Wow! This variant looks really interesting but if I understand correctly, it requires a new map right? If so, is this even possible to play now since the map link provided does not work anymore?? Thanks in advance for any responses to this question.
HBG sculpts for U.S. set
-
I would really like to see a landing craft and a PT boat. PLEASE, don’t make me make them!
-
For those who want to know here is the USN type of Landing craft. This will clear up the acronym use by us retired Military types for everyone else.
LSD- Dock Landing Ship
LST-Tank Landing Ship
LCM- Mechanized Landing Craft
LCVP-Vehicle Personnel Landing Craft
LSM- Medium Landing Ship
LCPL-Large Personnel Landing Craft
LSM®-Medium Landing Ship Rocket
LCU-Utility Landing Craft
LPD-Amphibious Transport Dock
Higgins Boat requires more research, more to come. Cheers -
are you still planing on making both china sets?
The plans are to make them, but we will see how sales go, I have not taken any money and I am working on my third mould. (Very Expensive)
Axis Minor set is projected for me to have pieces for sale on Aug 5. -
Great news HBG we are looking forward to them.
-
@coachofmany:
FMG is doing the Helldiver.
I believe FMG was going to mold the F6F Hellcat. Not the same as the SB2C Helldiver, which was the replacement for the SBD Dauntless. As Jeremy wrote above, they intend to mold the TBF Avenger.
-
If I may make a humble request, I’d like to see an A-26 Invader sculpt for a tactical bomber. If possible, I would like the fixed nose versions bristling with machine guns!
-
@C_Strabala:
If I may make a humble request, I’d like to see an A-26 Invader sculpt for a tactical bomber. If possible, I would like the fixed nose versions bristling with machine guns!
Personally, I’d love to see that too. It’s a different style than the dive bomber (dauntless) and the torp bomber (avenger). Skip Bombing campaign!
don’t think the molding of guns would fly in scale of this size. especially since the molds all seem to be top/bottom release, so at best you could get 2 muzzles along the center line of the nose, and that would look…. wrong.
-
Good point about the mouldings. I didn’t consider the fact that the scale would not lend itself well to gun muzzles.
-
I also think that visually the A-26 is a smart choice for a Tac Bomber.
-
An idea I read in earlier posts would be good. Split the tac bomber category up. Have medium bombers and dive/torpedo bombers. If we could get all countries to have a 4 engine bomber, a 2 engine bomber and a single engine bomber you would have heavy, medium and tac(dive/torpedo). This will be good for people that use techs. Also if players playing Germany or japan want to perdue heavy bombers they would have a pieces that look like a heavy! Just sayin!
-
An idea I read in earlier posts would be good. Split the tac bomber category up. Have medium bombers and dive/torpedo bombers. If we could get all countries to have a 4 engine bomber, a 2 engine bomber and a single engine bomber you would have heavy, medium and tac(dive/torpedo). This will be good for people that use techs. Also if players playing Germany or japan want to perdue heavy bombers they would have a pieces that look like a heavy! Just sayin!
The B-25 that I am making for the US set will be the same size as the Bombers in OOB German and Japan bombers. This will become the Med. Bomber for the game since they are 2 engine. All 4 engine will be heavy and torpedo/dive will be Tacs.
Of course you can use them how you want, but my thinking is in line with Tigerman77.
Now that I think about it he might of swayed me to go this route. -
@coachofmany:
An idea I read in earlier posts would be good. Split the tac bomber category up. Have medium bombers and dive/torpedo bombers. If we could get all countries to have a 4 engine bomber, a 2 engine bomber and a single engine bomber you would have heavy, medium and tac(dive/torpedo). This will be good for people that use techs. Also if players playing Germany or japan want to perdue heavy bombers they would have a pieces that look like a heavy! Just sayin!
The B-25 that I am making for the US set will be the same size as the Bombers in OOB German and Japan bombers. This will become the Med. Bomber for the game since they are 2 engine. All 4 engine will be heavy and torpedo/dive will be Tacs.
Of course you can use them how you want, but my thinking is in line with Tigerman77.
Now that I think about it he might of swayed me to go this route.Does this mean that you might develop heavy bomber pieces for the Axis? At present, all they have is medium bombers. Even FMG’s Italian bomber, the SM 79, was really medium size.
-
Yes,
The Axis will have heavy Bombers! -
Coach, May I suggest for your Luftwaffe Heavy Bomber the Fock Wolf FW 200 Condor. It was a 4 engine bomber, Long Range Recon and some even used as transports. It was a big plane almost the size B-17 or the B-24.
Second suggestion: The only purpose built Strategic German Heavy Bomber was Henikel HE-177/HE-274 GREIF, Drawback, this aircraft was only a two engine plane. Carried two tons of bombs up to a 1000 miles. It was designed to do 60 degree dive bombing runs as well. Luftwaffe crews nicknamed it the FLYING COFFIN. To many of them had engine fires. Real good color pictures top/side views can be found at WINGS PALETTE. http://wp.scn.ru/en/ww2/b/1037 :-D :-D :-D :-D
-
I love the FW Condor idea!
-
The Ju89 would be my choice but when the time comes, I will poll and ask opinions.
-
@coachofmany:
Yes,
The Axis will have heavy Bombers!VERY COOL!!! I would like to cast my vote for the Fw200 Kondor. (Admittedly, I am not familiar with the Ju89. I take it that was a 4-engine plane?)
When we were discussing Axis bombers on the FMG combat units discussion thread (quite a while back), someone gave some ideas for large Japanese and Italian bombers. I think the planes mentioned only got to prototype stage or very few were actually built, but at least they were some ideas. -
When we were discussing Axis bombers on the FMG combat units discussion thread (quite a while back), someone gave some ideas for large Japanese and Italian bombers. I think the planes mentioned only got to prototype stage or very few were actually built, but at least they were some ideas.
Two proposed four-engined Japanese heavy bombers that I can think of include the G5N “Liz” and the G8N “Rita” - only a few of each were completed, although a few G5N’s were actually used as transports. I would personally be satisfied with the choice of either of these as Japanese heavy bomber, although I would choose the G5N over the G8N.
-
Hey guys, do we need a new thread for this discussion on Heavy Bombers?
-
Coach, May I suggest for your Luftwaffe Heavy Bomber the Fock Wolf FW 200 Condor. It was a 4 engine bomber, Long Range Recon and some even used as transports. It was a big plane almost the size B-17 or the B-24.
Second suggestion: The only purpose built Strategic German Heavy Bomber was Henikel HE-177/HE-274 GREIF, Drawback, this aircraft was only a two engine plane. Carried two tons of bombs up to a 1000 miles. It was designed to do 60 degree dive bombing runs as well. Luftwaffe crews nicknamed it the FLYING COFFIN. To many of them had engine fires. Real good color pictures top/side views can be found at WINGS PALETTE. http://wp.scn.ru/en/ww2/b/1037 :-D :-D :-D :-D
Except the Condor was NOT a heavy bomber. It was barely considered a bomber (mainly naval engagements). It carried up to 2000 lbs of bombs on hardpoints located on the wings, with no internal bombay, and because it was a retrofitted civilian passenger plane, they were never ideal for combat. The JU88 (the OOB bomber) could carry nearly 4000 lbs of bombs. And to compare, the B17, which was not the allies heaviest bomber, could easily carry 5000 lbs, the B24 had an even larger capactiy and the B29 could carry 20,000 lbs.
As for the HE177, I too originally confused it as a two engine plane. However, it is in fact a 4 engine plane with paired engines on each nacelle/prop. It LOOKS like a 2 engine plane, but it’s technically not.
Suggested Topics
