Author Topic: Varients of airframes that are already in AH that we need. (Read 716 times)

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #15 on:** October 26, 2002, 04:37:58 PM »

Need another early Russian plane

hazed- · « **Reply #16 on:** October 26, 2002, 04:43:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hristo
Fw 190A-3
Bf 109T

not sure but i think the carrier version of 109 (T) didnt actually see action.That is unless I missed something

I must say though it would mean id finally have an aircraft i actually would WANT to fly off a CV.As it is I only really like the f6f.
The zero is not my cup of tea and neither are the f4us or the lame seafire.I would like to see a few unusual types like sea planes

Mitsu · « **Reply #17 on:** October 26, 2002, 06:10:05 PM »

lol.

you're correct too, karnak.
i forgot Ki-61-II.

moot · « **Reply #18 on:** October 26, 2002, 06:18:06 PM »

An end of war, low altitude 190 would be great news, maybe in 1.21..

thrila · « **Reply #19 on:** October 26, 2002, 09:59:40 PM »

Quote

Who cares? New planes would be up for the 1st week - after that back to the usual La7/Niki/Spit routine...

Hey you missed out the p51.

AtmkRstr · « **Reply #20 on:** October 27, 2002, 12:24:06 AM »

Mustang I
Mustang II
Mustang III

Canadian skins, of course

devious · « **Reply #21 on:** October 27, 2002, 01:27:37 AM »

As for planes with existing lookalikes:

FW-190 A6

FW-190 D11

BF 109 K4

Karnak · « **Reply #22 on:** October 27, 2002, 01:56:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by devious
As for planes with existing lookalikes:

FW-190 A6

FW-190 D11

BF 109 K4

I don't know about the Fw190A-6, but the Fw190D-11 was practically nonexistant. It would bring no real granularity to the AH plane set. It fills no gaps.

Hristo · « **Reply #23 on:** October 27, 2002, 01:41:03 AM »

AFAIK, Bf 109T were operational and flew sorties from land bases in Norway.

Fw 190A-6 fills quite a gap. A gap of 2 extra mausers. Several hundred were produced.

Wotan · « **Reply #24 on:** October 27, 2002, 02:31:42 AM »

The a6 would be great

The 109ts in norway had their foldable wings fixed and it was slower then a 109e. Theres no need for it, nor will it ever get used.

There were a few d11s but we dont need it in ah..

We could use an 109e7(b). db601n with a center bomb rack for 4 x 50kgs or a 250 kg bomb. It also has a dt option.

Its faster then the 109e4 we have.

Karnak · « **Reply #25 on:** October 27, 2002, 02:58:12 AM »

Thanks for the info on the Fw190A-6.

I think you guys are getting too granular though.

I was thinking of aircraft needed to fill gaps in the timeline.

For example, we have no Bf109 to represent the time between our early Bf109G-6 and the high performing Bf109G-10. That is why the Bf109G-14 would make a great addition.

In the same vein, the Spitfire LF.Mk IX would give us the mainstay fighter of the RAF for 1943 and 1944.

These aircraft both fill gaps in the timeline. Gaps in which the Bf109G-6 and Spitfire F.Mk IX that we have were not the mainstay fighters, but are forced to be in AH setups.

Unless I am gravely mistaken, the Fw190A-6 never replaced the Fw190A-5, but rather served along side it. Thus that time gap is adequately represented by the Fw190A-5. We do not need the Fw190A-6 any more than we need the Spitfire Mk Vc, even though it could be said to close a two Hispano gap.

The same is true of the Bf109E-7. While neat and nice, it doesn't really fill a time gap because it served along side the Bf109E-4. For the same reason the Spitfire Mk IIa isn't needed.

A needed Fw190 is an early version like an Fw190A-1 or Fw190A-2 and a fighter (not bomber killer or Jabo) that is between the Fw190A-5 and Fw190D-9.

Wotan · « **Reply #26 on:** October 27, 2002, 05:36:30 AM »

no karnak we did a libya map in the ct. The 109e7 would have been great to fill the gap between the BoB e4 and the 109f4.

There was a huge gap between what we had available. The same would be true on the east front. There were 109e4ss that were converted to e7s and e4 with db601n eng. But no drop tank and with only the ability to carry 1 250kg bomb. With light vehicles like the m16 m8 m3 2 x 50kgs could kill them.

I am not saying give us this at all costs but when bringing in new variants it would be easy enough to tweak the fm with minimal model changes. The a6 would be the same. An gun adjustment and an fm tweak and we are there.

The a1/a2/a3/a4 would all mean a change in the physical model an adjustment in the CofG. For ease a 190a6 and a 190a9 would be simple in terms of model adjustments.

Same with the e7.

Thats provided ht has good fm data.

The g6 we have has the model of a later war g6 but the fm of the early model.

Ht could use the g2 model give it the current g6 fm and with a new fm for the current g6 model could be made to fit a later war version.

So why were speculating, why not?

Wilbus · « **Reply #27 on:** October 27, 2002, 05:47:07 AM »

A fighter between A5 and D9 would probarly be an A6.

Two more I'd like to see is the A9 and F9, maybe not needed so much but nice planes

What we need most of all though is Many MANY more loadouts for the 190 F8 and Il2. I think HTC might have forgotten they even added those two planes.

devious · « **Reply #28 on:** October 27, 2002, 06:54:04 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hristo
AFAIK, Bf 109T were operational and flew sorties from land bases in Norway.

Fw 190A-6 fills quite a gap. A gap of 2 extra mausers. Several hundred were produced.

Sshhh ! The Allied Conspiracy might discover our secret plan

Gorf · « **Reply #29 on:** October 27, 2002, 11:07:13 AM »

One plane you could add with some slight modifications to the Lancaster is the Wellington.

Also

the Mig 3 would be a fun ride also.

Gorf