Remake this plane

[ONTOS]

Since the B26 is being remade or remodeled, remake the B17 to the F model. It's been mentioned before.

[macleod01]

I think we can all agree that although we would like to see the F, there are many, many MANY more planes that need redoing before the B17 even gets looked at! Thinking along the lines of the JU-88, SBD etc.

So +1 to the F, but not for a long time!

[XxDaSTaRxx]

The G was far superior to the F.

-1


Instead, add the F as a new aircraft itself. 

[ONTOS]

That's actually what I meant, a new B-17, the F model. The G model is better,but we still have lesser planes being added.The Ki 43 for example ( I really like the Oscar myself ).When I look at War films with B-17's, it's the F model I see.Why do the Ju 88 and SBD need reworked ? How about adding the Helldiver. I made a suggestion one time about adding the Fiat 55 and I got ansewers we need more old planes not new. Now I'm suggesting an older plane and people are saying update the old. By the way the Fiat 55 is still a good choice for a new fighter.                                   

Not as lean, not as mean, But still a Marine

[Motherland]

Why do the Ju 88 and SBD need reworked ?                             

The same reason the B-26 did
Because they're like 14 years old and they look like it


I know this is always a point of contention but I think people really overestimate the G.55. You really have to consider that while it was a really stand out fighter among its contemporaries, it was still a 1943 fighter and it was only standing out compared to the 109G-6, C.205, P38G, Yak-9/T etc., and while those are all fine planes they're not late war super assassins or anything.

[Karnak]

If I recall correctly the Ju88A-4 is now the oldest 3D model left in the game, having been added in v1.04 along with the Lancaster.

[Scca]

Since the B26 is being remade or remodeled, remake the B17 to the F model. It's been mentioned before.

Why the F do you want that?  <<<<  see what I did there?

No really, what does the F offer?

[Karnak]

No really, what does the F offer?

Faster, earlier war, no nose turret, no staggered waist guns, possible a radio compartment gun, reduced arc of fire for the tail turret.

[Fulcrum]

Faster, earlier war, no nose turret, no staggered waist guns, possible a radio compartment gun, reduced arc of fire for the tail turret.

i.e. an even easier target. 

+1 for me! 

[Dead87]

Yea all the 190 gas usage...thats ridiculous...i lift off the air field with full tank of gas..within 3 mins of flight im down to half a tank....now the 190 A-8 range was 644 miles....now the 109G-6..range was only 373 miles....yet i can stay in the air alot longer with a 109 ...then any of the 190s.....this needs fixed

[Karnak]

Yea all the 190 gas usage...thats ridiculous...i lift off the air field with full tank of gas..within 3 mins of flight im down to half a tank....now the 190 A-8 range was 644 miles....now the 109G-6..range was only 373 miles....yet i can stay in the air alot longer with a 109 ...then any of the 190s.....this needs fixed

????

Come again?

As to your half tank of gas, which tank are you looking at?  AH models separate fuel tanks.  The Fw190 in AH certainly cannot burn half of its fuel in three minutes.

[Dead87]

Im telling you...go fly any model of the 190...and watch that fuel burn away..then do the same with a 109...and tell me im still wrong ,both with a full tank of gas...but not drop tanks...ok maybe not 3 mins...defiantly feels short lived tho...i was in a big air battle last night and i know for a fact i was in the air alot longer with a 109 then a 190...which shouldnt be possible

[Zoney]

I'm telling you...go fly any model of the 190...and watch that fuel burn away..then do the same with a 109...and tell me I'm still wrong ,both with a full tank of gas...but not drop tanks...OK maybe not 3 mins...defiantly feels short lived tho...i was in a big air battle last night and i know for a fact i was in the air alot longer with a 109 then a 190...which shouldnt be possible

Buddy, I'm not sure what is up but allow me to reassure you that you are not burning fuel that fast in a 190, please just take my word for it.  You may be misreading that gauge.

[whiteman]

your seeing the individual tank gauge, it bounces back and forth between main and the current tank being used. I don't fly the 190's much so i couldn't tell you what tank it burns first.

[XxDaSTaRxx]

Yea all the 190 gas usage...thats ridiculous...i lift off the air field with full tank of gas..within 3 mins of flight im down to half a tank....now the 190 A-8 range was 644 miles....now the 109G-6..range was only 373 miles....yet i can stay in the air alot longer with a 109 ...then any of the 190s.....this needs fixed

The 2x fuel burn doesn't help any.