Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Mirage on January 01, 2011, 04:10:48 PM
-
Being newer, I have been avoiding posting a wish just because I didn't want to come across as an annoying person who makes a bunch of demands for change while being new to the game, but I have been messing around with the WGr-21 rockets on the Fw-190's and also doing some research about them on the internet, I have taken down a couple of offline drones with them and am thinking about taking them to the MA, but in my research on the internet I found that the tubes which the rockets sat in were jetisonable after the rocket was fired. so my proposal is that the WGr-21's could function like the RATO units for the Ar-234b, as once the rockets have been fired and explode, the tubes will fall away?
what are your guys opinions on this?
-
if its historically accurate then im all for it. if not then... well yeah :lol
-
well I am pretty sure they did not drop away automaticaly in real life, but I was just thinking to do it like the RATO units so once you fired the rockets you dont have to select the rocket tube on the ordinance counter to drop it
-
They could be jettisoned, but I'm not sure how often a flight would actually have to drop them. Just as with external fuel tanks, they were precision pieces of equipment, that did cost the war effort to replace.
EDIT: Forgot to mention that the RATO units jetisson automagically because they are fitted with parachutes that ensure a safe descent to a waiting ground crew below. Neither the rocket tues, nor external fuel tanks had these 'chutes.
-
So it was one of those things that could be dropped, but was frowned uppon if you did drop them?
-
Correct. Of course, if a flight HAD to drop the option was available. 2 rocket tubes are a bit more replaceable than a high-performance plane and well-trained pilot.
-
Ah I see now so would it still be viable to have this as an option in ah?
-
While it may not have been a regular event in real life, it would be a nice touch.
-
Boy, I've been reading this board waaay too long.
Searched for "jettisonable"
Found buried in this thread: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,70707.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,70707.0.html)
Edited for content:
We try look into any VALID discussion of flight modling that could be incorect, and have responded to some like the rocket pod jetison before.
That question is a choice on our part to make them not jetisonable, because all players would just jetison after use, and that is not how they were used. The jetison was for emergancy only, and not disposable. There for in an effort to be more realistic we chose not to have them jetisonable. And now once again just this statment will lead to another heated argument.
HiTech
That would be a "no" from the developer.
You can tell it's him by the typos. :D
Search is very effective if you know what you are looking for. Like I said, waaay too much time reading here....
wrongway
-
Ah well I guess that settles that :)
-
Boy, I've been reading this board waaay too long.
Searched for "jettisonable"
Found buried in this thread: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,70707.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,70707.0.html)
Edited for content:
That would be a "no" from the developer.
You can tell it's him by the typos. :D
Search is very effective if you know what you are looking for. Like I said, waaay too much time reading here....
wrongway
Nice find, Wrongway.
-
but if the drop tanks were not "dropped" unless needed also then why are we allowed to do so? Sounds like more pilots returned with them then actually dropping them.
-
but if the drop tanks were not "dropped" unless needed also then why are we allowed to do so? Sounds like more pilots returned with them then actually dropping them.
I'd assume it was standard procedure for a P-51 flight on escort duty to drop their tanks just prior to engaging, later in the war.
-
but if the drop tanks were not "dropped" unless needed also then why are we allowed to do so? Sounds like more pilots returned with them then actually dropping them.
What is this from?
AFAIK drop tanks were dropped when empty or when the enemy was sighted, whichever came first.
There were no "explosive bolts" required to drop drop tanks. Besides, look at the name, drop tanks.
They did not always cooperate, however.
wrongway
-
They could be jettisoned, but I'm not sure how often a flight would actually have to drop them. Just as with external fuel tanks, they were precision pieces of equipment, that did cost the war effort to replace.
EDIT: Forgot to mention that the RATO units jetisson automagically because they are fitted with parachutes that ensure a safe descent to a waiting ground crew below. Neither the rocket tues, nor external fuel tanks had these 'chutes.
Strictly from this post....
-
I think brown baron was just using external fuel tanks as an example that it costs time and money to drop things from your airplane so that is why they were discouraged from dropping the rocket tubes once empty
-
What is this from?
AFAIK drop tanks were dropped when empty or when the enemy was sighted, whichever came first.
There were no "explosive bolts" required to drop drop tanks. Besides, look at the name, drop tanks.
They did not always cooperate, however.
wrongway
From some of the books I have read on the Luftwaffe, it appears that when planes were on the move in areas where it held air-superiority, they would keep their tanks from take-off to landing. This I infer from the obvious wear-and-tear on some tanks. As HiTech stated, they are not exactly one-time-use disposable pieces. Standard procedure for Allied forces were different, I'm sure, as their main priorty was getting their bombers' crippleing payloads on target and get back to friendly skies ASAP, while the German directive was more conservative as vital resources were destroyed.
-
It was 8 years ago that HT made that statement that the tubes would not have the option of being dropped. Perhaps his/their views have changed.
IIRC, there was a statement somewhere back when about "the B29 not ever going to be added" because it would be detrimental to game play. How times change. ;)
-
Boy, I've been reading this board waaay too long.
Searched for "jettisonable"
Found buried in this thread: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,70707.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,70707.0.html)
Edited for content:
That would be a "no" from the developer.
You can tell it's him by the typos. :D
Search is very effective if you know what you are looking for. Like I said, waaay too much time reading here....
wrongway
I don't believe you the search function never works that well.
-
It was 8 years ago that HT made that statement that the tubes would not have the option of being dropped. Perhaps his/their views have changed.
IIRC, there was a statement somewhere back when about "the B29 not ever going to be added" because it would be detrimental to game play. How times change. ;)
You find this quote. I'm pretty sure I can find a "we never said that" from a recent post.
I don't believe you the search function never works that well.
I knew what I was looking for. :D
"Search" just narrowed it down.
wrongway
-
IIRC, there was a statement somewhere back when about "the B29 not ever going to be added" because it would be detrimental to game play.
Only by players. HTC never said that. The only thing ever being ruled out was the n00k.
I almost never say never, an exception to that is an atomic bomb.
We've heard time and time again (recently if memory serves) that there is never going to be a B-29.
I don't want to comment on possible outcomes while the poll is still live but that's never been said by anybody at HTC, even in private. It would be stupid to put something in the poll that we weren't willing to make. We have said before that we'll never do an atomic bomb.
-
I remember reading the no b29 quote. about 2 years ago.
semp
-
I remember reading the no b29 quote. about 2 years ago.
semp
I want to see that :)
-
Lol I'm not sure how we got talking about b29s but to keep it a bit on topic it will be interesting to see how effective the WGr-21s will be against it :)
-
I remember reading the no b29 quote. about 2 years ago.
semp
I want to see that :)
Me too.
Search all possible variations of B29 or Superfortress by Hitech, Skuzzy, Pyro, Superfly, etc.
Good luck.
Lusche posted the "no we didn't" quote I was thinking of.
Heck, they mentioned the B-29 on the home page forever, didn't they?
wrongway