Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: l0newolf on April 14, 2010, 03:39:23 PM

Title: A6M Rufe
Post by: l0newolf on April 14, 2010, 03:39:23 PM
Eh,  what the heck our jap. planeset wont be complete without it!
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Wildcat1 on April 14, 2010, 03:46:11 PM
would this be the seaplane version of the zeke?

the only advantage i see in this is that you *might* be allowed to up it from a CV after the CV has been sunk.
but the pontoons really reduce the planes aerodynamic abilities.

so in the end, +/-1
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: RedTeck on April 14, 2010, 04:41:56 PM
Make one of the ships docked at the port a seaplane tender. This would give the A6M a unique role as aerial port defender. But then again, wouldn't the game have to be modified for float operations?
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Shifty on April 14, 2010, 05:45:29 PM
You don't need a seaplane tender if you have a port.
 This would be a great addition if it was possible to get float planes to work in the current code.
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Ack-Ack on April 14, 2010, 06:03:18 PM
would this be the seaplane version of the zeke?

the only advantage i see in this is that you *might* be allowed to up it from a CV after the CV has been sunk.
but the pontoons really reduce the planes aerodynamic abilities.

so in the end, +/-1

They weren't operated from normal CVs but operated from seaplane tenders like Kamikawa Maru or raiders like Hokoku Maru when out at sea.  Otherwise, they operated from shore bases as interceptors, scout and also used to help defend remote bases like Attu in Alaska.

You're right about the performance hit something like 20%, enough that it wasn't a match for early US and Allied fighters.

ack-ack
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: lyric1 on April 14, 2010, 06:07:14 PM
Make one of the ships docked at the port a seaplane tender. This would give the A6M a unique role as aerial port defender. But then again, wouldn't the game have to be modified for float operations?
Don't know I guess some of the PT boat code would be similar?
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: 321BAR on April 14, 2010, 08:24:49 PM
I would rather have the a6m3 and a6m6 before any seaplane. and even before my new A6ms id like to have well must i say it again... M-18!!!!
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Simba on April 15, 2010, 03:35:54 AM
Nuts to the Rufe, gimme the Rex.

 :cool:
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: AirFlyer on April 15, 2010, 04:00:49 AM
I would rather have the a6m3 and a6m6 before any seaplane. and even before my new A6ms id like to have well must i say it again... M-18!!!!

I doubt will ever see the A6M6... A6M5c would be your best chance at a heavier armed Zeke I'd guess. The A6M3 on the other hand I would love to see, either the Model 32 or 22 although I think the latter would work out better.
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: 321BAR on April 15, 2010, 05:56:11 AM
I doubt will ever see the A6M6... A6M5c would be your best chance at a heavier armed Zeke I'd guess. The A6M3 on the other hand I would love to see, either the Model 32 or 22 although I think the latter would work out better.
yeah probably true. I was thinking the same about a half hour after posting that. But like the big letters say id take an M-18 first  :lol
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: RedTeck on April 15, 2010, 11:32:04 AM
My mention of the seaplane tender was because it would/could be a destroyable object. If they just added a fighter hanger to the base, the next question is why can't I have my P-51, Spit 16, LA......
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Karnak on April 15, 2010, 01:23:05 PM
The N1K1 "Shiden" "Rex" would be more effective.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/N1K1_in_biwalake_.jpg)

In IJN designation terms the first letter in an aircraft's code indicates its intended task.  For example, "A" = carrier fighter, "J" = land based interceptor and "N" = float plane fighter.  We see these designations used on the A6M (carrier fighter, 6th one in IJN service, Mitsubishi), J2M (land based interceptor, 2nd one in IJN service, Mitsubishi) and N1K (float plane fighter, 1st {purpose built} one in IJN service, Kawanishi).  On some aircraft additional roles, or changed roles happen and in that case a "-A", "-J" or "-N" is added as a suffix indicating the new role.   Examples of this are the A6M2-N, N1K1-J and N1K2-J.

Thus we can see that the N1K2-J, which is so popular in AH, started out as a float plane fighter.
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Wildcat1 on April 15, 2010, 02:15:52 PM
i say before any of this, the ki-43 and G4M should be added

or the J2M3  :pray
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: 321BAR on April 15, 2010, 02:23:17 PM
M-18 first  :aok
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: HighTone on April 15, 2010, 03:00:31 PM
i say before any of this, the ki-43 and G4M should be added

or the J2M3  :pray

 :aok.   Same here


Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Flayed on April 16, 2010, 03:48:19 PM
They weren't operated from normal CVs but operated from seaplane tenders like Kamikawa Maru or raiders like Hokoku Maru when out at sea.  Otherwise, they operated from shore bases as interceptors, scout and also used to help defend remote bases like Attu in Alaska.

You're right about the performance hit something like 20%, enough that it wasn't a match for early US and Allied fighters.

ack-ack

  And don't forget the kobayashi maru that was sunk by Klingon dive bombers.  ;)

 Sorry I just saw those names and this just poped into my head lol.
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Ack-Ack on April 16, 2010, 04:47:11 PM
  And don't forget the kobayashi maru that was sunk by Klingon dive bombers.  ;)

 Sorry I just saw those names and this just poped into my head lol.

Ahhh...but the Kobayashi Maru wasn't destroyed by Klingon dive bombers.  Kirk got ahold of the attack plans and was able to successfully rescue the crew of the Kobayashi Maru and destroy the Klingon dive bombers at the same time.


ack-ack
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: Flayed on April 16, 2010, 05:26:56 PM
  But he only saved one incarnation of that poor ship.  All others were destroyed I believe lol.
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: oakranger on April 16, 2010, 09:06:43 PM
I would rather have the a6m3 and a6m6 before any seaplane. and even before my new A6ms id like to have well must i say it again... M-18!!!!

M-18, what about the M-16T
Title: Re: A6M Rufe
Post by: 321BAR on April 17, 2010, 07:45:50 AM
M-18, what about the M-16T
M-16 is too lightweight. M-18 specs... oy must i post that again? or should i just send you here?-> http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,284562.15.html  Page two explains it... And if you wanna see how much i want the M-18 type M18 into search theres 14 threads on the first page alone that i had posted in about the M-18 :rofl
to add to what i said in that link it is the fastest tracked armored vehicle from WWII