Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Question about 4E Bombing

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Question about 4E Bombing Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/17/2018 4:57:46 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 3954
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
Look, here's how I see it... The game/code (whatever) has limits/restrictions on what is reasonably possible and what is not. I doubt that there's an algorithm for each type of possible attack. i.e. Airfield, ground, city, navel, etc. So the code is designed to do what needs to happen within the limits of the game. What's that? City bombing. This was probably the most important aspect of history that needs to be reflected in the software. At least IRT the game. So the design is to focus on that, and get the rest to work reasonable well. This is my take on what Nicodemus was saying. JMHO YMMV

Now that said, I've no input to the code these are just my views and opinions. I have to say though that some things accomplished by the use of 4E bombers seem to be, shall I say 'over the top'. So if I or anyone else wishes to have some kind of HR to limit these things, why on earth should anyone else care? As long as players agree that is that. I'd also like to add that I would never ask another player for an HR that I would not accept if I were playing his/her side.

TBH in one of my games as Japan I decided to try city bombing myself, just to see a bit of what happens. If you ask me its way too easy to destroy a city. All I did was on occasion night bomb Calcutta with whatever occasional bomber group I had left doing nothing. No more than 25-30 aircraft every second or third night. Well within a rather shot period I had about one third of Calcutta reduced to ashes. I thought that it was pretty easy, but in game terms I thought it worked. As this is what happened to Japan, and in the end what needs to be accomplished in the long run. At least within the scope of the game.

There you have my thoughts and views. If it means I'm not your PBEM opponent, so be it.

Ciao

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 91
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 8:19:34 AM   
RichardAckermann

 

Posts: 256
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline
Does anyone know about the speed settings of 4-E bombers during approach of an airstrike?
I imagine they would fly the distance at cruise speed, but before bombing, did they speed up to full speed?
If yes, How long did they remain on cruise speed? Or in other words, at what distance to target did they increase speed, if at all?

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 92
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 12:55:18 PM   
tarkalak

 

Posts: 157
Joined: 6/26/2017
From: Bulgaria
Status: offline


_____________________________

We, the capable, led by the clueless, do the impossible for the good of the ungrateful. And we did so much , with so little, in so small time, that we are now qualified to make anything from nothing.

Konstantin Josef Jireček

(in reply to RichardAckermann)
Post #: 93
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 1:33:43 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 10695
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RichardAckermann

Does anyone know about the speed settings of 4-E bombers during approach of an airstrike?
I imagine they would fly the distance at cruise speed, but before bombing, did they speed up to full speed?
If yes, How long did they remain on cruise speed? Or in other words, at what distance to target did they increase speed, if at all?

I am not so sure they did always speed up for the bombing run. More speed = more bomb dispersal and less time for the bombardier to get the target in his sights. I would guess that if flak was heavy and accurate they would speed up more (but only if the lead bomber did - formation keeping), but if cloud or darkness shielded them a bit they would go slower.
After dropping the bombs they may have gone full speed to clear the target area for the next bomber group coming in.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to RichardAckermann)
Post #: 94
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 1:44:01 PM   
MakeeLearn

 

Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline
quote:

"On a moonlight night in November 1942, six B- 17's roared along the deck at full speed into Rabaul Harbor....



quote:

As the result of prolonged practice, pairs of B-25's learned to attack a vessel at a gliding speed of 250 to 275 m.p.h., and knew the fire power of one B-25 would be raking the side of the vessel during the split second that the other strafed and bombed the beam."


quote:

Emphasis should be placed on the fact that in every case the intensity of the fire from the enemy vessels was decreased when the B-25C- Is opened fire on them. The bombing run made by each aircraft was at an altitude of about 10 to 15 feet at an average speed of about 250 MPH.


A War of Their Own: Bombers over the Southwest Pacific


It would depend on each mission, number of aircraft, formation and especially the altitude.

< Message edited by MakeeLearn -- 3/27/2018 2:25:28 PM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 95
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 1:45:50 PM   
MakeeLearn

 

Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline
quote:

According to the 3d BG,
the following procedure in attacking shipping is recommended. High speed approach from medium altitude to a point about three miles from the target at an altitude of 1,000 to 1,500 feet. Then start violent "butterflying" at full throttle (side slips and rapid changes in altitude). At 1,500 yards from the target heavy A/A ceases to be effective and at that point, the plane should be at about 500 feet altitude. Fire one short sighting burst at 1,500 yards, then fire continuously from 1,200 yards in a full throttle, straight beam approach on the target; drop the bombs from between 500 feet and at masthead height when the previously selected reference point (a point on the airplane's nose) crosses the waterline of the ship. The pilots should remember that 50 caliber fire will drop about 100 feet in 1,000 yards when the plane is indicating 240 mph at sea level.


< Message edited by MakeeLearn -- 3/27/2018 1:49:46 PM >

(in reply to MakeeLearn)
Post #: 96
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 1:53:13 PM   
MakeeLearn

 

Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline
1942

quote:

Training Circular no. 46:

The report fully endorsed the concept and recommended that "training of pilots in these techniques be initiated at the earliest possible moment." Two of the attacks were deemed highly effective:

(1) Quartering front attack on armored surface vessels (more than one [ 1] inch of side armor plate) at maximum level flight speed and one hundred-fifty (150) feet to three-hundred (300) feet altitude, dropping one-thousand (1,000) pound or two-thousand (2,000) pound demolition bombs.

(2) Broadside attack on unarmored or lightly armored surface vessels (less than one [1] inch of side armor plate) at maximum level flight speed and at the minimum altitude necessary to clear the target, dropping demolition bombs of any appropriate size.


< Message edited by MakeeLearn -- 3/27/2018 1:55:40 PM >

(in reply to MakeeLearn)
Post #: 97
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 2:23:34 PM   
Barb


Posts: 2357
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline
4E would usually be limited by their formation. As such in Europe the usual combat box would upon hitting IP spread form vertical to horizontal formation (hard to keep station on leader if he has throttle on the wall). Entering bombing area would also be done on prescribed speed, or more precisely on a speed which turned out to be able to be kept by all planes in formation (some being older ships, some modern, some painted, others in the "silver"). This should even be prescribed in an operation order. After bomb release the combat box will try to restack vertically, while turning and climbing/losing altitude to throw off flak. Again the Exit point would have defined speed, altitude and position of each box within stream/wing.

So not much possibility for full throttle. You have to stay in formation to survive, and for some ships this will require full throttle, for others backing a little. Actually only the box leader would keep the throttle in a position, most of the other pilots in a box would be playing with their throttles up and down most of the time to keep their place in formation.

As for individual attack, it is usually wisest to use what speed you can get :D

_____________________________

[img]https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzOZPXg_qJ22TG43UmJ5UjRsb3c[/img]

(in reply to MakeeLearn)
Post #: 98
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 2:23:51 PM   
MakeeLearn

 

Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline
In the above I included the B25 for comparison.

One interesting fact on altitude is that

quote:

"Accomplish bombing at the lowest altitudes consistent with the type and amount of hostile anti-aircraft and fighter defenses .... In many cases it will be found that the losses from a single medium altitude mission will be less than the cumulative losses from the numerous high altitude missions required to produce comparative results."

(in reply to MakeeLearn)
Post #: 99
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 2:36:10 PM   
MakeeLearn

 

Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline
Plus there is Speed VS RPM vs Manifold Pressure

With a full load of bombs, to lower speed I believe you want to still keep RPM up as you decrease speed. And Manifold Pressure figures into it as well. There are some good original "How to fly a B17" films on Youtube.

(in reply to MakeeLearn)
Post #: 100
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 3:24:21 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 4715
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

Plus there is Speed VS RPM vs Manifold Pressure


There's a whole bunch of technical stuff that the pilot of an aircraft has to consider which impacts the tactical operation of his craft (not surprisingly). For planes with variable pitch propellors the pitch of the props greatly affected the range that the plane could fly on a mission. I read an account of a combat mission flown by civilian test pilot Charles Linbergh in WW2 where, flying some model of P-38 against the Japanese he returned from the mission with "half a tank of gas" while all the USAAF pilots were "sucking fumes" when they landed. IIRC it had something to do with propellor pitch and RPMs. He also showed the Marines that it was possible to take off in an F4U with 4000 lbs of bombs attached (presumably a fairly short range mission). Wish I could remember the name of that book (also had a story about the Boston baseball player Ted Williams in an F9F getting shot up over Korea and subsequently ditching).

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 101
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 3:48:18 PM   
RichardAckermann

 

Posts: 256
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline
So under the score "it depends". My favourite answer.
The whole thing is much more complicated than I had feared.
But thanks for all the input. I myself was quite clueless so far.

If the circumstance was that the 4-E formation was attacked by CAP several times enroute to their target, can I assume those bombers would probably run on something like cruising speed rather than full speed?

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 102
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/27/2018 11:18:21 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4129
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

1942

quote:

Training Circular no. 46:

The report fully endorsed the concept and recommended that "training of pilots in these techniques be initiated at the earliest possible moment." Two of the attacks were deemed highly effective:

(1) Quartering front attack on armored surface vessels (more than one [ 1] inch of side armor plate) at maximum level flight speed and one hundred-fifty (150) feet to three-hundred (300) feet altitude, dropping one-thousand (1,000) pound or two-thousand (2,000) pound demolition bombs.

(2) Broadside attack on unarmored or lightly armored surface vessels (less than one [1] inch of side armor plate) at maximum level flight speed and at the minimum altitude necessary to clear the target, dropping demolition bombs of any appropriate size.




Didn't worked in Med. Even barges could be full of AA weapons.

(in reply to MakeeLearn)
Post #: 103
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/28/2018 12:32:00 PM   
MrKane


Posts: 728
Joined: 3/9/2013
From: West Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: kfmiller41

Am playing Japan in a PBEM and my opponent just bombed my base at truk using about 50 heavy bombers. Date was 29 Dec 42. 5 raids came in at between 14000 to 18000 feet and total planes for all raids were 89. He lost no planes to my 30 zeros. He scored 18 hits, put 8 carriers and 1 battleship out of commission for at least 3-6 months with major damage. While I congratulate him on doing that I also feel like this accuracy is so out of whack I can understand why so many Japanese players call it quits. I mean I want to be competitive but I have nothing to shoot down hordes of 4 engine bombers, even my 2 engine fighters cannot stop them.
Am I just a bad player or is this something that should be house ruled to limit the uncanny accuracy these things have? It is only December 42 and he is already clobbering my bases with these beasts.


If you're looking for some help on settings drop in some screen shots of your fighter CAP settings, the combat report of the strikes, and some info on your pilot experience and skills. Too little here to go on.

That said, it's not out of the ordinary for massed 4Es to do a lot of damage on port strikes, as everyone has basically confirmed.


This uncanny accuracy during daylight is something that might be explained away, but when you see them coming in at night in 0% moonlight and getting multiple hits on pinpoint targets, while shooting down droves of night-fighters to boot without suffering much themselves, then you start wondering...


Thank You LST. I have stayed out of this thread due to my strong feeling on this subject. You, politely, hit the nail on the head.

Add to that the ability of 40-50 4EB to inflict 1,000+ Casualties on troops in Lvl-6 Forts and we're moving farther into the fantasy realms...



If it happens in PBEM, then you and your partner could rengetiate the house-rules and ban 2E/4Es from flying Ground attack missions in combat hexes.


My opponent is using B-29 for ground attacks. He has captured several cities simply by completely destroying dig-in Brigade or Division in single strike and sending his paratroopers very next turn. And I mean literally "destroying". There was division (10K man) before attack and next hex is empty at the very end of turn :D

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 104
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/28/2018 4:22:44 PM   
RichardAckermann

 

Posts: 256
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline
That's gotta hurt. How many B-29 did he send?

(in reply to MrKane)
Post #: 105
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/28/2018 4:31:09 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 15570
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Sounds like 2000 foot bombing runs.

(in reply to RichardAckermann)
Post #: 106
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/28/2018 5:12:50 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 7954
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Sounds like 2000 foot bombing runs.


Sounds like somebody didn't have much in the way of forts. Terrain helps more than forts, but even level 1-2 "field forts" will help prevent bombing damage. I just noticed a significant downtick in damage I was causing to some Chinese units in wooded-rough terrain. The first few turns, it was a lot. I could see when they got their first significant forts level built (presumably just level 1 given the time involved)... in less helpful terrain, you'd need at least forts 2 but possibly more.

There are some cities that are "clear" terrain. Even light urban, with forts 4+, should be enough to prevent wiping out entire divisions in a day with B-29s.

This coming from a guy who's wiped out entire divisions with B-29s. In clear terrain. With no forts.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 107
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 3/28/2018 5:32:05 PM   
MrKane


Posts: 728
Joined: 3/9/2013
From: West Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Sounds like 2000 foot bombing runs.


Sounds like somebody didn't have much in the way of forts. Terrain helps more than forts, but even level 1-2 "field forts" will help prevent bombing damage. I just noticed a significant downtick in damage I was causing to some Chinese units in wooded-rough terrain. The first few turns, it was a lot. I could see when they got their first significant forts level built (presumably just level 1 given the time involved)... in less helpful terrain, you'd need at least forts 2 but possibly more.

There are some cities that are "clear" terrain. Even light urban, with forts 4+, should be enough to prevent wiping out entire divisions in a day with B-29s.

This coming from a guy who's wiped out entire divisions with B-29s. In clear terrain. With no forts.


Well I have just lost another tank brigade and city in i such operation. It is main Mike's way win terrain plus night bombing airfields with his B-29. But I am not complaining just pointing strength of 4e. Anyway in day light sky belongs to me ;) even in 8/45

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 108
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 4/10/2018 11:26:29 AM   
tarkalak

 

Posts: 157
Joined: 6/26/2017
From: Bulgaria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

Plus there is Speed VS RPM vs Manifold Pressure


There's a whole bunch of technical stuff that the pilot of an aircraft has to consider which impacts the tactical operation of his craft (not surprisingly). For planes with variable pitch propellors the pitch of the props greatly affected the range that the plane could fly on a mission. I read an account of a combat mission flown by civilian test pilot Charles Linbergh in WW2 where, flying some model of P-38 against the Japanese he returned from the mission with "half a tank of gas" while all the USAAF pilots were "sucking fumes" when they landed. IIRC it had something to do with propellor pitch and RPMs. He also showed the Marines that it was possible to take off in an F4U with 4000 lbs of bombs attached (presumably a fairly short range mission). Wish I could remember the name of that book (also had a story about the Boston baseball player Ted Williams in an F9F getting shot up over Korea and subsequently ditching).



The propeller pitch angle is much like the gears in a car. Except that instead of discrete number of gears you can set it continuously.

So the "right" pitch angle will be different depending on what you need. If you want to cruise (read fuel economy) at certain altitude in certain weather conditions (humidity, air pressure, etc) you will have a certain "perfect" propeller pitch angle.

If you want maximum acceleration at the same conditions you will need different "perfect" propeller pitch angle.

And so forth.

If I recall correctly, FW 190 had automatic pitch control, and I am pretty sure that near the end of the war all modern fighter had it.

Of course, just like in real cars, an experienced pilot using manual pitch can outperform a less experienced one or one using automatic pitch control. The price is that constantly fiddling with it will lower your situational awareness.

_____________________________

We, the capable, led by the clueless, do the impossible for the good of the ungrateful. And we did so much , with so little, in so small time, that we are now qualified to make anything from nothing.

Konstantin Josef Jireček

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 109
RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 4/10/2018 12:06:24 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6093
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
If 2000 foot bombing runs are being made I would assume it was against a target without balloons.

Any base in clear terrain that isn't built up enough to have balloons needs substantial AA to protect troops deployed there.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to tarkalak)
Post #: 110
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Question about 4E Bombing Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.148