Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: JonDoe999 on November 30, 2009, 10:44:25 AM

Title: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on November 30, 2009, 10:44:25 AM
They Should Put On Another Plane That Drops Troops Like The C-46, Or One That Has Machine Guns Or Turrents.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Gabriel on November 30, 2009, 10:47:07 AM
(http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/AirShows/YankeeAirMuseum2006/Highlights/Ju52Tom2006.jpg)
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: ZZee on November 30, 2009, 01:00:32 PM
thinks it been covered before, but.............+1  :aok
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: AWwrgwy on November 30, 2009, 03:05:16 PM
The Urban Dictionary:  Turrent (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=turrent)

Quote
1.  turrent  
A common misspelling of the word "turret," usually made by people with a fourth-grade education.



wrongway
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on November 30, 2009, 05:05:22 PM
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY WRONWAY??? :confused: :headscratch:
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Becinhu on November 30, 2009, 07:06:50 PM
The C-46
I was not aware that we had this plane. How many perks does it cost?
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: MachFly on November 30, 2009, 08:10:23 PM
Quote
The C-46
I was not aware that we had this plane. How many perks does it cost?

I think he means C-47  ;)
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: E25280 on November 30, 2009, 08:24:00 PM
I was not aware that we had this plane. How many perks does it cost?


I think he means C-47  ;)
I think he is asking for an alternative to the C-47, such as the C-46, or alternately an (unspecified) transport with defensive armament.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: MachFly on November 30, 2009, 10:05:25 PM
I think he is asking for an alternative to the C-47, such as the C-46, or alternately an (unspecified) transport with defensive armament.

perhaps  :headscratch:
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Saxman on November 30, 2009, 10:10:21 PM
(http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/AirShows/YankeeAirMuseum2006/Highlights/Ju52Tom2006.jpg)

Would be a total hangar queen in the Mains. Its armament is negligible (about equivalent to the Kate) and it's even SLOWER than the C-47. And its utility in Special Events is limited.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Clone155 on November 30, 2009, 10:19:36 PM
Would be a total hangar queen in the Mains. Its armament is negligible (about equivalent to the Kate) and it's even SLOWER than the C-47. And its utility in Special Events is limited.

Maybe because it would be so slow, give it the historical amount of troops instead of 10 to make up for speed?
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Krusty on December 01, 2009, 12:12:25 AM
Its top speed was about 30-40mph higher than its takeoff speed.....

And making the Ju52 have anything higher than 10 troops would only penalize the C47 pilots, since HT said "I can make it carry any number I want, but it'll still take a full plane to capture a field" [paraphrased].


Meaning, Ju52 carries 20 troops, maprooms now take 20 troops, and C47 pilots get shafted.


10 is chosen for gameplay consideration. It's not a historical number. Ju52 or any other major troop plane in this game would carry 10 as well, just because that's the way the game is played.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Warspawn on December 01, 2009, 12:37:34 AM
(http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/aircraft/Douglas-Skytrain/IMAGES/skytrain-camo.jpg)


Wouldn't you love to have that at some point?


The Me-323 Gigant would be interesting; could even load up a tank or two to deliver by air.  It had 5 x 13mm MG's for defense....

*edit* doh!:  Waffentraeger (Weapons Carrier)
11 20mm MG 151 cannon
and
4 13mm MG 131 Machine Guns

(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/images/me323-main.jpg)



Interesting.  This plane actually meets requirements to be included at some point...

213 Me 323's were built before production ceased in April 1944. There were several production versions, beginning with the D-1. Later D- and E- versions differed in the choice of power plant and in defensive armament, with improvements in structural strength, total cargo load and fuel capacity also being implemented
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Krusty on December 01, 2009, 01:00:37 AM
Warspawn: field mod!

Bzzzt! Flag on the play!  :O


But, even if we had it, it wouldn't stop you from being lunchmeat.

It's not as if you're suddenly uber-protected like bombers with 10+ 50cals slaved to one target. It's a single 7mm (13mm??). Like the tailgun on the IL2, you'll maybe get 1 kill in a year with it  :banana:
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Strip on December 01, 2009, 01:07:04 AM
On a B5N....
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Krusty on December 01, 2009, 01:20:51 AM
if he was afk......











at half throttle......
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Warspawn on December 01, 2009, 01:42:28 AM
Naw, that's 2 × turreted 23 mm VYa-23 cannons, 150 rpg...
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Larry on December 01, 2009, 03:05:56 AM
It's not as if you're suddenly uber-protected like bombers with 10+ 50cals slaved to one target. It's a single 7mm (13mm??). Like the tailgun on the IL2, you'll maybe get 1 kill in a year with it  :banana:

You've obviously never actually tried using the tail gun on the IL2 have you?
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Angus on December 01, 2009, 03:47:20 AM
Would be a total hangar queen in the Mains. Its armament is negligible (about equivalent to the Kate) and it's even SLOWER than the C-47. And its utility in Special Events is limited.

Where do you get that? Or did you mean the Ju52? The C-46 is basically a bigger goon with lots more HP's. 2x2000 hp, 50 troops (payload+ fuel 16.000 lbs), 269 mph, ceiling 27.600 ft versus our goons 2x1200 hp, 27 troops (or a 6000 lbs load), , 224 mph, ceiling 26.400.
In short, the C-46 is the C-47 .... on steroids.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on December 01, 2009, 06:48:21 AM
 :aok NOW YOU KNOW A LOT ABOOUT THAT PLANE :aok
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Saxman on December 01, 2009, 07:21:19 AM
Where do you get that? Or did you mean the Ju52? The C-46 is basically a bigger goon with lots more HP's. 2x2000 hp, 50 troops (payload+ fuel 16.000 lbs), 269 mph, ceiling 27.600 ft versus our goons 2x1200 hp, 27 troops (or a 6000 lbs load), , 224 mph, ceiling 26.400.
In short, the C-46 is the C-47 .... on steroids.

Mind checking who I was quoting?
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on December 01, 2009, 07:39:27 AM
OH :uhoh
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on December 01, 2009, 12:10:15 PM
They Should Just Get An Airplane That Carries Troops And Can Protect Itself. :noid
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: bravoa8 on December 01, 2009, 12:18:22 PM
They Should Just Get An Airplane That Carries Troops And Can Protect Itself. :noid
JU-52 :rock

(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/85/244826514_64d0d1e90f_b.jpg)

It had a gun on the top of it.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Angus on December 01, 2009, 12:25:50 PM
Yes, and it was about as effective as a ping-pong ball. And the aircraft was so slow, that just about any Bipe at the time could fly rounds about it.
Naahhh, the C-46 at least has a superior performance to our goon, and IMHO would be an interesting (Bomber perked????) entrance to AH with say 20 troops :D
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: bravoa8 on December 01, 2009, 12:30:34 PM
Yes, and it was about as effective as a ping-pong ball. And the aircraft was so slow, that just about any Bipe at the time could fly rounds about it.
Naahhh, the C-46 at least has a superior performance to our goon, and IMHO would be an interesting (Bomber perked????) entrance to AH with say 20 troops :D
I still say JU-52 we need a german troop carrier anyway.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on December 01, 2009, 01:39:40 PM
Maybe it would be nice to have another Junker on Aces High II.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Krusty on December 01, 2009, 02:00:10 PM
You've obviously never actually tried using the tail gun on the IL2 have you?

As a matter of fact, many many many times. Getting a few hits doesn't stop them from blowing you away. Just puts nice holes in their wings, and they fly away and land your scalps, while you're in the hangar choosing your next plane.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Noir on December 01, 2009, 03:49:36 PM
As a matter of fact, many many many times. Getting a few hits doesn't stop them from blowing you away. Just puts nice holes in their wings, and they fly away and land your scalps, while you're in the hangar choosing your next plane.

I don't know...its 12mm, still kills planes

:aok NOW YOU KNOW A LOT ABOOUT THAT PLANE :aok

that guy is cracking me up  :rofl

the perked goon idea seems interesting thought, did the plane reach any decent production numbers during WWII ? And usage ?
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Angus on December 01, 2009, 04:32:35 PM
The C-46 hauled quite a lot in WW2, and also was in the ETO. Was more in the pacific as well as riding over the Himalayas due to it's better performance and range  than the C-47.
Now...ponder on a goon in AH that is faster and has 20 troops...so you can allow some to be strafed :D
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Rino on December 02, 2009, 11:08:00 AM
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY WRONWAY??? :confused: :headscratch:

     He means your spelling is awful.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Larry on December 07, 2009, 12:02:48 AM
As a matter of fact, many many many times. Getting a few hits doesn't stop them from blowing you away. Just puts nice holes in their wings, and they fly away and land your scalps, while you're in the hangar choosing your next plane.

Then it looks like you just aren't very good with it. Iv killed countless planes with the IL2's tail gun without even giving the enemy a chance. Just because you think its worthless doesn't mean it is.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on December 07, 2009, 03:04:01 PM
Okay, now I will tell as much as I can about the C-46

From "Airplanes Of The World 1490-1962 By Rolfe

Curtiss C-46 "Commando" Twin-engine U.S. military transport widely used during the war, particularly in flying the "Hump" in China. As a war-surplus, it was still in use as late as 1953.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: 2ADoc on December 08, 2009, 06:22:08 PM
Do some research on the plane, it was exceptional.  It would haul a load and was a good short field aircraft for its size.  It was huge inside and the cockpit was intimidating.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: jay on December 10, 2009, 01:44:24 AM
They Should Just Get An Airplane That Carries Troops And Can Protect Itself. :noid

still to early for a C47 with 3 gatlin guns on the side :(
 
(http://www.charleston.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/web/050502-F-1234P-003.jpg)
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Cthulhu on December 10, 2009, 06:49:41 PM
I want this

(http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/8225/fs01a.jpg) (http://img694.imageshack.us/i/fs01a.jpg/)

with 10 SEAL's onboard for capturing CV's.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on December 10, 2009, 07:05:51 PM
What is it?  :huh :O :confused: :uhoh :headscratch:
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Cthulhu on December 10, 2009, 07:36:50 PM
What is it?  :huh :O :confused: :uhoh :headscratch:

Kids  :rolleyes:

That, is the only aircraft (not flown by puppets) able to both ingress and egress the ocean's surface at great speed, with absolutely no damage, on a weekly basis. :D

(BTW, I only saw it do it in Black & White, your results may vary  ;))
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: JonDoe999 on December 11, 2009, 03:49:10 PM
Okay.






This topic has so far, did not have any "Add One" though. :(
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Saxman on December 11, 2009, 04:52:29 PM
Kids  :rolleyes:

That, is the only aircraft (not flown by puppets) able to both ingress and egress the ocean's surface at great speed, with absolutely no damage, on a weekly basis. :D

(BTW, I only saw it do it in Black & White, your results may vary  ;))

You're forgetting about this one:

(http://www.dvdactive.com/images/reviews/screenshot/2005/10/sky_captain_3.jpg)

:D
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: warphoenix on December 14, 2009, 01:02:22 PM
(http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/aircraft/Douglas-Skytrain/IMAGES/skytrain-camo.jpg)


Wouldn't you love to have that at some point?


The Me-323 Gigant would be interesting; could even load up a tank or two to deliver by air.  It had 5 x 13mm MG's for defense....

*edit* doh!:  Waffentraeger (Weapons Carrier)
11 20mm MG 151 cannon
and
4 13mm MG 131 Machine Guns

(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/images/me323-main.jpg)



Interesting.  This plane actually meets requirements to be included at some point...

213 Me 323's were built before production ceased in April 1944. There were several production versions, beginning with the D-1. Later D- and E- versions differed in the choice of power plant and in defensive armament, with improvements in structural strength, total cargo load and fuel capacity also being implemented
they wouldn't get off the ground in real life(hardley) and the ones that were lucky and did get off the ground etier crashed or were shot down
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: dstrip2 on December 21, 2009, 03:11:51 AM
honestly, flying a dang ju52 in WB was tough! it didnt have the power to do NOE really because even the slightest hill was a big deal for it. it was really underpowered. besides, ive landed 3 kills in a c47 before those things are dangerous!  :noid  but i do agree that a different troop carrier would be nice. i still think one that could operate from the CV would add an interesting aspect to the game, such as the good ol dumbo.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: Templar on December 21, 2009, 03:32:05 PM
I believe this thread needs to be moved into the Wishlist forum. One defensive MG is better than no defensive MG. +1 for any armed transport plane especially if its an Axis aircraft.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: jollyFE on December 30, 2009, 06:40:02 AM
What is it?  :huh :O :confused: :uhoh :headscratch:
Oh man the good old flying sub from the tv show voyage to the bottom of the sea.  Man the seaview ruled way before seaquest DSV.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: bravoa8 on December 31, 2009, 10:03:50 AM
C-46 had a longer range than the C47 or JU-52, It could go faster than both, carry a heavier payload, and I think it had a .50 cal on the back of it.

But, I'd like the JU-52 better myself.
Title: Re: C-46
Post by: AWwrgwy on December 31, 2009, 11:51:47 AM
C-46 had a longer range than the C47 or JU-52, It could go faster than both, carry a heavier payload, and I think it had a .50 cal on the back of it.

But, I'd like the JU-52 better myself.

No .50 cal (where'd you get that?) and no self sealing fuel tanks.

Burn baby burn.


wrongway