Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: 1K3 on July 27, 2007, 01:47:33 PM
-
and what variant model is the B-25 with a tank gun?
-
G
-
G and H had had the 75 mm
Unless they redo the fuselage of the C/D, I'd guess we'd get the G as it's much the same with the Top Turret behind the bomb bay etc.
H had a different tail gunner position, waist guns, and the top turret moved forward of the bomb bay.
-
didnt later versions of the c have waist guns too?
-
Originally posted by rogerdee
didnt later versions of the c have waist guns too?
Many of the B-25C/D used in the MTO were modified to their improve defensive armament:
321st Bombardment Group had 57 of their B-25Cs and Ds fitted with additional guns before being dispatched to Africa. This work was done at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center in Georgia. The virtually useless retractable ventral turret was removed and the hole in the floor left by the vacant turret was structured over. Larger windows were cut into the aft fuselage and a single 0.50-inch waist gun was mounted behind each window. A single flexible machine gun was installed in the extreme tail operated by a gunner sitting underneath a raised canopy that was somewhat similar to that later installed on the B-25H and J versions.
Additional airplanes were modified at the Sidi Ahmed Air Base at Bizerte. In addition to the extra defensive guns, more armor production was provided, with plates being added underneath the pilot's seats, forward of the instrument panel, on the waist gun floor, and on the floor and sides of the tail gun position.
More than 300 B-25Cs and Ds from the 12th, 310th, 321st, and 340th Bombardment Groups were processed. These planes served throughout the Mediterranean campaign from Tunisia to the final German surrender in northern Italy. Many of these modifications were later introduced on the production line with the B-25H and J versions.
-
You can find photos of modified C/Ds with waist guns, extra nose guns, tail guns etc.
I'm talking about a purpose built waist position with large windows and guns on each side in them along with the tail
G on top with added waist guns in small window, generally a single 50 in the tail in an unenclosed position. two 50s in the nose for siting and no sid gun packs along with the turret behind bomb bay
H had 4 50s in nose, 4 in gun packs below cockpit, 2 in the waist and two in the tail as well as 2 in the top turret moved forward. A much deadlier beast.
both had the 75s
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/25s.jpg)
-
Does the G also carry bombs? (Sorry I dont know anything about the B-25...)
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Does the G also carry bombs? (Sorry I dont know anything about the B-25...)
Nevermind, sometimes answering a question is pointless.
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Does the G also carry bombs? (Sorry I dont know anything about the B-25...)
IIRC 3,000 to 3,200 lb capacity for bombs in a G.
The pics show what appear to be the C/D and G versions of the B-25.
One pic however shows a partially glass nosed straffer though? (http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/confused0069.gif) (http://www.thesmilies.com) 8-pack in nose and four in fuselage-mounted pods (which first showed up in the H version, IIRC) much like a J, but J (and later H's) had a forward mounted dorsal turret, tail gun, and side gun positions, which this does not.
Now, it's generally been assumed field mods would not make it into the game, so it there a factory version of a C/D, G, or H that matches that one shown, or are field mods no longer to be considered taboo in AHII? Or is it a recognition about the great number of field mods this particular plane saw in the war? Did the fuselage pods arrive before the H version?
Just curious, as I've just other forum members word about the "field mods" thing and have never seen anything official from HTC regarding the matter.
-
As long as there is a straight bomber version, Ill be happy!
-
The screenshots show only 4 in the nose and 4 in the cheeks.
Also, I thought at first it was a painted glazed nose, but on second thought I think it's just not finished yet. The tail planes are boxed of, as are the cheek guns. I think he's just still modeling the windows, is all.
-
Originally posted by Serenity
As long as there is a straight bomber version, Ill be happy!
ill be happy in one i could dogfight or at least try to. :D
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
IIRC 3,000 to 3,200 lb capacity for bombs in a G.
The pics show what appear to be the C/D and G versions of the B-25.
One pic however shows a partially glass nosed straffer though? (http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/confused0069.gif) (http://www.thesmilies.com) 8-pack in nose and four in fuselage-mounted pods (which first showed up in the H version, IIRC) much like a J, but J (and later H's) had a forward mounted dorsal turret, tail gun, and side gun positions, which this does not.
Now, it's generally been assumed field mods would not make it into the game, so it there a factory version of a C/D, G, or H that matches that one shown, or are field mods no longer to be considered taboo in AHII? Or is it a recognition about the great number of field mods this particular plane saw in the war? Did the fuselage pods arrive before the H version?
Just curious, as I've just other forum members word about the "field mods" thing and have never seen anything official from HTC regarding the matter.
The Strafer was a 5th Air Force Mod. Any B25C/Ds that came to them went through that process. In that regard it's not a field mod in that an entire air force was modifying the 25s before they got to the field.
5th AF requirements for example had their B24s coming without Ball turrets and they had tunnel guns installed instead as the conditions they operated in tended to make the ball turrets useless.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
The screenshots show only 4 in the nose and 4 in the cheeks.
Also, I thought at first it was a painted glazed nose, but on second thought I think it's just not finished yet. The tail planes are boxed of, as are the cheek guns. I think he's just still modeling the windows, is all.
Understand that the painted noses on the C/D strafers were just that. They painted over the glazing as there was no one in there to look out. So you will see some with the front of the nose still showing the glazing at times.
The gun packs were all part of Pappy Gunn's conversion for the 5th AF of the B25C/D into a strafer.
The original cheek guns were in a single pod with 2 guns sticking out, not the later two pod set up of the H and J versions.
-
Like this one:
B-25H-1NA - IL-2 Skinners 'trick' to paint over the glaze...
(http://www.warwingsart.com/345thBG/B25J_345thBG_498th_BS_Falcons_800_00.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
The Strafer was a 5th Air Force Mod. Any B25C/Ds that came to them went through that process. In that regard it's not a field mod in that an entire air force was modifying the 25s before they got to the field.
5th AF requirements for example had their B24s coming without Ball turrets and they had tunnel guns installed instead as the conditions they operated in tended to make the ball turrets useless.
Thanks. That was a better response to that question than I thought I'd get in the forums.
So, the new addition will be a C/D with options on the 5th AF "Strafer" version and on the C/D versions that were factory converted to the G version.
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
Thanks. That was a better response to that question than I thought I'd get in the forums.
So, the new addition will be a C/D with options on the 5th AF "Strafer" version and on the C/D versions that were factory converted to the G version.
That would be the best guess, unless they decided to do the H which leaves open the option to do a J as the H would have the later fuselage with forward turret and tail postion etc.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
(http://www.warwingsart.com/345thBG/B25J_345thBG_498th_BS_Falcons_800_00.jpg)
**Polishes up 190A8**
(Only German metal I fly, other then 234)
-
I am wondering why they are not making the 25 as the H and J instead. It seems as though in its current state (suspected to be a D and G) it will fair better in the early, mid, and FSO enviroments especially if the retractable belly turret is not included. Though I will be using it.
-
Understand that the C/Ds were fighting well into 44 and the Js were 44-45.
It makes the most sense to start with the C/D for any number of reasons, scenarios, snapshots and AvA not withstanding :)
And of course Toad's Dad flew a D strafer in 44.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Understand that the C/Ds were fighting well into 44 and the Js were 44-45.
It makes the most sense to start with the C/D for any number of reasons, scenarios, snapshots and AvA not withstanding :)
And of course Toad's Dad flew a D strafer in 44.
I understand this, but the reason people voted down the he-111 was because they deemed it defenceless and slow, if they do not model the retractable turret this is just a sheep for the slaughter. If it atleast does not hace the turret on the D, I will be hunting these in my 109 for sure.
-
Originally posted by DaddyAck
I understand this, but the reason people voted down the he-111 was because they deemed it defenceless and slow, if they do not model the retractable turret this is just a sheep for the slaughter. If it at least does not have the turret on the D, I will be hunting these in my 109 for sure.
You going to get yourself in trouble like I do you keep posting these things DaddyAck.
And slow? At least it will be faster than the Goon, Kate, and Val as well as the Stuka, SBD, TBM, and IL-2 (at least at altitude, it may be slower than these 4 on the deck).
No worries!
-
Again the debate goes on.
Is this for purely MA use or are there other motivations for it's inclusion.
I know Ted is a 26 guy. For a late war, MA bird it would make great sense. But I don't think that's all that goes into it.
If that was the case, then we'd have 51Ds, 190D9s, 109Ks LA7s Spit 16s etc and nothing prior to late 44 production.
Would the He111 make sense? Sure for the scenario use and potential early war stuff and AvA. Would it get used in the MA? Doubt it.
The more I think about it, the more I believe the cannon bird will be an H if only for the MA use option.
With tail guns, waist guns top turret, 8 forward firing 50s and the 75mm it would be a potent bird that can't get clobbered as easy.
But I also bet that guys will take strafers up too and those with a history bent will take the glass nose one at times.
-
According to the screenies its looking like the 25D and G, they if it is modeled will have a dorsal turret and a retractable ventral turret (and a .30 in a flex mount in the nose for the D). I stand by my conviction that these birds will be under gunned and almost never taken to altitude, hence the easy prey comment. As far as the comment "If that was the case, then we'd have 51Ds, 190D9s, 109Ks LA7s Spit 16s etc" look around the LWA, that is most of what is seen (you forgot N1Ks) there are a few whoom fly older mounts, but the ratio is dis-proportionate. Finally unless they change from whats in the screen shots we will not have the H, it is looking like the D and G which is fine for the EWA and MWA as well as FSO and senarios.
(about my He-111 comment, I was not trying to debate anything. I was stating my opinion that there would be no difference in including the 111 over the 25 with the versions it appears we will be getting.)
-
Well, Ack, at least it's all they've shown so FAR. IIRC, they didn't announce the F4U-1A being added when the Corsairs were updated until the actual date-of-release changes were posted on the downloads page.
While there ARE going to be modeling differences between the C/D/G and J, it strikes me that they're not going to be so significant that it would drastically affect their ability to include the later Mitch (I think I remember either Skuzzy or Waffle mentioning that they really wanted to get in the C/D, G ***AND*** J when it was announced the B-25 won the vote-off). While nothing really to this extent, I've done enough 3D modeling in the past to know that moving the turret may be a simpler matter than most people realize.
-
Oh roger, I realize that these were just works in progress teaser type things. I just will have to wait and see how it all works out as to which versions we actually get. (and if they do give teh para-frags with the H)
-
Originally posted by Saxman
While there ARE going to be modeling differences between the C/D/G and J, it strikes me that they're not going to be so significant that it would drastically affect their ability to include the later Mitch (I think I remember either Skuzzy or Waffle mentioning that they really wanted to get in the C/D, G ***AND*** J when it was announced the B-25 won the vote-off).
It was Pyro I thought. But, one pic shows what is aparently a B-25C/D "Strafer" as the 5th AF flew them, so why develop the "Strafer" if you were also adding the J?
No I think you had it right in the other thread: One B-25C/D with option load out for Strafer and one B-25G (C/D conversion to G).
The first probably will allow drones, the second probably won't. The painted over nose section of the strafer may negate use of the norden in the C/D, the G probably won't be equipped with one, or solid nose prevents it's use. All built on the C/D airframe and FM.
-
Well...
B-25C/D/G would be more of a midwar bird. Certainly she'll be more competitive there.
The B-25J strafer has an additional four forward .50cal in the nose so brings more fixed forward firepower, not to mention being able to put the dorsal turret into it as it's now located much further forward. She'll also be more survivable with the addition of the tail and waist gunner positions in both the bomber and strafer variants.
Also factor in the increased ordinance loadout with the external racks, (noted in one of the threads in another forum) and I can see where the B-25J would be worthwhile.
-
I can see where doing the J could be worthwhile, but if they were working on the B-25J, then why bother with the B-25C/D done up in the strafer version for the 5th AF?
(http://www1.hitechcreations.com/images/b25/b257.jpg)
I'm surprised there are 3 versions of the B-25, considering how some of the past releases have comes over the past 2 years. I can't really see a fourth. The C/D strafer and early G models were at least all built on the same C/D version. The J had a number of differences compared to them.
-
I'd say the reasoning would be one for MW, while the other would be more viable in LW (C/D/G would get eaten alive by the late-war uber rides, but the J would at least stand a fighting chance with the beefed up defensive armament.
My thinking is it would be more or less the same reason we have about a dozen different Spit and 109 variants. I'm sure the Spit and 109 regulars would be pretty frustrated contending with La-7s and F4U-4s with only the Mk.I and Emil in the stable, even though the game could have probably survived without the other models.
Besides, how much modification to the model was REALLY needed to turn the glass-nosed C/D into a strafer anyway?
-
Originally posted by DaddyAck
Oh roger, I realize that these were just works in progress teaser type things. I just will have to wait and see how it all works out as to which versions we actually get. (and if they do give teh para-frags with the H)
Parafrags went to work with the C/D Strafers and A20s of the 5th. They never really took to the B25H as pilots didn't like having no co-pilot for low level work and the cannon wasn't effective in that role.
They often replaced the cannon with 2 50s in the gun tunnel.
-
So, basically, after all this debate, we're sure of one thing: We're getting the B-25.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
So, basically, after all this debate, we're sure of one thing: We're getting the B-25.
I was just about to type the same thing.
-
Originally posted by Saxman
I'd say the reasoning would be one for MW, while the other would be more viable in LW (C/D/G would get eaten alive by the late-war uber rides, but the J would at least stand a fighting chance with the beefed up defensive armament.
I've bee admonished many times in these forums since the voting started by others that it's not about the LW or being competitive in the LW. It is about adding a bomber to "fill a hole" in the already large American plane set with a plane that can be used, by the Allies, in any Theater of Operation for SEA. You soooo silly. LW indeed.
Besides, how much modification to the model was REALLY needed to turn the glass-nosed C/D into a strafer anyway?
Very little, plus there was the Vote for Toad's Dad contingent in the forums, as he flew a Strafer, so it's addition is very easy to see being done. Remove flexible forward .50, add a few fixed forward .50s'. paint the nose to disable use of the Norden possibly? The 5th AF strafer and early models of the G were all built on the C/D airframe, so FM and damage model are about the same. Biggest change is blunt nose on the G.
The J would require a bit more work. Tailgun, moving the top turret, removal of dorsal, addition of side gunner positions, changing single cheek mount pods to dual cheek mount pods. Not sure if there were any engine upgrades, but the above would require more changes to the graphics, FM, and damage model from the baseline C/D used for all the others.
So, is it more realistic that after three months since the vote that AHII is getting a C/D along with a Strafer and a G option, or that we are getting those 3 PLUS a J?
-
Well, you ASKED what other reason there is to add the B-25J since we're already getting a C/D strafer, so I gave one. :p
-
While Im glad to see the B25 win, I thought it would be in its later configurations. Look at the B-24,26,17s they are all in their late war configurations. Oh well, it seems that from the screenies unless changed to add the retractable belly turret, this EWA/MWA plane is going to get creamed in the LWA and only have the dorsal turret to defend with, not to mention how funny it will be to watch people actually try and strafe TT with the HE rounds. I can forsee the LTAR's scores shooting WAY up. :D
-
I'm so sick of late war uber rides. We need as many early/mid war planes to fill the huge gaps in the set. Kudos to HTC for attempting to fill them.
-
DaddyAck,
The fact that those are in their late war configs is likely the reason the B-25 is in the early war configs. Want to fly a late war American medium bomber? Great, grab a B-26.
-
well.............
when do we get it?
-
2 weeks :D
-
it said some where that the B25H could carry 8 rockets.
-
So with the tank gun this is probably the A-10 warthog/bomber of world war II as was the p-47/fighter
-
Originally posted by devild0g
So with the tank gun this is probably the A-10 warthog/bomber of world war II as was the p-47/fighter
Not really. A-10 is a ground attack and anti-tank platform with a long loiter time and heavy armored to survive low over a battlefield. That B-25G's 75mm fired HE rounds that were used to sink shipping: sampans, fishing boats, barges. Occasionally up against a lone patrolling destroyer. Simple bridges or structures would also be good targets for it.
The IL2 and Henschel Hs 129 (limited numbers, 800-900, so little effect on war) have more in common to the A-10 Thunderbolt II than the B-25G/H. Closest American analogy to the A-10 for the 1940's would be the A-1 Skyraider, but it did not get deployed until 1946, and no big gun mounted. The A-26B Invader or the B-25J probably come close as well to the A-10's ability to haul lot's of ord, have a long loiter time over target, and have lot's of rounds to fire in strafer role..... but they were not anti-tank guns either.
-
Check the home page. Looks like the count is now up to possibly three models plus 1 alternate gun package:
B-25C/D in bomber and strafer packages
B-25G (unless they've decided to forgo the G and just use the H)
B-25H
With a B-25H in the stable, a 25J bomber and strafer is much more likely.
-
Drop one of those 75mm HE shells on top of the tanks turret and see what happens.
-
Most likely?
Nothing.
-
Originally posted by ariansworld
Drop one of those 75mm HE shells on top of the tanks turret and see what happens.
It should result in some damage now and then when the shelll hits engine grills and such.
If it results in a lot of kills, it's modeled wrong. ;)
-
Originally posted by Saxman
Check the home page. Looks like the count is now up to possibly three models plus 1 alternate gun package:
B-25C/D in bomber and strafer packages
B-25G (unless they've decided to forgo the G and just use the H)
B-25H
With a B-25H in the stable, a 25J bomber and strafer is much more likely.
I think it's just the 2 (C/D and H) until they say otherwise. One was a lot, 2 was more than expected... 3 would just be downright generous!
I will remain skeptical to keep my hopes for a J from being squashed.