Japanese Air to Air Combat Dropoff

[Andy Mac]

Nicholas I tested that on my scenario where both sides swept each other and the losses were identical.
 
In your test only the Allies are on sweep so they get the advantage of more bounces to get a fair test IMO of that dynamic you need to have the equal and opposite happening as well.
 
So same number of Japs P47's sweeping and allied base with P47's on CAP. i.e. mirror images of the combat
 
In my test I had 2 x 100 Japanese F4U's sweeping 2 bases with 100 Allied F4U's on CAP and vice versa
 
Whoever was on sweep won and by the same margin so basically the sweeping force appears to get a bounce bonus over CAP unless Radar is present which changes things.
 
Your test scenario is a lot more flexible than mine my main issue is ther is to much going on for me to pick up on patterns but it is an excellent test bed
Andy

[Nicholas Bell]

Whoever was on sweep won and by the same margin so basically the sweeping force appears to get a bounce bonus over CAP unless Radar is present which changes things.


Good! I guess that clears up the loopsided losses in each year against the Japanese at Lae, but I'm still wondering why the 1944 losses are so much higher.

1942
Jpn Losses: 196
Allied: 110

1944
Jpn Losses: 280
Allied: 93

I have my doubts as to whether the US losses will so greatly exceed if the Japanese sweep a US base. Have to check it out if I can gin up enough intellectual curiosity to revise the test bed and run more of them.

[BigJ62]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: BigJ62

Does the range field mean miles or thousands of yards for radar, if miles who defined it as miles because
the editor manual states thousands of yards for this field?
Has anyone tried gutting the B-24D take out .50 cal and bombs just to see if escort is more effective than sweep? Maybe the escorts are flying higher regardless of the alt you set resulting in a bounce bonus.
Thanks

The meaning of this field changes with device type. It isn't documented well anywhere I know of. It probably is miles for radar. If it isn't miles then all radar ranges are too short - by 1.6 times.

I find it very hard to believe that the CPS-1 got 400 miles because every source I've looked at states
that it's effective range was up to 200 or between 200 - 250 miles, the SCR-270 effective range is up to
150 miles and the CXAM is up to 100 miles. I don't know how good the radar was in WW-II but, I was a radar
operater when I was in the US Navy(1980's) and if the range field means miles for radar then they seem a
little too high to me, perhaps the devs could enlighten us.

[Nicholas Bell]
"While it's possible the escort is getting the bounce, it's "should be" irrelevant because the exact same
conditions exist in each test year, ie if they're getting the bounce in '42 they're getting it in '44, but
the losses are higher in 1944. Now one might think, well, maybe there's hard code to give the Allies a higher
chance of bounce in 1944, but Matrix has denied any such bias."

Yeah I thought of that after I posted.

p.s. Does anyone have some good links for radar ranges from WW-II to current?

[ChezDaJez]

I find it very hard to believe that the CPS-1 got 400 miles because every source I've looked at states
that it's effective range was up to 200 or between 200 - 250 miles, the SCR-270 effective range is up to
150 miles and the CXAM is up to 100 miles. I don't know how good the radar was in WW-II but, I was a radar
operater when I was in the US Navy(1980's) and if the range field means miles for radar then they seem a
little too high to me, perhaps the devs could enlighten us.

I don't know what the actual ranges for allied radars should be for this era but there are a few factors to take into consideration. The ranges listed are based upon large, high altitude targets with a radar at or near sea level. A target flying low is not going to be detected by a CPS-1 radar (or any other radar) until he is pretty close to the emitter.

It must be remembered that radar is basically a line-of-sight sensor and has a limitation called the radar horizon due to the curvature of the earth which limits the range at which it can detect lower altitude targets. It can be computed using the folliwng formula:

1.25 X SQRT(height of radar antenna in feet) + 1.25 X SQRT(Target altitude in feet)... So a radar antenna located at 100 feet above sea level is going to be able to detect an aircraft flying at 100 feet above sea level at approximately 25 miles.

Using the same antenna altitude, a radar could detect an aircraft flying at 20,000 feet at about 190 miles. An aircraft at 30,000 feet would be detected at about 230 miles. All this assumes that the radar has sufficient power to generate a high enough signal excess to produce a return.

The radar cross section of the target is also going to play a large part in the chance for detection as are the atmospherics present at the time. Sometimes a radar will experience a phenomenon called ducting where the radar waves become trapped in a thermal duct and proivide extended (sometimes over the horizon) ranges.

Lastly, an antenna's position relative to the topography. An antenna at the base of a large hill will not be able to detect a target in that direction until it appears above the crest of the hill. Henderson Field was effectively radar blind to the south and southwest because of where it was at. The Japanese tried to take advantage of that fact on at least 3 occasions but were thwarted by early warning from coastwatchers.

Now, that is all real-life crapola. Unfortunately, I know of no routines in the game that take these factors into account. But they should.

Does anyone have some good links for radar ranges from WW-II to current?

Now that I have beat radar detection ranges to death, I will go on to say that the actual detection range is not ithat mportant... it is the amount of warning time that the detection range provides that is ultimately important.

Assume for a moment that your radar detects an enemy raid at 100 miles flying at 20000 feet... That gives you a 20 minute response time against a 300mph target or 30 minutes against a 200mph target...

Anyways, I wanted to say more but I just noticed the time and have to head to work.

Chez

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

US Radar on Carriers (air search) and all allied base forces

CXAM (ON Carriers) - Range 150, Penetration 500, Effect 50
SCR Radar - Range 250, Penetration 500, Effect 70

Both Upgrade as of 1/43 (subject to carrier upgrade cycles) to

CSP -1 Radar - Range 400, Penetration 500, Effect 80

Basically the CSP -1 Radar if it works as I think it does will mean more Fighters on CAP at the correct Bounce Altitude so less pilots having to climb to intercept when on CAP basically better allied fighter performance when on CAP and out to 6 or 7 hexes from any base (400/60) less chance for Japanese pilots to surprise or bounce allied air units.

This is fairly powerfull.

I think the best Japanese radar has range 100 and effect 45 so at best 2 hex bonus and lower strength than allied

Andy

Just curious - what happens if you attack the allied CVs from multiple altitudes? Would it split the CAP to cover groups @ different altitudes?

[BigJ62]

It never occured to me to check in game but in the range column in the ship detail screen, it lists CXAM
at 150,000. I have to believe it means yards. I never knew the math of radar but I do understand the
general mechanics. The ranges given in game are less than some sources I found, which I was mainly looking for shipborne radar, maybe that's 2x3's way of balancing the equation for where the radar is installed to.

Later

[el cid again]

Turns out BigJ62 is correct. The CPS range should be in the 200 mile range - for large targets too.
BUT MAYBE the value in the table is in thousands of yards.

A "radar mile" is 2000 yards - so 200 miles = 400.

In which case all the other radars are rated wrongly.

This may be cleared up officially if we are lucky.

[Bliztk]

I always thank that I live in the world of metric devices [X(]

[Zemke]

It sounds to me like the designers need to fire some of their historical researchers and hire a few of the guys who post here.

[Andy Mac]

OK latest round of tests
 
Test scenario 100 B29's escorted by 100 Corsairs attacking 2 Japanese bases. Each Jap base has 200 J Corsairs on 90% CAP
 
Allied bases have a CPS 1 Radar Japanese Bases have a Sound Detector
 
1942 Run through
 
Allied Jap
77    115
59      99
84      93
83     108
71     107
 
374    522
 
the 1944 run through
 
71    100
98     99
82     93
76     98
74     59
 
401   449
 
Losses dont appear out of line betweeen 42 and 44 although numbers of escorting corsairs seem to vary a great deal betweeen runs which is why losses are quite variable in some tests
 
If I get time I will run the same series three more times once without radar and then once each for allied only radar and jap only SD.
 
My initial conclusion is again there is not hard coded benefit to the Allies between 42 and 44 as a result of heavy bomber box fire.
Unfortuantely that leave me with a headache because I cannnot see anything wrong with Nicholas's scenario and he got different overall results [&:][&:]
 
Basically I am back to the drawing board.
 
Anyone got any ideas its not sweep v cap and it appears not to be heavy bomber defensive fire I am open to suggestions as to what I should test next ?

[Ron Saueracker]

So, what's with the various posts regarding an A2A revamp I've seen lately on the forum. Hopefully there is some flame with the smoke.

[el cid again]

I know nothing. But I have learned about radar range in this thread - so I am increasing most radar ranges by a multiple of 1.6. But not AI radar (or CPS-1). That may make air combat more deadly if it involves fighters - and on both sides.

Note that RHS mutiplied the effectiveness of Sound Detectors by 250% (to 25% from 10%) - which I regard as a very conservative rating. [They probably work 75% of the time - although not at all locations. On Kerguelin Island's west
coast they would never work- constant wind noise.] I also increased the range from 25 to 40 - because that is 40,000 yards = 20 nautical miles = 25 statute miles = less than half a hex.

The net effect is that sound detector and lesser radars will have more effect than in CHS and stock. The advantage of CPS-1 now is only that it works 90% of the time (higher than anything else). Its range is not greater than two other Allied radars of lesser reliability. And CXAM (an early Allied radar) is going to work at 240,000 yards - which may sometimes matter. The Japanese Type 13 family (11/12/13 in RHS) will work at 90 miles- their real range.

[ChezDaJez]

Just thought of one other little detail...

It doesn't matter how far the radar can detect something so much as what the maximum display scale of the set is. A radar's theorectical max range almost always is greater than what its display can show.

If you can find clear pictures of the radar displays, that will give an absolute maximum detection range regardless of what the theorectical range is.

Chez

[Iron Duke]

Hi El Cid

With regard to the AN/CPS-1 ,also called MEW While looking for info i found that only 6 sets were made all in the Rad Labs[hand crafted]. 3 sets in England by D-Day , a 4th made portable by the British and landed over the normandy beachhead.
I've only found mention of two set in the Pacific , on Okinawa and on Siapan
In RHSCVO 4.43 Build rate for CPS-1 is 30 , I think build rate should be 1 , what do you think? Do you have any additional info?

Cheers

[ChezDaJez]

As Iron Duke noted, only six sets were built.

Kammer was assigned to the project to develop a "microwave early warning (MEW)" radar in June 1942, and the first operational MEW or "AN/CPS-1" was in operation in Britain by January 1944. Six preproduction MEWs were put together by hand at the Rad Lab to get the device out in the field.

Although Eagle and MEW were derived from similar concepts, they had little resemblance. A complete MEW system weighed about 60 tonnes (66 tonnes), required eight trucks for transport, and drew 23 kilowatts of power from a portable generator. It took 150 troops three days to pick up and move a MEW.

The MEW control electronics included five 30 centimeter (1 foot) scope displays, allowing operators to track large numbers of targets. While Eagle used electronic steering, MEW required 360-degree coverage, and so it used a rotating antenna. The MEW antenna was actually two antennas joined back-to-back, with one antenna covering low altitudes and the other covering high. Each of the two antenna consisted of a linear array with 106 dipoles in front of a solid reflector, in the form of a section of cylinder with parabolic curvature laid horizontally.

Each reflector was 7.6 meters (25 feet) wide. The low-coverage reflector was 2.4 meters (7 feet 10 inches) tall, while the high-coverage reflector was 1.5 meters (4 feet 11 inches) tall. They could form a beam only 0.8 degrees wide that could provide extremely precise location of intruders, at least in the horizontal plane. The beam was very tall and so MEW did not do well at height-finding.

A second MEW was was operational in Britain by the summer of 1944. The two radars were very useful in helping to deal with the V-1 Blitz, as MEW's longer range gave greater advance warning of flying bombs, allowing more effective fighter interceptions. Since the V-1s flew at preset low altitudes, MEW's inability to compute heights was not a problem.

The Rad Lab's office at the TRE modified a MEW system to be transportable during April 1944, and this MEW was set up on the Normandy beachhead, arriving in pieces on 12 June 1944. It included a complete fighter-control center, organized around a vertical transparent plotting panel on which plotters marked positions and wrote notes in mirror writing. The MEW helped Allied fighters protect the invasion forces from German intruders, and in particular keep track of the massive flow of air traffic over the area.

The height-finding problems was addressed by adding a British AMES Type 13 CMH radar. The same idea was used with some other MEW installations with the US counterpart to the AMES Type 13 CMH, the AN/APS-10 Little Abner.

Another MEW arrived in France in late summer, but the MEW systems were large and complicated and so were of limited use during the rapid Allied advance west. SCR-584s were more portable and accompanied the armies as they advanced.

A MEW was sent to Saipan, where the USAAF was ramping up Boeing B-29 Superfortress bomber raids against Japan. The system arrived on 21 September 1944, and was not greeted with much enthusiasm. It was big, it was clumsy, and since air traffic in the Pacific was much less dense than in Europe, longwave radars like the SCR-270s seemed able to do the job just fine. Destructive Japanese low-level intruder air raids on Saipan suggested that the longwave radars didn't do the job as well as might be desired, and the MEW was operating on top of Mount Tapochau on Saipan by New Year's Eve. Japanese raiders suddenly lost the element of surprise, and the MEW also served well to locate downed aircraft in the sea around the island.

The above is from the Website "The Wizard War: WWII and the Origins of Radar. It contais very good information on the design, development and performance of most radars used by combatant countries in WWII. The link can be found: The Wizard War

Chez

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

So, what's with the various posts regarding an A2A revamp I've seen lately on the forum. Hopefully there is some flame with the smoke.

What are you talking about Ron?

[TheElf]

edited

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

So, what's with the various posts regarding an A2A revamp I've seen lately on the forum. Hopefully there is some flame with the smoke.

What are you talking about Ron?

Just read somewhere that perhaps "we should wait until the next patch" regarding A2A stuff.

[BigJ62]

In the manual on page 114 under escort, whoever gets the bounce gets "substantial bonuses to combat" btw read the whole paragraph. Now here's the kicker on page 136 section 7.3.2 3rd paragraph states
"It should also be noted that although the combat Animations reports the total number of (cap)fighter
aircraft attempting to engage, the actual number of planes that(in the) dogfight are usually much less."

What this means is there are too many unknowns to accurately gage Allied and Japanese loses whithout
seeing the source code. At this point I don't know what more can be done.

p.s. The "The Wizard War: WWII and the Origins of Radar" site was one of the first sites I found and a
good one at that.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

Just thought of one other little detail...

It doesn't matter how far the radar can detect something so much as what the maximum display scale of the set is. A radar's theorectical max range almost always is greater than what its display can show.

If you can find clear pictures of the radar displays, that will give an absolute maximum detection range regardless of what the theorectical range is.

Chez

The ranges usually given are not theoretical detection ranges, but operational ranges. Further, in this period, the range of radar could be set by the operator - just changing the scale or time base knob (if an A scope). So a picture would only show what the range of that particular setting was - not the limit. It can be very complicated: Japanese ships routinely used radar WITHOUT transmitting - meaning they would detect Allied radar at greater range than the allied radar could detect anything! We are not set up to model that sort of thing. In this case, the transmitter tubes were poor, so operating passive was sort of making virtue of necessity - and if they needed a positive range - the tube was likely to work having had little burn time. On the other hand, only the arrogance of Americans assuming the enemy could not intercept signals avoided the risk that we might go passive - and not be detected at all. As I said - complicated. We are not modeling at this level - yet. WITP has the hooks though - for "EW devices".