Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: glzsqd on July 08, 2014, 11:46:45 PM
-
The TBM
(http://i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r561/folanjohnp1/vt15_zps12c2622c.jpg)
The B5N
(http://i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r561/folanjohnp1/B5N_Type_97_Carrier_Attack_Bomber_Kate_B5N-31_zps315df058.jpg)
I think a brilliant way to turn these two planes from Hangar Queens into a useful addition to the game is to allow the ability to bring a 3 plane formation. This will allow them to bring more ordnance than their Jabo counter parts the F6F and F4U. Since they are both fitted with a Bombsite, I predict that this will increase the usage of both airplanes in large scale raids.
-
Agreed!
-
+1 :aok
-
Only problem and possibly the reason why they don't have em already is because drones are stuupid when it comes to cvs. It would be interesting to watch them try and land on one.
-
Good idea :aok
-
Only problem and possibly the reason why they don't have em already is because drones are stuupid when it comes to cvs. It would be interesting to watch them try and land on one.
I always thought it didn't matter if the Drones landed, as long as they didn't explode before you tower out.
-
I always thought it didn't matter if the Drones landed, as long as they didn't explode before you tower out.
I'm all for it +1
-
+1, maybe the new TBM already has drones :aok
-
+1
-
+1, the B5N has the same bomb load as a KI67 :)
-
+1
-
Those are good snacks. The TBM is a little crunchy, even. +1
-
+1 :aok
need more snacks!
-
+1
EatG
-
Well I'd like to see these planes used more, some how some way. I'll go that far.
-
+1
-
:aok +1
-
+1. I think the main reason the tbm and b5n don't have formations is that they didn't drop their bombs as a formation, each plane was individually responsible for sighting on then dropping on the target; instead of dropping their bombs at the signal of the formation's leading plane. At least, that is the logic that makes sense to me. Maybe it is as simple as they don't have multipul engines?
-
+1. I think the main reason the tbm and b5n don't have formations is that they didn't drop their bombs as a formation, each plane was individually responsible for sighting on then dropping on the target; instead of dropping their bombs at the signal of the formation's leading plane. At least, that is the logic that makes sense to me. Maybe it is as simple as they don't have multipul engines?
Formation attack runs were used by both sides for their naval bombers and torpedo planes.
Here are some TBMs and Helldivers doing a level bombing run in formation.
(https://my.vanderbilt.edu/michaelbess/files/2014/02/bess-5-5.jpg)
-
+1
-
+1
-
+1, it'd be a great alternative to rolling jabbos off the boat if you can run formations instead.
-
That's a interesting picture ack-ack. Do you know how common a practice that was?
-
so how man +1s does a wish need to be realized?
-
More than we can give.
-
Formation attack runs were used by both sides for their naval bombers and torpedo planes.
Here are some TBMs and Helldivers doing a level bombing run in formation.
(https://my.vanderbilt.edu/michaelbess/files/2014/02/bess-5-5.jpg)
What are the white objects mounted under each wing? They don't appear to be bombs.
-
What are the white objects mounted under each wing? They don't appear to be bombs.
The droptanks? :headscratch:
-
What are the white objects mounted under each wing? They don't appear to be bombs.
Radar pod (right wing from pilot's pov) and a drop tank (left wing from pilot's pov).
-
Thanks!
-
+1
I think the drones are smart enough, just need to be more precise. Just like landing on a real CV, but what are the chances of making it back to the CV in the first place? We are talking about some of the slowest planes in the MA... Can't wait to find trips of these in my 9t
-
All the single engine bombers should have drones. Not just for more ordnance on target but also for more collective tail end return fire as well.
+1 (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-signs007.gif)
-
so how man +1s does a wish need to be realized?
just one, from the correct guy.. who happens to work at htc.. and is named hitech.
-
just one, from the correct guy.. who happens to work at htc.. and is named hitech.
:lol
-
+1
-
+1 Great Idea
-
just one, from the correct guy.. who happens to work at htc.. and is named hitech.
Actually, don't even need one +1. Just the OP is needed. :)
-
+1
-
+1
-
It is good that we should have this. :aok
-
I am guessing that the reason that the TBM and B5N do not have formations is because that either their usage was not as a formation bomber (more for the B5N I imagine,) or because gameplay wise carrier launches to not really work for formations, whether mechanically or visually.
-
I am guessing that the reason that the TBM and B5N do not have formations is because that either their usage was not as a formation bomber (more for the B5N I imagine,) or because gameplay wise carrier launches to not really work for formations, whether mechanically or visually.
I was thinking that it could be a gameplay issue (non issue, if the total amount of ordinance allowed from a CV launch would be less). :aok However, I am in favor of seeing this for the sake of increasing the fleet impact on attacks.
I could be wrong, but it seems that LVTs spawn further from shore, and faster and better capable bombers have been added that sink CVs in one pass. There is something to be said for adding some offense to the fleet (there again this could be balanced by limiting ordinance).
-
+1 :salute
HP
-
I would love to throw together a B5N or TBM w/formation bomb run...
Agreed on formations.
-
+1 (nice simple addition to bring life to the CV offensive)
I'm tired of landing B-25's on the CV's, it's a long flight usually! :salute
-
+1
join for a tour :airplane:
-
+!
-
+1
-
+1
-
YES +1