420']http://youtu.be/5HKqHw9M0Yo[/media]

 

• I am also working on the "Head-on" video as you may gather from some of the head-on passes I used in the J2M2 review.
• Next review? Well it may be the Ki-43-III Otsu as the plane is brilliant for practising head on passes!

All the best folks, and thank you for staying with me.  :salute:

Edited May 17, 2015 by tx141

[Blastmaster1972 1,235]

Otherwise, I am doing perfectly fine, and things should be picking up now!

 

Good news Paul!