B-29 Super Fortress

[Saxman]

Keep in mind that this is EXACTLY the reason the B-29 would need to be perked and perked HEAVILY--AND why she's really the best choice for a bomber that can be added that's WORTH perking. She's too fast, too heavily armed, and has too big of a bomb load to be allowed to run loose in the Mains without restriction.

[Chalenge]

If you are flying a fighter at high altitude and make two passes on a level bomber and you run out of E... you arent flying your fighter right.

358 is what the B29 will do trimmed nose down and running all out. You cant do that when your heavy or level either one. Thats a speed you will see when your rtb only. Normally a B29 is good for 220 in cruise or 290-310 fully loaded and level... almost just like a B24.

[Iron_Cross]

358 is what the B29 will do trimmed nose down and running all out. You cant do that when your heavy or level either one. Thats a speed you will see when your rtb only. Normally a B29 is good for 220 in cruise or 290-310 fully loaded and level... almost just like a B24.

Well cruise is out the window, since most bomber pilots will fly flat out anyway, and to save perkies they will likely fly as high as possible to avoid interception as well.  Then we are back to the the scenario I laid out with the Boston.  Chasing a bomber that already has done it's job.  So most scenarios are going to be a long tail chase for the interceptor.  Most of the time, when I got shot down in the Boston, it was because I didn't have a tail gun to kill my pursuer.  That won't be a problem with the B-29, plus you will more likely run out of gas before a B-29 would, even with a quarter tank.  You are also assuming that the interceptor is at least reasonably co-alt,  something not likely to happen when there is a good furball happening between two bases.

[lyric1]

Most of the time, when I got shot down in the Boston, it was because I didn't have a tail gun to kill my pursuer.  That won't be a problem with the B-29,

You assume some one will saddle up on your 6? Most Noobs will how ever those that know how will have any & all bombers in a formation shot down with out a single hit on the attacking fighter.

[Saxman]

Chalenge,

B-29s were outrunning Japanese fighters while UNDER full combat loads. This points to an airspeed exceeding a mere 300mph. Keep in mind as well that these B-29s were carrying not only 20,000lbs of bombs but a loaded down with gas. In the arenas it's rare to see the large bombers flying with more than 50% fuel, so the B-29 is going to be flying lighter than it would have historically, anyway.

And it's not all about running OUT of E, either. Setting up an attack run is made more difficult because you'll need to allow yourself more room and greater lead when making a pass to avoid missing the formation and ending up in the tail arc.

[fullmetalbullet]

i say put it to a vote. i mean obama got in office because america didnt want to seem to racist to the world. then again i never voted for the other guy either seeing as im to younge to vote, but voting seems to be the best way to settle disagrement insted of argueing over oh it will unbalance things well look at the ME-262 that motherdiddlying jet is faster then all the other planes in the game, so adding the B-29 wouldnt seem any diferent then adding the wright brothers first attempt at an airplane and adding guns to it and pitting it agains a P-51D or ME-262.

[Rich46yo]

The Lancaster has pretty weak defenses, and is pretty slow, this is not the case with the B-29.  Everything I see, points to the B-29 being an overly abused monster bomber in the MA if introduced.  The only scenarios I foresee playing out in the MA are ones where it is running at maximum altitude carpetbombing the hangars of bases where good furballs are happening, like the Lancaster is presently.

How many guys in this game actually have the patience to up heavy bombers and climb them up to 30,000' where they are basically safe, or comparatively safe? Very few and almost all of those are either bomber squadron guys flying their once weekly formation run or the score guys flying one of their 10 a month bomber runs to keep their ranks up.

95% of guys who upp bombers will never climb a B-29 that high. They dont have the patience for it and "most" have no interest in bombing strats anyways. Nobody is going to do it to hangar bang. Hangar bangers climb to 8,000' and come in 2s or 3s. You can only line up so many hangars in a pass anyways and they are only down for 15 mins to begin with. Nobody is going to risk perks to take B-29s hangar banging at 6,000' of ALT. Why would you when you can carpet bomb with disposable Lancs that cost you nothing?

And nobody is going to upp 29s to down CVs either. First off why dive bomb 29s to kill CVs when you can use Lancs, 24s, 17s, and JUs, which cost you nothing and leave the CV just as dead. And certainly nobody is going to climb to 30,000' to kill a CV because not only would that CV be killed by the time you reached 20,000' but so would, probably, the 3 CVs that spawned after the one you upped 29s to kill in the first place.

So the only time you'd really see 29s is when they are bombing strats. And even then only the very few strat runners, or bomber squadrons, would bother upping them. I doubt even the rank guys would use 29s cause they could use other bombers just as easily and would be risking less. Fly a B-29 under 20k and it will be killable just like any other bomber. If perked at 100 a plane, or 150, even guys with a lot of bomber perks will only take so many hits with them.

This entire fantasy that the "sky would be red with 29s" is just that, "fantasy".

[fullmetalbullet]

Your right, why risk it, ill tell you why! less numbers to take out an airfield why send 20 bombers to do the job of 5 to 10? but i still think it should be put to a vote and i say yes!

[Chalenge]

Chalenge,

B-29s were outrunning Japanese fighters while UNDER full combat loads. This points to an airspeed exceeding a mere 300mph. Keep in mind as well that these B-29s were carrying not only 20,000lbs of bombs but a loaded down with gas. In the arenas it's rare to see the large bombers flying with more than 50% fuel, so the B-29 is going to be flying lighter than it would have historically, anyway.

And it's not all about running OUT of E, either. Setting up an attack run is made more difficult because you'll need to allow yourself more room and greater lead when making a pass to avoid missing the formation and ending up in the tail arc.

Saxman read lyrics post again. He is describing how I take down bombers and I dont care if its doing 350 it will get shot down. I have even posted video on how to do it through many discussions on attacking bombers. Sorry you missed it was good times. 

[Saxman]

Maybe a B-29 would be a waste against hangars, but there ARE other targets beside the strats. Her bombload would be ideal for taking down towns.

Also, the B-29's speed would NOT just come into effect at 30,000ft. The B-29 is fast at ANY altitude, and while bombers above 20,000ft are rare in the Mains I would still say 15,000ft is the AVERAGE. I see more bomber formations operating in that altitude range than I do under 8000ft. Bomber pilots are only going to climb as high as they need to in order to avoid interception, and when the majority of fights occur under 8k that naturally pushes the formations higher.

[Saxman]

Chalenge,

I know how to take down bombers, and the formation speed DOES make a difference.

[Iron_Cross]

95% of guys who up bombers will never climb a B-29 that high. They don't have the patience for it and "most" have no interest in bombing strats anyways. Nobody is going to do it to hangar bang. Hangar bangers climb to 8,000' and come in 2s or 3s. You can only line up so many hangars in a pass anyways and they are only down for 15 mins to begin with. Nobody is going to risk perks to take B-29s hangar banging at 6,000' of ALT. Why would you when you can carpet bomb with disposable Lancs that cost you nothing?

And nobody is going to upp 29s to down CVs either. First off why dive bomb 29s to kill CVs when you can use Lancs, 24s, 17s, and JUs, which cost you nothing and leave the CV just as dead. And certainly nobody is going to climb to 30,000' to kill a CV because not only would that CV be killed by the time you reached 20,000' but so would, probably, the 3 CVs that spawned after the one you upped 29s to kill in the first place.

So the only time you'd really see 29s is when they are bombing strats. And even then only the very few strat runners, or bomber squadrons, would bother upping them. I doubt even the rank guys would use 29s cause they could use other bombers just as easily and would be risking less. Fly a B-29 under 20k and it will be killable just like any other bomber. If perked at 100 a plane, or 150, even guys with a lot of bomber perks will only take so many hits with them.

So by that rationale then, the B-29 would be a useless addition to AHII, used about as much as the Arado 234 is presently.  It would be relegated to hangar queen status simply because there are other bombers as capable, and don't cost any perks to use.  If we take that to the extreme, the only people wanting it is so they can look pretty flying it in offline mode so they won't waste precious perkies, or just because it was used in WWII and should be added like the L-4 Grasshopper.  Sure it would be seen in use.  I occasionally see the Arado being used, usually by n00bs who are going, "Wow I can use all my perkies for this bomber now." or more rarely by people wanting to find the CV that the other side is hiding.

[Chalenge]

Chalenge,

I know how to take down bombers, and the formation speed DOES make a difference.

No it doesnt except in the case of the 234 which at times I have trouble killing all three with a P51. Any other bomber in AHII is easily defeated IF you do it right. From what you have said I dont think you do it right at all.

[Chalenge]

So by that rationale then, the B-29 would be a useless addition to AHII, used about as much as the Arado 234 is presently.  It would be relegated to hangar queen status simply because there are other bombers as capable, and don't cost anything to use.  If we take that to the extreme, the only people wanting it is so they can look pretty flying it in offline mode so they won't waste precious perkies, or just because it was used in WWII and should be added like the L-4 Grasshopper.

If you limit your thinking to solo bomber pilots perhaps so but there are large groups of pilots that would disagree.

[Iron_Cross]

If you limit your thinking to solo bomber pilots perhaps so but there are large groups of pilots that would disagree.

So were talking about squad missions, and how they are done presently now?  So you want to give a bigger hammer to squadrons for taking even more bases?  That is all I can infer by that statement.  You're not helping your case by inferring the only people going to deploy it are large, base take, mission hoards.  Yes squad missions are fun, for the squad.  I have been in on the other side of those missions too, and I usually move somewhere else, because the fun just keeps on leaving, until they run out of steam.