Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: BaldEagl on January 31, 2014, 11:49:21 PM
-
I see no reason why the PBY Catalina has been excluded from the game for this long.
(http://www.airplane-pictures.net/images/uploaded-images/2009-3/30/40932.jpg)
PBY
June 1937-May 1945
4,051 Catalinas, Cansos (Canada), and GSTs (Soviet Union)
Proposed Varient: PBY-5A
October 1941–January 1945
Production: 802
One of the most widely used seaplanes of World War II, Catalinas served with every branch of the United States Armed Forces and in the air forces and navies of many other nations including Australia, Brazil, Canada, Great Britan and Russia with the last active military PBYs retired from service in the 1980s.
Imagine the skinning options to appeal to our players from around the world.
Let's forget temporarily about it's actual seaplane capabilities. Those can be modeled later at an appropriate time.
(http://www.airplane-pictures.net/images/uploaded-images/2009-7/6/52537.jpg)
So now that we've established it, at least temporarily, as a land based plane lets see what could be done with it in the game.
During World War II, PBYs were used in anti-submarine warfare (Catalinas were the most extensively used anti-submarine warfare aircraft in both the Atlantic and Pacific Theaters of World War II and were also used in the Indian Ocean.), patrol bombing (United States Navy Black Cats attacked Japanese supply convoys at night sinking 112,700 tons of merchant shipping, damaging 47,000 tons and 10 Japanese warships.), convoy escorts, search and rescue missions (especially air-sea rescue) and cargo transport. In addition, both USN and RAAF Catalinas regularly mounted nuisance night bombing raids on Japanese bases.
Catalinas participated in some of the most notable naval engagements of World War II. An RAF Coastal Command Catalina located the German battleship Bismarck, which was attempting to evade Royal Navy forces, a flight of Catalinas spotted the Japanese fleet approaching Midway Island, beginning the Battle of Midway while a Royal Canadian Air Force Canso foiled Japanese plans to destroy the Royal Navy's Indian Ocean fleet when it detected the Japanese carrier fleet approaching Ceylon.
Light bomber, torpedo aircraft (in our case used against task groups until submarines are modeled), armed cargo/troop transport, spotter/observation aircraft (allow it the same GV spotting capabilities as the Storch).
Skinning possibilities expand with the introduction of the Black Cats.
Use in scenarios, particularily Midway.
Let's look at performance.
General characteristics
Crew: 10 — pilot, co-pilot, bow turret gunner, flight engineer, radio operator, navigator, radar operator, two waist gunners, ventral gunner
Length: 63 ft 10 7/16 in (19.46 m)
Wingspan: 104 ft 0 in (31.70 m)
Height: 21 ft 1 in (6.15 m)
Wing area: 1,400 ft² (130 m²)
Empty weight: 20,910 lb (9,485 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 35,420 lb (16,066 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney R-1830-92 Twin Wasp radial engines, 1,200 hp each
Performance
Maximum speed: 196 mph (314 km/h)
Cruise speed: 125 mph (201 km/h)
Range: 2,520 mi (4,030 km)
Service ceiling: 15,800 ft (4,000 m)
Rate of climb: 1,000 ft/min (5.1 m/s)
Armament
3 .30 cal (7.62 mm) machine guns (two in nose turret, one in ventral hatch at tail)
2 .50 cal (12.7 mm) machine guns (one in each waist blister)
4,000 lb (1,814 kg) of bombs or depth charges (or torpedo racks)
By some measures a hanger queen but, with a unique combination of chachteristics all it's own and the ability to expand on it's uses as the game progresses combined with nearly endless skinning possibilities catering to players from many nations outside the US I'd venture to guess that the Catalina would develop a strong, albeit small, core audience.
For the umpteenth time I think the PBY is long overdue.
-
Agree. Full stop. No excuse.
-
+1, nothing like a slow flying, weakly defended target. Now if you want a Flying boat that could defend its self and was a hell of a lot quicker, the HK8
General characteristics
Crew: 10
Length: 28.15 m (92 ft 4 in)
Wingspan: 38.00 m (124 ft 8 in)
Height: 9.15 m (30 ft)
Wing area: 160 m² (1,721 ft²)
Empty weight: 18,380 kg (40,436 lb)
Loaded weight: 24,500 kg (53,900 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 32,500 kg (71,500 lb)
Powerplant: 4 × Mitsubishi Kasei 22 radial engines, 1,380 kW (1,850 hp) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 465 km/h (290 mph)
Range: 7,150 km (4,440 mi)
Service ceiling: 8,760 m (28,740 ft)
Rate of climb: 8.1 m/s (1,600 ft/min)
Wing loading: 153 kg/m² (31 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: 0.22 kW/kg (0.14 hp/lb
Armament
Guns:
5× 20 mm Type 99 cannon (one each in bow, dorsal, and tail turrets, plus one each in two waist blisters)
5× 7.7 mm (.303 in) Type 92 machine guns in fuselage hatches
Bombs: 2× 800 kg (1,764 lb) torpedoes or Eight 250kg (4,400lbs) bombs.
(http://www.msacomputer.com/flyingboats-old/japan/H8K-Type2-Emily-m.jpg)
The Sunderland Mk III was also in service and was faster with better fields of fire, though the bomb load was a bit lower.
(http://www.war44.com/misc/images/2/Sunderland_Flying_boat.jpg)
-
I see no reason why the PBY Catalina has been excluded from the game for this long.
I see plenty of reasons:
- Totally useless as far as MA goes.
- The US plane set is bloated compared to the other big countries as it is.
- Very, very little use for special events. It is so easy to name aircraft which would be many times more useful as far as these events go.
-
I see plenty of reasons:
- Totally useless as far as MA goes.
- The US plane set is bloated compared to the other big countries as it is.
- Very, very little use for special events. It is so easy to name aircraft which would be many times more useful as far as these events go.
Same here although I would really like to see a P47D23 and a B25J (with formation) added.
-
+1
-
I think HTC would need to create a role that the Catalina could perform in the MA for it to be worth adding. Given its limited speed and defensive capability, the ability to up at a port would not be enough for it to see much use. The only role that comes to mind is allowing it to land next to a damaged fleet and resupply it.
The H8K would be a useful bomber in its own right and not need a specialist role. Also the floatplane version of the A6M2 would be a handy port defence aircraft and need few resources for HTC to create.
-
I think HTC would need to create a role that the Catalina could perform in the MA for it to be worth adding. Given its limited speed and defensive capability, the ability to up at a port would not be enough for it to see much use. The only role that comes to mind is allowing it to land next to a damaged fleet and resupply it.
Showing enemy TGs on the map so long as it's in visual range.
-
Showing enemy TGs on the map so long as it's in visual range.
Seems kinda tedious for the PBY player.
And what happens to the PBY if HTC ever decides to add the Sunderland or Emily?
-
I agree that a flying boat would be a neat addition for the game but it would need a role that is mission related as simply bombing would make it less than useless. I still think along with fighter, bomber, vehicle and attack missions there needs to be a reconnaissance mission added. This would also incur perk points with the slower and more vulnerable aircraft awarding higher points. The mission should be developed along the lines of discovering targets of opportunity for each side. This should include locating fleets and shipping at sea along with finding the strats. Simply seperating the strats appears to be a good stop-gap measure but if HTC really wants this MMOG to develop and grow there needs to be a random distinction to target discovery.
I know everyone here hates Warbirds with a passion and after being here since October I am no fan anymore either. However, when I left Warbirds in 2004, the maps did have targets of opportunity strewn about it. A remote factory here, a railroad marshaling yard over there as well as concentrated targets around cities. This is where the Catalina, the Mavis, the Kingfishers, the Sunderland and a whole host of potential additions could add this critical dimension to the game.
Other than each others airbases, each new map could have the strategic targets shifted around and hidden until a reconnaissance aircraft discovers them. Then once found they remain painted on the map until the next map turns over. I'm sure the pure furballers on here would protest the development efforts but I feel this dimension of the game would be beneficial to all.
It would provide for daring recon missions for thrill seekers while fighter pilots would have to endure some mundane patrols ( just like in real life) hunting for these snoopers. Then it would simulate that pleasant feeling you top guns get when you spot easy meat attempting to make a hasty exit from the area.
It would create a reason for being and a mission for the topic of this thread as well as other seaplanes, floatplanes and land based recon aircraft.
It would create variety in the maps that a lot of you old timers have memorized thus injecting new thrills and discoveries.
My argument here is not just about supporting or increasing "porking" as many of you will think. It's about expanding the dimension of an already excellent MMOG and bringing it even closer what was real back then.
-
I think HTC would need to create a role that the Catalina could perform in the MA for it to be worth adding. Given its limited speed and defensive capability, the ability to up at a port would not be enough for it to see much use. The only role that comes to mind is allowing it to land next to a damaged fleet and resupply it.
The H8K would be a useful bomber in its own right and not need a specialist role. Also the floatplane version of the A6M2 would be a handy port defence aircraft and need few resources for HTC to create.
:airplane: Resupply of CV's is good idea! I think to make it more useable in the game, make it where it would not show on radar, and be able to travel with no Icons! At least that way, it would have a chance to survive long enough to re-supply a CV or a port!
-
:airplane: Resupply of CV's is good idea! I think to make it more useable in the game, make it where it would not show on radar, and be able to travel with no Icons! At least that way, it would have a chance to survive long enough to re-supply a CV or a port!
No, no and no.
Fleets were resupplied by freighters, not the light load a flying boat could carry.
PBYs, and other flying boats, were not stealth and would show up on radar just fine.
PBYs, and other flying boats, were not harder to see than other aircraft.
Survivability is what it is. P-40s don't get compensation because they are less survivable than P-51s. Want more survivability? Use an Emily. Want more perk points for your sortie? Take a PBY-5A.
Having the flying boat that spots an enemy CV put the enemy CV's icon on the map for a period of time. Say, keep the fleet in sight for 5-10 minutes to "mark its course" and then the fleet icon stays on the map for ~30 minutes, gradually fading until it is gone. Causing the icon to show up, or refresh if the fleet already had an icon, would be the trigger to to award the perks/score. That seems to me to be the best idea for flying boats. Of course, they will act as bombers as well.
-
I would love the pby to be my torp bomber of choice. 2 US torps could sink a cv, so would only need one of these beautiful birds. And I don't even care if htc makes it LANd on water (what's the point anyway, besides having it spawnable at ports). +1 PBY
-
Yes. +1 for the H6K. :D
-
I agree with Fish that the H8K would be a much better flying boat to have in game.
-
No, no and no.
Fleets were resupplied by freighters, not the light load a flying boat could carry.
PBYs, and other flying boats, were not stealth and would show up on radar just fine.
PBYs, and other flying boats, were not harder to see than other aircraft.
Survivability is what it is. P-40s don't get compensation because they are less survivable than P-51s. Want more survivability? Use an Emily. Want more perk points for your sortie? Take a PBY-5A.
Having the flying boat that spots an enemy CV put the enemy CV's icon on the map for a period of time. Say, keep the fleet in sight for 5-10 minutes to "mark its course" and then the fleet icon stays on the map for ~30 minutes, gradually fading until it is gone. Causing the icon to show up, or refresh if the fleet already had an icon, would be the trigger to to award the perks/score. That seems to me to be the best idea for flying boats. Of course, they will act as bombers as well.
I'd treat it like strategy mode in 1942: The icon position updates only so long as the scout remains within visual contact. Once contact is lost, the icon stays in a fixed position for so long (say, half an hour) to show where the boat was the last time it was spotted, maybe with a tooltip when hovering over the icon giving:
Course Heading
Last Contact
You could then differentiate between "Active" sightings (sightings updated within the last 5 minutes) and "Inactive" sightings (sightings updated later than 15mins) by graying out the icon.
Make "Scout" an actual mission type in the hangar, available to the PBY, H8K, and I'd also argue the SBD and B5N since those also saw heavy use as scouts (I'm divided on whether to do so for the B-24 and B-17. Maybe allow it, but formations are disabled for Scouting missions). Make the PBY and H8K available from ports, and that would give you scout planes available from land bases, ports, and carriers. Points and perks are only awarded for performing scout duties with this mission type, and while the player can still take ordinance, but as with Fighter missions, won't receive points for blowing stuff up when they do. Additionally, ONLY flying a "Scout" mission will mark the CV location.
-
Oh, and as for the PBY vs. H8K...
Add them both, and perk the H8K (uses bomber perks).
There were over 3300 Catalinas built compared to just shy of 170 H8Ks. Regardless of capability, the PBY is THE representative flying boat type (more Catalinas produced by the US alone than all of the Sunderlands, H8Ks, H6Ks, Mariners and Marses COMBINED), so even if the Emily and Sunderland are more capable, it would be like having the B-29 and omitting the B-24 to go right to the H8K and not add the Catalina.
-
Don't think the H8K has the performance/survivability to justify being perked. While not many were built, it was worked hard making those 170 far, far more significant to the war than, say, the Ta152 (less than 50), Wirbelwind (less than 50), Ostwind (less than 100), F4U-1C (200), C.205 (250), N1K2-J (just over 400) or P-47M (100). The PBY-5A was more significant, true, but that sort of relationship has not gotten things like the C.205 perked to protect the usage of the C.202 in the MA.
I am skeptical of perking anything that lacks the performance or survivability to justify perking it. That only leads people to almost never using it as it is a waste of perk points, see Ta152 and Spitfire Mk XIV as examples. People will use the PBY-5A if they want to just as some people use the P-40E because they want to.
-
Similar to Greebo I would say the right environment would need to be created.
It would be great for early war scenarios though in general the Naval operations are late-war. An example, you climb into the 5" guns and have the benefit of proximity fuzes, that I am pretty certain, only the US had and it was late-war.
If we added a cargo convoy and lowered the AAA to early war standards the Catalina could have some fun making torpedo runs. Short of that, it would be like upping a Val.
boo
-
Don't think the H8K has the performance/survivability to justify being perked. While not many were built, it was worked hard making those 170 far, far more significant to the war than, say, the Ta152 (less than 50), Wirbelwind (less than 50), Ostwind (less than 100), F4U-1C (200), C.205 (250), N1K2-J (just over 400) or P-47M (100). The PBY-5A was more significant, true, but that sort of relationship has not gotten things like the C.205 perked to protect the usage of the C.202 in the MA.
I am skeptical of perking anything that lacks the performance or survivability to justify perking it. That only leads people to almost never using it as it is a waste of perk points, see Ta152 and Spitfire Mk XIV as examples. People will use the PBY-5A if they want to just as some people use the P-40E because they want to.
I think a perk is justifiable if you compare it to other aircraft with the same role, as is the case of the B-29 vs the other US bombers. The H8K out-performs the PBY significantly enough (although I THINK the Catalina had a larger bomb load, I'd have to double check. The Cat also had a FAR more variable armament if you were to include anything the Black Cats did, and I'm sure there's a case to be made for some of those loads) that if both are added it would be the dominant flying boat in the game. A mild perk (5-10) to encourage more use of the Catalina would be fair.
-
I think a perk is justifiable if you compare it to other aircraft with the same role, as is the case of the B-29 vs the other US bombers. The H8K out-performs the PBY significantly enough (although I THINK the Catalina had a larger bomb load, I'd have to double check. The Cat also had a FAR more variable armament if you were to include anything the Black Cats did, and I'm sure there's a case to be made for some of those loads) that if both are added it would be the dominant flying boat in the game. A mild perk (5-10) to encourage more use of the Catalina would be fair.
B-29 isn't perked because of how it performs compared to other bombers. It is perked because of how powerful it would be if uncontrolled. The same is true of every single perk airplane in the game.
The extremely rare Wirbelwind and Ostwind (combined production for those is less than the H8K2) are not perked to push people into using the M16.
I stand by my assertion that perking units that don't offer significant survival advantages against the common foes in the MA results in those perked units not being used. In the hypothetical case of the H8K2 vs PBY-5A the merits of the H8K2 over the PBY-5A are irrelevant to its use as a perk plane. What matters is its merits vs things like P-51Ds, Spitfire Mk XVIs, La-7s and F4U-1Ds. The B-29 is a challenge for any of those to intercept and destroy. The H8K2 is unlikely to be more of a challenge for them than the B-17G.
-
Just give the PBY a very high ENY vs a very low ENY for the H8K2. Problem solved.
I really like the idea of marking a task group with a "last seen" icon on the map. :aok
I still think using it as a land based observer/spotter, bomber, torpedo bomber and armed cargo/troop transport alone would have it seeing a lot of use until other functions become viable.
As to the US planeset already being robust almost every Allied nation flew the PBY. Skin yours.
It's iconic and should be added to the game.
-
Just give the PBY a very high ENY vs a very low ENY for the H8K2. Problem solved.
I really like the idea of marking a task group with a "last seen" icon on the map. :aok
I still think using it as a land based observer/spotter, bomber, torpedo bomber and armed cargo/troop transport alone would have it seeing a lot of use until other functions become viable.
As to the US planeset already being robust almost every Allied nation flew the PBY. Skin yours.
It's iconic and should be added to the game.
:aok Great idea
-
I see plenty of reasons:
- Totally useless as far as MA goes.
- The US plane set is bloated compared to the other big countries as it is.
- Very, very little use for special events. It is so easy to name aircraft which would be many times more useful as far as these events go.
There are many AC in the plane set that meet this criteria already. Why shouldn't HTC add this, or the something like the JU-52?
-
There are many AC in the plane set that meet this criteria already.
Could you name a few?
Why shouldn't HTC add this, or the something like the JU-52?
Because the resources are better spent elsewhere.
-
Because the resources are better spent elsewhere.
Their not your resources and yes there are several AC/vehicles that see minimal use in the MA but are still valued for SEs.
-
I really like the idea of marking a task group with a "last seen" icon on the map. :aok
That works, but the recon aircraft should be required to keep visibility on the fleet for 5-10 minutes before the icon appears. Some time so that the defender(s) can attempt to stop it. Just gaining visibility would be too easy.
-
+1
-
Their not your resources and yes there are several AC/vehicles that see minimal use in the MA but are still valued for SEs.
How is it relevant who owns HTC? I'm allowed to have stand on which would be best for AH just like anyone else and use arguments for defending said stance.
and yes there are several AC/vehicles that see minimal use in the MA but are still valued for SEs.
Per your original statement, you said there are many aircraft already in AH which are useless both in events and in the MA (you quoted me and said 'many already fill my criteria'). I asked if you could name a few (I asked since I have a hard time naming one). I'm guessing you can't name any since you are clearly dodging the question . And even if 'bad decisions' were made in the past and such units would have found their way to AH, why add more now?
Your whole logic is flawed.
-
A PBY could also be used for air-sea rescue, fishing wet pilots out of enemy waters. Assign a big perk bonus to rescuing a fellow team member.
-
Actually resupply of a CV is the one thing I'd like to see happen, no matter what vehicle is used to do it with.
With the addition of the very lethal TU2S CVs are even more at risk and to many great fights are ended to early due to it.
-
A PBY could also be used for air-sea rescue, fishing wet pilots out of enemy waters. Assign a big perk bonus to rescuing a fellow team member.
Yep. The could have been used in the Battle of Britain scenario where rescue was a part of the scenario.
-
Yes!! Add the flying boat!! Oh wait...
(http://i61.tinypic.com/2l8k8ld.jpg)
-
Yes!! Add the flying boat!! Oh wait...
(http://i61.tinypic.com/2l8k8ld.jpg)
What the..... :headscratch:
-
Some mens' flying boats are bigger than others. ;)
-
Ah rather like a lanc that, the underside is not very well protected :x
-
I think there are a few valid reasons as to why it hasn't been added.
#1 The terrain can't support it. The water is like normal land and the PBY would simply 'flip over'. So you couldn't take off or land very well.
#2 There isn't a need for it. Because our radar is absolute there are no reasons to make or have scout planes.
Because I want this plane in the game, and I try to compromise and negotiate. I think that something HTC could consider if they were going to add this plane, is to make radar less reliable or make it less accurate in some form. Then they would have a valid reason to add it to Aces High.
+1 though, for the PBY :)
<S>
-
#1 The terrain can't support it. The water is like normal land and the PBY would simply 'flip over'. So you couldn't take off or land very well.
I don't think this is true. PT-Boats already have a model for movement on water.
#2 There isn't a need for it. Because our radar is absolute there are no reasons to make or have scout planes.
Radar and scout planes have nothing to do with each other. Our 25 mile radius radar doesn't change what limited uses a scout plane would have.
-
I don't think this is true. PT-Boats already have a model for movement on water.
Radar and scout planes have nothing to do with each other. Our 25 mile radius radar doesn't change what limited uses a scout plane would have.
I was thinking on the PT boat idea for awhile when the last PBY wish came forth.
While I don't know the technical 'stuff' behind what makes the planes fly in-game and the PT boats "float", I figure since those components of travel are there, perhaps they can be combined together in the form of the PBY.
As for radar and scouts, that was more of an opinion (isn't everything?) instead of 'stated fact'. It was based off of the 'normal' player actions. For example with the FI marker plane. Why would you fly that and mark a tank when you can take off in a ju87 and kill them (or il2) or go an even easier route with the a20 or heavy bomber (rumored lancstukas).
I still think it should be added to the game and available at ports, I think at the very least it would be an interesting addition .