Author Topic: ju88 and b25c  (Read 1498 times)

Offline surfinn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
ju88 and b25c
« on: June 20, 2013, 06:18:41 PM »
Why are these two still on the attack menu and allowed to take off without ords and with formations enabled? I think its a oversight that needs to be corrected. Either by disabling their formation capability from the attack menu or taking them off of the attack menu and putting them in the bomber only menu.  :salute

Offline MrKrabs

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
      • AH-Freebirds.com
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2013, 06:37:12 PM »
The boiling pot is put away and the crab has gone back to sea...

Offline surfinn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #2 on: June 20, 2013, 09:55:21 PM »
cant see the picture there its not showing up

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #3 on: June 20, 2013, 10:12:36 PM »
Why are these two still on the attack menu and allowed to take off without ords and with formations enabled? I think its a oversight that needs to be corrected. Either by disabling their formation capability from the attack menu or taking them off of the attack menu and putting them in the bomber only menu.  :salute

While I can't speak directly for HTC I'd be willing to bet that bombers are labelled as such of they were used more so for actual bombing missions of static targets.  Aircraft that have the ability to score in the attack column are able to do so because they were used as a direct fire support vessel, and both the B25 and Ju88 were used as level bombers AND as close air support (direct fire, non level bombing) vs enemy positions.

B17's were not sent to loiter on station and wait for the call to bomb X hill because the troops were in need of assistance.  Lancasters didn't do that either.  The Mossi FB Mk IV did, so did the He111, so did the IL-2, so did the A20 and P47.  Oh, and the Ju88's could carry torps as well, that qualifies as a direct attack imo.

Do not try and figure out HTC's system of how they label what.  Same goes for giving "all bombers" full and complete views based solely on how they are classified (bomber) and not what the crew members of the plane could actually see.

Just go with the flow.  Trust me, life is easier. The sun will come up tomorrow regardless.   :aok
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 Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #4 on: June 20, 2013, 11:42:49 PM »
SmokinLoon,

It is "Mosquito FB.Mk VI".  The Mk IV was the Mosquito B.Mk IV, an unarmed bomber.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline gyrene81

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11629
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #5 on: June 21, 2013, 09:56:46 AM »
Why are these two still on the attack menu and allowed to take off without ords and with formations enabled? I think its a oversight that needs to be corrected. Either by disabling their formation capability from the attack menu or taking them off of the attack menu and putting them in the bomber only menu.  :salute
might want to change the cereal you're eating.

look up both of those planes...in depth. you will find your answer.
jarhed  
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #6 on: June 21, 2013, 10:37:23 AM »
SmokinLoon,

It is "Mosquito FB.Mk VI".  The Mk IV was the Mosquito B.Mk IV, an unarmed bomber.

Yeah thanks.  My 1 spelling error of the day and that wuz it.    ;)
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 Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23933
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #7 on: June 21, 2013, 10:41:16 AM »
I rather wonder why the B-26 with it's nice additional strafing capability  is not also rated as an "attacker"  :headscratch:
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #8 on: June 21, 2013, 10:48:36 AM »
Yeah thanks.  My 1 spelling error of the day and that wuz it.    ;)
Actually you make that error habitually.  I just decided to comment on it this time.   :P
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Bruv119

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15678
      • http://www.thefewsquadron.co.uk
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #9 on: June 21, 2013, 11:37:47 AM »
I rather wonder why the B-26 with it's nice additional strafing capability  is not also rated as an "attacker"  :headscratch:

all of them have forward firing pilot controlled guns I would imagine it should. 

Only HT can say why they class them as attack.   
The Few ***
F.P.H

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #10 on: June 21, 2013, 12:31:14 PM »
I rather wonder why the B-26 with it's nice additional strafing capability  is not also rated as an "attacker"  :headscratch:

I've wondered the same thing, it was used in many light bomber squadrons in the "attack" role, alongside the A-20 and later A-26.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline surfinn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #11 on: June 21, 2013, 09:38:01 PM »
Still don't get why they have the formation option enabled from the attack menu for those aircraft. Why can these "attack" aircraft take off with no ords when they have zero strafing ability as a formation? Only thing I've seen that makes since was dead stick saying they were on station with "ords" to bomb a position as close support. Not opposed to them being used as fighters if ya want to but not with formations enabled.

Offline Zacherof

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3996
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2013, 03:05:11 PM »
Using bomber formations as fighter is kinda pointless as you lose your drones.

Best bomber-figher is the SBD tho followed by the TBM.
In game name Xacherof
USN Sea Bee
**ELITE**
I am a meat popsicle

Offline JUGgler

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1269
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #13 on: June 22, 2013, 04:37:54 PM »
The JU88 should have a "fighter mode"

I like to call it the FU88  :O



JUGgler
 
Army of Muppets

Offline Zacherof

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3996
Re: ju88 and b25c
« Reply #14 on: June 22, 2013, 04:41:51 PM »
If only it had a 13mm or 20mm forward gun instead of those infernal bb's
In game name Xacherof
USN Sea Bee
**ELITE**
I am a meat popsicle