Page 2 of 2

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 12:47 am
by geofflambert
It just seems (to me) a crying shame that B-25s were not developed to carry torpedoes when called upon. I don't care that they were army, why didn't that happen?

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 1:11 am
by wdolson
North American made torpedo racks for the B-25 and the Army did testing with them. They were never used operationally because by the time they could have been deployed, torpedoes were only used when going after carriers or battleships, neither of which were seen by US forces between late 1942 and mid-1943.

Bill

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:10 pm
by crsutton
My understanding is that Gen. Kenney favored the A20 and wanted more. Not as effective as the B25 but in a theater where a downed plane over jungle or sea meant the very real chance of the loss of the crew, the A20 with it's 2 man crew offered a morbid economy of force.

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 1:00 am
by Dili
The modified A-20s and B-25s were devastating in the low altitude skip bombing role. The suite of .50s was enough to sink small craft and kept flak gunners cowering on larger ships. The attack came in fast at mast height and was usually so quick the defending ship had no opportunity to maneuver. The most famous use of these bombers was the Battle of the Bismark Sea.

Didn't worked so well in Mediterranean due to many AA in all vessels including barges specific for AA. A Siebel barge could have 2 Quads 20mm plus 2 single 20mm and a 37mm.

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 1:16 am
by wdolson
US medium bombers were also dedicated to other roles than they were in the Pacific. In the Med they were used at medium altitudes to attack land targets more than they were in the Pacific.

Bill

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 11:55 am
by Lecivius
Gunn's team used whatever weapons were laying around. The existing B-17's were getting worn & inoperable. So were a lot of the fighters in theater. That's why the aircraft were fitted with ironed in weapons of various sorts. Some had a lot of .50's in the nose. Some had .50's and .30's. One had 2 .303's and 2 20mm from some busted Airacobra's. One had a 37mm hand loaded AT gun [X(]

All of this I got from Morison's.

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 7:10 pm
by wdolson
Pappy Gunn was an interesting character. He also had a reason to do all he could for the cause. He was a Navy pilot and retired in the 1930s. After retiring, he went and started an airline in the Philippines. He was there with his family when the war started and he was unable to get them out, so they got interned with other civilians. During the Philippines campaign he was flying an airliner as a liaison aircraft and went down in the jungle, but walked out a week later.

He escaped to Australia and was essentially drafted into the Army by MacArthur. He served as the 5th AF's engineering guru for most of the war.

At the Battle of Leyte Gulf, he went ashore in one of the early waves to help coordinate the establishment of the base at Tacloben. The first thing they did was build an emergency strip on the beach. That strip was used by the Navy flyers who lost their ship in the Battle Off Samar. The Navy planes were airborne so late in the day that night had fallen by the time their last tank of fuel began to run low and they needed to be guided in. At Tacloben there was only one person who knew how to do an LSO's job: Gunn. He grabs a couple of flaming torches and guided in every Navy plane. Because there was no room at the strip, most of the planes were pushed off into the surf as soon as they landed.

When my father arrived at Tacloben a few weeks later, he said the surf was full of Navy planes. He didn't know why they were there other than someone said the Navy had lost some carriers. He didn't learn the full story until recently.

Gunn probably became a good barnyard mechanic keeping his airline going in the middle of nowhere. It was the sort of field engineering the 5th AF needed during the dark days of 1942.

Bill

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 3:07 am
by Barb
Pappy was one hell of a man. I have a book about him written by his son:
http://www.amazon.com/Pappy-Gunn-Nathaniel/dp/1418437751/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=1-1&qid=1412229216

He was the man that never said "no" to any crazy idea - He tried to modify B-25s to the extent they were shedding skin when firing all the .50cals - I think he managed to pack 14 forward firing (2 top turret, 4 in side blisters, 8 in the nose) on one piece - but they had to remove them to keep the plane flyable.

He was the right men to the 5th Air Force - when Kenney asked North American to build strafer version of B-25, North American representatives said the plane would not fly because of center of gravity - Pappy replied to them he had removed the center of gravity from his planes [:D]

He was definitely the men that "got things done" - He stole 12 brand new B-25s from the Dutch air force (who doesn't have pilots trained in them) ... He even went back to the "place of crime" and requisitioned the (removed) bomb-sights on gun point.

He was also a man who can make things crazy - once he and few others rolled a bomb to a ditch behind some tents where pilots were sleeping... Most unappreciated wake up call [X(]

And as an legendary aviator, he ended his life in a plane crash - back in Philippines flying his own airline.
[&o]

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 4:35 am
by Yaab
ORIGINAL: crsutton

Attack bombers will drop down and attack at 100 feet for any attack set below 6,000 feet. The will suppress AA at bases and on ships (but can still potentially take a beating) Above 6,000 feet they work just like any other bomber. Non attack bombers only carry half a bomb load when set to low level attack. Fighters set to 1,000 feet will drop down to 100 feet as well.

Does it mean that if I set attack bombers to attack airfield/port/city/ground targets between 1000-5000 feet they will always drop to 100 feet? That can be pretty devastating for the attack bombers fly against ground targets.

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 5:26 am
by oaltinyay
Has anyone experience with Ki45s or anything similar from IJN side ? I am producing a lot of them and training them in LowN to get at the lesser escorted groups.

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 8:52 am
by towtow59_MatrixForum
ORIGINAL: Yaab

Does it mean that if I set attack bombers to attack airfield/port/city/ground targets between 1000-5000 feet they will always drop to 100 feet? That can be pretty devastating for the attack bombers fly against ground targets.

In my testing, yes from 6k down attack bombers will drop to 100 feet and strafe their target, no matter what mission they are on, excluding city attacks as I have not tested that.

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 9:36 am
by Yaab
Many thanks!

RE: Attack Bombers

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 8:45 pm
by spence
The original versions of the PV-1 deployed to the Pacific had a bombardier and 2 x .50 cal in the nose. In the field they were modified as well with a "chin pack" of 3 additional .50 cal added and the bombardier removed. From the AARs published by various PV-1 squadrons at VPNavy.com low level attacks were quite common. Later production of the PV-1 included the "chin pack"/no bombardier and the PV-2 included it right from the start. A special PV-2D version was contracted for the invasion of Japan and had 8 x .50 cal in the nose. Only about 30 of the 500 contracted for were completed before the Japanese surrendered and the contract was cancelled.