[Baco1170]

I read taht the Ta 183 was going to be able to carry a bomb payload , but the war ended an dthis never happened. The two otehr incarnatios became puer fighters, soemthing the Ta 183 as doen in il-2 is clearlly not, due to lack of performance. Still it would be a nice Fighter bomber, if soemone could add bombs to the pilons it allready has, instead of the X4 guided rockets. It could be a new plane, called ta -183 B or C or even AG

Is thsi idea too outrageus, or unhistoricla?

I belive it would give jet pilots soem more flexibility, since today onlly the Me-262 a2 can carry bombs and of course the Ar 234 wich has no self defense capability whatsoever.

[F22-Raptor-2006]

the Ar-234 has backfiring guns for self defence. No gunners. Saying that the G0-229 should have a bomb load. If anyone looks in the Aircraft Guide.pdf it says there that it has a bomb load of something but i can't remember now.

[Baco1170]

yeap it has backfiring 20mm cannons, but they are not working, theyr static, and trying to aim them by manouvering the plane is almost imposible.

Anyway, the Ar 234 is a recon/medbomber. I was looking for someone to expand the "Jet Jabo" options .

[GentleKiller]

I read taht the Ta 183 was going to be able to carry a bomb payload , but the war ended an dthis never happened. The two otehr incarnatios became puer fighters, soemthing the Ta 183 as doen in il-2 is clearlly not, due to lack of performance. Still it would be a nice Fighter bomber, if soemone could add bombs to the pilons it allready has, instead of the X4 guided rockets. It could be a new plane, called ta -183 B or C or even AG

Is thsi idea too outrageus, or unhistoricla?

I belive it would give jet pilots soem more flexibility, since today onlly the Me-262 a2 can carry bombs and of course the Ar 234 wich has no self defense capability whatsoever.

having trouble spelling? lol
234 has rear 20 mms that really kill if properly used :wink:

[RAF_Magpie]

Yup - its always amusing watching an unsuspecting fighter get close, thinking you havent noticed them... then depress the trigger... no more Mustang... isnt that right Leigh lol :mrgreen:

[Spanky]

nothin better then blowin the nose cone off a YP-80

[CKY_86]

Yup - its always amusing watching an unsuspecting fighter get close, thinking you havent noticed them... then depress the trigger... no more Mustang... isnt that right Leigh lol :mrgreen:

I love doing that online, the reaction is pricless :lol:

Seriously, ive had one guy accuse me of hacking & one asked where to get the mod for guns on the 234 :lol:

[Baco1170]

Sorry about the typing... - it' s not faulty spelling, it' s quick not revised typing at work .

Anyway, so I'll have to practice more with the Arado it seems...

Thanks for the replys all the same chaps.

[Brophmeister]

I'd be all for a bombload on a Go229, after all it was intended to be a bomber if it had have gone into mass production (to meet Goerings 3x1000 requirement, I believe). But of course, it would have to be a second version placed into one of the new aircraft slots as modding the original could stuff up some online play.

[Baco1170]

I'll Take that too.

Still The TA was suposed to carry a bomb inside in the belly compartment. But I didn't ask for that becouse the opening of the bomb bay door would be trouble I belive... :wink:

[JV69_BADA]

The ta183

1- wing racks should be removed in clean config.(better aerodynamics, higher speed)
2- Possibilty for only 2 X-4 or 2 external fuel tanks
3- possibility of only 1 fuel tank under the hard-point between the landing gear or a sc250 or 1
BT400 aerial torpedo(+2 fuel tanks underwings in the bt400 case)
4- Splitting the 4 guns in 2 groups like on the 262.
5- RM-24 underwings WITHOUT the 4 wing-racks.

The Go229 or morelikely Ho-IX :wink:

No bomb load! structural integrity not capable of taking a bomb in the air.
The plane having already a nose ballast of 600kg to compensate the CoG.
Go229 :nothing to do with the 3x1000 Goering request.
See(good book !): http://www.historicaviation.com/histori ... -(CgqOmhPi)?ID=6159