Author Topic: B-29 Super Fortress  (Read 115879 times)

Offline 5PointOh

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2842
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1185 on: May 01, 2009, 12:38:48 PM »
Here, I did this just for a comparison.  All data comes from the warbird resource group, except the B-29 data which comes from Boeings web site.



http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/b29.html

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/
Coprhead
Wings of Terror
Mossie Student Driver

Offline Plazus

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2868
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1186 on: May 01, 2009, 05:22:26 PM »
Pardon my ignorance, but what was the purpose of the Polesti runs in WW2?
Plazus
80th FS "Headhunters"

Axis vs Allies

Offline smokey23

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 537
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1187 on: May 01, 2009, 05:32:23 PM »
I say if it was to be added just do it like the 163's

1. Can only up from certain large bases. That meens only those few bases would need any kind of runway redo.
2. Perk it
3. No formations
4. NO NUKES

makes sense to me. :aok

Offline Motherland

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8110
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1188 on: May 01, 2009, 05:38:50 PM »
Pardon my ignorance, but what was the purpose of the Polesti runs in WW2?
Hitting fuel refineries. Lack of fuel is what really crippled the Luftwaffe more than anything else.

Offline AWwrgwy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5478
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1189 on: May 01, 2009, 05:45:24 PM »
Pardon my ignorance, but what was the purpose of the Polesti runs in WW2?

Disrupt the production of fuel for the German war machine.   :D

I suppose you are asking about the Low Level raid, Operation Tidal Wave.  It was supposed to be a "sneak in under radar" affair.  Unfortunately one of the lead bombers doing the navigation was lost on the way.  Some of the bomb groups missed a turn and arrived a bit late.  And, just because you fly low doesn't mean someone doesn't SEE you and report it.

54 of 177 bombers were lost.  The refinery was 40% damaged but quickly repaired.

Ploesti was also dive bombed by P-38s on June 10, 1944.LINK


wrongway
71 (Eagle) Squadron
"THAT"S PAINT!!"

"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay

Offline JETBLST

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1190 on: May 01, 2009, 10:08:38 PM »
Here, I did this just for a comparison.  All data comes from the warbird resource group, except the B-29 data which comes from Boeings web site.

(Image removed from quote.)

http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/b29.html

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/

VERY NICE POST!!!  WELL DONE!!

Offline bobtom

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 478
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1191 on: May 02, 2009, 09:31:24 PM »
I say if it was to be added just do it like the 163's

1. Can only up from certain large bases. That meens only those few bases would need any kind of runway redo.
2. Perk it
3. No formations
4. NO NUKES

makes sense to me. :aok

I think we should have formations, then it will be more than lancs. We could just take up lancs and we wouldn't need to spend the perks.

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1192 on: May 03, 2009, 12:47:25 AM »
m00t already exploded this pic.

Besides the landscape, notice that the air speed indicator and e6b do not match.

I made that pic.  I did it as a joke, the text buffer had a conversation with Superdud in it, someone has blanked it out to try and make it look more genuine (something which i never intended).

I also photoshopped one of a B-29 divebombing an AH CV from the cockpit view, but i don't think that has survived anywhere.
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1193 on: May 03, 2009, 01:55:36 AM »
furbie ! where have you been old pirate ?
now posting as SirNuke

Offline Pannono

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1101
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1194 on: May 03, 2009, 04:22:06 AM »
Havent seen this in 2 months so.....
Pannono
Proud Member of Pigs On The Wing
8 Player H2H: 2006-07
MA Tours: 87, 97-113, 143-144, 160-Present
FSO: JG54

Offline macerxgp

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1195 on: May 03, 2009, 06:13:25 PM »
And if we want to recreate Ploesti?

(Image removed from quote.)

You mean an NOE raid?

I've NEVER done one of THOSE before!
Quote from: Saurdaukar
Operational kettles in August 2009 exceed operational pots by approximately 142%.

Your comparison is invalid.

DeMaskus
357th-Death Dragons

Offline Serenity

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7313
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1196 on: May 03, 2009, 06:47:17 PM »
You mean an NOE raid?

I've NEVER done one of THOSE before!

I usually frown on them, but if you're actually recreating Ploesti (B-24s NOE to a fuel depot) it's actually quite fun!

Offline fullmetalbullet

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 834
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1197 on: May 04, 2009, 10:00:23 AM »
i would like tos see bombing missions like the ones in WW2, hundreds of bombers at once!!!! but idk if theres that many players?
"Cry Havoc, And Let Slip The Dogs Of War" Julius Caesar


Offline shotgunneeley

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1056
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1198 on: May 05, 2009, 04:22:53 PM »
Havent seen this in 2 months so.....
(Image removed from quote.)

That clip deserves a special place next to the middle school sex-ed vieos  :aok
"Lord, let us feel pity for Private Jenkins, and sorrow for ourselves, and all the angel warriors that fall. Let us fear death, but let it not live within us. Protect us, O Lord, and be merciful unto us. Amen"-from FALLEN ANGELS by Walter Dean Myers

Game ID: ShtGn (Inactive), Squad: 91st BG

Offline xthecatx

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1199 on: May 06, 2009, 05:36:25 AM »
OMG again with the 29s  :huh