Author Topic: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review  (Read 6542 times)

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23860
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2011, 06:16:02 PM »

So.  Basically the Japanese were fooling themselves when they thought they shot down high-flying B29s.  Got it.

- oldman

Huh?  :headscratch:
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9347
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2011, 06:25:59 PM »
Huh?  :headscratch:

None of the planes you suggested could catch and kill B29s was Japanese.

- oldman

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23860
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #17 on: February 22, 2011, 06:28:27 PM »
None of the planes you suggested could catch and kill B29s was Japanese.

- oldman


Yes. For a good reason. How is the performance of the N1k or Ki-84 at 35k in AH? What cruising speed does a B-29 have at that altitude - in AH? ;)

Because that's what  the question was about
« Last Edit: February 22, 2011, 06:30:11 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #18 on: February 22, 2011, 06:31:56 PM »
So.  Basically the Japanese were fooling themselves when they thought they shot down high-flying B29s.  Got it.

Comparing real life and AH isn't viable for several reasons.

First of all, "high-flying" and "35k" can be two different things.

Lusche's assessment is very accurate.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9347
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #19 on: February 22, 2011, 06:32:21 PM »

Yes. For a good reason. How is the performance of the N1k or Ki-84 at 35k in AH? What cruising speed does a B-29 have at that altitude - in AH? ;)

Because that's what  the question was about

Hey, I'm not beating on you!  I'm sure you're correct.  My point is that Japanese fighters DID shoot down high-flying B29s (before 3/10/45).  Evidently we can't duplicate that in AH.

- oldman

Offline Muzzy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1402
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #20 on: February 22, 2011, 07:03:57 PM »
Well it's not that you *can't*, it's just very very difficult.  Again, if you can catch one it doesn't take much to drop it.  I cut one in half with two quick bursts from a spitsteen.  Against a B-17 I'll empty my clip and be lucky to get maybe one or two. 

The interesting thing is we can simulate (sort of) how the 29 would have fared against German fighters, which were far more capable bomber killers.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2011, 07:05:50 PM by Muzzy »


CO 111 Sqdn Black Arrows

Wng Cdr, No. 2 Tactical Bomber Group, RAF, "Today's Target" Scenario. "You maydie, but you will not be bored!"

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23860
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #21 on: February 22, 2011, 07:06:38 PM »
Hey, I'm not beating on you!  I'm sure you're correct.  My point is that Japanese fighters DID shoot down high-flying B29s (before 3/10/45).  Evidently we can't duplicate that in AH.

- oldman

We can, if our B-29's would fly the same mission profile as the real one back then and the fighters are competently vectored in.

But as pinpoint bombing accuracy at 360 mph @ 35k is no problem in AH....
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #22 on: February 22, 2011, 09:51:26 PM »
Oldman -

We also don't have any of the Japanese fighters that were used to attack the B-29s when they flew high.  I have to admit that I'm a little disappointed by this update.  Only new plane is the B-29, which will end up seeing next to no use.  Not even useful for scenarios, since we don't have the Japanese planeset to go against it. I keep thinking every new update is going to be the "big one" with some Russian or Japanese planes to fill the chasms in the planeset.

I'm still going to sign up though, just like I always do :).  Maybe some day the WW1 planeset could get some attention too, that'd be cool.

Offline Tupac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5056
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #23 on: February 22, 2011, 09:55:33 PM »
How many have you shot down Snailman?
"It was once believed that an infinite number of monkeys, typing on an infinite number of keyboards, would eventually reproduce the works of Shakespeare. However, with the advent of Internet messageboards we now know this is not the case."

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23860
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #24 on: February 22, 2011, 10:01:15 PM »
How many have you shot down Snailman?


:(
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Tupac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5056
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2011, 10:05:35 PM »

:(

It's okay snailman, I only got one and it was with an A2A rocket.

I'm up in a 152 hunting them as we speak
"It was once believed that an infinite number of monkeys, typing on an infinite number of keyboards, would eventually reproduce the works of Shakespeare. However, with the advent of Internet messageboards we now know this is not the case."

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6166
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #26 on: February 23, 2011, 05:30:15 AM »
I have yet to take the B29 up for a run in the MA, I'm not even sure if I will.  I cant think of how I wold use all the ordnance, range, etc.  I knew it would going to climb like g'ma on a ladder when loaded to the max w ords (and regardless of the %50 or %100 fuel).  I will eat my words though, I was betting that the B29 would not be here before summer, I was very wrong.  Job well done to the crew at HTC.   :salute   

I wish HTC would add a small perk price to the Lanc, B24, B17, and B26.
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16330
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #27 on: February 23, 2011, 07:32:35 AM »
Durability: not as great as I'd hoped.  It doesn't take much to rip off a wing.
Is this aero or gun damage?

Snailman - Sorry I never got that topic up.  I kept having one thing after another to do and it's just my luck that this time the new plane was released sooner than usual. 
... Or maybe it's not too late:
There are not many that have the necessary excess power / performance at 30K and above: F4U-4, Spit XiV, P-47M&N, Ta 152, 109K4 (to a lesser extend maybe Spit 9, 38L/M and P51D). At 35K+ things get really very difficult for all of those too (109K drops out first), at that altitudes it's mostly reduced to Ta152 and 47M/N and maybe still the Spit XIV. But with the technicalities of ultra-high combat flying, the 29 holds almost all the cards up there.


You need climbrate to get up there in the first place. You need speed to catch up with a 360mph plane without running out of fuel), and then you still need a lot of power/climbrate to get into favorable attack positions (crawling up low six vs 20mm rear gun no good idea). You need good maneuverability at ultra high altitude (that's just relatively spoken - players that usually just furball down low will find themselves alternating between stall and compression) and you need firepower to bring it down.
Reading this I still immediately think that a plane like the 410 (ie the punchier ones - ideally BK5 or 2xMK103 or at least 6xMG151 (and A2A rockets; did the 410 carry any?)) that can make the most of each single pass is a good solution to the problem the B-29 presents to destroyers: it's so fast and well defended, especially if we compound these with thin air.

How about the chog's high alt performance?   The reach and volume of its guns might make it competitive if it's not too wheezy up there (edit - by AH perfcharts it looks like it's got enough performance left around 30k).  I'll try and put the topic up by this weekend. 

Oldman -

We also don't have any of the Japanese fighters that were used to attack the B-29s when they flew high.  I have to admit that I'm a little disappointed by this update.  Only new plane is the B-29, which will end up seeing next to no use.  Not even useful for scenarios, since we don't have the Japanese planeset to go against it. I keep thinking every new update is going to be the "big one" with some Russian or Japanese planes to fill the chasms in the planeset.

I'm still going to sign up though, just like I always do :).  Maybe some day the WW1 planeset could get some attention too, that'd be cool.
Hey Steve,

Not implying anything but just commenting: the B-29 was always gonna be a dev resource hog, from what HTC said. 
« Last Edit: February 23, 2011, 09:22:15 AM by moot »
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline RufusLeaking

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1056
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #28 on: February 23, 2011, 09:08:54 AM »
We can, if our B-29's would fly the same mission profile as the real one back then and the fighters are competently vectored in.

But as pinpoint bombing accuracy at 360 mph @ 35k is no problem in AH....
In RL history, Curtis Lemay ordered the B-29s to low altitude raids due to poor high altitude accuracy.

In AH, due to perk prices, lack of Tokyo size targets, and B-29 fragility, low alt Superfortresses will not be a common sight.
GameID: RufLeak
Claim Jumpers

Offline Bino

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5937
Re: Muzzy's Preliminary B29 Review
« Reply #29 on: February 23, 2011, 01:16:30 PM »
In RL history, Curtis Lemay ordered the B-29s to low altitude incendiary bombing raids due to poor high altitude high-explosive bomb accuracy, and because Japanese cites of the 1940's were highly flammable.

EDIT: context added


"The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'." - Randy Pausch

PC Specs