Author Topic: So how many B-25 variants are we going to have? (Read 2474 times)

Guppy35 · « **Reply #30 on:** July 30, 2007, 02:06:01 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DaddyAck
Oh roger, I realize that these were just works in progress teaser type things. I just will have to wait and see how it all works out as to which versions we actually get. (and if they do give teh para-frags with the H)

Parafrags went to work with the C/D Strafers and A20s of the 5th. They never really took to the B25H as pilots didn't like having no co-pilot for low level work and the cannon wasn't effective in that role.

They often replaced the cannon with 2 50s in the gun tunnel.

McFarland · « **Reply #31 on:** July 30, 2007, 07:04:16 AM »

So, basically, after all this debate, we're sure of one thing: We're getting the B-25.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #32 on:** July 30, 2007, 07:58:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by McFarland
So, basically, after all this debate, we're sure of one thing: We're getting the B-25.

I was just about to type the same thing.

tedrbr · « **Reply #33 on:** July 30, 2007, 12:44:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Saxman
I'd say the reasoning would be one for MW, while the other would be more viable in LW (C/D/G would get eaten alive by the late-war uber rides, but the J would at least stand a fighting chance with the beefed up defensive armament.

I've bee admonished many times in these forums since the voting started by others that it's not about the LW or being competitive in the LW. It is about adding a bomber to "fill a hole" in the already large American plane set with a plane that can be used, by the Allies, in any Theater of Operation for SEA. You soooo silly. LW indeed.

Quote

Besides, how much modification to the model was REALLY needed to turn the glass-nosed C/D into a strafer anyway?

Very little, plus there was the Vote for Toad's Dad contingent in the forums, as he flew a Strafer, so it's addition is very easy to see being done. Remove flexible forward .50, add a few fixed forward .50s'. paint the nose to disable use of the Norden possibly? The 5th AF strafer and early models of the G were all built on the C/D airframe, so FM and damage model are about the same. Biggest change is blunt nose on the G.

The J would require a bit more work. Tailgun, moving the top turret, removal of dorsal, addition of side gunner positions, changing single cheek mount pods to dual cheek mount pods. Not sure if there were any engine upgrades, but the above would require more changes to the graphics, FM, and damage model from the baseline C/D used for all the others.

So, is it more realistic that after three months since the vote that AHII is getting a C/D along with a Strafer and a G option, or that we are getting those 3 PLUS a J?

Saxman · « **Reply #34 on:** July 30, 2007, 03:45:40 PM »

Well, you ASKED what other reason there is to add the B-25J since we're already getting a C/D strafer, so I gave one.

DaddyAck · « **Reply #35 on:** July 31, 2007, 11:22:22 AM »

While Im glad to see the B25 win, I thought it would be in its later configurations. Look at the B-24,26,17s they are all in their late war configurations. Oh well, it seems that from the screenies unless changed to add the retractable belly turret, this EWA/MWA plane is going to get creamed in the LWA and only have the dorsal turret to defend with, not to mention how funny it will be to watch people actually try and strafe TT with the HE rounds. I can forsee the LTAR's scores shooting WAY up.

Stang · « **Reply #36 on:** July 31, 2007, 11:54:29 AM »

I'm so sick of late war uber rides. We need as many early/mid war planes to fill the huge gaps in the set. Kudos to HTC for attempting to fill them.

Karnak · « **Reply #37 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:07:38 PM »

DaddyAck,

The fact that those are in their late war configs is likely the reason the B-25 is in the early war configs. Want to fly a late war American medium bomber? Great, grab a B-26.

hooper69 · « **Reply #38 on:** July 31, 2007, 08:32:53 PM »

well.............

when do we get it?

Wes14 · « **Reply #39 on:** July 31, 2007, 08:35:14 PM »

2 weeks

VansCrew1 · « **Reply #40 on:** August 01, 2007, 12:13:00 PM »

it said some where that the B25H could carry 8 rockets.

devild0g · « **Reply #41 on:** August 03, 2007, 08:48:57 AM »

So with the tank gun this is probably the A-10 warthog/bomber of world war II as was the p-47/fighter

tedrbr · « **Reply #42 on:** August 03, 2007, 10:01:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by devild0g
So with the tank gun this is probably the A-10 warthog/bomber of world war II as was the p-47/fighter

Not really. A-10 is a ground attack and anti-tank platform with a long loiter time and heavy armored to survive low over a battlefield. That B-25G's 75mm fired HE rounds that were used to sink shipping: sampans, fishing boats, barges. Occasionally up against a lone patrolling destroyer. Simple bridges or structures would also be good targets for it.

The IL2 and Henschel Hs 129 (limited numbers, 800-900, so little effect on war) have more in common to the A-10 Thunderbolt II than the B-25G/H. Closest American analogy to the A-10 for the 1940's would be the A-1 Skyraider, but it did not get deployed until 1946, and no big gun mounted. The A-26B Invader or the B-25J probably come close as well to the A-10's ability to haul lot's of ord, have a long loiter time over target, and have lot's of rounds to fire in strafer role..... but they were not anti-tank guns either.

Saxman · « **Reply #43 on:** August 03, 2007, 03:21:22 PM »

Check the home page. Looks like the count is now up to possibly three models plus 1 alternate gun package:

B-25C/D in bomber and strafer packages
B-25G (unless they've decided to forgo the G and just use the H)
B-25H

With a B-25H in the stable, a 25J bomber and strafer is much more likely.

ariansworld · « **Reply #44 on:** August 03, 2007, 03:59:41 PM »

Drop one of those 75mm HE shells on top of the tanks turret and see what happens.