Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Tyrannis on December 04, 2010, 06:03:03 AM

Title: B-17E.
Post by: Tyrannis on December 04, 2010, 06:03:03 AM
how about it? this plane should be added for early war, may boost numbers to have more than just one heavy buff in early war.


TECHNICAL NOTES:
Armament: One .30-cal. and eight .50-cal. machine guns and 4,200 lbs. of bombs
Engines: Four Wright R-1820-65 turbo-supercharged radials of 1200 hp each
Maximum speed: 317 mph at 25,000 ft.
Cruising speed: 226 mph
Service ceiling: 36,000 ft.
Range: 3,200 miles (maximum ferry range)
Span: 103 ft. 9 in.
Length: 73 ft. 10 in.
Height: 19 ft. 2 in.
Weight: 51,000 lbs. gross weight (actual - normal load)
Serial numbers: 41-2393 to 41-2669 and 41-9011 to 41-9245
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=2452

Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Saxman on December 04, 2010, 08:38:48 AM
I'd like to see it just for the PTO scenarios in AvA and FSO. No B-17Gs fought in the Pacific.
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Volron on December 04, 2010, 10:11:00 AM
I definite +1 for this.  Seriously, it bites having to intercept B-17G's with an A6M2.  At least with the B-17E, you stand a much better chance at shooting one down. :lol
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: alpini13 on December 04, 2010, 11:20:22 AM
finally a B-17 post that makes sense!...great idea :aok
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Squire on December 04, 2010, 11:22:14 AM
Would like to see it as well. Thumbs up.
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: LLogann on December 04, 2010, 11:53:30 AM
Lanc is the only EW heavy?  And the cost of it is insane.  +1

how about it? this plane should be added for early war, may boost numbers to have more than just one heavy buff in early war.
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: VonKost on December 04, 2010, 11:56:42 AM
I've always been partial to the 17F and they made quite a few of them.
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Saxman on December 04, 2010, 12:15:22 PM
I've always been partial to the 17F and they made quite a few of them.

The F might be the better choice of the two, as only the G was produced in larger numbers. Additionally, there was only 5 months between US entry into the war and the introduction of the F model, so the E didn't have nearly the longevity before being supplanted.
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Pigslilspaz on December 04, 2010, 02:08:05 PM
+1
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: JOACH1M on December 04, 2010, 02:09:05 PM
+1
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Liberator on December 04, 2010, 02:29:35 PM
+1
Title: Re: B-17F
Post by: 321BAR on December 04, 2010, 05:47:57 PM
Thread jack!!! ^ :aok
                    |
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: SmokinLoon on December 04, 2010, 07:36:32 PM
I agree.  Both the early war heavy bombers could use an appearance.  The B24D is what my grandfather flew in the PTO. 
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Guppy35 on December 04, 2010, 09:23:08 PM
17F would be the better choice as it was used in the Pacific and also the MTO and ETO.  The F would be a better stand in for the E model then the E for the F in terms of numbers, skins etc.    Almost identical look outside of the framed nose glass on the E.  I doubt folks would want the remote belly turret of the early E model over the ball turret of the late E and F.

The best known of the PTO B17s were F models too.  Black Jack, The Mustang,and others.  Obviously the most well known B17 was an F as well with Memphis Belle.
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Tyrannis on December 04, 2010, 09:47:58 PM
17F would be the better choice as it was used in the Pacific and also the MTO and ETO.  The F would be a better stand in for the E model then the E for the F in terms of numbers, skins etc.    Almost identical look outside of the framed nose glass on the E.  I doubt folks would want the remote belly turret of the early E model over the ball turret of the late E and F.

The best known of the PTO B17s were F models too.  Black Jack, The Mustang,and others.  Obviously the most well known B17 was an F as well with Memphis Belle.

but does the F have any epic stories to top this?  :rock

http://biggeekdad.com/2010/10/old-666/

(sorry if shes not  really a b-17E, all the search engines kept calling her an E so im assuming right now she is, ether way, amazing plane and an amazing crew, with an amazing story  :salute )
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: thndregg on December 04, 2010, 10:33:03 PM
B17E or F.. I wouldn't mind either. My preference is the "F".
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Saxman on December 04, 2010, 10:37:22 PM
but does the F have any epic stories to top this?  :rock

http://biggeekdad.com/2010/10/old-666/

(sorry if shes not  really a b-17E, all the search engines kept calling her an E so im assuming right now she is, ether way, amazing plane and an amazing crew, with an amazing story  :salute )


The E and F are virtually identical airframes, so it would be easy to skin Old 666 on a B-17F (as opposed to the B-17G vs. E/F, which are different enough that HTC won't allow their skins on the G).
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Pigslilspaz on December 04, 2010, 10:40:07 PM
field modded E, wouldn't mind it though  :D

 :salute to all those men.
Title: Re: B-17E.
Post by: Guppy35 on December 04, 2010, 11:47:02 PM
If you are really interested in the Pacific B17s, I'd suggest "Fortress Against The Sun" by Gene Salecker.  It covers it from the time they got there til they were withdrawn and has individual histories on all the B17C,D, E and F that operated in combat in the Pacific.