Author Topic: New Planes Request (Read 4314 times)

Wofat · « **on:** December 20, 2005, 08:25:03 PM »

Please consider the very perk planes...

Fighers: Donier Arrow, Bearcat and Black Widow.
Bombers: B-29 and HE-111 (not a perk plane)

Thanks,

ME

Saxman · « **Reply #1 on:** December 21, 2005, 03:06:27 AM »

Bearcat unlikely as she missed WWII (otherwise I'd want an F2G!!!).

P-61 would be cool, but would there really be a point with no night fighter ops? Unless HTC decided to add that...

Not as familiar with German aircraft so can't say much about the Dornier, although the 111 would be a good add.

*Hits the deck to avoid the 29 flamers*

SMIDSY · « **Reply #2 on:** December 21, 2005, 04:17:43 AM »

most people have been begging for the HE-111 for as long as i can remember.

B-29 cant happen because furball will be all like "OMFG NOOKIES!!! ONE ONE ONE!!!"

bearcat wasnt in ww2. why not add the f86 then? nah.

arrow was used in VERY limited numbers.

i am biased to using the black widow because my grandfather flew in them.

CalDe1 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 21, 2005, 01:41:43 PM »

The p-61 could be used as an attacker like the 110, and the DO-335 would be a very nice addition, it was used in limited roles yes, 1 training squad and two operational squads. but hey they added the Spit 16 a very advanced fighter for this game so why not both of these? The other thing I would to see and we used to do this in air warrior all the time, is to allow you to accept invitations for ALL you gunner seats in a bomber or attacker. We used to fill up a B-17 or even a B-25 and go have fun, I thought this game was about fun not just winning. Thanks for listening to me ramble on.
Calde

Karnak · « **Reply #4 on:** December 21, 2005, 02:13:11 PM »

Spit XVI is not a very advanced fighter. It is not even as advanced as the Spit VIII. It is just a Spit LF.IX with a clipped "e" wing. You could find Spits 99% as effective in 1943. The Do335 (no confirmed usuage) is not remotely comparable to the Spit XVI.

CalDe1 · « **Reply #5 on:** December 21, 2005, 07:05:54 PM »

If you do your homework

you will find that 3 squadrons were operational, 1 training and 2 operational, Somewhere I have a pic of a distant relative climbing out of one. The Spit 16 was very late intering the war and made little impact. All I'm saying is thier is no rime or reason to what planes they add. If they added the spit 16 and 109k why not add the P-61 and DO-335

. Personally I enjoy flying the Spit 16 in the attacker role.
Happy flying
CalDe

Karnak · « **Reply #6 on:** December 21, 2005, 08:08:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CalDe1
If you do your homework you will find that 3 squadrons were operational, 1 training and 2 operational, Somewhere I have a pic of a distant relative climbing out of one. The Spit 16 was very late intering the war and made little impact. All I'm saying is thier is no rime or reason to what planes they add. If they added the spit 16 and 109k why not add the P-61 and DO-335 . Personally I enjoy flying the Spit 16 in the attacker role.
Happy flying
CalDe

Erm, I suspect you have mistaken mark numbers or are confusing bubble top Spit XVIs with Spit XVIs in general. The Spit XVI (which as I stated earlier was only given a mark number separate from the Mk IX due to it's American engine, being in all other ways an LF.Mk IXe) entered service in July, 1944 and more than 1000 were built.

The bubble top Mk XVI (which we do not have in AH) entered service in March, 1945.

To put it another way:

Spitfire LF.Mk IXe = Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe

Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe = Spitfire LF.Mk IXe

They are the same aircraft. So when you total the numbers, if you want to be accurate, you need to include all the Spitfire LF.Mk IXs in the same list, and the Spitfire LF.Mk IX entered service in March, 1943. As you can see the Spitfire LF.Mk XVI is not an advanced fighter. The Spitfire Mk VIII was significantly more refined than the Mk XVI and it also entered service in 1943.

SMIDSY · « **Reply #7 on:** December 21, 2005, 08:10:10 PM »

the Do-335 was used in combat. P-51 pilots mentioned durring the end of the war mentioned "large, strange-looking aircraft" that they couldn't catch at any altitude.

Karnak · « **Reply #8 on:** December 21, 2005, 08:24:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SMIDSY
the Do-335 was used in combat. P-51 pilots mentioned durring the end of the war mentioned "large, strange-looking aircraft" that they couldn't catch at any altitude.

That does not mean it was in "combat". Remember, the German's couldn't do test flights without prototypes technically being "in combat". It would hardly be fair to the Allies to use that as a metric.

EagleDNY · « **Reply #9 on:** December 21, 2005, 09:15:07 PM »

Frankly I'd like to see the Arrow just because the luftwaffe guys need something to even the playing field a bit. I'd vote yes on the Do-335 just to give us some more variety.

EagleDNY
.02

Krusty · « **Reply #10 on:** December 21, 2005, 10:54:06 PM »

Karnak whether it's fair or not, it's one of HTC's criteria

I don't know if I'd ever want to see it. Sure it's impressive and all but with the scant information on how it flew, it would probably end up flying worse than the Ta152 we have now.

ramzey · « **Reply #11 on:** December 21, 2005, 11:49:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SMIDSY
the Do-335 was used in combat. P-51 pilots mentioned durring the end of the war mentioned "large, strange-looking aircraft" that they couldn't catch at any altitude.

BS

one of engineer was moving plane from one airfield to another and was cough by Clostermann flying Tempest
Unarmed plane runn , end of story

Karnak · « **Reply #12 on:** December 22, 2005, 02:05:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Karnak whether it's fair or not, it's one of HTC's criteria

I don't know if I'd ever want to see it. Sure it's impressive and all but with the scant information on how it flew, it would probably end up flying worse than the Ta152 we have now.

Krusty,

That is less combat than the Meteor saw, and Luftwaffe fans universally say the Meteor has no place in a WWII sim. The Meteor actually fired it's guns in anger and engaged Fw190s in combat, though without result. If the Meteor doesn't cut it because ground targets don't count and unmanned missles don't count and combat without loss inflicted or suffered doesn't count then a Do335 running away most definately doesn't count.

CalDe1 · « **Reply #13 on:** December 22, 2005, 08:59:46 AM »

Look Guys, the point I was trying to make was, not to add any planes that would offset the balance but to add a few that actually saw combat, the DO-335 flew on the eastern front , well closer to it than the allies, yes it was a late comer no argument there, the P-61 also was a late comer but they both had thier place. They both did thier jobs and neither were notorious for anything. They were pretty boring actually, but thats not the point. Why don't we have the B-25 in the game? it is a sweet ride, it saw lots of action. Both planes would be very nice to fly. I will concede to Spit point of matter as I can't find my notes.
CalDe

Karnak · « **Reply #14 on:** December 22, 2005, 10:01:39 AM »

How would it, if added, redress the balance? In the MA it would be perked and in ToD or the CT it would never see use. That doesn't address the balance at all.

A better way to redress the balance is to figure out why Luftwaffe fighters don't match their reported ease of use and provide the data to get them fixed.

Another method would be to get ammo belts that tracked individual round types, eg, tracer HEI, HE, HE, minen, tracer HEI, HE, HE, minen, ect, ect instead of just a generic average of them.

That would be a way to address the imbalance without resorting to "Wonderwaffe" oddballs.

Another way would be to advocate for the addtion of Russian planes other than their top dogs. The Russians are missing huge numbers of aircraft, but of the top Russian fighters only the Yak-3 is missing. I-16, LaGG-3, MiG-1, Yak-1, Yak-7 and a huge variety of bombers.