Author Topic: Scoring A-20 havoc in fighter mode (Read 3374 times)

Scherf · « **Reply #90 on:** December 29, 2007, 06:09:58 AM »

Thx gents.

waystin2 · « **Reply #91 on:** December 30, 2007, 10:09:55 AM »

After running into Cobia38 last night( ~~Sir), I say yes on the fighter mode. It can be flown that way, quite well. Cobia, what is your equipment setup like to push the A-20 that hard?~~

Krusty · « **Reply #92 on:** December 30, 2007, 01:30:40 PM »

Doesn't mean it IS a fighter. You can fly a B-26 like a fighter too. You can fly a B5n like a fighter too.

Know what? They're not fighters. The WAY it's flown does not dictate its purpose nor should it the scoring method.

waystin2 · « **Reply #93 on:** December 30, 2007, 04:16:12 PM »

Roger that Krusty. I just was amazed at the way he shot me down 4 times in 3 different Spits (8,9,16), and a Nik in short order. All of which I had Alt advantage, not sure about E advantage as those big planes hide it well. I should have had the turn & burn advantage, but it did not turn out that way. If I run into a B-26 that pulls these aerobatics, then my AH world will be rocked again.

Oink

humble · « **Reply #94 on:** December 30, 2007, 08:07:00 PM »

You can not fly a B-26 (or B-25) remotely near an A-20, especially an A-20 flown by someone like cobia or WW.

splitatom · « **Reply #95 on:** December 30, 2007, 08:31:16 PM »

how about we end this post because we all know that htc wont make the a 20 do fighter sorties

Raptor · « **Reply #96 on:** December 30, 2007, 10:10:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Scherf
Remind me again, does A20 = Boston?

BostonIII = A20A

cobia38 · « **Reply #97 on:** December 30, 2007, 10:22:06 PM »

the way i see it is this
if you select ATTACK mode in the hanger on a plane that is fighter/attack
selectable your perk points still go towerds fighter,but your scored as attack.
on planes that have attack/bomber selections and you select attack, your scored as attack but your perk points are BOMBER
here is wher its screwed up in my opinion.
i think that either ther should be a seperat perk cat. for attack.then you can include some perked rides such as A-26,s or other rare attack aircaft.
or.... any air to air kill made by a fixed gun aircraft is scored/perkpoints as fighter.
in compairing a-20 to mossi ther isent much diff between them heck they both have bomb bay doors !!!

Krusty · « **Reply #98 on:** December 31, 2007, 09:17:48 AM »

But, Humble, again it's not about how you CAN fly the plane, it's about how it was DESIGNED to fly.

You can fly a P-47D with 2500lbs of bombs and 10 rockets and use it as a dive bomber if you want. It wasn't a bomber. You can turn fight in a Ju87 (fun, for a brief period of time) but this is NOT a fighter.

The categories are based on the historical role of the craft in question, NOT how they are ultimately used/misused in AH.

P.S. The engines were upgraded, the nose faired over and filled with guns, but in general the airframe SHOULD be identical. Now imagine if the A-20G flew like the Boston III. That seems a lot more realistic than the Boston III flying like the A-20G, IMO. Chances are this is a bugged or inaccurate flight model from the first generation of craft ever modeled in the game, and if (when??) it's ever remodeled, these "features" may go bye-bye like the P-47s super turn fighter status did. Just food for thought.

humble · « **Reply #99 on:** December 31, 2007, 11:08:13 AM »

The A-20G was a significantly reworked version designed.....for better air to air and air to ground capability. It had more power, stronger wings and better control authority. The A-26 took things a step further still. The A-20G wasnt designed as a fighter....but it was designed to have an air to air combat capability. Bombers, even medium bombers have gun positions for defense. While the A-20 does have a top turret the reality is that the planes air to air capability was a major component of its defensive capability. Further it doesnt have a bombsite or bomidear (sp?)....

As cobia said (and I've said) it was an attack plane not a bomber. So given the two catigories of "fighter/attack" or "attack/bomber" the arguement that the a-20 (a plane with no bombsite or true defensive gun pakage) should be a "bomber" vs a "fighter" is suspect.

In the end the A-20 is closer to a fighter then a bomber and its overall performance (in real life) is alot closer to the mossie or 110 then the B-25/B-26.

Krusty · « **Reply #100 on:** December 31, 2007, 11:18:03 AM »

Okay, perhaps my use of "bomber" wasn't the best choice. I agree it's more of an attacker.

The best parallel would be the IL2. It's got a bomber scoring and an attack scoring option. You can still fly it as base defense and get a lot of dogfight kills, but it would not really qualify as a fighter. Sure it can defend itself, in some circumstances, but it was never sent out with the intention of engaging the enemy in the air and/or air superiority.

Side note: Night fighting doesn't count, as most often bombers and attackers were used rather than traditional fighters, because they had 2 engines (freeing up nose space for the radar and guns packages) and more than 1 crew. The Blenheim, the Ju88, the Beaufighter, the Japanese used recon planes with upward firing guns, etc. None of these were fighters, but still could kill bombers at night. So in regards to saying "Boston III was a night fighter" -- doesn't really make it a fighter. I just wanted to reply to that earlier point while I had it fresh in mind.

humble · « **Reply #101 on:** December 31, 2007, 11:59:42 AM »

I'm not arguing that point at all....it was never intended as a "fighter". It isnt however a bomber either...its really a ground attack plane. Basically the WW2 equivelent to the A-6 intruder...

Bronk · « **Reply #102 on:** December 31, 2007, 12:16:13 PM »

Exactly why we need attack only perk/score. When the A26 is introduce the solid nose version is an example of a perk attack ac.
Anything without a lvl bomb sight should be designated as such.

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #103 on:** December 31, 2007, 04:01:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by humble
The A-20G was a significantly reworked version designed.....for better air to air and air to ground capability. It had more power, stronger wings and better control authority. The A-26 took things a step further still. The A-20G wasnt designed as a fighter....but it was designed to have an air to air combat capability. Bombers, even medium bombers have gun positions for defense. While the A-20 does have a top turret the reality is that the planes air to air capability was a major component of its defensive capability. Further it doesnt have a bombsite or bomidear (sp?)....

As cobia said (and I've said) it was an attack plane not a bomber. So given the two catigories of "fighter/attack" or "attack/bomber" the arguement that the a-20 (a plane with no bombsite or true defensive gun pakage) should be a "bomber" vs a "fighter" is suspect.

In the end the A-20 is closer to a fighter then a bomber and its overall performance (in real life) is alot closer to the mossie or 110 then the B-25/B-26.

The bombardier position was eliminated so the weapons package of up to 8 .50 cals (this I didn't know but the A-20G also was designed to carry 4 20mm Hispanos, though I don't know if any used them in combat.). This provided the Havoc with a powerful punch for strafing ground targets. Something the USAAF learned in the Pacific where glass-nosed A-20s had been fitted with field modifications to increase their forward firepower during low-level strafing missions. The added firepower was not installed with air to air combat in mind or even a thought in the design.

The only A-20G variant that was designed with air to air combat in mind, was the P-70s and P-70As.

In the end, the A-20G was closer to a bomber than a fighter, after all that's how it was designed and how it was used in the war. It's over all performance was equal to that of a light/medium bomber, with more in common with planes like the B-25, B-26, Bristol Blenheim, Bristol Beaufighter, Junkers Ju 88, Messerschmitt Me 210, and Petlyakov Pe-2 than any fighter.

ack-ack

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #104 on:** January 02, 2008, 08:07:11 PM »

Did a little more research on the 20mm equipped A-20s. Apparently the cannons were so unreliable with a slow rate of fire that only 250 Havocs were made with the 4x 20mm cannons in the solid nose. Out of those 250, 100 were converted back to the 6x .50 cals in the nose while the remaining 150 cannon equipped Havocs were sent to the Soviets as part of the Land Lease program. No information on whether or not the Soviets retained the cannons on these Havocs or not.

ack-ack