PDA

View Full Version : The B-29 Question - Questions.



MustangWZI
03-31-2004, 10:14 PM
Hello all. With the wonderful news about Pacific Fighters now fully aware. I have had a question pestering me ever since I found out.

The B-29 had a large, unquestionable role in the Pacific Theater. With Pacific Fighters' basis being the PTO here is my question.

What is Luthier and team doing about the B-29? Is there going to be a fully flyable, cockpit and all, version of this bird? Or is it only going to be available as an AI controlled aircraft? Or is the B-29 not even going to make an apearence here?

Well there it is, there is no obligation to answer and I understand if you guys are too busy to answer or if this is going to be one of your guys' little secrets.

Feel free to bump if anyone is as interested in this as me.

Thank you.

http://server6.uploadit.org/files/MustangWZI-sig5.JPG
Like the moon over
The day, my genious and brawn
Are lost on these fools
~Haiku

MustangWZI
03-31-2004, 10:14 PM
Hello all. With the wonderful news about Pacific Fighters now fully aware. I have had a question pestering me ever since I found out.

The B-29 had a large, unquestionable role in the Pacific Theater. With Pacific Fighters' basis being the PTO here is my question.

What is Luthier and team doing about the B-29? Is there going to be a fully flyable, cockpit and all, version of this bird? Or is it only going to be available as an AI controlled aircraft? Or is the B-29 not even going to make an apearence here?

Well there it is, there is no obligation to answer and I understand if you guys are too busy to answer or if this is going to be one of your guys' little secrets.

Feel free to bump if anyone is as interested in this as me.

Thank you.

http://server6.uploadit.org/files/MustangWZI-sig5.JPG
Like the moon over
The day, my genious and brawn
Are lost on these fools
~Haiku

MustangWZI
04-01-2004, 12:19 AM
Originally posted by Luthier1:
Sorry guys, unfortunately a single flyable heavy bomber is a really huge task, and considering the time and resources we have it's just very very hard to do. Basically, a cockpit is a cockpit, and it takes the same amount of time to build a single-seat fighter's pit as it does a heavy bomber's gunner position.

So, basically the choice we were facing is either to have 7-8 flyable fighters, 3-4 flyable two-seaters, or a single flyable heavy bomber. I am a big fan of level bombers myself - the only flyable heavy we've ever had was built by me after all - but in this case we had to say no to flyable heavies because otherwise we'd have some really major smaller planes as AI-only.

You will get some level bombers, but they will be two engine for now. We'll see how things go after the initial release though

That answers one of my questions but theres others. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://server6.uploadit.org/files/MustangWZI-sig5.JPG
Like the moon over
The day, my genious and brawn
Are lost on these fools
~Haiku

NegativeGee
04-01-2004, 02:38 AM
I agree, towards the end of WW2 the B-29 was a key aircraft in the PTO, being very active in bombing missions against a wide variety of targets.

I can see Luthiers point about it as a flyable, but an AI model would be fantastic.

Off course, then you would need some high altitude interceptors to oppose them with, like say the Ki-44 Shoki (plug, plug), then you could do some really interesting late war missions http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

http://www.invoman.com/images/tali_with_hands.jpg

Look Noobie, we already told you, we don't have the Patch!

MustangWZI
04-02-2004, 03:25 PM
Bump!

http://server5.uploadit.org/files/MustangWZI-sig200.JPG
Like the moon over
The day, my genious and brawn
Are lost on these fools
~Haiku

Eafdawg
04-03-2004, 12:27 AM
I would really really really like to see a B-29, but I will take whatever luthier will give us (heck he could put X-wing fighters, the hot air balloon from Wizard of Oz, and a moose with a rocket pack in there and I would still buy it...but the moose would have to have the correct roll rate). But the B-29 has long been my favorite WWII airplane. I mean honestly it just looks freakin' sweet and shiney and...droool...mmmmm...B-29. I would pay for a sim that let you fly a B-29 and only a B-29 without ANYTHING else (even a background, or any other planes)...then again I just might be crazy.

LuckyBoy1
04-03-2004, 01:29 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=26310365&m=738103723

Solutions for internet security & spyware problems... http://www.geocities.com/callingelvis911/s_s.html

Luckyboy = Senior hydraulic landing gear designer for the P-11 & Contributing Editor to Complete Users magazine.

Bellicause
04-03-2004, 05:10 AM
I want an interception mision in KI-84 Hayate against B-29 superfortress on nuclear bombing !!!!

MustangWZI
04-03-2004, 12:54 PM
Well right now the best I could predict is it's down to two possibilities Were not going to see it here or were going to get it in AI form. Personally now I think were not going to get it, I mean the B-17 was pretty big and demanding to get several squadrons flying at once with the .50's blasting away and the B-29 was almost twice as big! Now I'm leaning towards a possible inclusion an AI B-24 Liberator. Hopefully! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

luthier1
04-03-2004, 12:57 PM
I'll have no more of this panic mongering! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

You'll get both the B-29 and B-24. Come on, how could a Pacific sim ship without either one of those?

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

MustangWZI
04-03-2004, 01:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by luthier1:
I'll have no more of this panic mongering! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

You'll get both the B-29 and B-24. Come on, how could a Pacific sim ship without either one of those?

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WOW, http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif You've relly made my day. You've made my week! I know you've heard this a lot but I'm going to say this agian, Thank you for having such a great presence here in the forums, you are truly the king of kings! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

http://server5.uploadit.org/files/MustangWZI-sig200.JPG
Like the moon over
The day, my genious and brawn
Are lost on these fools
~Haiku

LuckyBoy1
04-03-2004, 01:45 PM
Yes, but will both those bombers be flyable from like, inside the cockpit? I know it is a big request, but as long as the game's going to include all of ACE, we can concentrate a little more on getting a couple of bombers flyable rather than a half dozen more obscure planes.

Solutions for internet security & spyware problems... http://www.geocities.com/callingelvis911/s_s.html

Luckyboy = Senior hydraulic landing gear designer for the P-11 & Contributing Editor to Complete Users magazine.

luthier1
04-03-2004, 02:02 PM
We're not making any obscure planes flyable. As a matter of fact, we're not even making a lot of major planes flyable.

Here's a short list of crucially important Pacific planes that are not in AEP, and I'd consider them a much higher priority than the B-24 or B-29.

1. A-20
2. A-26
3. Aichi Val
4. B-26
5. Boomerang
6. B5N Kate
7. Beaufighter
8. F4F
9. F4U
10. G4M Betty
11. Ki-43 I
12. Ki-43 II
13. Ki-44
14. N1K1
15. N1K2
16. PBY
17. SBD Dauntless
18. Seafire
19. TBF/TBM
20. SBD
21. SB2C

That's just off the top of my head. We're not even making all of these flyable in the initial release, and a couple not at all. And a B-24 or B-29 would take at least as much time as any three of the projects above. I'll personally need some very strong arguments to be convinced that I need to dedicate resources to the heavy flyable bombers rather than the planes above.

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

PF_Talus
04-03-2004, 02:26 PM
Luthier, if you give me 4 flyable B-25's, a Dauntless and Corsair, that will make this game for me.


http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/Talus/p63-3.jpg

Eafdawg
04-03-2004, 02:51 PM
As I said in my crazy ramblings earlier, I'd take the B-29 at the expense of all the other planes planned for the game (I'm not exagerating...well, not much). But, seriously, if there is anyway that we could get a flyable B-29 that would make the game for me. I'd still buy the game even if there wasn't a B-29 (flyable or AI only).

Obi_Kwiet
04-03-2004, 08:00 PM
I don't thank that's ever been done before. Make one last add on before BoB with a B-29, B-24 B-17, and a B-26! With that I will considderthis the msot compleat sim in history. And I will be even more anxous for it to begin again in BoB! But man, if you coe through on this we will love you!

goshikisen
04-03-2004, 09:45 PM
A-26, Seafire, and Boomerang a higher priority than the B-29? I'd question that... but I'll take whatever you guys can crank out. I see an AI B-29 as important to a Pacific Theatre simulation as I do an AI B-17 to a European Theatre simulation... in other words, very important.

A series of missions in which Shoki, Raiden, Hien and Toryu aircraft are tasked with defending against American B-29 attacks over Japan would be pretty interesting... especially in Oleg's engine.

Here's hoping you guys can find the time to build an AI Superfortress...

Regards, Goshikisen

luthier1
04-03-2004, 09:48 PM
PLEASE try to read the threads all the way through before replying to them.

You ARE getting a B-29. We're talking about priorities for making it flyable.

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

goshikisen
04-03-2004, 09:54 PM
My apologies Luthier... and thanks for the heads up.

Liberator and Superfortress... I can't wait to see your finished masterpiece.

Regards, Goshikisen

goshikisen
04-03-2004, 09:56 PM
can I sell you on the idea of a Hien and a Raiden? (just joking sorta... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif)

Angelus897
04-03-2004, 10:26 PM
Isn't Hien (Ki-61, right?) almost finished? I saw a bunch of pics in the older dev. updates.

Giganoni
04-03-2004, 10:27 PM
Hmm yes the B-29 played an important part in the PTO..and I have no problem with an official scenario of it bombing military targets in Japan and you having to defend the bombers or the target. Although I hope no official scenario would be made of the firebombings of Japanese cities at night. I think that would be easily considered poor taste and should simply be left to private individuals creating their own missions if they so desired. Of course, leaving this out does deny the use of the Ki-45 Toryu, Japans best and most famous night fighter and which I would love to be able to fly.

Jonny___C
04-04-2004, 08:56 AM
PF will certainly have to include:

Val
Kate
Betty
Zero (already in FB)
Ki-43
Ki-61

Dauntless
Devastator
B-25
F4F
Lightning (already in AEP)
Airacobra (already in FB)
Buffalo (already in FB)
P-40 (already in FB)
F6F
F4U

You can't build a good Pacific game without those. Everything else is gravy.

NegativeGee
04-04-2004, 10:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by luthier1:
We're not making any obscure planes flyable. As a matter of fact, we're not even making a lot of major planes flyable.

Here's a short list of crucially important Pacific planes that are not in AEP, and I'd consider them a much higher priority than the B-24 or B-29.

1. A-20
2. A-26
3. Aichi Val
4. B-26
5. Boomerang
6. B5N Kate
7. Beaufighter
8. F4F
9. F4U
10. G4M Betty
11. Ki-43 I
12. Ki-43 II
13. Ki-44
14. N1K1
15. N1K2
16. PBY
17. SBD Dauntless
18. Seafire
19. TBF/TBM
20. SBD
21. SB2C

That's just off the top of my head. We're not even making all of these flyable in the initial release, and a couple not at all. And a B-24 or B-29 would take at least as much time as any three of the projects above. I'll personally need some very strong arguments to be convinced that I need to dedicate resources to the heavy flyable bombers rather than the planes above.

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oo oo ooo! you said Ki-44!

Pretty pwease can we have it as a flyable!?!

If money is an issue, I have a spare kidney http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

http://www.invoman.com/images/tali_with_hands.jpg

Look Noobie, we already told you, we don't have the Patch!

JG27_BLACKHART
04-04-2004, 01:11 PM
ROFL Damn I posted one like this before I seen it was already posted ... I had the same thought .. because the B-29 ended the war so to speak .. was wondering if it would be entered with Atomic bombs as a load out option ...

http://home.earthlink.net/~eaglz/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/bh.jpg

Angelus897
04-04-2004, 01:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jonny___C:
PF will certainly have to include:

Val
Kate
Betty
Zero (already in FB)
Ki-43
Ki-61

Dauntless
Devastator
B-25
F4F
Lightning (already in AEP)
Airacobra (already in FB)
Buffalo (already in FB)
P-40 (already in FB)
F6F
F4U

You can't build a good Pacific game without those. Everything else is gravy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well the models for Val, Betty, Ki-61, and Ki-43 look like they are almost done. So do the F4F, B25, and F4U models. Of course the cockpits are the hard parts.

Bull_dog_
04-04-2004, 08:57 PM
Didn't the B-29 have remote controlled turrets??

I don't know much about how they operated but I thought gunners looked through a sort of periscope to fire....I'm thinking the A-26 had similar turrets too...very accurate and the crew could sit in the relative comfort of a pressurized cabin

sopwithkennel
04-05-2004, 03:46 AM
@ luthier1... Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you.. Thank you..
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif
For the Boomerang..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

Oh did I thank you... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

_____________________________
Can we please have a CA-Boomerang for Pacfic Fighters?
http://www.wargamer.com/Hosted/CloseCombatFuture/CAC.jpg

sopwithkennel
04-05-2004, 03:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
Didn't the B-29 have remote controlled turrets??

I don't know much about how they operated but I thought gunners looked through a sort of periscope to fire....I'm thinking the A-26 had similar turrets too...very accurate and the crew could sit in the relative comfort of a pressurized cabin<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes they are remote controled. thats what the clear perspex domes on the fuselage are for. The gunners sat at these domes.

_____________________________
luthier1 said we can have a CA-Boomerang for Pacfic Fighters.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif
http://www.wargamer.com/Hosted/CloseCombatFuture/CAC.jpg

MornJW
04-05-2004, 03:51 AM
I read that the germans wanted a system like that for the He-177 but could never get it to work. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif A most troubled aircraft.

Heavy_Weather
04-05-2004, 06:39 AM
great news http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

"The wise man is often the man who plays dumb."

Bull_dog_
04-05-2004, 05:57 PM
the whole reason I wanted to make sure of the periscope thing cause it seems pretty easy to model a crosshairs...

So if you had a good pit and bombadiers station...the others could be remotely operated turrets...seems like it wouldn't be near as much work for a B-29 as many other aircraft...

A thought for a future patch even