Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: TwinBoom on November 17, 2009, 06:21:32 PM

Title: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: TwinBoom on November 17, 2009, 06:21:32 PM
(http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/3797/f4u1aads.jpg)
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: BnZs on November 17, 2009, 06:33:47 PM
Bah. If they want to hangar-bang, let them takes the "scrubs" from the Corsair set.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: crazyivan on November 17, 2009, 06:35:44 PM
2x 1000lbs. bombs hmm.  my vote is yes. :aok
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Spikes on November 17, 2009, 06:54:46 PM
1 torp?
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Strip on November 17, 2009, 07:29:30 PM
Torpedo would change the game dynamics, for the better imho.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Saxman on November 17, 2009, 10:42:08 PM
I think the wing pylons were a very late field mod made on the 1A after the 1D came along. I'd say leave the 1A ordinance as it is, but give the 1D its center 2000lber to go along with the wing bombs and rockets (imagine trying to get THAT off a CV!)
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: AWwrgwy on November 17, 2009, 11:39:49 PM
Just because it could be carried doesn't mean it ever was.

Seen the P-38 pics with a torp?  Or the Fw190?

B-26 carried torps externally, once.

Anything else?

wrongway
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Ack-Ack on November 18, 2009, 12:23:00 AM
Just because it could be carried doesn't mean it ever was.

Seen the P-38 pics with a torp? 

wrongway

Actually, yes I have.  Used to have a picture of a P-38 that was used to test the feasibility of carrying torpedoes but it was only a test and never went beyond that one test.


ack-ack
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Masherbrum on November 18, 2009, 12:36:21 AM
Just because it could be carried doesn't mean it ever was.

Seen the P-38 pics with a torp?  Or the Fw190?

B-26 carried torps externally, once.

Anything else?

wrongway

(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c62/Masherbrum/Aces%20High/P-38torpedo.jpg)

Cannot locate the picture I have of the FW-190 F-8/U2 with the Torpedo.   

As for the B-26, you are wrong.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: batch on November 18, 2009, 02:33:36 AM
As for the B-26, you are wrong.

I dont know of any other known records........ but there were 4 B26s carrying torps that were used in the Battle of Midway......... and at least one account suggests 2 torps hit their target
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Ack-Ack on November 18, 2009, 03:11:27 AM
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c62/Masherbrum/Aces%20High/P-38torpedo.jpg)

Cannot locate the picture I have of the FW-190 F-8/U2 with the Torpedo.   

As for the B-26, you are wrong.

Yep, those were the pictures I had.  Also had another picture of a P-38 with transport pods slung under each wing that could carry one person.  A pilot that was transported in one afterwards wished that the person that designed them was forced to ride in one so they would know what it was like being in Hell.


ack-ack
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Masherbrum on November 18, 2009, 07:13:28 AM
I dont know of any other known records........ but there were 4 B26s carrying torps that were used in the Battle of Midway......... and at least one account suggests 2 torps hit their target

There were two Squadrons of them in the Aleutians Campaign, as well as a couple of detachments from the 38th in Australia.   But this is going off of memory from books I've read a while ago and in my basement.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Gabriel on November 18, 2009, 08:09:47 AM
If they don't give F4U a torpedo it is probably because how much more irrelevant it would make the TBM. Not that this is a particularly good argument mind you,,,when people are smashing CVs with Lancasters with impossible  precision accuracy .
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: vonKrimm on November 18, 2009, 09:00:37 AM
Just because it could be carried doesn't mean it ever was.

Seen the P-38 pics with a torp?  Or the Fw190?

B-26 carried torps externally, once.

Anything else?

wrongway

well since you asked....Yes.  Can eliminate the situation were planes that never fought alongside each other removed from the game?  I mean we could have Japanese planes for the Bish, German/IT for the Nits, US/UK planes for the Rooks, I guess USSR planes for a new side (the Queens?).  I only suggest this since you are bangin on about what could have been done in WWII vs. what actually did occur.

So I say "yes" for the expanded ords. on the 1a
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Krupinski on November 18, 2009, 09:23:12 AM
Just because it could be carried doesn't mean it ever was.

Seen the P-38 pics with a torp?  Or the Fw190?

B-26 carried torps externally, once.

Anything else?

wrongway

(http://www.axishistory.com/fileadmin/user_upload/f/fw190-torpedo.jpg)
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Krupinski on November 18, 2009, 09:26:01 AM
Better picture...

(http://www.luchtoorlog.be/img/fw190a/ae6_579.jpg)

 :salute
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Gabriel on November 18, 2009, 09:28:38 AM
I think you guys are missing his point.

He knows those pictures exist that's why he asks if you've seen them.  I believe he's saying that just because the aircraft had the capability doesn't mean it was something that was used operationally.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Shuffler on November 18, 2009, 09:47:44 AM
I think you guys are missing his point.

He knows those pictures exist that's why he asks if you've seen them.  I believe he's saying that just because the aircraft had the capability doesn't mean it was something that was used operationally.

They just posted the pics for other folks. I think they all understand the issue at hand.  :aok
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: batch on November 18, 2009, 09:58:02 AM
the B26 example he gave though WAS used operationally
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: BnZs on November 18, 2009, 10:30:22 AM
Why wish for a fighter, any fighter, with torps? A suicide 190 is just going to pork your ords before the CV comes a-callin' anyway. :bolt:
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: DH367th on November 18, 2009, 11:11:11 AM
Could care less about 1a ord just diggin the cool pics thanks guys.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Masherbrum on November 18, 2009, 11:15:27 AM
Could care less about 1a ord just diggin the cool pics thanks guys.

Deadhead!!!!!!   WOOWOO!  :devil
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Getback on November 18, 2009, 02:16:50 PM
Darn, no rockets.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: AWwrgwy on November 18, 2009, 02:34:18 PM
I think you guys are missing his point.

He knows those pictures exist that's why he asks if you've seen them.  I believe he's saying that just because the aircraft had the capability doesn't mean it was something that was used operationally.


Ding Ding Ding!!!  We have a winner!!!

And yes, The B-26 did operationally drop a torpedo so lets see that rather than the F4-U "It was designed to" but actually never did so.


wrongway
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Shifty on November 18, 2009, 04:58:11 PM
I think the wing pylons were a very late field mod made on the 1A after the 1D came along. I'd say leave the 1A ordinance as it is, but give the 1D its center 2000lber to go along with the wing bombs and rockets (imagine trying to get THAT off a CV!)

Agreed. Leave the 1A alone. Why mess with perfection?  :D
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Karnak on November 18, 2009, 07:42:43 PM
The design requirement that resulted in the Lancaster's very long bomb bay (and the Halifax's as well) was the requirement that they be able to carry and drop torpedoes.

Not that they ever actually did so, mind you.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Sc00ter on November 18, 2009, 08:57:47 PM
I think the wing pylons were a very late field mod made on the 1A after the 1D came along. I'd say leave the 1A ordinance as it is, but give the 1D its center 2000lber to go along with the wing bombs and rockets (imagine trying to get THAT off a CV!)

Full flaps, wep on and take off into the wind  :airplane:
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Saxman on November 19, 2009, 07:23:31 AM
Too bad we don't HAVE wind....
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: EDO43 on November 19, 2009, 03:27:40 PM
Too bad we don't HAVE wind....

We used to...it was at 16K IIRC and played hell with the bomb drops above that altitude....too many complained they couldn't hit squat with the wind on so I believe HTC removed it.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Krusty on November 19, 2009, 04:46:43 PM
I gotta cry foul on that one...

I been bombing in AH since waaaay the hell back, and never have I ever had to deal with wind in the MAs.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Ack-Ack on November 20, 2009, 04:36:28 AM
I gotta cry foul on that one...

I been bombing in AH since waaaay the hell back, and never have I ever had to deal with wind in the MAs.

then you didn't play AH as far back as you think you did, Saxman is correct about the wind layer around 16k. 


ack-ack
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Patches1 on November 20, 2009, 11:58:57 AM
Actually, it was Charles Lindburgh who showed that it was possible to load the 2000lber plus another 2000lbs of ordnace on the Corsair. He actually flew it into combat...4000lbs of ordnance on the F4U. I don't know what the exact loadout was off the top of my head, but the centerline held a 2000lber.

He also showed Corsair and P-38 pilots how to wring the best possible speed, distance and fuel conservation out of their aircraft.

Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Krusty on November 20, 2009, 12:00:37 PM
then you didn't play AH as far back as you think you did, Saxman is correct about the wind layer around 16k. 


ack-ack

Can you give a time frame for this?

I used to do tons of 25k lancaster HQ runs with AKNimitz and never ran into wind, but for a long time I never went very high before that.
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: TwinBoom on November 20, 2009, 07:17:30 PM
Just because it could be carried doesn't mean it ever was.

Seen the P-38 pics with a torp?  Or the Fw190?

B-26 carried torps externally, once.

Anything else?

wrongway


do you ever say anything not negative? you and krusty brothers?
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: Ack-Ack on November 20, 2009, 08:16:08 PM
Can you give a time frame for this?

I used to do tons of 25k lancaster HQ runs with AKNimitz and never ran into wind, but for a long time I never went very high before that.

It was around when I started playing around tour 8. 

ack-ack
Title: Re: Update F4U-1A Ords Please
Post by: AWwrgwy on November 20, 2009, 11:55:08 PM

do you ever say anything not negative? you and krusty brothers?

Cousins.

What negative?  I said it was never used.  That's negative?


wrongway