Author Topic: Axis don't need He-177 ! (Read 899 times)

Staga · « **on:** July 26, 2001, 03:01:00 PM »

I let Dowding to tell you why Axis don't need He-177 but why Ju-87 and He-111 should be in game.

Dowding why should axis have only early-war bombers?

You're also CM so is this also HTC's opinion?

Dowding · « **Reply #1 on:** July 26, 2001, 06:02:00 PM »

Unbelievable.

I'm not going to add any more, for fear of really losing it.

My opinion is my own, and no-one elses.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #2 on:** July 26, 2001, 06:17:00 PM »

Please define "need". Seems to me that your definition is really just screaming want really loud.

Combine that with thinking your oppinion represents all Axis pilots and ya have your typical luftwhine.

AKDejaVu

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #3 on:** July 26, 2001, 06:20:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Staga:
I let Dowding to tell you why Axis don't need He-177 but why Ju-87 and He-111 should be in game.?

I followed that thread, he clearly stated he wanted the early war bombers for scenarios. They would be more usefull in that aspect for him and us. He also clearly stated he believes the Japanese need a bomber before the German's get another one.

Quote

Originally posted by Staga:
Dowding why should axis have only early-war bombers??

Again, the way he said it gave me the impression for scenarios. Those things everyone is crying about.

Quote

Originally posted by Staga:
You're also CM so is this also HTC's opinion?

Is he an employee of HTC?
-SW

Staga · « **Reply #4 on:** July 26, 2001, 06:42:00 PM »

I still think that most of the time players spend in AH they're in MA.

Like I said in that another topic Axis already have early-war level/divebomber which has been used in scenarios etc.

Why not model middle/late-war Axis heavy bomber which had about same bomb-load as its allied cousins had ?
After all there were more than one thousand made and about 700 were in operative use in eastern front, some with 50/75mm AT-cannons.

Anyway that topic was "Axis need a Heavy bomber... but somehow Dowding translated it to "Axis need a light or medium early-war bomber for use in scenarios".
That kind of Hi-Jack kinda pissed me off. Well maybe next time he will start his own topic.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #5 on:** July 26, 2001, 06:48:00 PM »

Maybe... but it stated "Axis need a heavy bomber..." He threw in his bit that Germany already has a bomber, shouldn't the Axis get Japanese bomber?

The Axis does include Japan, not just Germany you know?
-SW

Staga · « **Reply #6 on:** July 26, 2001, 06:50:00 PM »

DjV I still fly more allied iron than axis and I don't give a dam who build that plane. So take your "Luftwhiener stamp" and put it back to your pocket.
I just think its a cool plane which could be fun and more suitable for use in MA (And maybe some scenarios too).

SOB · « **Reply #7 on:** July 26, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Staga:
That kind of Hi-Jack kinda pissed me off. Well maybe next time he will start his own topic.

Staga, I'm not sure which thread you were reading, but it looked to me as if everything Dowding said was a direct responce to your posts...

Quote

Staga:
Maybe we could use it in a somekind of WW2 scenario ?

Quote

Dowding:
If it's main attraction revolves around its use in scenarios, I'd rather see something like the stuka.
It could be used in any LW scenario from 1939 in loads of different theatres.

Quote

Staga:
Koba when shall we see a "Historical scenario" from '40 with 70%axis and 30% Allies?

Seemed to me you had a bug up your arse about something. Can't see why you kept getting so upset about Dowding's posts, including insulting one of the scenarios for no good reason that I can see. "I left laughing"

SOB

BTW...On the subject of the HE-177, I think it looks like a neat bomber and would love to see it for the MA and whatever scenarios it might be useful in.

Staga · « **Reply #8 on:** July 26, 2001, 07:07:00 PM »

Yep SW, I heard they made a film where IJN attacked to some port somewhere in pacific.

So what kind of heavy bombers Japan build in WW2?
I tried to look but most of them carried about 1000kg thought H8K "Emily" (btw 167 made) carried about 2000kg.

Now "Greif" carried about 5000kg, got decent defensive armament so for me it looks like it suits quite nicely in MA.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #9 on:** July 26, 2001, 07:24:00 PM »

The He-177 carries 6000kg(13,200lb).

Here's a list of Japanese bombers:
Nakajima "Liz" 2 Heavy Bomber: 7,000lbs Max.
Mitsubishi G4M2 "Betty" Type 1 Land Attack Plane, Model 22: 4,840lbs Max.
Mitsubishi Ki-213 "Sally" Type 97 Heavy Bomber, Model 3: 4,400lbs Max.
Kawanishi H8K "Emily" 22 Flying-Boat: Can't find information on it's bombload.

That's a list of Japanese bombers that I know, Dowding might know of more.
-SW

juzz · « **Reply #10 on:** July 27, 2001, 02:21:00 AM »

1. G5N(Liz) - only 6 were built(4xG5N1 + 2xG5N2) and were used as transports.

2. 4,000lbs+ bombloads for the G4M and Ki-21? Every source I have seen says only 2,200lbs.

3. H8K2 could carry 8x250kg bombs under the wings(which I imagine would reduce it's ~290mph top speed significantly).

4. I suspect the 13,000lbs max. load for the He 177 is a similar type of figure as the B-17 max. load, which was something like 20,000lbs(In AH it is only 6,000lbs).

Fact is, the Axis forces don't really have a "heavy" bomber in the same class as the Lancaster and B-17(unless you want to get into prototypes and very low production types).

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #11 on:** July 27, 2001, 07:34:00 AM »

Juzz, I got those numbers from Jane's Fighter Aircraft of WWII (or some such title, book is at home- I am at work)
-SW

brady · « **Reply #12 on:** July 27, 2001, 08:21:00 AM »

Well I said it before and I will say it again the He 177 would be fun to have but I do not feal we nead it by any means. The Germans already have a great bomber the JU 88 it caries 6k LB's of bombs but has a light defensive arament as it is a early war example.

What would be nice is for the Japanese to get a Buff ( or the Italians or the Russians SM 84 and TU 4 respectively)

Frances :(P1Y1) 340mph,2,205lb's of bombs, or one 1,764lb torpedo, 20mm type 99 defensive cannons. This fast and comparatively nimble buff would be fun and usable in the MA.

KI 67(peggy)Engine: 2 x Army Type 4, 1425kW, wingspan: 22.5m, length: 18.7m, height: 7.7m, wing area: 65.85m2, start mass: 13765kg, empty mass: 8649kg, max speed: 537kph, cruise speed: 400kph, ceiling: 9470m, range w/max.fuel: 3800km, range w/max.payload: 2800km, armament: 1 x 20mm cannon, 4 x 12.7mm MGs, 500-800kg of bombs.

The above 2 Buffs are late war machines 44 vintage, they incoperate the lessons learned from the faliures or shortcomings of the early war Japanese Bufs , like the betty, of to little protection and to light a defensive arament. Gents we do not want a early Japanese Buff, the would be to weak.

Staga · « **Reply #13 on:** July 27, 2001, 09:19:00 AM »

So depending what japanese bomber you fly you could kill one hangar or not even that much ?

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #14 on:** July 27, 2001, 09:25:00 AM »

This doesn't make any sense to me. First of all the countries in the MA are not country specific, each side has an equal arsennal.

What difference does it matter if someone goes up in a Japanese bomber instead of a B26? A lot of them have the same bombload as the B26... But have much larger calibre defensive fire.

This just sounds like a "THe LuftWaffe needs more and more and more..." to me.
-SW