Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message


Kwik E Mart -> Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/20/2010 7:10:38 PM)

[X(][X(][X(][X(][X(]

http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090602-042.pdf
[image]local://upfiles/13152/8C727CF9C16847F2A9E70F04DF70C06F.jpg[/image]




freeboy -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/20/2010 7:12:36 PM)

I cannot remembe rthe title, BUT in witp research, I remember reading about attacks using PHOSPEROUS against 4E bombers over Japan...




redcoat -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/20/2010 9:45:21 PM)


Phosphorus bombs from Time Life’s The Road to Tokyo.

[image]http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/4997/phosphorus1.jpg[/image]

Caption: Heading home from a raid on Iwo Jima, B-24s pass through a shower of incendiary fragments from two phosphorus bombs dropped by Japanese fighters flying high above. Though this spectacular weapon damaged many planes, it failed to knock down a single Liberator..

Another photo from Time Life.

[image]http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/5427/phosphorus2.jpg[/image]






wdolson -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/20/2010 10:05:18 PM)

The Germans tried the same thing.  Dropping bombs on formations of heavy bombers turned out to be mostly a waste of explosives.

Bill




Kwik E Mart -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/20/2010 10:56:51 PM)

would still make a cool graphic in the combat replay [X(]




cap_and_gown -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 12:24:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

The Germans tried the same thing.  Dropping bombs on formations of heavy bombers turned out to be mostly a waste of explosives.

Bill



I suppose. But wouldn't it be possible for one of these "bombs" to be more accurate than AAA? Course, you can't deploy as many of these bombs as you can cannons on the ground.





Dili -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 2:05:06 AM)

Italians tried the same thing at time of Sicily Invasion. The air to air bomb problems are mostly due to diffculty of launching the bomb correctly for the fuze set time.




wdolson -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 3:24:31 AM)

With AA, a heavily defended site will have possibly 100+ guns all firing multiple rounds a minute.  If they have the fuse set to the right altitude, that's a lot of shrapnel among the bombers with the occasional direct hit or near miss that can be devastating.  With bombs used for AA, there are only one, or maybe a couple per plane.  The pilot needs to judge his altitude above the bombers to drop his bombs for his fuse settings.  Being off be 500 feet means all bombs miss by a significant margin.

AA guns can just put more steel in the area of the target than aircraft dropping bombs and there is more room for correction as they fire.

Bill




bklooste -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 5:46:55 AM)

yep 120 lb zero bomb is about the same a 6 88mm rounds in weight ( and the rounds would cover more area). The fuse would be a royal pain.



quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

With AA, a heavily defended site will have possibly 100+ guns all firing multiple rounds a minute.  If they have the fuse set to the right altitude, that's a lot of shrapnel among the bombers with the occasional direct hit or near miss that can be devastating.  With bombs used for AA, there are only one, or maybe a couple per plane.  The pilot needs to judge his altitude above the bombers to drop his bombs for his fuse settings.  Being off be 500 feet means all bombs miss by a significant margin.

AA guns can just put more steel in the area of the target than aircraft dropping bombs and there is more room for correction as they fire.

Bill






Swenslim -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 6:03:14 AM)

Why they didnt use non-guided rockets ?




witpqs -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 7:32:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Swenslim

Why they didnt use non-guided rockets ?


The Germans did. They had very limited success - not really effective.




xj900uk -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 11:04:44 AM)

Don't 4get the British and their para-bomb, which was dusted off the invention scrap-heap and got ready for the feared Seelowe.
Apparently this was absolutely lethal and caused loads of casualties, but only to the ground crews who had to prepare and launch the thing...




John Lansford -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 11:30:06 AM)

The Germans also dropped smaller bombs attached to parachutes when attacking the big bomber formations.  The parachutes drifted through the formations and while few if any bombers ever hit them, they had to break formation to avoid them and often that was all they wanted anyway.

Same with the 8cm rockets they'd fire at the bombers.  A single rocket would destroy a bomber, but they were very effective in breaking up the formation and reducing their mutual supporting firepower. 




Fishbed -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 12:06:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Don't 4get the British and their para-bomb, which was dusted off the invention scrap-heap and got ready for the feared Seelowe.
Apparently this was absolutely lethal and caused loads of casualties, but only to the ground crews who had to prepare and launch the thing...


Actually they also had a much simpler system in use for airfield defense too: they would have rocket cable sent in the sky at the approaching bombers - and in the same fashion as barrage balloon, a low-alt plane's wing catching the wire would bring it with itself and trigger parachutes opening at both ends, destabilizing the plane and sending it to the ground. It actually worked pretty well from an AAR I read about a low-alt attack that went really very wrong for a staffel of Do-17z




redcoat -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 12:15:46 PM)


The Japanese also used some air-to-air rockets. The IJN and IJA both developed rockets although I suspect that the IJN used more of them in combat.

These rockets were armed with white/yellow phosphorus – like the air-to-air bombs developed by the Japanese.

A picture from an AAF intelligence report showing a failed attack on a B-29 with such a rocket.

[image]http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/9863/b29rocketattack.jpg[/image]

A photo of a Ki-43 Hayabusa with an air-to-air rocket. Taken during a test.

[image]http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/826/hayabusawrocket.jpg[/image]




morganbj -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 1:11:24 PM)

Politicians have put more planes on the ground than anything.




Chickenboy -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 1:34:54 PM)

I wonder what some of those IJ pilots would be thinking if they were trying to air-bomb over their home turf. I'd feel pretty bad watching a stick of bombs (or parachute bombs, whatever) that I dropped miss the Allied bombers and drift into some residential neighborhood that I'm trying to protect.




Dili -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 4:59:23 PM)

London had 7000 casualities due to own flak.




wdolson -> RE: Need new graphic for Zero vs B-17 interception (4/21/2010 11:06:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I wonder what some of those IJ pilots would be thinking if they were trying to air-bomb over their home turf. I'd feel pretty bad watching a stick of bombs (or parachute bombs, whatever) that I dropped miss the Allied bombers and drift into some residential neighborhood that I'm trying to protect.


When attempts were made to drop bombs as AA, the bombs were usually altitude fused so they would go off before hitting the ground.

There still would be shrapnel raining from the sky though.

I once knew a guy who's father was a fighter pilot near the end of WW II and he had been assigned ground spotting duty with the infantry. He would direct the fighters in on ground attack missions. When the fighters went over, they would open up over their own lines and there would be a hail of .50 caliber shell casings. Everybody would duck for cover. He didn't recall anybody being seriously hurt, but everyone was covered with bruises. Air resistance would slow the casings down some, but they were still probably traveling over 100 mph when they hit.

Bill




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125