Doolittle raid

[hufc]

Does anyone know if Doolittle raid can be simulated in the Campaign game as i have not seen it mentioned in the rule book?.

[vettim89]

I would say no. The game will allow you to put a squadron of B-25's on a CV but all they can do is transfer to a base

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: newell

Does anyone know if Doolittle raid can be simulated in the Campaign game as i have not seen it mentioned in the rule book?.

Not really in any meaningful way. Only carrier capable planes can launch from CVs. These are the historically capable aircraft.

It would take quite an effort to simulate this raid, given the game mechanics. Historically the raid caused little damage, though it did have a psychological impact. The problem is home morale is not something that is really modeled.

[wdolson]

AE doesn't have a Doolittle Raid, but you could create it in the editor with a special version of the B-25 that was carrier capable. 

Any aircraft slot can be made carrier capable now.

Bill

[VSWG]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

AE doesn't have a Doolittle Raid, but you could create it in the editor with a special version of the B-25 that was carrier capable.

These aircraft would land on the carrier after the raid though.

[wdolson]

True, there is no shuttle bombing in the game.

Bill

[wworld7]

ORIGINAL: VSWG

ORIGINAL: wdolson

AE doesn't have a Doolittle Raid, but you could create it in the editor with a special version of the B-25 that was carrier capable.

These aircraft would land on the carrier after the raid though.

I want to see film of a B-25 landing an a Yorktown class CV.

Pronto!

[Terminus]

It was done on an Essex.

[wdolson]

USS Shangri La in 1944.  The same day Lt Bob Elder did a number of take offs and landings with a naval P-51.

http://steeljawscribe.com/2007/10/05/flightdeck-friday-more-oddities

This looks like kind of a screw ball site (I did get an error message first time I tried to look at it), it's the only pictures of the landing I could find.

The B-25 handled well on a carrier.  It probably also helped North American to get the contract for the twin engine AJ Savage series, which were close in size to a B-25.

A B-25 probably could have landed on a Yorktown, but the margin for error would have been small and accidents much more likely.

Bill

[wworld7]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

It was done on an Essex.

That does not meet the conditions of the question.

Hence, let's fire up the BBQ pit...Roast Terminus could be on the menu...

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish

ORIGINAL: Terminus

It was done on an Essex.

That does not meet the conditions of the question.

Hence, let's fire up the BBQ pit...Roast Terminus could be on the menu...

Need any matches? [:D]

[rogueusmc]

The above website states that the Tricycle landing gear configuration prevented it too???

I know of a number of tricycle geared aircraft that were standard aboard carriers???

[rogueusmc]

For that matter, I can't think of many that weren't tricycle since WWII

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: rogueusmc

The above website states that the Tricycle landing gear configuration prevented it too???

I know of a number of tricycle geared aircraft that were standard aboard carriers???

It might have something to do with the design of early tricycle landing gear. The design of a B-25 probably assumed some angle of rotation on landing that couldn't be guaranteed on a bobbing and weaving carrier deck.

[wdolson]

The Navy didn't like tricycle gear early on.  When they evaluated a version of the P-39, they insisted that it be modified to be a tail dragger.

The Navy over came their resistance to tricycle gear soon after the B-25 landing.  The F7F Tigercat began to enter service in 1946, though it failed carrier trials and didn't end up passing carrier trials until it was obsolete.  Jets pretty much have to be tricycle gear, so the Navy had to adapt.  Some early Navy jets had extremely long nose struts though.

Bill