CAC Boomerang request thread #1 of 1000

[Megalodon]

I think that Boomerang would be an excellent use of art rescourses in the current state of AH's planeset. I have a right for that opinion and I've provided solid arguments supporting my position.

I would like to see the Boomerang added before any other planes are added.

Not many aircraft that deserve a queue spot before a CAC Boomerang, It can do more than the Brewster and I would not be afraid to say it's a better plane for AH, with the Brewster being so limited.

[Butcher]

I think that Boomerang would be an excellent use of art rescourses in the current state of AH's planeset. I have a right for that opinion and I've provided solid arguments supporting my position.

I would like to see the Boomerang added before any other planes are added.

Not many aircraft that deserve a queue spot before a CAC Boomerang, It can do more than the Brewster and I would not be afraid to say it's a better plane for AH, with the Brewster being so limited.

Can you show me the theaters the Boomerang was deployed? and locations?

[caldera]

I think that Boomerang would be an excellent use of art rescourses in the current state of AH's planeset. I have a right for that opinion and I've provided solid arguments supporting my position.

I would like to see the Boomerang added before any other planes are added.

Not many aircraft that deserve a queue spot before a CAC Boomerang, It can do more than the Brewster and I would not be afraid to say it's a better plane for AH, with the Brewster being so limited.

What he said.

One man's "waste of resources" is another's fun plane to fly.  Anything added, other than another late war monster will be considered a "waste of resources" to all those that spend all their time in top tier aircraft.  The Ki-43 will be a hangar queen after the first month as would the Boomerang.
Look at the P-40E's usage lately.  Maybe we should just get rid of it.  Oh, and the 109-E, Spit1, Hurri1, etc.  They are a "waste of resources".

HTC did add the Boomerang as eligible for the recent plane vote, like the Ki-43.  The Ki-43 didn't win either.  Both would be a fun change of pace for those that want one.  Why is that so objectionable?  The Boomerang was produced and flew in combat strength during the war.  It has the firepower that other small turny birds lack.  It will be flown if added. 

[Butcher]

What he said.

One man's "waste of resources" is another's fun plane to fly.  Anything added, other than another late war monster will be considered a "waste of resources" to all those that spend all their time in top tier aircraft.  The Ki-43 will be a hangar queen after the first month as would the Boomerang.
Look at the P-40E's usage lately.  Maybe we should just get rid of it.  Oh, and the 109-E, Spit1, Hurri1, etc.  They are a "waste of resources".

Like the Brewster, the P-40 would fill quite a few more theaters for FSO and Snapshot then the Boomerang would, which would be extremely limited to Late 42-Early 43 time periods around Moresby.

109-E
Ki-43
Brewster
P-40e

all fill in more then 2 Theaters (minimum) let alone the Brewster that fills in at least 5.

This is my only issue with voting on it, one theater - and in a time period where the P-47D-11, P-38G, Spit V all are in production and being flown.
If I can get more information on what squadrons were deployed, it might be added to other theaters, but I highly doubt it.

[Megalodon]

If I can get more information on what squadrons were deployed, it might be added to other theaters, but I highly doubt it.

 Try reading the thread  

 Edit: you have posted 2 posts down from the info. 

[FTJR]

Can you show me the theaters the Boomerang was deployed? and locations?

When did theatres become a prerequisite ?

I am away traveling ATM, I can supply the locations when I get back. (this weekend)

[FTJR]

At the end of Hostilities,
4 Squadron was in Labuan, North Borneo. Its sister Squadron, 5, was in Bougainville, a distance of 2800 NM's
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=BUA-lbu&MS=wls&DU=mi

By comparision,  London to Rome to Cairo is a distance of 2200 NM's
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=lhr-rom-cai&MS=wls&DU=mi

Which, correct me if I am wrong, covers  the European, Mediterranean, and North African Theatres. With room to spare.

[Wmaker]

[Butcher]

At the end of Hostilities,
4 Squadron was in Labuan, North Borneo. Its sister Squadron, 5, was in Bougainville, a distance of 2800 NM's
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=BUA-lbu&MS=wls&DU=mi

By comparision,  London to Rome to Cairo is a distance of 2200 NM's
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=lhr-rom-cai&MS=wls&DU=mi

Which, correct me if I am wrong, covers  the European, Mediterranean, and North African Theatres. With room to spare.

I suppose it would make a good observation spotter, I did some checking it served in three theaters New Guinea, the Solomon Islands Campaign and Borneo Campaign - which is a plus in my book, I really am dis-interested in aircraft that flew in limited engagements - I suppose it would certainly help the plane sets.

My reason is simply an opinion, something that flew in very limited theaters, loses a vote vs something that flew in multiple campaigns like a Ki-43 (which deserves its spot someday), something like a Ta-152 is limited to one theater, and only late war, I would of never voted on it.

I did find 4 manuals in my storage with all the information you need on the Boomerang, from squadron markings, operational theaters, pilot logs, production numbers etc.
Only problem is one of the manuals is in polish.

However I do have all the profiles, specifications from the factory itself on the production.
Let me know if any of it can be of help to the cause

[FTJR]

Butcher (and Wmaker), from my point of view, this is just like a high school discussion, one side gets to argue for, and the other the against. Its been a rather interesting conversation for me, you both make good points, and hopefully i've been able to counter argue with a degree of success.

As we all know HTC makes the final call.

<S>

[Butcher]

Butcher (and Wmaker), from my point of view, this is just like a high school discussion, one side gets to argue for, and the other the against. Its been a rather interesting conversation for me, you both make good points, and hopefully i've been able to counter argue with a degree of success.

As we all know HTC makes the final call.

<S>

I am one to make sure everyone knows what they are getting, before jumping to conclusions, for example I was totally against the B-29 - highly perked, and by the time you see it - its beyond 30k - total waste of time, honestly my vote was for the Aussies getting the Beaufighter.

[Megalodon]

(Image removed from quote.)

How it was delivered from the factory to Finland - minus the navy stuff but you added pilot armor and other things and it had no self sealing tanks. In the deal you got 10 motors and 20 props and a few other parts for 20 mil.

Brewster F2A-1 Buffalo (June 1938 to November 1939)
3 x .50 Brownings, 1 x .30 Brownings
940 hp Wright R-1820-34<--- is this what is in the game?
301 MPH @ 17000

[Fish42]

let alone the Brewster that fills in at least 5.

The brewster we have in the game (239) really only covers, from what I understand the finnish theater of war. Its a very different plane from the ones used in the other theaters.

[phatzo]

The brewster we have in the game (239) really only covers, from what I understand the finnish theater of war. Its a very different plane from the ones used in the other theaters.

I think the US used a few similar ones but not the same.

[Wmaker]

940 hp Wright R-1820-34<--- is this what is in the game?

No it isnt. AH has the export model of the F2A-1 (Model 239). There was a ban in US on exporting engines designated for the military and thus Model 239 was equipped with R-1820G5, a civillian model of the Cyclone 9.