Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Patrick Hunt]

(( That is why I said different facility, I'll add the extra detail I thought it was kind of obvious if your doing it fresh not expanding that you want it away from the current one.

[3_14159]

Oh, and we'll get 15mm machine-gun even lighter than 30kg I'll be like - BULLSHIT

Just look at the weight of modern high caliber MGs

That happens when I don't look up numbers... so yes, lightening will probably be right out.
I still believe that the 15mm is a better fit for fighters than a new 10mm.
This is due to the reason that fighters tend to be appreciably armoured, and we therefore need a punch to actually do damage to them. [1]

[1] I sadly did find no better source than the Hurricane article on wiki: "Often the eight or 12 small-calibre machine guns did not damage the sturdy and heavily armoured German aircraft; consequently, Soviet ground crews started to remove the Brownings.", although they did use 7.7mm, not 10mm.

Raven T is better for hitting all enemy ships then a dive bomber.

Why?
Comparing the Raven(T) and the Osprey, they both are torpedo armed, with the Osprey sporting additional MGs, more speed and range. What makes the Raven(T) better with both operating the same way, that is closing in low over the water surface then dropping torpedoes?


Also, on increasing the factory output: A 2400point factory complex alone means expanding our whole industry by nearly 50%. I believe that, even if sustainable by resources, to be unachievable simply due to the production tools, buildings and so on.

[Patrick Hunt]

Hmm actually good point, may as well scrap the T entirely and just mass produce the Osprey since it's far superior.

[10ebbor10]

On a side note, all complexes are divided in 600 production unit factories.

Do note that the Osprey is almost 3 times as expensive as the Raven T.

[Aseaheru]

The T is more agile. We also have more troops who know how to use it. It would also work as a fighter still with the same success as the originals. However, I agree that we should not make more, but instead update our existing stocks. Or most of them anyways.

[Patrick Hunt]

We can't really afford to, to use bombers you need air cover. Our only air cover is the Ravens. If you stick torpedos on them they become to bulky to fight enemy fighters properly and our losses sky rocket.

[10ebbor10]

The T is more agile. We also have more troops who know how to use it. It would also work as a fighter still with the same success as the originals. However, I agree that we should not make more, but instead update our existing stocks. Or most of them anyways.

The T is unarmed safe for a torpedo.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

In fact 3.3 times cheaper... if you want to say that 10 Ravens(T) aren't better than 3 Ospreys, I'll disagree completely. Not producing Ravens(T) is a bad idea.

I sadly did find no better source than the Hurricane article on wiki: "Often the eight or 12 small-calibre machine guns did not damage the sturdy and heavily armoured German aircraft; consequently, Soviet ground crews started to remove the Brownings.", although they did use 7.7mm, not 10mm.

In 1941
Aircrafts of that era not that sturdy. More machine-guns = much easier to hit.

[3_14159]

Do note that the Osprey is almost 3 times as expensive as the Raven T.

That is true - but the Osprey carries twice as many torpedoes.

The T is more agile. We also have more troops who know how to use it. It would also work as a fighter still with the same success as the originals. However, I agree that we should not make more, but instead update our existing stocks. Or most of them anyways.

The raven T, among other things, has no machine guns and is not compatible airframe-wise with our others. This kind of makes the fighter part... difficult.

Basically, we've got the following pros and cons:
Raven T: Cheaper, no need for MGs, more agile, known to pilots. More efficient.
Osprey: Faster, can fight after dropping bombs/torpedoes, more range. More effective.

I believe that therefore, the Osprey should become our main attack bomber for bigger fights, with Raven Ts for attacking commercial raiders, doing lower-risk bombing runs and so on.

[Patrick Hunt]

Works for me, I removed A since it was the same as the 2 UR proposed.

[Aseaheru]

Oh hell. Who removed the guns?

Also, we could always CONVERT our existing ravens once you lot come up with a new fighter. A good one please.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

I. Torpedo bombers have no need for MGs, that's completely not needed for the role

[Aseaheru]

Tell that to every nation ever...
We couldent even leave them one gun? I mean hell, even swordfish had one.

[Patrick Hunt]

Of course it needs a gun, if it gets attacked whats it gonna do? Politely ask the enemy fighters to go away?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

yep, 7.5mm... And I'd love to hear in what situation it was ever useful

Of course it needs a gun, if it gets attacked whats it gonna do? Politely ask the enemy fighters to go away?

Die. That's why torpedo bombers need escorts. especially ones without rear turret (turret is marginally useful, but neither of our bombers have one)
Forward facing machineguns are useless against proper fighters.