Will they ever add the B-47?

[Szussy Salty Seadog]

So a lot of people have been talking about the B-36 for like forever but what about the B-47 Stratojet? It is not that silly to add. Ill copy and paste the specs from wikipedia:
Maximum speed: 607 mph (528 kn, 977 km/h)
Service ceiling: 33,100 ft (10,100 m)
Rate of climb: 4,660 ft/min (23.7 m/s)
Guns: 2× 20 mm (0.787 in) M24A1 autocannons in a remote controlled tail turret with AN/APG-39 Gun-laying radar
Bombs: 25,000 lb (11,000 kg) of ordnance
I don't think it would be too OP if put against Mig-15s only as it has no defensive armament. It fits in the time era as it's first flight was in 1947 and it was introduced in 1951.

[Supreme Corgi]

i dont think this one would be placed in

[Szussy Salty Seadog]

Please explain why?

[Kirk Kokaine]

Originally posted by Pan 'Papa Bear' De Worski:

Please explain why?

Carried nuclear bombs.

[WitchKingAngmar]

Originally posted by Taffer:

Originally posted by Pan 'Papa Bear' De Worski:

Please explain why?

Carried nuclear bombs.

Nuclear bombs won't be in game. The B-29 carried a nuclear bomb and it will be added

[Kirk Kokaine]

Originally posted by WitchKingAngmar:

Originally posted by Taffer:

Carried nuclear bombs.

Nuclear bombs won't be in game. The B-29 carried a nuclear bomb and it will be added

Ah, didn't realise the B-29 had nukes.

[Silly Grey Owl]

The B-29 dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was the USA's first nuclear armed strategic bomber. It was retired in '49 as the main strategic bomber and replaced by the B-36 which was in turn replaced with the B-52. Smaller weapons have been carried by other bombers for tactical use but SAC flew only a handful of different birds for 50 years (varients and upgrades aside).

[Holy Mold Emperor]

They should add the B-52, because the US Department of Defense won't be retiring it until it is 100+ years old.
Who cares if it has an OP bomb load, I think the United States is the real loser here.

[Fish]

B-47 will never be added. Why? Fits timeline, sure. But 25,000lbs of ordanance and a top speed that would requie even Sabres to dive in order to keep up for prolonged amounts of time. But your guess is as good as mine.

[Helium3]

no B-47? then add the B-36 >:D. I don't need no tea-plane.

[Ed]

NVMD I'm mistaken.


They will add the B-57 Canberra though.

[Fish]

Originally posted by Helium3:

no B-47? then add the B-36 >:D. I don't need no tea-plane.

B-36 wont make it in. Its the exact same problem as with the B-47, except 4x worse.

Originally posted by Lin Beifong:

NVMD I'm mistaken.


They will add the B-57 Canberra though.

Which makes no sense when they can add the bloody B-45 which is American and was just as good as the Canberra. Stupid that theyre adding a lend-lease aircraft when they have a perfectly fine jet bomber that America ACTUALLY BUILT WITHOUT BRITAIN'S HELP OR GETTING IT LEND LEASE FROM THEM D:<

[Ed]

Originally posted by Comrade Nishizumi Miho♥:

Originally posted by Helium3:

no B-47? then add the B-36 >:D. I don't need no tea-plane.

B-36 wont make it in. Its the exact same problem as with the B-47, except 4x worse.

Originally posted by Lin Beifong:

NVMD I'm mistaken.


They will add the B-57 Canberra though.

Which makes no sense when they can add the bloody B-45 which is American and was just as good as the Canberra. Stupid that theyre adding a lend-lease aircraft when they have a perfectly fine jet bomber that America ACTUALLY BUILT WITHOUT BRITAIN'S HELP OR GETTING IT LEND LEASE FROM THEM D:<

Why not just add both? Eventually we are going to get the B-29, so ordnance won't matter as a limit anymore.

[Fish]

Originally posted by Lin Beifong:

Originally posted by Comrade Nishizumi Miho♥:

B-36 wont make it in. Its the exact same problem as with the B-47, except 4x worse.



Which makes no sense when they can add the bloody B-45 which is American and was just as good as the Canberra. Stupid that theyre adding a lend-lease aircraft when they have a perfectly fine jet bomber that America ACTUALLY BUILT WITHOUT BRITAIN'S HELP OR GETTING IT LEND LEASE FROM THEM D:<

Why not just add both? Eventually we are going to get the B-29, so ordnance won't matter as a limit anymore.

Ordnance size isnt the only problem, if you actually bothered to read my post...

[Ed]

Originally posted by Comrade Nishizumi Miho♥:

Originally posted by Lin Beifong:

Why not just add both? Eventually we are going to get the B-29, so ordnance won't matter as a limit anymore.

Ordnance size isnt the only problem, if you actually bothered to read my post...

Yes, forgot about speed

[Szussy Salty Seadog]

Originally posted by Comrade Nishizumi Miho♥:

B-47 will never be added. Why? Fits timeline, sure. But 25,000lbs of ordanance and a top speed that would requie even Sabres to dive in order to keep up for prolonged amounts of time. But your guess is as good as mine.

Half the ordnance or reduce it to 20,000lbs? Reduce the speed a bit? The F-80 Shooting star has a lower top speed than it should have historically, and I'm willing to have it nerfed a bit to get a good jet bomber. The B-29 has 20,000lbs of ordnance and it's getting put in...

Originally posted by Comrade Nishizumi Miho♥:

Originally posted by Helium3:

no B-47? then add the B-36 >:D. I don't need no tea-plane.

B-36 wont make it in. Its the exact same problem as with the B-47, except 4x worse.

Originally posted by Lin Beifong:

NVMD I'm mistaken.


They will add the B-57 Canberra though.

Which makes no sense when they can add the bloody B-45 which is American and was just as good as the Canberra. Stupid that theyre adding a lend-lease aircraft when they have a perfectly fine jet bomber that America ACTUALLY BUILT WITHOUT BRITAIN'S HELP OR GETTING IT LEND LEASE FROM THEM D:<

One of the reasons why I want the B-47 to be put in. I know that these bombers would tip the balance, but I find it a bit like they're shooting america in the foot a bit since the Russians get the Tu-4 which has 10 20mms or essentially an upgraded B-29.