DISCUSSIONS
- << previous
- 1
- next >>
Why is it that the range of planes from one type of carrier, i.e. light carrier versus fleet carrier have a different range? I have noted that when a fleet carrier and a light carrier are deployed in the same fleet, that because the light carrier is deployed with the fleet carrier, the fleet may not attack a target that a "Fleet carrier" by itself would normally be able to attack. I know that the United States Light Carriers carried the same planes that the regular Fleet Carriers did. The normal load out was usually nine "9" dive bombers, nine "9" torpedo bombers, and twelve fighters. Because they were built on light cruiser and heavy cruiser hulls, they had larger dimensions than the Escort Carriers, notably in the hangar deck. The escort carriers could not carry the Douglas SBD (Slow But Deadly) dive bombers because of the lack of folding wings on this plane, but they could carry the TBF/TBM torpedo bombers. So in actuality even these carriers could mount a limited raid that a fleet carrier could perform. A second point on this is that it is understandable that the escort carriers would be equipped with the older models of planes, however; the Light Carriers were built as light fleet units and were use as if they were fleet carriers even though they a lesser number of planes. Please refer to this article in Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Independence_%28CVL-22%29
Watch out buddy, the last time you only got a hole through your head...this time it could be worse
- 00crusader
- location: United States
- joined: Dec 04, 2009
- posts: 142
Are you sure it's the carriers affecting range? Have you been upgrading your carrier planes?
"I am not your son"
~JPS
- cavetroll1304
- MHII, MH GOLD
- location: United States
- joined: Aug 10, 2009
- posts: 1260
cavetroll1304 said
Are you sure it's the carriers affecting range? Have you been upgrading your carrier planes? Yes I have, that's the first thing I do for Airforce Research.
Watch out buddy, the last time you only got a hole through your head...this time it could be worse
- 00crusader
- location: United States
- joined: Dec 04, 2009
- posts: 142
Carriers themselves do affect range, that is a fact that I have observed many a time (as I rarely upgrade carrier aircraft).
- Light-Infa
- location: United States
- joined: Aug 10, 2009
- posts: 212
Light-Infa said
Carriers themselves do affect range, that is a fact that I have observed many a time (as I rarely upgrade carrier aircraft). This is a bug they need to fix before they release the new game. Otherwise; what's the use of building Light Carriers? Just to replace Early Carriers?
Watch out buddy, the last time you only got a hole through your head...this time it could be worse
- 00crusader
- location: United States
- joined: Dec 04, 2009
- posts: 142
00crusader said
Light-Infa said
Carriers themselves do affect range, that is a fact that I have observed many a time (as I rarely upgrade carrier aircraft). This is a bug they need to fix before they release the new game. Otherwise; what's the use of building Light Carriers? Just to replace Early Carriers?
I think somewhere on the old forum they had a reason for carriers affecting range.
"I am not your son"
~JPS
- cavetroll1304
- MHII, MH GOLD
- location: United States
- joined: Aug 10, 2009
- posts: 1260
cavetroll1304 said
00crusader said
Light-Infa said
Carriers themselves do affect range, that is a fact that I have observed many a time (as I rarely upgrade carrier aircraft). This is a bug they need to fix before they release the new game. Otherwise; what's the use of building Light Carriers? Just to replace Early Carriers?
I think somewhere on the old forum they had a reason for carriers affecting range.
I've dug through the game's XML, and apparently carrier air unit upgrades increase the range of carrier fighters.
Why such a big deal over carrier fighters, why no emphasis on naval carrier borne bomber aircraft that packed the larger weapons load? The Grumman F6F-3/5 variants could admittedly carry a 2,000 lb ordnance load though I'm not sure what the range with this weapons load was. The bomber variants on the other hand were designed to carry the same bomb load with a longer range. So should carrier fighters really determine the range of an aircraft carrier, especially since they cannot patrol at their extended range with the later models?
Watch out buddy, the last time you only got a hole through your head...this time it could be worse
- 00crusader
- location: United States
- joined: Dec 04, 2009
- posts: 142
Its not about the fighters, its an abstract of a Carrier airgroup (which is made up of fighters, torpedo and dive bombers....thus the good naval attack) so its factors like range and speed that are different (and uprating the attack values across the the board.) Also the larger the carrier the heavier the planes it can carry thus the better peformance ....this is TOTALLY realistic)
- Zygmund
- location: Unknown
- joined: Feb 07, 2010
- posts: 2
Zygmund said
Its not about the fighters, its an abstract of a Carrier airgroup (which is made up of fighters, torpedo and dive bombers....thus the good naval attack) so its factors like range and speed that are different (and uprating the attack values across the the board.) Also the larger the carrier the heavier the planes it can carry thus the better peformance ....this is TOTALLY realistic)
What heavier planes are you talking about, they are not even counting bombers here, did you build any naval bombers? Did you research any naval bombers? Did you pay any attention to my post? I'm talking about the carrier air groups and the bombers... You don't research naval bombers therefore there are no more heavier bombers. All you research are carrier/naval fighters. Is researching the other carriers adding new bombers? If so why are carrier fighters a separate research category? Reality is this, the last bombers developed were the Douglas series of Skyraider bombers, this followed the SB2C Helldivers built by Curtiss which was preceded by the Douglas SBD "Slow But Deadly" Dauntless divebombers. The last torpedo bombers were the Grumman TBF Avengers. The last piston engine fighters to be deployed on the carriers were the Grumman F7F Tigercat and the Grumman F8F Bearcat. None of these fighters were deployed during WW2, also the Skyraider was not deployed until postwar either. All of these planes mentioned that were not used during WW2 were carrier qualified on the Essex class of carriers. The Essex class of carriers were followed by the Coral Sea/Midway/FDR which in my opinion were the first super carriers. The Essex class carriers during the Vietnam war flew everything the Midways and Super Carriers carried until the advent of the F-14 Tomcat fighter and the A3J/A5/RA5 Vigilante bomber . So as far as carrying heavier planes the Essex class Fleet Carriers did carry the heavier planes up until the advent of the F-14 and A5.
Watch out buddy, the last time you only got a hole through your head...this time it could be worse
- 00crusader
- location: United States
- joined: Dec 04, 2009
- posts: 142
- << previous
- 1
- next >>
