I often asked myself, why Japan - one of the most main warfaring nations of WW2 - is so badly represented with carrier based bombers in Warbirds. Have a look what they have: Aichi D3A VAL - cv-based divebomber, 430km/h speed, 250+50+50kg bombs Nakajima B5N - cv based level/torpbomber, 378 km/h, up to 800kg bomb The Aichi D3A was taken out of front service in 1943 and replaced by the Yokusuka D4Y - a far better cv-based dive bomber: Speed: 546kmh, 250+30+30 bombs, 2319 planes built. Also the B5N was taken from the front units in 1943 and replaced by the Nakajima B6N. Speed: 482 kmh, up to 800kg bomb, 1133 built. Now - wouldnt it be a good idea to try to add the better japanese carrier based planes. They played an important role during the japanese operations in WW2 and are simply not existent in Warbirds.
lol babek if iam thinking right, you start similar posts about japanese bombers once every 2 months ....
D3A removed? D4Y required big carriers with catapults, most were sunk. B5N removed? B6N required big carriers with catapults, most were sunk. D4Y and B6N could not replace them.
G4M is not carrier based. Afrika, commander of 25IAP saw some chronicles where Betties took of from carrier deck, so Aike aggreed to put G4M to CV. because of IJN airplanes lack. Ju 87 C did not reach production of 25 samples. A7M2 is big fantastic Zero. N1K1-A and N1K2-A cover tasks of thos fiction IJN cv-fighter enough. the only planes worth inthis thread are D4Y2a and B6N2a. but fh-staff currently have some technical problems introducing them.
@glas: G4M was never used as a carrier based buff in history @gunitz: only few prototypes of A7M were built - they never were used in battle @exec: D3A and B5N were taken out from front service in 1943 and replaced by their successor models. Also these planes were built in higher numbers than the obsolete planes. About this catapult thing... Strange - never heared before about this. But what I know are the ships these new planes operated from. The D4Y operated from the following japanese aircraft carriers during the war: Chitose (sunk October 1944) Chiyoda (sunk October 1944) Hiyo (sunk June 1944) Junyo (heavy damaged December 1944 - never repaired) Shinyo (sunk in November 1944) Shokaku (sunk in Battle of Philippines) Soryu (sunk in Battle of Midway) Taiyo (sunk in August 1944) Unyo (sunk in September 1944) Zuikaku (sunk October 1944). The B6N operated from the following aircraft carriers during the war: Hiyo (sunk June 1944) Junyo (heavy damaged December 1944 - never repaired) Shinyo (sunk in November 1944) Shokaku (sunk in Battle of Philippines) Taiyo (sunk in August 1944) Unyo (sunk in September 1944) Zuikaku (sunk October 1944). Some of these carriers were used for training of carrier based planes and were not used in battle (like the Shinyo, the Taiyo or the Unyo). But some of them indeed used them during war. And not in low numbers. For example the Imperial Mobile Fleet used more than 70 B6N from its carriers to battle. So - i dont know if the carriers of the mobile fleet had catapults. But obviously the B6N were able to start from these ships. The point is, that we have only obsolete cv-based japanese divebombers and levelbombers. And I strongly dislike these non historical cv-based N1K1 or G4M. I know its difficult to add new planes - but still I think that adding B6N and DY4 as cv-based gold planes would be a good idea. EDIT: Here some infos about the The Battle of the Philippine Sea Date : 19-20 June 1944 The Mobile Fleet under Vice Admiral Jisaburo Ozawa was divided into three forces - the Van Force, and "A" and "B" Forces. Here the numbers of B6N and DY4 used by these units: Van Force (Vice Admiral Kurita) CVL Chitose CVL Chiyoda CVL Zuiho 9 Nakajima B6N torpedo-bombers - "Jills" "A" Force (Vice Admiral Ozawa) CV Taiho CV Zuikaku CV Shokaku Combined air complement of these three carriers - 70 Yokosuka D4Y Suisei dive bombers - "Judys" 51 Nakajima B6N torpedo-bombers - "Jills" "B" Force (Rear Admiral Takaji Joshima) CV Junyo CV Hiyo CVL Ryuho 27 Yokosuka D4Y Suisei dive-bombers - "Judys" 18 Nakajima B6N torpedo-bombers -"Jills" So - according to this order of battle 77 B6N and 97 DY4 were used in this battle of late 1944.
I have question about B25C. It's known that Doolittle lead attack for Tokyo on B25s from CV. I tried do that on offline and it's almost impossible. With 10% fuel and 60lb paras load i were able to take off after few tries, but more bombs or fuel prevent that. I tried all bomber and B25C and some other were only buffs unable to take off from cv. Even big planes like He177 with nice load ald 50% fuel or B17 with 1000lb bombs and 50% fuel took off from cv at first attempt. A thing that makes take off B25C from cv impossible is very slow accelerate 0-100mph :/ Can it be changed ? I know that online B25C on cv is unavailable, but that thing at offline makes me mad (few hours with attempt to take off )
http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/d3a.htm miraculously, D3A was produced after "it was removed from frontal units"
lat, take ordnance 7 "light 500lb" without turrets. it models doolittle's B-25B. anyways, it's strage. i took off with almost any load of B-25C/J
Look here: http://www.aviation-history.com/aichi/d3a.html In June 1942 the D3A was introduced and was powered by a 1,300 hp Kinsei 54 engine. The production version of the D3A2 featured an increased range to 915 miles (1,472 km) with a fuel capacity of 1,079 liters (237-4 Imp gal). Externally the aircraft was almost identical to the D3A1 with the exception of a propeller spinner and a rear canopy section that was longer and more pointed. It was designated Navy Type 99 Carrier Bomber Model 22 and began to replace the Model 11 in front-line units in the autumn of 1942. When the much faster Yokosuka Suisei became available, the D3A2s were relegated to land-based units and to those operating from the smaller carriers which had a deck inadequate for the Suisei's higher landing speed. In 1944 when the American forces returned to the Philippines the D3A2s took an active part in the bitter fighting but were hopelessly out performed and losses were heavy. By then many D3A1s and D3A2s were operated by training units in Japan and several were modified as Navy Type 99 Bomber Trainer Model 12s (D3A2-K).7 During the last year of the war, D3A2s were mostly relegated to second-line duties. Nevertheless: The B5N and D3A were taken away from the carriers when possible and replaced by more modern B6N and DY4. And your own source shows this: Accoording to this link D4Y was built in higher numbers than D3A and used from many japanese carriers http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/d4y.htm Same for the B6N http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/b6n.htm Again: It would be nice if this unhistorical N1K and G4M would be taken away as CV-based FH-planes while B6N and DY4 would be added in future.
I took off with 20% fuel and ord 7 at first time. With 50% fuel it gone to water few times. I don't want say that is 100% impossible, but compared with much heavier buffs it's really weird not to take off easy. He177 cv take off i made before 1.61 or 1.62 patch (where He177 climb was fixed) and I done it at first time, with many bombs and 50% fuel. It was so easy.
Sorry, had just done a reinstall and didnt have time to look up before posting. My bad, I just assumed.
but why we have 109 t, if they have make a low quantity of rhis figthers too, is not a bad idea to make ju 87 c. and why we dont have the .j2m3 raiden interceptor, p1y1 ginga. g3m2 and the ki 67 hiryu ahh and the ki 100 II too.
We have the 109t cos there are very few Gold cv-based fighters in the game (much the same as why we have the G4M). The rest of the planes, exec already answered why.
Raiden, Ginga and the others are not carrierbased bombers. From landbases the GOLD-side has german landbased planes. But from CV it only has obsolete material and the B6N/DY4 which were used by the Japanese Empire for their CV-battles are not available. Instead we have the unrealistic N1K and G4M as cv-born planes. Therefore the question if it would be possible to add B6N and DY4 in future.
