Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: tuton25 on June 11, 2012, 02:36:46 AM
-
The game really needs to add a few axis bombers (i.e. the HE-111, DO-17, and the JU-52)
-
We have too much hangar space? :D
-
dornier-217 for late war and Heinkel -111 for BofB.
the Ju 52 aswell at some point but hardly a priority.
-
Ju188A-1 for late war and Heinkel -111 for BofB.
the Ju 52 aswell at some point but hardly a priority.
Fixed.
:p
-
I was always amazes the HE-111 was not the very first German Bomber in the game. It was produced from 1935 to 1945 in many versions. Not having it in the game is a lot like not having a Spitfire add yet. While I know it was some what inferior to the JU-88 and other later bombers, it still may be the most historically important German bomber of WWII.
-
The HE-177 certainly would NOT be a hangar queen...
Everyone fears its introduction so much (it'd basically be the poor mans B-29) that every time it's even mentioned a flame war erupts.
I'd go in $100 on having it added to the game... who's with me?! :rock
-
Fixed.
:p
Agreed, Ju-188 before Do-217, but that's not to say NEVER a Do-217 hahah
-
Would love to see more German bombers
Don't really mind which, but the He-111 would be nice.
-
The HE-177 certainly would NOT be a hangar queen...
Everyone fears its introduction so much (it'd basically be the poor mans B-29) that every time it's even mentioned a flame war erupts.
I'd go in $100 on having it added to the game... who's with me?! :rock
Me!!!
-
We have too much hangar space? :D
Perspectively, from the square footage of fighters stuffed into the AH fighter hangars... yes.
-
Yes...Wikipedia is always 100% right on the money but...this is what it says anyway.
I emboldened the big point: 351 mph at 19,000 feet. It also has a 20mm in the nose and tail. This bird needs a perk and put into the air soon. Was not aware it was around, and with roughly 1,000 copies built and combat under its belt it meets the criteria. I would even put this ahead of the He-111 for the simple reason the 111 is cannon fodder though it will be great for early and mid war scenarios. The 177 is up to snuff right away.
+1 on this one.
Boo
Performance
Maximum speed: 565 km/h (351 mph) at 6,000 (19,685 ft)
Stall speed: 135 km/h (84 mph)
Combat radius: 1,540 km (957 mi)
Ferry range: 5,600 km (3,480 mi)
Service ceiling: 8,000 m (26,246 ft)
Rate of climb: 190 m/min (623 ft/min)
Wing loading: 303.9 kg/m² (62.247 lb/ft²)
Armament
Guns: **1 × 7.92 mm MG 81 machine gun in "fishbowl" nose glazing
1 × 20 mm MG 151 cannon in forward ventral Bola gondola position
1 × 13 mm MG 131 machine gun in rear ventral Bola gondola position
2 × 13 mm MG 131 machine guns in FDL 131Z remotely operated forward dorsal turret, full 360° traverse
1 × 13 mm MG 131 machine gun in manned Hydraulische Drehlafette DL 131I aft dorsal turret
1 × 20 mm MG 151/20 cannon in tail position
Bombs: Up to 6,000 kg (13,227 lb) of ordnance internally/7,200 kg (15,873 lb) externally or up to 3 Fritz X or Henschel Hs 293 PGMs (w/FuG 203 Kehl MCLOS transmitter installed)
48 × 50 kg (110 lb) bombs (2,400 kg/5,291 lb total)
1 × 2,500 kg (5,511 lb) bomb (2,500 kg/5,511 lb total)
12 × 250 kg (551 lb) bombs (3,000 kg/6,613 lb total)
6 × 500 kg (1,102 lb) bombs (3,000 kg/6,613 lb total)
2 × 1,800 kg (3,968 lb) bombs (3,600 kg/7,936 lb total)
2 × 1,800 kg (3,968 lb) bombs + 2 × LMA III mines (4,600 kg/10,141 lb total)
10 × 500 kg (1,102 lb) bombs (5,000 kg/11,023 lb total)
2 × 1,000 kg (2,204 lb) bombs + 2 × 1,800 kg (3,968 lb) bombs (5,600 kg/12,345 lb total)
6 × 1,000 kg (2,204 lb) bombs (6,000 kg/13,227 lb total)
2 × FX 1400 Fritz X + 1 × FX 1400 Fritz X under the wings and fuselage (w/FuG 203 Kehl MCLOS transmitter installed)
2 × Hs 293 or 294 + 1 × Hs 293 or 294 under the wings and fuselage (w/FuG 203 Kehl MCLOS transmitter installed)
2 × 500 kg (1,102 lb) bombs internally + 2 × Hs 293 under the wings (w/FuG 203 Kehl MCLOS transmitter installed)
2 × LT 50 torpedoes under the wing
-
He-177 is old news. Mostly seen carrying guided missiles (which are heavy and draggy) on the outer wings. When it was bombing it wan't as effective as folks on this forum like to pretend.
Let me put it this way.... The B-17 was designed to carry loads up to and exceeding 18,000lbs.
Doesn't mean it did it. 5,000lbs was the standard bomb load.
Might try checking into the actual history of this plane's use. I don't know all of it but I've read some of the Eastern Front use.
It would be a serious abuse of history to include it in the game ahead of ... well.. ANY other plane IMO. Unlike the Me210's undeserved reputation, the He-177 definitely deserved its bad rap.
-
Ju-290A-5
http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/2-Airplanes/Axis/1-Germany/04-Bombers/Ju-290/Ju-290A-5.htm
-
The sky over London was black with He-111's
This bird crapped all over my home town.......I want to shoot it down! :D
Crazy birds like the 177 can wait, this ones important.
-
I frequently defer to the officianados on these points. One note with the 177 having engine problems that restricted aspects of its mission. Is this also not true of the P-47M or N?
As for "the Few" wanting to shoot down some Heinkels of ill repute...gotta respect that.
Boo
-
A Ju-188A-2 would be nice, purely for the extra engine power.
-
He-177 is old news. Mostly seen carrying guided missiles (which are heavy and draggy) on the outer wings. When it was bombing it wan't as effective as folks on this forum like to pretend.
Let me put it this way.... The B-17 was designed to carry loads up to and exceeding 18,000lbs.
Doesn't mean it did it. 5,000lbs was the standard bomb load.
Might try checking into the actual history of this plane's use. I don't know all of it but I've read some of the Eastern Front use.
It would be a serious abuse of history to include it in the game ahead of ... well.. ANY other plane IMO. Unlike the Me210's undeserved reputation, the He-177 definitely deserved its bad rap.
He-177s bombed London using 2 x SC1800 plus 2 x SC1000, that is 5,6t (12.000lbs+) right there and they could carry up to 7t. And that is from the early Steinbock raids, when the aircraft still had issues and before the A5 was fielded in numbers.
B-17 might have been designed for 18000lbs, but that was well before they put all those gun turrets on it.
You might want to read for a change about the He-177 instead of repeating common misconceptions...
-
B-17 might have been designed for 18000lbs, but that was well before they put all those gun turrets on it.
B-17G's maximum allowed bomb load was 16,000lbs.
-
B-17G's maximum allowed bomb load was 16,000lbs.
It should be noted that the "maximum" bomb load for B-17s was including external ordnance (assuming they had fittings for it)
And I have seen that listed at 16,000/17,600/and 18,000lbs.
The maximum INTERNAL bomb load was well under 10,000lbs. (I believe it capped at 8k, but 4k to 5k was a standard bomb load... not sure how accurate those numbers are but they are in the ballpark for sure).
-
It should be noted that the "maximum" bomb load for B-17s was including external ordnance (assuming they had fittings for it)
And I have seen that listed at 16,000/17,600/and 18,000lbs.
The maximum INTERNAL bomb load was well under 10,000lbs. (I believe it capped at 8k, but 4k to 5k was a standard bomb load... not sure how accurate those numbers are but they are in the ballpark for sure).
And? The implication I was responding to was that the B-17 had that rated load prior to the addition of all the turrets and that it had been reduced to ~6,000lbs by the turrets.
Keep in mind that most German bombers seem to rely on external hard points as well. Certainly the Ju88, Ju188 and He177 fall into that category.
-
And? The implication I was responding to was that the B-17 had that rated load prior to the addition of all the turrets and that it had been reduced to ~6,000lbs by the turrets.
Keep in mind that most German bombers seem to rely on external hard points as well. Certainly the Ju88, Ju188 and He177 fall into that category.
Oh, please don't misunderstand, I was only clarifying in case someone started losing their minds over how small the B-17 bomb load is in AH compared to the theoretical maximum.
To go tit for tat as far as the HE-177 is concerned would, I believe, put its maximum in-game bomb load somewhere between the B-17 and the Lancaster... but perhaps not necessarily as useful (the # and size of the bombs themselves).
-
+1 :aok
-
To go tit for tat as far as the HE-177 is concerned would, I believe, put its maximum in-game bomb load somewhere between the B-17 and the Lancaster... but perhaps not necessarily as useful (the # and size of the bombs themselves).
4t of bombs at ~2800km range is not that bad , isn't it?
Bombs were 4x 1000kg but they could also use bigger ones (2x 1.7/1.8t)
-
Who needs bombers when you have B38's!
-
I frequently defer to the officianados on these points. One note with the 177 having engine problems that restricted aspects of its mission. Is this also not true of the P-47M or N?
As for "the Few" wanting to shoot down some Heinkels of ill repute...gotta respect that.
Boo
An enormous portion of the plane/vehicle set in-game had moderate to severe teething trouble and many were plagued with issues throughout.
Since AH doesn't model that, we don't have to worry about it.
Ignore the "I'M SKEERED OF A GERMAN HEAVY BOMBER!!!" crowd. They are citing trouble the HE-177 had early on, the bird is more qualified than many already in the game.
-
An enormous portion of the plane/vehicle set in-game had moderate to severe teething trouble and many were plagued with issues throughout.
Since AH doesn't model that, we don't have to worry about it.
Ignore the "I'M SKEERED OF A GERMAN HEAVY BOMBER!!!" crowd. They are citing trouble the HE-177 had early on, the bird is more qualified than many already in the game.
To a degree yes, but none of those units dominate the game. Even the N1K2-J and Ki-84, which had horrid quality control, aren't modeled as wonder weapons like they are in IL-2: Sturmovik. They use Japanese fuel and the performance resulting from that, not the post war tests on higher octane American fuel that produced much higher performance.
Add the He177 into the game by the numbers and it will utterly dominate the B-17, B-24 and Lancaster, likely becoming the most common bomber by a large margin.
-
To a degree yes, but none of those units dominate the game. Even the N1K2-J and Ki-84, which had horrid quality control, aren't modeled as wonder weapons like they are in IL-2: Sturmovik. They use Japanese fuel and the performance resulting from that, not the post war tests on higher octane American fuel that produced much higher performance.
Add the He177 into the game by the numbers and it will utterly dominate the B-17, B-24 and Lancaster, likely becoming the most common bomber by a large margin.
I agree that if this aircraft was modeled based on it's "best of" paper stats, it would be rather ludicrous.
However, I think that HTC has done a bang up job modeling everything so far... there is no one plane that dominates anywhere... and I think that if they decide to give us some Grief it'll be great!
-
I agree that if this aircraft was modeled based on it's "best of" paper stats, it would be rather ludicrous.
However, I think that HTC has done a bang up job modeling everything so far... there is no one plane that dominates anywhere... and I think that if they decide to give us some Grief it'll be great!
The only things they could do, if reliability is off the table, is a combination of making it structurally weak, limiting it to lighter bomb loads or perking it. By the numbers it looks like it would be a ~350mph bomber with a 20mm cannon in the tail and ~13,000lb bomb load.
-
Been flying it for years.
It does not cause the other bombers to become hangar queens.
That said........
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/40/PetlyakovPe-8.jpg)
some of you also have experience flying this one since it existed in fighter ace.
-
And? The implication I was responding to was that the B-17 had that rated load prior to the addition of all the turrets and that it had been reduced to ~6,000lbs by the turrets.
Keep in mind that most German bombers seem to rely on external hard points as well. Certainly the Ju88, Ju188 and He177 fall into that category.
What implication?
Krusty affirmed that was the number, I just put in doubt that the initially turret-less B-17 could actually carry that to any useful distance after being encumbered with so many turrets, crewmen and guns. But, I am pretty sure that if the USAAF could have loaded more bombs into the B-17 and still fly high and far they would have.
Btw, I never mentioned 6000lbs, get your facts straight.
The He-177 carried only the bulky SC2500 and missiles externally since it was quite capable of carrying its full 7t load internally, which is more than 15000lbs.
Now I see why some people are worried about the Greif taking the place of their preferred rides, but the truth is that the He-177 isnt as good as they fear. I have to dig some data up, but Ill post it as soon as I can.
But no, the Greif wont be doing 350mph loaded, not even close.
And the 20mm has miserable angles.
-
To a degree yes, but none of those units dominate the game. Even the N1K2-J and Ki-84, which had horrid quality control, aren't modeled as wonder weapons like they are in IL-2: Sturmovik. They use Japanese fuel and the performance resulting from that, not the post war tests on higher octane American fuel that produced much higher performance.
Add the He177 into the game by the numbers and it will utterly dominate the B-17, B-24 and Lancaster, likely becoming the most common bomber by a large margin.
So perk it then ;)
-
So perk it then ;)
Having to perk something that was, in reality, a dismal, mediocre piece of crap so that it doesn't dominate successful units strikes me as a sign that something is seriously wrong.
-
Having to perk something that was, in reality, a dismal, mediocre piece of crap so that it doesn't dominate successful units strikes me as a sign that something is seriously wrong.
Explain the Tiger II then? HTC is developing the vehicles as if they were in tip top shape without bugs or issues - assuming they were ever fixed in case of the He-177 they were.
If there isn't a blend of Arcade and realism people would simply be frustrated by common problems like for example on a Tiger II the transmission broke down constantly.
Imagine if someone rolled off base 25 feet then suddenly the engine died, forcing them to either get supplies or ditch and lose 150 perks without even firing a shot?
-
They were never fixed in the He177, which is why Heinkel kept working on the He277 secretly. The He177A-5 was better than the earlier models, but still far from acceptable, still much worse than the always brought up in He177 threads B-29A started at.
-
Tiger II is highly perked, and wails the crap out of every other GV it meets, except MAYBE the M18 (haven't played, don't know what the situation is). I don't think theres really anything that could dominate the the plane set, fighter or bomber, in the same way the Tiger II dominates the GV set.
And yet the Tiger II also had dismal reliability. Yeah, it was pretty well armored, even counting the poor steel, up untill late summer of 44 when things REALLY went down hill. Yeah, the best-armed tank of the war. But IIRC, the average distance traveled before a break down of some sort was only about 80 miles.
-
Tiger II is highly perked, and wails the crap out of every other GV it meets, except MAYBE the M18 (haven't played, don't know what the situation is). I don't think theres really anything that could dominate the the plane set, fighter or bomber, in the same way the Tiger II dominates the GV set.
And yet the Tiger II also had dismal reliability. Yeah, it was pretty well armored, even counting the poor steel, up untill late summer of 44 when things REALLY went down hill. Yeah, the best-armed tank of the war. But IIRC, the average distance traveled before a break down of some sort was only about 80 miles.
No, it wails the crap out of M18's too ;)
-
They were never fixed in the He177, which is why Heinkel kept working on the He277 secretly. The He177A-5 was better than the earlier models, but still far from acceptable, still much worse than the always brought up in He177 threads B-29A started at.
Yeah but if HTC Allows the Tiger II in the game, despite its numerous problems which were never worked out - the He-177 has a pretty good chance to be added in game as well.
I argued against the Tiger II when it was suggested to be added, mainly the reliability issues of its transmission and everything else - since it was added to Aces High I can't argue against adding the He-177 since frankly there isn't an argument.
He-177 might of never got the bugs fixed completely, neither did the Tiger II, however with the war already lost - there was no time really to work the bugs out, it was simply straight out of the factories into combat, where being a pillbox worked out for it.
-
Karnak has some strange abomination towards the 177.
-
Karnak has some strange abomination towards the 177.
Do you mean abhorence?
-
Do you mean abhorence?
He probably means abhorrence...
:bolt:
:salute
-
It rubs me the wrong way. That the best heavy bomber in the game would be one that was historically insignificant and mostly a disastrous program for the Germans. It is like having the best fighter turn in the game be the P-40 or LaGG-3 and not the F4U-4.
-
Look, Karnak, The A3s and A5s werent nearly as bad as the early series (what were total death traps, i agree). Also... 4-hogs are one of the very best planes here, how many of them were built? Did they played a larger role in the war? Stepping forward, there is an aircraft called P-47M. How many were built? What were the reports of its reliability? Yet its one of the bestest BnZ fighters in game, totally dominates the eny5 pony for example. Got my point, Sir?
See, this reasoning is invalid, Sir. Even tho i agree with you that the Ju-188 is higly above the He-177 priority-wise, even i (the laic) can bring up better reasons: the 188 played a much larger role in the war, was produced in larger numbers, could fit on many special events, is high performance, had many variations, etc etc.
The point is, whos opinion you would like to change, Tank Ace's or HTCs? You know, there is one you surely cant change and an other what might be flexible.
:salute
-
As I've said in the past, the He177 is clearly a potential addition as it obviously meets all of the criteria. I would simply make some of the modeling choices that are subjective, not the raw performance numbers that are fixed and it must hit, a bit weak. Give the engines and fuselage a lower damage limit, give it a bit lower of a speed and G limit before it breaks. Not sure about how to handle its bomb load as I've never seen a good list of what it carried and every list seems to be different. I frequently see 11,000 and 13,000lbs listed (jag88 is saying over 15,000lbs, though his use of the "88" number in his name makes me question his reliability) and I have seen much lower numbers as well.
-
As I've said in the past, the He177 is clearly a potential addition as it obviously meets all of the criteria. I would simply make some of the modeling choices that are subjective, not the raw performance numbers that are fixed and it must hit, a bit weak. Give the engines and fuselage a lower damage limit, give it a bit lower of a speed and G limit before it breaks. Not sure about how to handle its bomb load as I've never seen a good list of what it carried and every list seems to be different. I frequently see 11,000 and 13,000lbs listed (jag88 is saying over 15,000lbs, though his use of the "88" number in his name makes me question his reliability) and I have seen much lower numbers as well.
I have a few books on the He-177 if you want me to send you to help you research it.
-
Give the engines and fuselage a lower damage limit, give it a bit lower of a speed and G limit before it breaks.
I would oppose that very much. The advantage the He 177 had over the other bombers during the Steinbock raids was that it could attain a much higher velocity in a shallow dive to avoid AA fire and night fighters. That doesn't read to me like a structurally weak machine, not surprising if taking into account it was being designed as a true dive bomber (even though that would have pushed things a little too far).
I understand where you are coming from and actually share the same concerns, but I would be all against artificially weakening an airframe to adjust it's usage in Aces High. Our Me 262 hasn't unreliable engines in routine operations either, they are just very prone to damage - and this could be the way for a possible HE 177 to. A heavy bomber with only two, but quite fragile engines would suffer in it's popularity. And beyond that, there's always the balance tool of perk points.
Of course, all that problems can be avoided if we would get the Do 217 instead of the He 177 :devil
-
The Ki-84 had engine and landing gear reliability problems in reality. In AH those problems don't exist, but it does shed control surfaces in AH which nobody has been able to find any data suggesting was a problem with it in reality. What I am suggesting for the He177 is along that line.
The fuselage weakness I was taking from comments by Capt. Eric Brown.
-
As I've said in the past, the He177 is clearly a potential addition as it obviously meets all of the criteria. I would simply make some of the modeling choices that are subjective, not the raw performance numbers that are fixed and it must hit, a bit weak. Give the engines and fuselage a lower damage limit, give it a bit lower of a speed and G limit before it breaks. Not sure about how to handle its bomb load as I've never seen a good list of what it carried and every list seems to be different. I frequently see 11,000 and 13,000lbs listed (jag88 is saying over 15,000lbs, though his use of the "88" number in his name makes me question his reliability) and I have seen much lower numbers as well.
Would the He-177 manual do?
(http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo208/jag888/Bomload.jpg)
4 x SC1700 make 6800Kg, that is 14991lbs. Granted, that is for the initial A0 version of the aircraft and as such it does not include missiles, 6 x SC1000 (2 of them external I understand), 2 x SC2500, 2 x SC1700 + 2 x SC1800 or any other late and/or external loads.
This one comes from the same document:
(http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/weapons-systems-tech/45688d1299773437t-he-177-bomb-bay-load-out-he-177.jpg)
Data on range-load for the He-177:
(http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/He177A_load_range.jpg)
Structural weakness is a no go, these aircraft did up to 680Km/h in shallow dives during Steinbock (Nowarra, pp 228) so clearly any structural problems these aircraft had were gone by 1944 (Griehl, pp.53).
Funny you should question my reliability since I have been the only one to back his assertions with sources, but hey, who am I to question someone who believes on Egytian gods? Or did I just also made a wild assumption based on someones fake internet game?
JAG
-
jag88,
I am not saying you aren't reliable either. Just that the "88" bit can have negative connotations and I wasn't sure of its use in your case.
I appreciate the primary source documentation. It is always preferred.
Do you know what was commonly carried in practice?
-
Ok, no problem, I had to add a number when I found my regular name was already taken and 88 is easy to remember for reasons other than "the 88", actually.
There were several configurations and I found references of them operating with 1000Kg loads to 5600Kg loads, they could carry more but I have not found references for actual missions. Info on this aircraft is hard to come by.
The gun angles for the A3 manual, A 20mm sounds great until you see how restricted those gun arcs really were:
(http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo208/jag888/Gunangles.jpg)
The R2 config is for the Mg151/20mm armed birds. It really only leaves a single 13mm to defend the belly.
I think the fact that the aircraft can carry fewer 250 and 500Kg bombs than the Lanc would affect its popularity. It can carry a lot, but that load is usually spread between fewer bombs and that reduces its in-game flexibility.
Btw, speeds are actually little better than the Lancs and B17...
JAG
-
What is the climb rate?
As to the weak fuselage, Capt. Brown said he was told to be careful due to that when he flew it. That it had a nasty combination of very light elevators and a weak fuselage structure. I don't think that would affect speed though.
-
...and here is where we have the problem:
(http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/aviation/85637d1236108177-he177-speed-climb-he177a3-data.jpg)
As you can see this is the maker's data for Dec. 1942 and the source for the oft-quoted 550Km/h level.
This is the official one from June 1944.
(http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/aviation/151797d1289907083-b-17-vs-he-177-vs-lancaster-p1100048.jpg)
All credit for this find and the pic is alejandro's.
I am more inclined to believe the later set as the correct data, as you can see there is a sizable difference in performance and it actually (in the later table) roughly matches the speeds, weights and altitudes recorded in AH's charts for the B-17 and Lanc. Roughly, at 31t it matches the Lanc's performance, but at 26t it does outperform the B-17 at 6000m in speed and load.
Its only true "advantage" is that it can tolerate dives loaded, it really doesnt outperform the other bombers that much to warrant perking or neutering it.
JAG
-
Karnak, you want to make it shed gear, and NON CRITICAL components, fine. But, really, if it didn't break up in a dive, it shouldn't be rendered inopperable just because you don't want to beat it with the perk-stick.
-
Been flying the He177 for years.
Nice plane but I took the pe8, DB3, b24 more often.
-
The Ju 188 was hardly more important or built in larger numbers thant the He 177 - just 100 more built.
The He 177 GL/C table has to be taken with care, the last two rows note flame dampers and a minimum of 5% power loss yet max speeds (at too low FTH) are the same or even above the A-3/R2. Nowhere in this table is noted whether Gm is just fuel burnt or if the bombs have been dropped (external glide bombs in case of the A-3). Data source for the A-3 is Rechlin while the other two seem purely calculated.
-
Karnak, you want to make it shed gear, and NON CRITICAL components, fine. But, really, if it didn't break up in a dive, it shouldn't be rendered inopperable just because you don't want to beat it with the perk-stick.
My point was that the Ki-84 already got that treatment, despite being built to greater strength requirements than any other WWII Japanese fighter, not that the He177 should as well.
I am saying that it should be more vulnerable to Gs and to damage inflicted on it. In other words, dive it as fast as it can go, but be gentle on the pullup.
-
Alright, sounds reasonable.
Oh, and as to the He-177 being the best heavy bomber, *cough* B29.