Night Bombing Overpowered?

[Yakface]

I've got two games going - one as the Japanese and one as the Allies, both in early 43. I am concerned about the effectiveness of bombing airfields at night.

A couple of AAR reports will highlight waht I mean. Firstly this is my attack on a well reconned Magwe airfield.:

Night Air attack on Magwe , at 57,47

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
Liberator II x 17
B-17E Fortress x 18
B-17F Fortress x 42
B-24D Liberator x 27


Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 3 destroyed on ground
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed on ground
Ki-43-Ic Oscar: 13 destroyed on ground
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 3 destroyed on ground
Ki-46-II Dinah: 1 destroyed on ground

In total 50 aircraft were destroyed

Airbase hits 10
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 33

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x Liberator II bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
8 x Liberator II bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
6 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
12 x B-17F Fortress bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
9 x B-17F Fortress bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
9 x B-17F Fortress bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
6 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
12 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
12 x B-17F Fortress bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
12 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
9 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes

Despite the fact that the weather was 'sever storms' 50 aircraft were destroyed on the ground (size 6 with under 300 aircraft engines at the base). I hate to think what the result would be if weather had been clear.

I lost one bomber which crashed on landing.

My opponent informed me that the airfield was under stacking limits.

In my game as the Japanese I've been on the sticky end of similar results. My opponent has been bombing a base for some weeks so I was able to do some hits per plane analysis. In clear weather each 4E bomber achieves on average between 2 and 2.5 hits per mission, which seems pretty good to me.

That's concern 1 - which would not be a game breeaker if there was some defence/price to pay by the attacker. Which brings me to concern #2......no defence and no price to pay

[Yakface]

As I mentioned in game 2 my opponent has been bombing a base for some weeks/ So I stationed 10 AA units there (3 of those big ones with 10 searchlighs and 5 of the 4-8 gun heavy flak units plus two tank divisions with organic heavy flak). I also decided to send LRCAP with as many fighters as I could manage.

The results were less than impressive. 130 were available for CAP. 60 engaged. From the replay only 2 managed a hit.

Whilst my fighters fumbled around aimlessly the bombers were blowing them away - many damaged and lots shot down . (I stongly suspect that my searchlights were bracketing my fighters rather than his bombers).

Night Air attack on Katherine , at 76,128

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 102 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 37 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 24
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 90
Ki-46-IIIb Dinah x 6



Allied aircraft
Liberator II x 3
B-24D Liberator x 9
B-24D1 Liberator x 4


Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 5 destroyed

In fact 11 were lost in A2A with 2 more to ops

Allied aircraft losses
Liberator II: 3 damaged
B-24D Liberator: 4 damaged
B-24D1 Liberator: 2 damaged

Grand total of 1 B24 lost to ops. The damage was almost all caused by flak and barrage balloons (bombers at 6,000ft

Runway hits 3

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x Liberator II bombing from 6000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 6000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 6000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing from 6000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-24D1 Liberator bombing from 6000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
204 Ku S-1 with A6M3 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 24 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 15 minutes
24th Sentai with Ki-44-IIa Tojo (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 21 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 11 minutes
54th Sentai with Ki-44-IIa Tojo (21 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
21 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 12000
Raid is overhead
59th Sentai with Ki-44-IIa Tojo (19 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
19 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 12000
Raid is overhead
248th Sentai with Ki-44-IIa Tojo (29 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
29 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 12000
Raid is overhead
Spc.Attck.Unit Det with Ki-46-IIIb Dinah (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 6 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 1 minutes

This is not the only time I've tried intercept. All previous ones had the same outcome. The others were under 1106i where radar was fubar. Thought I try again under 1108i before posting

[Yakface]

In summary - my concerns

Night bombers always find the airfield (attacks everyday for at least two weeks without any apparently getting lost)

Damage enough to make base untenable

No defence (at least until 44 when radar on aircraft become available)

Minimal ops loss (no greater than day attacks I would say)

This is going to lead to a very boring game IMO

Oh BTW after my night attack as the Allies (first AAR) I suggested that we drop any airbase attacks and only used night bombing for strategic targets. Before asking my Allied opponent to do the same I wanted to see what others opinion is.

Was night bombing of airbases a prospect during the pacific war? If results were anything like the above....why the hell did they bother with day attacks?

[bbbf]

I personally restrict night bombing to my British bombers, and even then usually just the Wellingtons - night bombing of airfields is too effective to fairly use the USAAF bombers.

[LoBaron]

The general consensus here is AFAIK that night bombing really is (slightly) overpowered and bad weather
is an (a bit) too weak negative modifier.
Please note my careful way of expressing this. [;)]

Still I think we have again a situation where I have to point to the most obvious influencing
factor in the game.

Numbers

Allied aircraft
Liberator II x 17
B-17E Fortress x 18
B-17F Fortress x 42
B-24D Liberator x 27

104(!!!) heavy bombers attacking one airfield at 6000ft stacked with fighter aircraft. [X(]
Thats something to wreck opposition. These are European theatre numbers, never used in massed
attacks against airfields in the Pacific.



The only long term protection against massed 4eng raids for the Japanese is AAA and dispersal
in the range of the Allied heavy bombers,

Not doing so and your opponent gets the results you posted, Yakface. Thats, partly at least, his own fault.



I have a proposal though to reduce the effectiveness of night bombing raids in general - which may
add to the fact that TheElf already mentioned the general availability of massed heavies has to be
reduced a bit (however this will be done).

Proposal: reduce the max availability of AC per squadron for night bombing raids to 25%, except for
dedicated night fighters. This could help to prevent such results in the first place and
help to balance night air action in general.

[LoBaron]

The second combat is a bit less a problem:

3 Runway hits. This means that at least the fighters were able to prevent any serious damage to the airbase,
even though it was protected by dayfighters.

Night A2A realism is very hard to asess as the Japanese were notoriousely poor in that regard.
The only more or less confirmed A2A kill I know of is Saburo Sakai shooting down a B29 right before
the unconditional surrender of Japan.

[witpqs]

In my experience so far there are very few highly successful attacks. Most are wimpy. And even day fighters on night CAP have a big impact on the raids. I doubt night attacks are really overpowered in the big picture.

[Puhis]

Night bombing seems to be somewhat overpowered. My next HR suggestion might be something like: night bombing only when there's 50 % or more moonlight.

[darbycmcd]

I have found if you HR that night bomb raids have to be at 15'k it seems to give about the right results. they end up as harrassment missions, force defender to put some of the cap on night duty, wreck a few planes on the ground.

[m10bob]

I seem to disagree with the posters here..I feel night bombing is just about right, if not dummied down a tad for certain time frames.

The Brits were the masters of night bombing after probably 1941, had been at it a while and used "pathfinder" units to mark the target which effectively let the main formation find it.

Since they were not going for pinpoint targetting, an airfield would of course be much easier to hit, than say a single building, or even factory complex.

The night bombing was probably cut down from the original WITP by maybe 50% in effectiveness, and if we further castrate it, will no longer be an option for either player, (even the units which historically mastered the concept?).

[LoBaron]

I have a similar opinion as you bob.

I just think that the general availability of (heavy) bombers is too high and this also
affects night bombing runs where its even more unrealistic.
Have you ever heard of 100+ heavies raiding a single target at night without op loss?

Not that I am an expert on this but I guess even mounting such a strike would have been impossible
with WWII standards.

This also implies that night bombing in fact is only very slightly overpowered and the problem is
more the general availability of planes for these types of missions.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Still I think we have again a situation where I have to point to the most obvious influencing
factor in the game.

Numbers

Allied aircraft
Liberator II x 17
B-17E Fortress x 18
B-17F Fortress x 42
B-24D Liberator x 27

104(!!!) heavy bombers attacking one airfield at 6000ft stacked with fighter aircraft. [X(]
Thats something to wreck opposition. These are European theatre numbers, never used in massed
attacks against airfields in the Pacific.

This was my initial reaction as well. Look at the total bomb load in that huge gaggle of planes. And from very low altitude. If the allied player can muster such an attack he should be rewarded. Just a stunning number of attackers for the PTO.

FWIW, the AI Japanese fly "night fighters" pretty much all the time, especialy Nates. If someone can tell me how these crates can find incoming bombers, let alone attack them, I'll listen to arguments that the attack code is too powerful.

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: m10bob
The Brits were the masters of night bombing after probably 1941, had been at it a while and used "pathfinder" units to mark the target which effectively let the main formation find it.

And still, the smallest target they were able to hit was "a city", but more often than not, they failed to hit even that.

Since they were not going for pinpoint targetting, an airfield would of course be much easier to hit, than say a single building, or even factory complex.

Heh..no. If that airfield was the size of Hamburg, then perhaps yes, otherwise no. Unless the airfield was located at a very very easy place to find, like at the mouth of a river, night bombers would not have been able to hit an airfield before well into 44.

The night bombing was probably cut down from the original WITP by maybe 50% in effectiveness, and if we further castrate it, will no longer be an option for either player, (even the units which historically mastered the concept?).

The units which "historically mastered the concept" were only aiming at massive targets...like Berlin or Tokyo. They often managed to miss even that. Bomber Command had enormous problems with what they called "bomb creep" meaning that later aircraft in the bomber stream aimed at fires already caused by earlier bombers, this multiplied with every new aircraft, leading to long strings of bombs moving back along the bomber stream-route away from the city that was targeted. Often the Germans would find such bomb-alleys running several kilometers out into the countryside after a BC attack.

Pathfinders and radar made accuracy better of cource, but they too were aiming at cities, not smaller targets. Before pathfinders, I believe the BC accuracy was something along the lines of "less than 5 % of bombs landed within 5 kilometers of aimpoint" or something ridiculous like that.

[m10bob]

Can't figure on night bomber op losses due to bad landing because the planes would be coming home with the rising sun, and getting a plane airborne is not difficult, if the speed is up and the stick is back.

I would still agree ops losses might be higher due to the fact the ground crew at any given base is likely the same (tired) people working day shift to fix those planes?

In Feb 1944 Mitscher was using TBM's as pathfinders for night ops and when attacking Palau (at night) had a night trained unit doing mast high night attacks with single 500 pounders which were credited with sinking 17 ships, with evidence provided by aerial photography the next day..

Mitscher did not like having a single night fighter unit on his carriers due to the fatigue it caused his plane handlers, but he did approve of entire carriers which were all night ops..

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
less than 5 % of bombs landed within 5 kilometers of aimpoint" or something ridiculous like that.

Wow, didn´t know it was that bad...

[Dobey455]

ORIGINAL: m10bob
The Brits were the masters of night bombing after probably 1941, had been at it a while and used "pathfinder" units to mark the target which effectively let the main formation find it.

And still, the smallest target they were able to hit was "a city", but more often than not, they failed to hit even that.

Simply incorrect.
In the early years, yes the night bombing was terrible. But improved techniques and especially navigation technology (Oboe, H2S) and Pathfinder units meant that by the time the allied bomber forces were bombing transportation targets in France in 1944, prior to Overlord, it was discovered that Bomber Command was actually bombing more accurately by night than the 8th AF was by day. (this was because at night each bomber aimed individually, where as by day they bombed as a single formation perhaps a mile, or more, wide and several miles long.)

Since they were not going for pinpoint targetting, an airfield would of course be much easier to hit, than say a single building, or even factory complex.

Heh..no. If that airfield was the size of Hamburg, then perhaps yes, otherwise no. Unless the airfield was located at a very very easy place to find, like at the mouth of a river, night bombers would not have been able to hit an airfield before well into 44.

I agree AF were never a realistic night bombing target - they provide little in the way of a radar return, and unlike a factory they are actually relatively dispersed rather than a large building, or cluster of buildings. A good HR would be that only city (manpower) targets could be attacked by night, or industry after 1944.

The units which "historically mastered the concept" were only aiming at massive targets...like Berlin or Tokyo. They often managed to miss even that. Bomber Command had enormous problems with what they called "bomb creep" meaning that later aircraft in the bomber stream aimed at fires already caused by earlier bombers, this multiplied with every new aircraft, leading to long strings of bombs moving back along the bomber stream-route away from the city that was targeted. Often the Germans would find such bomb-alleys running several kilometers out into the countryside after a BC attack.

Pathfinders and radar made accuracy better of cource, but they too were aiming at cities, not smaller targets. Before pathfinders, I believe the BC accuracy was something along the lines of "less than 5 % of bombs landed within 5 kilometers of aimpoint" or something ridiculous like that.

You are confusing results with potential. Even after BC proved they had the ability to hit pin point targets at night they continued to bomb cities.
This was NOT because they were not capable of anything more. It was because many senior people....especially "bomber" Harris passionately believed in the concept of Area bombing, or "City busting."

Again I think limiting night bombing to city's only, prior to 1944 would be effective if this is an issue that you feel is out of balance.
But bear in mind the option is available to both sides.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

The general consensus here is AFAIK that night bombing really is (slightly) overpowered and bad weather
is an (a bit) too weak negative modifier.
Please note my careful way of expressing this. [;)]

Still I think we have again a situation where I have to point to the most obvious influencing
factor in the game.

Unfortunately it´s not slightly overpowered, it´s highly overpowered. Why? Because we are talking about a TACTICAL attack, not a STRATEGIC attack on a big city. The problem is that a relatively small (compared to a big city) airfield is as easily hit as the big city. Hitting an airfield at night in early 43 with heavy bombers? hmm

Real life nigth attacks aimed at cities not at industry complexes or other pin point targets.

[SuluSea]

I seem to remember someone on the developement team stating that night bombing takes advantage of DL from  the day time phase for that reason I stay away from bombing at night. Has anything changed with recent patches? Thanks!

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: Dobey
Simply incorrect.
In the early years, yes the night bombing was terrible.

First you say Im incorrect, then in the next sentence, you agree with me?

But improved techniques and especially navigation technology (Oboe, H2S) and Pathfinder units meant that by the time the allied bomber forces were bombing transportation targets in France in 1944, prior to Overlord, it was discovered that Bomber Command was actually bombing more accurately by night than the 8th AF was by day. (this was because at night each bomber aimed individually, where as by day they bombed as a single formation perhaps a mile, or more, wide and several miles long.)

No one is arguing that BC was as bad in 44 as they were in 41. I am saying though that they were absolutely appalling in 41, and somewhat better in 44. I will need a source for the statement that ye average Lancaster at night was more accurate than ye average B 17 (with Norden-sight no less!) at day. Especially since the Lanc will be "aiming" at a patch of black surrounded by absolute darkness...unless it is aiming at a pathfinder-marker. Or perhaps a radar echo... But still, to claim that they were more accurate than the Norden sight-B17s is news to me. So what is the source for that statement?

You are confusing results with potential. Even after BC proved they had the ability to hit pin point targets at night they continued to bomb cities.

What is the size of this "pin point target" you claim the BC could hit in 44?

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Dobey

ORIGINAL: m10bob
The Brits were the masters of night bombing after probably 1941, had been at it a while and used "pathfinder" units to mark the target which effectively let the main formation find it.

And still, the smallest target they were able to hit was "a city", but more often than not, they failed to hit even that.

Simply incorrect.
In the early years, yes the night bombing was terrible. But improved techniques and especially navigation technology (Oboe, H2S) and Pathfinder units meant that by the time the allied bomber forces were bombing transportation targets in France in 1944, prior to Overlord, it was discovered that Bomber Command was actually bombing more accurately by night than the 8th AF was by day. (this was because at night each bomber aimed individually, where as by day they bombed as a single formation perhaps a mile, or more, wide and several miles long.)

Since they were not going for pinpoint targetting, an airfield would of course be much easier to hit, than say a single building, or even factory complex.

Heh..no. If that airfield was the size of Hamburg, then perhaps yes, otherwise no. Unless the airfield was located at a very very easy place to find, like at the mouth of a river, night bombers would not have been able to hit an airfield before well into 44.

I agree AF were never a realistic night bombing target - they provide little in the way of a radar return, and unlike a factory they are actually relatively dispersed rather than a large building, or cluster of buildings. A good HR would be that only city (manpower) targets could be attacked by night, or industry after 1944.

The units which "historically mastered the concept" were only aiming at massive targets...like Berlin or Tokyo. They often managed to miss even that. Bomber Command had enormous problems with what they called "bomb creep" meaning that later aircraft in the bomber stream aimed at fires already caused by earlier bombers, this multiplied with every new aircraft, leading to long strings of bombs moving back along the bomber stream-route away from the city that was targeted. Often the Germans would find such bomb-alleys running several kilometers out into the countryside after a BC attack.

Pathfinders and radar made accuracy better of cource, but they too were aiming at cities, not smaller targets. Before pathfinders, I believe the BC accuracy was something along the lines of "less than 5 % of bombs landed within 5 kilometers of aimpoint" or something ridiculous like that.

You are confusing results with potential. Even after BC proved they had the ability to hit pin point targets at night they continued to bomb cities.
This was NOT because they were not capable of anything more. It was because many senior people....especially "bomber" Harris passionately believed in the concept of Area bombing, or "City busting."

Again I think limiting night bombing to city's only, prior to 1944 would be effective if this is an issue that you feel is out of balance.
But bear in mind the option is available to both sides.

city bombing only at night sounds like a reasonable hr. With manpower only targetted, the industry would get damaged by fires (if fires actually work in AE which I haven´t seen evidence for yet).