Print

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

[andrea]

but at that altitude it is escorted. A turbocharger not only adds to the service ceiling, but also makes their fighter even faster.

[andrea]

Spoiler: AS-HF-32 (click to show/hide)

This is a full aluminium single wing fighter, mounting 2 autocannons, 2 light machineguns and mounts for 2 rockets. It has a powerful engine with fuel injection and a turbocharger, allowing great speed and an high service ceiling. It is built to allow good manouvrability. It uses retractable gear and a closed cockpit

I was thiinking something like this. Not sure how useful the rockets would be. maybe we should keep a single autocannon in the shaft and 4 machineguns on the sides?
a matter for somebody else to discuss, I am going to sleep.

[Funk]

1 auto canon is worth 4 machine guns
We should put the propeller on the back, and mount al the guns on the front.

[andrea]

you get a better sight in front, but pusher propellers seem to have plenty of disadvantages, including a reduced efficiency due to working in a disturbed air flow.

[tryrar]

Spoiler: AS-HF-32 (click to show/hide)

This is a full aluminium single wing fighter, mounting 2 autocannons, 2 light machineguns and mounts for 2 rockets. It has a powerful engine with fuel injection and a turbocharger, allowing great speed and an high service ceiling. It is built to allow good manouvrability. It uses retractable gear and a closed cockpit

I was thiinking something like this. Not sure how useful the rockets would be. maybe we should keep a single autocannon in the shaft and 4 machineguns on the sides?
a matter for somebody else to discuss, I am going to sleep.

Well, if you have two wing-mounted autocannons and two nose-mounted MGs mounted to a syncro gear, then that's a decent armament loadout that allows us to delete the heavy propshaft. As for the rockets, I'd rather have a two standard hardpoints able to mount a couple light bombs(25kg), a couple racks of rockets(say two rockets a rack?) and has piping to allow mounting of a couple 250l drop tanks. If we don't get those in the design, it would be a simple matter to revise them in.

[Funk]

you get a better sight in front, but pusher propellers seem to have plenty of disadvantages, including a reduced efficiency due to working in a disturbed air flow.

Yes but how bad is 2% lost power any way if the plane is lighter and we have a smaller plane over all.

Let go for your weapon set up unless we go for a pusher then we should swap the machine gun and autocannons round.

[Kot]

Guys, I would just like to remind that with current state of everything, we can pretty much afford to screw around and make something else than what would be best.
I propose staff cars. Or liason planes. Or something else.

[Execute/Dumbo.exe]

Well, I'm at least gonna vote for a parachute revision so our para-troopers can drop with more than their pistol.

[andrea]

Well,  kot, if we go for something not immediately useful we should go for a V2 rocket or similar.  So we can later humiliate the world by launching the first satellite.

[Andres]

Guys, the GM hasn't said anything about their nuke progress being a joke. We should take it seriously.

[Kot]

Well,  kot, if we go for something not immediately useful we should go for a V2 rocket or similar.  So we can later humiliate the world by launching the first satellite.

I actually support.
Rockets. Rockets all the way in.

[10ebbor10]

Guys, the GM hasn't said anything about their nuke progress being a joke. We should take it seriously.

WE SHOULD NOT

Basically, we know what they designed. We know that they had no design, revision or spy slots left. The only way that nuke design is real is if the GM is actively bending the rules in their favor, at which point we can't win.

[10ebbor10]

Designs so far :

AS-N32 : A nuke. Basically a waste of effort.

AS-LT32. A new, more modern light vehicle with a turbocharged direct injected diesel engine, and specifically designed to carry a radio. It has treads instead of wheels for traversing more rough ground than our armored cars, and a new Christie suspension to maintain as much of the high speed a light vehicle is expected to have, and at least enough armor(whether through thickness or sloping) to resist .60 rounds out to at least medium range. Is crewed by 3 crewmen: Driver, gunner-loader, commander-radio operator.

Well,  kot, if we go for something not immediately useful we should go for a V2 rocket or similar.  So we can later humiliate the world by launching the first satellite.

I actually support.
Rockets. Rockets all the way in.

I highly doubt we can get a rocket. If we're doing something silly anyway, why not a giant railway cannon.

[andrea]

I proposed a new fighter as well. Add it to the list.  Also, does your light vehicle have a gun?

[Aseaheru]

So, The options are:
Nuke-o-dumb
Possible upgrade to armored car, possibly unarmed
Liquid fuel rockets, trying to skip 15-years of research the Germans did on that, and do it earlier than them
Brand new interceptor to replace the two year old ones....


 You know, I don't like any of those. What about we go and replace our near ainchent arty, or else let us get more resourses with a transport thing.

Or, and this is an ooooh idea, an APC?