Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Krusty on May 14, 2007, 05:12:49 PM
-
We need a Beaufort. Or a Betty. Something we can stick in a 1942 scenario and NOT have to dumb things down because the bomber is too advanced for the fighters of that era!!!
We need some basic early-war twin-engined bomber with medium-to-light payload that we can use to substitute, if need be, for other early bombers.
Suggestions include:
G4M Betty
Bristol Beaufort
Bristol Blenheim (good choice IMO)
Heinkel He111H-6
Handley Page Hampden
Note I've not included the Wellington because it has a "heavy" payload. I'm thinking specifically of the VERY large hole in the light/medium early war bomber planeset. I've not included the SM.79 because it is a tri-motor, and while it has the same relative specs as these it breaks the illusion and could not be substituted for much else.
We have too many early war setups that need some sort of twin bomber but we cannot use anything in-game.
Even the up-coming B-25 will be to fast for most early-war setups. It's one step closer, but probably won't be useful until after 1943.
In almost every scenario/setup/FSO/AvA we can't use the Boston III because of its speed. We're using the Ju88 right now in FSO to sub for a Japanese bomber! How's that for a stretch?! We can't use the Ki67 because of its speed, climb, and defensive firepower. It is a late war bomber and it shows. The A20G is too powerful for any setup before 1943. The Ju88 itself carries a very heavy payload (6000lbs) and while it has light defenses it is quite durable and flies very fast. It isn't very representative of the bulk of early-war twin bombers. It makes things difficult when you substitute it for another nation's bomber.
Any of the planes listed in this thread could be used to sub for countries in the SEA, or early war over the channel or in North Africa. They would have a lot of "substitutability" and would plug a very big hole in a large number of setups.
Disclaimer: I hereby admit any of those planes would almost entirely be a hangar queen, but it is VERY much needed for all the events we run here in AH! We just can't plug this hole with any of the planes we've already got!
-
Oh, and just to back up the need for this, things that could really use a new early 1940s bomber include:
SEA Japanese bombers (including Flying Tigers setups in China)
Channel bombers over Europe
Battle of Britain (can be subbed for either side!! also give variety to LW)
Soviet front battles like Karelia and early Eastern Front vs LW
North Africa
Italy (can sub for SM.79) and MTO areas of engagement
France (can sub for early french bomber, maybe in BOF setup?)
And probably many more I can't think of right now.
-
2nd this!!!!
It was a pain trying to catch your Ju88s during the last BoB. :(
-
It'd help if HTC tightened the leash on Buff formations to prevent guys from driving balls to the wall all the way to target. Say, exceed a given airspeed that's so high above cruise and drones go POP.
-
Between use of popular vote and resources dedicated to ToD, I don't see any other early war bombers being added in the foreseeable future.
-
Originally posted by Saxman
It'd help if HTC tightened the leash on Buff formations to prevent guys from driving balls to the wall all the way to target. Say, exceed a given airspeed that's so high above cruise and drones go POP.
I'd respond to this but I'd start a crescendo of hijacking...So, I agree with Krusty that an early bomber would be welcome.
-
Hey, it has advantages for the buff drivers, too. Gives more control over grouping (I rarely exceed cruise speed when I decide to level bomb).
-
Well said Krusty!
-
You guys had your chance last month for a slow early war bomber and you voted for the B-25.
Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.
-
Blooz, I'm not talking about a vote. IMO the vote is a bad idea. You start with 12 choices, and by the time you're down to the final 2 you're forced to vote for something you may never have wanted to vote for in the first place (and let's be honest, NOBODY is going to abstain when it comes to voting on a new plane). It comes down to the lesser of evils, so to speak.
I don't mean a vote, I mean HTC decides to model one of these, and does NOT put it up to a public vote. One of the planes listed above is very much needed, but nobody would ever vote for it (why vote for something slower, more obsolete, when the A-26 is on the table?!?)
P.S. The B-25 is a mid war plane. The C model was one of the fastest B-25 variants, also. It's not slow, nor can it sub for anything in the 1940/1941/1942 years. It's pretty much a 1943/later plane. And yes I very much would like to have the B-25, it just won't help at all in the above situations.
-
I agree with Krusty. I want more EW bombers. I would love and die for a He-111. That glass nose is just so sexy.....(drool) The He-111 IMO would be the best choice. It could be used for BoF, BoB, Russian fronts, NA, Mediterranean Sea, even China. The Chinese ordered I think 6 He-111s but I'm not sure. It could sub as the SM.76 and maybe the Betty bomber.
(http://www.warbirdalley.com/images/he111-3.jpg)
-
Ew! Gross! Re-engined post-war restoration :D
(those engines look gawd-awful)
-
Notice the terrain under the He111 pic..................
re early war bomber............. didn't we have a vote on some stuff?
-
Originally posted by Krusty
One of the planes listed above is very much needed, but nobody would ever vote for it (why vote for something slower, more obsolete, when the A-26 is on the table?!?)
* Doolittle Raid
* Ben Afleck
* Ignorance
Carry on.
-
Krusty,
The Wellington doesn't carry anymore than the He111. Its bomb load was about 4,500lbs. Max speed was about 240mph.
-
Slower bombers would be ideal for Early War setups, but I doubt anyone in the MA would fly planes that are slower AND have less payload than many other bombers! (not even speaking of armament)
Something easier to accomplish this, is adding some kind of speed limit (like in the real life) The speed limit being your engine temperature, aircraft couldn't maintain full throttle all time...
Implement this, and you'll have enough slow bombers :aok
-
Karnak: Okay, it's not very heavy when compared to the lancaster, but it's more than the B-26, the B-25, almost as much as the B-17 (which some sources state carried 5k normally, not sure why AH has 6). Even with "only 4.5k" it still wouldn't be able to sub for the Betty, or the Heinkel, or the Beaufort, or the SM79. It carries too much, when the average early war bomber load was usually half that much. Betty carried 800-something kilograms total. The He111 carried 1000kg internal in early models and 2000kg in the later models (it would probably be the heavyweight on my list). The Beaufort had 2000lbs max load. The blenheim had only 1000lbs bombload.
I had to look it up just now, but the Hampden has a load of 4000lbs. So maybe I should remove the Hampden and the Heinkel from my list?
Frank:
Originally posted by Krusty
Disclaimer: I hereby admit any of those planes would almost entirely be a hangar queen, but it is VERY much needed for all the events we run here in AH! We just can't plug this hole with any of the planes we've already got!
-
I voted for the he111
-
Didn't bother reading the entire thread, missed that one, sorry! :)
-
I really don't think payload is an issue at all. Speed is the only issue.
The Wellington, G4M2 and He111 are the logical choices as they saw service throughout the war, not just the beginning and then withdrawn from service.
(G4M2's payload was 1,000kg or an 800kg torpedo)
-
Originally posted by frank3
Something easier to accomplish this, is adding some kind of speed limit (like in the real life) The speed limit being your engine temperature, aircraft couldn't maintain full throttle all time...
Implement this, and you'll have enough slow bombers :aok
I suggested once in the past that the way to slow the bombers, or at least formations of bombers, is to true up the flight physics of the drones. There is no reason why, if I have the throttle full open from take off, those drones should be able to catch my lead aircraft.
If a separation results from a tight turn, force the lead to slow down to let the drones catch up. If one of them loses an engine, let it drop behind unless the lead slows.
No drone "overspeed" would help keep formations a bit slower without adding artificial limits that other aircraft don't suffer from. It also continues to allow the option to use a single bomber to its max performance if that is preferred.
-
Originally posted by frank3
Slower bombers would be ideal for Early War setups, but I doubt anyone in the MA would fly planes that are slower AND have less payload than many other bombers! (not even speaking of armament)
But they WILL vote to add one that is slower and carries less payload apparently.
Something easier to accomplish this, is adding some kind of speed limit (like in the real life) The speed limit being your engine temperature, aircraft couldn't maintain full throttle all time...
Implement this, and you'll have enough slow bombers :aok
I can agree with getting rid of the drone catch up speeds that was stated, and myself, when bombing from altitude run at about 75 to 80% power to maintain a very level flight to take advantage of the hyper accurate bombs.
BUT, if you make the bombers as true to life as you suggest, you won't see very many bombers at all. It takes a big investment in time to run a bomber mission correctly, and large missions of buffs are pretty rare events compared to the furballs seen in the game. We don't see 60 plane groups and 1,000 plane missions. The full speed runs, external views, drones, and slaved turrets are all part of the game mechanics geared toward playability.
How many fighters could operate at full throttle all the time? How many actually did operate that way?
I'd like to see more EW planes, I'd love to see more planes added to the Russian, Italian, German, and Japanese plane sets. I'd like to see the FlaK36 added to the grunts. I'd like to see something to spend buff perk points on, other than the Arado.
Just don't think any of it will come to pass.
-
id love the 111 and Hampden
-
Just monkeying with drones isn't the solution, because often scenarios and events use just 1 plane without formations. Seeing that the main user of the planes on the above list would be for setups/scenarios/events, that doesn't really help.
Besides, not counting the Ju88, it doesn't help to slow down the bombers we already have, because they still don't fit in a pre-1943 setup. We need genuine early war bombers
-
Amen Krusty, Amen. I just hate it how people hate the EW fighters. The EW fighters are so cool.
-
VOTE HEINKEL!!! lol. ANY model of Heinkel He-111 would do fine for me, so long as I get my "spade"!
-
I believe the only real EW bomber we have is the Stuka, slow enough for a Hurricane to catch up :)
-
Originally posted by frank3
I believe the only real EW bomber we have is the Stuka, slow enough for a Hurricane to catch up :)
Too bad you never see them during the BoB ;)
-
Hehe, no, nobody is foolish enough :D
-
Probably because no one will fly cover for them. But what do I know I'm a freeloader :noid
-
Originally posted by Krusty
P.S. The B-25 is a mid war plane. The C model was one of the fastest B-25 variants, also. It's not slow, nor can it sub for anything in the 1940/1941/1942 years. It's pretty much a 1943/later plane. And yes I very much would like to have the B-25, it just won't help at all in the above situations.
Honestly, I do not see how you can call the B-25 a "midwar" aircraft. Sure, the J's finally arrived in '43, but the US started shipping B-25B's to England in 1940. They also shipped 162 B-25C-5's to the Netherlands in early '42, not including additional shipments to England.
By the end of '42, the US had produced well over 3000 B-25's, with the vast majority being exported overseas.
I am curious why you call it a "midwar" aircraft?
I used the source, " B-25 Mitchell" by Steve Pace, which I feel is a phenomenal reference on the B-25 as source for these delivery schedules.
I do agree however, that it would be nice to see more "early war" bombers like the Mitchell, most especially the He-111 and Do-17.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
They also shipped 162 B-25C-5's to the Netherlands in early '42,
German occupied Netherlands? or Indonesia?
-
Originally posted by Tilt
German occupied Netherlands? or Indonesia?
Does not specify, so I would assume that they went to the Pacific.
-
Just for clarification:
I say the B-25 is a midwar plane because even if we had the early C model, and we used it in scenarios or setups, it would simply be a better, faster, Boston III (which we still really can't use in early setups very well!).
The main request is a representative "early" bomber so that we can put it in a scenario and not have it out-run most of the fighters from the same time frame. B-25 has the speed and payload that (even if we had it) it couldn't sub for much else other than a B-25.
Not saying the B-25 isn't useful as itself, but it wouldn't sub for anything in the 1939-1942 range very well.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
Does not specify, so I would assume that they went to the Pacific.
The B-25's went to Indonesia, not sure how many we had over there though
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Just for clarification:
I say the B-25 is a midwar plane because even if we had the early C model, and we used it in scenarios or setups, it would simply be a better, faster, Boston III (which we still really can't use in early setups very well!).
The main request is a representative "early" bomber so that we can put it in a scenario and not have it out-run most of the fighters from the same time frame. B-25 has the speed and payload that (even if we had it) it couldn't sub for much else other than a B-25.
Not saying the B-25 isn't useful as itself, but it wouldn't sub for anything in the 1939-1942 range very well.
The only thing is Krusty, it did serve in the early war. Subbing for anything is not a reason the aircraft should not be considered early.
-
Original post was for something that could sub for more early war bombers (including 1940 and 1941 as well as 1942). It's likely we'll get an H or J model. Assuming we had a C, we still can't use the B-25 to sub for a Betty. Nor a Blenheim. Nor a Heinkel 111. Nor a Hampden.
Again, that's why it wasn't on the list. That's all.
-
fair enough. And Yes, I would like to see some older buffs in game. Would make scenarios all the more fun.