PDA

View Full Version : Flyable 4 engine aircraft?



JungleGeorge061
03-03-2005, 11:31 PM
My request.
More flyable 4 or more engine aircraft.
German, Russian, Japan, American.
I like flying the heavys, the more engines and weight, the more I like it.
Nothing like a hand full of throttles http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

JungleGeorge061
03-03-2005, 11:31 PM
My request.
More flyable 4 or more engine aircraft.
German, Russian, Japan, American.
I like flying the heavys, the more engines and weight, the more I like it.
Nothing like a hand full of throttles http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Tooz_69GIAP
03-03-2005, 11:41 PM
highly unlikely we are getting anything with more than 2 engines ever in FB/PF

HotelBushranger
03-04-2005, 12:44 AM
Shame, however I reckon there should have been AT LEAST 1 heavy for every nation. It should be done in BoB, and the subsequent sequels/expansion packs.

VVS-Manuc
03-04-2005, 02:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tooz_69GIAP:
highly unlikely we are getting anything with more than 2 engines ever in FB/PF <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You have the TB-3 already http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Tooz_69GIAP
03-04-2005, 02:40 AM
I wasn't counting that one, (I love that bird btw http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif ) but meant that there would be no more heavies made flyable.

joberrick
03-04-2005, 07:40 AM
IN the upcoming BoB, I hope to see the Hampden and Whitley. Both are <span class="ev_code_RED">twin engined</span>and flew in the same time period as BoB took place. I know for a fact that Hampdens were the first bombers to strike Berlin in August or September of 1940. THose are what I hope to see in the initial version of the game before add-on's come out.

As for the Germans, we'll most likely see Ju-88's and Heinkel 111's for twin engined bombers.

Hendley
03-04-2005, 08:34 AM
It sure would be nice to see at least ONE RAF bomber sometime... There's a lot to choose from. For BoB, a Blenheim is almost a must-have; essential for suicidal bombing missions of the French coast and ineffectual nighttime intercept missions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif... The best bomber of 1937

Capt._Tenneal
03-04-2005, 09:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VVS-Manuc:
You have the TB-3 already http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And with the Sveno SPB, you have a SIX-engine heavy ! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Lusitaniii
03-04-2005, 11:50 AM
C'mon lads...spit it out...we all want to a fly a Lancaster right? :P

Hendley
03-04-2005, 01:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lusitaniii:
C'mon lads...spit it out...we all want to a fly a Lancaster right? :P <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good lord, yes! The most significant bomber of WW2...

But the pedants among us will be the first to point out that it had nothing to do with the BoB...

Still, first choice for the expansion pack http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

gerhardius
03-04-2005, 03:11 PM
The Hampden and Whitley would be fun: the Hampden is reported to be pretty agile for a bomber and the Whitley flew with that nose down attitude due to the high-incidence wing. The Whitley, some marks at least from III on, had a ventral "dustbin" turret that would be interesting to see modelled. If we do get some bomber command aircraft in BoB will that mean we can drop leaflets?

madsarmy
03-04-2005, 03:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hendley:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lusitaniii:
C'mon lads...spit it out...we all want to a fly a Lancaster right? :P <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good lord, yes! The most significant bomber of WW2...

But the pedants among us will be the first to point out that it had nothing to do with the BoB...

Still, first choice for the expansion pack http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When BOB was first announced Oleg did say he really liked the Lanc, & somebody pointed out to him that the Lanc was not in the BOB.He replied BOB will progress like FB.
I think we will see ithttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

jarink
03-05-2005, 12:45 AM
Forget about heavy British bombers for BoB.

I fervently hope BoB includes Defiants. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

jarink
03-05-2005, 12:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HotelBushranger:
Shame, however I reckon there should have been AT LEAST 1 heavy for every nation. It should be done in BoB, and the subsequent sequels/expansion packs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What 4-engine bird would you choose for the Huns? Right now the Condor is all we have (the He-111Z does not count!) and it's not much... They never had much with more than 2 engines other than some limited production prototypes.

Other than floatplanes, the Japanese never had a 4-engine bomber that got beyond prototype. I don't know about the Italians, but I doubt they did, either.

Wseivelod
03-05-2005, 01:11 AM
Italy did have the P.108B.

this is from another website:

Piaggio P.108B / R1 08C Heavy Four Engine bomber
Country: Italy.

Type: P.108B - seven crew heavy bomber. R1 08C - transport.

Powerplants: Four 1500hp (Piaggio RXII RC35 18-cylinder radials; three bladed propellers.)

Dimensions. Wing span 104ft 11in (32.00m); length 73ft 1in (22.29m); height 19ft 8in (6.00m).

Weights: R1 08B - empty 38,1951b (17325kg); max loaded 65,8851b (29885kg).

Armament R108B - eight 12.7mm machine guns in nose, ventral turrets, waist and outer nacelle positions; max 77161b (3500kg) bomb load or three 18in (45.7cm) torpedos.

Performance. R108B - max speed 267mph (430km/h) at 13,780ft (4200m); cruise speed 199mph (320km/h); time to 16,405ft (5000m) 21.1 min; service ceiling 27,890ft (8500m); range 1550-2187 miles (2495-3520km).

Operators: Germany, Italy.

Piaggio P.108B engines: four 1500hp Piaggio P.XII engines bomb load max of 7,716lb (kg) or three 18 inch torpedoes crew: seven armament: eight 12.7mm machine-guns including a unique remotely controlled twin gun turret above each outer engine nacelle. production: 163 built

The P-108B's first combat sortie against Gibrater in 1942. The 274th Long-range bomber Squadron flew this mission. Operations took them over the Meditterean, to North Africa and even Russia.

Production. 1 R1 08,163 P.1 08B, 16 P.1 08C, 1 R1 08M, 1 P.1 08T, total 182.

Wseivelod
03-05-2005, 01:15 AM
here are some pics

http://wmilitary.neurok.ru/wwii/p_108b-d.gif

http://wmilitary.neurok.ru/wwii/p_108b.jpg

http://www.italiankits.it/Immagini/Aerei/shp108.jpg

Hendley
03-05-2005, 10:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jarink:
[QUOTE]Other than floatplanes, the Japanese never had a 4-engine bomber that got beyond prototype... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but wouldn't the Emily be a GREAT addition to the flyables? I would love to fly an Emily campaign. 24 hour missions, anyone?

p1ngu666
03-05-2005, 11:37 PM
http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/lanc2.jpg

there was kami's b29 cockpits, status unknow. i think b24 and b17 dev stopped awhile ago.

that italian thing looks like a accident with a door wedge, a b17 and a fw200 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

there trimotor bomber is what id rather like...

japanease considered betty a heavy bomber

german he177 grief thing, had a habbit of setting itself alight, ju88 is considered best ?

raf, gotta be the lancaster AND the mossie http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

lanc was best until b29 was fixed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

DuxCorvan
03-06-2005, 09:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jarink:
I fervently hope BoB includes Defiants. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In real life the concept of heavy turret fighter proved to be an almost complete failure, but if the gunners' AI is the same in BoB than in FB/PF, then Defiants and Rocs gonna master the skies in BoB in a rather unrealistic way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Jester_159th
03-06-2005, 10:22 AM
Four engined bombers would certainly be interesting, but what about the maps we'd need to make them worthwhile?

While two engined bombers were generally tactical in nature, and can therefore be used realistically (to some extent) on the map sizes we have in FB/AEP/PF, four engined bombers were without exception designed as long range strategic weapons. For realistic missions we'd need a map covering most of Europe (as an example). Can you imagine the work involved in making it..Not to mention the load times?

And considering the complaints that were made about the legnth of the missions in PF' campaign can you imagine what would happen if the average mission time was six hours or more?

Don't get me wrong. I would LOVE to see a Lancaster modelled realistically. Not to mention Stirlings, Halifaxs and Wellingtons (even though the latter was two engined), and of course the B-17 variants. I am just wondering how we could use these aircraft in a realistic context. Apart from the missions in support of the Normandy landings there were very few "short range" missions flown by these aircraft that could be recreated on maps the size we have at the moment.

Dr_shang
03-06-2005, 02:27 PM
Firepower for Combat Flight Simulator 3 have the B-17 flyable.

http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/CFS3/firepower.htm

http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/CFS3/images/firepower/5.jpg

p1ngu666
03-06-2005, 04:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jester_159th:
Four engined bombers would certainly be interesting, but what about the maps we'd need to make them worthwhile?

While two engined bombers were generally tactical in nature, and can therefore be used realistically (to some extent) on the map sizes we have in FB/AEP/PF, four engined bombers were without exception designed as long range strategic weapons. For realistic missions we'd need a map covering most of Europe (as an example). Can you imagine the work involved in making it..Not to mention the load times?

And considering the complaints that were made about the legnth of the missions in PF' campaign can you imagine what would happen if the average mission time was six hours or more?

Don't get me wrong. I would LOVE to see a Lancaster modelled realistically. Not to mention Stirlings, Halifaxs and Wellingtons (even though the latter was two engined), and of course the B-17 variants. I am just wondering how we could use these aircraft in a realistic context. Apart from the missions in support of the Normandy landings there were very few "short range" missions flown by these aircraft that could be recreated on maps the size we have at the moment. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

jump straight to the action, airstart 5 to 10mins from target http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

we also dont do longrange escort, but that doesnt stop ppl flying p51, p38,p47 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Hendley
03-06-2005, 07:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jarink:
I fervently hope BoB includes Defiants. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In real life the concept of heavy turret fighter proved to be an almost complete failure, but if the gunners' AI is the same in BoB than in FB/PF, then Defiants and Rocs gonna master the skies in BoB in a rather unrealistic way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, yeah, I've never thought of that--flying a Defiant from the back seat. Now _that_ would be a fighter I might actually get to master http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Beaufort-RAF
03-07-2005, 05:23 AM
While flying a Hampden and Whitley would be fantastic I doubt the're a realistic hope.

One aircraft though that really is a must as a flyable is the Wellington.

She was the mainstay of Bomber Command in the early war years and if as many of us hope BoB expands to the Med the Wimpy was a very important aircaft in that theatre.

She was also used as a torpedo bomber, a U-Boat hunter and in a specialized reconnaissance role in which she served in the skies over Germany until the end of the war.

Shangko
03-07-2005, 05:26 AM
Collection bombers of Firepower is a dream of bomberpilot...


Bueno, la colecci³n de bombarderos es como el sueo de un bomberpilot...

Arado Ar 234 B Blitz (Lightning)

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/ar234.htm


Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/b17.htm


Boeing B-29A Superfortress

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/b29.htm


Dornier Do217 M Medium Bomber

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/do217m.htm


Avro Lancaster Mk. III

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/lanc.htm


Messerschmitt ME 410 B Zerstorer

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/me410.htm


The Focke-Wulf Ta154

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/ta154.htm


Arado Ar 234 B Blitz (Lightning)

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/ar234.htm


Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/b17.htm


Boeing B-29A Superfortress

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/b29.htm


Dornier Do217 M Medium Bomber

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/do217m.htm


Avro Lancaster Mk. III

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/lanc.htm


Messerschmitt ME 410 B Zerstorer

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/me410.htm


The Focke-Wulf Ta154

http://www.shockwaveproductions.net/firepower/manual/ta154.htm

DuxCorvan
03-07-2005, 08:18 AM
You have some repeated items in that collection... besides, Ta 154 wasn't exactly a bomber.

Philipscdrw
03-07-2005, 08:42 AM
Nor is the Me-410... it's nice to know what's available for CFS3 but it doesn't really have anything to do with the aircraft we hope to see in 1C:BoB...

I want - a Supermarine Walrus! (If there's decent sea condition simulations - give me waves!) If I was a serving pilot in BoB, I would prefer to fly ASR, which involves flying around in shoddy weather in a Walrus, avoiding E-boats.

CaptArnold
03-07-2005, 03:59 PM
I would kill to see a flyable Radar-Equipped ME-110 or an HE-219 UHU. Maybe even a night fighter version of the ju-88. If u couldnt tell already i have a craving for night fighters and a Luftwaffe nightfighting campaign....would be cool to fly as both a radar operator and a pilot...all the while being directed by ground control towards a massive stream of bombers...Lancasters...Haliflaxes...Stirlings...an d avoiding their mosquito escorts...it would be really cool.

LuckyBoy1
03-07-2005, 10:30 PM
I remember hearing all this snot about how when PF came out, the "full real" crowd would be doing these long missions taking hours to get to a target. I've seen no evidence anyone plays that way. As a result, bigger maps are kinda useless.

We have all kinds of obscure planes that never saw any real battle time, yet no flyable B-17 or B-29 or Lancaster or Pe-8 (at least outside of Russia) and the developers are missing a sure bet by leaving them out.

Hendley
03-08-2005, 08:03 AM
I love the heavies too, but I can actually see why (a) they're an order of magnitude more work than a 1- or even 2-seater, and (b) why they don't work so well in the FB engine. I mean, I've given up doing high level bombing in the He111 and TB-3s. It seems more fun to use the Heinkel, for example, like an A-20 or IL-2--which is how it worked out on the eastern front in the end.

There's just not enough going on at high-alt to make the heavy bombing experience immersive (good hi-alt visuals, navigation, etc).

That said, a dambusting Lanc would be a perfect fit in the engine and maps... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JungleGeorge061
03-12-2005, 11:12 AM
Here's what I'd wish for in a FB+PF, expasion.
German side, even though most where only prototyps.
Flyable.
Fw-200
He-177, each engine was two coupled together?
He-274 / He-277
Ju-290
Ju-290B
Ju-390
And my favorite, Me-264
Me-264B proposed 6 engine version.
As far as the question of large bombers in DF maps. I prefere to mostly fly the He-111, and I am getting proficent at mid to high alttude bombing of the enemy airfields http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif and other targets of size. A larger bomber with a heaver payload would be great!

So if your about to take off and it starts raining bombs from nowhere...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

masaker2005
03-12-2005, 01:07 PM
Maddox listen this we won't four engines flyable bombers such are B-17, B-29, Avro Lancaster and paratroopers planes Ju 52 , C-47 and Li-2 listen us! Maddox!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif