NEW PLANE: Tupolev TU-2

[DREDIOCK]

COOL. A new target to shoot at!

This wont be no hangar queen fer sure. And I bet we end up with more then one who will become fighter aces in them

[Karnak]

That sure looks like 9 250kg? bombs it's carrying.  I also do not see any mounts for external ords.

(Image removed from quote.)

Those are probably 100kg bombs.  The Tu-2 is actually pretty small.

As to the external mounts, it is possible it won't have them, possible the model hasn't been finished yet and possible they are only attached when an external load is taken.

For example, the Mossies only has its external shackles added if it takes external stores.

[Ack-Ack]

I also hope HTC has finally rectified their habit of making bombers dis-proportionally tough for their size.

What proof do you have that bombers are? 

ack-ack

[DREDIOCK]

I also hope HTC has finally rectified their habit of making bombers dis-proportionally tough for their size.

You kidding?. You just have to know where to shoot. Shooting at the body alone will usually yield you little more then creating air conditioning and maybe killing a few gunners of PWing the pilot.

By contrast I find the YAK3 to be tougher then most bombers. Hell I find it to be tougher then JUGs

[Ack-Ack]

So this is the famous Russian P-38, oops, La-38.

Hardly.

ack-ack

[Tank-Ace]

What proof do you have that bombers are? 

ack-ack

Well, not all bombers. Just the A-20, and maybe the B-26 a little.

You can hammer away at an A-20, and it will just fly away with what would cut a 110 or Mossie in half. Unless the wing spar is made of some alloy of adamantium and mithril, it shouldn't be taking 3-4 30mm hits to knock off.

[Karnak]

What proof do you have that bombers are? 

ack-ack

A-20G

But I think that is unique to that aircraft.

[Ack-Ack]

Well, not all bombers. Just the A-20, and maybe the B-26 a little.

You can hammer away at an A-20, and it will just fly away with what would cut a 110 or Mossie in half. Unless the wing spar is made of some alloy of adamantium and mithril, it shouldn't be taking 3-4 30mm hits to knock off.

Like I thought, absolutely no proof at all.  It's funny how myself and others have no problems taking down bombers like the A-20, B-26 and others in a single pass, but others like you seem are incapable of it and blame the bomber for being 'too tough'.  

Kind of reminds me of the whine you posted awhile back crying about how tough B-17s were to shoot down and actually posted a wish to nerf the guns on the B-17 to make it easier to kill.  Maybe you should look at the tactics you're using and maybe work on improving your terrible gunnery skills if you're having troubles shooting down an A-20.

ack-ack

[Lusche]

Those are probably 100kg bombs. 

The cockpit screenshot says "B10", which is usually 100kg bombs

[Karnak]

Like I thought, absolutely no proof at all.  It's funny how myself and others have no problems taking down bombers like the A-20, B-26 and others in a single pass, but others like you seem are incapable of it and blame the bomber for being 'too tough'.  

Kind of reminds me of the whine you posted awhile back crying about how tough B-17s were to shoot down and actually posted a wish to nerf the guns on the B-17 to make it easier to kill.  Maybe you should look at the tactics you're using and maybe work on improving your terrible gunnery skills if you're having troubles shooting down an A-20.

ack-ack

I did some tests on the A-20G and, given its size, it is much tougher than one would expect.  Reasonably it should be a bit tougher than the big fighters, but it is much, much tougher.  I'd have to test it again to get the numbers, but I recall something like four times the durability of the Mossie.

I have no worries about the Tu-2 and I think the A-20G is likely to be "fixed" when it is updated.

[Iraqvet]

Tu-2 Bomber!!!!......Whooooohoo lets go Falcor   

[Arlo]

Very nice, finally a Soviet bomber!

Hopefully Pe-2 will follow someday.


Every good source that I've read on the TU-2 shows that 8300lbs simply won't fit to the aircraft. My guess is that the 8300lbs is a mistake by one author which then got copied over and over again to many "mainstream" "aircraft of WWII-books".

Here's a Soviet source which lists 1000kg as the "normal" and 3000kg as the maximum payload:
(Image removed from quote.)
(It also mentions that the forward firing cannons have 150rpg.)

http://ww2warbirds.net/ww2htmls/tupotu2.html

http://www.tu-2.info/

http://ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/tu-2.html

What's being referred to is an overload configuration.

"Bomb load was 1000kg inside the fuselage and 1000kg externally. Tu-2 was often used in overload configuration, carrying up to 4000kg (over 8800 lbs) of bombs."

Empty weight: 7,601 kg (16,757 lb)
Loaded weight: 10,538 kg (23,232 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 11,768 kg (25,944 lb)

23,232 lbs minus 16,727 lbs would equal 6475 lbs

25,994 lbs minus 16,757 lbs would equal 9,187 lbs

[Fulcrum]

Excellent.  Way to go, HTC!  I can't wait to shoot one down...should have plenty of targets over the next few weeks.  Everyone will have a fever for the new ride.  More cowbell!!

[Karnak]

23,232 lbs minus 16,727 lbs would equal 6475 lbs

25,994 lbs minus 16,757 lbs would equal 9,187 lbs

How much of that 6475lbs or 9187lbs is fuel, ammo and crew?

[Arlo]

How much of that 6475lbs or 9187lbs is fuel, ammo and crew?

Isn't it conceivable that in overload config they may not take on full fuel?