Poll: FMG U.S. aircraft

[Variable]

Any other suggestions?

[kcdzim]

@Variable:

Any other suggestions?

Just an FYI, The A-26 Invader is not the same as the B-26 Marauder.  Both would be appropriate as a tac bomber, but they aren’t the same plane.

[Variable]

@kcdzim:

@Variable:

Any other suggestions?

Just an FYI, The A-26 Invader is not the same as the B-26 Marauder.  Both would be appropriate as a tac bomber, but they aren’t the same plane.

Updated. Thanks for the correction!

[dinosaur]

I only wish FMG could make a special exception to the US and give us a couple extra pieces.  The US needs iconic Navy and European fighters, TAC bombers and regular Strat bombers.  The B-25 is a wonderful iconic aircraft for the war, but doesn’t pass the “Looks good on a carrier” test.  The P-51 and the F4U would be great to solve the fighter in Europe and Pacific theatre problem.  The B-17 can work for a single strategic bomber, but you still need a carrier friendly TAC bomber.

Likewise, I would like the US to have a sculpt for regular infantry, Marines and an elite soldier such as an Airborne trooper.

The tank isn’t that important to me because the tanks should be in Europe, along with the Mech units.

But I think what FMG is doing is so much better than what we have now, or any other alternative I see, that I’m not complaining about any of it.

[Razor]

How about you post some pics of the planes, man.

[Variable]

P-40

P-47

[Variable]

P-51

F4U

[Variable]

B-24

B-25

B-26

[Variable]

A-26

B-17

B-29

[Guest]

I voted with the majority on all three. 8-)

[kcdzim]

Is FMG making china sculpts?  Perhaps we’ll get a P40 anyway….  hmmmmmmmmm.

[Variable]

@kcdzim:

Is FMG making china sculpts?  Perhaps we’ll get a P40 anyway….  hmmmmmmmmm.

I think they should! Here’s a vote for it. That way it increases the odds of a P-51 or F4U for US (or both :-D)

[Guest]

I think that FMG should just go ahead and make every weapon ever used in WWII to satisfy the mob :-D

[kcdzim]

@Brain:

I think that FMG should just go ahead and make every weapon ever used in WWII to satisfy the mob :-D

As a member of the mob I will not be satisfied until the units can move under their own power.  Boo inanimate objects, boo I say!

[Razor]

@Brain:

I think that FMG should just go ahead and make every weapon ever used in WWII to satisfy the mob :-D

I actually agree with you on this one. We are brothers in arms.

Maybe next year, if the current piece project of FMG is successful, and the A&A community still want more units of new weapons, then FMG start a new project ? As long as it pays off, I see no reason why not.

Any way, I votet for the Mustang as fighter, the Mitchell as Tac, and the Liberator as Bomber. I think the Superfortress is way too big. No other nations had any plane that size. Maybe US should get this plane as an extra ? They did have the largest airforce of the world after all.

[Guest]

Usually the only thing that Razor and I agree on is that we both need our heads examined. At first I made that statement as a light-hearted joke/wish.  Now I am actually hoping that it is a possibility. Hopefully the game piece project is a big enough success to make something like this possible. Who knows? It could happen.

[Variable]

Okay, how about this question - Who would be willing to give up the 2nd tank model for a 2nd fighter model just for the U.S.?

[Variable]

Although the poll is already going this way, I thought I throw out a bit more conjecture on the fighter debate. Inspired by other posts, I looked up the service record of the P-38. It in fact saw the most action in the Pacific. That means BOTH the US fighters are Pacific theatre aircraft. We absolutely need a European theatre fighter - what better than the P-51.

I’m still pushing FMG to make us Corsairs too. No comments on my question above?

[Entek]

@Variable:

Okay, how about this question - Who would be willing to give up the 2nd tank model for a 2nd fighter model just for the U.S.?

I would.

[Razor]

I aint gonna do that