Author Topic: B-25 (Read 3784 times)

Krusty · « **Reply #45 on:** August 16, 2006, 05:49:52 PM »

B25H's were dropped pretty fast for the Js. Nobody liked the 75mm gun. Sure over 1000 were built, but most were delegated to attacking undefended shipping barges. Most crews didn't want that gun.

EDIT: I'm all for the glass-nosed C, the glass nosed J and the solid nosed J (imagine the armament options, with cheeks, without cheeks, etc)

Dichotomy · « **Reply #46 on:** August 16, 2006, 05:55:43 PM »

heyyyy Krustys back

Krusty · « **Reply #47 on:** August 16, 2006, 06:06:00 PM »

Yes, back from a week in Orlando

Guppy35 · « **Reply #48 on:** August 16, 2006, 07:23:44 PM »

Very late to the party but throwing in my 2 cents. If it was up to me and the choices were limited I'd ask for a B25C/D glass nose version with the top turret in the rear, no tail guns etc.

Then I'd ask that there be a 'strafer' option like the one Toad's father would have flown, which would have been a C/D with the 4 guns in the nose and 4 in two gun packages on each side of the nose ala 5th AF style.

Everyone drools about the H, but in the 5th AF which used the 25 extensively they took the cannon out of the gun tunnel and replaced it with twin 50s as it was more effective.

The 'strafer' version with the 50s were a much more potent aircraft which I imagine is why they went back to the all 50s nose with the later solid nose J.

And Toad, here's a Wolf painted B25C of the 71st BS, 38th BG 5th AF.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #49 on:** August 16, 2006, 07:33:29 PM »

Almost forgot, 80th Headhunter 38s could escort em

Ed Cragg and Cy Homer of the 80th covering a 345th B25 on the Rabaul run

Toad · « **Reply #50 on:** August 16, 2006, 07:58:28 PM »

Thanks for the pic!

I believe that many if not all of the C/D models in the SWPAC had a two .50 mg tail gun field modification.

Check this picture of Tin Liz, ( http://screeningroom.com/pacificwar.html ) same squadron as my father's Quitch. Tin Liz clearly shows a tail gun position; that matches my father's memory of tail guns on Quitch. Additionally, color plates of C/D aircraft in Hickey's Warpath Across the Pacific also show tail guns.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #51 on:** August 16, 2006, 10:44:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Thanks for the pic!

I believe that many if not all of the C/D models in the SWPAC had a two .50 mg tail gun field modification.

Check this picture of Tin Liz, ( http://screeningroom.com/pacificwar.html ) same squadron as my father's Quitch. Tin Liz clearly shows a tail gun position; that matches my father's memory of tail guns on Quitch. Additionally, color plates of C/D aircraft in Hickey's Warpath Across the Pacific also show tail guns.

Agreed on the tail mods. I wasn't real clear. I'd like a stock C/D model as the RAF had em, and the MTO groups among others without the tail guns.

The strafer C/D would have the 5th AF mods which made it so potent of a ground attack bird. The USN/Marine birds had the tail guns too I think, although I believe they put a single 50 in.

But for scenarios and such you'd need a stock C/D too. Obviously the strafer would get much more MA use.

I just don't want to see a solid nose J or cannon H before I'd see those that did most of the dirty work like those modified strafers

Krusty · « **Reply #52 on:** August 17, 2006, 10:13:03 AM »

I'm not a big fan of the field-modified C/D simply because it only has 4 forward 50cals. The Havoc has 6 of them and flies a lot lighter, it will do the job nicely.

I'd like the non-modified versions. Glass nose and factory-made hard nose.

toon · « **Reply #53 on:** August 17, 2006, 11:50:33 AM »

i got all excited seeing the wolfhead of my dads squadron. called him and told him the name of the plane but he couldnt remember it. he was on "hotnuts". im going to see if my wife knows how to post pics. on here as im a computer tard. if she can i'll be loading this post up soon. and TOAD does your dad remember maj.tannanbaum? he was operations officer of the group until the co drowned. his aircraft was the "sunsetters son". thanks for the picture guppy. ~~brick p.s. im taking my dad to the reunion in mesa...thanks for that info.~~

mussie · « **Reply #54 on:** August 17, 2006, 12:04:48 PM »

Cobra

if you want send me a copy of the pic and I will post it for you

gsx1100e@gmail.com

Major Biggles · « **Reply #55 on:** August 17, 2006, 12:15:53 PM »

to be honest, i'd rather have the A26, as an actual attack variant, seeing as we already have the a20 and the b26, both pretty similar to the b25.

a26 would get my vote instead of the b25

Krusty · « **Reply #56 on:** August 17, 2006, 12:23:51 PM »

A26 didn't serve in a FRACTION of the capacity that the B25 did. Also saying the A20 is similar is very misleading.

Major Biggles · « **Reply #57 on:** August 17, 2006, 12:40:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
A26 didn't serve in a FRACTION of the capacity that the B25 did. Also saying the A20 is similar is very misleading.

truesay, but i still want one!

Krusty · « **Reply #58 on:** August 17, 2006, 12:48:08 PM »

Toad · « **Reply #59 on:** August 17, 2006, 07:00:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
I'm not a big fan of the field-modified C/D simply because it only has 4 forward 50cals. The Havoc has 6 of them and flies a lot lighter, it will do the job nicely.

The Townsville strafers actually had 8 forward firing .50's.

Four in the nose and two on each side of the cockpit in blisters.

This is a picture of an early Townsville strafer, B-25C Mitchell, #41-12946, "Margaret" in a hangar at Garbutt airfield, Base Depot Number 4.