Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Kurt on January 27, 2006, 11:51:14 PM
-
Why no DO-17?
Sure, we wouldn't see it much in MA, because frankly the krauts were too stupid to bother with a 4 engine bomber that coulda made a difference...
But the DO-17 flew lots of sorties and was especially effective in the early war. It would be good for S.E.A. battle of britain scenarios and would add a something interesting to an otherwise tired fleet of Axis bombers in AH.
An HE111 would be a nice toy too.
-
yeah would be nice to have more German Bombers
DO-17 info (http://www.century-of-flight.freeola.com/Aviation%20history/new_ww2_aircraft/do17.htm)
(http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu/bibl/mil/ww2/kepek/planes/pics/do17_12.jpg)
-
Ju-188, He-111, Do-17, Do-217, S.M. 79, G4m...
Only problem is that they are all twin engine bombers with similar bombloads, so the people who don't want them will argue that they aren't needed since they can't do anything the planes we already have can't do. Same thing they say for the B-25, blenheim, A-26, etc. :(
Of course they don't mind adding more Spitfires and P-47s to the mix when we are woefully lacking in early war Japanese and Russian aircraft...
-
What did the Russians have in the area of heavy bombers? Would nice to see a Russian bomber.
-
I'd love to have a Do-17 in AH. Out of all the flight sims I've played, ive never gotten to fly one. Im dieing to get my hands on a Do-17.
I'd also like to see the Do-217E with the option of a Hs293 glider bomb (which was designed to attack armoured targets, like ships, planes on ground, maybe vehicals)
(http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/images/do217td_1.jpg)
(http://www.walter-rockets.i12.com/missiles/pix/dornier.jpg)
(http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/4308-bilder/hs293.jpg)
Oh yea I could see this as a new carrier killer. Should be able to be destroyed by ack, but not to easy.
-
Do17 would be nice for scenario use, but it would be worse than useless for anything else.
it would probably be comparable to the B5N
-
Maybe, But the Do217 is way faster compared to the Do17
Do217:
Max Speed:320mph
Range:1740 miles
Service Ceiling:29,530ft
Armament: One 15mm (0.59in) cannon; two 13mm (0.51in) and three 7.92mm (0.31in) machine guns; bomb load of 4000kg (8818Ib); (NOTE!) Two Hs293 or Fritz-X anti-ship missiles.
Do17:
Max Speed:225mph
Range:932 miles
Service Ceiling:26,905ft
Armament:One or two 7.62mm (0.31in) trainable machine guns in the windscreen, nose, dorsal and ventral positions;Internal bomb load of 1000kg (2205Ib)
I'd like to see both, but rather see the Do217.
-
Oh yea, and the Do217 has an awsome bomb load. In my book it says the B24 has a bomb load of 3992kg (8800Ib)
The Do217 has a bomb load of 4000kg (8818Ib) which means the Do217 carriers a little more than a B24, so this means that the LW guys now have a fast bomber that carriers just a little more than the B24.
But then again that book maybe wronge, because my book says the B-17 can hold up to 17,600 Ibs of bombs. But is that right?
-
Originally posted by Klum25th
Oh yea, and the Do217 has an awsome bomb load. In my book it says the B24 has a bomb load of 3992kg (8800Ib)
The Do217 has a bomb load of 4000kg (8818Ib) which means the Do217 carriers a little more than a B24, so this means that the LW guys now have a fast bomber that carriers just a little more than the B24.
But then again that book maybe wronge, because my book says the B-17 can hold up to 17,600 Ibs of bombs. But is that right?
That would be maximum bombload, with a minimum of fuel IIRC
-
dangit, owell, still good to me. But is that B-17 load out wronge?
-
Just did some research, you're right about 17.600lbs
http://www.aviation-history.com/boeing/b17.html
-
No doubt however that if a B-17 were loaded with that kind of bomb load it could not carry full fuel. I'd bet the 6000 pound standard load was based on the need to get all the way to Berlin.
Since in AH, we can't always count on everyone understanding that you wouldn't be able to fuel up the way you want, perhaps it was easier for HT to just stick with the common loadout.
-
Yes.. While B17s COULD carry 17,600lbs, and that would cut into range, I don't think they wanted them to, due to the altitude they were flying at and the air density (less lift) at 25000 feet. Also I think the idea of saturating the air with bombers meant less bombs per plane, but more planes. This was also seen in Vietnam with F105 Thuds, most of which were only carrying a few bombs on missions, when they could carry 5 times more. It was a matter of "don't put all your eggs in one basket" (that type of thing)
-
Now I understand it with the bomb load. Will anyways the Do217 would be great for the MA playing to me. Then we can get those guided rockets to kill CV groups. The Hs293 is a 500Ib bomb that has a rocket under it, and is controlable. I have a great plan on how it can be guided.
First you go to your F6 view, then you switch to your Hs293 and then put your cross hairs on the CV. Push the fire botton and the missile lauches, and heads towards the CV. If some bomber over head killed the CV before your missile got there, then u can move your cross hairs and then target a Destroyer or Battleship and the missile turns towards that target. Or another way is to keep your cross hairs on the target and the missile follows its. and u can direct it with your crosshairs.
Gosh I would love to have this plane with the option of a Hs293 or a Fritz-X anti-ship missiles. The range on the HS293 is 5 miles I believe so u have to be close for it to hit your target. And if it runs out of fuel it starts dropping fast.
-
I made a 1/48 modell of the Do-217 with Fritz-X, I'll post some pictures when get the chance.
I believe it carried 13mm's instead of the 7.67mm's the Ju-88 and Do-17 had?
-
sweet can wait:aok
-
bastard :lol
-
Unless I'm wrong... The 217 had 4 engines. Each prop had 2 engines powering it. How would this affect an engine if only 1 of the 2 connected to the prop got damaged/died?? Wouldn't it effectively kill the engine, thus taking out 1/2 the propulsion with only 1/4 the damage?
I think that might nerf this plane, damage-wise.
-
Hmm it's not the Do-217 Krusty, I know what aircraft you mean though, it's Heinkel He.....?
I have a modell of that too, I'll post some pics aswell.
They placed 4 engines in 2 pods because (I believe it was Goring?) didn't want a 4 engined bomber.
They solved the "problem" by placing 2 engines in each pod, but it had lots of problems (it kept burst out in flames)
-
thats the Heinkel 177 you are thinking of, the 277 was the 4 engined (conventional) version.
177
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW3/he177-002.jpg)
277
(http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/He277-3s.jpg)
-
ahh, that's right, He177 my bad! :)
-
lol. Yea that be a cool plane to add. I would also like to the see the Focke-Wulf 200 condor. That would also be an awsome ship destroyer.
-
yah, the condor would be sweet if we could code in anti-shipping missiles.
PS
BlueJ, for the link in yours and my sig, enter this in the sig box for a propper link:
[ url=http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Bunny%20Dictator] CLICK HERE FOR WOLD DOMINATION WEBSITE![/url]
PPS
eliminate space between "[" and "url" at the beginning to make it work.
-
What if I dont want to. :D
I noticed it a few days ago but I was to lazy to fix it.
-
Condor was easy pickings. It had a light bomb load (doesn't take much to sink a ship) and was very vulnerable. Once they began encountering resistance they were pulled from duty because of losses, if I recall
-
OTH - If theCondor could vector in U-Boats to carrier group ... :cool:
-
Originally posted by Martyn
OTH - If theCondor could vector in U-Boats to carrier group ... :cool:
Precisely how long to you think any carrier group would have a Condor orbiting it?
Carriers have these things called "fighters" that merchant convoys normally lack...
I'd enjoy seeing to Condor as it is one of the naturual prey items for Mossies. I just don't think I'd see very many people willing to play the part of prey.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I just don't think I'd see very many people willing to play the part of prey.
Precisely!
-
I always like to be prey, it really helps to learn new moves to aviod enemies, or get up on there @**!
-
I've often reported CVs and been far enough away not to be bothered. Especially at long ranges. I've even torpedoed CVs and survived (just) using JU88s - provided the CV is far from the action.
Anyway, I just like the idea of using different aircraft for usefully in the MA.
-
i think we should have an option of taking a light fuel load and more ord or ammo... I don't think anyone ever ups any kind of bomber with full fuel, so why not let us add a few more bombs or ammo if we only take 25%
-
Iceman, that is exactly why I requested (in the past) a second fuelburnrate for bombers. Even at 2x burn 25% on a lanc can still take you to 30k and fly you across the map AND back. I think all 4-engined bombers should have a 4x fuel burn (and some 2 engined ones, but this would screw over the B26, the Ar234 and maybe the ki67, big time)
-
Krusty... I'm in total agreement with ya bud