Author Topic: The Mustang we really need.  (Read 9077 times)

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #90 on: April 06, 2010, 06:05:53 PM »

well technicly yes it is a bomber, but it can make an awesome buff blaster. '

and wouldnt the role of this new plane be filled already in game by the p38? the b24 is just a more extreme example of reduced maneuverability in exchange for massive ownage guns

Jeebus...why do you keep comparing the firepower of bombers against that of fighters?  There is no correlation between the two in terms of firepower, when you're comparing firepower of a fighter you need to compare it to another fighter.  For example, the firepower of a Bf 110C-4 is far more lethal than the firepower of a A6M5, or you can say the firepower of a P-38 is more lethal than the firepower of the P-51B, while only more lethal than the P-51D until the 20mm cannon rounds run out.  Those are valid comparisons of firepower.

And by the way...the B-24 doesn't have "massive ownage guns".


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline kingcobradude

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 506
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #91 on: April 06, 2010, 06:07:42 PM »
Jeebus...why do you keep comparing the firepower of bombers against that of fighters?  There is no correlation between the two in terms of firepower, when you're comparing firepower of a fighter you need to compare it to another fighter.  For example, the firepower of a Bf 110C-4 is far more lethal than the firepower of a A6M5, or you can say the firepower of a P-38 is more lethal than the firepower of the P-51B, while only more lethal than the P-51D until the 20mm cannon rounds run out.  Those are valid comparisons of firepower.

And by the way...the B-24 doesn't have "massive ownage guns".


ack-ack
75 mm cannon vs lancaster. who wins?
CO, Druileáil Teagascóir, and Lámh Cathaoirleach Ginearálta of the Irish Air Force

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15635
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #92 on: April 06, 2010, 06:08:15 PM »
Any bomber is extremely vulnerable IMO...except for the 234...and even then for the average joe the only defense it has is it's speed.
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10583
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #93 on: April 06, 2010, 06:08:24 PM »
Wasn't this also part of the Project Rainbow testing, to give it a low observability coating?
Are we back on topic with the VLR pony's? Not sure any more with this thread.

Offline kingcobradude

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 506
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #94 on: April 06, 2010, 06:10:37 PM »
Any bomber is extremely vulnerable IMO...except for the 234...and even then for the average joe the only defense it has is it's speed.
yes the tail guns are not the best compwred to the package of fighters. but I really dont want to be looking down the barrels of a b 25 strafer's nose guns
CO, Druileáil Teagascóir, and Lámh Cathaoirleach Ginearálta of the Irish Air Force

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #95 on: April 06, 2010, 06:15:28 PM »
75 mm cannon vs lancaster. who wins?

Jeebus, are you serious?  Do you even have to ask what would happen to a plane that gets hit from a 75mm cannon round, let alone who would win in such a contest?


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15635
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #96 on: April 06, 2010, 06:15:50 PM »
yes the tail guns are not the best compwred to the package of fighters. but I really dont want to be looking down the barrels of a b 25 strafer's nose guns
Seriously...what is your fetish with bombers vs fighters? They don't compare, or else they wouldn't be in two different categories. The 234 is probably the only 'exception' to the bomber/fighter category.
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10583
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #97 on: April 06, 2010, 06:16:08 PM »
yes the tail guns are not the best compwred to the package of fighters. but I really dont want to be looking down the barrels of a b 25 strafer's nose guns
Now for the first time or maybe since I don't know when?? I can agree with you. Having said that what has the B25H has got to do with this thread? :headscratch: PS: EXCEPT FOR YOUR SPELLING.

Offline kingcobradude

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 506
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #98 on: April 06, 2010, 06:17:59 PM »
you guys want planes that you have no need for since you can play those roles with other planes
CO, Druileáil Teagascóir, and Lámh Cathaoirleach Ginearálta of the Irish Air Force

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15635
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #99 on: April 06, 2010, 06:22:55 PM »
I don't want any planes. I'm content with whacking guys in my 234, I'm trying to figure out your issue with bombers vs fighters and trying to compare them as one role.
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline kingcobradude

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 506
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #100 on: April 06, 2010, 06:24:31 PM »
I don't want any planes. I'm content with whacking guys in my 234, I'm trying to figure out your issue with bombers vs fighters and trying to compare them as one role.
not bombers vs fighters. b25 strafer vs bomber destroyer
CO, Druileáil Teagascóir, and Lámh Cathaoirleach Ginearálta of the Irish Air Force

Offline Spikes

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15635
    • Twitch: Twitch Feed
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #101 on: April 06, 2010, 06:28:55 PM »
yes the tail guns are not the best compwred to the package of fighters.
not bombers vs fighters. b25 strafer vs bomber destroyer
i7-12700k | Gigabyte Z690 GAMING X | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 | EVGA 1080ti FTW3 | H150i Capellix

FlyKommando.com

Offline kingcobradude

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 506
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #102 on: April 06, 2010, 06:31:35 PM »
CO, Druileáil Teagascóir, and Lámh Cathaoirleach Ginearálta of the Irish Air Force

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10583
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #103 on: April 06, 2010, 07:04:20 PM »

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: The Mustang we really need.
« Reply #104 on: April 06, 2010, 08:07:37 PM »
you guys want planes that you have no need for since you can play those roles with other planes

How could a B-25H or any other bomber make a suitable substitute for a P-51 as a long range escort?


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song