Author Topic: what are the new planes and tank (Read 2292 times)

33Vortex · « **Reply #15 on:** July 31, 2004, 03:29:12 PM »

Defiant would have no use ingame. Require 2 ppl to be effective coupled with bad flying performance = waste of manpower. That turret isn't of much use either .303 guns don't do enough damage.

Karnak · « **Reply #16 on:** July 31, 2004, 03:41:08 PM »

Charon · « **Reply #17 on:** August 01, 2004, 07:40:12 PM »

Quote

Defiant would have no use ingame. Require 2 ppl to be effective coupled with bad flying performance = waste of manpower. That turret isn't of much use either .303 guns don't do enough damage.

Quote

The first squadron to fly the Defiant was the newly formed 264 Squadron operating from RAF Sutton Bridge and later early in 1940 from Martlesham Heath. 264 was sent to France in these early stages and combined with 141 Squadron which also became a Defiant squadron. The story in France was not the same as at Dunkirk during the evacuation of the BEF forces when the Defiant making its first appearance was mistakenly thought to have been Hurricanes, and Bf 109s attacked from above and from the rear, a grave mistake on the part of the Luftwaffe, the turret gunner had a field day with the Messerschmitts.

http://www.battleofbritain.net/0009.html

Quote

Boulton Paul Defiant was to play an important role in trying to stop the advance of the Germans into Belgium and France in the Spring of 1940...

The Boulton Paul Defiant had a significant success in the German attacks leading up to the evacuation at Dunkirk. The sheer fire power of the Defiant took the Luftwaffe by surprise and by May 1940, the Defiant had shot down 65 German planes...

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/boulton_paul_defiant.htm

Lets hope it's ONLY 8 perk points.

Charon

milnko · « **Reply #18 on:** August 01, 2004, 08:05:21 PM »

33Vortex · « **Reply #19 on:** August 02, 2004, 02:33:38 AM »

Charon, keep in mind those were 109 Es they were shooting at. The mid-late war fighters were better built and had more armor. Also, many of those kills, as stated, were planes mistakenly identifying the Defiant for a Hurricane which is a fatal mistake of course. Once the germans knew what they were up against they avoided the turret, also the classic gangbang always works, no turret can shoot in more than 1 direction at any given time.
The only role the Defiant was considered successful in, as far as I know, was as a night fighter shooting down He-111s.

I still think 2 spitfires would be more effective than 1 Defiant.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #20 on:** August 02, 2004, 02:43:05 AM »

Defiant was a POS, why do you think it was withdrawn from regular fighter service so quickly. Purely a one trick pony, and a clumsy pony with bum leg to boot...

AaronM2 · « **Reply #21 on:** August 02, 2004, 03:22:58 AM »

Ahh man who needs more jets LOL we need better planes LOL yall should really have more big bombers well there is the 17 & lanc wouldent say 26 not that good to me b29 sounds good LOL and the boeing b-15 some new fighters would be nice to very nice like the 1 of the other 38s hehe gota love um well any way we need more planes OO and the p-51k would be nice to

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #22 on:** August 02, 2004, 03:37:12 AM »

Why on earth would you want a P51K? It was just a poor performing P51D....

AaronM2 · « **Reply #23 on:** August 02, 2004, 04:43:48 AM »

Well any way the other planes sound better hehe

Fariz · « **Reply #24 on:** August 02, 2004, 04:58:23 AM »

Panzer is easy -- T34 or Sherman, one of the models, probably mid/late war one.

With planes -- no idea. There are still tons of good planes to implement -- only VVS still need to have yaks/lagg/mig/aircobra -- and pe, su, db etc. Too wide field for guessing.

Xargos · « **Reply #25 on:** August 02, 2004, 05:03:23 AM »

Aircobra gets mentioned alot, I'd put money on that being one of them. Like 2 cents.

Charon · « **Reply #26 on:** August 02, 2004, 01:59:01 PM »

Quote

Charon, keep in mind those were 109 Es they were shooting at. The mid-late war fighters were better built and had more armor. Also, many of those kills, as stated, were planes mistakenly identifying the Defiant for a Hurricane which is a fatal mistake of course. Once the germans knew what they were up against they avoided the turret, also the classic gangbang always works, no turret can shoot in more than 1 direction at any given time.

I've hear this revisionist history before. The popular counter argument to that is that the poor pilot quality among the Luftwaffe at the start of the war combined with inferior fighters like the 109 were disasterous. However, once the higher quality german pilots began to enter service at the start of BoB, losses did go up among the Defiants. It's a testiment to Luftwaffe pilot training that they could overcome such a technological marvel. Still, at best, the LW could manage parity even with aircraft like the FW-190.

I believe the high point for the Defiant came during the channel dash when they damaged both the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. Some scholars credt this to mines dropped dropped by 5 Group aircraft, but I follow the school of thought that the damage was infliceted by Defiants strafeing the waterline of both ships with their turrets.

Just think what would have happend had they put a Gryffon in the Defiant.

Quote

Defiant was a POS, why do you think it was withdrawn from regular fighter service so quickly. Purely a one trick pony, and a clumsy pony with bum leg to boot...

Charon

SELECTOR · « **Reply #27 on:** August 02, 2004, 02:06:52 PM »

somthing a little better than the abrams i hope,, challenger 2 perhaps

MRPLUTO · « **Reply #28 on:** August 02, 2004, 04:51:02 PM »

Here's my guess:

Ki-84 Hayate, or "Frank"

Me-410A-1 (2 x 20mm, plus 2 x 7.92mm machine guns firing forward; 2 x 13mm rear firing fuselage barbettes, plus 2000 kg internal bomb load) This is the light bomber version from January, 1943. Another version could be the

Me-410A-1/U2, which was a heavy fighter with two additional forward firing 20mms, but no bomb load.

Both these planes have strong popular support. The Ki-84 was a great plane and will probably be very effective. I wonder if the problem with the wings ripping off at 7 to 8 g's will be modeled? I remember the AirWarrior Ki-84 had to be flown very gently at high speeds. The Me-410 might do much better in Aces High than in real life, since it won't always have to deal with a fighter escort. And in the right hands, the fighter version might be very deadly.

The tank:

I hope it's not the Sherman, which was a piece of flamming poop. I think it will be the T-34/76 (the model with the 76mm gun, obviously). Only big problem with T-34 is no turret machine gun with which to shoot at planes. I wonder if the optics will be of lower quality; is there a good way to simulate the superiority of American/German/British optics over Soviet?

That's what I think. If I had my choice I'd substitute the He-111H-3 for the Me-410, so that Battle of Britain scenarios wouldn't have to use the later model Ju-88A-4, which is faster that the A-1.

MRPLUTO

Simaril · « **Reply #29 on:** August 02, 2004, 07:47:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 33Vortex
Charon, keep in mind those were 109 Es they were shooting at. The mid-late war fighters were better built and had more armor. Also, many of those kills, as stated, were planes mistakenly identifying the Defiant for a Hurricane which is a fatal mistake of course. Once the germans knew what they were up against they avoided the turret, also the classic gangbang always works, no turret can shoot in more than 1 direction at any given time.
The only role the Defiant was considered successful in, as far as I know, was as a night fighter shooting down He-111s.

I still think 2 spitfires would be more effective than 1 Defiant.

Charon, is trolling for trouble always this easy? The hook wasn't even really baited!!

M13/40?????LMAO!!!!