Author Topic: I want my HE111 please! (Read 1431 times)

Lan784 · « **on:** September 18, 2005, 08:51:30 PM »

PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wolfala · « **Reply #1 on:** September 19, 2005, 03:56:41 AM »

How many ways to say NO.

Nyet
No
Nein
No
Nadda
Ninguna
Nope
Sorry

frank3 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 19, 2005, 07:29:38 AM »

and a 'nee' from Holland

SMIDSY · « **Reply #3 on:** September 19, 2005, 08:41:40 AM »

i dont understand why anyone wouldnt want the HE111.

Wolfala · « **Reply #4 on:** September 19, 2005, 11:50:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by SMIDSY
i dont understand why anyone wouldnt want the HE111.

We have the JU-88 - which is as close to defenseless as you can make a bomber. Only faster then the HE-111.

Krusty · « **Reply #5 on:** September 19, 2005, 12:28:21 PM »

Actually wolf, the Ju88 can take lots of punishment, is VERY fast, holds a LOT of bombs (2000lbs under wings and 2000+ internal).

A He111 would be best for fans of the Heinkel, but would be slower and have less defensive guns (1 dorsal, 1 ventral, instead of 2ea. on the Ju88), and, I think, carry less bombs.

But it is an "eventual must" for scenarios.

Wolfala · « **Reply #6 on:** September 19, 2005, 01:16:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Actually wolf, the Ju88 can take lots of punishment, is VERY fast, holds a LOT of bombs (2000lbs under wings and 2000+ internal).

A He111 would be best for fans of the Heinkel, but would be slower and have less defensive guns (1 dorsal, 1 ventral, instead of 2ea. on the Ju88), and, I think, carry less bombs.

But it is an "eventual must" for scenarios.

Its durability isn't in question - fact I made no mention of that. But that doesn't dismiss the fact it is a clay pidgeon b/c of the limited hemisphere's the guns can fire.

Furball · « **Reply #7 on:** September 19, 2005, 01:22:24 PM »

i want one so i can HO it.

8 x .303 shooting into that glass nose would seriously ruin a Heinkel crew's day.

Krusty · « **Reply #8 on:** September 19, 2005, 01:23:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wolfala
Its durability isn't in question - fact I made no mention of that. But that doesn't dismiss the fact it is a clay pidgeon b/c of the limited hemisphere's the guns can fire.

I brought up durability as one of its useful traits

Larry · « **Reply #9 on:** September 19, 2005, 02:08:33 PM »

NO we need the B29 first

Krusty · « **Reply #10 on:** September 19, 2005, 02:42:45 PM »

TK, you avacado, B29 would serve NO purpose in the MA. Only the B36 would have a place in the MA.

Larry · « **Reply #11 on:** September 19, 2005, 02:59:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
TK, you avacado, B29 would serve NO purpose in the MA. Only the B36 would have a place in the MA.

B fivty too!!! derrrr megea n00kage wooowooooo quah1!!1010101010101

Krusty · « **Reply #12 on:** September 19, 2005, 03:01:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Larry
quah1!!1010101010101

I'm sorry son, there's too much binary in your attempt to show enthusiasm, and not enough exclaimation points. I'm going to have to fine you for this...

Karnak · « **Reply #13 on:** September 19, 2005, 03:17:21 PM »

Personally I'd like to see the following bombers:

B-25C
G4M2 "Betty"
Ju188A-2
Pe-2FT
Wellington B.Mk III

Gives early war, catchable bombers to the British, Japanese and Americans that are still usuablem, gives a potent mid/late war bomber to the Germans and gives a representative bomber to the Russians.

Mister Fork · « **Reply #14 on:** September 19, 2005, 04:32:01 PM »

It's coming. Pyro said it was anyways last year. We need another bomber from the Luftwaffe, Do-17 or the He-111.

However, if they were to say 'update the existing planeset' or add a He-111, I'd say update the planeset.

Give it some time. They're working on TOD at the moment and I'm sure once that's up and running, more time can be spent on adding stuff.