Author Topic: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000  (Read 46519 times)

Offline phatzo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3734
      • No Crying
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #75 on: November 02, 2011, 02:55:28 AM »
I know a few of you guys go here
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/brewster-buffalo-vs-cac-boomerang-20394.html
a few pages of Brewster v Boomerang
No thank you Turkish, I'm sweet enough.

Offline Megalodon

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2272
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #76 on: November 04, 2011, 11:02:08 AM »
Sinbad II


Ubeut2




Okay..Add 2 Country's at once, Australia and France next plane update Add ...CAC Boomerang and the Dewoitine D.520

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10640
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #77 on: November 04, 2011, 03:25:02 PM »
I know a few of you guys go here
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/brewster-buffalo-vs-cac-boomerang-20394.html
a few pages of Brewster v Boomerang

Interesting info there.  :aok

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #78 on: November 04, 2011, 06:23:32 PM »
Exactly why would you suffer?

Well there are a dozen other aircraft's ultimately need to be added to the game first, Brewster served in more then enough Scenarios which is why it should of been added. CAC Boomerang served in such a limited capacity I would even argue the Ta-152 seen more action with its limited numbers, same for the ME-163.

Now saying that, I would agree on adding the CAC Boomerang only when other aircraft's filled the roll that seen more action. For example the Dewoitine D.520, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-3, Lavochkin LaGG-3, I-153, SB-2, PE-3, Bloch MB.150, IAR 80, Macchi MC.200, Ki-43, Ki-45, Ki-44, Reggiane Re.2000, He-111, Do-17, Macchi C.200, Curtiss-Wright CW-21, Yak-1, Ilyushin Il-4, SM.81, and Beaufighter.

Take your pick, I'd gladly vote for these first.
JG 52

Offline caldera

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6437
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #79 on: November 04, 2011, 06:43:14 PM »
Boomerang pwns all those heaps.
"Then out spake brave Horatius, the Captain of the gate:
 To every man upon this earth, death cometh soon or late.
 And how can man die better, than facing fearful odds.
 For the ashes of his fathers and the temples of his Gods."

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #80 on: November 04, 2011, 08:38:54 PM »
Boomerang pwns all those heaps.

If you can upgrade Fosters beer so its drinkable, then I will vote the CAC Boomerang.
JG 52

Offline phatzo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3734
      • No Crying
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #81 on: November 04, 2011, 10:53:52 PM »
If you can upgrade Fosters beer so its drinkable, then I will vote the CAC Boomerang.
It's called Tooheys New

I may have just started a beer war.
No thank you Turkish, I'm sweet enough.

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10640
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #82 on: November 04, 2011, 10:57:23 PM »
If you can upgrade Fosters beer so its drinkable, then I will vote the CAC Boomerang.
Firstly Fosters you get here in the USA comes from Canada under licence. Not really the same thing. Second most Australian's don't drink Fosters lager. Fosters is the crap that is left over from the beers we do like that is sent over seas.

Offline FTJR

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1996
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #83 on: November 04, 2011, 11:24:51 PM »
Well there are a dozen other aircraft's ultimately need to be added to the game first, Brewster served in more then enough Scenarios which is why it should of been added. CAC Boomerang served in such a limited capacity I would even argue the Ta-152 seen more action with its limited numbers, same for the ME-163.

Now saying that, I would agree on adding the CAC Boomerang only when other aircraft's filled the roll that seen more action. For example the Dewoitine D.520, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-3, Lavochkin LaGG-3, I-153, SB-2, PE-3, Bloch MB.150, IAR 80, Macchi MC.200, Ki-43, Ki-45, Ki-44, Reggiane Re.2000, He-111, Do-17, Macchi C.200, Curtiss-Wright CW-21, Yak-1, Ilyushin Il-4, SM.81, and Beaufighter.

Take your pick, I'd gladly vote for these first.

I've always agreed that there are other aeroplanes to added first, but stress that the Boomerang meets the critera, where it comes on the list is noones but HTC's decision.

Im sorry but if you're drinking Fosters, you've been had mate.

 :salute
Bring the Beaufighter to Aces High
Raw Prawns      

B.O.S.S. "Beaufighter Operator Support Services" 
Storms and Aeroplanes dont mix

Offline Megalodon

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2272
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #84 on: November 14, 2011, 01:30:27 PM »
Complete nonsense, nor is it a super plane in the game and its flight model isn't based on any "super facts". The performance in game matches Brewster Corp's manufacturers data and specification.


I'm well aware of the overboosting done by the RAAF. HTC usually models the aircraft based on "official" manufacturers or air service's data. HTC's P-40 models match manufacturers data just like the Brewster does.


Hardly surprising given the population/rescources of the given countries. But the fact itself is totally irrelevant.


Again, totally incoherent and irrelevant.


Seriously doubt that Brewster had a major impact on subscribtions and very much doubts that Boomerang would have much effect either.


Competition? In what way? I think there are far more dangerous planes in the game already. :) In fact, given the specs, Boomerang would probably be one of the easiest planes for the Brewster to shoot down in normal LWMA aircombat.


:rolleyes:


They are recorded very accurately in fact but given the way you come across I don't think I'm going to bother to post much regarding them.

HAHAHA   the way I come across?

If that was the case then it would fly like an F2a2, and you would have been satisfied with the original version put out by HTC right?


You have gotten your 46 or whatever planes for your country that have this miraculous kill total. <not that the Fin's boast or anything>
I would love to have the Boomer just to fight you in alone :) not to mention all the other reasons. <Base defence, bombs, smoke, does the Brewster have these?

Fine,.... then the RAAF wants there own P-40E that is there specs and manipulated to there preference by them and flown at tolerances they like.

Let the country 5x the size, and contributed way more to the war effort, have there 250 planes and you help with the research you hear me.

The only incoherency going on here is your attitude towards the Australian's and there plane. They deserve it just as much as the Fins did/do.

Look at the way your coming across.... tell a fellow AH country that, that made there own plane, flew it in squadron strength in WWII for
2 years to suck eggs.  :rolleyes:

The reason they didn't have 500 kills...  the opportunity never presented itself. Does that make them less worthy? .....the answer is NO!
Should they have had the opportunity, the would have had to fight better planes and more experienced pilots.
I'm sure their nads are just as big if not bigger than the Fin's.


 :cheers:



« Last Edit: November 14, 2011, 03:16:46 PM by Megalodon »
Okay..Add 2 Country's at once, Australia and France next plane update Add ...CAC Boomerang and the Dewoitine D.520

Offline Megalodon

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2272
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #85 on: November 14, 2011, 02:06:55 PM »
More line drawings





Okay..Add 2 Country's at once, Australia and France next plane update Add ...CAC Boomerang and the Dewoitine D.520

Offline TheRhino

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 83
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #86 on: November 15, 2011, 04:32:18 AM »
+1, It wouldn't be a bad idea to have an Australian designed-and-made aircraft. Who cares about the performance? There may be better aircraft in the game, but there is also worse.

 :salute
"May the Air Force be with you"


TheHawk, C.O. 457th 'Grey Nurse' SQN RAAF (Currently Inactive due to slow internet :( )

Offline phatzo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3734
      • No Crying
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #87 on: November 15, 2011, 10:23:56 PM »
Megaladon, You may have underestimated the size of our country. I figure it to be 225 times the size of Finland.
No thank you Turkish, I'm sweet enough.

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10640
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #88 on: November 15, 2011, 10:42:59 PM »
Megaladon, You may have underestimated the size of our country. I figure it to be 225 times the size of Finland.
Makes it a little hard to find things in that space at times. :D

Just to put some perspective on it.



For our Euro Friends.


Offline Megalodon

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2272
Re: CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000
« Reply #89 on: November 15, 2011, 10:51:37 PM »
Megaladon, You may have underestimated the size of our country. I figure it to be 225 times the size of Finland.
Not in population :)

Roughly 26 million in Australia, 5 mil in Finland  :headscratch: ...and you guys can't have your plane? How does that work out subscription wise?  :headscratch:


But.. they got a Plane,
Okay..Add 2 Country's at once, Australia and France next plane update Add ...CAC Boomerang and the Dewoitine D.520