Author Topic: ANY early war bomber  (Read 848 times)

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2008, 01:02:46 PM »
Ok, well can you think of any bombers that you would like to see added next that would be perkable?

Mosquito B.35 please.
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline 321BAR

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6140
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #16 on: October 09, 2008, 03:04:58 PM »
yet another early war bomber thread, and...I TOTALLY AGREEEEEE  :rofl
I am in need of a new epic quote
Happy Jack's Go Buggy

Offline Yossarian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2516
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #17 on: October 09, 2008, 03:13:04 PM »
Mosquito B.35 please.

That's hardly early-war.  In addition, as far as I can see, the main argument for early-war bombers to be added before a late-war perked bomber (such as the A-26 Invader, please see my thread here: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,247406.msg3034109.html#msg3034109), is that they would help in scenarios.  However, I don't see how the Mosquito B.35 could be of significant help in any scenario (and I haven't been able to find any information about its capabilities, so I can't really make any comparison between it and any other plane).
Afk for a year or so.  The name of a gun turret in game.  Falanx, huh? :banana:
Apparently I'm in the 20th FG 'Loco Busters', or so the legend goes.
O o
/Ż________________________
| IMMA FIRIN' MAH 75MM!!!
\_ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #18 on: October 09, 2008, 03:27:07 PM »
I think the B-25C is the fastest of the Mitchels and still able to outrun 109E-4s. It even has WEP. It soaks up gobs of cannon rounds with no damage. Had this come up in Aleutians campain a while back in FSO. A6M2s had a hard time closing with the B-25Cs (formations disabled) and I even managed to unload my entire cannon compliment into a single B-25B with limited damage. I then unloaded well over 1000 7mm rounds on an un-moving target (he was fixated on my carrier below!) from 600 to 400 yards out and never did any damage. They were all in the same spot, in the wing root and engine of the left wing, and never brought it down.

B-25Cs are lovely planes, don't get me wrong. They just don't belong as-is in early war scenarios. They're modeled out of steel.

I'd love to see a Blenheim. Old, slow, weak, sure. But they saw use and would be a good light bomber for early early war scenarios. (his, of course, in addition to the Better, the Heinkel, and others.)

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #19 on: October 09, 2008, 03:28:50 PM »
That's hardly early-war.  In addition, as far as I can see, the main argument for early-war bombers to be added before a late-war perked bomber (such as the A-26 Invader, please see my thread here: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,247406.msg3034109.html#msg3034109), is that they would help in scenarios.  However, I don't see how the Mosquito B.35 could be of significant help in any scenario (and I haven't been able to find any information about its capabilities, so I can't really make any comparison between it and any other plane).

I never said it was early war or good for scenarios.  

Answering your question - It is however, a bomber which would require a perk, that is not American, that i would like to see in game.

The He-177 is another, as is the Do-217, as is the Tu-2.  All of these would require a small perk, IMO.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2008, 03:31:18 PM by Furball »
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #20 on: October 09, 2008, 03:30:30 PM »
B-25Cs are lovely planes, don't get me wrong. They just don't belong as-is in early war scenarios. They're modeled out of steel.

Ahh so that explains it.

I hate that about the B-26, seems ridiculously hard to kill.
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #21 on: October 10, 2008, 12:09:38 AM »
I'd love to see a Blenheim. Old, slow, weak, sure. But they saw use and would be a good light bomber for early early war scenarios. (his, of course, in addition to the Better, the Heinkel, and others.)
People keep mentioning the Blenheim, but I don't think they really know what they are asking for.  It would be useless and incapable of doing anything useful.

A far, far better option would be the Wellington B.Mk III.  It carries a useful warload, unlike the Blenheim, is even slower so it can be caught but is tougher and has better guns giving it a bit to fight back with.


The Blenheim is not the equivalent of the He111 at all.  It is like asking for the Ju86.  The Wellington would be a much more balanced addition.  Slower than the He111, tougher, about the same payload.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2008, 09:05:44 AM »
Problem with the Wellington i can see, would be that it should be able to take a stupid amount of punishment basing it on the B-25 and 26 being so hard to kill.

Rounds would pass right through it because of the fabric, those that did damage did little because of that geodetic structure.  I know a guy that flew in Wellingtons, it was immensely popular with the crews, much more so than the Lancaster.
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: ANY early war bomber
« Reply #23 on: October 10, 2008, 09:55:29 AM »
The Blenheim's payload of four 250lb bombs pretty much means that even a formation would have limited impact on a strat target and basically no effect on a base.  It is no faster than the He111 and has paltry defensive guns in comparison.

Adding those two for and calling it balanced would be like adding an He111 and B-24-J and calling it balanced.


You are correct that the Wellington was extremely tough, it was also quite slow allowing even the Bf109E, Bf110C-4 and A6M2 to easily overtake it, even if it is at full throttle.  This makes it possible for them to set up and make proper attacks rather than spraying ammo at 500 yards.  Aiming for the engines or cockpit would still work as well.

Gunwise it is fairly well covered on the horizontal with .303s, four in the tail, two in the nose and one in each beam, but it does not have a top turret or a belly gun of any kind.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-