Author Topic: what you want (Read 1801 times)

NOD2000 · « **Reply #30 on:** December 02, 2002, 12:54:09 PM »

a plane

vorticon · « **Reply #31 on:** December 02, 2002, 01:08:54 PM »

p61...bristol beufort...

hogenbor · « **Reply #32 on:** December 03, 2002, 08:35:34 AM »

What I want? More early-mid war Russians seems entirely reasonable & Ki-84, Me-410, P-39, Sm-79, Brewster, I-16, Ki-43.

But what I really want and what I never see mentioned here is the Boulton Paul Defiant.

Yes I know, the tactical concept was wrong and that it was quite underpowered. I also know that as soon the Germans found out that it wasn't a Hurricane that they were shot down like turkeys. I even know that the turret was a death trap if the gunner had to bail out.

Nevertheless as soon as I saw the one surviving example I fell in love with it. It's a nightfighter variant, all black and it resides in the RAF museum in Hendon, UK. It appeals to the child in me, a fighter with 4 menacing guns in the back that can shoot in any direction simply MUST work!

Of course it would be utterly useless in the MA, and even in BoB scenario's its use is questionable at least. But it's just so cool! Years ago a friend bought AW for DOS, don't know which version it was exactly. How many planes were in that? Maybe some day, when all mainstream planes & variants are modelled, bugs are ironed out and graphics are ok, the attention of the programmers will turn to silly planes like the Defiant... just for the fun of it!

Relax guys, I know it will never happen...

Puudeli · « **Reply #33 on:** December 03, 2002, 09:11:47 AM »

Finnish Brewster of course

He111
H8K2 Emily
P39 (russian version)
Bristol Blenheim (Finnish version

)

Eagler · « **Reply #34 on:** December 03, 2002, 09:11:55 AM »

B-29 & a "Little Boy" load out

maybe then I'll be able to sink a ship

Sakai · « **Reply #35 on:** December 04, 2002, 10:39:55 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
Dr Zhivago,

I didn't say it saw no combat. The reality is that the Gladiator was a very minor player in WWII.

As opposed to the Ta-152 and Me-163, which we have or are building? Oh yeah, big contribution there.

The Glad served in the Med for some time (2 years?) and equipped one BOB sqaudron defending, I think Portsmouth or Plymouth. They were also used in the fall of France.

It's a great early war fighter that serves as a wonderful surrogate for hundreds of various early war planes that carried the early load.

Biplanes were belligerents through at least 1944.

Sakai

Jester · « **Reply #36 on:** December 04, 2002, 01:17:56 PM »

A battery of these would be nice.

Rasker · « **Reply #37 on:** December 04, 2002, 01:24:17 PM »

how about the capability to put a 4,000 pounder into the Mossie internal bombay? (this was actually done toward the end of the real war.

Or the Mossie boat buster variant with the 57mm cannon (I forget the number, but was nicknamed "Tsetse").

I'd love the B-25 with the 75mm tank gun. How about parafrag bombs to drop at low alts without blowing oneself up?

It would be interesting to use personal weapons such as pistols or rifles while on foot (even satchel charges on panzers and enemy installations). How about mixing player controlled troops in with drone troops exiting a goon, M3 or LVT (or a submarine

). Heck, man-portable heavy and light machine guns and mortars! hehe, why not buy a license to use the "Steel Panthers: World at War" system, which is downloadable for nothing. I shouldnt really drink this much caffeine!

Seriously, the Ki84 seems to me to be one of the most militarily and technologically significant aircraft missing from the planeset. After the war, it tested out as being faster than the P-51H and P-47M at 20,000 feet. Only the lousy fuel available to it prevented this kind of uber-performance during the war. I recall seeing that it was first in combat in China in 1943. The Nik also gives a competitive ride, but these two planes were as different as a FW-190A series and the 109F. I think the Ki84 is definitely worth adding

leitwolf · « **Reply #38 on:** December 04, 2002, 02:49:43 PM »

B-36, 75mm gun on a plane... atomic bomb...mwoahr...
"I wonder where your preoccupation with 'size' does come from"

Ridge · « **Reply #39 on:** December 04, 2002, 05:01:04 PM »

I'd like to see:

A6M5
Ki43
B-25B (for Doolitle missions)
B-25J (hard nose variant with 75mm cannon and 8 .50cals all facing forward)

Thanks!

S!

RR5

corey · « **Reply #40 on:** December 04, 2002, 06:01:45 PM »

the montana class battle ship. it was never built but was desined for ww2

corey · « **Reply #41 on:** December 04, 2002, 06:05:26 PM »

look at the planes on the stern

cajun · « **Reply #42 on:** December 04, 2002, 09:21:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sachs
Chanter you should be shot. It is requests like that, that HT and pyro see. They will add these planes in 1.12 coming to you in the summer of 2003. People cried for Stuka, we got Stuka, people cried for the p-40. We got that too. Please all I want to see is a ME-410. Can't be a modeling thing as there are several in museums worldwide. Stop the early war blitz of aircraft. These things just add dust and fill out the over used CT. Updates are becoming so infrequent it is mind boggling. Quit trying to add so much toejam into one release and give us small/medium releases instead.

You know there is more to Aces High than the Main Arena?
Scenarios, TODs, Combat Theatre (which more and more people are starting to play in) and the Historic setups in the H2H which somepeople host (like myself).
Without the CT or special events, I wouldnt fly AH, at least not Online just in H2H. And Neither would 50% of their other customers.

I don't get why everyone allways wants to fly the latest and greatest biggest cannons, engines etc.?
I find it much more satisfying shootin down N1ks & spits in hurricane 1 or Val than in a latewar plane!
Anyway, If you havent flown in SEA or CT or any other historic setup with early war planes, you really should try it nomatter how few people may be in the rooms, Its 10x more fun for me and you can have some pretty interesting fights when everyones not in N1ks,spits,temps,la7s fighting other N1ks,spits,temps & la7s!

As for what I'd like to see:
Gloster Gladiator,
Cr.42,
B25,
He-111,
I-153 & I-16,
Hs-123.

Pongo · « **Reply #43 on:** December 04, 2002, 09:31:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dr Zhivago
Yeah right , you should check this one...
Gloster Gladiator II in Finnish service

Edit: heres caption from that site...
Aimo E. Juhola provides a personal account of flying the Gloster Gladiator during the Winter War. Juhola was a pilot in LLv 12 and appointed Gladiator GL-277. He writes:

The Gladiator was nice and easy to fly, slower than our opponents, the Russian I-16 and I-153 The climbing performance was inferior at low levels up to 5,000 meters, at higher altitudes the GL was equal. In straight up climb the Russians were superior because they had adjustable propeller-pitch, which the GL’s didn’t have.

Doesnt that poor guy know that climb perfomance is irrelivent in fighter design? You simply tell your pilots to always engage from above..

B29 would be my answer to the post. Followed by a real spit ix and the IL10

bj229r · « **Reply #44 on:** December 04, 2002, 09:46:44 PM »

P47M--went 470 level flight..introduced early '45 in the 56th---56th bio says it was fastest prop job in ww2. Course..it wouldnt be 470 in AH...guess that would translate to mebbe slightly-faster-than-La7 speed of low 300's?