« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: 2 planes that we actually need  (Read 861 times)

Offline fdiron

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 697
2 planes that we actually need
« on: November 22, 2001, 11:17:00 PM »
There are 2 planes that AH truly needs.  One of them is a late war carrier based bomber.  The SB2C comes to mind.  Maybe there is a better dive bomber than the SB2C, cant think of one though.

 The other plane we need is a troop transport capable of launching from a CV.  Perhaps a flying boat.  PBY may have been capable of carrying 10 troops.  I'm sure some of the Japanese flying boats could carry troops.
Logged

Offline Durr

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 247
      • http://us.geocities.com/ghostrider305
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2001, 11:20:00 PM »
PBYs and other flying boats didnt launch from carriers.
Logged

Offline fdiron

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 697
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2001, 01:04:00 AM »
Yeah I know.  But PT boats didnt launch from carriers either.
Logged

Offline Sachs

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 570
      • http://where?
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2001, 01:20:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by fdiron:
Yeah I know.  But PT boats didnt launch from carriers either.

He's got a point there, have oftne thought of PBY's or whatever for trop delivery from cv as well.
Logged

Offline mipoikel

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3521
      • http://www.llv32.org
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2001, 01:27:00 AM »
One plane also comes to  my mind:

He 111 bomber, wonder why its not there yet?

And 1 could be fun.. Me 163 Comet!!   :)   :D null
Logged
I am a spy!

Offline Buzzbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2001, 01:39:00 AM »
S!

Stuka was a better dive bomber than the Dauntlas.  But it didn't operate off Carriers so your suggestion is a good one.  But bring the Stuka too.  We need one for scenarios and for when HTC changes the accuracy of level bombers.  Dive bombers will then be crucial to hit tactical targets.
Logged

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2001, 03:27:00 AM »
Do17Z in FAF markings..  finns needs bomber hey  ;)
Logged

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2001, 04:33:00 AM »
Mostly true buzzbait, they didn't opperate of carriers, however, there was a carrier version of it, it's wasn't a protoype and it was built and used in action, just not from carriers. Same thing as the carrier based 109, when the german carrier was scrapped the carrier planes were used like any other plane. Maybe it would be nice to add them anyway?
Logged
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline R4M

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 662
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2001, 04:55:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by fdiron:
There are 2 planes that AH truly needs.  One of them is a late war carrier based bomber.  The SB2C comes to mind.  

The TBM Avenger is a late war carried based bomber. If you want another, then do a japanese Judy, or a Tenzan. See, even a german Stuka (there was a carrier-modificated Ju87R) or a SBD Dauntless would be better. The SB2C was, as its own unfortunate pilots called it, a "Son of a squeak, 2nd Class". Get the idea of how bad it was.


 
Quote
Originally posted by Sachs:


He's got a point there, have oftne thought of PBY's or whatever for trop delivery from cv as well.

You've got a LVT for that purpose. Use it.  :)

[ 11-23-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
Logged

Offline SKurj

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2001, 08:38:00 AM »
Wilbus the 109T's were modified to standard ground based spec, they weren't used as built I believe.


SKurj
Logged

Offline ra

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3569
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2001, 12:08:00 PM »
Buzzbait,

In what way was the Stuka a better dive bomber than the Dauntless?

ra
Logged

Offline skernsk

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5089
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2001, 12:19:00 PM »
Stuka would be better for scenario's.

As for whether or not it WAS better is a matter of opinion.....
Logged

Offline Citabria

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2001, 02:00:00 PM »
no one would fly those aircraft.

they would join the other hangar queens such as the ju88 and tbm
Logged
Fester was my in game name until September 2013

Offline Montezuma

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 959
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2001, 02:02:00 PM »
They should add lots of early-mid war Pacific carrier planes.

A6M2, Val, Kate, Wildcat, SBD...

[ 11-23-2001: Message edited by: Montezuma ]
Logged

Hammerhead

  • Guest
2 planes that we actually need
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2001, 02:05:00 PM »
Wasn't there a B-25 variant for carrier-ops?
I think it was the B-25B (jus guessing here).
Perhaps they could be modified and used as medium bombers and trooper transports as well?   :D   :D
Would be fun though to operate a bomber off a carrier.
Hmmmm.....
As far as modifications go, perhaps we could use a TBM as well......carrying two troops per plane?   :D   :D   :D
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »