Jump to content
Y-29.Silky

Why a B-25 in Bodenplatte?

Recommended Posts

Just kind of curious why there's a B-25 vs a B-26? B-26 flew sorties over every Pacific/Western Front theater, 2 engines, resembles the A-20 and B-25, B-25 in Bodenplatte feels like an SBD in Africa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two reasons:

1) B-25 was in theatre and in the area during the Bodenplatte operation. They were RAF Mitchell's operating under the command of the 2nd Tactical Air Force.

2) Jason said during the Q&A that they hope to make the aircraft flyable in the future. If that happens the B-25C/Mitchell II was used in the east, the west and the Pacific. Very good bang for the buck if they can find the time to make it a flyable.

 

Also, where did B-26s operate in the Pacific? Aside from a few token ones at Midway I can't think of any.

Edited by ShamrockOneFive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B26 operated out of port morsbey, it’s use in the PTO was limited however the B25 was by comparasion rather Ubiquitous.

 

Personally I would rather see the the B26, but I get it makes more since to model the B 25

............................

 

Early deployment of the B-26 by the USAAF was to the Southwest Pacific theatre with the 22nd Bomb Group and later the 69th and 70th Bomb Squadrons. Operating in primitive conditions these units attacked Japanese bases from their own fields in New Guinea and the Fiji Islands, with 4 B26’s taking part in the Battle of Midway.

 

http://b26.org/

Edited by BRADYS555

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B-25 in Bodenplatte feels like an SBD in Africa.

Well... :P

 

An SBD Dauntless on the deck of USS Ranger, after returning from a strike mission against Axis forces in North Africa.

 

torch-sbd-1.jpg

  • Upvote 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The B-26 would be more appropriate imo for a western expansion but I understand why they chose the B-25. Hopefully we will get a B-26 someday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember, they are selling to the masses and casual users as well. You can't view this game strictly from a WWII aviation nerd perspective only. Don't worry, I am one of those too.

 

However, some of this is clearly marketing. The B-25 is far better known and represented in media as well. Thirty Seconds over Tokyo, Catch 22, Pearl Harbor (the movie), plus numerous other appearances in film. Name a movie where the B-26 is prominently featured. Tick, tock......

 

The B-25 was in theater. Let them build what sells to fund the interesting and historically important stuff as we go. It's been working out so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another factor that should not be overlooked is te fact that the RAF never operated the B-26 in Western Europe and only in very limited numbers in Africa. Thus a B-26 would be an almost exclusively USAAF plane, not just for Bodenplatte but in every theatre. Since the USAAF already has 3 of the 5 flyable allied fighters in Bodenplatte it seems logical to make the AI (hopefully soon flyable) bomber a RAF plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can use the B-25 as a stand-in bomber for Mustang escorts into Germany too.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, where did B-26s operate in the Pacific? Aside from a few token ones at Midway I can't think of any.

 

They ( B-26s) were definitely in New Guinea.

 

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_B-26_Pacific.html

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJDbTd7Ovu0

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TzAa0avsIk

 

But B-25s would be good for there too.......

Edited by Pail

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They ( B-26s) were definitely in New Guinea.

 

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_B-26_Pacific.html

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJDbTd7Ovu0

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TzAa0avsIk

 

But B-25s would be good for there too.......

 

Awesome. Always looking to expand my knowledge.

 

So we do have at least a few B-26s in the PTO. Not a large number but at least a few.

 

I get the interest around the B-26 and I was even recommending it in a hypothetical Normandy scenario that I had proposed months ago. But I do get the logic behind Jason's suggestion and the B-25 gives us a ton of flexibility in the future too without a total remodel.

 

I do hope they can give us, when appropriate, the solid nose and glass nose versions of the B-25 and versions with side mounted machine guns and otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When considering re-using assets for other BoX extensions, one has to remember that early -26s, which flew over Pacific, had different wings, engine covers, empennage and armament compared to mid and late versions which flew over Europe in '44 and '45. Apart from the the fuselage (well, most of it), all the rest of the 3D model of an airplane would have to be built from scratch or at least heavily reshaped to get the correct version for the other theatre of ops.

 

Now, none of the ETO glass nose B-25Js will be directly "transferrable" to PTO either (as by the '44 PTO units converted to -Hs and solid nose -Js), but you basically have to remodel nose section only to turn one into the other.

 

Also, glass -Js can be used directly in any potential late Eastern Front expansions.

Edited by Art-J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B-25 is OK...but from what i read about B-26 i got that feeling that Marauder will be much more fun in BOX... :salute:   :lol:

 
These bombers were called “The Widowmaker.” Because the planes were hard to land, particularly with one engine out, a lot of airmen died when the hot attack-bomber lost air speed and fell out of the sky. It also had a tendency to develop engine trouble on takeoff and crash.
 
 
The problem was so serious Col. Jimmy Doolittle, commander of the first raid on Japan flown from the deck of the carrier USS Hornet six months after America’s Pacific Fleet was sunk at Pearl Harbor, was called in to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Faster, and MUCH better looking.

 

Hard combo to beat.

 

Meh

 

If Jason decided on the B-26 there would be people asking why not the B-25?

Tempest, why no Typhoon?

190A8, why no A9?

Spit MkIX, why no MKXIV?

 

Never ends.

Someone even had the nads to tell Jason we need a 109F2.

 

The B-25 all things considered was the best choice, especially since we're going to PTO.

Hard to argue for the B-26 really in that light...what so we can bomb them in their revetments at Midway?

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree the B25 is a great choice.

 

I just like the 26 better.

 

We are not going to be able to fly the thing in any case, so I really don't have any skin in this game.  I see a lot of time in 51s and Tempests on my part, though I'm still more interested in the P39.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree the B25 is a great choice.

 

I just like the 26 better.

 

We are not going to be able to fly the thing in any case, so I really don't have any skin in this game.  I see a lot of time in 51s and Tempests on my part, though I'm still more interested in the P39.

It will still make great scenery though...so even though you're not flying it, you'll still enjoy it on some level.

I know I'll be using them in my missions. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will still make great scenery though...so even though you're not flying it, you'll still enjoy it on some level.

I know I'll be using them in my missions. :)

 

I'm pretty keen to see them in missions as well.

 

I broke out all three volumes of my Christopher Shores & Chris Thomas 2nd TAF books (they are the definitive books on this time period with the RAF and the 2nd TAF organization) and have been having a great time looking through. The Mitchell II's show up a fair bit in the operations. Often escorted by Spitfires or Tempests on raids to bomb bridges and railyards.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty keen to see them in missions as well.

 

I broke out all three volumes of my Christopher Shores & Chris Thomas 2nd TAF books (they are the definitive books on this time period with the RAF and the 2nd TAF organization) and have been having a great time looking through. The Mitchell II's show up a fair bit in the operations. Often escorted by Spitfires or Tempests on raids to bomb bridges and railyards.

 

Nice

I can type tomes on 9th TAC Jugs and 8th AF Mustangs, but I'm fairly ignorant on 2nd TAF stuff honestly...I'll check those books out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The B-26 became a safer aircraft once crews were re-trained, and after aerodynamics modifications (an increase of wingspan and wing angle-of-incidence to give better takeoff performance, and a larger vertical stabilizer and rudder).[4] After aerodynamic and design changes, the aircraft distinguished itself as "the chief bombardment weapon on the Western Front" according to a United States Army Air Forces dispatch from 1946.[citation needed] The Marauder ended World War II with the lowest loss rate of any USAAF bomber.[5]

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_B-26_Marauder

 

I also prefer them to the B 25, but the B25 is sorta the gateway bomber for the allies in game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice

I can type tomes on 9th TAC Jugs and 8th AF Mustangs, but I'm fairly ignorant on 2nd TAF stuff honestly...I'll check those books out.

 

Have any definitive guides on the 9th? I'm the exact opposite. I can tell you heaps about the 2nd TAF and their air operations but the 9th I'm less well versed in. I know generally what they had but not enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have any definitive guides on the 9th? I'm the exact opposite. I can tell you heaps about the 2nd TAF and their air operations but the 9th I'm less well versed in. I know generally what they had but not enough.

 

Yep

Winged Victory - very general, but all IX TAC, and covers Normandy.

A good read, but doesn't cover Belgium.

https://www.amazon.com/Winged-Victory-Army-Forces-World/dp/0375750479

 

Hell Hawks - 365th Fighter Group.

VERY good.

https://www.amazon.com/Untold-American-Savaged-Hitlers-Wehrmacht/dp/0760338256

 

Also this - very good as well.

A hard copy will cost you $300 or so if you can even find it...but in PDF it's still a great read.

Leap Off - History of the 404th

Leap Off_404thFG.zip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never ends.

Someone even had the nads to tell Jason we need a 109F2.

 

That's weird because we already have that one. And it's true. Plane choices will never satisfy everyone. 

 

Grt M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never ends.

Someone even had the nads to tell Jason we need a 109F2.

Someone demanded a plane we already have?

 

They’re a smart one, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure it was the Bf-110F2 that was being requested to fill the "110 timeline gap"

 

Cheers Dakpilot

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...