Author Topic: How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber  (Read 1539 times)

Offline DaddyAck

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2006, 08:52:01 AM »
I would like to see a larger German bomber too.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23046
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #16 on: October 12, 2006, 09:47:03 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by DaddyAck
I would like to see a larger German bomber too.

Large does not equal better.

The Ju88A-4 is in all ways other than range, superior to the Fw200 as a warplane.  It is tougher, faster carries a larger warload and is at least as well defended.

The Do217, Ju188 or He177 would be a far, far better addition than the Fw200 would be.

Even the lowly He111 or Do17 would be a better addition than the Fw200.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2006, 05:29:45 PM »
The only advantage over the planes Karnak mentioned is its extremely long range.
But hey, I doubt anyone in AH would spend the rest of his day flying over 2759 miles!

Offline VooWho

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1214
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #18 on: October 12, 2006, 05:39:27 PM »
I would
Non Sibi Sed Patriae!

Offline Denholm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9667
      • No. 603 Squadron
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2006, 06:31:45 PM »
I have to say yes, we're over-due for a four-engined bomber, and especially on the axis' side.
Get your Daily Dose of Flame!
FlameThink.com
No. 603 Squadron... Visit us on the web, if you dare.

Drug addicts are always disappointed after eating Pot Pies.

Offline Martyn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 536
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2006, 03:24:10 AM »
But the fact is that the axis were always weak on the heavy bomber side.
Here we are, living on top of a molten ball of rock, spinning around at a 1,000mph, orbiting a nuclear fireball and whizzing through space at half-a-million miles per hour. Most of us believe in super-beings which for some reason need to be praised for setting this up. This, apparently, is normal.

Offline frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2006, 06:23:29 AM »
IMO that the He-177 would've stood a good chance, was it not for its continuous engine fires


Offline Denholm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9667
      • No. 603 Squadron
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #22 on: October 13, 2006, 09:57:32 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Martyn
But the fact is that the axis were always weak on the heavy bomber side.

It doesent matter, we're past due to get a heavy bomber for the axis' side.
Get your Daily Dose of Flame!
FlameThink.com
No. 603 Squadron... Visit us on the web, if you dare.

Drug addicts are always disappointed after eating Pot Pies.

Offline DaddyAck

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2006, 03:36:00 PM »
If not a heavy bomber, I would like to see the He-111, and Ju-52 which can be used as a light bomber or as a german substitute for the  c-47

Offline baron7

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #24 on: October 15, 2006, 08:50:24 PM »
i would like to see the he-177 or the condor in AH2

Offline Martyn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 536
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #25 on: October 16, 2006, 03:24:51 AM »
There's not much demand for planes like the Condor (or the PBY) because they were mainly used for long-range maritime recce. Yes I know they attacked and carried bombs too, but as bombers go they weren't as effective as the others we already have.

To get around this people in the past have suggested that recce planes have the ability 'indicate' enemy fleets on the map - i.e. they fly over and then the pilot selects an option and the enemy fleet is marked on the map (albeit static - the icon doesn't move) for, say, 10 minutes. This will give recce planes a legitimate function in the sim.

Personally I think this should also apply to strategic targets such as Ammo/Training/Radar factories (not cities though - everyone would know where they are!).

The fleet spotting function will enable planes such as that big japanese float plane (I forget it's name), the Condor, the PBY (Catalina), that Arado float plane, Short Sunderland etc. etc. to be really useful.

If the factories are invisible, until highlighted, in the same way then we get to have a use for the planes like the Mossquito PR, Spit PR, P38 (the recce version - F5?), etc. etc. But I also think that flattening those factories doesn't seem to have much effect on the game.
Here we are, living on top of a molten ball of rock, spinning around at a 1,000mph, orbiting a nuclear fireball and whizzing through space at half-a-million miles per hour. Most of us believe in super-beings which for some reason need to be praised for setting this up. This, apparently, is normal.

Offline Col. Flashman

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #26 on: October 18, 2006, 03:32:51 AM »
A Luftanza airliner drafted by the Luftwaffa for Convoy destruction duties.
We'd need a Sea Haurricane then for catapult use off the Destroyer Escorts or Q-Ships.

Offline Col. Flashman

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #27 on: October 18, 2006, 03:36:22 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Martyn
There's not much demand for planes like the Condor (or the PBY) because they were mainly used for long-range maritime recce. Yes I know they attacked and carried bombs too, but as bombers go they weren't as effective as the others we already have.

 



Uncle flew PBY's w/ the "Black Cat Squadron" & dropped Torps during Night attacks on Nip convoys & their escorts, as well as on the I.J.N.

Offline Martyn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 536
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #28 on: October 18, 2006, 03:58:39 AM »
I'd really love to have the PBY, Sunderland, Condor, etc. It'd add a new dimension to the game.

One could 'Up' a PBY from coastal base (off the sea?), make a coffee and a sandwich, come back, chill out to some music while cruising around the ocean looking for enemy CVs. Bigger oceans become viable too and Midway type battles become more practical.

Furballers would hate it - but hey! There's more to AH than just furballing... or is there?
Here we are, living on top of a molten ball of rock, spinning around at a 1,000mph, orbiting a nuclear fireball and whizzing through space at half-a-million miles per hour. Most of us believe in super-beings which for some reason need to be praised for setting this up. This, apparently, is normal.

Offline Denholm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9667
      • No. 603 Squadron
How about a Fw 200C-3 bomber
« Reply #29 on: October 18, 2006, 09:05:03 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Col. Flashman
A Luftanza airliner drafted by the Luftwaffa

First of all it's Lufthansa, and second of all 747's were post-war.:p
Get your Daily Dose of Flame!
FlameThink.com
No. 603 Squadron... Visit us on the web, if you dare.

Drug addicts are always disappointed after eating Pot Pies.