the B24 Liberator : wise choice for upcoming bomber

[Karnak]

The only new big US bomber that I am interested in seeing in AH is the B-29A.  That would be a great thing to spend bomber perk points on.

An early B-17 would be a good thing as well.

The bombers that I am interested in seeing:

B-29A Superfortress
B6N2 Tenzan "Jill"
B7A2 Ryusei "Grace"
H8K2 "Emily"
He177A-5 Greif
Ju188A-1
Ki-67
Mosquito B.XVI
SBD Dauntless
S.M.79-II
Tu-2S

[Wutz]

J_A_B have you read abt the shortage of German Heavy Bombers, or are u just making it upp! HELLO.... Germany had a large bomber force. Hitler dident even like figthers, he was a bomber maniac. (like turning the 262 into a bomber... Yuukkk Idiot) He-177-Greif and Ju-188 both exceded 1000 versn built.

He-177= 1094 Built
Ju-188= 1036 Built
Do-217= 1750 Built

Arado Ar 234 Blitz 274 built, no there is a perk plane.

And here is the spec on the russian Tu-2 (2527 Built) this could be a nice ruski bomber.

Type: Tu-2S
Function: bomber
Year: 1943 Crew: 4 Engines: 2 * 1850hp Shvetsov ASh-82FN
Wing Span: 18.86m Length: 13.80m Height: 4.55m Wing Area: 48.80m2
Empty Weight: 7474kg Max.Weight: 11360kg
Speed: 550km/h Ceiling: 10970m Range: 2500km
Armament: 2*g20mm 3*mg12.7mm b1500kg

[Mitsu]

B-24 is great addition, Cit!

I wanna play Pacific War!

Mitsu

 

[jpeg]

We want b24.

I've been saying this in the arena for  two months now :-)

But more importantly right now we need ju52 as armed troop transport

[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: jpeg ]

[Karnak]

jpeg,

A Russian or Japanese C-47 would be much better than a Ju52 if you want an armed transport (I'm not even going to talk about an H8K4).

The Ju52 is more than 50mph slower than the C-47.

Personally I would never sacrifice 50mph for a single 7.92mm machinegun and if I were attacking a single 7.92mm machine gun isn't going to make a difference.

The Russian and Japanese versions of the C-47 are better armed than the Ju52 and slightly faster than the C-47.

[J_A_B]

"He-177= 1094 Built"
"Ju-188= 1036 Built"
"Do-217= 1750 Built"


Versus what, around 20,000 B-24's??

Which do you think had a larger impact on the war?

That said, there is possibly a use for some of these aircraft in AH.   From what I know about the He-177, it was mostly used on the Eastern Front, and some of them carried a large cannon like a lot of B-25's did.  That might be nice to have and would be unique to AH.  Perhaps a future perk bomber?

Ju-188?   Little more than a faster Ju-88, and would see little use in either the arena OR in scenarios.  

From what I know of the Do-217, it would be somewhere between the JU-88 and He-177 in ability.  Once again--not a bad plane, but not among those that is glaringly missing from the plane set.

My own suggestion is fill in the largest holes in the plane set first, then come back for the lesser-produced models.

J_A_B

[Raubvogel]

Largest holes? What hole is there that a B-24 fills? There is already a US heavy bomber. There is no hole. I'm not sure what your argument is, but I'm not buying it. You need to put those numbers you're slinging around into context before they mean anything. He177s and Ju188s might not have been produced in the numbers that US aircraft were, but that doesn't make them any less significant. They still made up a large percentage of the total Luftwaffe bomber force. There's nothing that the B-24 can do that the B-17 doesn't already do.

[shaunmcl]

B24 wouldnt last very long if a 262 started on it. what AH  needs is somthing bigger like a B29(Enola Gay plane) superfortress now that is a bomber id like to c that in the next update  and nukes to that would go well. also we should have the bouncing bomb in the lancaster   null

[shaunmcl]

Also we need some Stuka Dive bombers to do some cowardly vulching on poor people on runway but u need some dams to bounce bouncing bombs off    

[Daff]

"as is evidenced by warbirds the b24 liberator"

The popularity of the B24 in Warbirds probably had more to do with it's silly climbrate than anything else!.
(Although there was already a B24 squad, subbing with B17s before the B24 arrived in WB).

Daff

[fdiron]

B29 would be good plane to have.  B29A model had remote controll turrets (gee..I wonder what it would be like to have remote control turret)  B29b only had a tail gun.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by J_A_B:
Ju-188? Little more than a faster Ju-88, and would see little use in either the arena OR in scenarios.

Have you actually looked at the stats on the Ju188A-1?

Little more than a faster Ju88?   Would see little use?  

The Ju188 would replace the B-26B as the primary strike bomber and would give the B-17 a good run for it as the bomber to take to contested airspace.  The Ju188 ain't armed with popguns.  It has a 20mm cannon in a dorsal turret, a 20mm in the nose, a 13mm machine gun in the rear dorsal position and one in the ventral gondola's rear. It can carry 3,000kg (6,614lbs) of bombs internally and make 325mph.  The Ju188 was better than the Do217, B-25, B-26, Wellington, S.M.79, Ki67, P1Y1 and Tu-2S.

Production numbers shouldn't be used as a criteria anymore than amount of "combat" that an aircraft saw should be used.

The fact is that while we produced 18,000 B-24s and they did extemely good service for the Allies, the USAAF in particular, it won't bring much new to the table in AH.

It is more important, IMHO, to fill hole in the AH gameplay than to fill in holes that are defined as holes because of the total number of airframes of a given aircraft produced that were produced historically.

If production numbers were all that were to be used we'd have a pretty borring planeset.

[Citabria]

you guys are missing the point.


its about numbers of buffs in the main arena. HTC has made Aces High a main arena sim and left scenarios and HA's to wither on the vine.

the b24 will be a buff that can survive in the main arena. its that simple. and because of this people will fly it.

to people who say it is the same as the b17?
you are the same people who would say the p47 is the same as the p51 and thus not a worthy addition.

   

[ 11-03-2001: Message edited by: Citabria ]

[Urchin]

I'd love to see the B24.  It was THE bomber in the Pacific, and in the Med as well.  As far as the Germans getting a buff.. nah, not interested to be honest.  It would be adding a plane that really has no historical significance, just so it can get into the MA to replace something that does.  We already have enough historically insignificant fighters that are quite prominent, why add a bomber that is as well.

You want multi-engine German planes?  Give us bomber DESTROYERS.  Ju-88C was a bomber destroyer, He-219, Me 410- etc.  

The only historically significant 'bomber' the Germans had was the Stuka, and we only need that for Scenarios.

[Citabria]

urchin said it.

the b24 was the us pacific heavy bomber. b17s were removed from the pacific early on.