Author Topic: Grumman F6F-6  (Read 2064 times)

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #30 on: May 10, 2010, 05:30:17 PM »
The inevitable result of running out of late war WWII American gear isn't people switching to ask for other nation's WWII gear, it is to ask for American gear that didn't make it....
p-63 did. :D
See Rule #4

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #31 on: May 10, 2010, 05:47:30 PM »
F7F was in theater and flying when the bomb dropped--just not flying combat missions yet.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #32 on: May 10, 2010, 08:10:38 PM »
F7F was in theater and flying when the bomb dropped--just not flying combat missions yet.
Ki-43 was in theater and flying combat operations when the bombs dropped.....on Pearl and it was still in theater flying combat operations when the bomb dropped on Nagasaki.

You see why some of us might think the Ki-43 has a high priority than the F7F?
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #33 on: May 10, 2010, 09:09:52 PM »
p-63 did. :D

Let's not get into THIS debate again....
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #34 on: May 10, 2010, 09:59:32 PM »
Ki-43 was in theater and flying combat operations when the bombs dropped.....on Pearl and it was still in theater flying combat operations when the bomb dropped on Nagasaki.

You see why some of us might think the Ki-43 has a high priority than the F7F?

Whoa man.  You misunderstand.  I'm in no way proposing that the F7F be added anytime soon.  Merely mentioning it with respect to some of the discussion about the F8F, et al...  I'm absolutely in agreement that the gaps be filled first.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline FlakBait422

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #35 on: May 10, 2010, 10:11:06 PM »
A Bearcat would be nice, that wasn't Korean war?  :old:
 :cheers: FlakBait
I was told by a wise man to change my forum signature... and so I have. I am a better man now ;)

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #36 on: May 11, 2010, 04:59:15 AM »
Let's not get into THIS debate again....
What it didn't shoot down an enemy AC unlike the F7F and the F8F?
See Rule #4

Offline Vinkman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #37 on: May 11, 2010, 01:09:27 PM »
Ki-43 was in theater and flying combat operations when the bombs dropped.....on Pearl and it was still in theater flying combat operations when the bomb dropped on Nagasaki.

You see why some of us might think the Ki-43 has a high priority than the F7F?

Karnak, we realise that geting the Ki-43 in the game is your top priority, not sure you need to keep inserting your wish into everyone elses thread. Not really on topic is it?
Who is John Galt?

Offline gyrene81

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11629
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #38 on: May 11, 2010, 01:15:31 PM »
Karnak, we realise that geting the Ki-43 in the game is your top priority, not sure you need to keep inserting your wish into everyone elses thread. Not really on topic is it?
Not to slam you Vinkman, but the wishlist is full of useless chaff like this thread and Karnak is right...Ki-43 is needed far and beyond the "what if" aircraft. If everyone who started a discussion here would consider the effects on the game and the community before posting "I want another pony" junk, wouldn't be any problems...but that's not likely to happen any more than getting the F6F-6 or F8F.
jarhed  
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Offline Vinkman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #39 on: May 11, 2010, 02:23:45 PM »
Not to slam you Vinkman, but the wishlist is full of useless chaff like this thread and Karnak is right...Ki-43 is needed far and beyond the "what if" aircraft. If everyone who started a discussion here would consider the effects on the game and the community before posting "I want another pony" junk, wouldn't be any problems...but that's not likely to happen any more than getting the F6F-6 or F8F.

Hey slam away  :aok

I just think a good use of the wishlist board is to post what you want and if a lot of folks agree, then that's good feedback for HTC. If no one joins replies than a post with no or few replies gets very little attention.  I'm just suggesting that it gets muddled and confused when every thread turns into every other thread because every wish is regurjitated in every other wish.  After a period of time, Karnak can repost his Ki-43 wish so new folks and others can tulips if they still think it's high priority. If everytime the Ki-43 wish is posted it get 125 affirmative replies, HTC will get the message. And if he does, I promise I won't go to his thread and say "No way the P-63 is way more better"  or some other such hijacking type comment.

Who is John Galt?

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #40 on: May 11, 2010, 02:27:11 PM »
The Ki-43 isn't my top priority, it was just useful in that context due to its service period and absence from AH.

The "Wishlist" is full of requests for more late, or post war, American stuff when the American planeset is, by far, the most complete.

This is a public forum and I can post my opinion of those threads.  I consider them self centered idiocy.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Rebel

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 734
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #41 on: May 11, 2010, 03:43:14 PM »
The P51-H was in a "What plane next" poll by HTC a long time ago. Did that stang even see combat?

Depends on your definition of combat. 

If bullets have to fly before it's baptized as a "combat vet", then no.

However, it was in service, and flying patrols in the pacific in a combat theater.

That may not be good enough for some, but it's good enough for me.   
"You rebel scum"

Offline gyrene81

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11629
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #42 on: May 11, 2010, 03:45:49 PM »
That may not be good enough for some, but it's good enough for me.  
It's not good enough for the ones who actually make the decisions...and in the end, that is all that counts.
jarhed  
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Offline Juicey1

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #43 on: May 12, 2010, 06:58:17 AM »
I appreciate the time you ppl are taking to talk about every fricken plane otherthan the hellcat.  :mad:

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Grumman F6F-6
« Reply #44 on: May 12, 2010, 09:00:40 AM »
I appreciate the time you ppl are taking to talk about every fricken plane otherthan the hellcat.  :mad:



If you'd been PAYING ATTENTION you'd see why the F6F-6 will never appear in the game.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.