Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: swareiam on July 24, 2011, 02:52:57 PM
-
Many of you have voiced an opinion on the need for an AXIS transport. There has been obvious hesitation on the JU-52, the work horse of the Luftwaffe. So, how about the introduction of a very qualified competitor in this area. I place the first vote for the Arado AR 232. It was a mid years war design that literally soldiered to the last airframe. I believe the AR 232 could be the Luftwaffe transport we are looking for. It had a colorful and war wary service life. Do a bit of research on your own and give your opinion here.
Cheers...
Arado AR 232
(http://www.world-war-2-planes.com/images/Arado-Ar-232.jpg)
Specifications (Ar 232B)
General characteristics
Served with the Luftwaffe from 1942 until 1945
Crew: 4
Length: 23.52 m (77 ft 2 in)
Wingspan: 33.50 m (109 ft 10? in)
Height: 5.69 m (18 ft 8 in)
Wing area: 142.60 m? (1,535 ft?)
Empty weight: 12,780 kg (28,175 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 21,150 kg (46,628 lb)
Powerplant: 4 ? BMW Bramo 323 R-2 Fafnir 9-cylinder radial engine, 895 kW (1,200 hp) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 308 km/h at 4,000 m (191 mph at 13,123 ft)
Cruise speed: 290 km/h at 2,000 m (180 mph at 6,561 ft)
Range: 1,062 km (660 mi)
Service ceiling: 6,900 m (22,640 ft)
Armament
1 ? 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine gun mounted in the nose
1 ? 20 mm MG 151 cannon mounted in an EDL 151 dorsal turret
1-2 ? 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine gun mounted in the rear position
and 8 ? 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 34 machine guns mounted in side windows when transporting infantry
(http://www.aviastar.org/pictures/germany/arado-232-s.gif)
:salute
-
I'd like to shoot one down. :aok
-
Many of you have voiced an opinion on the need for an AXIS transport. There has been obvious hesitation on the JU-52, the work horse of the Luftwaffe. So, how about the introduction of a very qualified competitor in this area. I place the first vote for the Arado AR 232. It was a mid years war design that literally soldiered to the last airframe. I believe the AR 232 could be the Luftwaffe transport we are looking for. It had a colorful and war wary service life. Do a bit of research on your own and give your opinion here.
Cheers...
Hmmm...how much research went into this beyond Wiki?
The were less than 20 AR 232's built and those were pre-production aircraft and the most of those produced were retained by Arado and used to ferry parts between factories. Those few that did make it to operational service with the Luftwaffe saw very limited use.
ack-ack
-
The L2D 'Tabby' isn't good enough for you? Or does "AXIS" really mean "German"?
-
Hmmm...how much research went into this beyond Wiki?
The were less than 20 AR 232's built and those were pre-production aircraft and the most of those produced were retained by Arado and used to ferry parts between factories. Those few that did make it to operational service with the Luftwaffe saw very limited use.
ack-ack
Well as far as research goes... There was a fairly good reason why it saw limited use. It initially shared the same BMW 801 as the FW190 which the latter was a top RLM production priority at the time. Yet, the need still existed for another transport. So, provisions were made for another engine. Historically, just prior to the surrender of Field Marshall Paulus in Stalingrad January 1943. The AR 232 was the last transport to leave the city of Stalingrad prior to its capture by the Soviets. Thereby showing some promise towards its greater usage, because the need was certainly there.
Besides, that is history which no one can change. Maybe they would have reconsidered building more had the high command thought and prioritized a little differently. Maybe HT would need to consider other factors in this case. Other than numbers built, widespread usage and general popuality.
Whether a little research or a lot of research, there is an opportunity to get an AXIS transport, that had it had significatly better numbers, would have been a history maker...
JU52 or AR232 ???
Redtail7
-
The L2D 'Tabby' isn't good enough for you? Or does "AXIS" really mean "German"?
I thought reproductions of Allied aircraft didn't count. :headscratch: :D
-
I thought reproductions of Allied aircraft didn't count. :headscratch: :D
Why wouldn't it count? It was a license built aircraft and several hundred were made.
What don't count are captured aircraft. Note that we have a Japanese skin for it in AH.
-
Why wouldn't it count? It was a license built aircraft and several hundred were made.
What don't count are captured aircraft. Note that we have a Japanese skin for it in AH.
I see your point, I suppose that is why we do not have an unlicense built, uncaptured, and highly active/used AXIS transport.
Wehrmacht Workhorse... I mean donkey flown by the Luftwaffe.
(http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1040126255765&id=8bdb2f57a230e286e09bf5476b643c2e&url=http%3a%2f%2fdonkeyshines.com%2fassets%2fDonkey%2520Product%2520Images%2fdonkeypegasus450.gif)
Transportgeschwader TG2
:lol
AR 232... ;)
-
How much would a Ju52 add to the game though? Sure, I'd like it to be in, but I just can't see it being a high priority.
-
How much would a Ju52 add to the game though? Sure, I'd like it to be in, but I just can't see it being a high priority.
Ju52 had a gun, and the Ju52-3 had three engines. I'd sure as hell fly a 3-engined, armed transport over a two-engined non-armed transport (goon)
-
Ju52 had a gun, and the Ju52-3 had three engines. I'd sure as hell fly a 3-engined, armed transport over a two-engined non-armed transport (goon)
Even though you are going 50-60mph slower than the two engined transport?
I'd certainly rather my opposition was using Ju52s than C-47s. They come in much slower and the popgun, well, you may as well be unarmed.
-
How do the axis in the "axis vs allies" arena drop troops and supplies as it is now?
-
How do the axis in the "axis vs allies" arena drop troops and supplies as it is now?
Depending on the setup, either they don't or they use the C-47. If the Ju52 were added they'd use that in some settings for the Axis, in others the C-47 would get used for both sides. It is a minor component of the AvA. As I said, not a bad thing to get added, but a low priority thing really.
-
What the hell is that freaky plane?
-
What the hell is that freaky plane?
its a target.
-
why can't we stick to this and have this instead...
(http://www.fjr2.be/Junker%2052-2.jpg)
-
Should, wouldn't mind seeing the Ju-52 once every other aircraft is created before it, such as Ground Vehicles, Fighters, etc.
-
AAAHHHHH . SM-82 a faster armed three engine axis transport used for para ops AND bombing
-
AAAHHHHH . SM-82 a faster armed three engine axis transport used for para ops AND bombing
And wouldn't be added for that reason.
Ju52, sure. You get the choice of speed or guns when you choose between a C-47 and a Ju52. An SM.82 that is faster than the C-47 and armed is no longer a choice.
-
couldn't we perk it?
-
couldn't we perk it?
I suppose, but I am skeptical how many people would think paying perks for it would be worth it.
-
I suppose, but I am skeptical how many people would think paying perks for it would be worth it.
Perks for what? A transport that has a few rifle caliber machine guns? It would be a lower perk value then a C-47 of course, however I don't see any reason for it being even near as being perked.
-
Perks for what? A transport that has a few rifle caliber machine guns? It would be a lower perk value then a C-47 of course, however I don't see any reason for it being even near as being perked.
Why ever use a C-47 when you have an SM.82 as an option? It is faster and armed.
-
Okay, I am a believer and this is not just a good choice it is a great choice. The SM. 82 has the usage, numbers, history, and flight characteristics to be a winner in this category.
(http://www.eichhorn.ws/assets/images/savoia_Marchetti_SM82_Canguru.jpg)
:aok Gets my vote...
:salute
-
And wouldn't be added for that reason.
Ju52, sure. You get the choice of speed or guns when you choose between a C-47 and a Ju52. An SM.82 that is faster than the C-47 and armed is no longer a choice.
bull. you have no actual idea whether htc would add it or not. if the documentation and illustrations exist, it could very well get added.
-
bull. you have no actual idea whether htc would add it or not. if the documentation and illustrations exist, it could very well get added.
And would completely remove the C-47 from the game. If added, it would need to be perked. It would be a perk plane that was a free kill.
How many people do you think would pay perks for it over a free C-47 or Ju52?
-
Why ever use a C-47 when you have an SM.82 as an option? It is faster and armed.
Why ever use a hurr one when you have a hurri2 as an option? it's more heavely armed and comes with droptanks/bombs.
Why ever choose a spit one when you have a spit V as an option? its more heavely armed and comes with drop tanks.
Why choose the b25 when you have the b26? the b26 is more heavely armed and comes with a bigger bombload.
Just because there is something better already in the game, should not be reason enough to exclude an aircraft from inclusion. :salute
-
Why ever use a hurr one when you have a hurri2 as an option? it's more heavely armed and comes with droptanks/bombs.
Why ever choose a spit one when you have a spit V as an option? its more heavely armed and comes with drop tanks.
Why choose the b25 when you have the b26? the b26 is more heavely armed and comes with a bigger bombload.
Just because there is something better already in the game, should not be reason enough to exclude an aircraft from inclusion. :salute
Because there are Hurr I fans, Spit I fans and B-25 fans. I have yet to see a single thread in my over 11 years on this forum from a C-47 fan.
Basically, the request for the SM.82 is a request to make base captures easier.
-
Because there are Hurr I fans, Spit I fans and B-25 fans. I have yet to see a single thread in my over 11 years on this forum from a C-47 fan.
Basically, the request for the SM.82 is a request to make base captures easier.
im a c47 fan, and i just became a fan of the SM.82 after seeing it :aok
admittingly tho, not because of its 3 engines,speed, or armament, but because it looks so dam sleek&sexy :o
If it wasent aloud in the MA, it would atleast be nice to have for scenarios/AvA.
-
I think the C-47 vs Ju52 gives an interesting choice for troop transporting, speed of the C-47 or guns of the Ju52. I think there is a clearly superior answer between the two, but my opinion is not the be all, end all opinion.
-
And would completely remove the C-47 from the game. If added, it would need to be perked. It would be a perk plane that was a free kill.
How many people do you think would pay perks for it over a free C-47 or Ju52?
you do realize your claims are unfounded in any manner don't you?
sm.82
max speed = ~230mph
max alt = ~19000ft
range = ~1800mi
c-47
max speed = ~230mph
max alt = ~24000ft
max range = ~1600mi
the sm.82 was not designed to carry cargo, although a small number were modified fuel transports. the armament in the plane would be a very minor factor. nothing about the plane would make base capture any easier than it is now with a well organized group.
-
the 52 is iconic an was used from war start to wars end.
it is low priority though
-
Did the 251 generate this much controversy when it was added?
-
Did the 251 generate this much controversy when it was added?
No. Ju52 wouldn't either if HTC just showed screenshots of the upcomming Ju52. There were not threads requesting the 251 very often. It just sorta showed up.