Author Topic: aircraft optoins missing (Read 522 times)

bioconscripter · « **Reply #15 on:** November 15, 2002, 10:08:46 PM »

Was the 262 with the 50mm bomber busting cannon a production model or a prototype?

Shiva · « **Reply #16 on:** November 16, 2002, 01:40:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by bioconscripter
Was the 262 with the 50mm bomber busting cannon a production model or a prototype?

The Me262A-1/U4 "Pulkzerstorer" was a purely prototype aircraft; two airframes, Wk/nr 111899 & 170083. were modified to mount a single Mauser Mk 214 50mm cannon instead of the four 30mm Mk 108 cannon. The Mk 214 weighed 490 kg (718 kg installed and loaded) and was more than four meters long from breech to muzzle, firing a 1.5 kg projectile containing a 0.27 kg bursting charge at a muzzle velocity of 925 m/s, with a cyclic rate of 150 rounds per minute. One airframe was destroyed during testing; the other was captured and brought back to the US to be tested by "Watson's Whizzers", but crashed in Jersey while being flown to the testing site by Messerschmitt's test pilot Ludwig Hoffman.

Sachs · « **Reply #17 on:** November 16, 2002, 03:53:47 PM »

I can see that the ranks have been filled with the non informed now. This BBS used to be a good palce for info. now we have tons of people running in here saying this and that and oh my Fu**ing god its not like AW. I have grown so disenchanted with this game. The crop that has come in for me has ruined it. Do wish for the old AH days, now its dweeb 1.11 I am waiting for to come out. And btw read some books you might learn something

J_A_B · « **Reply #18 on:** November 16, 2002, 04:02:42 PM »

Sachs, tell us how you REALLY feel.

J_A_B

Booky · « **Reply #19 on:** November 17, 2002, 01:10:07 AM »

And Sachs is a damn rocket scientist

Pei · « **Reply #20 on:** November 17, 2002, 07:27:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fishu
wasn't it A model 262 in AH, while the bomb carrying version was B model.
However the rockets are missing.

Lancaster again is the best version for the allies, 2 .50cal's in the rear instead of the more commonly known Lancaster version with 4x.303 turret.

(Of course Ju88 is the worst version, the HTC style)

And the 109G10 we have is the absolute best one, so your point is?

Pei · « **Reply #21 on:** November 17, 2002, 07:28:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fishu
wasn't it A model 262 in AH, while the bomb carrying version was B model.
However the rockets are missing.

Lancaster again is the best version for the allies, 2 .50cal's in the rear instead of the more commonly known Lancaster version with 4x.303 turret.

(Of course Ju88 is the worst version, the HTC style)

And the 109G10 we have is the absolute best one, so your point is?

Whitehawk152 · « **Reply #22 on:** November 18, 2002, 07:46:35 PM »

24 rockets on the 262 would be fun, but then, so would a Grand Slam or the bouncing bomb.

If the bouncing bomb is included some dams would be needed and lights added (for getting that 60ft just right like they really did it) What is more fun than flying a heavy bomber at 60ft at night, over water, straight towards a dam with guns on it, showing lights and with a required bombing error of nothing, if not less? Suicidal, but fun.