Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: AceHavok on September 01, 2012, 08:06:55 PM

Title: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: AceHavok on September 01, 2012, 08:06:55 PM
Pretty please! It has a great combat record, numbers built etc... :D
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: RedBull1 on September 01, 2012, 09:06:59 PM
*directs 1sum to this post*
+1000
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Eric19 on September 01, 2012, 09:55:22 PM
+10000000000000000000000000000000 gimme my b25J with bombsight right now HTC or I'm gonna cry LOL
jk jk good job on strat thingy mehdohicky I got lost of perks today for running supps about 100 or so perks lol
but seriously ADD THE 25J
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Pigslilspaz on September 01, 2012, 11:11:58 PM
+5
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 02, 2012, 01:59:33 AM
+10000000000000000000000000000000000000000
 I would LOVE this variant!  :rock :rock :banana:
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 02, 2012, 02:13:01 AM
Whats a B-25J?

/Runs before 1sum catches him
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Karnak on September 02, 2012, 08:11:00 AM
B-25J would be a nice addition to the bomber stable in AH.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: TOMCAT21 on September 02, 2012, 08:12:28 AM
+1
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Tracerfi on September 02, 2012, 08:13:47 AM
we need german bombers first we only have one
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Eric19 on September 02, 2012, 08:46:07 AM
tracerfi we have 2 german bombers get it right god............. :bhead :bhead :bhead :bhead :bhead
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Tracerfi on September 02, 2012, 08:52:50 AM
tracerfi we have 2 german bombers get it right god............. :bhead :bhead :bhead :bhead :bhead

AR 234 does not count as a bomber in my book the Ju-88 is the only bomber we have the Ju-87 is a dive bomber give or take we only have one real German bomber

Edit: sorry for Hijack
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: MK-84 on September 02, 2012, 09:31:44 AM

AR 234 does not count as a bomber in my book the Ju-88 is the only bomber we have the Ju-87 is a dive bomber give or take we only have one real German bomber

Edit: sorry for Hijack

You are forgetting we have the Ju88
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 02, 2012, 09:35:30 AM

AR 234 does not count as a bomber in my book the Ju-88 is the only bomber we have the Ju-87 is a dive bomber give or take we only have one real German bomber

Edit: sorry for Hijack

Hi-jacking for a quote: AR 234 does not count as a bomber in my book -Tracerfi
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Tracerfi on September 02, 2012, 09:37:27 AM
Hi-jacking for a quote: AR 234 does not count as a bomber in my book -Tracerfi
its a jet bomber I only count prop planes
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 02, 2012, 11:51:04 AM
its a jet bomber I only count prop planes

lol Its still a Bomber... It carries bombs.....designed to bomb...... has a bombsite, its a bomber..

Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: AceHavok on September 02, 2012, 12:30:59 PM
I can has B-25J?
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: titanic3 on September 02, 2012, 12:32:47 PM
Hmm...how would it compare to a B-26? Replace it? No?
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Karnak on September 02, 2012, 12:55:05 PM
The B-25J could be added for a fraction of the effort needed to add a Ju188, Do217, He111 or such.  Comparing the two is like comparing apples and watermelons.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: AceHavok on September 02, 2012, 05:52:24 PM
The B-25J easily could replace the B-26,  It's basically a B-25H without the 75mm.  It also has a glass nose.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: palef on September 02, 2012, 05:55:22 PM
its a jet bomber I only count prop planes

No, it IS a jet bomber.

"It's a jet bomber. I only count prop (sic) planes."

How many can you count up to?
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 02, 2012, 06:24:24 PM
Not sure about this but ill fire away anyhow - the B-25C/H we have is close resembles the B-25J, wouldn't it be easy to add the B-25J in the game? I don't mean anytime soon - some other aircrafts out there I'd like to see added first, but if it can be reasonably quick to add
I wouldn't mind another variant added.

Basically would be a formation bomber with dozen 50s in nose along with 3k ords, basically a B-26 just not quite as good, still had some 4,000 versions built.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Karnak on September 02, 2012, 06:31:51 PM
The B-25J easily could replace the B-26,  It's basically a B-25H without the 75mm.  It also has a glass nose.
No reason to replace the B-26B when we can have both.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: AceHavok on September 02, 2012, 07:33:38 PM
Oops, I meant to see more use then the B-26.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Karnak on September 02, 2012, 07:44:34 PM
Oops, I meant to see more use then the B-26.
Doubtful.  The B-26B is superior to the B-25J in all significant ways.  Larger bomb load, faster, better gun positions.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Guppy35 on September 02, 2012, 10:40:43 PM
Not sure about this but ill fire away anyhow - the B-25C/H we have is close resembles the B-25J, wouldn't it be easy to add the B-25J in the game? I don't mean anytime soon - some other aircrafts out there I'd like to see added first, but if it can be reasonably quick to add
I wouldn't mind another variant added.

Basically would be a formation bomber with dozen 50s in nose along with 3k ords, basically a B-26 just not quite as good, still had some 4,000 versions built.


I think you hit on the potential issue for this though.

A formation of strafers.  I went and was looking at the histories of the MTO B25 Groups that were using B25Js for level bombing.  They didn't have the additional strafer 50s and why would they considering the roll they were used for?

So do you add formations for B25Js that aren't equipped as strafers and keep the strafer birds solo?

Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 02, 2012, 10:51:09 PM

So do you add formations for B25Js that aren't equipped as strafers and keep the strafer birds solo?



B-26 is much of a strafer as a B-25. I don't see many B-26s trying to strafe down hangers, even though it has a bigger bomb load and faster.
I don't see the B-25J being anything of a game changer, a set of lancs on the deck have a far more change to cause more damage by suicide bombing hangers then a B-25 has attempting to strafe.

Where the b-26 has less guns and bigger bombload, B-25 has more guns and less of a bombload.


 

Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: AceHavok on September 03, 2012, 01:50:05 AM
I think it's just a sexy plane.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Krusty on September 03, 2012, 02:06:18 AM
The B-25J could be added for a fraction of the effort needed to add a Ju188, Do217, He111 or such.

Indeed! Nose of the -C on the body of the -H, tweak a couple of guns packages, and the power curves.

I'm still puzzled as to why they added the C and H (or even the H at all!) but didn't add the VERY similar J model. It's like adding a 109F-4 but not a G-6.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 03, 2012, 08:33:57 AM
I just want the defensive armaments the H has, C is pretty undefended where J is simply a beast.

Lets see who tries to Ho down b-25Js.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Eric19 on September 03, 2012, 08:37:36 AM
I just want the defensive armaments the H has, C is pretty undefended where J is simply a beast.

Lets see who tries to Ho down b-25Js.
:D :devil
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Krusty on September 03, 2012, 02:55:25 PM
I just want the defensive armaments the H has, C is pretty undefended where J is simply a beast.

Lets see who tries to Ho down b-25Js.

Cs aren't nearly as defenseless as you might suggest. For whatever reasons HTC has modeled them as bullet sponges. I have experienced this as both attacker AND attacked. I've been in scenarios where entire flights of Fw190s ran out of ammo attacking B-25Cs and only getting 1 or 2 kills. I, personally, have withstood attacks from 3 Fw190D-9s in a single B-25C and survived to limp home 5 sectors on 1 engine. They broke off, having run out of ammo. The screenshots of the holes in my plane were epic.

I've also landed large numbers of 20mm hits (Fw190A8 with 4x20mm guns package) to no effect. Heck, I've hit B-25Cs with the spud gun on a P-39 point blank multiple times, and only oiled a single engine.

Because of their absurd resilience, they are quite defensible. On a single sortie I convinced 2 squadmates to up 25C formations with me. I nailed a single Me262 that attacked up, and one of my squaddies got another. On another sortie, he got TWO 262s in a single sortie that attacked him.

I do agree the defensive guns for the 25J would be idea for an MA level-bombing setting, but let's not go around saying the 25C is totally defenseless, shall we?
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 03, 2012, 03:18:27 PM
I do agree the defensive guns for the 25J would be idea for an MA level-bombing setting, but let's not go around saying the 25C is totally defenseless, shall we?

Lets see - the B-25C With Bombsite has one fixed 50 in the nose, one movable 50 in the nose two in the dorsal turret.

Now What does the B-25J have for defensive armaments? two 50s in the tail, two in the waist position, plus 10 additional 50s in the Nose.

I see a vast upgrade from defenseless to actually defendable, I mean christ a single attack from the rear 6 and a C model is shot down, doesn't matter if its a bullet sponge.
You sure as hell arn't doing the same in a J model. Hell I actually fly the H model just for the defensive positions vs the C model, only thing that sucks is no formations - i'd rather give up the 75mm for those extra guns.

Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Guppy35 on September 03, 2012, 03:21:03 PM
I just want the defensive armaments the H has, C is pretty undefended where J is simply a beast.

Lets see who tries to Ho down b-25Js.

Which again reveals that the wish is for strafer firepower in formations which wasn't there in the level bombers.  The C/D formation would be the same.


Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Krusty on September 03, 2012, 03:32:58 PM
Which again reveals that the wish is for strafer firepower in formations which wasn't there in the level bombers.  The C/D formation would be the same.

Guppy, that is my problem with the C model we have now. I want the "formations?" box to become unavailable as soon as you choose the solid nose. However, I wouldn't want to lose the multi-role capability as a whole. I would still love the option for the solid strafer nosed J. I just wouldn't want to see it in formations.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Krusty on September 03, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
I mean christ a single attack from the rear 6 and a C model is shot down, doesn't matter if its a bullet sponge.

This is where you are wrong. Because it DOES soak up bullets, targets must sit there firing into you repeatedly to do even the slightest damage. You have plenty of opportunity to return fire, even if they attack from BELOW your six. If you're even half awake you have a fighting chance.

The very fact it is a bullet sponge allows it to survive, and to shoot back. I am not saying it is as good as the J. I am saying you are flat out wrong that it is defenseless. Just because you can't seem to pay attention and shoot back when folks attack doesn't mean it's not possible.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 03, 2012, 03:37:37 PM
Guppy, that is my problem with the C model we have now. I want the "formations?" box to become unavailable as soon as you choose the solid nose. However, I wouldn't want to lose the multi-role capability as a whole. I would still love the option for the solid strafer nosed J. I just wouldn't want to see it in formations.

Why can't we have it locked - if you choose the solid nose you are stuck in attack mode and have no formations, in the Glass nose you are stuck in bomber mode with formations.
Depending on which nose you take, depends which version you get.


Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 03, 2012, 06:19:51 PM
B25 J

(http://i664.photobucket.com/albums/vv3/1sum41/DDalliance.jpg)

(http://i664.photobucket.com/albums/vv3/1sum41/IMG_0097.jpg)

(http://i664.photobucket.com/albums/vv3/1sum41/IMG_0100-1.jpg)
 :D +5000000000000 :aok
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Guppy35 on September 03, 2012, 06:31:31 PM
Why can't we have it locked - if you choose the solid nose you are stuck in attack mode and have no formations, in the Glass nose you are stuck in bomber mode with formations.
Depending on which nose you take, depends which version you get.




That would be the thing that made sense.  I understand the folks wanting the tail position but I think it's pushing it to have a guy be able to unload 3 plane loads of strafer 50s at a target in the air or on the ground

Not that I have any say in any of this :)

Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: cactuskooler on September 03, 2012, 07:35:19 PM
That would be the thing that made sense.  I understand the folks wanting the tail position but I think it's pushing it to have a guy be able to unload 3 plane loads of strafer 50s at a target in the air or on the ground

From experience, I can attest that three plane loads of strafers in formation is no more lethal than a single plane against air targets.  They don't converge at any point and you have no method of aiming the drones' nose guns.  It's only more intimating (and hilariously fun).

No hope for the drones' gun of hitting. 
(http://i547.photobucket.com/albums/hh473/cactuskooler/B-17s-1.jpg)

Your only chance would be to nestle up on another formation's six.  Even then not a single shot from the drones hit its target.  Maybe if I asked him to hold still and not shoot back while I align myself and test fire to see where the drones are pointing. :)

(http://i547.photobucket.com/albums/hh473/cactuskooler/88s1-1.jpg)

And I really don't see the issue of using a three strafer formation against ground targets.  Again they don't converge and you can't aim them.  The only target I can think of that could potentially be hit by all three planes simultaneously would be a large cluster of buildings in town.  Even then each plane would be hitting separate buildings, and any flight adjustments you make in your main plane would throw your drones off their target.  Frankly, I'd rather use my para-demos on the building clusters. :)

Most importantly, I want to replay this photo, and it's hard to find people who want to get killed by ack while playing PTO strafer with me, when they could just just level the town from 5k in Lancs. :)
(http://i547.photobucket.com/albums/hh473/cactuskooler/38th%20BG/jj43-28145EstrallitaPhilipinesEarly1945.jpg)

So +1 for the 25J.  I'd even skin it. :)
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: bangsbox on September 03, 2012, 09:27:02 PM
The B-25J easily could replace the B-26,  It's basically a B-25H without the 75mm.  It also has a glass nose.

SO WHAT IS THE POINT OF ADDING THIS....
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 03, 2012, 09:41:12 PM
SO WHAT IS THE POINT OF ADDING THIS....
Its a B25 variant that had defense and can bomb while using a sight. :aok
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: AceHavok on September 03, 2012, 10:18:07 PM
SO WHAT IS THE POINT OF ADDING THIS....

Because it's amazing!
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 03, 2012, 10:31:11 PM
Because it's amazing!
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/24565492.jpg)
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Karnak on September 03, 2012, 10:57:08 PM
Because it's amazing!
I am for adding it, but don't misrepresent it.

The B-26, not the B-25, had the lowest loss rate of American bombers in Europe.  The B-26 was superior.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Soulyss on September 04, 2012, 12:03:23 AM
Most importantly, I want to replay this photo, and it's hard to find people who want to get killed by ack while playing PTO strafer with me, when they could just just level the town from 5k in Lancs. :)
(http://i547.photobucket.com/albums/hh473/cactuskooler/38th%20BG/jj43-28145EstrallitaPhilipinesEarly1945.jpg)

So +1 for the 25J.  I'd even skin it. :)

Did someone say near suicidal B-25 mission?!?!?
 :D
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: cactuskooler on September 04, 2012, 01:03:26 AM
Did someone say near suicidal B-25 mission?!?!?
 :D


I know you're always up for it. :)
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Volron on September 04, 2012, 01:20:08 AM
I've brought home a heavily damage B-25C more than a few times.

(http://i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc473/UnkShadow/ahss6.jpg)

This isn't even the most heavily damaged one I've brought back (just don't have the screenies of them :().  In the events prior to this screen shot, I was attacked by a 262, 109 and P-47.  262 was what caused most of the damage to this plane.  He got one of my drones and, probably a surprise to some of ya, puffy from a CV got the other.  Yes, auto puffy from a CV shot down one of my bombers. :noid  They all had a bad day though. :)  Smoke the 262 and P-47, and greased the 109. :devil


Ya really can't say they are completely defenseless as they will take one hell of a beating.  I have fended off 110's, and we all know what their firepower is like. :aok
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: AceHavok on September 04, 2012, 05:01:20 PM
I am for adding it, but don't misrepresent it.

The B-26, not the B-25, had the lowest loss rate of American bombers in Europe.  The B-26 was superior.


I'm confused, are you comparing all models of the B-25 with the B-26? Remember the B-26 always had the tail gun.  I've even read stories of British pilots complaining that the 25C didn't have a tail gun.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Karnak on September 04, 2012, 08:07:33 PM

I'm confused, are you comparing all models of the B-25 with the B-26? Remember the B-26 always had the tail gun.  I've even read stories of British pilots complaining that the 25C didn't have a tail gun.
No, just the B-25J to the B-26B.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 04, 2012, 08:33:40 PM
No, just the B-25J to the B-26B.
Do you have these statistics? If so I would like to see them :)
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Eric19 on September 04, 2012, 08:39:30 PM
b25c was supposed to have a retractible belly turret also right behind the bombay  :mad:
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 04, 2012, 08:46:08 PM
b25c was supposed to have a retractible belly turret also right behind the bombay  :mad:
Most of those were taken out in the field. :aok
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: curry1 on September 04, 2012, 08:48:08 PM
Most of those were taken out in the field. :aok

So ours is a field mod?
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Ack-Ack on September 04, 2012, 08:50:41 PM
Cs aren't nearly as defenseless as you might suggest. For whatever reasons HTC has modeled them as bullet sponges. I have experienced this as both attacker AND attacked. I've been in scenarios where entire flights of Fw190s ran out of ammo attacking B-25Cs and only getting 1 or 2 kills. I, personally, have withstood attacks from 3 Fw190D-9s in a single B-25C and survived to limp home 5 sectors on 1 engine. They broke off, having run out of ammo. The screenshots of the holes in my plane were epic.

The B-25 (C/H) aren't all that much of a bullet sponge, it really depends on where you hit them.  Hit them aft of the cockpit and it will soak up some damage because the rounds are largely hitting areas with no vital, critical components.  Hit near or forward of the cockpit, wing root (especially vulnerable part on the Mitchell), or engine and you'll be very surprised at how little ammunition it takes.  It takes me no more than a solid burst at the wing root or engine to catch a Mitchell on fire and it takes me no more than 3 passes to take out a formation.  Those FW 190s you ran up against were obviously not very good shooters.

Quote
I've also landed large numbers of 20mm hits (Fw190A8 with 4x20mm guns package) to no effect. Heck, I've hit B-25Cs with the spud gun on a P-39 point blank multiple times, and only oiled a single engine.

Again, it really depends on where you land your shots.  I have no troubles with the 20mm cannon on the P-38 when engaging Mitchells, even the quad .50s are more than sufficient enough to down an entire formation.

Quote
Because of their absurd resilience, they are quite defensible. On a single sortie I convinced 2 squadmates to up 25C formations with me. I nailed a single Me262 that attacked up, and one of my squaddies got another. On another sortie, he got TWO 262s in a single sortie that attacked him.

Sure, the B-25C can defend itself but against a determined attacker that knows what he's doing, the B-25C doesn't have a snow ball's chance in Hell.  This is the one bomber in which it is safe to engage from slighly below (to keep out of the top turret's line of fire) the dead six position and sit there plinking away at the Mitchell and there is nothing but that the Mitchell driver can do other than cringe and pucker up.  Even coming from above, the top turret really isn't that much of a threat unless you are careless in your attack.  Broadside attacks are also quite effective against the Mitchell.  

As for the Me 262s that attacked you, all your anecdote does is tell me that you ran into a couple of Me 262 drivers that didn't know squat in attacking a bomber.

ack-ack
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: titanic3 on September 04, 2012, 10:15:20 PM
I ran into a couple of 25C and like AKAK said, sit behind them slightly below and have fun. Only thing they can do is watch.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 04, 2012, 11:35:17 PM
As for the Me 262s that attacked you, all your anecdote does is tell me that you ran into a couple of Me 262 drivers that didn't know squat in attacking a bomber.

ack-ack

I'd like to see the results of a veteran 262 pilot doing a quarter-head on pass and knows what he's doing. Anything decent he will score no less then two victories in one pass without a 25C even firing a shot.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: lyric1 on September 04, 2012, 11:59:49 PM
lol Its still a Bomber... It carries bombs.....designed to bomb...... has two bombsite's, its a bomber..


Fixed.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Eric19 on September 05, 2012, 06:14:20 AM
The B-25 (C/H) aren't all that much of a bullet sponge, it really depends on where you hit them.  Hit them aft of the cockpit and it will soak up some damage because the rounds are largely hitting areas with no vital, critical components.  Hit near or forward of the cockpit, wing root (especially vulnerable part on the Mitchell), or engine and you'll be very surprised at how little ammunition it takes.  It takes me no more than a solid burst at the wing root or engine to catch a Mitchell on fire and it takes me no more than 3 passes to take out a formation.  Those FW 190s you ran up against were obviously not very good shooters.

Again, it really depends on where you land your shots.  I have no troubles with the 20mm cannon on the P-38 when engaging Mitchells, even the quad .50s are more than sufficient enough to down an entire formation.

Sure, the B-25C can defend itself but against a determined attacker that knows what he's doing, the B-25C doesn't have a snow ball's chance in Hell.  This is the one bomber in which it is safe to engage from slighly below (to keep out of the top turret's line of fire) the dead six position and sit there plinking away at the Mitchell and there is nothing but that the Mitchell driver can do other than cringe and pucker up.  Even coming from above, the top turret really isn't that much of a threat unless you are careless in your attack.  Broadside attacks are also quite effective against the Mitchell. 

As for the Me 262s that attacked you, all your anecdote does is tell me that you ran into a couple of Me 262 drivers that didn't know squat in attacking a bomber.

ack-ack
all you gotta do in a b25c when someone tries to sneak up on your six is just hit auto climb and there dead I've killed many a jug and 110s and couple of 410s since the new release by doing that cause they don't expect it
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Butcher on September 05, 2012, 08:07:13 AM
all you gotta do in a b25c when someone tries to sneak up on your six is just hit auto climb and there dead I've killed many a jug and 110s and couple of 410s since the new release by doing that cause they don't expect it

Doesn't going auto climb then jump into gunner position put you in level flight?
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Karnak on September 05, 2012, 10:21:18 AM
Do you have these statistics? If so I would like to see them :)
No I don't.  It was simply a statement in a book somewhere.

That said, it is hardly surprising given that it is faster and has better defensive gun arcs while being spared the long rage deep penetration missions of the heavies.  What other US bomber in Europe is going to beat that?
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Eric19 on September 05, 2012, 03:42:06 PM
Doesn't going auto climb then jump into gunner position put you in level flight?
nope
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: tunnelrat on September 05, 2012, 03:57:10 PM
Doesn't going auto climb then jump into gunner position put you in level flight?

If you are talking about auto-speed (alt-X) it maintains while you are in gun positions.  It will, however, put you on standard autopilot if you are not already on it and jump to a gun position.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: RedBull1 on September 06, 2012, 12:23:26 AM
B25J pwns we so need it!
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Krusty on September 07, 2012, 06:32:24 PM
The B-25 (C/H) aren't all that much of a bullet sponge, it really depends on where you hit them.  Hit them aft of the cockpit and it will soak up some damage because the rounds are largely hitting areas with no vital, critical components.  Hit near or forward of the cockpit, wing root (especially vulnerable part on the Mitchell), or engine and you'll be very surprised at how little ammunition it takes.  It takes me no more than a solid burst at the wing root or engine to catch a Mitchell on fire and it takes me no more than 3 passes to take out a formation.  Those FW 190s you ran up against were obviously not very good shooters.

Again, it really depends on where you land your shots.  I have no troubles with the 20mm cannon on the P-38 when engaging Mitchells, even the quad .50s are more than sufficient enough to down an entire formation.

Sure, the B-25C can defend itself but against a determined attacker that knows what he's doing, the B-25C doesn't have a snow ball's chance in Hell.  This is the one bomber in which it is safe to engage from slighly below (to keep out of the top turret's line of fire) the dead six position and sit there plinking away at the Mitchell and there is nothing but that the Mitchell driver can do other than cringe and pucker up.  Even coming from above, the top turret really isn't that much of a threat unless you are careless in your attack.  Broadside attacks are also quite effective against the Mitchell.  

As for the Me 262s that attacked you, all your anecdote does is tell me that you ran into a couple of Me 262 drivers that didn't know squat in attacking a bomber.

ack-ack

That's quite dismissive. Please keep in mind I'm utter RUBBISH as a bomber gunner. Absolutely the worse. And yet I've survived a massive onslaught of 190D-9s attacking me and made it out alive. I've shot down Me262s, something my aim should never have allowed. You only have to bank into a shallow turn to track targets setting up below you and fire on them as they come at you.

You can't say the attackers sucked, because the 190s were quite skilled and the 262s were serveral encounters and repeated on different days as well. It wasn't the same idiot every time.

As for my FIGHTER gunnery, it is quite good. I'm not the BEST shot, but damn sure well know how to shoot 4x20mm at a bomber. I made 3 runs on a single B-25C in a Fw190A8 (4x20mm) and landed hits squarely on the fuselage just forward of the wings but behind the cockpit.

Further, when I hit one repeatedly with 37mms (this has happened on numerous occasions, as I enjoy flying P-39s) it has been in vital spots. Spots including wing areas where fuel was stored, engines (point blank), and even directly below the cockpit glazing with a side-angle.

You may not have much regard for the B-25's capabilities, but denying it soaks up damage is ludicrous.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Ack-Ack on September 07, 2012, 06:49:24 PM

You may not have much regard for the B-25's capabilities, but denying it soaks up damage is ludicrous.

It's not that I don't have a regard for the defensive capablilities of the B-25, I just don't have high regard for claims such as yours when the "evidence" is more indicitive of pilot ability than the plane itself.  As for denying it soaks up damage, I don't think I did that anywhere in my post. 

Quote
The B-25 (C/H) aren't all that much of a bullet sponge, it really depends on where you hit them.  Hit them aft of the cockpit and it will soak up some damage because the rounds are largely hitting areas with no vital, critical components.  Hit near or forward of the cockpit, wing root (especially vulnerable part on the Mitchell), or engine and you'll be very surprised at how little ammunition it takes.  It takes me no more than a solid burst at the wing root or engine to catch a Mitchell on fire and it takes me no more than 3 passes to take out a formation.  Those FW 190s you ran up against were obviously not very good shooters.


ack-ack
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Krusty on September 07, 2012, 06:54:08 PM
You suggested it. And "aft of the cockpit" is not devoid of important vital areas. Not the least of which includes the wing frames/spars, fuel tanks, major control surfaces. It's not just an empty shell, and if it's modeled as such that modeling is flat out WRONG, and will, as a matter of fact result in "bullet sponge" like features.

It means you are shooting bullets into something with good hits but doing no damage. It's a flaw in the damage modeling, rather than "you're not doing it right" -- because even when done right it still takes a beating.

The only way it's NOT a bullet sponge is with direct pilot kills -- but this is true of any plane. It shouldn't be factored in any more than on the B17, B24, or Lancaster, as they also pop very quickly when you shoot the pilot through the cockpit.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Babalonian on September 07, 2012, 07:04:18 PM
Mmmm, flying PBJs.....
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 07, 2012, 10:13:16 PM
Mmmm, flying PBJs.....
:aok I still think that this aircraft would be one of the most, if not the most used medium bombers in game if it were added. 
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: AceHavok on September 07, 2012, 10:55:47 PM
PBJ's looks almost identical to the B-25J could some please tell me the differences?
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 08, 2012, 12:46:38 AM
PBJ's looks almost identical to the B-25J could some please tell me the differences?
its the same thing just renamed because that's how the marines roll. :D
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Citabria on September 08, 2012, 01:20:37 AM
b25J would be a great late war level bomber. much more popular than b25c by far it would be.
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: MAINER on September 08, 2012, 08:38:21 PM
+1 for b-25J
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on September 09, 2012, 12:58:45 AM
+2000
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: sparky1 on January 31, 2013, 02:03:28 PM
I would love to see it in the game +1000
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: 1sum41 on January 31, 2013, 02:31:21 PM
+2000  :D
Title: Re: B-25J Mitchell
Post by: Babalonian on January 31, 2013, 04:33:40 PM
+35857