DBs in ASW role?

[jmalter]

playing Allies, w/ PDU on, i've got quite a few 18-plane VS sqns. those on active ops fly OS2U-3 Kingfishers, the trainers use the SOC-1 Seagull. now, some of those Seagull guys are ready to go active, but Kingfisher production can barely keep up w/ ops-losses & upgrading the float-planes of new ship arrivals.

but i've got plenty of 2nd-line SBD-3 DBs available - are DBs effective as ASW planes at 1k'?

[Grfin Zeppelin]

Can only speak for the Japanese. I had only soso results with Judys. Kates seem to do alot better. But yes, DBs seem to work in that role too.

[jmalter]

hi Gräfin Z,

i guess i'll have to give it a try, see if they get any results. thing is, i'd mistakenly exited a VS sqn's screen w/ upgrade left on, it converted to a new-model Helldiver during the turn execution - and the PDU path won't allow it to switch back to any kind of float-plane. guess this sqn will be my test-case.

am i correct in thinking that any plane flying ASW is using its 'extended range' bomb-load?

[Puhis]

My DBs are flying ASW at 11000 feet, and they are doing fine.

D3A2 Val from 956 Ku T-1 attacking a Electric Boat S-18 class SS at 113,139
a Shark class SS is reported HIT
D3A2 Val reports shape below surface at 113, 139 near Lunga
D3A2 Val from 956 Ku T-1 attacking an Allied SS at 113,139
an Allied SS is reported HIT
D3A2 Val reports radio transmissions at 115, 135 near Auki
D3A2 Val reports suspected submarine at 113, 139 near Lunga
D3A2 Val reports shape below surface at 113, 139 near Lunga

[spence]

Not that it has much to do with the game but IRL it was an SBD from the Enterprise that sank the first Japanese submarine of the war either 3 or 4 days after Pearl Harbor.

Not sure what their patrol altitude was though. Dive bombing would certainly have been the most accurate in so far as scoring a hit but it seems it would be difficult to pick out a submarine from 10K+ ft or more unless it was throwing up a really good wake by moving at standard (~15 kts) or full speed.

[spence]

I just checked with the CV6.org site and they have the original AARs from two pilots who attacked an IJN sub on 12/10/41...I think I read that post-war it was determined they both attacked the same sub which was sunk (I-70 I think). Both claimed to have hit the water with their 1000 lb bombs within 50+/- ft of the sub.
One pilot says he was patrolling at 300 ft and dropped his bomb from about 800 ft (apparently level bombing).
The other claims to have tried a glide bombing attack which turned into a dive bombing attack due to high local winds(implies higher altitude but doesn't say how high - pilot claims the sub was moving about 16 kts though).

[Gilbert]

ORIGINAL: spence

I just checked with the CV6.org site and they have the original AARs from two pilots who attacked an IJN sub on 12/10/41...I think I read that post-war it was determined they both attacked the same sub which was sunk (I-70 I think). Both claimed to have hit the water with their 1000 lb bombs within 50+/- ft of the sub.
One pilot says he was patrolling at 300 ft and dropped his bomb from about 800 ft (apparently level bombing).
The other claims to have tried a glide bombing attack which turned into a dive bombing attack due to high local winds(implies higher altitude but doesn't say how high - pilot claims the sub was moving about 16 kts though).

The following is an excerpt of her I-70 TROM:

"9 December 1941:
4 miles SW of Diamond Head, Oahu, Hawaii. At 0130 Cdr Sano reports an American carrier (USS ENTERPRISE (CV-6) arriving at Pearl Harbor. This is the last signal received from I-70.

10 December 1941:
I-6 reports sighting a LEXINGTON-class aircraft carrier and two cruisers heading NE. Vice Admiral Shimizu in KATORI at Kwajalein orders SubRon 1 and other boats to pursue and sink the carrier.

121 miles NE of Cape Halava, Molokai, Hawaiian Islands. After 0600 in the morning, Ens Perry L. Teaff's Douglas SBD-2 "Dauntless" dive-bomber of VS-6 from USS ENTERPRISE (CV-6) attacks I-70 on the surface and scores a near-miss with a 1,000-lb bomb that damages the submarine, preventing her submerging.

In the afternoon, another SBD of VS-6 flown by Lt (jg) Clarence E. Dickinson Jr. sights a surfaced submarine in the same area. Dickinson climbs to 5,000 ft for a diving attack. His plane is sighted from the submarine, which commences a slow turn to starboard, opening fire from her 13-mm machine guns. [3]

The bomb dropped from the "Dauntless" lands right beside the submarine, amidships. Its explosion throws several gunners over board. I-70 stops and starts to settle on the even keel, disappearing underwater about 45 seconds after the explosion at 23-45N, 155-35W.

When Dickinson returns to the scene of the sinking, he sights four IJN sailors flailing in the water. A bubble of oil and foamy water appears on the surface, followed by two more bubbles, containing oil and debris.

I-70 is the first Japanese combatant ship sunk by United States aircraft during World War II and the first fleet submarine lost in the Pacific War.

Sixth Fleet's headquarters tries to contact I-70, even after the other subs of her division return to Kwajalein. The effort is unsuccessful. I-70 is presumed lost with all 93 hands off Hawaii. "

Gilbert

[Puhis]

7th December Zero shot down Lt Dickingson's DB when he was flying to Pearl Harbor. Rear gunner was killed, but Dickinson survived. 3 days later he sunk japanese I-boat. Quite a retaliation.

[CaptDave]

Can't help wondering if this is the same Lt. Dickinson that "couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle" in Tora! Tora! Tora! (yes, I'm sure they just made up a name for the movie, but you never know).

[ChadS]

ORIGINAL: CaptDave

Can't help wondering if this is the same Lt. Dickinson that "couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle" in Tora! Tora! Tora! (yes, I'm sure they just made up a name for the movie, but you never know).

Almost definitely yes, in my opinion. It's very common for names to be pulled out and used in a manner like that, to add "realism." In 1970, when that was made, we didn't have the Internet to fact-check, so they didn't necessarily get the story right, but the "authentic use of the name" was considered important.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: jmalter

playing Allies, w/ PDU on, i've got quite a few 18-plane VS sqns. those on active ops fly OS2U-3 Kingfishers, the trainers use the SOC-1 Seagull. now, some of those Seagull guys are ready to go active, but Kingfisher production can barely keep up w/ ops-losses & upgrading the float-planes of new ship arrivals.

but i've got plenty of 2nd-line SBD-3 DBs available - are DBs effective as ASW planes at 1k'?

Any plane is effective as long as the ASW skill of the individual crews is decent. Does not matter. (well radar might help later on) Only thing is that some planes drop lighter bombs and when they hit do less damage. But for spotting and suppression, they all work the same given equal ASW skills.

As far as the right altitude. See if you can get any agreement on the board as to the best height...[;)]

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: jmalter

playing Allies, w/ PDU on, i've got quite a few 18-plane VS sqns. those on active ops fly OS2U-3 Kingfishers, the trainers use the SOC-1 Seagull. now, some of those Seagull guys are ready to go active, but Kingfisher production can barely keep up w/ ops-losses & upgrading the float-planes of new ship arrivals.

but i've got plenty of 2nd-line SBD-3 DBs available - are DBs effective as ASW planes at 1k'?

Any plane is effective as long as the ASW skill of the individual crews is decent. Does not matter. (well radar might help later on) Only thing is that some planes drop lighter bombs and when they hit do less damage. But for spotting and suppression, they all work the same given equal ASW skills.

As far as the right altitude. See if you can get any agreement on the board as to the best height...[;)]

For spotting and suppression this may be true. I find all planes can do this job well, or keeping the DL high on subs and giving them a harder time to make an attack run.

For hitting subs I'm not sure this is true. In my experience on the Japanese side the Kate is definitely the best at finding and then actually hitting subs. Not sure why it's better, but it is seemingly a bit better. Do the 2E MB have more of a penalty flying low at 1k? (I know they should have a reduced bomb load, but that should still be 2 x 250kg, right?). I have had little luck with the DBs in an ASW 'attack' role, but for finding subs they work as well as anything else given the right altitudes. I fly them on search at 2k if I want them to get a good view of the sub activity, but several players, including Puhis above have good luck at higher altitudes.

Also, the Jake should be my best at finding and hitting subs with it's four tiny 60kg bombs. But it is not, even in groups with high experience pilots that have 70exp in ASW. I find this odd.

The SBD should do just fine at finding subs, and if it does ever hit them they're toast after a shot from that 1000 pounder. If you run even 10 turns in a sandbox head to head game with SBDs at different heights you'll likely see what works better. Ops losses will be higher low down so if you're struggling with pools i would try them higher.

[crsutton]

I would think another factor would be the number of bombs carried. Liberator carried up to ten (well usually DC). But I never have really tested. As the Allied player I really depend on my patrol aircraft to find and detect enemy subs and then let the ships kill them. My opponent did the reverse and used masses of Japanese aircraft to good effect.

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: jmalter

playing Allies, w/ PDU on, i've got quite a few 18-plane VS sqns. those on active ops fly OS2U-3 Kingfishers, the trainers use the SOC-1 Seagull. now, some of those Seagull guys are ready to go active, but Kingfisher production can barely keep up w/ ops-losses & upgrading the float-planes of new ship arrivals.

but i've got plenty of 2nd-line SBD-3 DBs available - are DBs effective as ASW planes at 1k'?

Any plane is effective as long as the ASW skill of the individual crews is decent. Does not matter. (well radar might help later on) Only thing is that some planes drop lighter bombs and when they hit do less damage. But for spotting and suppression, they all work the same given equal ASW skills.

As far as the right altitude. See if you can get any agreement on the board as to the best height...[;)]

For spotting and suppression this may be true. I find all planes can do this job well, or keeping the DL high on subs and giving them a harder time to make an attack run.

For hitting subs I'm not sure this is true. In my experience on the Japanese side the Kate is definitely the best at finding and then actually hitting subs. Not sure why it's better, but it is seemingly a bit better. Do the 2E MB have more of a penalty flying low at 1k? (I know they should have a reduced bomb load, but that should still be 2 x 250kg, right?). I have had little luck with the DBs in an ASW 'attack' role, but for finding subs they work as well as anything else given the right altitudes. I fly them on search at 2k if I want them to get a good view of the sub activity, but several players, including Puhis above have good luck at higher altitudes.

Also, the Jake should be my best at finding and hitting subs with it's four tiny 60kg bombs. But it is not, even in groups with high experience pilots that have 70exp in ASW. I find this odd.

The SBD should do just fine at finding subs, and if it does ever hit them they're toast after a shot from that 1000 pounder. If you run even 10 turns in a sandbox head to head game with SBDs at different heights you'll likely see what works better. Ops losses will be higher low down so if you're struggling with pools i would try them higher.

I think the Kates do better with a successful attack due to their slower cruise speed. But detect/suppress is more important to me. I'd rather force them to keep their heads down as actual attacks happen less often. The Helen is my best platform for ASW. It takes a bit to train up the pilots but...

To the OP - I think if you find something with a slow cruise speed and a 250kg+ payload you'll get an improvement on successful sub attacks.

I normally fly around 1-3k ALT for ASW patrols. I normall fly 4-6k for Naval Search.

[aphrochine]

Upgrade to SBD-5s. They drop 1000lb bomb and have a far superior range. The Kingfishers drop 250lb bombs iirc without checking, and have an ASW range of 2.

[jmalter]

thanks to you all for your input.

Kingfishers have ASW range 3, which is adequate. it's the Seagulls that have ASW range 2, i use them only for training. i don't think any of my ASW sqns will see any SBD-5s for awhile, that's my current 1st-line DB & they're needed to upgrade all the CV & replacement sqns.

i've a large pool of SB2C-1C Helldivers available for my CV sqns, but i'm not down w/ putting a plane w/ service rating 3 on my CVs. i'd use the Helldivers for my land-based ASW sqns (they typically run at 50% rest), but the upgrade path doesn't allow it.

ain't it true that any plane on ASW patrol is using its extended-range load?

[Grfin Zeppelin]

ORIGINAL: jmalter


ain't it true that any plane on ASW patrol is using its extended-range load?

Yes indeed. Also range is halved.

[Cavalry Corp]

p-ssst - The jean is a better then you think ASW and you have plenty to use up at the start. Also use the V1 kate as there are quite a few of those...