Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Major Biggles on May 31, 2011, 10:43:30 PM
-
My little wish is that when HTC decide to remodel the boston 3/A20, they also add one or two other light bombers, preferably something british and something russian, and that they'd also add a new attack aircraft, perhaps the A26 that so many people have voted for in the new plane polls...
-
I love the Boston - +1 for any additions to it.
-
Quick question, did the Boston Mk. III have the ventral turret like the A-20 did as well?
-
Quick question, did the Boston Mk. III have the ventral turret like the A-20 did as well?
Don't think so.
wrongway
-
How about the hampden?
I have been reading Guy Gibson's Enemy Coast Ahead recently and the work those guys did in Early War just to remind Gerry that there was still a war on I take my hat off to them.
Very brave men who did their job no questions asked. Even if the target was some crazy idea to help the war effort. :salute
torpedo version optional ;)
For Russia I would say the TU-2 a very capable twin engine aircraft!
-
GB;
Wellington
Halifax
Russia;
DB3M
PE8
:)
-
The Russians and Germans are hurting for Buffs. There are good choices available too! The Do217, Tu-2, Pe-2 and Pe-8 each have the potential to carve out a niche in the MA imho.
-
The Russians and Germans are hurting for Buffs. There are good choices available too! The Do217, Tu-2, Pe-2 and Pe-8 each have the potential to carve out a niche in the MA imho.
What about the only Italian buff? (SM.79 I think) Also, didn't the Do17 serve too?
-
Do-17 was a nonentity. Even in the BOB it was obsolete and ready for retirement. It had a small minority of bombers in the LW attacks on the UK, but it still sustained a higher loss ratio than any of the other types.
It was the weakest of the pre-war bombers and saw almost no real war-time service. It has little use in the AH planeset other than "just because".
DB3 was about as useless. Also an early 1930s design. The Soviets used it a little longer than the Germans because they had this protective delusion that they wouldn't need newer craft (the German invasion removed them of that notion). FYI the DB3 is also called the IL4. Different companies but the same plane with minor changes, or some such.
For the Soviets the issue is they really didn't have a level bomber fleet. They had tactical air support. They had Pe-2s, but these are lightly armed by AH standards. They had LaGG-3s and such with rockets or IL-2s with bombs and guns.
The Tu-2 would be a good performer but was generally a late-war bomber and not very useful in planesets or scenarios and setups. Nice, yes, but filling only a tiny hole. I say the VVS planeset really needs a Pe-2 but that this is the only real "bomber" it desperately needs. All other VVS planeset holes would be fighters.
P.S. Pe-8 has no real place in this game. It was rarely used, they had all of low-teens digits in service, and were used as long range VIP transports in most notable instances. It simply wasn't needed. It was a morale boosting tool for the Soviet populace, not a real bomber. Flew most of its missions at night, too (I think).
-
For the Soviets the issue is they really didn't have a level bomber fleet.
I suggest you read up on Soviet Long Range Aviation (ADD). Soviets had a whole air force inside the air force dedicated to long range bombing. Much like the British Bomber Command. For example, some of the raids on Helsinki and Tallinn in early '44 were done with several hundred bombers per raid.
While neither IL-4 or Pe-2 will see much use in the MA they are very important types when looking at eastern front special events.
-
I don't know much about that, so I can't comment about big formation raids.
I would say that of the long-range night bomber fleet the VVS fielded 3 main rides, 2 of which we already have: The B-25 and the C-47 (and Li-2 licensed copy). The third was the least capable, the IL-4. The only reason this was used was because it was at night and had a very long range.
Consider that the old biplanes were still used by the VVS in night raids. They put anything up that they thought could escape detection at night. In the light of day it wouldn't have survived.
As for my comment: "the issue is they really didn't have a level bomber fleet" I will ammend that to exclude lend-lease.
(I still maintain the overall impact of VVS level bombing in the war was small, and their entire design philosophy seems to reflect this)
-
Krusty is right about the Pe-8s lack of meaningful impact on the war but I contend the same could be said of the F4U-1C. I looked up some stats and while some carried 20mm defensive armament, the bombload was too light to be an MA fav. The Pe-2 is the WWII aircraft with the highest production total that is currently not modeled in AH. (Honorable mention goes to the He111 in this category)
-
Quick question, did the Boston Mk. III have the ventral turret like the A-20 did as well?
No ventral turret on A-20 aircraft. If you meant dorsal turret the answer is no.
-
Lyric, in case there's any confusion I think he meant the gun placement, not a turret. I.E. the tunnel gun.
-
I don't know much about that, so I can't comment about big formation raids.
Well, if the ADD did raids with several hundred level bombers at a time wouldn't it tell you that they had a level bomber fleet?
I would say that of the long-range night bomber fleet the VVS fielded 3 main rides, 2 of which we already have: The B-25 and the C-47 (and Li-2 licensed copy). The third was the least capable, the IL-4. The only reason this was used was because it was at night and had a very long range.
B-25 was in no shape or form a main type of the ADD. It did have them but it was far from being a main type. Main type was the Il-4 and Il-4 is hardly worse bomber than Li-2. ~5200 Il-4s were produced during the war where as 862 B-25s were delivered to SU.
Consider that the old biplanes were still used by the VVS in night raids. They put anything up that they thought could escape detection at night. In the light of day it wouldn't have survived.
Night harrasment raids over the frontline have nothing to do with ADD or dedicated level bombers.
As for my comment: "the issue is they really didn't have a level bomber fleet" I will ammend that to exclude lend-lease.
Most of the ADD's fleet was comprised of domestically built aircraft.
(I still maintain the overall impact of VVS level bombing in the war was small, and their entire design philosophy seems to reflect this)
That is something that could be argued one way or another. However in the context of AH it is totally irrelevant. The fact is that the SU operated large numbers of level bombers in various offensives and campaigns and in order to have representative planeset to AH special events domestic Soviet bombers like the Pe-2 and Il-4 are very much needed.
-
Lyric, in case there's any confusion I think he meant the gun placement, not a turret. I.E. the tunnel gun.
If he meant Ventral tunnel gun? Then the answer is absolutely yes it had one. Drawings & photos available if required. 30 Cal on the Boston some versions had other types of guns, 50 cal on the A20G.