Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: gyrene81 on May 30, 2013, 07:46:10 AM
-
already have the b5n2, may as well add the "upgrade"...
B6N2
Engine: Mitsubishi MK4T Kasei 25 fourteen-cylinder air-cooled radial
Power: 1,850hp at take-off, 1,680hp at 6,880ft, 1,540hp at 18,040ft
Crew: 3 - pilot, observer/ navigator/ bomb-aimer, radio-operator/ gunner
Wing span: 48ft 10 3/8in
Length: 35ft 7 3/4in
Height: 12ft 5 19.32in
Empty Weight: 6,636lb
Loaded Weight: 11,464lb
Max Speed: 299mph at 16,075ft
Cruising Speed: 207mph at 13,125ft
Service Ceiling: 29,660ft
Climb to 16,405ft: 10 min 24 sec
Range: 1,085 miles normal, 1,892 miles maximum
Armament: Two flexibly mounted rear-firing machine guns, one 7.7mm ventral gun and one 13mm dorsal gun
Bomb-load: 1,764lb of bombs or one torpedo
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_nakajima_B6N.html#1 (http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_nakajima_B6N.html#1)
http://airandspace.si.edu/collections/artifact.cfm?id=A19810429000 (http://airandspace.si.edu/collections/artifact.cfm?id=A19810429000)
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/japan/aircraft/torpedo-bomber/nakajima-b6n-tenzan-jill.asp (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/japan/aircraft/torpedo-bomber/nakajima-b6n-tenzan-jill.asp)
-
I would love to see this plane and the D4Y Judy added at some point. We really need them for the latter PTO events. And I think they would get some MA use as well.
+1
-
No forward firing guns?
-
yes please..more late war axis aircraft...and more early was allied aircraft......just to make it even
-
B6Ns barely saw any service in 1943. At the end of 1943, some 40 planes were at/near Truk for that debacle, and almost all of them were shot down. Something like 4 made it out. After that the only other real combat they saw was the battle of the philippine islands, where they first served from carriers (middle of 1944), where they were rapidly shot down in droves by F6Fs and the Japanese rapidly lost all their remaining carriers.
After those 2 major battles, where the B6Ns did almost no damage and were lost en masse, the remainder of their careers can be summed up in one word: kamikaze.
Frankly, it's a bad choice to include as a plane. It wasn't important to the Japanese war effort, nor was it impactful in the war itself.
-
D4Y had some notable successes, such as against the USS Franklin.
-
B6Ns barely saw any service in 1943. At the end of 1943, some 40 planes were at/near Truk for that debacle, and almost all of them were shot down. Something like 4 made it out. After that the only other real combat they saw was the battle of the philippine islands, where they first served from carriers (middle of 1944), where they were rapidly shot down in droves by F6Fs and the Japanese rapidly lost all their remaining carriers.
After those 2 major battles, where the B6Ns did almost no damage and were lost en masse, the remainder of their careers can be summed up in one word: kamikaze.
Frankly, it's a bad choice to include as a plane. It wasn't important to the Japanese war effort, nor was it impactful in the war itself.
lol, now you're just being a pair of wet panties. the b5n was just as bad operationally against u.s. planes. as far as japanese high command and their propaganda machine, the b6n was "important" to their efforts, regardless of what Krusty thinks some 70 years afterwards.
-
Frankly, it's a bad choice to include as a plane. It wasn't important to the Japanese war effort, nor was it impactful in the war itself.
wow...good thing war effort and impact are not the only criteria that is need to be filled for a plane to be added. :rofl
:cheers:
-
If we were going for war impact, we'd only have, what? Hurricane Mk I, Lancaster, P-51D, B-17G, B-24J, B-29, Yak-9 and La-5FN.
After all, none of the other aircraft really, truely affected the end result...
-
If we were going for war impact, we'd only have, what? Hurricane Mk I, Lancaster, P-51D, B-17G, B-24J, B-29, Yak-9 and La-5FN.
After all, none of the other aircraft really, truely affected the end result...
True. In the Pacific theater we could have won the war with just submarines. :D
-
The B6N would be a nice addition ONLY if they were equipped with the Type 91 Mod 3 (or better) that allowed for a fast launching speed. Otherwise it is a waste - you have the speed to get near a carrier, but you would have to dump it all once in torpedo range to get a successful launch. They have versions of the Type 91 which could be launched from 300-350 knots - having one of these with a B6N would make torpedo attacks against the CV a serious possibility.
-
The B6N would be a nice addition ONLY if they were equipped with the Type 91 Mod 3 (or better) that allowed for a fast launching speed. Otherwise it is a waste - you have the speed to get near a carrier, but you would have to dump it all once in torpedo range to get a successful launch. They have versions of the Type 91 which could be launched from 300-350 knots - having one of these with a B6N would make torpedo attacks against the CV a serious possibility.
+1 we do need different torpedoes in this game
-
+1 we do need different torpedoes in this game
perk the cv's! :old:
-
+1
-
It is absurd to oppose the inclusion of the B6N, it was a midwar aircraft that saw plenty of use and suffered from the well known IJNAF problems of the time.
Now the B7A is a more tricky issue with a little over a 100 built and a much better performance...
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VPVotmXlnxs/TO9E_rKdRpI/AAAAAAAAleE/Z9Jcm1iKRD0/s1600/Aichi_B7A2.jpg)
(http://www.warbirdphotographs.com/NavyJB&W/B7A-6.jpg)