Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Karnak on January 16, 2003, 05:25:21 PM
-
I-16-24: Neat little early war Russian fighter with a usable armament
Ki.84-I-Ko Hayate "Frank": Very good mass produced late war Japanese fighter
M4A3 Sherman (75mm): Better AA than Panzer IV H, comparable armor and speed but worse main gun
Me410B-2 Hornisse: Neat late war Luftwaffe fighter/bomber
Mosquito B.Mk XVI: Late war Mosquito-Bomber, cookie carrier
P-38F/G Lightning: Earlier P-38 version so that the P-38 can be used in scenarios when it was most important
Sd.Kfz.234/2 Puma: Good Wehrmacht armored car, better gun and armor than M-8, but slower and no AA
T-34/85: Better speed, armor and gun than the Panzer IV H, but less ammo and no AA
-
Ki84 - For MA
G4M - for scenarios
Pe2 - for both
P38F/G - agree totally!
Aftrer these additions Im not that bothered ;)
Vladd
-
Tu-2
G4M
Pe-2
Ki-84
Ki-100
Just for giggles...Do-335 :D
-
I think,and I hope I am totaly wrong hear, that any plane with a perescope sight, or a complex defensive sighting system might be out of the question, at present. So No pe-2, Tu-2 or Me 410.
Plane wish list pffffffffffft, I am beyond hoping. Whatever they do is just that.
-
brady,
The Me410's tail gun is no more complicated than the B-17G's chin turret.
-
Mine would be pretty close, just some personal preferences in mine:
Ki-84
P-38J
P-47M
T-34/85
M-18 Hellcat
JU-52
P-61
-
Not shure on that one Karnak, Their are 3 diefent Revi, sights mounted in the back runing two guns controled by just one triger. I heared that the 210 for Il-2 is coming without the rear gunner because they are having a real hard time figuring it all out.
-
Ki-43
Ki-44
P-39Q
I-16 type 17
Beaufighter
Ju-188
Tu-2
-
That is interesting brady.
Well, I wouldn't mind if they fudged it and simply setup the Me410's rear guns with a single gunsight as in the B-17G's chin turret position. Bombsights are, after all, fudged to the point where all bombers have the same sight.
-
seems to me a PERFECT way to make a system that would very much resemble the me410 barbettes would be to copy the b17s.
think about this: when your rear gun is out of ammo in a B17 formation and you try to fire but only the top (or bottom) turret fires (as your gun is now empty) or the other aircraft in the formation fires from way over to the left or right at the spot youre aiming at. Well this would or could be how you make the barbettes work.
First you set them so they have the real limited field of fire the original barbettes had.Ie you make a sort of gun position but it cant be occupied by a player.You set them in the rear fuselage.
You then make the rear gunner position simply a sight that can be moved (and if you have to, put a gun in there but give it no ammo).
Slave the barbettes to this sight(gun) much the same as the b17s gun positions are slaved to whatever position you occupy in that bomber.
what you end up with is a rear gun that behaves I would imagine pretty similar to what you would expect to see.
the guns will fire from well below your sight but will hit/coverge on the area your sight covers.
isnt this really very simple?
I always wondered why this is such a hard thing to do when you can see a similar thing happening all the time already.its weird really.
-
Seems like that would work just fine to me hazed-.
-
May be because their is more than one sight, being controled by the same Stick(Handel/pistole grip)< I thought their were just two sights one on each side, but DB 603 said their were actualy 3 of them< I gues one for the center>.
I thought they could have more than one gunposition for the same spot, like one for each side of the plane but that would a pain to use kinda, I wounder if they could occupy the same space?
-
mine is Hawk 75 think of a P40 with a big radial...
Fokker D 21
how about the Horton 229
Gunns
-
too many good planes not yet in AH to list them all (also many good variants of planes already here). i'm sure that eventually we'll see everything everyone wants
-
Ki-44 and Ki-84.
They were new type fighters of Japanese Army.
-
Whish list...
I wish that when I see the "25% fuel only" message, and I press "OK"; that it meant OK and that the setting was accepted.
It's immensly frustrating when trying to up base defense, especialy if your normal ride is set to 100% fuel and ordinance...
I'd also like some way of equalising Vox volume. Some guys whisper, and then the next almost blows the speakers out. So I'd like to set an upper threshold, or even better (please!) a way to squelch range channel
And another thing....
a "side" MOTD in the SEA to help with the information flow to walk ons.
-
Hazed, that's not a satisfactory solution.
The barbettes could cover 70 degree's up/down (so 35 degree's down i guess) and 40 degrees to each side. If you can only aim at what you can see from the rear seat, fighters can just come up on low six where you should be able to see them, but can't.
Brady's suggestion with two gun positions is a more workable solution to me. Maybe a compromise. Position 2 would put you in rear cockpit, with an "ad-hoc" sight like you suggest. If the enemy planes fly to where you can't see him from there, you can jump to pos 3 or 4 that i located directly at the barbette. If you want you can do all the gunning from here of course, and when you point to a direction that both guns can fire, backwards, they should.
It's a little cumbersome, but anything to get the Me410 in AH :)
-
I want a Buff...
A very small Buff....
A Buffalo (and an I-16 too)
Cheers,
-
I like Karnak's original choices for aircraft, but I'd remove the Sd.Kfz.234/2 Puma and maybe even the t34 (sorry! but no AA!) and stick in the ki.44 and Fairey Firefly or a buff; Tu2 or H8K2!
Gatso
-
Oh, I know it's immature to have a wishlist, but i can't help chipping in my opinions.
Ki-84 - (and Ki-44 in the following release?)
H8K2 - It's beautiful, it's a Nipponee heavy bomber (looks to be a better bomber than the Lanc), it lands on water, what more could you ask for?
SM79 or Cant Z1007 - I don't know enough to say between these two, it would be nice to have an Italian bomber in scenarios, from the BoB to North Africa.
Pe-2 - Not only accounting for the bulk of Soviet bomber production from 1942-45, but they even made a 400+mph intercept version, one of the greats.
I-16 - nimble early war plane for variety on the Eastern front, or maybe do the I-15bis to keep the biplane nuts happy.
Mig-3 - a very fast, high alt early war fighter.
If we must have more U.S. planes:
F2A - The Brewster! With a Finnish skin. I think the case has been well made for this little plane.
P-38F - First really decent P-38 (combat flaps and 1,225 HP engines) I can't help wanting to fly my favourite plane more in the CT and scenarios.
P-39 - probably the D model (maybe Q aswell?). Default as a lendlease Soviet plane, we can always reskin it.
Oh, that's 9 already. Hmmm, for Germany, i find it hard to pick anything really new to the planeset that actually flew reliably in any quantity before the war was effectively over.
The Me-410 or He 219 would be nice interceptors, and they're both beautiful planes.
The ill fated He 177 heavy bomber, or the Ju 188, Do 17 and Do 217, even the He 111 all have a case to be made for them.
Maybe just model the Ju 52 as an alternative to the Goon.
I think what's more likely, though, is that HTC will focus on specific conflicts to fill out areas of the planeset, as they've done with the BoB and early Pac.
-
Spitfire LF IX/XVI (with clipped wings) - of the 5,500 spit IXs built nearly all were LF, it was also the RAF's mainstay fighter of '43 and '44.:)
Bristol Beaufighter- a great early attack fighter that saw service in just about every theatre the RAF were in, 5,562 Beaufighters were built. It looks really cool too.:D
Sea hurricane - performs exactly the same as the regular hurri's (no strengthening to the gear was required) but would be nice to fly hurris from Cv's. All that's needed is modelling the arrestor hook and we have a sea hurri Ia and IIc.:)
-
B-239
Ki-84
Mig-3
P-39
-
1. Me 410
2. Mig 3
3. KI-84
4. P-39
-
Tough question. Not having access to HT's roadmap I would have to kind of guess and think that HT has to look at the following trade-offs:
a) A plane/veh that can be used in multiple arena's (i.e historical significance /useability/ survivability)
b) Planes/veh for which all needed data is available and relatively accurate.
c) Planes/veh that either compliment the current AH environments or will flesh out future additions ( mission arena, more Sea battle, ground war etc etc)
d) re-use of current code base as much as possible.
That being said we basically have 2 groups that have lobbied hard for a plane, the japanese guys and the finns.
So I guess first would be the Ki-84 and Buffalo (2 versions, american and finn.....kinda like the F4F and FM2).
The Ki-84 and Finn version of the Buffalo could both survive the MA and these planes open interesting possibilities for both CT and scenario staff. Are both planes carrier capable???
From a jabo-ing/buffing point of view I don't think we are going to see anything new till strat takes on a much greater significance. Most buffs will not survive in the MA and there are "reasonable" substitutes for scenario's. We now have heavy bombers, medium bombers, ground attack, dive bombers and torpedo bombers. I think in this area we will hopefully see a fleshing out of the current set with more loadout options/versions....i.e JU-87G, FW-f8, Ju-88 etc. The Emily would be nice but I don't see this till both Strat and the Sea War facet of the game are fleshed out.
For the ground war, we have a heavy tank, medium tank and light tanks/armoured cars, as well as AA. In this area the facet I see lacking any representive is artillery, both guns and rockets. A self propelled piece would be nice as well as the Katyusha (sp?) rocket launcher. Would provide a nice facet to the ground war for both MA and scenarios which are hopefully going in the general direction of Nieman. Once all the facets of ground war are in place, then flesh out the variation in each category. One thing that will need to be figured out for this is how to provide proper fire control for indirect artillery in terms of zeroing in. I know we have Land Mode for sea guns, would need something similiar for the arty.
Sea stuff.....fuhgheddaboutit, at least for a couple of versions.
There, hopefully this wish list is somewhat realistic.
ZPB
-
P-40K !!! (how many here knew I was going to say that? :) )
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I-16-24: Ki.84-I-Ko Hayate "Frank": Very good mass produced late war Japanese fighter
I like that one, let's ask HT :D
-
Ki-84 was an IJAAF fighter - i'm pretty sure it was never used from carriers...i know Brewster was carrier capable, but have never read of it being used off a carrier on combat ops (would love to if someone has a link for me)...[pause]...it seem brewsters w/ 804 & 805 worked off of HMS Eagle in the mediteranea in 1941
-
Ki.84 never flew off of a carrier so far as I know. It certainly never flew off a carrier as a combat op, but it may have as a delivery method. I know that P-47s and Spitfire Mk XIVs both flew off of carriers as a delivery method, and were combat ready when they did as they were flying into an active area.
I really want the H8K2 and B-29A, but I have difficulty justifying that request due to the ammount of work that a big bomber takes HTC to do. He177A-5 wouldn't be a bad thing, but falls in the same category in my mind. Requesting one of those is like requesting four or five tanks and single engined aircraft.
The next bombers I'd like would be out of this list, but on no particular time schedule:
B-25B Mitchell: For scenarios so that the Japanese could have an early war bomber that they could catch opposing them
G4M2 "Betty": For scenarios so that the US could have an early war bomber that they could catch opposing them
Ju188A-2: So that the Germans would have a well defended bomber with a good payload and good speed
Pe-2FT: So that the Soviets could have an actual bomber
Tu-2S: So that the Soviets could have an actual bomber
Wellington Mk III: For scenarios so that the Germans could have an early war bomber that they could catch opposing them
-
I want every plane that flew operational sorties in wwII.
P.S. Hitech take your time I can wait I know you will get to every one eventually. The more time that gets put into them the better they will be.
Hail HITECH
Hail Aces High.
=S=
For with out them we would be stuck with that piece of crap wwIIonline. Or some other wanna be that couldent hold a candle to HT and AH.
You have the best relax youll get the rest.
-
AIRCRAFT:
KI-84 FRANK
PE-2 or TU-2
HE-177
ARMOR:
Fix vehicle bug so players can jump to all positions as in bomber a/c
Armor Bugs fixed on Tiger I
T-34/76 (You can stick an a/a gun on anything.)
T-34/85 (Make it a perk tank, as well as the Tiger)
-
STUKA !!!
srry couldn't resist.
I think I'll just go stare at it offline. :D
-
M4A3 Sherman (75mm): Better AA than Panzer IV H, comparable armor and speed but worse main gun
Add the firefly insead...should even the matchup a little more
or even the big 105mm
-
Beaufighter Mk21
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I-16-24: Neat little early war Russian fighter with a usable armament
Ki.84-I-Ko Hayate "Frank": Very good mass produced late war Japanese fighter...
...Mosquito B.Mk XVI: Late war Mosquito-Bomber, cookie carrier
P-38F/G Lightning: Earlier P-38 version so that the P-38 can be used in scenarios when it was most important...
Definately these three
-
There are 4 planes there.....hehehe.:)
-
B-239
I-16
KI-84
FW 190A-6
P-39
-
Originally posted by thrila
There are 4 planes there.....hehehe.:)
Lol, I know
-
Originally posted by LLv34_Snefens
Hazed, that's not a satisfactory solution.
The barbettes could cover 70 degree's up/down (so 35 degree's down i guess) and 40 degrees to each side. If you can only aim at what you can see from the rear seat, fighters can just come up on low six where you should be able to see them, but can't.
Brady's suggestion with two gun positions is a more workable solution to me. Maybe a compromise. Position 2 would put you in rear cockpit, with an "ad-hoc" sight like you suggest. If the enemy planes fly to where you can't see him from there, you can jump to pos 3 or 4 that i located directly at the barbette. If you want you can do all the gunning from here of course, and when you point to a direction that both guns can fire, backwards, they should.
It's a little cumbersome, but anything to get the Me410 in AH :)
Maybe I'm dense... how how did the rear gunner shoot at people coming from low 6 if he couldn't SEE them to aim the guns? Did the 410 have some kind of primitive radar guided rear guns? Or an actual rear gunner like the 110 had? Even if the guns could operate through a +-70 degree radius.. if the gunner couldn't see through the tail to aim at a plane... they couldn't shoot at it anyway, right?
-
Hes not talking aboput lo 6 where you cant see umm.
Hes talking splitting the 410 run gunner into 3 positions
1 that covers 35 degrees to the left
1 covers 6 like the 110 now
1 that covers 35 degrees right
So if you loose a con off to left or right you jump to the correct position top reaquire.
So the gun position cover the dead 6 would fire both guns, the left and 1 right just one.
it would seem a bit clumsy but like he said anything to get a 410 in game. They are struggling with this in il2 to get the rear gunners modelled in il2. Most likely they will release forward battles with out the gunner pos modelled.
HT hasnt figured how to get the pariscope site to work in the 234. That periscope was also used as a glide bomb site. The tu-2 has a similiar site for the rear gunner and maybe a possibility as to why that hasnt been added to the planeset.
-
-Beaufighter
-P39 (russian marking)
-Pe-2(at last russians get a bomber)
-B25(some late version)
-H8K2 (nice flyingboat it is)
-Vickers Wellington (good for scenario's)
-He-111 (scenario)
-Ki- 84
-Uhm the Oscar (scenario land based planes)
-B24
-B29 (perk)
-Me 410
-Catalina
-A26
-More italian stuff
More variants of the Ju-88 Ju-87 Il-2 P38 and Mosquito
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Maybe I'm dense... how how did the rear gunner shoot at people coming from low 6 if he couldn't SEE them to aim the guns? Did the 410 have some kind of primitive radar guided rear guns? Or an actual rear gunner like the 110 had? Even if the guns could operate through a +-70 degree radius.. if the gunner couldn't see through the tail to aim at a plane... they couldn't shoot at it anyway, right?
Well, that's the whole problem of this thing.
No it didn't have a radar to operate those guns, but the gunner had a periscope sight to be able to aim the guns. Sitting in the rear cockpit he had "screens" where he could see what each gun could see. How much he could see and how that screen looked is one of the problems when trying to model the Me 210/410.
"Two 13mm MG 131 guns in faired blisters, one on each side of the fuselage, remotely sighted and controlled by the rear-gunner. These two blisters are mounted on the ends of a barrel set across the fuselage and carried on annular ball-bearings on inner walls of fuselage. Through a torque multiplier, driven by a small electric motor and trains of gears, this barrel may be revolved to elevate or depress the guns, or further gearing within the barrel may traverse the guns. All movements of the gun is controlled by a pistol grip in gunner's cockpit. The guns may be elevated or depressed through a range of about 70 degrees and traversed independently of each other through about 40 degrees from the side of the fuselage. The guns may also be fired together towards the rear. A contact-breaker device interrupts firing when the guns, which are electrically fired, are pointing at any part of the aeroplane structure.
I agree with Wotan. IL-2 already have AI-gunners in the game, so in FB they are just letting the ai do the gunning and save the trouble. In IL-2 they did the same with one of the IL-2 field-models that had the gunner basically sitting in the rear fuselage, in "opne air".
AH doesn't have the "luxuray" of ai-gunners (if you want to call it that), and like we have seen with the Ar234, the periscope sights is not something that is a top priority of HTC.
__________________
Ylil. Snefens
Lentolaivue 34 (http://www.muodos.fi/LLv34)
My AH homepage (http://home14.inet.tele.dk/snefens/index2.htm)
(http://home14.inet.tele.dk/snefens/209.gif)
-
Yak-7B
Yak-1B
LaGG-3
P-39N
Ki-84
Ki-44
Ki-43
P-38F
4 for the VVS, 3 for the IJAAF, and 1 for the USAAF(AAC)..
these eight planes will close some incredibly large gaps in VVS and IJAAF... plus, an early P-38...
...
ps) Spitfire LF Mk.IX, and Bf109G-14 as a 'maybe' option.. those two also close the huge gaps in RAF and LW set..
-
Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
...-More italian stuff...
...and Mosquito
Amen, once again
-
He-51
Bf-109B
Bf-109D
Fiat Cr.32
Fiat Cr.42
MC.200
I-15
I-153
I-16
Ki-27
A5M
Ms.406
D.520
MB.152
Fokker DXXI
B-239
Hawk-75
And $5 / month special arena for them :)
-
Why not just model the Me-410 like any other plane, but classify it as a "bomber" for coding purposes...
That would allow it to use external view mode in the MA and hence the gunner view problem disappears. The guns would already work as they should because they won't fire when they're pointed at the plane.
The rear gunner could still shoot everywhere if the external view were to be disabled, but wouldn't be able to see everywhere...not ideal, but certainly better than simply not adding the plane because of a silly minor issue :)
J_A_B
-
Yeah, I'm all for adding the Me-410 and sorting the things out later. :)
BTW, I just found a pic in one of my books clearly showing the gun pointing upwards at an angle of 60-65 degrees. Either it could move more than the 70 degree I first posted, or it couldn't move very much down (60 degree up, 10 degree down for instance). I also found a pic of a gunner sitting in his seat, with a reflector sight visible. Was this for when locking the guns to fire backwards (like Ar234) or also to use when moving the guns. I don't know.
-
Beaufighter(s)
Cant
Tu-2
P39/P63
T-34
I-16(2 variants)
D 520
Frank
Emily
Hayabusa(s)
And for Existing airframes
LaGG
Spit IX lF or VIII
Sea Hurricane
More Mossies
Yak-3
Yak-1
pewww....bet this would be enough untill 1.13
-
Originally posted by LLv34_Snefens
Hazed, that's not a satisfactory solution.
The barbettes could cover 70 degree's up/down (so 35 degree's down i guess) and 40 degrees to each side. If you can only aim at what you can see from the rear seat, fighters can just come up on low six where you should be able to see them, but can't.
Brady's suggestion with two gun positions is a more workable solution to me. Maybe a compromise. Position 2 would put you in rear cockpit, with an "ad-hoc" sight like you suggest. If the enemy planes fly to where you can't see him from there, you can jump to pos 3 or 4 that i located directly at the barbette. If you want you can do all the gunning from here of course, and when you point to a direction that both guns can fire, backwards, they should.
It's a little cumbersome, but anything to get the Me410 in AH :)
I see . You mean the periscope had a way of seeing from the gun barrel almost?
So in other words whereever the gun could point you could see?
I wasnt aware of this. Where exactly did the lens of the periscope stick out of the aircraft? I always assumed it was aimed by the rear gunner and he was only able to see from inside the cockpit and all around.
From what you say it seems the periscope meant that the usual lower 6 oc blind spot was covered by the periscope right?
If this is the case how about you have normal control like i described before for any aircraft outside the blind spot but for when you want to fire at an aircraft in your lower 6oc position you press a button (say much like the zoom button) which gives you a view similar to the bomb sight with the ability to be moved around and aimed. (this would be similar to the calibration part of the bombing set up except you can fire guns with it)
wouldnt this work? It could possibly be used for the entire firing arc of the barbettes. This would be much like the main gun of a panzer only faster moving.
At worst with the method i mentioned before you would lose the lower rear 6oc shooting from the barbettes but with a bomb site type of gun sight (viewed from the exact position the real periscope lens was mounted) you would have a pretty close aproximation of what these gunners could see right?
basically you would be almost in the same position as the b17 ball gunner but the bullets would appear from above and either side of your view. To then see above the tail you would hit the zoom key or similar to see the veiw from the rear cockpit seat and have the gunning method i described before.
-
Hell if we got the Me-410 without the gunner I would love it. I don't care if we had it or not just bring it in here. The Jack would be a nice addition for the japanese planeset as well.
-
Cutaway showing gunner instruments and barbettes...
-
I'd like the B25, I think she's prettier than the B26, it also has waist-guns instead of blister guns.
only it'll be more vunerable from attacks from below...
-
If the guns were aimed with a periscope sight this would obvious have had to be located on the actual barbette, following the movement of the gun. Looking at closeup's of the barbettes there is only one place that stands out. You can see a small hole under the gun, that couldhave housed a mirror, but the more I look at it, I am certain that this is just the exit hole for spent shell casings.
I got pictures where the cover has been taken off the barbettes, but they are not very good (crewmen partly blocking or too far away), so I can't conclude anything from them.
Several sources mention they were remotely sighted by periscope, but this could just be another case of "109K have 15mm guns" poor source research.
-
anyone know if the P-61's turret gunner used a periscope sight? looks like the gunner's field of view is a lot more limited than the turrets field of fire...
-
All three people in the P-61 could use the top turret.
-
cool - i wonder if they ever fought over it
"ohh can i shoot it down?!?"
"you shot it down last time - its my turn"
"if you both dont shut up , nobodys going to shoot it down"
thanx
-
Rofl..
so, the P-61 gunner positions were named "Larry" "Curly" and "Moe" ?? :D
-
If im not mistake the Tu2 was a Russian b29 bascilly because they stole 2 of them from us and copied the designs which were finished till after wwii. If im right there will be no tu2 and further more why have a tu2 when we could just have a b29.
thats is of course if im correct about the tu2
-
Negative tailgnr. The Tu-2 is a WWII medium bomber that was developed internally by the Soviet Union. You're thinking of the Tu-4, which did not fly until 1947 or 1948 and so is not appropriate for a WWII sim.
-
I would like to see:
B-25
B-24 (Ploesti missions)
G4M2 (with the zippo effect)
TA-183 (was the German design for the Mig-15 and F-86)
S!
Ridge
-
retitle this one please!!
to the 2.1 release..
Skurj