PBY5-A

[guncrasher]

dont get a 262 unless you are ready to lose those perks.

semp

[wil3ur]

...I'll add your comments into the "I wouldn't do it so no one else should" category of why so many things shouldn't be added to this game.

There are a lot of great ideas on here that are smack talked down by straw man arguments and useless posting that has no constructive use to the game.  HTC doesn't seem to be doing a lot of development on the game as far as new features go.  We get little pieces from players, we haven't had a new map in god knows how long... and any post which suggests the game play be modified to possibly add something more is immediately shot down.

I'm sure there's people out there who think resupplying bases is a waste of time, and useless and should be left out of the game.  Because they wouldn't do it, does that mean no one should be able to?  Last time this came up, people complained about the new line up of P40s and how "everyone wanted them, but then no one uses them".  I for one don't remember a single person saying the P40 lineup needed to be expanded.  I've still flown them, and had fun in them.  They're not my bag of tea, so I don't up them every day... but it doesn't mean they shouldn't be in the game because I don't like to use them, and I can't see their purpose.

The Spit I is available in the MA, and I have a blast upping it when I get the wild hare up my butt...  but you hardly see those flown.  Does that mean they should be taken out of the game?  I'm just not getting these arguments that basically state, "It's not the best so we don't need it".  Where would Finland be if it took that attitude?

Or we could just cut everything out, Have the P51, the B29 and the F4U4 because every other plane is worthless and why waste time with anything else?

[gyrene81]

you really haven't gotten past the "kewl" factor have you wilbur? spit1s and p40s are faster and more maneuverable than the pby...you at least have a chance of surviving a sortie in them.

[Karnak]

...<stuff>

wil3ur,

The difference is that the Spit I took very little developer time as it is a variant of Spitfire which, as these boards are so constantly reminding us, is not exactly a rarely used airframe.

The PBY-5 would take a lot more developer resources being both a completely unique model and being a multi-engine, multi-station aircraft.  The question here is what would the developer time be most effectively used for?  Thus far the arguments for the PBY-5 have done a poor job of making a strong case for the PBY-5 being a good use of those developer resources.

[SpencAce]

also,   if the PBY is out of the Question, we do need a german heavy bomber,,,,, the fw200 is pretty sweet

[Butcher]

They have boat hangars, right?(Vehicle)
READ THIS THEN CLICK ON LINK:
Definition of Amphibious: Able to operate both on land and in water. SO ITS A BOAT!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aE0hnDWI_0U

Boat Hangers are called AV's or in another words: seaplane tenders, they were auxilary class ships designed to replenish and maintain seaplanes.
Other Aux ships are: AE - or effective fleet replenishment capability, the idea was to replenish carriers/warships at sea, AKE's were world war 2 designs however it was not until 1945 that AE's were able to replenish while at sea.

AD's were Destroyer tenders, able to replenish Destroyers with everything needed to maintain a squadron
AS were Submarine tenders
AGP were torpedo boat tenders (PT boats)
AKV were transports able to carry Aircraft (normally an AK could carry aircraft, however they had to be crated up, AKV's were able to keep a squadron of aircraft ready to deploy without having them crated (they used cranes)
AR's were Repair ships, if a warship was damaged he could dock with an AR and it would be able to give it some repairs before heading back to drydock, this was major in saving quite a few warships from being sunk, it wouldn't fix major damage (gun turret blown off) but if they needed to patch a hole in the hull, then an AR was useful.

Finally AVP were small seaplane tenders, for single engined seaplanes etc, possibly Pby's I cant remember.

AZ - not sure if any served in WW2 (cant remember) they were lighter then air tenders, for blimps etc. There were some blimps used for submarine spotting off california, however I barely remember reading much about them.

[USAF2010]

There was a very good episode of Wings of the Luftwaffe that showed the ports and contraptions that showed how German maritime seaplanes were launched and recovered.... wish i had a link, but oh well lol 

[Karnak]

also,   if the PBY is out of the Question, we do need a german heavy bomber,,,,, the fw200 is pretty sweet

Please explain in what way is the Fw200 "pretty sweet"?

Is it the fact that it is slower than the Ju88A-4?  Maybe the fact that it carries less bombs than the Ju88A-4?  Perhaps the fact that it has poorer defensive guns than the Ju88A-4? It might be the fact that it is much more fragile than the Ju88A-4?  Which of those were you thinking of?

[Ack-Ack]

Please explain in what way is the Fw200 "pretty sweet"?

Is it the fact that it is slower than the Ju88A-4?  Maybe the fact that it carries less bombs than the Ju88A-4?  Perhaps the fact that it has poorer defensive guns than the Ju88A-4? It might be the fact that it is much more fragile than the Ju88A-4?  Which of those were you thinking of?

Or the fact that Fw 200 crews were ordered in mid-1941 to stop attacking shipping and avoid combat in order to preserve their numbers and after 1943 served as transports on the Eastern Front.

ack-ack

[Krusty]

Or the fact it wasn't even a heavy bomber? It was a passenger liner converted to maritime recon and occasional anti-shipping runs.

[4Prop]

as long as we get supply convoys,subs, and then me might need them. why fly a plane that only goes 130 mph vs a plane that can carry just as much if not more ordinance and go 350.

how often do you fly the D3A1? why not..

[USAF2010]

Or the fact it wasn't even a heavy bomber? It was a passenger liner converted to maritime recon and occasional anti-shipping runs.

Kinda like how the He-111 was also a passenger liner? That itself had mild success, and clearly extensive use.....

I'm down for the Fw200... Want more 4 engine aircraft to intercept 

[Karnak]

Kinda like how the He-111 was also a passenger liner? That itself had mild success, and clearly extensive use.....

I'm down for the Fw200... Want more 4 engine aircraft to intercept 

The difference was that the He111 was designed as a bomber, but declared to be an airliner for cover purposes.  The Fw200 was designed as an airliner and later pressed into service as a patrol bomber.

[USAF2010]

The difference was that the He111 was designed as a bomber, but declared to be an airliner for cover purposes.  The Fw200 was designed as an airliner and later pressed into service as a patrol bomber.

Ah, thank you for the clarification sir! 

[DMVIAGRA]

Are you sure you want this update? I don't think I'd fry the prane, it has such row speeds, it would be an easy target for other pranes. I mean at high artitudes, it's stirr srow.