The Vulcan works fine in ground rb since it only has 5 more bombs than the buccaneer, and the buccaneer doesn’t nuke ground rb.
I’m well aware, but having more options at different battle ratings isn’t a bad thing.
1 Like
In terms of large strategic bombers going forward that have much larger payloads than the Vulcan, Victor, Valiant and B-47’s. An option would be to make them greyed out in ground rb above a certain br bracket. So that people won’t carpet bomb entire landscapes. Just how Helis are blanked out for air rb and boats for ground rb.
For larger bombers with larger payloads they could just add respawning airfields just like in sim enduring confrontation. And have the airfield respawns be random so that people won’t so easily predict the path of such bombers.
It’s a simple solution as bombers with giant payloads can hit targets of that scale reliably if allowed to reach them, and they won’t be abused to carpet bomb entire ground rb maps.
1 Like
Though it has only a slightly larger bomb load to that of the Buc S2 btw. 21 x 1k bombs I believe
The Buccaneers is 16x 1000lbs of bombs. The Vulcan and Valiants payload is 21x1000lbs and Victor’s is 35x1000lbs.
Does only the amount of bombs matter? its a plane way larger than the Buccaneer, slower and less maneuverable…not sure how that could work great in the current ground RB more.
Its not, but, what BR exactly is it supposed to be? (at least in your opinion)
Then thats a positive for the Vulcan, Valiant and B-47’s as they could be added without impacting the game too greatly. Many of the responses I have seen on the old forum and the community is that Ground RB players do not want things like the B-52 carpet bombing ground rb and ruining matches. So if people agree that the Vulcan for example is similar in performance to the buccaneer and that it would not work great then thats good. Almost all aircraft in ground rb except for guided bomb carriers do not “work great in the current ground RB.” but it allows people the option to fly it.
On the grounds of it’s performance the Vulcan is more usefull in payload compared to the Buccaneer because it could carry other than the 21x1000lb bombs, 3xpaveway bombs (but required 3rd party laser designation), martel and shrike anti-radiation missiles which could be added to the game since AA vehicles are getting bigger with more powerfull radar. And it would found that it could carry 2xAIM-9G (One on each Pilon) during the falklands and would work. It was never used or seen practical but they would serve the same purpose as harriers and buccaneer (aim-9b’s) in being defensive missile loadouts.
The Vulcan if I might add also has almost similar top speeds and maneuverability is the highest in the world for anything of that scale, weight and payload class.
In terms of BR, I myself and others discussing this topic have come up with these BR’s,
Blackburn Buccaneer S.2 = 9.3
Vicker Valiant = 9.3
Avro Vulcan = 9.7
Handley Page Victor = 10.0/10.3
The addition of the Valiant, Vulcan and Victor would finally have jet strike aircraft removed from the bomber tree and moved across where they should be positioned =
Buccaneer moving to the position after the Scimitar and before the FG.1, and the Tornado GR.1 being after the Jaguar GR.1A.
Now some may think that this then means there is no top vehicle in the bomber tree which they will be correct, however this is resolved by placing an aircraft after the V-bombers, that being the TSR.2 in that position. With the F-111C from Australia being an Event vehicle for the same/similar tier. After that there is absolutely nothing since there was nothing irl since the Royal Navy became the ones incharge of nuclear deterrance.
And like I have said to people before. If warthunder wants to put a cap on what kind of payload is allowed in tank rb, then they can do that. Bombers of a certain bombing class and above will be blanked out just like how ships are in ground rb or helis in air rb. You would still be able to fly those giant bombers in EC Air RB maps and especially customs to your hearts content, but you would not be able to use it in the gamemodes like ground rb where you can annihilate your and the enemies team instantly by just using a drop series to drop it all instantly.
^If they add something like that those from ground rb will have no concerns, and those bomber mains from air rb will still be able to fly the aircraft they want and would love to fly.
5 Likes
I think currently there isn’t much of a place in the game unfortunately, it’d be shot down before it got anywhere close to the targets in Air RB, Ground RB it’d get Pansir’d. This is only because Gaijin has refused to add more game modes over the many years people have been asking to allow modern bombers to be useful…
However, I still think it needs to be added, too iconic to not be in game.
FutureFlash2034’s ideas are good
3 Likes
The Canberra and the B-57 were the first strategic bombers of the early Cold War, so why stop when you can go on. In Microsoft Simulator they added the Avro Vulcan to experience the flight, why not WT do the same and by showing us what her payload can do.
Here’s a video of this beast that the Soviets fear so much about.
The Vulcan Bomber
2 years on and the problem still remains of compression.
Where do you place her.
Canberra at 8.3 and Buc S2 at 9.3 and in terms of overall performance, its somewhere roughly in the middle, with a bigger bomb load than both, but far less survivable than the Buc S2 is.
The fear is it would be a free kill for literally anything that could climb to intercept it, which is basically anything, especially the supersonics it would always face.
Dont get me wrong. It would be amazing and I would be in it every other day of the week. But it is an extremely tough aircraft to place. Perhaps as a premium or event premium where its downsides are mitigated by the premium bonus
1 Like
Somewhere in between if they don’t like her as a researchable why not add her in as a Premium for 11,000 Gold Eagles?
Wont be that high, probably more like 6-8k (harrier gr1 at 9.7 is 9k) , but I think a premium is unfortunately the only real way to place it. either that or a strategic bomber TT similar to that of helis that unlocks at a certain rank. That way its still researchable and usable in all gamemodes, but doesnt impact the main TT porgression.
1 Like
The Nighthawk has set a precedent for unarmed bombers. The Vulcan would essentially have all the same problems as the Nighthawk, but since the Nighthawk exists, there isn’t really a reason for the Vulcan not to (both are pretty iconic).
Canberra B Mk.2 and B-57A at 8.3are also unarmed bombers are they’ve been in the game since Oct 2014.
Buc S1 has been in the game since June 2021 and has no guns or AAMs at 8.7. (Buc S2 since Dec 2020 doesnt exactly have that good of an A2A fit either with only 2x Aim-9Bs that are rarely taken)
So its not new to the F-117. But the issue does still remain of placement for the Vulcan. Too high and its dead vs supersonics, too low and its better than the Canberras.
Though the Vulcan can equip 2x Aim-9Gs
couldnt vulcan only carry like 20k lb of bomb
21x 1000lb bombs was its max conventional loadout and what it used during Operation Blackbuck.
But it would not be convenient in ARB to hit 4+ bases and in ASB, would be a pain in the butt to do so in something as large as a vulcan. Only decent target would be the AFs. Again, 2+ years on and we still need decent new bombing targets
This is an excellent idea. War Thunder rules are essentially, if they were fitted once (or sometimes, if someone considered fitting them), then it’s fair game.
Only if they take the time to actually model it half correctly.
1 Like
Or buy it as a pack like £62.99
someday likely when they add similar stuff to other tech trees as well