PDA

View Full Version : Someone wants to model a japanese Uberplane?



VVS-Manuc
11-10-2004, 03:17 AM
We need the A7M Reppu (more planes build than MIG3U or I-185 !)

http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/a7m.htm

especially the A7M3-J http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif to cut these B-29 into small pieces

VVS-Manuc
11-10-2004, 03:17 AM
We need the A7M Reppu (more planes build than MIG3U or I-185 !)

http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/a7m.htm

especially the A7M3-J http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif to cut these B-29 into small pieces

Appleby93
11-10-2004, 04:06 AM
It certainly looks the business. Oleg pretty please with a cherry on top?

llandaff
11-10-2004, 04:43 AM
Look at the page you posted:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
UNITS ALLOCATED

Has not entered service during wartime.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Production: A total of 10 A7Ms were built by Mitsubishi Jukogyo K.K. at Nagoya as follows:
2 A7M1 prototypes
7 A7M2 prototypes and Service trials aircraft
1 A7M2 production aircraft
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


No, i don't think we need this aircraft. Flyable Betty with torpedoes is much more important.

Fritzofn
11-10-2004, 05:22 AM
HOLY **** -&gt; Two fuselage-mounted oblique-firing 30 mm Type 5 cannon and four wing-mounted 30 mm Type 5 cannon (A7M3-J).

Llandaff: stop whining about numbers, there is planes in this sim that didnt even leave the designe stages :P


but, this butcher bird is a tad over the top i belive, HEEEEEELL 6*30 mm that's.....cruel...

but i would like to see the KI-43 II Hayabusa.
a nice Corsair owner :-))

ElAurens
11-10-2004, 05:26 AM
Total number of Mig 3Us built: 6

So much for your arguement Llandaff. I do agree that we need the torpedo bombers ASAP, but, it would still be nice to have some of the Japanese experimental types.

Oh and by the way...


Total number of Go 229 flown: 0

Total number of Bf 109z built: 1, flown: 0

Snootles
11-10-2004, 05:38 AM
Speaking of Uber-planes, I'm still waiting for an I-211. What started out as a MiG-3 with an M-82A radial turned into what was arguably the best Soviet fighter design of the war. However, the La-5 got the production order. A series of 10, however, was built and fought on the Kalinin'sky front.

Warlordimi
11-10-2004, 05:45 AM
The Gotha DID flew! 45 minutes and even experienced a landing gear failure.

Here, the Ho IX V-2 in flight during February 1945!

http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/Horten_Nurflugels/ho_ix/ho_ix_first_flight.jpg


But I agree with some of you enough X-planes (even if I like the Horten one) and more flyable planes that belong to History!!!

TX-WarHawk
11-10-2004, 05:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Warlordimi:

http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/Horten_Nurflugels/ho_ix/ho_ix_first_flight.jpg


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I WANT TO BELIEVE

clint-ruin
11-10-2004, 06:00 AM
Is that a Ho-ix? :&gt;

wuggle85
11-10-2004, 06:05 AM
good picture of the horton in flight it was orderd into production very soon after but the allies overran the airfield and captured the prototype

firehttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gifstarter

Warlordimi
11-10-2004, 06:29 AM
Indeed, and the prototype remains are rotting in the NASM collection!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/Horten_Nurflugels/ho_ix/HORTON_IX-4.JPG

http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/Horten_Nurflugels/ho_ix/HORTON_IX-6.JPG

berg417448
11-10-2004, 06:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VVS-Manuc:
We need the A7M Reppu (more planes build than MIG3U or I-185 !)

http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/a7m.htm

especially the A7M3-J http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif to cut these B-29 into small pieces <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


As long as we are asking for planes that never saw combat:

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p72.htm

wuggle85
11-10-2004, 07:02 AM
now i dont want to affend any americans when i say this but to the pepole in charge of that place where the horton is GET YOUR F****** ACT TOGETHER tou've got a pice of aviation history, the first aircraft to be invisible to radar & your letting it rott, get it cleaned up and into a museum, i personlly would go to america just to see it.

firehttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gifstarter

Saburo_0
11-10-2004, 07:07 AM
Both the Reppu & the XP72 would be very cool.
All depends on who will build them. You should post at Netwings Dev. Forum. Quite likely someone is working on the Reppu.

I've been flying the Ki-43 & would love to see some more of these as well.

Still my personal most wanted is the Ki-44 Shoki!Just loved it in EAW & find it to be an attractive, sleek but tough looking bird. Also i usually fly mid-war planes alot more than the late war super stuff.

fordfan25
11-10-2004, 07:58 AM
a bearcat would be nice to. expasaly considering there was a carrier full of them two weeks from japans coast lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Wseivelod
11-10-2004, 08:02 AM
Just A Note :

I really think that the Horten wing which did fly was unpowered. I was under the impression that a powered prototype never flew.

Warlordimi
11-10-2004, 08:24 AM
There was also an unpowered glier test!

berg417448
11-10-2004, 08:29 AM
Apparently the GO-229 V2 flew:


€œIn addition to the V1 and V2, seven more prototypes were ordered plus 20 production fighters. The Go-229 V2 began it's flight test program at Oranienburg in January 1945. Take off required less than 450 m and handling was superb. The programme advanced no further.€

http://www.ctie.monash.edu/hargrave/horten.html

http://www.geocities.com/nedu537/go229/

xanty
11-10-2004, 09:01 AM
I totally wouldn't like to see these plane-prototypes or "for one week only" scenarios at the end of war. What a waste it would be.

We need many other "essential" planes before any of this happens. Planes that were there, that were used for war, for every day, for key battles, for real:

** SB2C Helldiver II (flyable if possible)
** SDB devastator (flyable if possible)
** Lockheed PV1 ventura or Harpoon (flyable if possible)
** Sea-Hurricane and Sea-Gladiator
** Bristol Beaufort
** B5N kate or B6N Jill (flyable if possible)
** Ki-21 Sally or Ki-49 Helen bombers (flyable if possible)
** Ki-44 Tojo (flyable if possible)
** Ki-45 Nick (flyable if possible)

As well as others, and making the Ai like the J2M or the N1K flyable. I knwo there is lack of refferences, but any effort should go to these and other planes before even considering the "experimental" section

FF_Trozaka
11-10-2004, 09:07 AM
very good list there, xanty, agreed 110%
S! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

VVS-Manuc
11-10-2004, 09:08 AM
The Go 229 V-2 was tested with Jumo 004B-3 engines in January 1945 and reached about 800 km/h during the first test flights. After a total flight time of 2 hours one engine caught fire and the plane crashed, killing the test pilot. 20 Go 229 A-0 planes were already ordered by the RLM at this time.Go 229 V-3 was nearly completed, V-4 - V6 under construction, when the factory at Friedrichroda was captured by the US army.

Obi_Kwiet
11-10-2004, 09:16 AM
Why don't we do the importent planes first, and the obsure ones later. The reason we have the Go-229 is because Gibbage did it. Not Oleg.

goshikisen
11-10-2004, 09:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Obi_Kwiet:
Why don't we do the importent planes first, and the obsure ones later. The reason we have the Go-229 is because Gibbage did it. Not Oleg. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree with you completely... we need a Tojo, Nick or Avenger before we need obscure stuff.

Freycinet
11-10-2004, 09:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by xanty:
I totally wouldn't like to see these plane-prototypes or "for one week only" scenarios at the end of war. What a waste it would be.

We need many other "essential" planes before any of this happens. Planes that were there, that were used for war, for every day, for key battles, for real:

** SB2C Helldiver II (flyable if possible)
** SDB devastator (flyable if possible)
** Lockheed PV1 ventura or Harpoon (flyable if possible)
** Sea-Hurricane and Sea-Gladiator
** Bristol Beaufort
** B5N kate or B6N Jill (flyable if possible)
** Ki-21 Sally or Ki-49 Helen bombers (flyable if possible)
** Ki-44 Tojo (flyable if possible)
** Ki-45 Nick (flyable if possible)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In addition to the ....ahem....Shinden of course! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/j7wpic.gif

Daiichidoku
11-10-2004, 12:52 PM
Enough fantasy planes with speculative FMs, PLEASE!

I love the Bearcat, and would cream for a Shinden, but lets have the real types to fly, please...ones with signifigance in the war, and also ones where there is a fair amount of flight data for accurate FM/DMs

you want BS speculative FM'd wunder birds, go fly crimson skies or SWOL or something

Bad enough in IL2/FB/PF with even the "marginal" types like Ki84C La7 3xB20, Yak 3P, 109K4, let alone those travesties I 185 109Z....

heck, even the established and well known types still have FM and.or DM problems need tweaking


dont get me wrong, id love to see a place for all the wonderful what if types...but FB is NOT for them...not while FB is supposed to be a WWII sim that is known for accuracy...how accurate can one be with a type that flew only a handful of times, let alone at all?

sure, a type liek the bearcat, for example, is a well-known quantity, but it simply did not see any combat...hence, it should not be in PF...
the AD1 skyraider flew before VJ day, should it be included in a WWII sim? NO WAY!

DuxCorvan
11-10-2004, 01:56 PM
First the REAL ones, please. I mean, those that you could encounter -at least once- in the front. Even Do 335 and He 162 accomplish this requisite, but Go 229 and Reppu, not.

And once the true workers are in, then, and only then, let the prima donnas enter. I mean, I love those 'too late' and 'what if' planes, but we have priorities. After that, you can make the Reppu, the Shinden, etc, as long as the used data is, at least, reasonable.

That's my opinion. Anyway, I have nothing against good 3rd party work, even in 'paper project' planes such as 109Z. They do it for free, they do what they want. It's fair.

Snootles
11-10-2004, 02:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> "marginal" types like Ki84C La7 3xB20 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The La-7 with 3 cannons was actually the main production type, and the two-cannon version was less common, only occuring in aircraft coming out of the Moscow plant due to a momentary gun shortage. It entered service in May 1944; that's hardly "marginal."