TU-2S, the best Bomber in the game.

[save]

Do we know what the real outcome of the claims 25 of august 1944 where in terms of pilots killed?
Over-claiming over enemy territory from both sides where almost mandatory, and did all US planes have gun cameras on in ETO at this time  ?
You can also read how some US pilots treated bailing German pilots in Knoke's book

Knoke was a very interesting guy. His biography is an excellent read. On August 25th, 1944, Knoke's leading his unit, joined a number of other Luftwaffe fighters scrambled in response to huge numbers of Allied fighters inbound. Knoke had recently returned to flight status after suffering a head injury when shot down in April. They ended up in a big fight with the 354th FG. Knoke shot down a P-51, while being shot down by another P-51 himself.

No one knows which Mustang Knoke clobbered. However, one P-51 returned to field A-31 badly shot-up (I forget the pilot's name). In the middle 1990s, during a review of the group's records, it was discovered that some German pilot may have deserved one more kill. How so, when it returned to base? A Bf 109 had shot out the Mustang's hydraulic system. When the pilot limped back to A-31, he attempted to lower his gear without hydraulic pressure. When the landing gear emergency release handle is pulled, the gear unlocks and will drop down partially under its own weight. The pilot shook the Mustang vigorously with the ailerons. The right gear locked. The left did not. After several failed attempts to lock it down, the pilot was ordered to bail out, rather than risk landing with one down, which he did. The P-51 was destroyed. Ironically, it was later discovered that the low time P-51 pilot had not actually followed emergency procedures. When shaking the gear down, one should do so while holding the emergency handle full back. This pilot failed to do so, and the one gear didn't lock. A pilot could also "crab" the aircraft to get some aerodynamic force to assist getting the recalcitrant gear to lock. The P-51, however, lacks the aileron force to maintain a "crabbed" attitude very long. Anyway, for this reason, a historian argued at the time that the P-51 was lost due to pilot error rather than being shot down. Naturally, there is much disagreement on this. I think some undetermined German pilot deserved the victory credit. I wonder how many of these types of losses never get reported as being due to enemy action?

It is also interesting to note that by late 1944, emergency policy evolved somewhat. When showing no hydraulic pressure due to damage resulting from enemy fire, a P-51 pilot was sometimes advised NOT to attempt to lower the gear, but perform a belly landing. The reason for this was that the hydraulic failure resulting from damage may be accompanied by other damage to structure and/or systems. Attempting to lower the gear may create a greater problem. Once a P-51 is on the ground and the engine shut off, the flaps and landing gear doors will gradually lower. Landing gear is retained up by mechanical locks, which can be manually unlocked with the emergency handle.

That said, August 25th was not a good day for the Luftwaffe in France. The 355th FG squadron of the 354th FG, was credited with 25 kills (Knoke being one of them), against three losses (including the one lost over field A-31). One 367th FG (flying P-38Ls and late J models) pilot, Capt. L. E. Blumer, shot down 5 Fw 190s in 7 minutes over St.-Quentin in his P-38L. All confirmed via gun camera and witnesses. The 367th claimed another 4 air to air, and 27 on the ground (some were bomber and transport types). That day, in France, a total of 77 Luftwaffe fighters were claimed as destroyed in air to air combat, and 27 on the ground that day by TAC pilots. 11 USAAF fighter losses were credited to all causes. Another 20 German fighters were claimed as destroyed on the ground by 20th FG Mustangs flying airdrome fighter sweeps. August 25th effectively ended the Luftwaffe's fighter presence in France.

Claims for August 25th by 8th AF and 9th AF fighters over France amounted to 77 claimed shot down, 7 damaged, plus 47 (all types) claimed destroyed on the ground. The primary goal of August 25th air ops was to destroy what remained of the Luftwaffe in France. It largely succeeded.

[Zacherof]

It hasn't been strenghtened. You just had some bad luck recently (and the Tu-2 isn't all that durable as well)

I may be mistaken but i thought if there are enemy bombers and fighters, the bombers would be targeted over the fighters

[icepac]

Some of the commenters on the b17s ability to show 500mph at high altitude being impossible have never flown at that altitude nor can be bothered to........yet they comment.

[save]

A set of B17s diving in formation at 500 TAS, and the ME163 compress so it can't follow 
At the same time the 163 compress following that set of buff the gunners can damage that 163 at 1.5k yards out.
Reality check please.

[Karnak]

Some of the commenters on the b17s ability to show 500mph at high altitude being impossible have never flown at that altitude nor can be bothered to........yet they comment.

Which commentators would those be?

[Scherf]

Do we know what the real outcome of the claims 25 of august 1944 where in terms of pilots killed?
Over-claiming over enemy territory from both sides where almost mandatory, and did all US planes have gun cameras on in ETO at this time  ?
You can also read how some US pilots treated bailing German pilots in Knoke's book

Short answer is, for total LW losses in France that day you'd have to ask Matti Salonen or Andreas Brekken or Remi T on the 12 O'Clock High forum. Matti especially is quite responsive - he appears to have a database compiled from research on the various Verlustmeldung quartermaster documents.

Knokke's book is an interesting yarn, but accurate historical detail it ain't.

Edit - Rather better history here, most discussions of 1944 LW losses in France seem to refer to it:

http://www.amazon.com/LUFTWAFFE-FACE-DEBARQUEMENT-ALLIE-Historique/dp/284048126X

Heheh, only $200 via these booksellers:

http://www.abebooks.co.uk/book-search/isbn/9782840481263?cm_mmc=sws-_-sws-_-bd-_-serp&clickid=UO2RwHyuqxA5WxfSPhR851NyUkTW51zttW1E240&cm_mmc=aff-_-ir-_-64682-_-77798&afn_sr=impact


(Easier just to ask Matti Andreas or Remi)

[Rich46yo]

I find myself starting to get kills in the TU2's as my gunner skills are starting to improve, and almost always damage the attacker. Your best bet is to use a lot of rudder and roll the plane to get looks out of the front top gun the fighter isnt expecting. Then a few very short bursts at 600 to range and at 400 aim for the wings of the attacker. If its a cannon bird you might as well start shooting at 600.

Anyway Im starting to use the KI-67 tricks I used to and am starting to survive with at least one plane to land. Years ago when I had a positive K/D with KI-67s I used a lot of these tactics, and they were days when we had real lethal Bomber killers. Ive noticed they arent as good nowdays. Thing is Im far from the bomber gunner I used to be, hopefully that will return. While the TU doesn,t have the KIs guns it is much faster and over triple the bombload. It has two speed sweet spots, one at 6 to 8k and another at 16k.

Funny but Im starting to see Knit and Bish CVs with a high cap a lot more often. Has the TU changed the game with its lethality against CVs? I believe so.

[PJ_Godzilla]

I think the frequency of high CV cap you're seeing is just local statistical variation. It's kind of a good place to hang, if you're in a fighter. If there's no traffic, you can just meander and climb a bit. You've always got the friendly puffy as a heads-up warning - and as a place to run if you get damaged, You've got the radar, and you've got the bait. Usually, the bombers come in low but the fighters often have some alt, especially if they're covering for fighters that are heavy down on the deck. The main reason I'll climb over a CV is for them - intercepting bombers is of secondary import since they're usually thrown into the meat grinder a bit more hurriedly.

Regardless, I think you give too much credit to the typical CV barnacle. THere's no telling what's coming in. I frequently see heavies down low. Besides, G4M is listed in wikipedia as having over 1800 ft/min - TU2 only 1600... I recognize that we've been arguing a bit over the weight and that this last will affect the induced drag (thus affecting climb) but these two should be in the same ballpark. Thus, if Betty didn't change it, why would the Tupolev? Granted, I see the latter a little more, but neither are as common as, eg, an F4U. That's what I'm spiralling up for...

[Rich46yo]

Im glad the Betty was modeled, dont get me wrong. I play this game for the primary reason of being a WW2 flight enthusiast and the Betty belongs here. But its a POS compared to the TU2S. For the first 4 or 5 K the TU climbs at over 2100 fps while carrying 6600 lbs of ords, using its generous WEP. That slows some past about 5 K but still I'd be willing to bet that the TU2S climbs with a full ord load about as well as a heavy Jabo like the P47N with a full bomb load. The Sweet spot for the TU2S is 8k and its WEP will get you to that Alt and up to full speed, with a full Load, before it runs out of WEP. Or close to it.

So now your at 8K at about 315 mph with 6600 lbs X 3. Thats a big problem for a CV if it doesnt have a high Cap, and even a high cap might not save the CV. The Betty on the other Hand is much, much slower and while it has a bit better defensive guns its also a Ronson lighter and easy to flame. The other sweet spot speed-wise for the TU is 16K but its much harder to hit a turning CV from that height. You have to guesstimate two boat lengths and try to figure where it will be in the turn by the time the bombs hit.

I forget the Bettys load since i dont like flying it. I think its 4,000, which is respectable. But does it have a 1,000 lb option? I prefer the big bombs to the 500 lb bombs for CVs. The TU's 2200 lb bombs, x9, is devastating. Ive often taken out the CV with 6, and then the cruiser with 3, in one pass.

Of course the other Heavies are very lethal too. Most of all the Lancs. But when you factor in the speed of climb, the speed/time to the target, and the punch when you get there...When you take all this into account then i think the TU2S is the Premier CV killer in the game. The B26 used to own that crown but now it belongs to the Red Star.

I think the frequency of high CV cap you're seeing is just local statistical variation. It's kind of a good place to hang, if you're in a fighter. If there's no traffic, you can just meander and climb a bit. You've always got the friendly puffy as a heads-up warning - and as a place to run if you get damaged, You've got the radar, and you've got the bait. Usually, the bombers come in low but the fighters often have some alt, especially if they're covering for fighters that are heavy down on the deck. The main reason I'll climb over a CV is for them - intercepting bombers is of secondary import since they're usually thrown into the meat grinder a bit more hurriedly.

Regardless, I think you give too much credit to the typical CV barnacle. THere's no telling what's coming in. I frequently see heavies down low. Besides, G4M is listed in wikipedia as having over 1800 ft/min - TU2 only 1600... I recognize that we've been arguing a bit over the weight and that this last will affect the induced drag (thus affecting climb) but these two should be in the same ballpark. Thus, if Betty didn't change it, why would the Tupolev? Granted, I see the latter a little more, but neither are as common as, eg, an F4U. That's what I'm spiralling up for...

[XxDaSTaRxx]

A set of B17s diving in formation at 500 TAS, and the ME163 compress so it can't follow 
At the same time the 163 compress following that set of buff the gunners can damage that 163 at 1.5k yards out.
Reality check please.

I think you need to take a look at the B-17G's top speed.

It can go nowhere near 500 with wings still intact.

[Lusche]

I forget the Bettys load since i dont like flying it. I think its 4,000, which is respectable

4x250kg.

I fly them quite a lot, especially for small field porking. Very nice bomber for that particular role with an even nicer perk return 

[SmokinLoon]

The Betty is often over looked.  I'd like to see some players use it more often.  No, it doesn't carry a major punch but AH doesn't always have to be about winning the "warz". 

Fuel up a Ki61 Tony or Ki-84 Frank for some long range escort duty and have some fun.   

[Rich46yo]

Its not the punch as much as it is the speed and the way it flames.

The KI-67 has the same punch and I couldnt count all the sorties Ive spent in it. Its a great bomber.

The Betty WAS needed. Its a personal thing I dont much like it.

[Brooke]

The Betty wasn't very robust to gunfire, but it had amazing range, and that was a very important feature in war for Japan.

[Lusche]

Its not the punch as much as it is the speed and the way it flames.

No doubt about the flames...
.. but the speed is actually quite good if you don't look at just the plain top level speed. The operational speed (yes, I just made that term up) is actually quite good in the mission profile I'm using the Betty for - a very quick climb to 18-20k, crossing the front and porking dropping the base.
The Betty darts to 20k in less than 15 minutes and can turn very well after the drop for the second approach. Such a run rarely takes more than 30-35 minutes total.