Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Nemisis on May 18, 2009, 05:38:04 PM
-
I think it would be kinda nice to be able to fire off a rocket that will knock down a buff at a range that will be enough to make it effective but not so far as to make people stop flying bombers. I don't know the ranges or the specs, only that the Germans had that one right the first time; they did not have to change the concept, do a complete overhaul, or have to scrap the project because I was a bad idea. I personly fly bombers a lot, and some fighter, and even though it would increace my casualty rate I still think it would be a good idea. Once when radar was down and most of the people in my area were gearing up for an attack a lank came came and jumped us. Someone spoted him...5k from the base. We scrambled fighters but he still downed our hangers. If we had had the wasserfall our attack would have captured around five or six bases. I know it would have some teething problems but still I think it would be a good idea. :salute
-
I dont believe HiTech will ever put SAMs into AH. Also, I dont think Wassers saw enough action to be included in AH.
-
I'd rather not have German super-weapons in game.
I would like, however, R4M's on my 262. :aok
-
Also, I dont think Wassers saw enough action to be included in AH.
"Not enough action" is an euphemism. It actually was.. none. :)
-
Motherland, I could almost tell you would say that. And you wouldn't be the one in the 262 that keeps shooting me down would it? If so you and I will have a dule in hiroshima Japan on august 6 1945, starting at 6am lasting untill you fry....I mean until 9am, ya thats what I said. pay no attention to the manhatten project roster. that is a forgery. and Lusche, it did see some action, but Pannono is probably right I would sooner bet on the Pe-8 or what ever the heck it was.
-
Motherland, I could almost tell you would say that. And you wouldn't be the one in the 262 that keeps shooting me down would it? If so you and I will have a dule in hiroshima Japan on august 6 1945, starting at 6am lasting untill you fry....I mean until 9am, ya thats what I said. pay no attention to the manhatten project roster. that is a forgery. and Lusche, it did see some action, but Pannono is probably right I would sooner bet on the Pe-8 or what ever the heck it was.
It did see NO action. Only about 40 missile test launches. Development was stopped in Feb 1945.
-
Motherland, I could almost tell you would say that. And you wouldn't be the one in the 262 that keeps shooting me down would it?
Actually, I can't remember the last time I flew the 262. I'd probably fly it more if it had R4M's :D
(http://www.stormbirds.net/images_technical/r4m5.jpg)
(http://www.stormbirds.net/images_technical/r4m4.jpg)
(http://www.stormbirds.net/images_technical/r4m6.jpg)
-
+1 on the R4m on the 262 :aok
-
How much was the performance affected on that 262 with the rockets?
-
Similar rack to the 190F-8's PB rockets, but lower profile... I'd guess (not certain) 10-15mph.
But for a 262? Probably still faster than any other plane in the game, even with the drag from those rockets.
P.S. I would love R4Ms if modeled correctly!
-
I don't have any hard numbers, however I don't think it would be too damaging to the 262's performance. The rockets and mounts would seem to have had a minuscule amount of drag compared to the WGr 21, and to my knowledge (which isn't exactly expansive on the subject I will admit), they seemed to be rather effective, so I would not hesitate to take them every sortie if they were put in game.
The PB1's had larger warheads but the 262 carried 24 R4M's (as opposed to 12), so I guess it would have slightly more of a performance hit than the 190F's PB1 racks.
-
Only problem is we don't fly that model 262.
+1 on the R4m on the 262 :aok
And that photo of the rockets......... Those aren't where the rockets went..... That looks like a field conversion.
-
And that photo of the rockets......... Those aren't where the rockets went..... That looks like a field conversion.
Would you enlighten us where the rockets went? :)
-
I have a photo somewhere of the A-1a/R-1 showing 5 and 5 under the fuselage, not the wings. Gotta find it. But with that said, Lusche, if you say that is a A-1a/R-1..... I will believe you.
Would you enlighten us where the rockets went? :)
ADDITION:
Called my uncle to ask him as it's his photo taken during the war.......... He is slightly nuts nowadays, but tells me his photo is an E2 with an added conversion under the fuselage where the bomb clasps would be, to add "extra" R4M's. The E model had 48 rockets, why would anybody need more? LOL
Ist das möglich?
-
I have a photo somewhere of the A-1a/R-1 showing 5 and 5 under the fuselage, not the wings. Gotta find it. But with that said, Lusche, if you say that is a A-1a/R-1..... I will believe you.
You should find it, I really would like to see that picture. :)
You are basically right in one thing: What we see in the pictures above was basically a field modification - because almost all 262's carrying the R4M were indeed equipped with them not by factory default but in the field. The racks from which the rockets launched were very simple wooden constructions, often build by small & midsize carpentry workshops. They were then send to the units.
And that's what the the "R" in A-1a/R-1 is indicating. "R" is the abbreviation for "Rüstsatz" = "kit". A 262 A-1a would become a A-1s/R1 by simply installing the racks to the wings (and do some wiring). It's not a different production version.
-
I agree Lushe, but if they were not official then I doubt we will see them in this game. And besides if you give them those rockets and they are good enough pilots, then you will have created an uber-pwnr and we will all be doomed, stay tuned for the seven day forcast :).
But I belive that somewhere along the line we hijacked this topic, we had better get it back to the wasserfall. Ok, you guys have told me that they were never used in combat, other than that, I got zilch. Please tell me how you think it would affect game play so I can see if I shoud time travle back and get them in action just long enough to make it into the game.
-
I agree Lushe, but if they were not official then I doubt we will see them in this game.
The R4M? Was fully official... hence the official designation /R1.
-
Oh sorry, I guess I missed that. But I still don't think we shoud give those nuts the R4M's. But still do you think the wasserfall would throw off the game play or make people stop flying or what?
-
Yeah, it's not like we don't already have Ruestsatz kits in game. All of the racks and whatnot we have on German fighters have some kind of designation.
-
So I have 2 questions: 1 is how much explosives did those R4M's pack in lbs's or kg's, none of that tons or a lot, or enough. Question 2 is do you think if we got the wasserfall in the game do you think it shoud be able to hit bombers, anything with bomber in it like fighter/bomber/ bomber/attacker, anything that was used to bomb bomb not like fighter bomb, or what? :noid
-
So I have 2 questions: 1 is how much explosives did those R4M's pack in lbs's or kg's, none of that tons or a lot, or enough.
For the R4Ms, IIRC, the charge's total weight was in the area of 500 grams, roughly 1 pound if I converted it correctly. The whole rocket though apparently only weighed about 4 Kilograms with the warhead attached.
-
For the R4Ms, IIRC, the charge's total weight was in the area of 500 grams, roughly 1 pound if I converted it correctly. The whole rocket though apparently only weighed about 4 Kilograms with the warhead attached.
2.2 lb to the kilo (kg) every good dealer knows that one
-
We already have the best anti buff rockets ever. :aok
http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/4/24/1013733/110rocket.zip
-
You can say that again!!!
We already have the best anti buff rockets ever. :aok
http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/4/24/1013733/110rocket.zip
Lusche...... I'm still looking, sorry bruder.
-
Sounds like a fairly small rocket or am I grossly over estimating the warhead size of most rockets? Would that be enough to destroy AA or a truck or anything above an oskar, I mean what are we talking about in terms of killing power here? And so not entirely sure about this Larry, are you talking about the rockets mounted on the 110? If so I think you been smokin the good stuff. Man I need some of that; just had to put my dog down :cry. Well any way, if you want to keep flying up there only to have me blow the crap out of your target with my wasserfall before you even fire.
-
It's a small rocket, 24 were carried on the 262 and they were all fired off in a shotgun like blast. It's only 4cm wide (that's a centimeter ruler in the picture I posted).
By comparison, the current anti-buff rocket we have in game is 21cm wide. I think US air-to-ground rockets we have are 5 inch rockets (15-ish cm?).
We have a variation of the R4M in game, the PB1 (Panzer Blitz 1) rocket in game is based on the R4M with a shape charge warhead for penetrating armor.
So, yeah they're comparatively small. They packed a punch, though.
-
Nice, so how much armor can they penetrat? Would they be good for blowing up an oscar or a jeep, or could you kill a halftrack, or a wirble, or maby even one of those light tanks in the game? And one more question, you say they shoot out like a shotgun, would that look like something like the rockets from the P47's in the Black Barron mission in CoD 3? Or maby the rockets from the P38's in the 'The Desert Fox' mission in CoD 2 Big Red One? :confused: And motherland if you got those rockets, I wouldn't fly unless I had fighter escort and 999000 onboard gunning for me.
And guys I know you all like talking about these R4M rockets but I started this to talk about the wasserfall. I just want to know what you think, not why we cant have it. If you guys help me out here they we can come right back to the R4M's. :salute
-
La7 had A2A rockets right?
+ 1 for more rockets.
-
It's pointless to talk about the Wasserfall because it was never used in combat so we will never know how effective it would have been.
As far as the shotgun effect goes, I don't play CoD so I can't compare. IIRC the rockets spread to about the wingspan of a bomber at 600 meters and have similar ballistics to the MK 108 30mm cannon. These numbers may have been completely fabricated by my mind however.
The R4M is not an armor piercing rocket. It's only a HE rocket made for taking down bombers. The PB1 is an armor piercing rocket with a shape charge warhead, however. It can destroy any tank in the game if you can manage to hit with it (you can't just get close like a bomb, you have to actually hit the tank). The PB1's are only available on the Fw 190F.
La7 had A2A rockets right?
+ 1 for more rockets.
I think EW Soviet aircraft had air-to-air rockets (the RS32? ), but they were deemed not worth the weight and drag and removed.
-
Very well motherland. So what do you mean when you say you can't just get close, does it do no area damage, not enough damage, is it because it is a shape charge it doesn't do any damage to anything it dosen't hit? And if it can take out any tank in the game then how come I don't see more people shooting at tanks with those things. Ok, so I don't remember where but I heard that the 4,000lb bomb carried by the lank and the almost 4,000lb bomb carried by the stuka can destroy a tiger but even with them if you get even around 50ft away then you will only damage them, if that is true then It would make more sense for all tank hunters to be flying Fw 190F, wouldn't it?
-
So what do you mean when you say you can't just get close, does it do no area damage, not enough, is it because it is a shape charge it doesn't do any damage to anything it hits? And if it can take out any tank in the game then how come I don't see more people shooting at tanks with those things.
Yes, since it's an armor piercing rocket it does no splash damage and just ineffectually hit the ground if you miss. People don't use them more often because asking most ground pounders to actually use something that takes a grain of effort and practice to use is usually too much to ask. The PB1's are very difficult to aim, but if you get good with them you have enough to take down 12 tanks in one run ;)
The R4M on the other hand is an HE rocket which would not be able to penetrate a tank, but would obliterate a bomber, or I guess as jeep if you wanted to...
Ok, so I don't remember where but I heard that the 4,000lb bomb carried by the lank and the almost 4,000lb bomb carried by the stuka can destroy a tiger but even with them if you get even around 50ft away then you will only damage them, if that is true then It would make more sense for all tank hunters to be flying Fw 190F, wouldn't it?
You can miss a Tiger pretty good and still pop it with a cookie.
-
ok I guess I heard wrong. I didn't know those were anti gv rockets, I will have to get some practice with them; I have been mostly using the B25 for gv killing. What do you mean by it it difficult to aim, please tell me about that and any other gremlins
-
ok I guess I heard wrong. I didn't know those were anti gv rockets, I will have to get some practice with them; I have been mostly using the B25 for gv killing. What do you mean by it it difficult to aim, please tell me about that and any other gremlins
How about you try it.
Then you'll see what he means by "difficult to aim". :rolleyes:
-
I cannot try it because I am a talking vegetable bent on world domination :D. But serisouly I would try it if I could, but every time I bring up to AH2 page on my computer it goes into restart. I am currently looking into it but it appears as if my computer meets or excedes the minimum requirments. And besides I would like to know before I try if there is anything special I should know like if they tend to fly off to the side or once the pass a certian range the begin to fall faster (IDK how but you never know). So if anyone can fill me in I would like to start out atleast walking if not running if possible.
-
+1 on the R4m on the 262 :O
-
YES.........
+1 on adding a 2nd model 262
+1 on the R4m on the 262 :O
-
What do you mean? The standard R4M installation was used on the Me 262A-1a. You'd just add the R4M option in the hangar. Lusche already pointed that out earlier in the thread.
If HTC had a separate model for every Ruestsatz equipped aircraft in the game we'd have about 80 German aircraft.
"Hey look... a Bf. 109G-6/R3! that must be an extremely specialized version of the 109!"
"No, it's just a 109 with a drop tank rack"
-
No......
Lusche pointed out the definition of the word Rüstsatz. However, based on HTC standards, it is still a different model. You may wish to read his reply again. IF that were the case, 20mm guns should be available in a Lanc's tail position. Think about it.
And the last 3 sentences.... ARE RIDICULOUS. No offense young man.
What do you mean? The standard R4M installation was used on the Me 262A-1a. You'd just add the R4M option in the hangar. Lusche already pointed that out earlier in the thread.
If HTC had a separate model for every Ruestsatz equipped aircraft in the game we'd have about 80 German aircraft.
"Hey look... a Bf. 109G-6/R3! that must be an extremely specialized version of the 109!"
"No, it's just a 109 with a drop tank rack"
-
How are the last 3 sentences ridiculous?
The Bf. 109G-6/R1 is the designation for a Bf. 109G-6 with the R1 bomb rack and arming mechanism Ruestsatz.
/R3 is for a drop tank rack.
/R2 is for the Wgr 21 tubes.
/R6 is for underwing 20mm gondolas.
We have all of these as options in the hangar in game. Obviously by HTC standards these are NOT different models.
In fact, since we have the WGr 21 tubes in game for several models and they are a much larger modification than the R4M's racks, the assertion that the Me 262A-1a/R1 would have to be a different model is a bit ridiculous.
Whoops sorry, the WGr 21 tubes are Ruestsatz 2, R4 is MK 108 underwing gondolas.
Just added up the in hangar options for the Fw 190 and Bf 109. If every Ruestsatz kit were a different aircraft we would have 16 different models of the Fw 190 and 59 models of the Bf 109, a total of 75 models between the two aircraft.
This is only if you have one kit per aircraft, though, no mixing, which definitely happened. So, accurately, we would have even more.
Note, though, I didn't add up any of the wing armament variations in the 190's (I don't remember if these carried separate designations), but I did add in the 30mm option for the Bf 109G-14, which in real life would have been the Bf 109G-14/U4 (standing for a factory modification).
-
How to Lie with Statistics......... They offer that class at your highschool?
How are the last 3 sentences ridiculous?
The Bf. 109G-6/R1 is the designation for a Bf. 109G-6 with the R1 bomb rack and arming mechanism Ruestsatz.
/R3 is for a drop tank rack.
/R2 is for the Wgr 21 tubes.
/R6 is for underwing 20mm gondolas.
We have all of these as options in the hangar in game. Obviously by HTC standards these are NOT different models.
In fact, since we have the WGr 21 tubes in game for several models and they are a much larger modification than the R4M's racks, the assertion that the Me 262A-1a/R1 would have to be a different model is a bit ridiculous.
Whoops sorry, the WGr 21 tubes are Ruestsatz 2, R4 is MK 108 underwing gondolas.
Just added up the in hangar options for the Fw 190 and Bf 109. If every Ruestsatz kit were a different aircraft we would have 16 different models of the Fw 190 and 59 models of the Bf 109, a total of 75 models between the two aircraft.
This is only if you have one kit per aircraft, though, no mixing, which definitely happened. So, accurately, we would have even more.
Note, though, I didn't add up any of the wing armament variations in the 190's (I don't remember if these carried separate designations), but I did add in the 30mm option for the Bf 109G-14, which in real life would have been the Bf 109G-14/U4 (standing for a factory modification).
-
theres 2 words i dont like to see in the same subject line anti and buff
-
How to Lie with Statistics......... They offer that class at your highschool?
Are you actually going to try to make any argument, or are you just going to sit there and make poorly veiled ad hominem attacks and call the facts 'ridiculous'?
I enjoy fruitful discussion however 'lol ur in hiskool' isn't fruitful discussion.
-
You spelled 3 words wrong.
Are you actually going to try to make any argument, or are you just going to sit there and make poorly veiled ad hominem attacks and call the facts 'ridiculous'?
I enjoy fruitful discussion however 'lol ur in hiskool' isn't fruitful discussion.
-
You spelled 3 words wrong.
Someone knows they're wrong. :rofl Trying to change the subject of the argument?