Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: ghi on February 01, 2007, 01:56:35 PM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e639Ec9lsQ
-
Nice One Ghi.... :aok
Man we gotta get one of these.
Imagine.... NOE raides behind NME lines... Mass Troop drops.... Landing one on the CV :)
-
great find!
-
YIKES!
We definitely DON'T need those.
Of the few the Germans produced most caught fire and burned due to engine overheating and synch problems.
The idea was scrapped.
ROX
-
Originally posted by Casinoman
YIKES!
We definitely DON'T need those.
Of the few the Germans produced most caught fire and burned due to engine overheating and synch problems.
The idea was scrapped.
ROX
are you getting confused with another aircraft? maybe the He-177 Grief?
IIRC something like 200 323's were built and saw a lot of use, a lot were shot down over the Med supplying Tunisia (i think the RAF shot down something like 20 in the same mission) and not replaced - you can't operate an aircraft like that without air superiority.
-
We could include that in a superior re-supply role!
If the C-47 shaves 15 mins off the repair time of a field, perhaps this monster could shave 30 minutes off or something like that.
This is probably a lot of effort for such a role, but it would be cool.
-
would not be bad to blow some bomber perks on for an aerial assault behind the lines.
-
neat.
From the video you would think they were putting tanks, halftracks and trucks all into that one airplane. USA shuld get rid of the C-4 and C-141, just get some of those bad boys.
-
The video is pure hype... I'll post more info when I get home.
-
I'd be happy to burn bomber perks to take that much in supplies or vehicles to anywhere on the map. I think the tanks we have would be too heavy - the one they unload on the video looks to be in the Pz II or III range. Maybe we could take up M8s, M16s and M3s (an Ostwind is a Pz IV chassis, so I don't think that would fly).
I'd just like the multiple field supplies, vehicle supplies, or the massive load of troops it could unload.
Question: did they ever do parachute drops from the 323?
EagleDNY
-
Fun plane, but id rather have the JU52
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Fun plane, but id rather have the JU52
:aok
All we need right here.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/1011_1156347278_junkers_ju52_3m.jpg)
-
Aye, the JU 52 would be great
-
ghi, it looks like something outta thunderbirds lol,
would be veryyyyyy coave tho:D
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
I think the tanks we have would be too heavy - the one they unload on the video looks to be in the Pz II or III range.
EagleDNY
Pzkw 38(t) I believe.
BTW, the Pzkw IIIs were almost as heavy as the IVs, and about twice as heavy as the IIs. IIRC the original concept was that the III would be the main battle tank and the IV the infantry support vehicle.
But I digress. A II could probably be carried if a 38 could, but I doubt something as large as a III would work.
-
Originally posted by Ball
are you getting confused with another aircraft? maybe the He-177 Grief?
Yes he must be mixing them up, but he's even wrong about the He177. The He177 was a successful bomber. Only the early models had problems with the engines catching fire, and more than 1000 He177 were made.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Yes he must be mixing them up, but he's even wrong about the He177. The He177 was a successful bomber. Only the early models had problems with the engines catching fire, and more than 1000 He177 were made.
I'm guessing he meant that big six engined bomber...ehh, I can't remember the name.
-
Originally posted by OOZ662
I'm guessing he meant that big six engined bomber...ehh, I can't remember the name.
The Ju 390, the "New York bomber"? It didn't have any engine problems. It had BMW 801D engines, not dual/synchronized engines like the He 177.
To be frank, I don't know what he is talking about ... and I bet he doesn't either.
-
Early in 1944 a Ju390 flew from its base in Mont-de-Marsan, France, to within 12 miles of New York City.
-
Originally posted by VooWho
Early in 1944 a Ju390 flew from its base in Mont-de-Marsan, France, to within 12 miles of New York City.
Thatīs an old claim which is widely disputed.
-
I actually meant this, the FW-200.
(http://www.geekstudmuffin.com/images/513339919fw200-1.JPG)
(http://www.geekstudmuffin.com/images/549517259fw200-2.JPG)
Which I just realized was a FOUR engined bomber. :huh :confused: :D
-
Originally posted by Viking
To be frank, I don't know what he is talking about ... and I bet he doesn't either.
:rofl zing!
-
Originally posted by OOZ662
I actually meant this, the FW-200.
Only problem the Condor had IIRC was structural weakness, i seem to remember reading that it was quite easy to break its back on landing.
Apart from that it was a very good aircraft.
-
'To be frank, I don't know what he is talking about ... and I bet he doesn't either.'
You all might be referring to the Dornier DO-X? 12 engine Commercial Float Plane that did about 100 Atlantic crossings. But these were built before the war.
There is another gigantic float plane that was built closer to or during the war - but I can't remember the variant name - It was a 6 engine job - perhaps another Dornier.
-
Originally posted by Ball
Only problem the Condor had IIRC was structural weakness, i seem to remember reading that it was quite easy to break its back on landing.
Apart from that it was a very good aircraft.
wasn't the condor what was supposed to go bomb the panama canal?
-
Messerschmitt Me 323 "Gigant" Heavy transport
First flight Fall 1941 Entered service 1943
Manufacturer Messerschmitt A.G.
Dimensions: Length 28.2 m 92 ft 4 in Wingspan 55.2 m 181 ft 0 in
Height 10.15 m 33 ft3.5 in
Weights Empty 27,330 kg 60,260 lb Loaded 29,500 kg 65,000 lb Maximum takeoff 43,000 kg 94,815 lb
Performance Maximum speed 270 km/h 170 mph Combat range 800 km 500 mile Service ceiling 4,000 m 13,100 ft Rate of climb 216 m/min 710 ft/min
Armament Guns 18 - 7.92 mm MG81 machine-guns (in one loadout example)
1. it was developed from a glider, the Me-321 transport glider
2. it was among the largest of aircraft to fly in WWII
3. it loaded through 11-foot high doors in the front of the fuselage
4. it was powered wholly by French engines
5. it could use Jet Assisted Take Off (JATO).
The Me-323 transport had a crew of five consisting of two pilots, two flight engineers and a radio operator. Two additional gunners could be carried as well
"the Me 323 was used in 1943 to ferry supplies and reserve troops from Italy and Sicily to the German Afrika Korps in Tunis and the area of North Africa. However, from Ultra intelligence, the transport formations' flight schedules were known to the Allies who used this information to send fighter squadron to ambush the aerial convoys and shoot down the transports.
For example, on 22 April 1943 near Cape Bon, several squadrons of Spitfires and P-40 Kittyhawks attacked a unit of 14 petrol-carrying Me 323s and their fighter escorts. All 14 were shot down with the loss of about 120 crew and 700 drums of fuel.
The Me 323 was also a short-range aircraft, with a typical range (loaded) of 1,000 - 1,200 km. Despite this, the limited numbers of Me 323's in service were an invaluable asset to the Germans, and saw intensive use. The Me 323 was something of a 'sitting duck', being so slow and large an aircraft. In the final weeks of the North African campaign in April/May 1943, 43 Gigants were lost, along with much greater numbers of Ju 52's. In terms of aircraft design, the Me 323 was actually very resilient, and could absorb a huge amount of enemy fire - the Afrika Korps' nickname of Leukoplastbomber (Elastoplast Bomber) was somewhat unfair. However, no transport aircraft can ever be expected to survive without air superiority or at least, comprehensive local air cover, and it is believed that no Me 323's survived in service beyond the summer of 1944."
Just under 200 Me 323's were built before production ceased in April 1944
Could carry and drop 100 troops or 15 tons of equipment.
We could include that in a superior re-supply role!
If the C-47 shaves 15 mins off the repair time of a field, perhaps this monster could shave 30 minutes off or something like that.
--- Xasthur
It's the supply crate, not the C-47 that reduces repair time, so it would come down to how many base supplies a Gigant could carry compared to a Goon.
Who wants a slow, armed goon that can carry a jeep, M3, M8, or drop 100 troops, dozens of vehicle supplies, or several field supplies at once?
We definitely DON'T need those.
Of the few the Germans produced most caught fire and burned due to engine overheating and synch problems.
The idea was scrapped.
ROX
Best I can figure, Ball is right, and you are thinking about the He-177, especially early models before the engine re-design, and the reason production stopped had more to do with the Fighter Emergency Program, which cancelled bomber production and operations and gave priority to defensive fighters in the final stages of the war.
Very large, very slow transport, but at least you can shoot back.