Baltimore V - utterly ridiculous

[vimhawk2]

Why did the Allies bother with fighters to win air superiority when this thing just cuts a swathe through the attackers and is also quite hard to shoot down?

Seriously, has this not happened to other people? How can something that is basically a light bomber with two 0.5" MG be so ridiculously destructive? I'm sure it shoots down far more than a US heavy bomber on a plane for plane basis, and the 109s really suffer. Whatever it's firepower is rated it's surely wrong? Have a look at it on wiki. If it was that good they wouldn't have bothered making Mitchells, Marauders and Invaders etc.

Thankfully hasn't a large bomb load so thinking about not even attacking them.

[JeffroK]

I use the Baltimore heavily in 1943 & early 44 and have never seen them do anything like you describe. How about some numbers or screen shots.
It is faster than B25 & B26, slower than A20, less maneuverable than all but good durability.
Far from having only 2 x 50 cal it had either 2 x 50cal or 4 x ,303 in the wings, Upper turret with 4 x .303 and a Ventral possie with 2 x .303, some had a further 4 x .303 rear firing guns.

I think the game rates it has been fully armed, this means up to 2 x 50cal and 10 x .303 or 14 x .303

Maybe your tactics are wrong or aircraft only marginally faster?

edit The game has is equipped with 4 x ,303 in the wings, Upper turret with 2 x 50cal and a Ventral possie with 2 x .303, and 4 x .303 rear firing guns.

[vimhawk2]

Thank you for that information. I was wondering about all that armament, because from what it looks like (not a large bomber) it doesn't seem all those MGs would fit! Also wondering how much use forward firing MGs in the wings would be, it's not like it's going to be dogfighting, and attacking fighters would presumably not come head on anyway. Basically I was just working on the idea that the only real danger was the turret mounted twin 0.5s, which I was wondering why that would be so much danger compared to attacking (apparently) much better armed aircraft. I take your point there is other rear firing armament, but am skeptical how much damage they could cause unless fighters lined up behind the thing. Nevertheless, again thank you for replying to my rant! I have calmed down a bit now and have been more successful attacking them since I wrote my original message, by not attacking with 109s at all.

Incidentally, it seems there were only about 1,500 ever built, so my game must be using a large percentage of the entire production! I suspect they've also lumped in all the marks into one and called them all "Baltimore V" as well.

[JeffroK]

Commonwealth pilots used the Baltimore and its predecessor Martin Maryland aggressively against the lower powered Italian aircraft, with a top speed over 300 mph it was useful and if a pilot though a head on attack was the way to go they could find up to 8 x .303 or 4 .303 and 2 x 50cal shooting back.

[vimhawk2]

Noted.

And on an unrelated subject...

I have never had cause to run latin through Google Translate before!

[Johntxic]

Vimhawk, I believe the only large-scale users of the Baltimore were the RAF/Commonwealth forces. The US never adopted it.