superfortress

[EagleEyes]

Please.....

It was the B-18!! Everyone knows it!! It couldnt be used in combat because it was far too superior!


 

[Masherbrum]

classic

They would have to also resize the bomber hangar

Perk Sheetmetal workers, Electricians, Pipefitters and Carpenters!     

[Martyn]

Indeed, we all know the Blenheim pwns all. 

No no no no. It was the Wellington. 

[1pLUs44]

I don't see why the Superfortress isn't already in game. It doesn't even need a large perk load out, since it's still a giant, slowmoving, silver bomber. Definitely not nearly as much of a tank as the B-17 was, easy to catch on fire, I doubt it would need a perk price of any more than 20, and that's too high for the damn thing. It was able to fly at high alts and hold lots of bombs, doesn't mean it was tough. No one in AHII has the patience to climb to 30K+ as well, and a perk price would drive them to do it.

[Martyn]

We do need something to spend perks on. B-29, as you say, would be OK - just disable the formation checkbox if it's an issue.

[Masherbrum]

Some climb to 30k with the 17's, 24's and Lanc's.  

You're incorrect on the speeds.

B-17:  

Maximum speed: 287 mph
Cruise speed: 182 mph
Short range missions (<400 mi): 8,000 lb (3,600 kg)
Long range missions (>800 mi): 4,500 lb (2,000 kg)


B-29:

Maximum speed: 357 mph (310 knots, 574 km/h)
Cruise speed: 220 mph (190 knots, 350 km/h)
Bombs:  20,000 lb (9,000 kg) standard loadout

Ki-67:

Maximum speed: 334 mph (537 km/h)


Boston III:

Maximum Speed:  344 mph (550 km/h) at altitude.
Bombs - 4,000 lb (1,900 kg)


In short, the B-29 would be next to impossible to catch with a piston engined airplane, given the space and area within the game.   If you're underneath it, forget it.   To "catch up" would take more sectors than it already does.    If it were to be added, the payload could not be 20,000 lbs.   You could potentially take out 3 fields in a single sortie with just ONE B-29.  

[ebfd11]

Hmmm maybe the b-29 isnt going to fly is because of the short span of time it was in service for the war. I do believe that there is to be a minimum time that planes are to be, to be able to fly in AHII. Just my guestimation why we wont have it.   

[FYB]

I don't see why the Superfortress isn't already in game. It doesn't even need a large perk load out, since it's still a giant, slowmoving, silver bomber. Definitely not nearly as much of a tank as the B-17 was, easy to catch on fire, I doubt it would need a perk price of any more than 20, and that's too high for the damn thing. It was able to fly at high alts and hold lots of bombs, doesn't mean it was tough. No one in AHII has the patience to climb to 30K+ as well, and a perk price would drive them to do it.

Yes... quite agreeable, the plane is a giant silver ball with bullets.
It would take almost half the map of a medium map to get it to +30k.
I dont mind having it because almost nobody would have the patience to get it 20k - 30k.

-FYB

[1pLUs44]

Some climb to 30k with the 17's, 24's and Lanc's.  

You're incorrect on the speeds.

B-17:  

Maximum speed: 287 mph
Cruise speed: 182 mph
Short range missions (<400 mi): 8,000 lb (3,600 kg)
Long range missions (>800 mi): 4,500 lb (2,000 kg)


B-29:

Maximum speed: 357 mph (310 knots, 574 km/h)
Cruise speed: 220 mph (190 knots, 350 km/h)
Bombs:  20,000 lb (9,000 kg) standard loadout

Ki-67:

Maximum speed: 334 mph (537 km/h)


Boston III:

Maximum Speed:  344 mph (550 km/h) at altitude.
Bombs - 4,000 lb (1,900 kg)


In short, the B-29 would be next to impossible to catch with a piston engined airplane, given the space and area within the game.   If you're underneath it, forget it.   To "catch up" would take more sectors than it already does.    If it were to be added, the payload could not be 20,000 lbs.   You could potentially take out 3 fields in a single sortie with just ONE B-29.  

I suspected so, but I'm trying to point out that almost no one would be patient enough to climb to 30k in one. I'm not even patient enough to climb past 15k in my B-17s or B-24s.

[Banshee7]

Pfft.  Wrong.

Everyone has their opinion.  And I didn't really mean to type allied...meant to say American.  Because the Brits had some dandies themselves 

[TOMCAT21]

as far as appearance in war went, the B-29 saw way more combat then the 234.  To add the B-29 and perk it, the perk value would have  to be approaching that of the 262.  I agree that we problably wont see the 29 anytime soon. The B-17F could be added and assign a modest perk value to 17G(ie..the spit 14 and F4U-1c/-4

[A.F. Crash, Fire, Rescue]

Some climb to 30k with the 17's, 24's and Lanc's.  

B-17:  

Maximum speed: 287 mph
Cruise speed: 182 mph
Short range missions (<400 mi): 8,000 lb (3,600 kg)
Long range missions (>800 mi): 4,500 lb (2,000 kg)

The B-17 was built to the 222 specifications established before WW2. Those specs were, carry 2000lbs of bombs or more at least 2000 miles at over 200mph.

[Masherbrum]

The B-17 was built to the 222 specifications established before WW2. Those specs were, carry 2000lbs of bombs or more at least 2000 miles at over 200mph.

Not for Cruise speed.   Thanks though.   

[100goon]

ill end it now, NO

[100goon]

thats the point..as stated, very few people would have the patience to actually climb one to where it is high enough to be safe from the blast.  Heck...the pilot of the B-29 said he felt the explosion at 30k..or however high he was

ive taken at 24 to 30k i find it fun up there, you can actually see the curveture of the "earth"