Any plans on TA152?

[Bombjack]

Wilbus, it's the "seeing action" thing which is the trouble. Germany was desperate for planes. Any completed airworthy plane had a chance of seeing action. By contrast the Allies were developing their planes far from the front, and were happy to win the war with the planes in theatre.

Any discussion of which planes to allow and which not to allow based (edit) solely (/edit) on whether they "saw action" is inevitably biased towards the LW.

(edit) Just as solely using production numbers is biased towards the US and Russia. I don't think there's any easy formula for inclusion - it's a matter of judgement, HT's judgement in this case   (/edit)

[This message has been edited by Bombjack (edited 08-08-2000).]

[juzz]

Same argument, different names...

[PC]

That's the point Bombjack! The Americans had a lot of stuff in Squadron service by the end of the war. These planes would have been in combat if they were needed.

I say if you add planes like the Ta-152, then all the planes that were in service by the Allies should be added.

If you wanted to be "fair" you'd use one standard of the LW and Japan and another for the Allies. How about something like this: If the LW made 10, lets have them.
If the Allies had it in squadron service, lets have them.

The LW should get all of theirs first and maybe some of them will shut the heck up already  
 

PC

[Westy]

 Let me use this a simple sports analogy to explain why only using aircraft that "saw action" is fallible and bogus.
 Say you want to recreate the 1975 World Series. Should you be only allowed to use in your virtual re-creation only those that saw actual game time? Why? That only favours the losing side as they are typically the ones who usually put every pitcher into the game in order to find the one that will stop the other side from gaining more runs. The losing team ends up tossing everyone into the game to try and pull out a victory or at least stop an onslaught. What then about the winning side? They had ace pitchers standing by too. And hot pinchhitters who could have been put into use also. But they weren't needed as bad as the losing team needed thier players. So some of th winning team players spend the time warming the bench?  Would that mean you cannot use them because they did not back then?  Lousy analogy maybe...
 Perhaps the folks who maintain the "it never saw combat"  as the dividing line that's not to be crossed can see my point and why it unfairly favours the Axis. I'm not talking the prototypes that never went into production or left the drawing board. Fact is if it was produced and entered into service by Sept 1945 it was a WWII aircraft. Whether it saw action or not. The difference is the Allies did not have the desperation that the Axis had to push those crates out the door to stem the war over thier own homelands. Just the same, however, the Allies had just as good if not better aircraft in many cases than the Axis did - notable exception being the ME-262. The difference is the Allies did no have the same need to rush them into the combat theatres to fight off the enemy. And that is because basically by 1945 there was hardly any aircraft up in the skies any more in 1945 - as compared to 1939 and up to 1943.

  -Westy