Author Topic: B-36 Peacemaker  (Read 739 times)

Offline NOD2000

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 904
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #15 on: October 23, 2002, 11:14:49 AM »
thats what i am saying yes it was a failure as bomber escort i know that i have established that three times..........i know this already........and there were 20 - 30 cases where they would send out the B-40 to go after captured planes and it worked well........the luft boys did fly captured american planes..........what they would do it sit outside the formation and radio ahead the forts group alt, position, heading, number, etc. and many times when a few staglers were left the captured plane would come in and straff the injured plane......this is not usually seen alot in books / documentation of fortresses flights because it was hard to tell what type of plane the fortress was being attacked by........u got to remeber they did have plane type icons or range icons the only plane that that was always reconized was the P-38 because of it defenate silouet........and yes B-40's were used on missions more than the test ones to see if they were effective as escorts..............B-40's would spot the captured plane and act like there hurt drift off beside the captured fighter then blast away then it would lose alt like it was hurt and return to base.......these B-40's were never really noticed because in formation they look like just another B-17G.....

also one of the four captured B-17's  would fly in formation with b-17's and they would get close to planes in formation and blast away at them durring boming run so that flak/fighters/watching lead bomber would have the other planes in formation distracted.......the captured b-17's mainly flew missions to drop information/supplies to spies in europe.....
« Last Edit: October 23, 2002, 12:09:41 PM by NOD2000 »

Offline Glasses

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1811
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #16 on: October 23, 2002, 01:08:16 PM »
KG200 flew allied planes regularly,and other exotic LW planes.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2002, 08:16:18 PM by Glasses »

Offline Lazerus

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2159
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2002, 01:23:34 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Glasses
KG200 flew allied plane regularly,and other exotic LW planes.

When I was in the KG200 there was a story about a captured B24 trying to saddle up with a returning formation posted on the squad BBS.  They also had quite a few pictures of captured planes that KG200 repainted and used for missions, mostly on the eastern front if I remember correctly. I'll see if I can find the link and post it.

OK, this isn't what I was looking for, but it does have some of the pictures that were on the squad bbs. This a link to a thread on another bbs, just scroll down for the different pictures.click
« Last Edit: October 23, 2002, 01:33:21 PM by Lazerus »

Offline NOD2000

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 904
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #18 on: October 23, 2002, 06:02:25 PM »
well we are starting to agree Oediius but still i have heard of them coming in to straffe usually only one pass just to keep there idenity kept secret(mainly when escorts became suspicious of other fighters or bombers that would hang back)  and yes there was 1 case that i know of i'm thinkin its late 44 that a enemy B-17 came after a USAF.......(accually it formed up beside it) and opeaned fire taking the b-17 out i'm thinking the USAF name was busting betty but the name could be wrong..........but i am glad we are agreeing..........and one of the captured 17's was shot down buy a b-40 it turned off one of its eng's acting like it was hurt then drifted backward to the 17 following the USAF squad and opened fire on it destroying it mercousously

Offline plumbob

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 262
      • http://www.332viking.com
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #19 on: October 23, 2002, 09:05:09 PM »
B-36 was introduced in 1948 i believe only 3 years remover from WWII, its not totally obsurd to add it to AH

Offline Lazerus

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2159
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #20 on: October 24, 2002, 01:55:39 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by plumbob
B-36 was introduced in 1948 i believe only 3 years remover from WWII, its not totally obsurd to add it to AH [/QUOTO]

Of course it is, this is a WWII sim, HTC isn't going to model post-WWII planes to put in it, then it would be a 'WWII and after' sim.

Offline whgates3

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1426
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #21 on: October 24, 2002, 02:59:22 AM »
YB-40s (either 16 or 20) flew w/ 92nd Bomb Group between May 29 '43 & July 28 '43.
One was lost on June 22.
YB-40 never was an offical combat A/C and none were manufactured - they were all converted B-17s. It would be a nice plane to have in AH if you could fly mixed formations, but w/ < 20 made it's probably low on the HTC's list, if its there@all


there was also one B-24 converted to an XB-41 w/ similar armament to YB-40 & same intended purpose

this site
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b17_12.html
has most of the details on the YB-40

Offline Replicant

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3567
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #22 on: October 24, 2002, 12:29:24 PM »
B29 would be nice, but even with an atom bomb I doubt I could hit anything with it! ;)

NEXX

Offline whgates3

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1426
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #23 on: October 24, 2002, 08:19:00 PM »
w/ the B-29 or B-32 you'd have 30 x 2000lbs (or some other combo adding up to ~ 10 tons) bombs from a 3 plane formation i'm sure you could do a hell of a good job pounding the $h|+ out of just about any ground target

Offline frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #24 on: October 25, 2002, 09:02:09 AM »
how about the B24 liberator, it's as good as the B17 but not as well known

Offline bj229r

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6735
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #25 on: October 27, 2002, 01:10:27 PM »
the one drawback about adding any of the previously-mentioned planes is darned few folks fly level bombers, either due to how hard it is to hit stuff...or the ever-increasing liklihood of gettin ur group kilt otw to target...1 ton of eggs or 10 tons of eggs, if ya cant get em on the target...rather moot point
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers

http://www.flamewarriors.net/forum/

Offline whgates3

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1426
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #26 on: October 27, 2002, 09:15:03 PM »
i think the w/ the high speed ( > 350 MPH top speed) and heavy defensive armament the B-29 would be quite tough to catch and knock down - giant target for flak though...

Offline brady

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7055
      • http://personal.jax.bellsouth.net/jax/t/y/tyr88/JG2main.html
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #27 on: October 27, 2002, 09:23:30 PM »
This is all well and good but ya gota ask yourself, why do we realy nead another US bomber, espichaly one that would soak up build time like the B 29, the B 24 is realy not neaded since we have the B 17. Russia and Italy have no leval bombers, and Germany has no heavy, how about HTC spend their bomber build  time thier for now, and perhaps later we can do another US bomber.

Offline Jester

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2753
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #28 on: October 27, 2002, 11:16:56 PM »
If you get the B-36 I want the SA-2 GUIDELINE SAM.  :D
Lt. JESTER
VF-10 "GRIM REAPERS"

WEBSITE:  www.VF10.org

Offline plumbob

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 262
      • http://www.332viking.com
B-36 Peacemaker
« Reply #29 on: October 28, 2002, 08:18:55 AM »
Well, acctually the germans had an AA missile that was almost workable when the war ended.  It was wire guided though i believe, so the pilot would still have to "fly" it into the enemy plane.