A planned ultra-long-range heavy bomber with 6 engines, 4 cannons and massive bomb bay designed to take off from Kuril Island to bomb the US mainland industry and land in Germany occupied France, and make another return sortie.
- 1
With the new air designer, is it possible to build to Japanese G10N Fugaku?
- Thread starter him_15
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I didn't see anything about one way plane launches
We can't do the Doolittle raids for example
We can't do the Doolittle raids for example
- 5
I did, but it was a one way ticket for the pilot too. Kamikaze's are a one way launch.
Shuttle runs were not uncommon during the war. (England to Italy; England to Russia; Italy to Russia, etc). But that has nothing to do with the plane designer. It would be a change to the mission mechanics. (You'd have to pick both a source and destination airfield. Range calculations would have to be altered to count source -> target -> destination rather than just base <-> target. You might need to consume airbase capacity on both ends, and similarly supply. And so on through working out the details.)
The plane designer thread didn't go into a whole lot of detail there. But assuming drop tanks (or undroppable extra internal tankage) are something you can add to large airframes, I don't see why you couldn't design a longer-range bomber with less payload because it's carrying extra fuel. A literal six engines probably won't happen. But then, it doesn't seem like that's actually an important number. Moar thrust is possible; whether that's 50% more "normal" engines or 4 engines that are each 50% more powerful works out to the same thing. The numeric details are all still WIP, so we don't know the upper bound of large airframe range if the design goes all-out on increasing range.
The plane designer thread didn't go into a whole lot of detail there. But assuming drop tanks (or undroppable extra internal tankage) are something you can add to large airframes, I don't see why you couldn't design a longer-range bomber with less payload because it's carrying extra fuel. A literal six engines probably won't happen. But then, it doesn't seem like that's actually an important number. Moar thrust is possible; whether that's 50% more "normal" engines or 4 engines that are each 50% more powerful works out to the same thing. The numeric details are all still WIP, so we don't know the upper bound of large airframe range if the design goes all-out on increasing range.
- 7
Fair point
Kamakazes were denoted as specific and special (and focus locked) so I wasn't counting them in my comment
- 2
You can make immensely long-range aircraft, sure. But the game mechanics being what they are, they'll still do 2 missions/day, even if that would be physically impossible. This is why daylight bombing is such a better choice than night bombing - night bombers fly 1 mission/day, daylight bombers fly 2 in HOI4.
So things like the Amerikabomber, that was supposed to fly around the globe, rather than turn around, seem unlikely to ever happen until/unless there's a major rework of the air mechanics to take into account aircraft speed and travel time.
So things like the Amerikabomber, that was supposed to fly around the globe, rather than turn around, seem unlikely to ever happen until/unless there's a major rework of the air mechanics to take into account aircraft speed and travel time.
Maybe a mechanic could be made where if an area is outside the range of the airbase you're stationed at, but within range of another, missions could be flown there at the cost of say efficiency. But as a computer scientist I can tell that this would increase the complexity of range calculations quite significantly. That said, I don't know how much these affect the speed of the game as is (ten times nothing is still nothing), and there might be some cool trick that allows it to be done much faster.
Had a game recently where I had tons of planes, but no way of putting them in the sky because I couldn't supply them. This might have alleviated said issue, or maybe I just need to up my supply game? That said, things seemed to have bugged out with province control so maybe the game was to blame. For context I was playing as Japan with the "Soviets" as my puppet, fighting the Axis' Russian collaboration government along the border between Europe and Asia.
Had a game recently where I had tons of planes, but no way of putting them in the sky because I couldn't supply them. This might have alleviated said issue, or maybe I just need to up my supply game? That said, things seemed to have bugged out with province control so maybe the game was to blame. For context I was playing as Japan with the "Soviets" as my puppet, fighting the Axis' Russian collaboration government along the border between Europe and Asia.
- 1
4 to 6 Engine Bombers with the big Airframe aren’t impossible. Otherwise the B-17 “Flying Fortress” or B-29 “Super Fortress” couldn’t build up f. e.
There are 3 Limits for all Planes (Thrust, Airframe and an third I can’t remember).
What the other Question for all 3 military Parts (Fighting / Movement etc.) belongs we will see.
There are 3 Limits for all Planes (Thrust, Airframe and an third I can’t remember).
What the other Question for all 3 military Parts (Fighting / Movement etc.) belongs we will see.
Thrust needs to be positive, Airframe limits what can be or can't be put in it and Agility also needs to be positive, if I am not mistaken.
9500 miles... only one plane has achieved that range, the Airbus A350ULR. I'd have to get out my slide rule, but pretty sure the amount of fuel needed would cause the payload to be close to non existent, if it could even take off with the weight of the fuel alone.
Kuril Island to the west coast and back would be a tad more realistic with only needing a range of approx 4500 miles
Kuril Island to the west coast and back would be a tad more realistic with only needing a range of approx 4500 miles
- 1