Author Topic: B29 Super Fort  (Read 739 times)

Offline Emptygun26

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
B29 Super Fort
« on: May 18, 2003, 05:34:49 AM »
Should we have it? If so should it be perked?

Offline acepilot2

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 886
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #1 on: May 18, 2003, 08:57:31 AM »
Should we have it? Yes.  As a matter of fact, the AH instruction manual uses it as an example of a plane that would be perked, along with the the tigerII.  This shows some indication that HTC had orginal plans to put one in the game.  Will it probably be perked? if the instuction manual says so, yes.

Offline Revvin

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1724
      • http://www.ch-hangar.com
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2003, 10:27:50 AM »
Yes lets have it but at low perk cost like the 163 is and give bombers something to use that might be a little more durable against the current crop of jet's and late war rides.

Offline empire2

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 252
      • http://www.marineairwingah.homestead.com/HomePage.html
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #3 on: May 18, 2003, 12:25:23 PM »
Since the B-29s Guns are not usualy manual how could you gun like that. Wouldnt the sight be way off and im sure if the sight and drone guns do what they are doing now( Which is every gun shoots a different way) nobody will really want to fly it. And if we do have it i think that they(htc) should model and perk a Nuclear bomb. I also belive that if this is done the bomb explosions should be changed to look more realistic. Not saying that the ones now dont look realistic but for bigger bombs i think the craters and explosions should be bigger. And maybe the a-bomb could be equal to 2000 lbs of explosive because i know its somewhere in that area, and when dropped you have to be a certain height to drop it, or it will not explode or they could model it to kill you.:D
I diddlyING LOVE ACES HIGH

Offline Rafe

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: B29 Super Fort
« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2003, 12:35:07 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Emptygun26
Should we have it? If so should it be perked?
It would be cool if we have that bomber now  :)

Offline Sixpence

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5265
      • http://www.onpoi.net/ah/index.php
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #5 on: May 18, 2003, 05:13:38 PM »
We should have the B29 being perked.........but no nukes.
"My grandaddy always told me, "There are three things that'll put a good man down: Losin' a good woman, eatin' bad possum, or eatin' good possum."" - Holden McGroin

(and I still say he wasn't trying to spell possum!)

Offline muckmaw

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3874
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #6 on: May 18, 2003, 05:56:52 PM »
No Nukes.

B-29 yes, Nukes no.

Perks yes.

Offline Sarge1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 365
      • http://www.geocities.com/soundpge/index.html
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2003, 09:38:57 AM »
the first bomb was equal to 20,000 tons of tnt and the stuka 1800kgs and the lanc's 4000 lb was equal to two tons do we get 10,000 times the damage, i could see a good 20 30 kill blast on a active field with vulching and also you would be shot down by kill shooters balsting friendlies to another air field the blast would if they figured it to the real on or as close as you can get to one in a game. would wreak havoc to many planes. not considering if they had the wind from the balst into it. 300mph winds outgoing at first then returning when mushroom forms would get many aircraft, not counting the hi high the blast would get would take out many High caps lurking around up above..I would like the B29 since it was in service in towards the end of 44 and 45 era (perked) it still had a great conventional payload that was better then the b17 24 25 26 , NUke i think would be too much for the game...

(example) All you need is a b29 w/nuke it would take out GV's VH's BH's FH's and town any cap the field has in a 10sq 15,000 ft high area, and a goon. to capture, while shell shocked people in the tower sent there by blast, (thinking "what the hell was that. no check six guys"), watching the capture... sounds cool though

 Not counting the tons of posts how unfair that is too, lets stick with a B29 conventional payload and perked

« Last Edit: May 20, 2003, 10:12:40 AM by Sarge1 »

Offline Sarge1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 365
      • http://www.geocities.com/soundpge/index.html
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2003, 10:06:18 AM »
Manufacture Boeing  
Model B-29 Superfortress  
Type Long-range very heavy bomber  
Power Plant Four 2,000hp Wright R-3350-23  
Performance
 
Maximum speed at 25,000ft 358mph  
Maximum speed at sea level    
Cruising speed 230mph  
Maximum range 5,600 miles  
Initial rate of climb  
Time to 20,000ft 38min 0sec  
Service ceiling 31,850ft  
Weights
 
Empty 70,140lb  
Loaded 124,000lb  
Dimensions
 
Wing span 141ft 3in  
Length 99ft 0in  
Height 29ft 7in  
Wing area 1,736sq ft  
Armament
 
Two .5in guns each in four remotely-controlled turrets. Two .5in guns or (early production) one 20mm cannon in tail  
Max bomb load 20,000lb  
Crew 11  
Production
 
Total production (Variants) 3,905  


would this be too much for our AH runways to take this off ground
and if mtns are in the way forget taking off at all unless the mtns craze on all the maps goes down some some feilds would be restricted,

Offline muckmaw

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3874
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2003, 10:16:34 AM »
Have it useable only from the Large fields.

Restrict it like they do the ME-163

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #10 on: May 20, 2003, 11:07:31 AM »
imo we should not get the superfortress.  We do not need it and the time making it would be better off spent making 2 medium LW/Russian bombers or 4 new fighters.

And if you want a bigger bomb it would be more feasible to make a perk lanc with 22,000lb Grand Slam bomb.

I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline 2Hawks

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 530
      • http://daniel.clanbaker.com
The B29 would be nice but...
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2003, 04:36:16 PM »
I Think if we got the B29 we shold also get the era P-61 Black Widow too.

However it was previously mentioned here that there aren't enough jap / German Bombers and Transports here. I would like to up an all Jap or German capture force and not have 9 JU88's escorting C-47's you knonw? Besides, Tri-motors are kewl. :)'

2Hawks

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2003, 04:48:42 PM »
The moment we get a P-61 and a B-29, I throw a campaign for the J7W Shinden and the Do-335.

Offline Emptygun26

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #13 on: May 20, 2003, 07:16:11 PM »
I would like to see the B29, not so much that it is cool or that it carrys a huge bomb load. Mostly due to its history. It made a statement durring WWII. In fact, you can say without a doubt it was the bomber that saved more lives than it took. Had we had to assualt Japans mainland with our troops. Who knows what the out come would have been. For both sides.
 I think the B29 should be perked, and only allowed to be used from the rear area feilds, this would keep it from being over used. This would also make it alittle more realistic. Giving the crew plenty of time to grab some alt. No nukes though.

 Sarge some of your facts are slightly off. So here is the fact sheet on the B29 directly from Boeing.

Boeing B-29 Superfortress
Model 345, B-29 to -29C

Type: High-altitude heavy bomber, with crew of 10-14.
Engines: Four 2,200hp Wright R-3350-23 Duplex Cyclone 18-cylinder radials each with two exhaust-driven turbochargers.
Dimensions: Span 114ft  3in (43.05m); length 99ft (30.2m); height 27ft 9in (8.46m).
Performance: Maximum speed 357mph (575km/h) at 30,000ft (9144m); cruising speed 290mph (467km/h); climb to 25,000ft 97620m) in 43 mins; sevice ceiling 36,000ft (10,973M); range with 10,000lb (4540kg) bombs 3,250 miles (5230km).
Weughts: Empty 74,500lb (33,795kg); loaded 135,000lb (61,240kg).
Armament: Four GE twin-0.50 in turrets above and below, sighted from nose or three waist sighting stations; Bell tail turret, with own gunner, with one 20mm cannon and twin 0.50in; internal bomb load up to 20,000lb (9072kg). With modification, carrier two 22,000lb British bombs externally under inner wings.

So we can carry two of those 22,000 lb bombs. I say lets have it.

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
B29 Super Fort
« Reply #14 on: May 20, 2003, 08:40:36 PM »
Let's not drag history into this.

 There are loads of documents uncovered in recent days which specifically shows Japan was long ready to surrender before any more allied onslaught. The fall of the Tojo regime itself was a significant statement of the change of stance within Japan. Japan was already divided between 'peace', 'limited war' and 'all out contest' before the war even started.
 
 Besides, the devasting might of military action which regularly takes human lives, is sanctioned only through the fact that the display of force is limited specifically in order to protect civilians. When someone becomes a soldier, that is like taking a vow either  kill or be killed in order to save civilian lives. That's what justifies modern military compared to the past ages when the people who had military power controlled all human lives.

 ...

 The perks seem a good idea. I never was all too welcoming towards the B-29.. but if it was indeed perked, and also, maybe if the box formation option was unavailable, then maybe the B-29 might be an interesting addition to AH. I don't think any mega perks are necessary.. maybe 10~20 perks?