Me-163

[Zacherof]

*facepalm* arrrg!!! Make the standard cost 75 then.

[RedBull1]

*facepalm* arrrg!!! Make the standard cost 75 then.

or 100

[icepac]

I'd like to see it at 150.

I'll still fly it to tank town, though.

[Slade]

If you are going to update the 163 please add the gun package used in WWII that fired straight up as a 163 passed under a bomber. Thanks.

[Zacherof]

If you are going to update the 163 please add the gun package used in WWII that fired straight up as a 163 passed under a bomber. Thanks.

to my knowledge the only upward firing weapon the 163 had were 50mm rockets that fired when the bombers shadow passed over the plane.

And they were only experimentaly used a handfull of times.

[Slade]

to my knowledge the only upward firing weapon the 163 had were 50mm rockets that fired when the bombers shadow passed over the plane.
And they were only experimentaly used a handfull of times.

Thanks Zach.

Facts are that it existed and it was used in battle in WWII.  It was not an experiment...unless you consider the 163 debatably as an experiment. 

[Zacherof]

Thanks Zach.

Facts are that it existed and it was used in battle in WWII.  It was not an experiment...unless you consider the 163 debatably as an experiment. 

my only referance to this weapon this weapon is in This book
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1935149466

[Ack-Ack]

Thanks Zach.

Facts are that it existed and it was used in battle in WWII.  It was not an experiment...unless you consider the 163 debatably as an experiment. 

It was only used once during a test that brought down an Allied bomber (some reports say a B-17, others a Halifax).

ack-ack

[icepac]

Sounds like it saw more use than the P63.

[Zacherof]

It was only used once during a test that brought down an Allied bomber (some reports say a B-17, others a Halifax).

ack-ack

thanks for helping to prove a point ack