Author Topic: Slower bombers! (Read 1532 times)

Krusty · « **on:** May 14, 2007, 05:12:49 PM »

We need a Beaufort. Or a Betty. Something we can stick in a 1942 scenario and NOT have to dumb things down because the bomber is too advanced for the fighters of that era!!!

We need some basic early-war twin-engined bomber with medium-to-light payload that we can use to substitute, if need be, for other early bombers.

Suggestions include:

G4M Betty
Bristol Beaufort
Bristol Blenheim (good choice IMO)
Heinkel He111H-6
Handley Page Hampden

Note I've not included the Wellington because it has a "heavy" payload. I'm thinking specifically of the VERY large hole in the light/medium early war bomber planeset. I've not included the SM.79 because it is a tri-motor, and while it has the same relative specs as these it breaks the illusion and could not be substituted for much else.

We have too many early war setups that need some sort of twin bomber but we cannot use anything in-game.

Even the up-coming B-25 will be to fast for most early-war setups. It's one step closer, but probably won't be useful until after 1943.

In almost every scenario/setup/FSO/AvA we can't use the Boston III because of its speed. We're using the Ju88 right now in FSO to sub for a Japanese bomber! How's that for a stretch?! We can't use the Ki67 because of its speed, climb, and defensive firepower. It is a late war bomber and it shows. The A20G is too powerful for any setup before 1943. The Ju88 itself carries a very heavy payload (6000lbs) and while it has light defenses it is quite durable and flies very fast. It isn't very representative of the bulk of early-war twin bombers. It makes things difficult when you substitute it for another nation's bomber.

Any of the planes listed in this thread could be used to sub for countries in the SEA, or early war over the channel or in North Africa. They would have a lot of "substitutability" and would plug a very big hole in a large number of setups.

Disclaimer: I hereby admit any of those planes would almost entirely be a hangar queen, but it is VERY much needed for all the events we run here in AH! We just can't plug this hole with any of the planes we've already got!

Krusty · « **Reply #1 on:** May 14, 2007, 05:29:57 PM »

Oh, and just to back up the need for this, things that could really use a new early 1940s bomber include:

SEA Japanese bombers (including Flying Tigers setups in China)
Channel bombers over Europe
Battle of Britain (can be subbed for either side!! also give variety to LW)
Soviet front battles like Karelia and early Eastern Front vs LW
North Africa
Italy (can sub for SM.79) and MTO areas of engagement
France (can sub for early french bomber, maybe in BOF setup?)

And probably many more I can't think of right now.

zorstorer · « **Reply #2 on:** May 14, 2007, 07:03:59 PM »

2nd this!!!!

It was a pain trying to catch your Ju88s during the last BoB.

Saxman · « **Reply #3 on:** May 14, 2007, 07:40:03 PM »

It'd help if HTC tightened the leash on Buff formations to prevent guys from driving balls to the wall all the way to target. Say, exceed a given airspeed that's so high above cruise and drones go POP.

tedrbr · « **Reply #4 on:** May 14, 2007, 11:45:28 PM »

Between use of popular vote and resources dedicated to ToD, I don't see any other early war bombers being added in the foreseeable future.

Stoney74 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 14, 2007, 11:54:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Saxman
It'd help if HTC tightened the leash on Buff formations to prevent guys from driving balls to the wall all the way to target. Say, exceed a given airspeed that's so high above cruise and drones go POP.

I'd respond to this but I'd start a crescendo of hijacking...So, I agree with Krusty that an early bomber would be welcome.

Saxman · « **Reply #6 on:** May 15, 2007, 12:29:33 AM »

Hey, it has advantages for the buff drivers, too. Gives more control over grouping (I rarely exceed cruise speed when I decide to level bomb).

Ghosth · « **Reply #7 on:** May 15, 2007, 07:32:28 AM »

Well said Krusty!

Blooz · « **Reply #8 on:** May 15, 2007, 07:42:28 AM »

You guys had your chance last month for a slow early war bomber and you voted for the B-25.

Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.

Krusty · « **Reply #9 on:** May 15, 2007, 08:41:13 AM »

Blooz, I'm not talking about a vote. IMO the vote is a bad idea. You start with 12 choices, and by the time you're down to the final 2 you're forced to vote for something you may never have wanted to vote for in the first place (and let's be honest, NOBODY is going to abstain when it comes to voting on a new plane). It comes down to the lesser of evils, so to speak.

I don't mean a vote, I mean HTC decides to model one of these, and does NOT put it up to a public vote. One of the planes listed above is very much needed, but nobody would ever vote for it (why vote for something slower, more obsolete, when the A-26 is on the table?!?)

P.S. The B-25 is a mid war plane. The C model was one of the fastest B-25 variants, also. It's not slow, nor can it sub for anything in the 1940/1941/1942 years. It's pretty much a 1943/later plane. And yes I very much would like to have the B-25, it just won't help at all in the above situations.

VooWho · « **Reply #10 on:** May 15, 2007, 04:55:44 PM »

I agree with Krusty. I want more EW bombers. I would love and die for a He-111. That glass nose is just so sexy.....(drool) The He-111 IMO would be the best choice. It could be used for BoF, BoB, Russian fronts, NA, Mediterranean Sea, even China. The Chinese ordered I think 6 He-111s but I'm not sure. It could sub as the SM.76 and maybe the Betty bomber.

Krusty · « **Reply #11 on:** May 15, 2007, 05:22:21 PM »

Ew! Gross! Re-engined post-war restoration

(those engines look gawd-awful)

Tilt · « **Reply #12 on:** May 15, 2007, 05:50:17 PM »

Notice the terrain under the He111 pic..................

re early war bomber............. didn't we have a vote on some stuff?

tedrbr · « **Reply #13 on:** May 15, 2007, 07:45:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
One of the planes listed above is very much needed, but nobody would ever vote for it (why vote for something slower, more obsolete, when the A-26 is on the table?!?)

* Doolittle Raid
* Ben Afleck
* Ignorance

Carry on.

Karnak · « **Reply #14 on:** May 16, 2007, 03:00:43 AM »

Krusty,

The Wellington doesn't carry anymore than the He111. Its bomb load was about 4,500lbs. Max speed was about 240mph.