What aircraft??

[palef]

CAC Boomerang.

Savoia Marchetti SM79

Kawanishi H8K

[Widewing]

As far as I know, the convoy hunting was the biggest threat the UK faced during the war, as said by Churchill himself. The Condor was widely used to spot those convoys, which would later be hunted down by U-boot wolfpacks. Some argue that the PBY sunk a lot of tonnage, but we can't forget that german u-boots alone sank almost three times the tonnage sunk by all allied countries. And a lot of those ships whent down thanks to airplanes like the Fw-200. It was ultimately replaced by some versions of 88s, 290s and 177s, but it set the first stone. That's why I consider it important.

U-boats sank 14.69 million tons (all Allies), losing 785 submarines of 1,158 deployed. That's 12,686 tons per sub, and 18,713 tons sunk per loss.

USN Subs sank 5.63 million tons (Japanese only), losing 48 of 233 submarines deployed. That's 24,120 tons per sub, and 117,083 tons sunk per loss.

So, while the U-boat campaign is very impressive in size and scope, the U.S. campaign against Japan was far more efficient, and markedly more successful at strangling the enemy war effort. The powerful U-boat effort was so vast that it forced the Allies to respond with innovative anti-sub technology, weapons and tactics that eventually crushed the U-boat threat. Losing bases in France was the last major blow. If we look at Japan, we see that they were not only unable to respond on the Allied scale with ships and aircraft, they never seemed to fully grasp anti-sub methodology (as utilized by the Allied navies).

There's an interesting paper on the above and more at: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/history/wwii-campaigns.html

[Widewing]

CAC Boomerang.

Savoia Marchetti SM79

Kawanishi H8K

If any fighter had minimal affect on the war, it was the Boomerang. I don't believe it shot down anything. It saw use in close support and strafing in New Guinea and Borneo. It was effective, but very limited in it's contribution to the war.

On the other hand, the other two saw a great deal of service. However, since we don't have water landing as an option (or more importantly, taking off), I don't see the H8K in the game without a major change to the programming.

[Karnak]

However, since we don't have water landing as an option (or more importantly, taking off), I don't see the H8K in the game without a major change to the programming.

I suspect that the PT-Boat code would work pretty well for water take offs and landings.

[Volron]

The thing is, there is already a major change being worked on by HTC.  Water will be different, judging by the video.

[Oldman731]

So, while the U-boat campaign is very impressive in size and scope, the U.S. campaign against Japan was far more efficient, and markedly more successful

While everyone knows that I'm not a big fan of the Third Reich, the question has been raised:  What if US subs had to face what the Nazi subs had to face?

- oldman

[Karnak]

While everyone knows that I'm not a big fan of the Third Reich, the question has been raised:  What if US subs had to face what the Nazi subs had to face?

- oldman

I sincerely doubt we'd have done any better than the Germans, and quite possibly worse.

[Xavier]

There's an interesting paper on the above and more at: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/history/wwii-campaigns.html

Now I got some interesting reading for the weekend! 

There's a book that that follows the Luftwaffe's bomber usage (and development) year by yeah, mostly reconaissance aircraft and flying boats. Shame that I've only found it in spanish... It's called Objetivo América, by Manfred Greihl. It's centered on the german plans to bomb the USA, but since thay all failed most of the material is on the use of long-range bombers by the Luftwaffe. It's even got a chapter about mid-air refueling, quite an interesting read! There's blueprints and photos of some stuff that's hard to find. But I mostly recommend this read because it has the transcripts of conversations in the german Air Ministry, like the brilliant moments where heavy bombers where laughed at (those will never affect the way! silly americans ), or when heads of different design bureaus (Messerschmitt, Dornier, Arado) outright called each other names or laughed at the contender's bombers proposals. It really helps understanding germany's failure to manufacture a heavy bomber in 9 years of war! 

Now that I checked...I have two copies of this book. Don't ask why, I don't really know! Maybe I'm a bit of an impulsive buyer 



Here's one of the interesting illustrations. It shows the range of several bombers, taking off from France.



The range of the Fw-200 goes from 1500 to 2200km, depending on bomb load and extra fuel tanks carried. I believe this map was from 1942, there's some more maps (circa 1943-44) that also show ranges for Ju-290, He-177 and even Me-264 if they were used as reconaissance machines over the Atlantic.

And I'm done with my mighty wall of text...for now! 

[Rich46yo]

They were much more effective flying out of Norway when operating against allied convoys. The JU390 or Me264 never made it past prototype but even if they had the presence of escort carriers would have also limited their effectiveness I believe.

If we look at Japan, we see that they were not only unable to respond on the Allied scale with ships and aircraft, they never seemed to fully grasp anti-sub methodology (as utilized by the Allied navies).

Technical, strategic, and Industrial limitations werent the only limitations that hurt the Japanese. Cultural ones were just as damaging. I think convoy escorting was considered a dishonorable career move by many in the IJN, which was the most forward thinking arm of the Japanese armed forces. I think there was just no enthusiasm for it. The concept of a glorious death while fighting the one huge decisive battle is not a really good naval strategy. This was probably a factor in their failure as developing effective anti-sub operations.

Not that it mattered. When they finally saw disaster staring them in the face they were not able to produce neither enough anti-sub platforms nor technically enough advanced ones either. Thats why they did a crash production course on those crummy little coastal defense type ships.

So I think your statement is true due to cultural reasons, as so many of their failures were, and also by the fact they just didnt think a long war was possible. They werent very good at adopting either as conditions changed. But still they had to be aware of the USN submarine fleet, as well as America's production capability, as well as their own heavy dependence on import by sea, most of all oil. So who really knows what they were thinking?

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/history/wwii-campaigns.html

Great read.

[R 105]

Ju-52 transport aircraft. Im pretty sure it had a very large effect on the war.

[Squire]

Would like to see the Cr42 and Gladiator or the M.C. 200.

CAC Boomerang.

Savoia Marchetti SM79

Kawanishi H8K

...ya ok but no Boomerang.

[Debrody]

It was actually just a bad joke. Tante Ju would be a pretty bad hangar queen. Some better ones down there:
Wellington, Beaufighter, Halifax
Cr-42, G-55
D-520
Lagg-3, Pe-2
109/AS, Ju-188
Ki-44, J2M
and so on

[trap78]

Beau
F4F-3
Ki-44
A-36

[Megalodon]

If any fighter had minimal affect on the war, it was the Boomerang. I don't believe it shot down anything. It saw use in close support and strafing in New Guinea and Borneo. It was effective, but very limited in it's contribution to the war.

On the other hand, the other two saw a great deal of service. However, since we don't have water landing as an option (or more importantly, taking off), I don't see the H8K in the game without a major change to the programming.

 So what! ......there were approximately 8-10 ta152H1 that made it in the war without getting sabotaged or blown up by the US and saw service for what a month? and never flew it's intended purpose?


Plus Boomerang was used for 3 years in 5 full squads and was built 250 in number.
Plus the Australians and Kiwi's that support this game would love it and deserve it.
Plus it would be fun as hell.
Plus I would love to fly it.

++++1

[Megalodon]

No direct effect on the war, but a game changer in the game.

P-51A and Mustang Mk.Ia

Faster than B or D below 8k, lighter and more maneuverable. The Mk.Ia has four hispanos...

Historically significant aircraft missing...

F4F-3
P-47D-21. Paddle prop razor back
P-38H P-38G handling with much better performance
High Altitude 109G models
Do 217
Ju 288 (fast medium bomber)
Lagg-3
MiG-3
Yak-1 (Yak-7b is similar in performance)
Fw 190A3
Spitfire LF Mk.V (clipped wings)
He 219
Ju 88C-6 (potent bomber killer
Ki-44

+1000 on the 51's

MS-406
D-520
Hawk75