Move different models of airframes into gun package selections

[Torquila]

- I wish all the sub-models of airframes would be moved into the gun package selection area in the hanger (with their assorted gun packages)

[jeffdn]

- I wish all the sub-models of airframes would be moved into the gun package selection area in the hanger (with their assorted gun packages)

Why?

Some are quite radically different.

[Torquila]

Not really, radically is like 110 to 410.

Most, if not all, are more 109-E to 109-K

[The Fugitive]

I don't understand what your asking. Are you asking that the gun package for the K4 be available for the 109-E as well and vi-versa?

[Torquila]

I know it sounds weird, but i figure it better to have less visual clutter in selecting your planes.

So when you select the "a6m" on the list, you are presented with the gun packages and bomb/droptank packages for the entire series modelled, with associated engine/cosmetic changes.

[jeffdn]

Not really, radically is like 110 to 410.

Most, if not all, are more 109-E to 109-K

What if the variants were in a collapsible list on the clipboard menu, i.e. you'd click "Spitfire", and the variants would expand out from under it?

Alternatively, have you tried just adding the planes you use to your favorites list?

[The Fugitive]

The problem is those gun packages were not available to the other planes in those series. So being able to load a 30mm in a 109-E is wrong.

Also how would it remove the clutter? The rows of options on some sets would lead out the hanger doors!

[Torquila]

I shouldn't have to need a favourites list to easily find the plane I want on the entire list.

Fugitive, are you suffering from comprehension issues?

[The Fugitive]

maybe, it is early in the morning here.

The favorites listing is a good option too. List your planes there and always open to the favorites list and you wouldn't have to go through the whole list, if thats the problem your looking to solve.

[Torquila]

But it is a problem, I have a list; and then a second list. Is that really necessary?

[Karnak]

It is moot.  AH is not built so that flight model and damage model changes can be tied to hangar selections for a chosen airframe. This is why the Mosquito Mk XVIII cannot be modeled as a hangar choice of armament for the Mosquito Mk VI, from which half of the real Mosquito Mk XVIIIs were built.

[The Fugitive]

But it is a problem, I have a list; and then a second list. Is that really necessary?

Yup, it is if you don't want to bother going through the main list.

They already give you the option to create your own list of planes/vehicles you want to use, so use it and ignore the "other" list unless you feel the need to explore planes/vehicles that are NOT on your list.

Grouping the planes/vehicles under a single header just won't work as the variations are wide.

[Torquila]

What karnak said pretty much sunk this possibility.

[SmokinLoon]

Not really, radically is like 110 to 410.

Most, if not all, are more 109-E to 109-K

Um... weight, wings, stronger frame, canopy.  Not to mention torque, climb, speed, acceleration, climb, and stability.  The 109E-4 to 109F-4 may not have been the best example.   

However, I see your point.  The best case in point may be the I-16 AH has in the line up.  There are 3 different versions represented under one model, which from the very brief research I did shows that they had the same engine output (though 2 different engines), and the addition of hard points for drop tanks and rockets. Otherwise, the frame (and engine ability) remained the same between the 3 versions (Types 24,28,29).

There are very few aircraft from WWII that didnt see drastic changes to the point of not being to keep the same frame and engine performance and only the guns.  Even the I-16 we have is considered a "late" version and was not used beyond 1942 thanks to far better aircraft coming off the Soviet production lines.

   

[The Fugitive]

What karnak said pretty much sunk this possibility.

ohhhhh I think it was sunk loooooong before that.