Author Topic: B-25 sub fight?  (Read 768 times)

Offline 68Hawk

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1365
      • 68th Lightning Lancers
B-25 sub fight?
« on: April 07, 2007, 07:20:12 AM »
Ok, if the B25 wins, which variant are we going to get?

We could have a whole other voting chain just to decide which gun package we want.  Some of them are almost different planes from the others.

If we're going to get the airframe made, can we get a couple of gun packages put in?

Maybe one with the glass nose for Doolittle raid and early war scenarios and another with the 75mm for some fun ground attack.

????
68th Lightning Lancers
Fear the reaper no more fear the Lancers!
http://www.68thlightninglancers.net

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #1 on: April 07, 2007, 07:46:29 AM »
Just what is it with this "Doolittle raid" obsession?

Offline croduh

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #2 on: April 07, 2007, 08:04:53 AM »
I curse the day that someone got the idea to make Pearl Harbor.

Offline frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2007, 10:46:39 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by duh
I curse the day that someone got the idea to make Pearl Harbor.


Better not let Raptor hear that :D

IMO the Doolittle raid-variant of the B-25 should not be modelled, or even considered.

Why?

The Doolittle raid is just what is says: 'a raid', a single raid, a historically important one, but nonetheless it was just one time.
Furthermore, the B-25 was completely stripped from armament and armour, quite useless in an actual fight.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #4 on: April 07, 2007, 10:49:18 AM »
If the B-25 wins.... Glass and solid nose versions of the most common version would be appropriate... The B-25J.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #5 on: April 07, 2007, 11:43:33 AM »
My wish for the 25 variants would be a glass nosed C/D version.  If nothing else it covers fine for the Doolittle fanatics.  It also covers the RAF version and the first Soviet lend lease versions, along with the MTO USAAF birds and early PTO and Aleutian B25s.

Then I'd want a B25C/D strafer since that was in action from 42 until 44.  That and we then can get "Quitch" for Toad's Dad.

Finally I'd want a solid nosed J version for all those late war complainers that it's going to be a dog.

I tend to think that they forget the 25 was a ship killer and a low level one at that.  Folks would have to quit whining about task forces getting attacked by low level buffs when it comes to 25s and I'd think a solid nosed J with 8 in the nose 4 on the fuselage and 2 in the top turret, all pointed forward, could kill a lot of ack :)
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Movie

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #6 on: April 07, 2007, 11:53:33 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Kweassa
Just what is it with this "Doolittle raid" obsession?


its fun to launch b25s off carrier

Offline tedrbr

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1813
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #7 on: April 07, 2007, 12:43:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by duh
I curse the day that someone got the idea to make Pearl Harbor.


Oh common.  Some of the voters watched "Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo" too.

You'll all get a B-25 G, H, or J with a 75mm in the nose and 6,000 lbs bomb load just like Wiki sez it could carry, that can launch from a CV and randomly carries a nook.  It will have WEP, and be faster than a Ki-67 in level flight, and will be able to take out GV's on the ground with one shot.   It will be all the rage in the LW arenas.

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #8 on: April 07, 2007, 06:18:56 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Movie
its fun to launch b25s off carrier


And that's the #1 reason so many vote for it...

And the movie didn't even stay true to history...
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #9 on: April 07, 2007, 06:41:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by tedrbr
just like Wiki sez



:rofl :rofl :rofl


P.S. Better be careful, some folks might think you're serious

Offline Movie

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #10 on: April 07, 2007, 06:41:56 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wilbus
And that's the #1 reason so many vote for it...

And the movie didn't even stay true to history...


true the movie had many inaccuracies.
1) In preparation for the attack, Doolittle (Baldwin) is show training the pilots on land in a flat, sparsely wooded valley near mountains somewhere in the American Southwest. The actual training was done at the airfield known today as Columbia Metropolitan Airport in West Columbia, South Carolina. It is a far more verdant and mountainless area in the state's "Piedmont" topography. In fact, it continued to be training site for B-25 crews during the war which would use islands in the nearby Lake Murray for target practice. A crashed B-25 was recovered from the lake in the 1990's, restored and is now on display in the state museum.

2) Several shots of the USS Hornet aircraft carrier depicted it as having an angled flight deck, a technology that was not implemented until after the war. However, in every other respect the ship, portrayed by the USS Lexington, is accurate, and even of the same Lineage, the Essex class. The Japanese carriers are portrayed more correctly by comparison—a few of them did have their bridge/conning tower superstructure on port side rather than the more common starboard configuration.

3) Affleck and Hartnett's characters are shown taking part in the Doolittle bombing raid over Tokyo in which, as fighter pilots, they would not have been allowed to participate.

4) The B-25 Mitchells shown participating in the Raid are "J"-models, when the models used in the actual Raid were "B"-models.

5) Several crewmen on Affleck and Harnett's B-25's are killed in the firefight with the Japanese, including Harnett's character. In fact, no members of the raid were killed in this manner. Three airmen died in the crash landings in China, three were later executed as POWs by their Japanese captors, and one died of starvation in captivity. (Four other POWs were recovered alive near the end of the war).

Offline tedrbr

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1813
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #11 on: April 07, 2007, 06:59:05 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Krusty
:rofl :rofl :rofl

P.S. Better be careful, some folks might think you're serious


I'll admit to my using Wiki as quick and dirty source for forums, but I was called on the carpet in another thread when I used the Wikipedia quote of 6,000 lbs ord carried in a B-25J.  Posted a retraction and correction.  I've not been able to find any other source anywhere near that high.  
I've seen the B-25B listed as 2,000 lbs ord, B-25C/D's listed as 3,000 lbs normally and 4,000 lbs for short ranged missions.  Saw another poster list 5K in another thread for a late model B-25, but I have not seen a source on that either.

At least it will be the best looking, most often skinned buff, at the back of the hangar in LW....next to the Arado.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #12 on: April 07, 2007, 08:20:12 PM »
I thought you were being totally sarcastic in the previous post, and hence I was saying "better be careful, or folks might not see the sarcasm and agree with you!"

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #13 on: April 08, 2007, 12:41:15 AM »
You guys probably get tired of me consistently referencing this website, but it is definitive, IMO.

Bomb configurations are listed here

Again, a great B-25 resource--www.vmb-613.com

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
B-25 sub fight?
« Reply #14 on: April 08, 2007, 05:16:53 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Movie
true the movie had many inaccuracies.
1) In preparation for the attack, Doolittle (Baldwin) is show training the pilots on land in a flat, sparsely wooded valley near mountains somewhere in the American Southwest. The actual training was done at the airfield known today as Columbia Metropolitan Airport in West Columbia, South Carolina. It is a far more verdant and mountainless area in the state's "Piedmont" topography. In fact, it continued to be training site for B-25 crews during the war which would use islands in the nearby Lake Murray for target practice. A crashed B-25 was recovered from the lake in the 1990's, restored and is now on display in the state museum.

2) Several shots of the USS Hornet aircraft carrier depicted it as having an angled flight deck, a technology that was not implemented until after the war. However, in every other respect the ship, portrayed by the USS Lexington, is accurate, and even of the same Lineage, the Essex class. The Japanese carriers are portrayed more correctly by comparison—a few of them did have their bridge/conning tower superstructure on port side rather than the more common starboard configuration.

3) Affleck and Hartnett's characters are shown taking part in the Doolittle bombing raid over Tokyo in which, as fighter pilots, they would not have been allowed to participate.

4) The B-25 Mitchells shown participating in the Raid are "J"-models, when the models used in the actual Raid were "B"-models.

5) Several crewmen on Affleck and Harnett's B-25's are killed in the firefight with the Japanese, including Harnett's character. In fact, no members of the raid were killed in this manner. Three airmen died in the crash landings in China, three were later executed as POWs by their Japanese captors, and one died of starvation in captivity. (Four other POWs were recovered alive near the end of the war).


Add to that the fact that everything was made a little harder and little more heroic (carrier was spotted sooner, making the distance to target longer in the film), the two fighter pilots shooting down more planes then they in R/L during the attack on Pearl Harbor etc etc, the film is full of such BS.

IMO it's only dishonoring towards the vets to do it in such a manner.
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.