Author Topic: KI61! (Read 629 times)

Staga · « **Reply #15 on:** January 08, 2002, 04:16:00 PM »

So is Natedog modelling "Greif" ?

Karnak · « **Reply #16 on:** January 08, 2002, 04:20:00 PM »

Ah, Broes, ya shoulda let them post images of it when it was good and ready. Its never fun to have things leaked.

I guess it got left in the editor on accident.

Mitsu · « **Reply #17 on:** January 08, 2002, 04:24:00 PM »

[edit]I've read Karnak's post.
so I deleted this response.
Pyro or HT may feel bad this happening...[/edit]

Apache,
Thanks, I will have a patch in next version.

-Mitsu

[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: Mitsu ]

Nefarious · « **Reply #18 on:** January 08, 2002, 04:30:00 PM »

Hmmmmm i thought the Ki67 had a hard nose and was strictly a heavy bomber killer, did the Ki67 or later versions have a hard nose, in otherwords no glass?

and plus i thought they had a 75mm cannon for buff-killn'??

maybe im thinking of a different plane.

Mitsu · « **Reply #19 on:** January 08, 2002, 04:47:00 PM »

It's a Ki-109, Nefarious.
Mitsubishi has produced 22 Ki-109s.
It's a modified model of Ki-67.
It has tested against B-29, but result was failure.
Ki-109 couldn't climb to B-29's flying altitude.

BTW, it was very good at (small) ship attack in the test.
But it hasn't been used for its role after all.
(Imperial Japanese Army kept these planes for the final battle.)

-Mitsu

[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: Mitsu ]

moose · « **Reply #20 on:** January 08, 2002, 05:26:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak:
Ah, Broes, ya shoulda let them post images of it when it was good and ready. Its never fun to have things leaked.

I guess it got left in the editor on accident.

nah
i think it was a cool 'easter egg' to find and plus, we all knew about the ki-67 anyway

now when we see the finished product we'll even be more happy

all this is is just a small morsel fed to the fishes

Tac · « **Reply #21 on:** January 08, 2002, 10:33:00 PM »

suks.

Though I'd fly THAT instead of the ju88 just because its got 1 cannon.. weee!

Kieran · « **Reply #22 on:** January 09, 2002, 06:12:00 AM »

There are a lot of Mossie and B-26 pilots that just might disagree with ya there.

Preon1 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 09, 2002, 07:42:00 AM »

So SF, when are we going to see it?

Two weeks?

Vermillion · « **Reply #24 on:** January 09, 2002, 11:53:00 AM »

Before anyone talks about how bad it "sucks", tell me what the current fastest bomber in AH is, and whats its maximum speed ??

K West · « **Reply #25 on:** January 09, 2002, 12:05:00 PM »

The Arado!

and it goes "FAST!"

Westy

Karnak · « **Reply #26 on:** January 09, 2002, 03:51:00 PM »

The Ar234B, and its slower than a Mosquito B.XVI when carrying bombs (and it carries less bombs as well).

The fastest non-perk bomber is the B-17G Flying Fortress, which reaches a speed of 300mph at 30,000ft, according to the AH charts. The Ju-88A-4 would be the 2nd fastest with a speed of 286mph at 15,000ft.

Tac · « **Reply #27 on:** January 09, 2002, 08:14:00 PM »

verm, it says its a bomber/heavy fighter.

Sort of like a mossie. And that speed really aint that hot.

I dont know if the figures say that it turns good or accels good, but as a fighter it may not be very useful.

brady · « **Reply #28 on:** January 09, 2002, 08:33:00 PM »

It is not a fighter, it is a very good medieum bomber, that is also torpedo capable, btw, I hope we get the varient with the twin 12.7mm mg's in the rear.Another interesting point is that the guns it carries are all based on the US 50 cal, MG, in fact if they were put side to side they would look almost identical. These are improved weapons they are lighter and fire faster than thier US counterparts, they also fire HEI rounds as apposed to the standard US Ball ammo.

Kieran · « **Reply #29 on:** January 09, 2002, 09:34:00 PM »

...and if you come in from the top you risk the business end of the 20mm HO cannon. It may carry a light load, but it should be more maneuverable than a B-26 and have some punch.