Author Topic: New fighters  (Read 1930 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: New fighters
« Reply #30 on: August 17, 2011, 11:09:01 PM »
Did the meteor score any actually kills against a manned aircraft? Not just against V1's?
No, just one dogfight against some Fw190s before being chased off by some Spitfires who thought they were Me262s. Shooting down an aircraft is not a criteria though.  It saw combat, being used for ground attack missions against German positions.


Quote
Asside from that, you might want to add the Me-410. If we got the BK-37 armed version, it would likely replace the Il-2 as the main GV buster.
Perhaps.  I'd like to see the Me410 added in any case.
:huh  OK someone REALLY needs to explain or better yet show me how the crap you killa tank with an IL2 or a Hurri mk IID. :headscratch:    yeah, i get that you can shoot the rockets at tanks and drop the bombs from the IL2 and get kills but how do you gun down a tank with 30 bullets from a hurri? even if you could keep it on target without missing a single shot or getting a face full of howitzer does it even do any damage to the heavier ones, i mean i can see it taking down a jeep or m3 or even an m8, ive been killed by 2d's in M8's before but against a Sherman or even a Panzer +? probly the wrong thread to post this on but just confused  :headscratch: LOL
The 23mm, 37mm and 40mm AP ammo those aircraft carry for whichever gun is the one in question can penetrate some of the armor on most of the tanks in AH.  It isn't a matter of repeated hits, it is a matter of hitting in the right place at a steep enough angle of impact.  Do that with one round and it can be a dead tank.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 11:11:32 PM by Karnak »
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline dj4592

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: New fighters
« Reply #31 on: August 17, 2011, 11:15:54 PM »
uh..so if i sneak my hurri D up behind a panzer engine off and land/roll up on him, then shoot him in the back of the turret at point blank will i get a kill with the 40mms?  :headscratch: that would be the best kill ever. or do i jump out fo my plane and stick my .45 down the barrel and shoot the shell to detonet inside tank??   :ahand

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: New fighters
« Reply #32 on: August 17, 2011, 11:29:12 PM »
uh..so if i sneak my hurri D up behind a panzer engine off and land/roll up on him, then shoot him in the back of the turret at point blank will i get a kill with the 40mms?  :headscratch: that would be the best kill ever. or do i jump out fo my plane and stick my .45 down the barrel and shoot the shell to detonet inside tank??   :ahand
Front, side and rear armor tends to be too thick for these guns to get through.  Normally you are trying to punch through the thinner armor on the deck or turret roof.  Some older model tanks do have other vulnerabilities.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline gyrene81

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11629
Re: New fighters
« Reply #33 on: August 18, 2011, 09:21:56 AM »
The IAR was the only plane on his list that was at all significant.

The Re.2005 was the one I was objecting to, though he says it was bait.
ok true. the re.2005 though fitting the squadron and combat criteria fails in the category of significance. perhaps given another year it may have been as significant as the c.202/205.


To be clear to Tank-Ace and gyrene81, there are both early and late war units I advocate for.  My typical range right now is something like Ki-43, Yak-1 through Ju188A-1, Me410, J2M3/J2M5 and Tu-2.  My criteria are a mixture of what is needed for historical purposes and what I think would do well in the MA or fill quasi holes in the MA.
alright i get it now.
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 Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: New fighters
« Reply #34 on: August 18, 2011, 01:15:09 PM »
Karnak, the Me-410 would give much increased preformance in every aspect over the Il-2. Oh sure, you might not kill as many tanks with each rearm or sortie, but you might be able to make 3 sorties in the time it takes the Il-2 to make 2.


With the Il-2, the 23mm cannons are basicly useless. Take the 37mm's.

Panzer/Panther: Sides and back of the hull/turret, and the engine decking
M4: Sides of the hull, and the engine decking/turret top
T-34: Engine decking/turret top
Tiger: Dive in strait down from above and fire at the top of the tank. Little chance of succes but possible.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2011, 01:18:41 PM by Tank-Ace »
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: New fighters
« Reply #35 on: August 18, 2011, 03:16:44 PM »
It would depend on the loadouts we get with the Me410.  It has a lot of options and there is no promising we'd get a BK-37 as an option.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: New fighters
« Reply #36 on: August 18, 2011, 04:06:32 PM »
The BK37 was the anti-tank gun on the Ju87G. what the 410 had was the BK5, a 50mm round that was HE only. I've read some commentary that they were used on the Russian front against armor, but often terms like "armor" are loosely defined and it probably wouldn't harm tanks much.

Even the 75mm HE from the B-25H we have in-game bounces off medium tanks. I remember flying right up behind a Sherman on the deck and firing a 75mm @ 200 yards, seeing it "hit" (saw the hit sprite) in the dead center of the engine compartment, and never did any damage.

So I wouldn't suspect the guns on the Me410 to be super tank busters. Not like can openers or anything.


Just sayin'...

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: New fighters
« Reply #37 on: August 18, 2011, 05:43:24 PM »
Hmmm... Must be thinking of the Hs 129 that had the BK37.
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: New fighters
« Reply #38 on: August 18, 2011, 05:51:27 PM »
Hs129 is more noted for Mk101 30mm and Mk103 30mm.

Few ever got the BK37. Those were almost exclusively on the Ju87 variants. Instead, as soon as the BK37 became available on the Hs129, they moved to the PAK40 75mm. This was some 1200 kg for an already underpowered airframe and was almost unflyable. But.... fly it did!

Very low, and very slow, but with a mean punch!



EDIT: 12 rounds, claimed to be able to knock out any tank in the world at the time, assuming the Hs129 survived to get into attack position. It was vulnerable to ground fire due to its slow speed. Maximum speed clean was only 250mph. Much slower with the PAK40.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2011, 05:53:32 PM by Krusty »

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: New fighters
« Reply #39 on: August 18, 2011, 05:55:19 PM »
Would rather have the Ju-88P if its that or the Hs 129 with BK 7. But the Hs 129 DID carry the Bk 37, even if rarely. P-51 can carry 1000lb bombs and rockets, when they rarely carried both.

I say as long as we're taking 25%, carrying full fuel and full ordnance in the B-29, etc, then no reason not to include the Hs 129 with Bk 37.
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: New fighters
« Reply #40 on: August 18, 2011, 06:31:37 PM »
There was no BK37 on the Hs129... They started testing and stopped right away. They shifted tracks entirely away from that. It wasn't rare, it was downright nonexistent. The Hs129's main claim to fame was the Mk101 and Mk103 guns. The majority of them that carried gunpods used these guns. The problem is that by even early 1943 they were having problems punching through Soviet armor. They were only 30mm rounds.

The 75mm was also rather rare, but actually used. 25 were made starting in June 1944 and ending in Sept 1944. That was when they shut down production.

So if you want a Hs129 representative of actual WW2 capabilities, it will have a 30mm gunpod or external bombs/rockets. In short, it was obsolete before 1943 came around, and Fw190Fs and obsolete Ju87Gs were much more capable of killing tanks. An interesting addition if ever added, but useless in almost every way related to Aces High MA play.


P.S. I think you should stop wishing for the Hs129 and just wish for the Ju87G. It had more ammo, better performance, and 2x the hitting power (twice the guns).
« Last Edit: August 18, 2011, 06:33:15 PM by Krusty »

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: New fighters
« Reply #41 on: August 18, 2011, 07:36:40 PM »
You could make the argument for a perked ordnance package (if this feature is ever introduced) consisting of the 7.5 cm BK cannon that was mounted on the Hs 129 B-3.

I also wouldn't call the Hs 129 "obsolete by the time 1943 came around", when there is no evidence to support that claim.  The Hs 129 was produced in very small numbers, so small that it really had no appreciable impact on the war.  However, it did perform well in battle when conditions were right.  Like the Ju 87, it was dependent on the Germans having tactical air superiority over the battle field and by middle-late 1943, things were changing dramatically on the Eastern Front and the luxuries of air superiority was no longer enjoyed exclusively by the Luftwaffe.  The small numbers of Hs 129s found themselves in flying in increasingly large numbers of defensive actions and their losses started to increase as air cover wasn't always available as it was in the past.

This was the major problem with the Hs 129, it was a plan introduced at a time when things were shifting against the Germans, basically it had the deck stacked against it from the start.  Had the B series been produced in larger numbers and the Luftwaffe could have maintained their early tactical air superiority over the battle field, the Hs 129's reputation would have been positive instead of being a plane that was never really given a chance to succeed.

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 Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: New fighters
« Reply #42 on: August 18, 2011, 07:46:09 PM »
Wouldn't mind a perked ordnance feature. Would let us add some load-outs and planes without the game being completly thrown off balance.


I would enjoy using the 14000lb super torpedo in the B-29  :banana:.
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"