Hello all,

Thank you to all who replied to my first question concerning the Nuremberg (TL6) Attack Aircraft accommodation question. I've just completed inserting the MT Consolidated Errata v. 2.21 (02/23/2013) from the Introduction to  Designing Fixed-Wing Aircraft.

Here is some of my findings:

1. MT COACC page 9 Reading Aircraft Specifications versus fixed-wing aircraft examples.

     The specifications example p. 9 shows that the Locomotion block's first entry is for Inoperative/Destroyed Damage Points. The only fixed-wing aircraft that has this configuration is the Pretoria p. 35,

On the Ypres p. 11, Tuscon p. 13, Cheyenne p. 15, Laramie p. 17, Reno p. 19, Abilene p. 21, Daytona p. 23, Nuremberg p. 25, Chicago p. 27, Pleiku p. 29, and San Diego p. 31 show the Inoperative/Destroyed Damage Points as part of the Power block.

I'm moving the Reading Aircraft Specifications and Pretoria's specification sheet Inoperative/Destroyed Damage Points from Locomotion to Power.

2. MT Consolidated Errata v. 2.21 (02/23/2013) p. 62 change the Agility formula from (MS/100 + G x 100)/100 - ME + MP to (((MS/1000) + G) x (100/(100 - ME)) + MP).

The Pretoria (TL9) Fighter is the example used for designing fixed-wing aircraft the revised formula changed Agility from 3 to 4.

Based on the test using the Pretoria there is a high probability that the other fixed-wing aircraft will have changes to Agility.

I am going to make a spreadsheet for designing fixed-wing aircraft to see how close I can come to the samples up to COACC page 35 and I will post another update.

Tom Rux