Author Topic: Hitech: Please give us Razorback Jug with Paddleblade (Read 549 times)

Buzzbait · « **on:** April 11, 2002, 02:33:36 AM »

S!

This is a very simple request:

Just give us a paddleblade option on the P-47D11. You don't need to give us a new model. Don't need to change the weight on the D11 or anything else. Just the extra pull of that big fat prop.

Monk · « **Reply #1 on:** April 11, 2002, 08:01:27 AM »

Vector · « **Reply #2 on:** April 11, 2002, 09:47:14 AM »

Ohhh, AMEN Buzzbait!!

Glad to see I'm not the only one here to dream about paddle blade.
Sure would be nice addition. I'd like to see it as an option to choose from hangar, just like a drop tank, I'd pay few perks for it (although it wouldn't unbalance the arena). Finally there would be something to spend perks. The whole 56th FG was equipped with paddle blade retrofit kit and so were several other groups.
Well, it would require quite amount of additional work from HTC, climb boosting and graphical things.......

Another option could be the P-47D-23, the best performing jug of whole D-series. It'd have better payload than D-11 and baddle blade as a standard and it's still a Razorback.

I'm sure Staga is otw with his 150MB pictures..

brady · « **Reply #3 on:** April 11, 2002, 02:22:06 PM »

How about instead of another Jug, we get a A6M2?, or an earler P 38?

Urchin · « **Reply #4 on:** April 11, 2002, 03:32:30 PM »

I agree - please bring the Me410 to Aces High

. LOL.

Actually, this is an issue that has been brought up again and again and again. I think Pyro said it isn't going to happen, you'd have to ask Ammo or someone like that.

spitfiremkv · « **Reply #5 on:** April 11, 2002, 03:43:59 PM »

that paddleblade prop was very effective. it increased the climb rate of the p47 noticeably.

superpug1 · « **Reply #6 on:** April 11, 2002, 04:42:36 PM »

agree i do. yes. it would help much.

Furious · « **Reply #7 on:** April 11, 2002, 05:42:58 PM »

We don't need another stinking p-47.

HT's time would be much better spent creating the Fw190-A3 or the Fw190-D12.

F.

Ps. I am only 1/2 kidding.

-ammo- · « **Reply #8 on:** April 11, 2002, 06:43:32 PM »

and the other half cant be taken seriously;)

-ammo- · « **Reply #9 on:** April 11, 2002, 06:45:03 PM »

cc on that buzz, we dont need another model, just the increased acceleration and climbrate that was afforded by the paddleblade prop.

minus · « **Reply #10 on:** April 11, 2002, 07:28:09 PM »

,,it increased the climb rate of the p47 noticeably,,

ok and in dive , biger propeler drag ? or like the LA7 , the damn thing with stoped engine not have drag at all

DblTrubl · « **Reply #11 on:** April 12, 2002, 01:13:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by brady
How about instead of another Jug, we get a A6M2?, or an earler P 38?

Ding Ding Ding! We Have A Winner!

IMO we need more Japanese and Italian rides before we add more allied iron. Of course I wouldn't complain too much if HTC gave me a P-38G-10 to play with, but I wouldn't mind waiting till we have the Ki-84, Ki-100, J2M etc.

nuchpatrick · « **Reply #12 on:** April 12, 2002, 01:33:44 PM »

Buzzbait

I too being one who flys the P-47D-11on a daily basis would love to see the big paddle blade prop. It would just make this plane more leathal than what it is now. Plus the extra climb power wouth put that 2000hp to great use!

And whos needs another dang Zero.. you can't hardly shoot anything down with it..and why have and early PJ. The "L" was the best of the line. Improved superchargers and better payloads.

spitfiremkv · « **Reply #13 on:** April 13, 2002, 11:37:43 AM »

Quote

ok and in dive , biger propeler drag ? or like the LA7 , the damn thing with stoped engine not have drag at all

the Jug can outdive everything. I don't think the paddle-blade propeller would affect its performance in diving, even if it creates extra drag which I doubt.

DblTrubl · « **Reply #14 on:** April 13, 2002, 02:45:10 PM »

Nuchpatrick, there are quite a few players who would like to have another Zero, myself included. Just because you have difficulty getting kills in it doesn't mean it's an impossible task. Why have an early P-38?(not to be anal, but we don't have a "PJ" in AH and the L used the same GE B-33 turbos as all H-5 and later variants except the one-off K model) Yes, the J-25 and L were the best of the bunch but that doesn't mean the F through J-20 models were completely useless. If we're going to use that logic then why have the D-11 and D-25 Jugs? The D-30 climbs better and carries more ordnance. Why have any 109 but the G10, or any 190 but the D9? The earlier models of these planes give MA players more choices in what they have to fly and I can't see that as a bad thing. They are also useful in scenarios and in the CT where it's nice to have an actual 1942 variant for a 1942 setup rather than substituting a 1944 variant in its place simply because the 42 model isn't available.

This whole "perk prop" issue has been discussed before and I'm not so sure it would be as simple as some think. Don't get me wrong, I love P-47s and fly them quite often, but if we allow field retrofits for the Jugs then they should be available for every other plane as well. I know a few 38 drivers who would love to have the kit installed that allowed a pair of 2,000lb bombs to be loaded. Luftwaffe fans would be frothing at the mouth to get even a small portion of the retrofits that were used on their rides. The time it would take for HTC to research and implement those changes would not be insignificant and I'd rather see them spend it modeling new aircraft for the IJN/IJA and RA which are sorely under-represented. Our three Jug variants by themselves equal the number of Japanese fighters modeled in AH and exceed by one the total number of Italian planes we have.

As much as I'd like to have a P-38G or a paddle blade razorback Jug, I can wait until they fill out the Japanese and Italian planesets a bit.

HTC: More IJN/IJA and RA planes please!