Very cool aircraft, but honestly its just about impossible to use in game at its current BR. I understand this BR is likely based off of its bomb load, but even the most aggressive of side climbing will not let you make it to the enemy base at 3.7 since 3.3-5.0 vehicles are filled with props with great climb rates and devastating weaponry.
I think 3.0-3.3 would be a much more appropriate BR for this aircraft. Its simply too big, too slow and too unprotected to face the onslaught of fast climbing cannon props.
5 Likes
3.0 will not help this poor thing, it still will be the slowest bomber of this br. I suggest 2.3-2.7 instead, since it is not that much better than regular tech tree mariner. And US already have one 2.3 premium plane at rank 3.
2 Likes
I was thinking of an AB map - the ships were all stationary IIRC.
Even as Air AB was mentioned - in order to be complete:
Imho we had at least 3 maps with stationary ships even in Air RB which were replaced (#2), deleted (#3) or extremely rare (#1):
- Norway
- Stanicza of Krimskaya
- Operation Husky
Details:
- On Norway there was a stationary destroyer / cruiser parked near an U-boat bunker (which was also a base). So with a torp hit on the warship you killed the ship and the base at the same time. Very late game a hell of light landing craft landed on the island - u could kill up to 5 with a P-108 or a Do 217 K with a torpedo, but the af aaa on the Island was way too strong.
- On this “Krimskaya” map there were 2 parked cargo ships in an almost undefended harbor (map replaced).
- On Operation Husky the allied ships (mainly large landing craft) created mid/late game 2-3 stationary clusters.map had an auto ticket win for allies ~45-50 minutes…and got deleted.
Currently i see in Air RB Midway quite often (lots of stationary ships), Operation Kuban with 4 stationary ships) and even on the Britain map you find a few of stationary ships in the harbour. The challenge is to get there alive …
It seems decent enough in air sim at least, although it’s so slow that by the time you reach a base or ground targets to bomb, you’re almost full-cycled your Useful actions timer.
The cockpit was very disappointing though.
Edit:
I decided to fly it as a gunboat.
It’s quite effective at shooting down planes in sim and surprisingly survivable (I got torched by a yer-2 and the fires were put out.)
Spoiler
5 Likes
i don’t have the plane but in preview it has the R-2800-34w which is the same version of the f8f-1 bearcat and it only displays 1800hp where the R-2800-34w in the f8f has 2299 hp. is the preview wrong or do they just have different horse power figures out of the same engine?
1 Like
The PBM-5 should use the - 34 whilst the F8F-1 had a -34W. It’s basically the same engine except the W has water injection boosting combat power. I also believe the base - 34 should be 2100hp so it’s quite a bit short on horses.
3 Likes
in the viewer they are both listed as 34w but the w is water methanal injection i was just seeing if the preview is wrong but yes u are right the water methanal injection should push the 34w to 2400 while when its not active its 2100
2 Likes
I checked and was surprised to find no one has done a bug report on the wrong engine and missing hp.
I never cashed in my coupon after seeing how slow and useless it was in naval during the test flights. I doubt more power would make a significant difference to its effectiveness as its armament pushed it up in BR anyway.
3 Likes
it may well be a placeholder because i cant think of any other planes that use the -34 (in game)
The F7F also used the - 34W but the unboosted variant wouldn’t be applicable to most WT planes. Using the - 34W as a placeholder is fine during development but should not have passed on to the release.
3 Likes
your not wrong about that but this is gaijin they do this all the time (bomber cockpits are a prime example)
@LeonDasPro Please let us know if you guys make a report/or of one already is listed! I will definitely add my ‘vote’ to the report. I would love to use this plane, I keep all my BP vehicles so I can use the upgrade coupons to get the next BP. I hope it does get upgraded engines, would absolutely help it, even if it’s not a huge upgrade.
2 Likes
waiting for it to come on the market, how much do you think it will cost?
I got this a couple days ago, only reason to fly it is the 8 sea mine payload (shhh)
Honestly dont bother. It should be ideal for navy with ita large bomb/mine loadout and defensive turrets. But instead its a lumbering giant thats easy meat for anything with half decent AA.
Expect it to be cheap!
I tried to bring attention to the bug report site that the “customisable” payload that is interchangeable as mentioned on the devblog. For some reason doesn’t allow torpedos + mines or 2xap-bombs + mines. When they would not interfere with eachother at all, just as how the other loadouts don’t as they fit within the weight limitations.
My report was immediately shot down as not having evidence. But any logic shows if the 8x mines internally weight nearly 4tns and the doors close fully like with the internal bombs or ap bombs, and the 2x torpedo or 2x ap bomb externally are on the racks and do not interfere with the bomb-bay doors at all like with other payloads. And having them added together does not go over the 5,800kg max payload limit, then you should be able to create that custom loadout, it seems to just be a bug with it being restricted accidently as an overweight payload when it isn’t.
If anybody can find blueprints that say otherwise please do send them me, but otherwise there shouldn’t be any confliction. (I have looked at too many manuals and pilots handbooks for the PBM series and I cannot find anything).
2 Likes
Yes, it seems to be a bug. But it might not be. Or it might be.
Just ask the guys next time for the evidence they had when they added German bombs to the premium IL-2 in the German TT. There is zero evidence that this was even considered by the Germans as the Il-2s were seen as a piece of junk…
1 Like
