Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'aircraft'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 38 results

  1. AirSuperiority

    CV Midway

    CV Midway Rock`n`Roll ahead of the server maintenance
  2. hello guys, i am one of those guys that like to play aircraft carriers. i usually play the new hakuryu with quite decent results(average dmg around 120k, usually top 5 player). overall the game experience is fine, but i would like to point out 2 things: 1) when you are driving the planes, you cannot reinforce the anti-air gun sectors of the carrier. i think that this is quite "shitty" because i can't properly defend my ship from incoming planes. the only way i can do it is to recall my planes, reiforce the sector, and re-start the voyage(crap). it would be nice to have 2 different keys in order to reinforce the left or the right side of the ship without leaving the flight squadroon. 2) improve the auto-pilot. after the new patch there have been a lot of improvement on this topic, but still, is quite hard to go backwards and sometimes the ship collides with islands.
  3. Randathamane

    So, The carrier rework then...

    Here is a simple poll for the community regarding the aircraft carrier rework. Simple question, is it better now or has it been broken?
  4. I don't know if a topic was previously done before about this topic, but I think it's something we should care about as the Graf Zeppelin was really the only aircraft carrier done by the german Kriegsmarine. This project was intended so that the power of the Kriegsmarine would go further than just the confines of the Baltic seas. This carrier if it would have been finished it could of have been capable of transporting 42 fighters and dive bombers- 12 fighters and 30 dive bombers. It was expected that it would either carry 12 Junkers Ju 87, prepared to land on carriers, and thirty Bf 109 and Fi 167 torpedo bombers. This carrier was 262.5 meters long and an beam of 36 meters, its max. speed was of about 38 knots, about 62 km. The carrier was laid down 28 December of 1936, and it was launched the 8 of December of 1938, when it was 85% completed. Armament The armament was rather simple and did not fit any battery bigger than 15 cm cannons to defend themselves against other warships. 16 × 15 cm SK C/28 guns 12 × 10.5 cm SK C/33 guns 22 × 3.7 cm SK C/30 guns 28 × 2 cm FlaK guns Armor The Graf Zeppelin was finely defended, as at the belt the amount of protection was of 100mm (3.9) in. The flight deck was protected with 45 mm (1.8) in. Now the main deck was a bit better protected than the flight deck with 60 mm (2.4) in. Now my question is, will it be present in the German Kriegsmarine branch tree of World of Warships, or will it just remain as an iconic ship?
  5. Now Best to Us aircraft carrier is that nothing is touched, but none of what they have imagined will be accomplished,It is up to us to adapt,because they have changed everything in relation to them,it will be difficult to control,just to do as little damage as possible, and to give up as much as they do with artillery in WOT.
  6. HI guys, I'm no more able to drop manual torpedo by aircraft using the ALT command. I've always used without problems....I have had some months of break and now that I'm playing again I have this strange issue....maybe some updates? When I select an airplane and I press the ALT button nothing happens. If I'm using a battleship for example and I press ALT command I can see the information about the other ship like always (this means the button works well). The command settings are default and the ALT bottom is setted to "alternative battle interface mode". I don't see a specific command to manual torpedo/bomb drop but pressing "F1" during the game, in the Aircraft help tab I can see that ALT is the button to use for the manual drop..... Anyway I've always used the ALT button and I never had this problem before.... Someone can help me please? Thank you very much!
  7. I own the ranger myself, and often find that the Hiryu is capable of dominating with it's two fighter squadrons able to counter your fighters, while attacking your strike group or utterly decimating your fighters while your strike group tries to run. Carriers aren't played often, so less people run the AA defensive fire ability, and no sensible/sane CV captain will fly over one of these ships (ie: Cleveland, Atlanta etc). And often times you're left circling your aicraft around not being able to do much or they end up destroyed, or you have to sacrifice your fighters just to squeeze one full strike group through, before losing 60-100% of your strike aircraft. It's utterly unbalanced from Tier 5-8 with carriers, and I've seen many people say this over the years as well. No update seems to have an answer or solution to this & IJN carriers are just out right better in this tier, before USN carriers become competitive at Tier 9 and 10. Feel free to vote in the poll, post your findings, opinions, thoughts and such below. It'd be good to see some positive change result from this thread so carrier gameplay is actually balanced again, rather than being an RNJ slog hoping you're against another Ranger while playing yours.
  8. ylven999

    Spotting aircraft

    Hi, Does anyone know, what type is the spotting aircraft on the A hull of the Richelieu? Up until now I was quite successful in identifying even the lesser known aircraft on WOWS ships, but this one I cannot fine anywhere.
  9. Echecs_nicolas

    Utiliser la DCA WoWS

    Salut la compagnie ! Tout d'abord, je suis désolé si je ne suis pas sur le bon sujet, mais voila. Je viens vers vous car ça fait maintenant deux parties ou je me fait asmater la gueule par des avions torpilleurs ou des bombardiers en piquet. Pourtant, mon petit cuirassé possède des défenses anti aériennes, et j'aimerai bien les utiliser. Cependant, bah, je ne sais pas comment faire, et quelle touche cliquer. Pouvez vous m'aider silvoupley ? :] Ah, et j'y pense, j'ai une autre question. A ce qu'il parait il y a des cuirassés Français dans le jeu, mais pourtant, impossible de les trouver dans l'arbre technologique, et ça me fait [edited] car je suis très chauvin et que je souhaiterai jouer des cuirassés Français. Est ce normal ? Merci beaucoup, Cordialement, A French Chauvinist
  10. QuintenCK

    Carrier EXP

    Hi everyone! I've noticed something in the game lately. And to no suprise it is the CV EXP system. I have sent a ticket to Wargaming, and they directed me to here. So why not make use of it? As you can see on the picture, I earned less EXP in my Essex, than in my Fuso, altought I did better in most ways in my Essex. And I bet I am not the only one complaining that we have to use premium camo, for CV EXP to become relevant. Take note: On both ships, I ran no other economy flags than the +50% EXP bonus. Both were not my first victory of the day. I don't have a premium camouflage on both ships. So my ideas on it, and how we can improve CV gameplay a bit, by rebalancing CV economy. Some of my ideas: Plane kills give EXP, not much, but they do. So what I would do is increase the EXP earned by these ribbons, after all, your team loves you for killing enemy planes. Example: If we say a single plane ribbon gives 10 EXP, then we could increase it by halve, to 15 EXP. I would increase the base EXP gained by CVs overall a little bit, maybe with 5-10%. The credits earned is very poor, I got more credits in my Fuso than in my Essex, yet the Essex has higher maintenance costs. So I would seriously buff the credits gained from CV gameplay. I don't know how the algorithm works for CV credits, but in general, I would buff it with a serious 20%. Lower the maintenance on high tier ships in general, not by much, but maybe like 5-10%. It would not only please the CV community, but all high tier players. These were some of my ideas. I am open to other ideas and to people who know how to balance it more, write a comment! Thank you.
  11. auf den deutschen Schlachtschiffen T8-10. Am merkwürdigsten finde ich dabei die Bismarck, da ja das Schwesterschiff das Flugzeug ja ordentlich zeigt. Ist etwas bekannt,ob und wann das geändert werden soll? Ich finde es jetzt nicht wirklich schlimm aber es nimmt ein bisschen von der Atmosphäre.
  12. Hallo ich bin BlueLight, ich wollte nur kurz ein Thema anschneiden welches mir aufgefallen ist. Ich persöhnlich finde eifnach das die Flugzeugträger der 2 Nationen Japan und USA wirklich sehr unausgeglichen sind . Vergleich : Pro Contra Japan - gute Tarnung und Bewegung - Kann es sehr selten mit anderen Flugzeugen aufnehmen - Gut gg andere Schiffe - weniger Flugzeuge pro Staffel und Insgesamt - schnell und wendig - niedrige Überlebensfähigkeit - viele Staffeln - auf Team angewiesen - große Schwierigkeiten gg Zerstörer / selten möglich gut zu treffen - Bomber treffen eher selten und haben wenig DMG USA - Stark gg andere Träger und Flugzeuge - nicht so mobil und nicht so guter Tarnwert - Jäger besten im Spiel - weniger verschiedene Staffeln zum reagieren - Flugzeuge hohe Überlebensfähigkeit - weniger Staffeln - gute Chance all Schiffsarten zu töten - bestimmen den Luftraum emens - Bomber machen viel Dmg und treffen gut - viele Flugzeuge allgemein / pro Staffel - nicht unbedingt auf Team angewiesen Was sagt ihr dazu schreibt doch gerne mal eure Meinungen als Kommentar oder falls ihr anderer Meinugn seid. Ich spiele selbst gerne die Japaner würde mir nur ein wenig mehr Balance wünschen. Was ich sehr ausgeglichen finde ist bei beiden zum Beispiel die Flugabwehr da kann man echt nichts sagen. Ich halte nur einfach die Amerikaner stärken da sie wesentlich mehr Vorteile für den Kampf im Gepäck haben. Eigene Meinungen und Erfahrung gern erwünscht!! Mfg xBlueLighTx
  13. Hallo Wargaming-Team, Ich fahre sehr gerne Japanische Schiffe unter anderem z.B. den Flugzeugträger Zuhio. Aber es regt mich immer wieder auf, dass dessen Fighter denen einer Bogue dermaßen stark unterlegen sind, dass ich theoretisch direkt das Spiel verlassen kann, da meine Flugzeuge - besonders mit dem Fighter Loadout auf der Bogue - direkt zerstört werden und ich somit keine Chance habe, ordentlich Punkte zu machen. Es verdirbt den Spielspass und erst Recht den Spaß an den Japanischen Flugzeugträgern, somit ist das spielen bis zum Tier 6 Flugzeugträger der Japaner eine Qual für mich! Es wäre toll, wenn man dies ändern könnte und die Fighter stärker machen würde, damit das Gefecht nicht sofort verloren ist!
  14. NorseBerserker

    German Aircraft Carrier

    Hi Do You plan make aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_aircraft_carrier_Graf_Zeppelin Thank You
  15. CaptJack_Sparrow

    RN Cruiser AA thoughts

    Yes, yes it's another RN thread... BUT! It isn't a "When are they coming?", oh no this is just a thread to get your guys opinions on the strength of the Royal Navy AA. With rumors that the Royal Navy cruiser line is coming in the Q3 of 2016 there is lots to talk about before then. Do you think that the overall cruiser line AA will be as good as US cruiser AA or as bad as the Japanese cruiser AA or near the middle with the German cruisers AA? I myself am not too sure, I think they may on par with the German cruiser AA, again just my 2 cents.
  16. akagikancolle

    CV and control of planes

    I wonder how is the control of planes in this game because carriers were aimed at long distance attacks, so i wonder if it is well simulated in terms of distance and control too. Thanks!
  17. As I have been mostly playing aircraft carriers so far in the CBT I feel that despite the fun I'm having there is one huge problem that I just have to point out. The scaling of the aircraft. Any CV player should be able to agree that anytime you go up against a higher tier carrier your fighters will become absolutely garbage. Why is it that the difference between 1 tier matters so much when it comes to fighters? It's not uncommon to see a 100% increase in effective power (Damage + Survivability) and it's not uncommon to lose a whole squadron while only killing a single of the enemies planes who are just from a single tier higher carrier. Thoughts about this and what can be done? Making lower tier fighters slightly stronger?
  18. I know this is a Warships forum; but, when talking about the Imperial Japanese Navy, one of the subjects that comes to mind is its air branch, with iconic aircraft such as the A6M series. So, this topic is about the naming procedures for japanese aircraft by the IJN; land based aircraft of the IJNAF will also be included. Take in account that this post reflects the short designation system adopted in the 1920s, some of the aircraft named with this designation system also have an equivalent in the older nomination system; being the aircraft designed between As always, feedback welcomed and be civilized when answering. And now, lets get to it! FIRST CHARACTER, THE AIRCRAFT TYPE LETTER The first letter on an aircraft in service (or predicted to be in service) in the IJN, always indicates the aircraft type; or so to say, the function that aircraft will have in the operations. LETTER AIRCRAFT TYPE A Carrier Based Fighter B Carrier Based Torpedo Bomber C Carrier Based Reconnaisance Aircraft D Carrier Based Dive Bomber E Reconnaisance Seaplane F Fire Director/Observation Seaplane G Land Base Bomber* H Flying Boat J Interceptor K Trainer L Transport M Special Seaplane N Seaplane Fighter P Land Base Bomber Q Anti-Submarine Patrol R Land Based Reconnaisance S Land Based Night Fighter *The designation "P" and "G" doesn't seem to have a clear distinction. Some sources state "G" as attack bomber; not really correct since not all of the aircraft following such designation serve that purpose (G4, G5, G8, G10). Not only that, but the G4M and the P1Y serve mainly exactly the same purpose; the main difference being that the P1Y is a fast bomber, and it was also designed with guided rockets in mind as part of its loadout. SECOND CHARACTER, THE AIRCRAFT TYPE NUMERAL This one has not a lot of science behind it. This number indicates the number which this machine occupies in the aircraft serving the same role. For example, A6M: Means it is the sixth aircraft to be accepted as a carrier based fighter. Bear in mind that for an aircraft to carry this numeral (and thus affecting the ones which will come behind it) IT DOESN'T need to enter service. For example, the J4M Senden carries the number 4 in the Interceptor series, despite never leaving the design board. It also affected the aircraft coming behing it. The J7W Shinden, for example, entered service (only "technically", since the aircraft was ordered into production but none mass-produced units were finished). So, the "7" of the J7W was affected by the "4" of the J4M. THIRD CHARACTER, THE DESIGNER COMPANY LETTER This letter indicates the company or enterprise the designer or team of designers which created the aircraft worked for. Foreign aircraft in japanese service had aswell their own manufacturer letter, but in the following table, only japanese companies are listed. LETTER MANUFACTURER A Aichi D Showa G Hitachi Kokuki H Hiro J Nihon Kogata Hikoki K Kawanishi M Mitsubishi N Nakajima P Nihon S Sasebo W Kyūshū Y Yokosuka Z Mizuno Guraida Seisakusho FOURTH CHARACTER, THE MODEL NUMERAL This number indicates the version of the aircraft, starting with 1 (usually the prototype ot pre-production unit designator). The model of the aircraft referenced major or notable changes between different models. For example A6M2 ; the said "2" indicates that is the second model of the A6M series. (OPTIONAL) FIFTH CHARACTER, THE SUB-MODEL LETTER This low-caps letter, is not always present, but if so, represents a sub model of the current version of the aircraft stated on the previous character. It is sometimes found in letter ranging from "a" to "d", representing the grade of the sub-model, but can alternativelly be found as short names, each one equivalent to a grade. To list the first four ones: "Grade a" - "Ko" "Grade b" - "Ōtsu" "Grade c" - "Hei" "Grade d" - "Tei" And as an example: A6M5c , the "c" meaning is the third (or grade c) sub-model of the fifth version of the A6M series. (OPTIONAL) SIXTH CHARACTER, THE ROLE-CHANGING LETTER There are sometimes when the aircraft's role doesn't match its initial designation; this is due to a change in purpose for the said aircraft. This can be either done by direct engineering on the aircraft, changing its characteristics and converting it into a new aircraft; or simply reusing a version of such aircraft with a different role. Whatever the reason, when an aircraft begins to fullfill a role it was not designed to, the new role letter designation (look at the first character table), is added at the end, preceded by a "-". Likely, the most famous example would be the Shiden; whose designation is N1K1-J (for the first version). Acording to the first character, this aircraft should be a seaplane fighter (which is what it was in its original version, the N1K1 Kyōfu), but it is not, it is an interceptor. The last character, the "-J", nullifies the first letter, adding a new role for the aircraft. That is not the only example though, many more purpose changes were made by the IJNAF to various aircraft during the war. Well, this is it for the time being, hope you enjoyed this little guide on naming procedures for IJNAF aircraft. I will be adding more information in the near future, such as the "nickname" naming convention for IJNAF aircraft, a list of all aircraft, special designation cases (such as the MXY7) and double designation aircraft (such as the A6M). Thank you for your time!
  19. Trebor_Air_Fighter

    Swedish Cruiser HSwMS Gotland

    Although I am not Swedish, I think this would make quite an interesting Premium cruiser, possibly tier 4 or 5? It carried 6 Hawker Osprey aircraft, although it had a capacity for eight, the reason being that Sweden originally bought 6 but when it tried to purchase more, production has ceased. From Wikipedia: Armament 6x 152mm (6in) guns in two double turrets and two single turrets 4x75mm and 4x25mm AA guns 6x533mm torpedo tubes More stuff from Wikipedia Displacement: 4,600 t Length: 134.8 m (442 ft 3 in) Beam: 15.4 m (50 ft 6 in) Draught: 4.5 m (14 ft 9 in) Happy Sailing Trebor_Air_Fighter
  20. Munition

    how to rework CV's

    Please Moderators, move this to Development Section -> Discussion Hello everyone,I thought about aircraft carriers and how they are represented in the game and came up with some ideas. I want to say I'm not a strict CV hater but sometimes they annoy me. Mainly I'm writing this because I'm a little bit disappointed how carriers play as I expected something different. For those who now check my profile: Yes, I haven't played a single game in a carrier yet, but I played them in the closed Beta.Please feel free to comment on every single idea as I'm curious about your opinions. Also I'm sorry if I open the 500th thread about this but I want to show you my ideas. A) Removal of the "Flight Control" as a module of the carrier. Replace it with "Deck Crew"Players can mix their general aircraft-setup the CV carries into battle in the harbor like granates in WoT. Number of fighters carried should forced to be 1/3 of plane-load.The new module "Deck Crew" determines how many aircraft can be prepared by the crew simultaneously and thereby reduces the whole preparation time. B) Removal of pre-set squadrons. Replace it with custom squadronsNow you can create bigger formations. IJN CV's can increase/decrease the strength of one squadron by 4 planes per step and USN according to this by 6 planes per step. This way you can avoid too many small squadrons per CV at one time. C) Add control over the squadron's altitudeMax. altitude should be limited to 5km but if your planes fly this high they can avoid much of the light/medium AA. On the other side dive-bombers are diving longer (but are more accurate) towards their target and torpedo-bombers need to circle down before they can attack and thereby they are longer a target.A good player could use this for example to overfly some of the cruisers AA, than lower the altitude and attack the battleships. D) Massive increase of preparation time before squadrons can be launchedThis is the payoff for your new freedom but it also preserves you from spamming and losing all your aircraft early in the game. E) Add the danger of being attacked while you prepare you squadrons and end in a massive fireballThis makes the gameplay more depth as you have to think strategically. F) Add the option of armor-piercing bombs with massive damage for dive-bomber G) Higher the point of bomb release for dive-bombers and thereby lower their accuracy H) Increase the closest point of torpedo release to circa 1km G) and H): Diving to long and/or get to near to the AA is suicidal I) Increase the time torpedoes need to be armed a little bit J) Removal of the "Blue Angels"-like squadron-attack for torpedo-bombersThis is even to unrealistic for an arcade game - also it's unfair for BB's.They shouldn't drop their torpedo simultaneously and also not perfectly parallel.If you think twice about this it even could increase the chance for a hit as the torpedos don't run as predictable. K) Add the possibility to deflect torpedoes if they hit you with something like 15°or less To complete my statement I want to say I don't think this reduces overall effectivity but makes playing a carrier more strategically and more balanced. I'm really looking forward to your opinion!
  21. This question came up into my mind a few times: the catapult fighter and the spotter plane on BB's and CA/CL's is a numbered ability, meaning that you can launch it only so many times before it runs out. Why? is it a balance consideration? Why can't it work like it works for carriers: Whatever aircraft you recover you can launch again? Catapult fighters are not all that powerful, so them counting off every time they are launched seems to make not that much sense. Is it because of their spotting capacity? I'm just curious, as I'd like to see recovered aircraft being launchable again, but if it can be reasoned against it's fine. Cheers
  22. Serenissima

    Aircraft Models

    Anyone yet had the idea of replacing the aircraft models, particularly at lower tiers, with the appearance of aircraft that actually served in WWII? It really, really bothers me seeing the ugly yellow peacetime colours on those ancient biplanes flying off a Bogue or Independence from the Second World War. Seems like it's definitely something that'll be needed for any kind of immersion, at least. I suppose this could be done either by just replacing the models ingame with later aircraft models from this game, or better, perhaps ported from World of Warplanes to add a bit more variety?
  23. Rarely do I see cruiser captains actively try to protect battleships, at least after the first couple of minutes of a battle. So how can we get those pesky cruisers () to want to stay with their heavier comrades? I haven't been to these forums for a while, so this may have been suggested before. Anyway, here it goes: If a battleship is inside a cruiser's AA range and that cruiser shoots down a bomber or torpedo bomber (this does not apply to fighters), the cruiser gets an extra XP and credit award for that aircraft kill (compared to a regular aircraft kill). Maybe even more credits and XP if said aircraft are on a bombing\torpedo run. I'm not talking about thousands of XP here, just a small amount, but still enough for cruisers to want to stay closer to their BBs. If that isn't enough, how about an award? Kill X bombers\torp bombers when a BB is inside the cruiser captain's AA range, and the captain gets the award! Are there any downsides to something like this? I sure don't see them... Maybe WG does...
  24. (FYI, I have also posted this topic in NA) I had a thought one day thinking, were there any torpedo bombers that dropped 2 torpedoes at once? It turns out, such a craft does exist. It is Known as the russian Tu-2T (ANT-62T) Bomber. When the russian Aircarriers are added into the game, there will be one problem, as far as I can research, during the period of WWII, russian had NO designs on aircraft that would be Aircraft Carrier ready, regardless of their number of blue-print designs on carriers. Even when russia did acquire an aircraft carrier (The German Graf Zepplin, the only German Aircarft carrier built in WWII) it never got equipped with aircraft (as far as I am aware) and was used as a mobile command post, and later used for target practice, sinking the Graf Zepplin. This means that, when Russian Aircraft Carriers are added, all air-craft equipped to them will HAVE to be theoretical adaptations from Russian land based aircraft. So, thus, we bring in the TU-2T (ANT-62T) (Not OP in the least xP) The TU-2T (ANT-62T) was a variant of of the Russian TU-2T, which had many many variants, and serverd in the russia's forces from 1945-1947, with the first prototype to fly in 1941. Of all the variants of the Tu-2T, the "ANT-62T" was the only one equipped with torpedoes. What type of Torpedoes I cannot tell, the only factor I can tell is the External bomb carrying weight limit for this plane was 2,270Kg. Gameplay: I cannot say much on its gameplay factor, as we do not as of yet know how many planes are in a russian squadron of planes, comparitvely to Japanese which have 4, and Americans that have 6. These bombers I would guess are easier to shoot down due to their size, but would be more devestating then the current Tier X Torpedo Bomber Aircraft The Hitch :/ Currently, in game the largest aircraft on any Carrier has a wing span of 14 meters, from what I can find atleast. The Tu-2T (ANT-62T) has a wingspan of 18 meters. HOWEVER, there is a counter point to this, which may still make this aircraft viable in world of warships for its authenticity, according to the thread by mr3awsome on upcoming ships, the likely candidate for the Russian tier 10 Aircraft Carrier is the Projekt Kostrominitov (as suggested by WG's Q&A), which, in my research, would of been 300 meters long, and 35meters wide, putting it at being bigger then the Midway and Hakuryu. Which, in theory, might allow it to accommodate an aircraft 4 meters wider. The Kostrominitov: (The ships design was based off the graf zepplin, just bigger, 'cause russia) Why bring this aircraft to the game? -To give something more unique to Russia, - 'cause Russia is Stronk Sources: http://russian.warbi...up.org/tu2.html https://en.wikipedia...ki/Tupolev_Tu-2 http://forum.worldof...062015/#topmost
  25. HexTq

    Performance drop

    Experiencing heavy performance drop when 3+ higher (tier V+) carriers and their aircraft on map. Frame drop, lagspikes and sound issues.