Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Nemisis on November 07, 2009, 07:31:04 PM
-
Is there any real reason we can't get the A-26? Its not like it hasn't been asked for. I'm just wondering if hitech decreed that we won't get it or if there is a reason past that.
-
No reason not to get it at all. Quite frankly, it rocks.
YES TO THE A-26!!!!
-
WOOOT!!!! :banana:
And the A-26 please.
-
About a year or so ago, it came in 2nd place to the B25, as I recall. HTC actually surveyed all the pie-lets with a pop-up radio button to vote. I was for it then and would be now. It was one of my favorite rides in Air Warrior.
:aok
-
Oh yeah, I remember that. I voted for it. Damnit, I voted for it so it should have won :cry.
-
About a year or so ago, it came in 2nd place to the B25, as I recall. HTC actually surveyed all the pie-lets with a pop-up radio button to vote. I was for it then and would be now. It was one of my favorite rides in Air Warrior.
:aok
I thought the 39 came in second to the 25, and the 26 was third? Hell, I can't remember that long ago anyway.
-
Hey, just a quick question, why did they ordering go out of order? P-40 is EW right? Then how come the P-38 is MW?
-
Hey, just a quick question, why did they ordering go out of order? P-40 is EW right? Then how come the P-38 is MW?
Because the number designation has nothing to do with the year the plane was produced and operational. The number designation was based on chronological order. For example, the P-40 was the 40th basic pursuit aircraft to be ordered by the USAAF, the P-38 was the 38th basic pursuit aircraft ordered.
(prefix)(type)-(chron. num.)(variant)-(production block)-(factory)
ack-ack
-
deleted due to triple post mess up
ack-ack
-
deleted due to triple post mess up
ack-ack
-
wtg akak, triple post.
:banana:
-
wtg akak, triple post.
:banana:
Stupid browser, got an error each time I clicked on Post so I figured it didn't go through. LOL!
ack-ack
-
Also keep in mind that the time a plane BEGINS development, is not the time a plane enters service. Many planes had long and complicated development cycles... So while the P-47 saw service before the P-51, the P-38 saw service after the P-40.
Consider the P-39 earned an order for a prototype in October of 1937, and had the prototype flying by April 1938.
The XP-39E was an up-engined version designed to get more out of the plane. They were tested in Feb 1942, and re-designated P-76. 4,000 were to be built, but production was cancelled 3 months later in favor of a redesigned air frame to go WITH the more powerful engine.
So the P-63 was born. First flights Dec 1942 and Feb 1943.
Goes from P-39 to P-73 to P-63, chronologically speaking.
I just liked that example because it's a good illustration that the number didn't really imply order of inclusion.
-
Shades of 'Always', I reckon an A-26 fire-bomber would be handy for extinguishing flaming hangars. Put the guns back in for 'Bay of Pigs' Special Events, of course . . .
;)
-
we need the a26 it had the biggest guns of any ww2 airplane :x. 110's will be obsolete (j/k)
semp
-
we need the a26 it had the biggest guns of any ww2 airplane :x. 110's will be obsolete (j/k)
semp
Don't you mean most? 14 .50cals forward firing .50 cals. Both a top and bottom gun turret dome thrown in for good measure.
The A-26 we be pure awesome!
-
+1 for the A-26 :aok
-
we need the a26 it had the biggest guns of any ww2 airplane :x. 110's will be obsolete (j/k)
semp
(http://www.billundluftfoto.dk/billeder/fly/a26.jpg)
-
The A-26 would be a fine addition to the plane set. The need for more Soviet and Japanese planes is more pressing though.
Helm ...out
-
I thought the 39 came in second to the 25, and the 26 was third? Hell, I can't remember that long ago anyway.
And you think I can?? :old:
-
The need for more Soviet and Japanese planes is more pressing though.
Helm ...out
Absolutely. IN
-
I would enjoy the A-26.
Might make me fly bombers exclusively.
The question is... Will it be perked?
-
I'm guessing if it will be perked, it would be something low like 15 or so.
-
Love to fly this one. My grandfather flew this in the Pacific Theater.
+1 :banana:
-
This would be awesome. :banana:
-
so hitech, can we PLEASE get the A-26 :angel:?
-
(http://www.billundluftfoto.dk/billeder/fly/a26.jpg)
Actually, up to 16 forward facing 50 cals:
Note nose guns here:
(http://www.airclassicsmuseum.org/Images/A-26form.jpg)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/phantom2/4053089425/sizes/l/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phantom2/4053089425/sizes/l/)
And wing guns here (2 pods of 2 guns per wing :)):
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2714/4053089425_deafe40fe5_b.jpg)
Hence, 8+8=16 guns :)
And one more picture for no other reason except it looks cool!
(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/images/a26-001.jpg)
-
The Bf 110G-2 still has more forward facing firepower. 2 MK 108 and 4 MG 151/20 are roughly equivalent to 32 M2 .50 cal MG's in game. Of course the A26's would have a straighter trajectory.
-
motherland, thats still some serious hitting power. And, as you said, straighter trajectory, which will improve accuracy.
-
+111111111111111111111111111119 :aok
General characteristics
Crew: 3
Length: 50 ft 0 in (15.24 m)
Wingspan: 70 ft 0 in (21.34 m)
Height: 18 ft 3 in (5.64 m)
Wing area: 540 ft² (50 m²)
Empty weight: 22,850 lb (10,365 kg)
Loaded weight: 27,600 lb (12,519 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 35,000 lb (15,900 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Pratt & Whitney R-2800-27 "Double Wasp" radials, 2,000 hp (1,500 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 355 mph (308 kn, 570 km/h)
Range: 1,400 mi (1,200 nmi, 2,300 km)
Service ceiling: 22,000 ft (6,700 m)
Rate of climb: 1,250 ft/min (6.4 m/s)
Wing loading: 51 lb/ft² (250 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.145 hp/lb (108 W/kg)
Armament
Guns:
6 or 8× 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M2 Browning machine guns in the nose
8× 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M2 machine guns in four optional underwing pods
2× 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M2 machine guns in remote-controlled dorsal turret
2× 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M2 machine guns in remote-controlled ventral turret
Bombs: 6,000 lb (2,700 kg) - 4,000 lb (1,800 kg) in the bomb bay plus 2,000 lb (910 kg) external on the wings
(http://www.airbum.com/photos/A-26Silverleftturn.jpg)
-
Actually, up to 16 forward facing 50 cals:
(http://www.airclassicsmuseum.org/Images/A-26form.jpg)
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/phantom2/4053089425/sizes/l/)
:t
(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/images/a26-001.jpg)
I heard that you can also have the top turret locked foreward and fired by the pilot.
So its more like 18 foreward firing 50 cals. :devil
-
Like I said, fly through a furball and bang, you just shot down 5 people.
-
The Bf 110G-2 still has more forward facing firepower. 2 MK 108 and 4 MG 151/20 are roughly equivalent to 32 M2 .50 cal MG's in game. Of course the A26's would have a straighter trajectory.
True, but the A-26 is just *so* much better looking, lol ;)
-
Please note the center of the nose.....
(http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/aircraft/bomber/douglas-a-26-invader/douglas-a-26-05.jpg)
:noid
-
Please note the center of the nose.....
(http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/aircraft/bomber/douglas-a-26-invader/douglas-a-26-05.jpg)
:noid
Its either a lazer cannon or a 40mm bofors.
Either is fine with me. And I wish I had photoshop.
-
Its either a lazer cannon or a 40mm bofors.
Either is fine with me. And I wish I had photoshop.
none of the above..... :noid
-
none of the above..... :noid
A very bright light used for illuminating targets for ground attack?
-
Think more b-25ish...
-
So what should be the perk price for it?
Dont forget the A-26C also saw action and would be the level bomber varient. It would be lethal against CVs I can tell you that much and very survivable. Were talking Mossie speed with almost heavy bomber ordinance load. Add in 3 fighters worth of MGs.
Im thinking the 100 perk price range. Unlike the perk bomber we already have the A-26 would have a big impact on the game.
-
A very bright light used for illuminating targets for ground attack?
In Korea...
Think more b-25ish...
Uhhh. No.
It is a light.
The proposed 75mm mounting was offset to the right with two .50s on the left.
The A-26 "all purpose nose" was designed to accept 8 .50s or 1 75mm and 2 .50s or 3 37mms or 1 37mm and 1 75mm or 1 37mm and 2 .50s or 2 37mms or 6 .50s or a bombardier nose with 2 .50s.
(http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/8338/image1wa.jpg)
Only the 6 .50, 8 .50 and bombardier nose saw service.
wrongway
-
I'm thinking no perk for the A-26C modle, and between 15-20 for others depending on which model we get.
-
In Korea...
Uhhh. No.
It is a light.
The proposed 75mm mounting was offset to the right with two .50s on the left.
The A-26 "all purpose nose" was designed to accept 8 .50s or 1 75mm and 2 .50s or 3 37mms or 1 37mm and 1 75mm or 1 37mm and 2 .50s or 2 37mms or 6 .50s or a bombardier nose with 2 .50s.
(http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/8338/image1wa.jpg)
Only the 6 .50, 8 .50 and bombardier nose saw service.
wrongway
Why do you spoil my fun. :D
-
So what should be the perk price for it?
Dont forget the A-26C also saw action and would be the level bomber varient. It would be lethal against CVs I can tell you that much and very survivable. Were talking Mossie speed with almost heavy bomber ordinance load. Add in 3 fighters worth of MGs.
Im thinking the 100 perk price range. Unlike the perk bomber we already have the A-26 would have a big impact on the game.
Not that much. Its still a bomber and neither carries the ords of a heavy bomber or is as armed as a heavy bomber. It also wont be formation enabled.
6 fifty nose should be perked at 7, 8 fifty at 15 and bomadier at 3. Each gun pod should be an extra 2 perks and external ords should be 10 perks each.
-
Why do you spoil my fun. :D
I have a book...
wrongway
(needs a scanner)
-
Sandwich, as your commander I order you to shut the f**k up about ord perking. Up to but not including the 3 perks for bombadier version, I agree with you.
The bombadier version would be less dangerous then the B-26 we have now.
-
I have a book...
wrongway
(needs a scanner)
I fail to see how you having a book correlates to spoiling my fun. ;) :neener:
-
Sandwich, as your commander I order you to shut the f**k up about ord perking. Up to but not including the 3 perks for bombadier version, I agree with you.
The bombadier version would be less dangerous then the B-26 we have now.
I dont like perking.
I would much rather have the A-26 and all its options unperked but the plane is way too dangerous and its perfromance is way too good for it to be free to everybody.
I dont want it perked at 100 though. That prospect gives me the shivers.
-
Like I said, the bomber version is unperked (unless it two carried the gun pods in the wings). Past that, its a bomber dude. Average SA will usually keep you safe from it. Most fighters can just motor away and outrun it.
-
threak hijacked...
-
So hitech, is there any real reason we can't get the A-26?
-
So hitech, is there any real reason we can't get the A-26?
my only guess is because most people think that another fiter plane is more needed like the p39 which is seldom used.
semp
-
Perhaps the plane set we have may need some balancing, and maybe :praythe A 26 is still in the works....
Still think this would be a great addition nonetheless. :cheers:
-
Bring the A-26! :rock
:banana:
-
I never miss a chance to beg for this plane! :D
-
Not that much. Its still a bomber and neither carries the ords of a heavy bomber or is as armed as a heavy bomber. It also wont be formation enabled.
6 fifty nose should be perked at 7, 8 fifty at 15 and bomadier at 3. Each gun pod should be an extra 2 perks and external ords should be 10 perks each.
Really? It will be 50 to 70 mph faster then the B-26 and carry an additional 2,000 lbs of ords. Here, take a look at its maneuverability and zoom http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iayVNS20rc
So Mossie speed, with near P-38 maneuverability, and a 6,000lb bombload, and B-26 level defensive gunnery?
Perk it at 10 and you might as we;; call the game A-26 High.
-
Really? It will be 50 to 70 mph faster then the B-26 and carry an additional 2,000 lbs of ords. Here, take a look at its maneuverability and zoom http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iayVNS20rc
So Mossie speed, with near P-38 maneuverability, and a 6,000lb bombload, and B-26 level defensive gunnery?
Perk it at 10 and you might as we;; call the game A-26 High.
Well then.
30 is my final Offer for 6 gun nose!
40 for 8.
Did it have counter rotating props?
-
100 perks would be a fair price for this bird
-
Alright then.
100 perks it is. :(
-
100 perks would definitely be worth it.
FINALLY we would have something worthwhile and effective to spend our bomber perks on!!!
-
my only guess is because most people think that another fiter plane is more needed like the p39 which is seldom used.
semp
Many of us know that the US planeset is very full while others have huge gaps and need attention, thus we don't think the A-26 is a good idea at this time.
-
100 perks would definitely be worth it.
FINALLY we would have something worthwhile and effective to spend our bomber perks on!!!
(http://web.mit.edu/ryangray/Public/Gnus/thumbs_up.jpg)
-
So hitech, is there any real reason we can't get the A-26?
Actually there "was" a reason but it has been corrected now!
I believe the A26 should be included ingame but I'd like to see the planeset filled out first.
Oh and I'd say 100 perks would be fair and worth the cost to fly this bird.
If and when we get it I hope I dont run into Cobie flying it,unless he's in green..... :devil
:salute
-
Reasons it will need to be perked fairly high?
Its capability. OK so thats number 1. It was a late war attack plane so good at what it did that it hung around for 30 years. For all I know its still being used. Imagine the A-20 with more guns, much faster, and far more maneuverable.
2, Gamewise it would be almost impossible to defend against once it was located. That is unless you have a very fast fighter already up with Altitude. And even then it will be difficult to catch before it drops ords.
3, It will be pure murder on CVs. As a level bomber or, especially, dive bombing and chucking out 36 500lb bombs from a formation. And its so fast it will be very hard to stop.
4, Just as effective for porking fields, VHs, other hangars...ect
5, Most players have so many zillions of bomber perks if the thing aint perked halfway high the A-26 bomb and bailers will screw up the game even more then they do in Lancs. The Invaders get to their target so fast, with so much ord, and if they were perked at 10 points these same clowns will chuck them away as fast as they do their Lancs.
6, Lastly they will have a huge impact on GV'ing. Most of all tanks. I might kill a lot of tanks but I do it with gunnery, from a very slow airplane. A good dive bomber, in such a fast maneuverable plane, with so many 500lb bombs, will impact the GV game a great deal. You can just plain upp them and get them to targets so quickly, with so much TnT..... The Invader really would have to be controlled with perk price or it would just ruin GV'ing. Even a single will hold 12 500lb bombs.
So a light perk price would be out of the question I would think. I believe the A-26 would impact the game even more then the B-29 would. It would be a pure killer no doubt.
-
Reasons it will need to be perked fairly high?
Its capability. OK so thats number 1. It was a late war attack plane so good at what it did that it hung around for 30 years. For all I know its still being used. Imagine the A-20 with more guns, much faster, and far more maneuverable.
2, Gamewise it would be almost impossible to defend against once it was located. That is unless you have a very fast fighter already up with Altitude. And even then it will be difficult to catch before it drops ords.
3, It will be pure murder on CVs. As a level bomber or, especially, dive bombing and chucking out 36 500lb bombs from a formation. And its so fast it will be very hard to stop.
4, Just as effective for porking fields, VHs, other hangars...ect
5, Most players have so many zillions of bomber perks if the thing aint perked halfway high the A-26 bomb and bailers will screw up the game even more then they do in Lancs. The Invaders get to their target so fast, with so much ord, and if they were perked at 10 points these same clowns will chuck them away as fast as they do their Lancs.
6, Lastly they will have a huge impact on GV'ing. Most of all tanks. I might kill a lot of tanks but I do it with gunnery, from a very slow airplane. A good dive bomber, in such a fast maneuverable plane, with so many 500lb bombs, will impact the GV game a great deal. You can just plain upp them and get them to targets so quickly, with so much TnT..... The Invader really would have to be controlled with perk price or it would just ruin GV'ing. Even a single will hold 12 500lb bombs.
So a light perk price would be out of the question I would think. I believe the A-26 would impact the game even more then the B-29 would. It would be a pure killer no doubt.
I agree with you except for saying that the A-26 would have formations. Bombsite or not if the A-26 gets formations then the A-20 should get fromations too. And didnt the A-20 have a bombsite nose too?
50 seems a little more reasonable. 75 at most.
Wish we could have the 37mm + 75mm nose. Then we could perk it like a 262. :O
-
The A-20 does have formations. Called the Boston by the Brits.
My guess is it would work the same way in the game. Formations for the glass nose. Singles for the attacker.
Like the B-25 also.
-
The A-20 does have formations. Called the Boston by the Brits.
My guess is it would work the same way in the game. Formations for the glass nose. Singles for the attacker.
Like the B-25 also.
Touche sir, Touche.
-
Really? It will be 50 to 70 mph faster then the B-26 and carry an additional 2,000 lbs of ords. Here, take a look at its maneuverability and zoom http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iayVNS20rc
So Mossie speed, with near P-38 maneuverability, and a 6,000lb bombload, and B-26 level defensive gunnery?
Perk it at 10 and you might as we;; call the game A-26 High.
Past its fixed guns, it has 4 .50's, 2 dorsal, and 2 ventral. Where as the B-26 has 7, 2 tail, 2 top, 1 left ventral, 1 right ventral, and 1 nose.
-
The A-20 does have formations. Called the Boston by the Brits.
My guess is it would work the same way in the game. Formations for the glass nose. Singles for the attacker.
Like the B-25 also.
when bostons can carry 8 500 lbs bombs,grow some big boy guns and handle like a A-20 then you can call it an A-20
-
OK, so it seems like this would be a really dangerous plane. How about free for the bomber version, but 20 perks for the 8 gun version, and 25 for the 8 gun version, along with the wing mounted .50's?
-
yes :aok
-
Where was all the ammo for the extra nose guns carried? In the bomb-bay? If so, forget carrying many bombs (if any) if the gunship version's your choice.
<departs muttering 'usual over-gunned USAAF kites>
;)
-
Where was all the ammo for the extra nose guns carried? In the bomb-bay? If so, forget carrying many bombs (if any) if the gunship version's your choice.
<departs muttering 'usual over-gunned USAAF kites>
;)
Yea cuz quad hizzokas in the nose of a mossie is under gunned. :neener:
-
Yes, compared to the A-26, the mossy looks like a pile of crap.
-
I truly don't believe that the A-26 should be perked that high, if at all. I would rather have ord perked as I would want to fly the A-26 primarily as a fighter.
At the end of the day the A-26 is still liable of being chased down and raped by the much faster and more maneuverable fighters and I don't think it's gun domes would put up an effective enough defence, it would be solely on the bomber pilot to out fly the enemy in his fighter.
I would also love to see the A-26 have automated gun turrets just for the hell of it, can I get a +1?
-
Yes, compared to the A-26, the mossy looks like a pile of crap.
Well, you're young and sometimes make comments (like the above) that aren't so bright.
ack-ack
-
when bostons can carry 8 500 lbs bombs,grow some big boy guns and handle like a A-20 then you can call it an A-20
Not the point. Point is it was/is the same airplane. The Brits wanted speed and range, thus the design adjustments. Ask HiTech why we dont have all the A-20 versions. My guess would be he gave us two so we could dive-bomb single and level bomb while filling the Brit set.
At the end of the day the A-26 is still liable of being chased down and raped by the much faster and more maneuverable fighters and I don't think it's gun domes would put up an effective enough defence, it would be solely on the bomber pilot to out fly the enemy in his fighter.
Much faster? Once the glass nose version dropped its bombs it will accelerate to over 370 mph. So if you dont have Alt. on it you'll have to crawl up its rear into 4 0.50s. Even on the deck it will go over 330 mph, "Mossie speed", so a lot of fighters wont be able to catch it.
Of course the other option would be only the 1 plane version with no formation. Then the price could be less.
-
Past its fixed guns, it has 4 .50's, 2 dorsal, and 2 ventral. Where as the B-26 has 7, 2 tail, 2 top, 1 left ventral, 1 right ventral, and 1 nose.
Actually it has up to 16 fixed guns. Don't forget the 8 which could be mounted in the wings.
-
Actually it has up to 16 fixed guns. Don't forget the 8 which could be mounted in the wings.
<Drooools>
-
I truly don't believe that the A-26 should be perked that high, if at all. I would rather have ord perked as I would want to fly the A-26 primarily as a fighter.
Can it carry bombs in the strafer version? If so, then it SHOULD be perked. 16.50's and 6k of bombs is too much to be free.
Actually it has up to 16 fixed guns. Don't forget the 8 which could be mounted in the wings.
ASIDE FROM its mounted guns, it carried 4 .50's as defensive armament.
-
There was one version able to deliver 8,000 lb of bombs. Think about that? More then a B-17.
And yes the attack version, the A-26b "or actually B-26b", could deliver 6,000 lb of bombs too. However if MG blister packs were set in the wings this of course limited its bombload to internal only.
-
Then I think a perking of 20 is in order. Yeah, it may seem low, but really if it gets caught, its probably going to die. Its not like it can run from anything but the hurricane and other slow A/C.
-
There was one version able to deliver 8,000 lb of bombs. Think about that? More then a B-17.
And yes the attack version, the A-26b "or actually B-26b"
Depends on the year. Prior to 1948, the B-26B was an entirely different plane.
B-26B Marauder (Prior to 1948)
(https://www.aviationillustration.com/shop/images/B-26.02l.jpg)
B-26B Invader (After 1948)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/B-26Bs_452BW(L)_Korea_May1951.jpg)
ack-ack
-
So does the before 1948 version only carry 6k of bombs, or would it be more like the B-26 with 4k of bombs?
-
So does the before 1948 version only carry 6k of bombs, or would it be more like the B-26 with 4k of bombs?
The before 1948 version was the Martin B-26 Marauder, the B-26 we have in the game and only carried 4,000 pounds of bombs.
In 1948, the A-26 was redesignated as the B-26 and in the 1960's during Vietnam, it was redesignated A-26 as a political concession to the Thailand government so we could operate the Invader from our bases in Thailand.
ack-ack
-
So there the same plane :huh? Why are we even asking for something from 1948?
-
So there the same plane :huh? Why are we even asking for something from 1948?
During WW2 and up until 1948, the Invader had the designation of A-26 while the Martin Marauder had the designation B-26. In 1948, when the USAAF became its own branch of service, the B-26 was already out of operation and the A-26 was designated as the B-26 (USAAF designations required bombers to be given the "B" for bomber designation). So from 1948 until sometime in the 1960s, the A-26 was now the B-26.
ack-ack
-
Oh, OK. Your previous post confused me. What was the bombload of the A26 before 1948? Same as the B-26 we have now?
-
Yes, we still want the A-26. It flew in WW2, and did some damage too. :rock
-
WOOOT!!!!! ADD THE A-26 :banana: :banana: :banana:!!!!!!!!
-
Yes, we still want the A-26. It flew in WW2, and did some damage too. :rock
Yep. We seriously should have another perked bomber.
-
Yep. We seriously should have another perked bomber.
that is not a bomber, THAT IS A KILLER :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:
-
Bombers can be killers. Its a bomber, and its a killer. We need a whole new level of pwnge to classify this.
-
how about a killer pawner bomterller (1/2 bomber, 1/2 fiter, 1/2 killer (hey its better than one)). btw bananas are not substitute for sheep but they look cool dancing :x :banana: :x.
semp
-
(http://showbizmanagementadvisors.com/DancingSheep.gif)
-
A-26 PLEASE :x