Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: DingHao2 on July 23, 2001, 12:13:00 PM
-
Ju-388 or 288 anyone? Im not an expert on japanese or italian planes.
-
He-177 "Greif" or maybe Do-217. Ju-290 could be nice too with bigger load than B-17.
-
btw some Ju-290 "SeeAdlers" got 9*20mm + one 13mm gun for defensive armament.
Some got 5*MG151/20mm and 6*MG131 13mm.
Hmm Ju-290 would propably be too good plane. Or if it comes its propably armed with 7,92mm mg's.
-
Do-217 E-2
max speed: 311MPH
Service Ceiling: ~20,000ft
Minimum bombload: 8818lb, or Torpedo internally (no idea what max bomb load out is)
Armament: Upper&Lower Rear Guns- 13mm MG131,
Dorsal Gun EDL131 electrically driven turret, Front guns- 1 fixed MG141/15 and in the E3 version a hand aimed 20mm MG FF for attacks on ships. Usually two beam firing MG15s. Some aircraft had twin MG81s firing aft fromt he tailcone.
Problematic airplane though: It tried to swing on take-off, and in cruising flight tended to oscillate about all axes, especially in yaw, even after the slats had been added along the inner edges of the fins.
Would you still want it after reading those problems?
-SW
-
Id be happy with He111H
-
HE-111H was a medium bomber i think...but we need a hvy one like a Do-217 or Ju-290 or Ju-388 to kick them rook butt.
-
Anoyone got any operational numbers on these? (production numbers, service numbers and dates/year when entering service?)
Really would like to see the He-177 or the Ju-288 but not anything that didn't see action :)
-
He-177:
Arado built 130 A-1s, followed by 170 Heinkel-built A-3s and 826 A-5s with repositioned engines and longer fuselages.
About 700 served on the Eastern Front, many having 50mm and 75mm guns for tank busting.
Ju288:
22 built. 17 crashed, but a few were thrown into battle in mid-1944 armed with 5cm BK 5 guns.
-SW
[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: SWulfe ]
-
He177 had around 1000 made. It was used a lot, and apparently (which surprised me because one always hears it sucked) was rather well liked by the crews who did mostly night bombing and anti-ship work.
Id say a He177 would be a good German Heavy bomber to do in AH, as its certaily the only represntative heavy "bomber" they had, the Fw200 Condor doesn't really count.
As for other axis bombers I know of the Piaggio P108, and some of the larger twin engined Japanese bombers. However the P108 had only 36 units made and the Japanse planes were too light to be heavies.
I dont see the big flying boat thing as really a "bomber", so it seems the He177 would be best.
It has various 20mm cannon and 13mm MG as defense, has good bombload, should have guided missles in AH, looks great and has many possible camo schemes!
Cant go wrong with the He177 in AH! :)
-
Did the Germans have any late war heavy bombers? If so.. what did they use them on?
For some reason, heavy bomber and LW just doesn't seem to fit. I just get more of an impression of fast attack scenarios... not many involving large bombers.
AKDejaVu
-
yep, grun... :D :D
-
SWulfe:
---------------------------------------
Would you still want it (Do217) after reading those problems?
----------------------------------------
It's got my vote!
Along with a Boston, a Hurricane (IIc), and a Mustang I to fill out a Dieppe planeset :).
anRky
-
I agree GRUNHERZ the He177 would be a good addition to the Heavy Bombers.
(http://www.applink.net/thunder/pics/he177.jpg)
(Heinkel He 177A-5/R2 Greif "Griffon")
Click Here for more info on the He177 (http://www.kotfsc.com/aircraft/)
Thunder
[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: Thunder ]
-
Bombers and their loadouts:
He-111: 5,510 lbs or two LT 950 Torpedos
He-177: 13,225 lbs
Do-217: 8,800 lbs
Ju-290: 19,000 lbs
Non-Axis heavies:
B-24: 8,000 lbs
B-29: 20,000 lbs
Of course, you would have to perk the hell out of the B-29... :D
V.
[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: Vruth ]
-
Thx for digging up the info. He 177 it is!!! :D
-
He177! and some remote control bombs to boot!
-
Good lord, that thing is way to ugly to be added here.
-
he177 as long as they dont model its common engine fires and system failures! :)
-
With proper colour it looks quite nice :)
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/staga/Pics/he177.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Staga:
"She bop- he bop-a-we bop,
I bop- you bop-a-they bop
Be bop-be bop-a-lu-she bop,
Oo-oo-she-do-she bop-she bop"
Lauper, 1983
<shudder>
You are to never do that again. '80s pop is horrible noise that would make a deaf man's ears hurt.
-SW
-
"Axis needs a heavy bomber... "
ROFL!! Ain't this pretty much what Goreing told the lil toejam when they coudn't bomb britain to it's knees?
-
Originally posted by Ding_Hao:
Ju-388 or 288 anyone? Im not an expert on japanese or italian planes.
Why? What scenario would it be used in?
Or do you want it for a FA style 'revisionist fantasy' Main Arena?
-
Maybe we could use it in a somekind of WW2 scenario ?
Not sure, just a thought. :rolleyes:
-
They need a heavy bomber? For what? No... we don't need any more bombers of any kind in this game. what we need is more (and more realistic)targets for the bombers we got.
I asked a guy in the arena (he was shouting for the B29).... What are you gonna do if you get a B29? "i'm gonna bomb the crap outta some HQ's" was his reply.
Gee... that'l be a lot of fun for the rest of us won't it?
lazs
-
Lazt historically LW bombers were used more against tactical than strategical targets. As you know in Eastern front He-177 with 50 or 75mm cannon were used against tanks etc. Aren't you interested to get a tank-killer like that ?
-
BTW Lazs it's known whatkind of gameplay you like but now it looks like you want that all ppl in AH plays with your rules?
-
Montezuma:
------------------------------------------
Or do you want it for a FA style 'revisionist fantasy' Main Arena?
-----------------------------------------
Is there anything else in AH?
anRky
-
Hangtime,apparenty Goering had said to someone,"The Furher will never ask me how big are our bombers,just how many do we have"..What great communication between two buffoons.Goering cared more about how Adolf regerded him than he did about his own Luftwaffe.
-
BTW,did that plane pictured above see any action or was it still on drawing board..It's beautiful in an ugly duckling sort of way.. :cool: <Bring On The Stuka's Please!!>
-
If it's main attraction revolves around its use in scenarios, I'd rather see something like the stuka.
It could be used in any LW scenario from 1939 in loads of different theatres.
-
Axis already have a early-war bomber.
Maybe its time to have a middle- or late-war bomber.
Without need to use perkpoints.
-
Somehow I think some ppl would be pleased to see Axis to get a Stuka instead something which could survive better in MA.
Dowd are you still running 20%Axis/80%Allies snapshots ?
-
SirLoin,
Total production of the He177 was about 895.
He177A-0: 30 Pre-production aircraft.
He177A-1: 130
He177A-3: 170
He177A-5: 565
Production was halted in October, 1944.
-
WBRG got these numbers in their site:
Production:
8 Prototypes
35 He 177A-0 (Mainly Arado built)
130 He 177A-1 (Arado built)
170 He 177A-3 (Heinkel Built)
826 He 177A-5
Dunno which one is right.
-
Some of the numbers conflict and some don't Karnak and Staga.. I posted some numbers for the He-177 a bit up the page. My numbers seem to match Staga's... Did you get those numbers from the book "Hitler's Luftwaffe"?
-SW
-
Either way, it was clearly produced in number, with the He177A-5 being the major version.
He177A-5/R2
Powerplant: Daimler-Benz DB 610A-1 (port) and B-1 (starboard) 24-cylinder liquid-cooled engines, each rated at 2200 kW (2,950 hp) for take-off.
Dimensions: wing span 31.44 m (103 ft 1 in); length 22.00 m (72 ft 1 in); height 6.39 m (21 ft); wing area 102 mē (1,098 sq ft)
Weights: empty equipped 16800 kg (37,037 lb); maximum take-off 31000 kg (68,342 lb)
Performance: maximum speed 488 km/h (303 mph) at 6100 m (20,000 ft); maximum range 5500 km (3,417 miles) with two Hs 293A; service ceiling 8000 m (26,246 ft); time to 3050 m (10,000 ft) 10 minutes
Armament: one 7.9mm MG 81J machine gun in glazed nose; one 20mm MG 151/20 in front ventral gondola; two 7.9mm MG 81 machine guns in rear ventral gondola; two 13mm MG 131 in dorsal barbette; one 13mm MG 131 in dorsal turret; one MG 151/20 in tail; internal weapons bay for 16 SC 50 bombs or four SC 250 or two SC 500; external pylons for two LMA III parachute sea mines, LT torpedoes' Henschel Hs 293A or FX 1400 Fritz X missiles
-
I got some nice pics, I'll post 'em when I'm at home.
One thing looks strange:
Most sites say internal load was only about 2200lb while its overall capacity was over 13000lb. So it was carrying +10000lb under wings and fuselage ?
Any info what kind of bombs it could carry in wing hardpoints or were they only for guided missiles?
SW those manufacturing numbers are from warbirdsresourcegroup (http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org)
-
Hmm "Fritz X" weighted about 1650kg (1400kg bomb) so if it was carrying three of those guided bombs its over 10000lb but then it couldn't carry internal load.
-
staga... first of all you have no idea of how I like to play AH and even if you did.... What the hell does that have to do with what I said.
What i said is still true... THERE ARE NO FRIGGIN TARGETS FOR THE BOMBERS WE ALLREADY HAVE. You want em for scenarios? How ya gonna keep em out of the main where their (all bombers) effect is at best lopsided and at worst the total destution of any other type of gameplay.
We got too many guys who fly the damn things now even tho they know they are just being a pain. You wanna add to that??
Wouldn't it be better to work on making the bombers more realistic and purposeful without making em so adversarial to fighter guys?
lazs
-
AFAIK there are Cities, ammo-factories, Camps for troops, refineries, vehicle- , bomber and fighter-hangars, fuel and ammo-storages etc. I don't know what you're talking about?
Guess we're playing different game :D
Anyway here's couple pics:
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/staga/Pics/color_he177_1.jpg)
and
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/staga/Pics/color_he177_2.jpg)
Pics were taken when American fighter-bombers were attacking againts base.
-
Guess those pics kinda proof that He-177 saw action :D :D :D
-
Dowd are you still running 20%Axis/80%Allies snapshots ?
Care to point out when this has ever been the case?
No, I didn't think so.
-
It just seems that the Axis "need" more medium bombers. That's was their primary bombing vehicle, afterall. For both the Japanese and German planes.
AKDejaVu
-
DjV in that case allies need swordfishs for torpedo-runs and Wellingtons/Stirlings for levelbombing.
Sounds good eh?
-----
Koba maybe numbers were 70/30. I went to that server, saw "welcome text" with %-numbers and logged off right after that laughing.
-
DjV in that case allies need swordfishs for torpedo-runs and Wellingtons/Stirlings for levelbombing.
Sounds good eh?
Um.. don't really know what you are trying to say here staga.
The allies rellied on the massive use of heavy bombers. The Axis did not. The B-17, B-26 and Lancaster are apropriate. There are some other allied heavy bombers that could be included in that mix. The point is.. there aren't really any Axis bombers that do... at least not in the heavy bomber division.
"Axis need a heavy bomber!"
"Why?"
AKDejaVu
-
DjV why do Allies need heavies in AH ?
-
If you want to relive history, there is no German heavy bomber in widespread use outside of anti-shipping. You can point to 1,000 produced, but how many were in the air at any given time? How many were serviceable? Where did they serve? How did they fair against opposition? Why was production ended before the war ended?
If you want play balance the Germans (as part of the Axis) need a heavy bomber. That way if you want to draw the simple Axis/Allies line you have a bomber comparable to the the Allied's two heavies.
Really, you just need to decide what compromise you want to make.
-
Just as I thought, Staga.
*Some* scenarios do have that kind of balance, but the idea is to recreate a specific historical situation. I believe that's why they call them 'historical'.
The LW were outnumbered...err...alot during the war - or do you believe in recreating solely the very few scenarios where that wasn't the case (especially post 1942)?
-
Do not mix RL and AH's main-arena or next you need a historical-arena.
I don't care if I fly allied or axis plane BUT I'm eager to see more bombers in AH and He-177 looks like it could be quite interesting add-on to AH's planeset (loads of different armament-options) and IMO it would fit here better than Ju-88(MA with its gameplay is still where ppl spends most of their time. If you look planes in MA almost all are '43 or later so why not add a Axis bomber from that era of war?
______
Koba when shall we see a "Historical scenario" from '40 with 70%axis and 30% Allies?
IMO its weird to use percentages like that in game; I would rather see 50/50 so nobody could not say they lose because of numbers.
You're free to set up scenario as you like and players are free to decide if they like to play with your rules or not. How many ppl were in that scen? How many were in MA? Did you had to ask ppl to move to the Axis side?
I hope not.
-
Originally posted by Staga:
Maybe we could use it in a somekind of WW2 scenario ?
Not sure, just a thought. :rolleyes:
What battles was that strange thing in?
Whatever you find, I bet I could come up with just a *few* more for the Stuka or Betty...
-
lazs1,
What is your Main Arena Handle??
Thunder
-
Staga,
Very nice pictures, I think the He-177 would be a GREAT addition to the game. The Bomber Community deserves a plane like this and its creation would fill many needs. I provides a type plane for the Axis in main arena. It would be great for scenerios. The Brits & Yanks always have to fly and escort the heavys. It would be fun to turn it around at times. Be sides its kinda cool lookin :) Anyway, I like it!
Thunder
-
i'm no more in this sim, but i'd like to
see this bird for you.
these aren't pics of an finished modell.
(http://home.t-online.de/home/sebastian.schweizer/1771.jpg)
(http://home.t-online.de/home/sebastian.schweizer/1772.jpg)
(http://home.t-online.de/home/sebastian.schweizer/1773.jpg)
wastel
-
WB3 is getting He-177? WTG !
Montezuma in eastern-front saw fights lots of planes you propably haven't even heard. If you want to start a thread against He-177 please do so but do it in another topic.
-
thunder.. my handle is, as allways lazs.. when the bulitin booard got ate last time I had to re register but allways sign "lazs"
staga... I agree with you. what do the allies need heavy bombers for in the game. there is no realistic targets to bomb. your pics prove some points I have allways made. What do tiy see burning in the pics? not hangers or fuel dumps or fighters those are all well hidden (except hangers which are not worthwhile targets in any case)... Those bombers won't be taking off and "fighter bombers" could kill em just as easy by strafing em. In AH the bombers can affect the fighter war drasticly.... This of course is silly unrealistic and never happened in the war... In AH, fighters can't effect the bomber war which is silly as your photos poing out. It is bassakwards now and you want to make it even worse.
lazs
-
Err...Staga I don't think there is the planeset for a true 1940 scenario. You know that as well as I do.
I actually remember the scenario where you took your 'bat and ball and went home' over of the percentages. It was an Arado vs Typhoon set-up and, please correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Arados on the rare side compared to Tiffies?
Now if we had the Stuka, the Me-110 and the Hurricane...
Explain how the He-177 would achieve a 1940 scenario with the balance you mention?
-
Dowding:
"The LW were outnumbered...err...alot during the war - or do you believe in recreating solely the very few scenarios where that wasn't the case (especially post 1942)?"
This one sentence you typed tells me more than you might understand. It clearly shows what kind of scenarios we can expect.
70%/30% eh ? Have fun, I rather spend my time in WWIIOL :)
Btw it wasn't Arado/Temp scen.
AFAIR I haven't ever lose a Arado to the enemy fighter ;)
-
Personaly I would like to see the HE177 just because it is a cool looking plane. Give us a little more variety. The only axis bombers so far are the AR234 and the JU88. Neither are my fav's but the 88 is kinda cool. Would also like to see the HE111. It wouldn't be very effective but it too is a cool plane. Brings back memories of "The Battle of Britain".
Neither the 177 or the 111 are modeled in any online war sims are they?
(http://home.att.net/~lmluper/markatsig.jpg) (http://www.jump.net/~cs3)
-
i would love to see the he 177, but i think the japanese should get a buff first since the Germans already have one. The Peggy or the franciss would be my choices.
-
P1Y1!!!
(http://www.ijnafpics.com/JB&W2/P1Y-33.jpg)
-
PLEASE, PLEASE, VERY PRETTY PLEASE!!!!
Savoia-Marchetti SM.79 Sparviero (http://www.aviation-history.com/savoia-marchetti/sm79.html)
I know it's not a heavy...but I would sell my mother-in-law to fly this beauty! :D
-
"Pics were taken when American fighter-bombers were attacking againts base."
I have those same pictures in a book, it says that the engines caught fire while taxiing. This was always a problem with the engine types used in this beautiful plane.
But the book may be wrong.
JG5FaBi
-
No, Staga that's not what I meant at all. I was explaining why scenarios with that balance exist. Also, I don't decide what scenarios run, I just happen to be part of a team that designs them.
But then, I seem to remember you taking issue with Hostile Shores' 54% to 46% balance.
You also didn't answer my question regarding how the He-177 will enable 1940 (LW majority) type scenarios?
-
Originally posted by Dowding:
You also didn't answer my question regarding how the He-177 will enable 1940 (LW majority) type scenarios?
Could you point me where did I binded He-177 and 1940 type of scenarios together?
I know and I hope you know too that bird came in operative use in late '42.
One thing I've alwas trusted is term "FairPlay".
Which in games meant you play by the rules (written AND un-written) and games I've played teams are equal sized.
AH is still a game IMHO.
-
You were complaining about the balance in certain scenarios. I was pointing out that the LW would have a balance advantage if we could do more 1939/40 scenarios. But for that we need more early war aircraft that were present in large numbers, such as the Stuka. The presence of the Stuka would do more to realise those kind of set-ups, unlike the He-177 which saw less service and was produced in less numbers.
An He-111 would be a better choice, if you wanted that kind of scenario.
But in real life, things are rarely 'balanced'. My personal view of the purpose of scenarios is to provide an historical as possible 'snapshot' of a engagement, maybe with a slight 'what if' kind of change. For those people that want to experience maybe what it was like to be in a particular situation.
Campaigns, to me, are more a 're-write the history books' kind of set-up.
The LW were outnumbered throughout the latter years of the war - scenarios often reflect that. What would be the point of running a '1000-bomber raid' type of event, for instance, where you had 20 B17s, 10 P51s and 40 Doras? It wouldn't exactly be historical would it?
-
I wasnt going to add anything more to this but Lazs has to keep compounding things
Lazs says "In AH the bombers can affect the fighter war drasticly.... This of course is silly unrealistic and never happened in the war..." Lazs bombers did affect the fighter war in WW2, that was one of the objectives of strategic bombing. Bombing refineries, ball bearing plants, A/C factories, etc were designed to reduce the LW capablities to launch a defense against Allied attacks, Land or Air. And so it is done in AH, I bomb your factories and refineries and it affects your bases. I bomb your precious fighter hangers and you cant fly and mount a defense. Thats how its supposed to be. That how we take a base, resistence is futile.
Again a quote from Lazs ----
"In AH, fighters can't effect the bomber war which is silly as your photos poing out. It is bassakwards now and you want to make it even worse.
lazs " ---- Fighters did it in WW2 and here in AH affect the bomber war. I think its called "shooting them down"
It must really get to you, all those bombers taking out your hangers so 'You' cant fly and play.
-
Dowding why dont you stop for a while and think:
There's already a early war axis levelbomber; We dont need He-111.
Also we already have early war axis divebomber, We dont need Ju-87.
In both cases I'm talking about Ju-88.
It sure makes me wonder why are you against He-177 ?
Is it because that certain plane or is it because I'm lobbying it?
Why do you want to add another axis early war planes which would be dead meat in MA where ppl still spend most of their time in AH?
IMHO it would be waste of resources to model planes like He-111 when we already have a plane from same era of war with better speed and bombload.
So why not use that time to model Axis bomber which saw action since late 1942 and was having a loadout which was in "par" with allied bombers and could be used in many different ways depending its armament ?
And Dowding:
Forget scenarios. I've seen them already and decided to stay in MA. As I said I prefer even sides in games more than "historical" numbers with some side having 15-30% more players.
-
Besides...where else can u get a name that sounds as cool as Grief--german for Griffon.
:D :D :D :cool:
[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: Ding_Hao ]
-
Changed my signature--im for an He-177 instead of a Ju-388. Grief saw more action than the Ju did.
-
Besides...where else can u get a name that sounds as cool as Grief--german for Griffon.
-
Staga:
------------------------------------
Also we already have early war axis divebomber, We dont need Ju-87.
------------------------------------
'We don't need the Stuka', 'We don't need the F4F' -- I can't believe what I'm hearing on these boards.
What's next, 'We don't need the P-40?'
You guys are dismissing out of hand potentially the funnest planes in the planeset!
anRky
-
Certain countries need certain types of planes--right now, the Axis dont need another light or med. bomber, they need a hvy bomber! and the US already have several acceptable fighters--we wont be needing another one for a while.
-
Not at all Staga. You were arguing for its inclusion based on its potential in scenarios; I was pointing out that there are far better LW 'scenario' planes. The Stuka being just one.
I wouldn't mind seeing it here, but I'd prefer to see a Japanese or Russian level bomber first.
Strangely enough, this is just my opinion; I won't get the hump if it is criticised/contradicted.
-
Staga, you are being very misleading about the balance issue in scenarios. Balance isn't only about numbers you know. Pit 40 LW fighters against 20 Allied fighters and 20 Allied bombers, set the mission for the Axis as defense, and you have an instant Axis win. The G10 and D9 can ignore escort fighters and tear bomber formations to bits- a fact well proven in numerous previous scenarios. In many of those cases the bombers were destroyed down to the last plane.
Now, if you want to eliminate radar and not tell the Axis where the raids are going, fine. You might have an argument on the numbers. The fact remains, if the LW are able to concentrate anything near their full strength near a formation of bombers the fighter escort is inconsquential, and you have a guaranteed Axis win.
Now I see in another thread you attack Dowding for disagreeing with you, and even question HTC's decision to allow him to CM. Pathetic. What are we to infer by those snide comments, BTW, that HTC is giving tacit approval to anti-Axis scenarios? I don't know about the others, but I sure smelled a hint of that nonsense.
So I ask, why have you not volunteered to help out in designing and running scenarios? You seem intelligent, a student of history of sorts, interested in aviation, and critical of the efforts of others, why not take a shot at it yourself? I have, and I suspect if you do you will find things not so black-and-white as you make them appear.
-
Ding_Hao:
----------------------------------------
Certain countries need certain types of planes--right now, the Axis dont need another light or med. bomber, they need a hvy bomber! and the US already have several acceptable fighters--we wont be needing another one for a while.
----------------------------------------
How do I join the Axis? Or the US? I must be missing something.
The only country choices I get when I'm online (or offline) are Bishop, Rook, and Knight.
anRky
-
We need the V-1 :)
Launch it from some base and hope it hits nearby at least.
We can intercept them with typhoons or so.
Maybe they can add this someday, i think it will be nice for scenarios.
-
Contrary to much Luftwobble propaganda ;) (lighten up, I'm kidding) Axis does NOT equal German.
In fact if you want a good Axis bomber, there are two Japanese mid-late war bombers that are very good.
P1Y2 "Frances"
Ki67 "Peggy"
Either would make an excellent bomber for the MA, and be quite distinct from any bomber that we currently have.
-
Anrky--want to join the axis?? Come on down to Luftwaffe-the knights!
-
Verm I thought we were talking about Heavy bombers in this topic?
What kind of load "Frances" or "Peggy" carried ? 1000-1500kg?
-
Ki-67: 800kg, P1Y1: 1000kg. They both do about 340mph.
He 177A-5 would be good for MA variety - as a "heavy" bomber it fits in between the B-17(good defensive guns, smaller bombload) and the Lancaster(poor defensive guns, massive bombload).
But I think Japan NEEDS a bomber before anyone else. Then Russia(Tu-2/Pe-2 :)) and Italy(S.M.79 :D) too.
-
Staga,
If your deffinition of "heavy" is solely dependant on a bombload of 10,000 lbs + then the He177A-5 is probably the only Axis bomber to qualify. However, if that is your definition, then the Allies only have one heavy, the Lancaster MkIII. The Ju88A-4 carries as much of a bombload as the B-17G.
I believe that a aircraft falls into the "Heavy bomber" category due to multiple things, durability, firepower, size, number of engines and bombload. I do agree that Japanese aircraft have light bombloads. The design requirement to be able to fly over vast tracts of the Pacific ocean dictated this limitation.
Here are my 3 suggestions for Axis heavy bombers:
He177A-5/R2
Powerplant: Daimler-Benz DB 610A-1 (port) and B-1 (starboard) 24-cylinder liquid-cooled engines, each rated at 2200 kW (2,950 hp) for take-off.
Dimensions: wing span 31.44 m (103 ft 1 in); length 22.00 m (72 ft 1 in); height 6.39 m (21 ft); wing area 102 mē (1,098 sq ft)
Weights: empty equipped 16800 kg (37,037 lb); maximum take-off 31000 kg (68,342 lb)
Performance: maximum speed 488 km/h (303 mph) at 6100 m (20,000 ft); maximum range 5500 km (3,417 miles) with two Hs 293A; service ceiling 8000 m (26,246 ft); time to 3050 m (10,000 ft) 10 minutes
Armament: one 7.9mm MG 81J machine gun in glazed nose; one 20mm MG 151/20 in front ventral gondola; two 7.9mm MG 81 machine guns in rear ventral gondola; two 13mm MG 131 in dorsal barbette; one 13mm MG 131 in dorsal turret; one MG 151/20 in tail; internal weapons bay for 16 SC 50 bombs or four SC 250 or two SC 500; external pylons for two LMA III parachute sea mines, LT torpedoes' Henschel Hs 293A or FX 1400 Fritz X missiles
He177 Advantages: Very heavy bombload and high speed
He177 Disadvantages: Twin engine configuration increases vulnerability.
Kawanishi H8K2 "Emily"
Dimensions: Span 38.00 m, Length 28.13 m, Height 9.15 m, Wing area 160.0 m2
Weights: Empty 18,380 kg, Loaded 24,500 kg, Maximum 32,500 kg, Wing loading 153.1 kg/m2, Power loading 3.3 kg/hp
Performance: Maximum speed 252 kt at 5,000 m, Cruising speed 160 kt at 4,000 m, Climb to 5,000 m in 10 min 12 sec, Service ceiling 8,850 m, Maximum range 3,862 naut miles
Armament: 20 mm Type 99 Model 1 cannon in bow, dorsal and tail turrets and two beam hatches, and 7.7 mm Type 92 machine-guns in ventral, port and starboard fuselage sides and cockpit hatches (H8K2, H8K3 and H8K4)
External load: two 800 kg torpedoes, or eight 250 kg bombs, or sixteen 60 kg bombs or depth-charges (H8K1 to H8K4)
Powerplant: Four Mitsubishi MK4Q Kasei 22 fourteen-cylinder air-cooled radials, rated at 1,850 hp for take-off, 1,680 hp at 2,100 m and 1,540 hp at 5,500 m, driving four-blade metal propellers (H8K2, H8K2-L and H8K3)
Accommodation: Crew of ten (H8K1 to H8K4). Crew of nine and 29 passengers or 64 troops (H8K2-L)
H8K2 Advantages: Extremely durable and very well armed. Great climb rate.
H8K2 Disadvantages: Light bombload and few produced. Only flyable from water.
Piaggio P.108B / R1 08C
Country: Italy.
Type: P.108B - seven crew heavy bomber. R1 08C - transport.
Powerplants: Four 1500hp (Piaggio RXII RC35 18-cylinder radials; three bladed propellers.)
Dimensions: Wing span 104ft 11žin (32.00m); length 73ft 1―in (22.29m); height 19ft 8žin (6.00m).
Weights: R1 08B - empty 38,1951b (17325kg); max loaded 65,8851b (29885kg).
Armament: R108B - eight 12.7mm machine guns in nose, ventral turrets, waist and outer nacelle positions; max 77161b (3500kg) bomb load or three 18in (45.7cm) torpedos.
Performance: R108B - max speed 267mph (430km/h) at 13,780ft (4200m); cruise speed 199mph (320km/h); time to 16,405ft (5000m) 21.1 min; service ceiling 27,890ft (8500m); range 1550-2187 miles (2495-3520km).
Operators: Germany, Italy.
Production: 1 R1 08,163 P.1 08B, 16 P.1 08C, 1 R1 08M, 1 P.1 08T, total 182.
P.108B Advantages: Good bombload and defensive armament.
P.108B Disadvatages: Slow and few produced.
[ 07-27-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ]