Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: tikky on February 22, 2005, 06:58:12 PM

Title: can we have....
Post by: tikky on February 22, 2005, 06:58:12 PM
... da B-29? :D
Title: can we have....
Post by: Elfie on February 22, 2005, 08:12:18 PM
Screw the B-29........ We have enough American planes already. We need more Axis planes before anymore allied planes imo.
Title: can we have....
Post by: 6GunUSMC on February 23, 2005, 02:48:41 AM
The greatest bomber of the era should be in the game.  Please no bonehead add-ons about a perked atom bomb... I think the B-29 has been overlooked too long.  Thumbs up to Pacific Fighters for including it even though at the moment it is only AI.
Title: can we have....
Post by: Fruda on February 23, 2005, 02:58:20 AM
We don't need more Axis planes than Allied planes. The Soviet planeset is full of holes. We need a lot more Soviet planes.

However, there's always the Italian planeset...
Title: can we have....
Post by: Shane on February 23, 2005, 04:18:49 AM
sure, but only if it's availabe 40 sectors  off map or requires 5 hrs to reach the nearest friendly area.

i mean wtf you want a b-29 for? it was a pure deep strategic bomber while AH is truly a tactical game.

gawd.
Title: can we have....
Post by: JB42 on February 23, 2005, 04:20:03 AM
I would hardly call the B-29 WWII "era". More like Post WWII era, even though it was used late in the war. That honor would probably go the B24.
Title: can we have....
Post by: Fongman on February 23, 2005, 05:21:55 AM
I need B25,I-16,P86,Ju52
Title: can we have....
Post by: DaYooper on February 23, 2005, 09:06:17 AM
I'd pay perk points to take B-25's off of cv's.

How about you?

What do you think is a fair # to pay?
Title: can we have....
Post by: Rino on February 23, 2005, 09:23:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by JB42
I would hardly call the B-29 WWII "era". More like Post WWII era, even though it was used late in the war. That honor would probably go the B24.


     Then I guess all your Ta-152s and Dorkas are post war era
too?  sheesh.
Title: can we have....
Post by: OIO on February 23, 2005, 09:23:35 AM
Fiat CR42 please.

I want my biplane :D
Title: can we have....
Post by: BUG_EAF322 on February 23, 2005, 10:39:12 AM
Quote
Then I guess all your Ta-152s and Dorkas are post war era


Exactly

not to metion the low in numbers build osty (about 40 of them  made)

A lot of people forget it won't perform so super when fully loaded.
Title: can we have....
Post by: 6GunUSMC on February 23, 2005, 12:03:45 PM
Quote
Originally posted by JB42
I would hardly call the B-29 WWII "era". More like Post WWII era, even though it was used late in the war. That honor would probably go the B24.


Hi 42!

Actually The B-29 first flew Sept. 21, 1942 and first flew in combat June 5, 1944, 15 months before the end of the war.

Data Direct from Boeings website:

First flight:  Sept. 21, 1942
Model number:  345
Classification:  Bomber
Span:  141 feet 3 inches
Length:  99 feet
Gross weight:  105,000 pounds (140,000 pounds postwar)
Top speed:  365 mph
Cruising speed:  220 mph
Range:  5,830 miles
Ceiling:  31,850 feet (4,000 ft lower than B-17!)
Power:  Four 2,200-horsepower Wright Double Cyclone engines
Accommodation: 10 crew
Armament: 12 .50-caliber machine guns, 1 20 mm cannon, 20,000-pound bomb load

Nearly 3,900 were built and delivered during the war.
Title: can we have....
Post by: JB42 on February 23, 2005, 12:23:42 PM
What i was trying to get at is a plane that served the last 15 months of a 72 month (and one day) war would hardly make it teh bomber of that time-span. If anything, I would argue that the B-29 started a new era on it's own.

The era of I'm to high for you to shoot me down :p

As for "my Ta-152s and Dorkas", i wouldn't consider them post-war, they weren't widely used like the B-29 after 1945 sheesh

In the end, the fact remains, most people want the B-29 so they can afk for an hour and bomb HQs with impunity. There are far more vital planes that still need to be added. Not that I care much, but hell, we don't even have a French plane. They were in that war weren't they?

how about:

PZL P-24
Fokker D.XXI
Arsenal VG-33
Dewoitine D.520
Gladiators and/or Swordfish
Bf410
Fiat G.55
Reggiane Re.2005
VL Myrsky
IAR 80
Lavochkin LaGG-3
Mig-3
Title: can we have....
Post by: Furball on February 23, 2005, 12:28:01 PM
don't make me get the pic out!
Title: can we have....
Post by: BUG_EAF322 on February 23, 2005, 01:13:58 PM
The arado was more of the new era bomber as the B-29 was.

Its a wo2 bomber nothin else.

offcourse the ta 152 and dorkys wheren't widely used after the war :rolleyes:

It was the equipment of the losers .

:D
Title: can we have....
Post by: Panzzer on February 23, 2005, 01:17:49 PM
Don't forget that we need the Brewster (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52235&). :) With some Russian planes...
Title: can we have....
Post by: 6GunUSMC on February 23, 2005, 01:18:36 PM
Quote
Originally posted by JB42
What i was trying to get at is a plane that served the last 15 months of a 72 month (and one day) war would hardly make it teh bomber of that time-span. If anything, I would argue that the B-29 started a new era on it's own.

The era of I'm to high for you to shoot me down :p

As for "my Ta-152s and Dorkas", i wouldn't consider them post-war, they weren't widely used like the B-29 after 1945 sheesh

In the end, the fact remains, most people want the B-29 so they can afk for an hour and bomb HQs with impunity. There are far more vital planes that still need to be added. Not that I care much, but hell, we don't even have a French plane. They were in that war weren't they?

how about:

PZL P-24
Fokker D.XXI
Arsenal VG-33
Dewoitine D.520
Gladiators and/or Swordfish
Bf410
Fiat G.55
Reggiane Re.2005
VL Myrsky
IAR 80
Lavochkin LaGG-3
Mig-3


I agree that other planes need to be added as well and yes, it was a 6 year conflict and 15 months out of a 72 month conflict may seem minuscule but it is over 20% of that time and those 15 months are a full 33% of the official US involvement in the war.

I think that a bomber of this much historical importance should not be overlooked.  It's service ceiling is 4,000 feet LOWER than the B-17.

I would love to see the Condor and the B-25H added as well, but in this case I believe the historical importance of the B-29 warrants its addition to the planeset.  Remember this plane was so important that the odious Joe Stalin himself ordered that the 3 B-29s that crash landed in siberia after receiving battle damage over japan be copied exactly down to the last detail.  Our "Ally" (using that term VERY loosely) copied this bomber and it became the TU-4 "Bull"

I don't want to get into any arguments based on other post-war planes that are here. (Example 3 gun La-7)  I think this plane deserves better that a petty argument like that, and it has a great enough record to easily stand up for itself.  This plane had good numbers (nearly 3,900), saw PLENTY of combat and was a technological marvel of its day which included computerized gun turrets!  

Seriously, historically - This airplane BELONGS here, it earned that spot.  I am not asking for a 1946 bomber like the B-36! LOL (:::Thinking:::  45K ceiling...  86,000 lb payload...  16 20mm canon defense...   HEy HiTech!!!! Can I pleeeee.......  nah)
Title: can we have....
Post by: Howitzer on February 23, 2005, 01:51:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Panzzer
Don't forget that we need the Brewster (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52235&). :) With some Russian planes...


That dog just won't hunt  =)
Title: can we have....
Post by: Elfie on February 23, 2005, 03:35:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Howitzer
That dog just won't hunt  =)


Actually Howi....the Finnish pilots flying Brewster Buffalo's racked up some pretty impressive kill totals. Otoh the Finns are the only ones who seemed to have any real success with it. Kinda like the P-39 Airacobra and the Soviets heh.
Title: can we have....
Post by: Howitzer on February 23, 2005, 03:56:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Elfie
Actually Howi....the Finnish pilots flying Brewster Buffalo's racked up some pretty impressive kill totals. Otoh the Finns are the only ones who seemed to have any real success with it. Kinda like the P-39 Airacobra and the Soviets heh.


I know they did, but they didn't have la7s, d9s, typhies, and mustangs trying to BnZ them constantly...  I have nothing against the plane, just don't think it has a place in the MA.  Heard different stuff about it, just not sure why we should add another plane with an ENY value of 60.  How many spit Is you see on a given day?  :p

I'm just biased I guess....  But this horse has already been beaten to death anyway, so it really doesn't make a difference what I think.  Just stirring the pot  :aok
Title: can we have....
Post by: StarOfAfrica2 on February 23, 2005, 04:19:28 PM
Swordfish!!!!   Swordfish!!!!   Swordfish!!!!   Swordfish!!!!   Swordfish!!!!   :D
Title: can we have....
Post by: Karnak on February 23, 2005, 06:18:23 PM
I'd like to see the B-29 just to watch the dweebs try to get a 200 perk point (600 for the formation) bomber with over 80lbs.sq.ft of wingloading off our short runways that a Lanc can barely get off of.

That'd be amusing.  That and the cacophony of BBS whines about how the trees, or hill, or town, ate their 600 perk points and HTC has to give them a refund. :D

Yeah, that'd be fun.
Title: can we have....
Post by: Grits on February 23, 2005, 06:47:55 PM
Skua!! 1ts teh Ub3r!!
Title: can we have....
Post by: 2stony on February 24, 2005, 03:28:37 PM
How about these buffs.

He-111
Betty
B-25
Wellington


and these planes.....

P-39
Laggs
Me-210
Me-410
Beaufighter


:aok