Suggestions for New Planes & Vehicles With Notes & Comments

[Dessy]

I agree completely with your choices (especially the B-24 in desert colors!).

And another vote for an earlier P-38. An F would be okay, a green J would be better

[Duedel]

>**Lots of people screaming for both the Beaufighter and Me-410. Give the masses what they want.


plühs (please)

[Shiva]

(the Ju88's defensive armament is worthless in MA)

It's not worthless. At it's worst, it's merely mostly worthless.

I'm still amazed at the number of people who think that they can come in from behind and low on a Ju-88 with impunity, forgetting about the gondola gun. Sure, it's a popgun, but my attackers always seem to be Spits, with their nice, vulnerable water-cooled engines sitting out there in front to get their cooling system or oil pinged out. Eventually, though, they're going to learn to make approaches outside of the fields of fire of the guns, and then the defensive armament of the Ju-88 will be worthless. But the supply of dweebs seems to be inexhaustible.

[Turbot]

As much as I would love to use the the B25 H's 75mm can opener on tanks and such - I also wish for more axis bombers firstly.

The P-39 would be a wonderful plane to add, the russians used them by the thousands and was indeed a mainstay of their airforce for some time.

[MRPLUTO]

Really great comments and criticisms, everyone!

******

Best criticism is that my "Priority" list had too many American planes, especially buffs.

For v1.11 I'd like to see the:

Komet, Tiger I, Sherman, Stuka, and B-24, with the remaining effort put into the Mission Theater and perfecting the strategic system in the Main Arena.  And whatever else HT thinks needs to be done.

Although I prefer to see more early war planes, I felt the B-24 was important to have because it was produced in greater numbers than any other multi-engine bomber.


******

The Catalina! How did I forget the Catalina flying boat?  Would be very useful for air/sea rescue and against the submarines HT has said we'll have someday.

******

The CANT Z.1007 3-engine Italian bomber would be a good choice, but I chose the S.M. 79 because it was more numerous, with 1,217 produced compared to 560 Z.1007's.  Also, I think the S.M. 79 looks cooler.

Same reasoning for the "Betty": it was the most numerous Japanese bomber of the war, though not by much.  Also, the "Jill" and "Judy" had very little defensive armament.  The "Betty" may blow up easily, but at least it had a 20mm gun in the tail!

brady...first you say we have too many American planes, then you say you want the early P-38...can't have it both ways

...on the other hand, I do like your suggestion to select the Tupolev Tu-2 instead of the IL-4:D  But as Dowding points out, technical data seems to be hard to get on the Tu-2.  I don't know if the IL-4 would be any easier.  Tu-2 was a 1943 plane, by the way.  

Also, good point about the T-34-76 having no anti-aircraft gun.  I still want the T-34, though.

******

Laz:  Re.2005 is a nice plane, but it's operational life was only from May to August of 1943.  They were all grounded because of a structural defect in the rear fuselage, and the war got in the way of modifications ever being made.

******

Maybe the Ju-52 should get priority.  After all, it served in great numbers on all European fronts, would add a lot to the "flavor" of the sim, and it has guns.

******

MRPLUTO

[Dowding (Work)]

I just think B-24 would be a waste of HTC resources right now. It's not a 'must-have' for either the MA or special events, since it is so easily substituted with the B-17. The only justification is the numbers produced and theatre portfolio. There are far more interesting planes out there that could really plug some gaps - especially in the Jap and Russian planesets.

I also don't buy the idea of modelling US lend-lease planes before home-grown VVS types. They weren't used in 'huge numbers' compared to your I-16s, your LaGGs and your MiGs. Lend lease isn't really a valid argument IMO.

What I'd like to see:

Stuka (D and G)
Tiger
Sherman
T-34 (both 76mm and 85mm)
I-16
Tu-2
Pe-2

Would be nice. But I'm usually happy with any new plane additions.

[Wilbus]

The 75mm in the B25 H was a low velocity short barreled gun, it wasn't very good against Tanks and other armored veichles but was mostly used against softer targets.

If you really want a flying can opener you will want the German Hs129, it used a high velocity (3300 feet/s or so) 75mm with armor piercing ammonition, semi-automatic and was capeble of penetrating about 130mm armor from 1000 meters. Could fire about 4 rounds in a pass starting from 1000 meters.

[Duedel]

I would suggest the Ki-44, the only japanese plane constructed for Boom and Zoom.

[gatso]

Nice list, but you forgot the H8K2 Emily!  

Ki43/Ki84/H8K2

I-16/P39/Tu2 or Pe2

Tiger1 me163

That'd do me for 1.11.

Gatso

[brady]

The only realy Viable reasion to add the B 24 is if it's your favorate plane realy:) Which I understand although I cant suport it:)

 I think sighting production numbers as a reasion to include certain planes is not good reasioning , certainly in the Case of the Cant vs the SM 79, I seriously doubt Italy will get two bombers and the cant is the better of the two their for it makes more since to ask for it as apposed to the SM 79.

 The betty had type 99 MK I cannons which have a piss pore rof and MV so hitting with them before a 50 call shreaded you would be lucky indead.

 The P 39 is yet another US plane I would hope to see a true soviet plane instead of a lend lease example.

 I dont realy want another US at this time but it would be nice, and since we will undoubtedly get one, It would be helpfull if it were an early P 38.

 The PBY would be imo a big waste of time, easy target prety usless bomb load, and porely defended. Howeaver A Sea Plane would be Awsome to have and Either an Emily or a Coranado are the only two realy good choices.

 Another transport although nice to have would also be a waste of time imo, a better choice would be a Tabby, or a soviet vershion of the C 47, both armed and in the case of the Tabby faster than a C 47.

 Once agin in the case of the RE 2005 numbers built and reliabality issues are not realy revelent factors to determine introduction of a paticular plane/ or exclushion.

  BTW I fully expect to see some kinda Sherman at some point.

[hazed-]

Cr 42 biplane would be a fantastic plane imo

as for italian bombers i have to say i think they should be added if not for the reason that there are several really good italian squads online and i think they add a great deal of colour to AH.

they have been stuck flying the 205 for so long i think its time to give them some new stuff.

As for the 85mm russian guns I think they should not be added at the same time as the German 88mm for this reason:

The germans had an enormous amount of time in WW2 where their armaments were far superior to the guns fielded by us and the russians and therefore i think the MA should try to reflect this.Let the German tiger dominate for a while! otherwise it will never show us just haw nasty it is to face one with 75mm pop guns vs that evil 88mm. just a few months please! I personally want to spend every perk i have trundleing along in my tiger picking off shermans like sardine cans AND I WILL DRIVE SHERMANS TOO

as for the other suggestions i like all of them.The B24 is a VALID inclusion because it did most of the work for the US.It was used far more than the b17.Go check your history books guys.

Id also like to see a wellington or halifax or beaufighter before i see b25,s though as we have a b26 and it isnt exactly overused is it.Most opt for jabo fighters or b17s.

nice list

[Turbot]

Originally posted by Wilbus
The 75mm in the B25 H was a low velocity short barreled gun, it wasn't very good against Tanks and other armored veichles but was mostly used against softer targets.

My only experience with it is from Warbirds.  It was really fun against tanks and buildings.

If you really want a flying can opener you will want the German Hs129, it used a high velocity (3300 feet/s or so) 75mm with armor piercing ammonition, semi-automatic and was capeble of penetrating about 130mm armor from 1000 meters. Could fire about 4 rounds in a pass starting from 1000 meters. [/B]

Sounds fun too.   I would also enjoy the Panzer Blitz rocket system the 190-f8 is supposed to already have

[Turbot]

Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
I also don't buy the idea of modelling US lend-lease planes before home-grown VVS types. They weren't used in 'huge numbers' compared to your I-16s, your LaGGs and your MiGs. Lend lease isn't really a valid argument IMO.

You are right, "only" 4,719 lend-lease P-39's reached the USSR.

[Wilbus]

Yes Turbot, panzer blitz to the F8 IS NEEDED, should have had them along time ago IMO.

As for WB B25 H, yeah it was fun, when I was a member of the 332nd Flying Mongrels back in WB 2.x we once flew a B25 H race during our squad time, most of my time went to shoot at people actually trying to race

1 shot one kill

Finally, as I got near the goal, there were a bunch of guys waiting for me who had finnished a long time before I arived, and to say the least, I didn't look pretty when they were done with  me

As for WB Dammage modell, I won't even comment, however, the 75mm in the B25 in real life wouldn't do much good against a medium tank, even a light tank will survie it I think.

[brady]

The Soviet 85mm gun on the T34/85 was about as effective as the 7.5cm gun on the Panzer IVH we have, the 8.8cm gun on the Tiger was much more effective in terms or armor penatration than the soviet 85mm gun.