Best Mediuim Bomber for Pacific operation

[madmickey]

Consider cost, effectiveness, and ability to manufacture it late model like the A-26 and the fact that even though the Mossie was a great plane that was probably inexpensive to make there was only a limited number of woodworker in Britain. This should not preclude the later 2 planes but consider it when you make your choices.

[Mike Scholl]

Based on availability and effectiveness, I'd have to say the Betty.....The load wasn't
the biggest, the defense not the strongest, and the construction certainly not the
sturdiest.., but the range is the key.....The size of the Pacific made the range in-
valuable.....The game over-rates it--but it was still truely incredable for a two-
engined (or even a 4-engined) bomber.....And in the Pacific Theatre, range was
the trump card.

[mlees]

.....And in the Pacific Theatre, range was
the trump card.

Not so sure. The long range does you no good if, at the end of your 5 or 6 hour flight, you fly into well prepared CAP. I would say control of the air was trump.

[KPAX]

Bettys would be near the top, if not the top. Those torps are killers.

And yes, you may loss 4-10 of them, but they get a nice juicy hit on a capital ship, you are way ahead.

Those Beu V-IX torps are pretty dang good too. Not the range but the punch.

The Marauders, once trained up, can be nice for the Allies too.

I would have to say that the range is the key. I would rather have the Martins with the long range and crappy load then a hard hitting Beu V-ix with shorter range and better punch.

[Andy Mac]

Do Wellingtons count as Medium bombers I love the way on anti shipping that they occasionally use torps makes them deadly !!!!

Also they have range and can take a hit.

They are my favourite ;P

[kaleun]

I have to go with the beauforts. Bombs are useless on BBs, and you can be sure, if there is a BB in range, all the B25s,26s and A20s will go off and bounce their bombs off the BB's armor, and ignore all the juicy transports that are sitting RIGHT THERE! At least the 'fort can get a torp in and hurt the S.O.B.[8|]

[JohnK]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Based on availability and effectiveness, I'd have to say the Betty.....The load wasn't
the biggest, the defense not the strongest, and the construction certainly not the
sturdiest.., but the range is the key.....The size of the Pacific made the range in-
valuable.....The game over-rates it--but it was still truely incredable for a two-
engined (or even a 4-engined) bomber.....And in the Pacific Theatre, range was
the trump card.

Bergerud in "Fire in the Sky" considers the Betty one of the worst aircraft designs of World War II and I'd tend to agree.

What great accomplishments of the Betty, exactly, can you point to in World War II? (Remember Force Z was sunk by Nells).

Basically there was no point in the Betty having a range longer than the Zero. A shorter range, better armored aircraft would have been more useful.

[Zeta16]

ORIGINAL: JohnK

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Based on availability and effectiveness, I'd have to say the Betty.....The load wasn't
the biggest, the defense not the strongest, and the construction certainly not the
sturdiest.., but the range is the key.....The size of the Pacific made the range in-
valuable.....The game over-rates it--but it was still truely incredable for a two-
engined (or even a 4-engined) bomber.....And in the Pacific Theatre, range was
the trump card.

Bergerud in "Fire in the Sky" considers the Betty one of the worst aircraft designs of World War II and I'd tend to agree.

What great accomplishments of the Betty, exactly, can you point to in World War II? (Remember Force Z was sunk by Nells).

Basically there was no point in the Betty having a range longer than the Zero. A shorter range, better armored aircraft would have been more useful.

Yep, I never use them out side zero range unless I really need too or the is going to be on CAP.

[norsemanjs]

B-26, Having played both sides I've found the B -26 squadrons once trained well seem indestructable. It is depressing as the japanese player to see a B-26 formation without escort be intercepted by a squadron of zeroes and get no kills and pound your transports with bombs.

[janushm]

beaufords...torps and..well alot sturdyer than the single engine ones...lacks range.
B26....i now understand why it stal saw action in vietnam...like norseman said...provides his own escort...still lacks range. and comes in game too late...i wish i had 20 squadrons of em in 1941.

my mossies havent seen alot of action yet. so cant really tell

[madmickey]

ORIGINAL: janushm

beaufords...torps and..well alot sturdyer than the single engine ones...lacks range.
B26....i now understand why it stal saw action in vietnam...like norseman said...provides his own escort...still lacks range. and comes in game too late...i wish i had 20 squadrons of em in 1941.

my mossies havent seen alot of action yet. so cant really tell

The B-26 of vietnam was the A-26 of WWII not the Martin Marauders.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: JohnK

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Based on availability and effectiveness, I'd have to say the Betty.....The load wasn't
the biggest, the defense not the strongest, and the construction certainly not the
sturdiest.., but the range is the key.....The size of the Pacific made the range in-
valuable.....The game over-rates it--but it was still truely incredable for a two-
engined (or even a 4-engined) bomber.....And in the Pacific Theatre, range was
the trump card.

Bergerud in "Fire in the Sky" considers the Betty one of the worst aircraft designs of World War II and I'd tend to agree.

What great accomplishments of the Betty, exactly, can you point to in World War II? (Remember Force Z was sunk by Nells).

Basically there was no point in the Betty having a range longer than the Zero. A shorter range, better armored aircraft would have been more useful.

JOHNK I think I made it obvious that the design of the Betty WAS a very one-legged
stool in my opinion as well......But it could carry a meaningfull and effective load for a
huge distance and be a very real threat on arrival......Which means that one unit of
Betty's can force the Allies to put up an awful lot of CAP in an awful lot of locations.

Strategically this makes them very valuable as they also force convoy escorts over
an enormous area as well......And yes, they were part of a "line" of Japanese Mediums
that continued throughout the war.....The were the replacements for the Nells, and they
would be replaced themselves at the end of the war by the Francis.......But for the ma-
jority of the war, they were the representative of this "line" the Allies faced.....And the
huge range of threat they represent probably added months to the length of the war by
forcing the Allies into greater protection of their route of advance than would have been
needed without this threat.

Were they great planes overall?....Probably not.....But the question asked was what was
the best medium bomber for the War in the Pacific?.....And this was the theatre the Japs
designed them for.....They were available throughtout the war in adequate numbers
(for the Japanese, at least) to be a continuous factor in Allied planning......And if the
Italians had had them available in the Med, the British would have had a much tougher
time as their shipping would have been under threat from a few miles outside of
Gibralter to a few miles outside Alexandria and even in the Suez Canal.

[Mr.Frag]

Remember, the Nell & Betty really came about before the concept of CV's guarding things with CAP.

If you take the CV's out of the game, I think you'll find your fear level of these aircraft goes up rather severely.

The other thing we don't get in our game which is where this aircraft shines through would be the ability to maintain contact and report in for extended periods of time. (tough to shadow with 1 day turns)

[Hornblower]

I agree on the Betty comments. Game wise if they catch a TF without cap, and in torp range, as the allies you’re in for a few bad moments. Excellent range which in 41-42 in the DEI makes the movement of TF’s in there range, a hazardus operation. As for the Allies, I would take the B-25, especially the later models. The combo of .50’s and skip bombing are transport killers. And they are capable of closing out any IJA airbase in there range

[KPAX]

To further the Allied Med bomber idea. What is the best med bomber for the Allies in

1942 ?

1943 ?

1944 ?

1945 ?

And why ? This should generate some good comments.