View Full Version : Do you think the PBY-5a is important to PF?

09-03-2004, 12:15 AM

09-03-2004, 12:15 AM

09-03-2004, 02:14 AM
if you have the bpy for the allies....youd need to have something like the Mavis (a collosal 4 or 5 (maybe 1 prop in the middle..i forget) behemoth similar to the pby) for the axis

09-03-2004, 01:48 PM
i expected more voting, hmm

09-03-2004, 02:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by xTHRUDx:
i expected more voting, hmm<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well my vote counts as two so i did my part lol http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

09-03-2004, 05:50 PM
The PBY is a Must Have aircraft.





09-03-2004, 06:58 PM
Hell yes.

I'd like to see others like the Coronado, Mariner, and Sunderland make it(hopefully flyable) in too.

The little Goose would be nice as well. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

"Not all who wander are lost."

09-03-2004, 07:50 PM
i'm still a little bit worried about not seeing a PBY-5a external, yet. it would suck if someone went through all the trouble to make the internal and we have no external for it.

09-03-2004, 08:18 PM
IIRC, Gib has said that he was doing the 5A because of it's ability to take-off/land on either water or terra firma. He felt it would be more versatile. Since the PBN has no landing gear, this versatility would be negated. I'm sure we'll get the correct 3D model. We just haven't seen it yet. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

"Not all who wander are lost."

09-04-2004, 02:14 AM
you'll have to ask him, his website made no mention of an external, just the internal. maybe someone else is doing the external. .i don't think he is doing it. based on the post's i've read from him.

09-04-2004, 05:03 PM
Dornier D0 24K needed...............

09-05-2004, 02:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JFC_Phantom:
if you have the bpy for the allies....youd need to have something like the Mavis (a collosal 4 or 5 (maybe 1 prop in the middle..i forget) behemoth similar to the pby) for the axis<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think we need to go tit for tat in aircraft type. The PBY is very well known which is not the case for the other model you mentioned, and would hate to see the PBY overlooked because some other model can't make it in.

09-05-2004, 09:04 AM
Hey xTHRUDx m8, please include 5th option and put it to look like "I do not know". I will then vote for that option. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

09-05-2004, 10:10 AM
For such an important aircraft in RL, I think it's necessary to have it in game IMO.

Vertically challenged since 1984.

09-05-2004, 10:15 AM

the H8K "Emily" is already in the game. It's a bigger and better flying boat in every technical way (cept it ain't as pretty to me http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) than the PBY. Not flyable, but the Allies won't have a flyable floatplane like the Ruth, I'd wager. Certainly not a fighter float.



09-05-2004, 11:19 AM
The PBY-5a would add so much dynamics to PF, that I could not imagine a pacific game at the caliber of PF leaving this out. The excitement of floating off a downed flyer, making a rescue, bring the engine to power and breaking water with vapor trailing....or spending hours on recon.... Yes, effective use of water born planes is very important to the long term success of this game. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/heart.gif

09-05-2004, 07:48 PM
pby update


09-06-2004, 03:40 AM
I hardly think the Mavis was an obscure plane. It really filled the same role as the PBY in terms of finding the enemy carriers. But it was more deadly when it did find those carriers, IMO.

09-08-2004, 12:26 AM
cool update, yes?

sorry, a shameless bump