Search results for query: *

I know, it's probable what's happened is that my phones autocorrect has changed it. :) As you say though, the mistake is pretty appropriate. I do wonder if the He-177 had been developed like the 277 whether it would have worked. I heard it wasn't so much that the engines were unreliable but...

No, it was Nazi projects, and part of the problem with German industry was that they were continually set against each other, Willi Messerchmitt also had a long running feud with Erhard Milch, Secretary of State for Aviation. This was not the only such case of industries being set against each...

No, I meant the Brequet. The link to that piece about the game is here http://forumini.wikidot.com/breguet-br-810 It mentions an experimental torpedo bomber. It doesn't matter anyway, you were told in either the first or second page that the problem with France wasn't equipment, or at least...

Where do you get that the Breguet B810? All I see is a reference to it in a game as a naval torpedo bomber development of a land based aircraft? The plain fact is that replacing all light bombers with dive bombers is not a magic cure all as for one thing, range generally suffers and ordnance...

The very early Wellington's did have a pair of fixed, or at the most semi flexible guns. The very earliest marks didn't have the power operated turret.

No we are not JUST talking about Italy, your very own original post referred to getting rid of all light and twin engine bombers, please answer that, the Italian thing was a later tangent. Doing as you mentioned back then would have an adverse affect on the war. If you're going to cite dive...

Those were two of the ones I quoted, all in all, the Skua, Val, Dauntless and Stuka and the Stuka was the worst in term of range. Wiki gives the range of the Stuka with a bomb load but not the others but I don't imagine it would be that much difference from the figures given.

Which ones are you thinking of, I quoted ranges of a number of contempary early war ones and the Stuka was by far the least range. Even the Skua outranged the Stuka by a significant margin.

The last time in Western Europe seems to have been the Battle of Britain where they largely attacked radar stations and while achieving minor success they were butchered by the RAF fighter squadrons and the damage quickly repaired. Despite the towering radar masts, they were not an easy target...

Buy Japanese ones because they were allies? The Japanese will be needing all the aircraft they have for themselves eventually and are on a build up. The Breda 65 was, like other aircraft of that time, rapidly obsolete due to advances and the Ba 88 was an utter failure as a military aircraft...

The other problem was that the rapid pace of aircraft development quickly made aircraft that had been rated as damned good quickly obsolete. The Fairey Battle for instance was fast for its time, which unfortunately was very short. The Dornier 17, especially the 'flying pencil' early versions...

And did you ignore the fact that the FCS was faulty and the ammunition for the 2 pounders had degraded. Prince of Wales FCS had been faulty, she was still a relatively new vessel and probably had teething problems, meanwhile Repulse was an older WW1 era ship and while upgraded in the inter war...

So basically this combo is going to ignore all AA fire from warships? You cite the sinking of Force Z while ignoring the fact that there were none of your magical dive bombers present in the attack. Prince of Wales FCS was damaged by the heat and humidity and a good portion of its AA ammo...

Well trying to get a comparison of contempary dive bombers here. Junkers 87B with a 500kg bomb is 370 miles. Blackburn Skuas range is given on wiki at 760 miles which seems more than I would have thought. SBD Dauntless is 1,115 miles Aichi D3A 'Val' is given at 840 miles. I'm assuming that's...

Even if you target transports, there is no way they will be unescorted. There will still be the flak coverage and fighters also have a range limitation. Remember for instance in the Battle of Britain that Me-109's could only have 10 minutes over sections of the South of England when they were...

I still don't know where you're getting the Dive bomber as a wonder win all weapon. It 's an entirely different skill set for one thing. Also, as has been mentioned there is such a thing as onboard AA on ships. You can also guarantee that vessels aren't going to just sit still when there are...

I believe Rudel in later years was using the Stuka G model with twin 37mm underwing cannons. So, at this point not a dive bomber. He did sink the Battleship Marat (ex Petropavlovsk) earlier in the war with a dive bomber variant.

Saying the Soviet air force sucked throughout the war is also a rather broad claim as in the opening days of Operation Barbarossa a lot of the VVS was caught on the ground. Not to mention at this point the main fighters were the Polikarpov I-15, I-16 and I-153, and these aircraft gave a decent...

I'm not denying it, I'm just saying that Dive Bombers as mentioned before aren't a magic cure all. Carrier forces generally prefer to have a mix of fighters, torpedo craft and dive bombers. I know the Dauntless was a decent aircraft and like most USN aircraft was pretty sturdy. However, the...

If you'e going to class all twin engines as useless, that's going to apply to the Luftwaffe as well. The triumvurate of the Heinkel 111, Junkers 88 and especially the Dornier 17 were not particularly heavy bomb carriers. And for all the way you're trying to make dive bombers as a magic weapon...