Author Topic: Fw 200  (Read 2274 times)

Offline Rob52240

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3770
      • My AH Films
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #30 on: May 28, 2012, 04:07:50 PM »
Why do you assume that Rob? The Ju-88 was reasonably well armed for when it was designed, arguably better armed than early B-17's.

The Ju-188 was decently armed as well, as was the He-177.

Just small caliber guns
If I had a gun with 3 bullets and I was locked in a room with Bin Laden, Hitler, Saddam and Zipp...  I would shoot Zipp 3 times.

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #31 on: May 28, 2012, 04:53:40 PM »
B-17B, and C had a .30 caliber gun in the nose, a .50 in the dorsal turret and ventral turret, and a .30 cal each in the waist gunner possitions IIRC.

Thats not a whole lot of firepower, and not much of an improvment over the 4 7.92mm's on the Ju-88.

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: Fw 200
« Reply #32 on: May 28, 2012, 04:55:19 PM »
Ventral gondola.   B-17B and C didn't have a ventral turret.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #33 on: May 28, 2012, 05:58:54 PM »
Ventral gondola.   B-17B and C didn't have a ventral turret.

Just how many B and C's were in combat? comparing apples to oranges, Ju-88 was in combat far longer and ill equip to defend itself even late war.

Prime example would a be a B-17E to B-17F - it was clear the E model was unable to defend itself in combat, and modifications made to upgrade the defense, F model is a primary example of combat upgrades.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2012, 06:01:45 PM by Butcher »
JG 52

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #34 on: May 28, 2012, 06:15:58 PM »
It also needs to be noted that the Ju-88 was serving primarily on the Eastern Front, where the red airforce had been smashed, and there was only a real need to upgun them starting around 1943, by which time the Ju-188 and He-177 were being brought into service.
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 Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #35 on: May 28, 2012, 06:31:47 PM »
It also needs to be noted that the Ju-88 was serving primarily on the Eastern Front, where the red airforce had been smashed, and there was only a real need to upgun them starting around 1943, by which time the Ju-188 and He-177 were being brought into service.

That's not the main reason, in the 1930s Bombers were as fast as fighters for the time, there was an insight to "outrun the fighters" to bomb the targets - however fighters caught up pretty quick, there wasn't a reason any country needed to up the defenses of the bombers (look pre-1942).

Only the American's once gained combat experience, were lucky enough to be able to re adapt the B-17 to the "flying fortress" it was, if you look at the British bombers - switched to night time bombing, while Japanese had really no opponents to deal with - left with a major problem once american planes
were able to get its guns to bare.

JG 52

Offline Volron

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5805
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #36 on: May 28, 2012, 07:06:45 PM »
I think it would be awesome to have the Fw 200 added.  But I would be surprised to see it before the Do-17, truth be told.  The plane that might start an argument is the TB-3.  It does meet the requirements to be included in AH, even if the Russians stopped making them before the war started.  They were in squadron strength and were even used in daylight raids, though the losses where severe to say the least.  I would like to see the TB-3 EVENTUALLY added.  I will admit though, that it's scenario and FSO use would be limited, but probably no more than the Fw 200 (the Fw 200 will have more use if we ever get merchant convoys and subs, maybe).  And no, I'm not thinking about that mothership TB-3 thing they tried. :)


And yes, I threw out a TB-3 card. :D


As for the Fw 200, yes, an eventual add, definitely.  But I wonder how they will model it... :headscratch:  It was known to break it's back when landing after all...  Couple of pings to the tail when engaged and it snaps off?  That...would suck. :bhead
Quote from: hitech
Wow I find it hard to believe it has been almost 38 days since our last path. We should have release another 38 versions by now  :bhead
HiTech
Quote from: Pyro
Quote from: Jolly
What on Earth makes you think that i said that sir?!
My guess would be scotch.

Offline TwinBoom

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2960
      • 39th FS "Cobra In The Clouds"
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #37 on: May 28, 2012, 07:07:53 PM »
Id like to see the Fighter version of the JU88 when it gets updated

TBs Sounds 
39th FS "Cobra In The Clouds"NOSEART

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #38 on: May 28, 2012, 08:19:22 PM »
Was speed improved at all with the fighter version? Manuverablity?
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: Fw 200
« Reply #39 on: May 28, 2012, 08:20:43 PM »
Was speed improved at all with the fighter version? Manuverablity?
Ju88C had about the same performance as the Ju88A-4.

Ju88G could do over 400mph, IIRC.

Edit:

The Ju88 was one of the two most versatile airframes of WWII and between it and the Mosquito it can be argued endlessly which was more versatile.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2012, 08:22:41 PM by Karnak »
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline titanic3

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4235
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #40 on: May 28, 2012, 10:17:41 PM »
Ju-88G would be nice as well as a remodeling of the current one. IMO, if you want a non-hangar queen, MA, German bomber, it's either the Ju-188, or He-177. Ju-188 wins my vote though.

  the game is concentrated on combat, not on shaking the screen.

semp

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23939
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #41 on: May 28, 2012, 10:23:09 PM »
no love for my Do-217  :cry
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline titanic3

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4235
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #42 on: May 28, 2012, 10:30:11 PM »
no love for my Do-217  :cry

I thought about it, but figured that anything the 217 can do, so can the He-111. While I would love to see all 3 major German bombers together, in terms of time spent on development, the He-111 is the most needed thing right now along with a Ju-88 remodel and BoB variant that doesn't leave Spitfires I in the dust.

  the game is concentrated on combat, not on shaking the screen.

semp

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23939
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #43 on: May 28, 2012, 10:33:09 PM »
I thought about it, but figured that anything the 217 can do, so can the He-111.

You may be thinking of the Do-17... the 217 is way superior to the He 111
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: Fw 200
« Reply #44 on: May 28, 2012, 11:06:55 PM »
no love for my Do-217  :cry
I'd much rather see the Ju188A-1, but the Do217 would be my second choice for a LWA viable German bomber.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-