A Thought for a new ride

[RODBUSTR]

   I fly bomber missions a lot more now because I am almost sure of getting some fighter action, but ammo runs low when you have to fight off 9 or 10 planes per sortie.   Heck a lot of times I go up without bombs just to shoot it our with the fighters.  So think about the YB-40.  A fighter would not know If it was a B17g or YB-40 until it got close.  and well.     

[icepac]

Yeah........and leave the icon just saying "b17" for both bomber and gunship.

[Krusty]

You know the Y in the name denotes a prototype model, right? Practically speaking, you'd also lose formations and be 10x more vulnerable than a standard 3-ship formation that we have already. They were so heavy that when the bombers they were "escorting" dropped their bombs, they got left behind and pounced on with very bad results. They also never served in squadron strength, and never had a production run.

The old requirements were: 1) Production models only (no prototypes or field mods), 2) had to serve in unit strength at least (no 1-offs, etc), 3) had to see combat (qualifies for this, but not the others)

[perdue3]

I like it, let's get an XF-11 and an XF5F, too. 

[nrshida]

   I fly bomber missions a lot more now because I am almost sure of getting some fighter action

Strangely, as anyone who has tried to engage you in the MA will testify, the one thing you're certainly not interested in is engaging in 'fighter action' 

[Ack-Ack]

(Image removed from quote.)

Strangely, as anyone who has tried to engage you in the MA will testify, the one thing you're certainly not interested in is engaging in 'fighter action'  (Image removed from quote.)

 

[Vraciu]

(Image removed from quote.)

Strangely, as anyone who has tried to engage you in the MA will testify, the one thing you're certainly not interested in is engaging in 'fighter action'  (Image removed from quote.)

 

As for the OP's premise.   -100000000

That experiment was an abject failure.  We really have more pressing needs than a gimmick.

[Vraciu]

I like it, let's get an XF-11 and an XF5F, too. 

What?  No XF8F?????

[BuckShot]

+1 for the yb40.

[perdue3]

What?  No XF8F?????

Why not just the F8F?

[Vraciu]

Why not just the F8F?

I’m following the theme. 

[RODBUSTR]

nrshida "troll Patrol"  Look at My stats. I may have a higher percentile of Bomber kills than most, but that is because I  seek Them out because so many players won't.  They are the reason pursuit planes were invented in the first place... From the looks of Your stats you prefer to be a target ,  Have a blast.

[RODBUSTR]

    This isn't the ETO and speed of them would not matter in AH because The y would not be escorts. They had a fair kill record for Their brief service life, but The all seeing eye is gone and Bufftarding is back to the lonely boring play it was and I'm back to fighters. 

[nrshida]

nrshida "troll Patrol"  Look at My stats.

I don't believe MA stats necessarily represent one's ability or worth in combat very much, as our relative stats might suggest. I have my own evaluation, a qualitative one, and you fit into the: couldn't-drive-a-greasy-stick-up-a-dog's-arse category, which is why (and probably because) you avoid 'fighter action' so much.

I may have a higher percentile of Bomber kills than most, but that is because I  seek Them out because so many players won't.

You're also pretty good at blowing 15k's worth of energy immediately and seeking your ack out when you merely see a co-alt opponent in the same plane.

Your request is essentially a trick to get easy kills by conning other players -1,000,000,000.

[Vraciu]

nrshida "troll Patrol"  Look at My stats. I may have a higher percentile of Bomber kills than most, but that is because I  seek Them out because so many players won't.  They are the reason pursuit planes were invented in the first place... From the looks of Your stats you prefer to be a target ,  Have a blast.

Bombers are the easiest targets in this game.