ORIGINAL: el cid again
The problem with your fighter theory (for early fighters anyway)
is that they lacked the hard points for more than two bombs. You CAN mount a 15 kg bomb, or 30 kg, or 60 kg - on any hardpoint.
But there are only two of them. [Cluster bombs - present for the Allies - somewhat solve this issue - in that they typically permit
4 smaller bombs per hard point. The devices are defined - but not used by stock aircraft as far as I am aware. But they work very well!
If you use them.]
It is perfectly true that more smaller bombs really matter for airfield attacks. And I doubt a Mary or Ann can carry a 250 kg bomb. Anyway, it is not
listed as the standard loadout. 50 kg bombs are. Light bombers often carried 30 kg and even 15 kg bombs - especially to longer ranges.
It is not matter of historical bombload, but working of game engine. Two bombs are worse, than MORE THAN TWO bombs, so no reason to use fighters, if you can send bombers, and score more hits. Fighters does not seem to hold better against AA fire (they will probably fight better - in airfield attack role, against enemy CAP only).
Obvioulsy you have to keep some limits, so overall bombload weight would be one of it, although I am trying to simulate this device (however 10 bombs seems to be probably too much in this case):
You keep on saying that carrying more bombs is always better but it just not that simple.
Carrying more bombs (unless they are presented as a stick load) provides a better opportunity to score more hits. But more hits does not necessarily mean more damage is inflicted as damage inflicted is a factor of bomb effect.
That is currently hardly an issue, because 90% of planes uses only the same 500 lb/250 kg bombs.
In terms of the game engine, for the purpose of shutting down airfields, it really doesn't profit one to inflict more "hits" if the cumulative bomb effect is less than that achieved from fewer hits using bigger bombs.
Nope. I have rearmed VALs with 3x60 kg bombs for airfield attack (which is less, than 3/4th of original 250 kg bomb load/effect wise), and result was 10-15% more damages to airstrip. Since it is pretty rare to hit with whole bombload, you can assume, than no more than 2 bombs would hit for every plane. It gives like 2 times more hits, but only HALF of effect, yet airfield was MORE damaged, as a result.
It is possible, that it is easier to destroy plane with bigger bomb (but difference was around 3%, and definitely more planes was damaged overall), and bigger bomb should destroy more supply, with supply hit, but that is all.
To move onto naval attack. What would be the point of an aircraft carrying more bombs, none of which are capable of penetrating say a cruiser's armour over an aircraft carrying fewer bombs but each capable of penetrating the armour.
Again, planes currently carries the same bomb. The only exception, I can recall, are DBs.
Now, if you use bigger bombs, it will make plane more preferable to Naval Attack, but you need capacity to carry them, which again put 4Es as preferred platform - so no solution for this problem with current engine, except using "sticks" (TM by NEMO)
Can anyone provide a list of links with aircraft data sheets? I am only really asking for Guadalcanal era aircraft for now. It is hit or miss for US aircraft and got Bupkiss on any other nationality.
WIKIPEDIA should have most basic data for all planes (OK, maybe only for one model)
You can use this site http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/,
or this site, which I have found better, but it is in Czech. Not, that I understand much of this language, but planes have tables in two versions, and one of them is in english (although it seems to be automatic translation) http://www.valka.cz/