Author Topic: B-29  (Read 1309 times)

Offline sandwich

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 590
Re: B-29
« Reply #15 on: August 01, 2009, 02:14:48 PM »
No. A bomber at 33,000+ up and at 375+ top speed with the bomb loadout of a 24 would be unbalancing.

Also, if you want to fly a B-29, have I got a game for you.
(Image removed from quote.)
So quick to judge without even reading the first post.

I dont want a b29, I want the 262 to be able to carry a bomb.

Offline Denholm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9667
      • No. 603 Squadron
Re: B-29
« Reply #16 on: August 01, 2009, 04:00:56 PM »
You were too quick to jump the gun. Please read the post he was quoting.
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 sandwich

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 590
Re: B-29
« Reply #17 on: August 01, 2009, 04:20:41 PM »
my bad enker

also it is still not a b29 post

Offline Eagleclaw

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 298
Re: B-29
« Reply #18 on: August 03, 2009, 12:27:37 AM »
I don't think the B-29 would be too bad as long as we, yes had perk point cost, and maybe add a nuke which would cost.. Bomber Points? but have it set Very high.
        ____ 
       {     }
      {       }   
    - -\    /- -
  -  - /    \  --
   -  /      \  --
The day no hoes would fly......

Offline AirFlyer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1210
Re: B-29
« Reply #19 on: August 03, 2009, 10:49:26 AM »
I'm fairly certain the Me-262 version we have never carried a bomb. Always have the Ar-234 though.
Tours: Airflyer to 69 - 77 | Dustin57 92 - 100 | Spinnich 100 - ?
"You'll always get exactly what you deserve." Neil