Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Shark88 on February 20, 2003, 03:06:31 PM
-
the Consolidated B-24 Liberator
-
And the Northrop P-61 Black Widow
-
the first two didnt make it into combat during the war. so no to the F7F and F8F. But BIG YES to the P-61.
-
I sense someone new to WWII history.
Yes ... yes ... there were some interesting planes that almost flew in the war. There were even some interesting planes that did fly in the war. Yes, the B-29 was really important in the end. And the atom bomb was a blast. But that's not what AH is about (I think). Shoot more for what offers:
1: Some balance. If HT was to model every uber-plane we had prototypes of (or even started up assembly lines for) at the end of the Pacific war ... then TOD would be AI, for the most part, on the Japanese side ... with some very bored human players on the allied side.
2: Planes that flew in the early, mid and late war. Just concentrating on the late war (or the too late for war) doesn't offer the entire "WWII experience."
3: Challenge. WWII wasn't a "cruise missle" war.
TYTYVM :D
-
What about the Heinkle He 177? did this bomber fight in the war?
-
Originally posted by Viper17
the first two didnt make it into combat during the war. so no to the F7F and F8F. But BIG YES to the P-61.
In WW II, an F7F-3 variant with a rear seat for a radar operator was effectively used in combat by the Marines in Korea as a day and two-place night fighter as well as an attack aircraft
so yes it was!!!
-
"American F7F-3Ps flew a few operations for the US Marine Corps towards the end of WWII, but other F7F-3N machines went on to see service on night interdiction missions whilst in Korea. Their last function was as night time target designation aircraft for B-29 bombing raids."
http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Aircraft/Tigercat.html
1: WWII and the Korean conflict were two seperate events.
2: AH doesn't need the F7F. Probably not even if AH decides to offer a Korean War arena and planeset.
3: There's plenty of planes AH does need. Try backing off from uber-prototypes and "too late for WWII" planes and look at the ones that saw plenty of action but aren't modeled. Unless, of course, you're trying to promote some sort of "what if - 1946-47" thang. If so ... good luck.
;) :D
Originally posted by Shark88
In WW II, an F7F-3 variant with a rear seat for a radar operator was effectively used in combat by the Marines in Korea as a day and two-place night fighter as well as an attack aircraft
so yes it was!!!
EDITAhhh .... you've come to your senses and changed the first two to just the B-24. That ... I'll go for. ;)
-
ALL WW2 online combat flight sims- yes, every single one of 'em - NEEDS a range of REPRESENTATIVE bombers for nations other than the USA.
That means planes like the following, so far as AH is concerned:
UK
Halifax (including troop transport version)
Wellington
Blenheim
Germany
Do17Z
He111H
Do217 (I prefer the E, but I'd settle for any 217!)
Ju52 transport
Italy
SM79
SM81
Cant Z1007
Russia
Pe2
SB2
TB3
Japan
G3M
G4M
Ki21
Now, that's just SOME of the bombers that played an important part in the war. I havent included seaplanes and floatplanes (which I'd like to see... H81K's, Sunderlands, Ar196, Catalina's... etc - 2-3 from each major combatant). And yes, the Liberator is an odd ommission from the US part of the AH planeset...
I havent even mentioned intruder and recce planes until just then... as for fighters, there are plenty that deserve inclusion before any "1946" wunderplanes are even considered for POSSIBLE inclusion.
Then there's the little matter of the French air force. It may have gone under quickly, but it was fairly numerous, and many of its planes were used by Axis forces, and some were even recaptured and used again by Free French forces late in the war.
This, boys and girls (the ladies and gentlemen won't need telling this) is a game of World War Two air combat, which means it needs to include planes that were COMMON in that conflict in order to represent WW2 reasonably well. And believe it or not, there were mor ebombers than fighters built in WW2, for teh very good reason that bombers are offensive aircraft whilst fighters are defensive aircraft, and you don't win wars by fighting purely defensively.
Now, every plane added to AH means an increase in the size of the download and an increase in the space taken up on our hard drives. So please let's not waste space with late war fighters that either saw very limited action in small numbers or none at all...
Just my two penn'orth...
Esme
-
At the very least, the Allied bomber plane set should be further fleshed out with the B-24, B-25, A-26, Halifax, Wellington and any other Allied bomber that saw action, since bombing is going to be a major part of AH2. It also stands to reason that the Axis countries should also have their bomber plane set added to as well.
Ack-Ack
-
How about the P-39/P400? It was used heavily by US, USSR and Free French.
-
Everything I hear about the Tigercat is that it was a dog. And many got blown out of the sky in Korea. It never made it into combat During WW2. BTW I saw one this summer HUGE plane.
-
Some correction for Viper about the F7F..
the F7F was not a dog... it was a HOTROD.
It outperformed the F4U line,
it could sustain a tighter and longer turn then any US WWII aircraft, the only one that could give it a run for its money was the F8F.
As for combat, it was in route to the pacifice front along with F8Fs, cant remeber the carrier it was on. THe plane was deployed, it was just a few days away from making the front. SO it did not see action but it was available along with the F8F.
As for getting blown out of the sky in Korea,, alot of props got blown out of the sky. Even the glorified twing mustang.
THe F7F and F8F both had bad timings. THey cameout in the end and after the war, future spending on prop fighters was not seen as a good plan with the coming of the Jet Age. Just a lot of bad luck.
-
And the F2A Buffalo, we MUST have the Buffalo!!!
-
I think Esme is right on the money when it comes to the planes he pointed out. Especially the need for a german transport. There have been a few times when I went to take a base with a flight of JU88's and had to defile the formation with a C-47. Nothing wrong with a C-47 mind you, just looked REALLY out of place with a swarm of german planes.
a JU52 would have made it a kick prettythang set of flights.
My 2 $.02
2Hawks
-
Originally posted by Shark88
What about the Heinkle He 177? did this bomber fight in the war?
According to my information, yes, it did serve in WWII. Something like over 1,000 of all HE-177 variants were produced.
-
Esme has some excellent suggestions. But I still think the B-24 has a role to fill in AH. Its heavier bombload than the B-17 and better defensive armament than the Lancaster would be useful.
******
I don't want to see Korean war era planes in AH.
******
Check out my recent post, "Why the P-61 Will Be a Disappointment". Not saying we shouldn't have it, just that it's a big, slow target (except for the C model, of which about 40 were made). It was designed as a night interceptor, something not needed in AH, since all planes have neon icons over them at night.
******
MRPLUTO VMF-323 ~Death Rattlers~ MAG-33
-
Korean War era would be ok, IF it was kept to a seperate arena.
-
Originally posted by MrWimpy
Korean War era would be ok, IF it was kept to a seperate arena.
Which I believe HiTech said he would never add. One reminder about adding night fighters to AH would be the problems with modeling their onboard radar.
ack-ack
-
I think all WW2 planes should be in AH
-
I think all MAJOR types of WWII planes that saw action should be in AH2. There are some that never saw action. There are some that saw action, but in very limited numbers.
I also think the Ground vehicle list needs some expansion. Like adding the T34, and the Sherman in their various models.
But, like everyone else, that's just my opinion. :-)
-
Heh heh Ack-Ack. That brings me to a different point:
In the Main Arena of AH2 (AH Classic), there should be no single target to wipe out a country's entire radar. Instead there should be a number of radar stations scattered around the terrain, each of which would provide local radar coverage. CV radar should naturally be essentially undestroyable (unless of course carriers and cruisers and such are modeled with full damage models).
Not only would this eliminate the "oddness" of having CV radar go out when a build on land is destroyed, it'd provide a strat target which would be worth hitting that, at the same time, wouldn't majorly harm the gameplay of people 200 virtual miles away.
I'd also say that, at the very least, sector sounters (bar dar) should ALWAYS be fully available in the tower, and in flight for about 1 sector around your present position in the future Main Arena (this would be absent or configurable in the "Mission Arena"). The counters are simply too important of a tool to be made totally unavailable (plus those who don't like that feature will mostly be flying in the Mission Arena anyway).
A "radar station" strat object would also benefit the "mission arena" in that terrains could be built with better control as to range and limits of radar coverage, along with having important historical targets made available.
J_A_B
-
thought u wanted b29?
-
Originally posted by MrWimpy
According to my information, yes, it did serve in WWII. Something like over 1,000 of all HE-177 variants were produced.
Well, kind of but not really.
I think like 700 were shipped to the Russian front to use as cannon platforms because they wouldn't bomb with them and the plane was basically detested by the Germans after years of trying to make it work. The design was horribly flawed and they only made 1000 because they could, not because it was an effective bomber. It was possibly Germany's stupidest WWII aviation move (that and delaying the 262 fighter development ot make it useful as a divebomber). It had modest use as a missile dorpping anti ship plane, not much and not as much as the Do-217 as best I recall.
They had, as best I can tell, one raid that was successful wit them as a bomber against industrial targets in Russia and one odd raid at london where a few of the planes in the raid that did not catch fire and turn back divebombed haphazardly and fled. Brady has all these "what if" ideas about the 177 but basically it was the worst plane program in Germany. If everything worked on it it flew quite nicely by all accounts but by that standard of measure we should include the two stage superchager on a 1941 P-39 model because that was the best way for it to perform. At some point you have to say "come bloody on."
D0-217 far and away a more realistic choice. Since this is fantasy la-la land, who cares, model the worst POS ever designed in Germany, but in a simulation striving for some representation of historical accuracy two of your three formation buddies in the Greif would be combusting sometime between engines on and a few miles from base.
Sakai
-
If you allied homers claim F7F, then I must raise the bar and call for a Do-335B with 2x Mk103 30mm in wings, two 20mm over cowl, and a centerline Mk112 55mm.
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
Heh heh Ack-Ack. That brings me to a different point:
In the Main Arena of AH2 (AH Classic), there should be no single target to wipe out a country's entire radar.
J_A_B
I wonder if that's a hold over from HT's and Pyro's AW days when you were able to knock out a countries radar by destroying the main base.
ack-ack
-
i hope that Ah2 at lease has the b29
-
so u can use it in H2H rooms to kill..... errr.......
who u play H2H with??!
-
..the only thing AH-2 MUST have....
is a siren for the stuuuuka ..awwwrrooooooooooooooooooooo ooo!!!!!:D
-
Here's a list for you.
M4 Sherman Calliope(it's raining rockets!)
T-34/85 or SU-100
B-25("H" model w/75mm would be cool)
B-24(got to have it!)
B-29
P-39/400(death to GVs from above!)
:cool:
-
Originally posted by 2stony
Here's a list for you.
M4 Sherman Calliope(it's raining rockets!)
T-34/85 or SU-100
B-25("H" model w/75mm would be cool)
B-24(got to have it!)
B-29
P-39/400(death to GVs from above!)
:cool:
Good choices, I think before I saw 3 new US bombers I would like to see the Wellington, IL-4 and SM-79 or D0-217 to kind of flesh out the sets some.
Thing about WWII rockets, were they as effective as say a 105 mm Battery?
Also, I don't know about you but I think cannon-equipped fighters and the Il-2 already are pretty "deadly from above" on armor. Takes about 3-4 passes to kill a panzer if you know what you are doing in an Il2. Also, you'd think the Hurri IID would be an effective tank killer, no?
Sakai
-
Hurri D prolly would be effective if the guns were firing simultaneously and carried AP. Both guns firing separately cause a rediculous amount of yaw, making it hard to hit a B17, let alone a tank.
SM79 and a decent - attack aircraft, pure fighter, and hvy bomber for each of our current countries - before any more allied bombers.. then a B25 with alllll the loadout options would be nice..
-
Originally posted by Rutilant
Hurri D prolly would be effective if the guns were firing simultaneously and carried AP. Both guns firing separately cause a rediculous amount of yaw, making it hard to hit a B17, let alone a tank.
SM79 and a decent - attack aircraft, pure fighter, and hvy bomber for each of our current countries - before any more allied bombers.. then a B25 with alllll the loadout options would be nice..
B-25 served too far, too wide too many variatiants to not serve, but aye, all those otehr planes first. And a seaplane.
Sakai
-
Originally posted by Desl0ck
..the only thing AH-2 MUST have....
is a siren for the stuuuuka ..awwwrrooooooooooooooooooooo ooo!!!!!:D
Hopefully with ToD we'll eventually see an early model Ju-87 with the siren but I'd rather have a D-5 with wing mounted 20mm cannons or a G-1 with 37mm Flak 18 cannons on wing mounted gun pods.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
At the very least, the Allied bomber plane set should be further fleshed out with the B-24, B-25, A-26, Halifax, Wellington and any other Allied bomber that saw action, since bombing is going to be a major part of AH2. It also stands to reason that the Axis countries should also have their bomber plane set added to as well.
Ack-Ack
anymore fleshed out and people will be putting pictures of the aliied bomber plane set on the wall
Hurri D prolly would be effective if the guns were firing simultaneously and carried AP. Both guns firing separately cause a rediculous amount of yaw, making it hard to hit a B17, let alone a tank.
ive used the d guns succesfully...and dont work as well as they should (5 pings to kill a a6m...)
-
..can we have a single .50 cal mounted in the door of the C-47.....for purely defensive purposes...naturally...:D
-
Originally posted by Sakai
Well, kind of but not really.
I think like 700 were shipped to the Russian front to use as cannon platforms because they wouldn't bomb with them and the plane was basically detested by the Germans after years of trying to make it work. The design was horribly flawed and they only made 1000 because they could, not because it was an effective bomber. It was possibly Germany's stupidest WWII aviation move (that and delaying the 262 fighter development ot make it useful as a divebomber). It had modest use as a missile dorpping anti ship plane, not much and not as much as the Do-217 as best I recall.
They had, as best I can tell, one raid that was successful wit them as a bomber against industrial targets in Russia and one odd raid at london where a few of the planes in the raid that did not catch fire and turn back divebombed haphazardly and fled. Brady has all these "what if" ideas about the 177 but basically it was the worst plane program in Germany. If everything worked on it it flew quite nicely by all accounts but by that standard of measure we should include the two stage superchager on a 1941 P-39 model because that was the best way for it to perform. At some point you have to say "come bloody on."
D0-217 far and away a more realistic choice. Since this is fantasy la-la land, who cares, model the worst POS ever designed in Germany, but in a simulation striving for some representation of historical accuracy two of your three formation buddies in the Greif would be combusting sometime between engines on and a few miles from base.
Sakai
The problem with it was engine cooling which could have been solved by replacing its two twin engines with 4 separate one.
Which would have given germany a bomber with performances close to the B29 a few years before the US.
Politicians wanted it capable of dive bombing not the designers.
The designers could have solved the problem if they had been given free reign of the project.
Instead they were told to do impossible things.
How is that a flawed design?
The He177 was a great design that wasnt given a chance to shine by politicians who did not understand what it could and could not do.
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
The problem with it was engine cooling which could have been solved by replacing its two twin engines with 4 separate one.
Which would have given germany a bomber with performances close to the B29 a few years before the US.
Politicians wanted it capable of dive bombing not the designers.
The designers could have solved the problem if they had been given free reign of the project.
Instead they were told to do impossible things.
How is that a flawed design?
The He177 was a great design that wasnt given a chance to shine by politicians who did not understand what it could and could not do.
How is it a design flaw? Well, the cooling problems did arise out of the design of the twin nacelle no? I mean, you can say it would have been "better" as a 4-engined plane, and that's accurate but I have a hard time swallowing the "poor engineers, it was forced on them" mantra since really if they knew it was tinkering beyond capability of the design they might have started with a new design. This is what happens when 1) politicians and not engineers try to amend design changes and also 2) what happens when engineers are so in love with work already done that they stubbornly refuse to can it in favor of . . . .(drumroll) . . . .
a better design.
I mean, it was one design over the other, one design is tragically flawed the other not. It doesn't matter who demanded it, it is still a design flaw. Heinkel apparently knew it from the get go but he refused to give up on the 177. Seems to me honest engineers sometimes have to say "no, we need an entirely new design."
Plane was also too heavy which was hardly due to any changes in the specs.
Sakai
-
I would like to see the B25H with the 8 .50 & 75mm oh boy I am getting all excited agian.
-
Originally posted by Sakai
How is it a design flaw? Well, the cooling problems did arise out of the design of the twin nacelle no? I mean, you can say it would have been "better" as a 4-engined plane, and that's accurate but I have a hard time swallowing the "poor engineers, it was forced on them" mantra since really if they knew it was tinkering beyond capability of the design they might have started with a new design. This is what happens when 1) politicians and not engineers try to amend design changes and also 2) what happens when engineers are so in love with work already done that they stubbornly refuse to can it in favor of . . . .(drumroll) . . . .
a better design.
I mean, it was one design over the other, one design is tragically flawed the other not. It doesn't matter who demanded it, it is still a design flaw. Heinkel apparently knew it from the get go but he refused to give up on the 177. Seems to me honest engineers sometimes have to say "no, we need an entirely new design."
Plane was also too heavy which was hardly due to any changes in the specs.
Sakai
It was too heavy because it was reinforced for dive bombing.
Which wasnt the designers' idea.
It was a political decision that was bad for a plane of that size.
The engineers were prevented by politicians from making it with 4 seperate engines which would have fixed most of its problems.
Heinkel kept with it because he could not do what he wanted and the plane needed improvements.
He had no choice.
The plane did not work properly so he tried to fix it.
Make sense to me.
The He177 never had a chance in a country that did not want 4 engine bombers.
-
How about the japanese rocket-powered baka bomb. That way, all the suicide afficianadoes that must currently resort to fully loaded jugs could finally have the weapon of their dream.....
Bring on the hateful responses.
-
Originally posted by AVRO1
It was too heavy because it was reinforced for dive bombing.
Which wasnt the designers' idea.
It was a political decision that was bad for a plane of that size.
The engineers were prevented by politicians from making it with 4 seperate engines which would have fixed most of its problems.
Heinkel kept with it because he could not do what he wanted and the plane needed improvements.
He had no choice.
The plane did not work properly so he tried to fix it.
Make sense to me.
The He177 never had a chance in a country that did not want 4 engine bombers.
Well, kind of.
See, the problem is that Heinkel and his engineers had to build a plane to the military's specifications. That is to say, the military doesn't have to have an He-177 with 2 engines, they simply need an airplane with certain characteristics. At some point, the engineers should have said "we can't get there from here".
They never did. The 4 engine plane was called the 277 as I recall.
See the problem with that whole "it is all politicians deciding" thing is that the Military, not Heinkel, identifies the plane's needs. Germany's military felt the air arm should support the troops more than engage in strategic bombing. Clearly they should have developed both capabilities. But Heinkel hanging onto that design for that many years simply because he could was as silly as saying this design should do things it was never designed to. At some point, the engineers have to say "no" and move on. They kept trying to make it into a different specification.
Bottom line is the plane sucked as built and has no place in this game because for all intents and purposes it never flew effectively. For all its flaws the Italian P108 had a better record albeit in smaller numbers. Geez, the Petlyakov 8 was a more successful plane on many levels, shouldn't we have it instead? I mean it served into the 1950s in the Soviet Union.
Model the Do217, it was Germany's most effective heavy bomber. Also the excellent He-111, Il-4 and the SM-79 and Cantz1007. We also need the Wellington and the Pe-2. But I digress.
Sakai
-
B-29... I have other wishes, but a B-29 should be a shoe-in!
-
See below for list.
Thank you for your attention.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen10
See below for list.
Thank you for your attention.
You know, it would be quite simple to model the flight and handling characteristics of the JU52, just try the old Air Warrior P-47D model.
Sakai