Need More Carrier Planes

[funked]

Val
Kate
Dauntless
Bf 109T
Ju 87C

[Toad]

Don't forget the Russian carrier planes!!!!

We need WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more LW carrier planes TOO! WAAAAAAAAAAAY more!

[brady]

well.....no kate..please can we have a...

   

and instead of a vall a B7A2 would be nice  


     Brady

------------------
 

[This message has been edited by brady (edited 12-27-2000).]

[SKurj]

Be nice if we can open canopy on the dauntless too!!!

AKskurj

[RAM]

I really think that we need a dedicated divebomber, two for carriers and one for land based missions:

-Helldiver
-Judy (a val will be less than dead meat in MA)
-Ju-87D (good base to bring up a Ju87G  )

[juzz]

Oh fine give the US a 1944 Navy while everyone else gets their 1941 gear!  

How about:

B6N2a "Jill" (B7A would be nice too, but only 114 made and didn't equip any carriers unfortunately)
D4Y1 "Judy" (maybe D4Y3 with radial engine?)

Stuff the LW, they never finished their carrier, ha ha!  

And like - how about some more Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm gear?!

Firefly I
Corsair II
Swordfish II  

[Vermillion]

umm Juzz, look up the "Battle of the Phillipine Sea".  

There were plenty of Jills in that battle on CV's.

109T? why? Also the same for things like Swordfish. Until we get a planeset that fits around them, they're all totally useless.

If we want the ultimate torpedo bomber we need the:

Aichi B7A-2  Ryusei (Shooting Star) Codenamed: 'Grace'

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 12-27-2000).]

[juzz]

I said "Grace" never saw a carrier deck!  

[Vermillion]

Ah, thought you said "Jill"  

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[Karnak]

Grace was carrier capable though.

If our F4U-1C gets carrier status and most players seem cool with the Bf109T and Ju87C there can hardly be a fair argument that the B7A-2 should not be carrier capable.

It had the hook and associated equipment.  Model that and let the players do what they will with it.

------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother

Sisu
-Karnak

[SKurj]

Seahornet +)

AKskurj

[juzz]

There's no problem with putting "Grace" on the carrier.

Point is that the B6N2 should be first since there were about 10 times as many produced and it equipped many IJN carriers during WW2.

PS: The F4U-1C was actually operated from a carrier during WW2. B7A, Bf 109T and Ju 87C never were.

[Sundog]

A Seahornet would be cool...however, since we don't even have a Mossie yet...!  

I would definitely like to see the Jill added. A Helldiver as well.

I wouldn't add the Val, Kate, or Dauntless unless HTC was going to do an early/mid war plane set release which included the Ki-43,
P-40, LaGG-3 or MiG-3, Hurricane, Do-217, Betty, etc.

I know they have the perk point system, but regardless of how perked something is, I wont fly the MC.202 because the guns are damned bb shooters. We would need a complete early/midwar planeset that we could make the only planes flyable in the historical terrains in the SEA. Just my $.02 worth.

SD

[funked]

Oh yeah I forgot, Seafire Mk. XV.

[Torgo]

All of the (limited to those 200 or so, of course) F4U-1Cs that saw combat in WWII were carrier-based off Okinawa, I believe.

Basically, without a Rolling Plane Set (which I assume we'll never see) I don't see any dedicated dive bombers as being relevant at all.

They all were irrelevant by 44/45 (which is essentially the AH planeset) because by that time fighters were faster, could carry as many bombs, and could dive bomb just as well.

Who cares about a Helldiver? You can divebomb with a Hog with the gear down and put 2x1000 lb. with ease. Which is one reason why by the end of the war you were seeing US CVs with nothing but fighters.

Divebombers are nothing but targets in this MA. Heck, the TBM is nothing but a target, too.  It's 1000x more efficient to sink an enemy fleet taking some big American Iron with 2x1000 lbs and divebombing than trying to torp a CV.