The Flak Gap

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: treespider

I hope everyone realizes this is not a JFB vs. AFB thing... the same applies to ineffectual Allied AA at low levels as well...

Correct - this affetcts both sides in WitP game (and I always maintained that)!

Though Allies are slightly better off because they have more automatic AA weapons in OOB...



US Army Coast AA Regiment

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name                  Ceiling
 -----------------------------------------
 12x 409     75mm AA Gun           28000
 8x  406     37mm AA Gun           10500
 8x  404     20mm Oerlikon AA Gun  10000
 

US Marines AA Battalion

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name                  Ceiling
 -----------------------------------------
 12x 409     75mm AA Gun           28000
 

NOTES:
AA upgrades are as follow...

Code: Select all

 Device  Name                  Ceiling
 -------------------------------------
 409     75mm AA Gun           28000
 ->
 415     90mm AA Gun           33800
 
 406     37mm AA Gun           10500
 ->
 408     40mm Bofors AA Gun    22800
 

US Army Base Force

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name                  Ceiling
 -----------------------------------------
 4x  409     75mm AA Gun           28000
 4x  406     37mm AA Gun           10500
 4x  399     .303 Lewis AAMG       6200
 

US Navy Base Force

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name                  Ceiling
 -----------------------------------------
 8x  410     3in AA Gun            29800
 8x  408     40mm Bofors AA Gun    22800
 8x  403     0.5in Browning AAMG   14500
 

US Marines Defense Bn (on average - they differ a lot from one to another)

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name                  Ceiling
 -----------------------------------------
 12x 410     3in AA Gun            29800
 30x 403     0.5in Browning AAMG   14500
 30x 399     .303 Lewis AAMG       6200
 

NOTES:
AA upgrades are as follow...

Code: Select all

 Device  Name                  Ceiling
 -------------------------------------
 410     3in AA Gun            29800
 ->
 415     90mm AA Gun           33800
 
 403     0.5in Browning AAMG   14500
 ->
 408     40mm Bofors AA Gun    22800
 
 399     .303 Lewis AAMG       6200
 ->
 404     20mm Oerlikon AA Gun  10000
 

Leo "Apollo11"

That was quick...

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: treespider

I hope everyone realizes this is not a JFB vs. AFB thing... the same applies to ineffectual Allied AA at low levels as well...

Here! Here!

[Big B]

It would seem the cleanest solution to the problem would be to put an altitude limit of 24,900 on 75mm guns for everyone - leaving the heavier guns to cover the higher altitudes.


...asuming we agree there is a problem that needs addressing

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

Yes, but quite a few of the Base Forces are Naval Base forces and Naval Guard units are equipped with 25 mm twin mount guns, no?

That's correct (IJN had 25mm and IJA 40mm) but dedicated AA units completely lack those. Also please note that there is rather small number (four each) of weapons in unit:


IJA Base Force

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name             Ceiling
 ------------------------------------
 4x  275     75mm AA Gun      30000
 4x  274     40mm AA Gun (2)  14000
 4x  272     13mm AAMG (2)    13000
 

IJN Base Force

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name             Ceiling
 ------------------------------------
 4x  275     75mm AA Gun      30000
 4x  273     25mm AA Gun (3)  14000
 4x  272     13mm AAMG (2)    13000
 

Leo "Apollo11"

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Big B

It would seem the cleanest solution to the problem would be to put an altitude limit of 24,900 on 75mm guns for everyone - leaving the heavier guns to cover the higher altitudes.


...asuming we agree there is a problem that needs addressing

Why a clean solution???[;)] I'm sure we can come up with a 100 line algorithm that JoeW could easily plug into the code...[;)]

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso



If what Nik says is true, and the charts are accurate, then the 75mm AA gun (device 68 - IJ gun??? - max alt 25K is under 25.5), and the 25 mm AA gun should also cover that area.

Unfortunately Japanese land units consist of:

IJA AA Regiment

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name             Ceiling
 ------------------------------------
 12x 276     105mm AA Gun     36000
 12x 275     75mm AA Gun      30000
 8x  272     13mm AAMG (2)    13000
 

IJA AA Battalion

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name             Ceiling
 ------------------------------------
 18x 276     105mm AA Gun     36000
 6x  272     13mm AAMG (2)    13000
 

IJN AA Battalion

Code: Select all

 ##  Device  Name             Ceiling
 ------------------------------------
 8x  276     105mm AA Gun     36000
 8x  275     75mm AA Gun      30000
 8x  273     25mm AA Gun (3)  14000
 24x 272     13mm AAMG (2)    13000
 

And there is just 1 (one!) "IJN AA Battalion" in OOB


Leo "Apollo11"

Yes, but quite a few of the Base Forces are Naval Base forces and Naval Guard units are equipped with 25 mm twin mount guns, no?

yes they have. 4 of those guns in each base force. Though still the most AA guns (if you´re only talking of gun numbers) are not shooting at all at the perfect low bombing altitude. So you place three AA regiments at Rabaul or Truk (I´m only saying three as this would seem not as off as placing a dozen) an aviation regiment (no AA guns at all) and two base forces. Should look like as dangerous as the bomber pilots were so afraid off when they first attacked Rabaul in real life (they reported HEAVY AA fire, didn´t they?).

So there would be 36x105 mm guns, 44x75 mm guns, 8x25 mm guns and around 30x13 mm MGs. Now the bombers come in at the often repeated perfect bombing alt of 6000 feet and all with what they are shot at are those 8x25 mm (which perhaps can hurt a bomber) and the small pipi 30x13 mm MGs.

The 80 real AA guns are silent. From the beginning of the bombing until the end.

People that are saying there´s no problem with the existing flak in the game, are actually saying that it is historical or realistic that if the Allied NEVER would bomb over 6000 ft in 4 years of war no Japanese AA gun bigger than those 25mm (or some 40mm that are in IJA BFs) would ever have fired a single shot!

If people would then say that if this was ever the case in real life and the Japanese wouldn´t have done something about it, then it´s time for me to keep me out of this discussion! [:D]

[Nikademus]

how does this fix anything?

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Another matter that has not been addressed and partly explains why attacks were launched at much higher Altitudes IRL is the complete absence of barrage ballons in the game...

Yep, no barrage baloons but no anti-torpedo defences in harbors either, yet 2E bombers can use torps vs ships in port despite both a lack of historical examples of 2Es doing so, especially given the limiting confines of most harbors.[8D] Barrage baloons and net defences would be most welcome IMO.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

how does this fix anything?

You would still have Hvy AA guns larger than 75mm to shoot above 25,000, while the 13mm, 25mm, 3"DPs & 4.7" DPs(pretty sure I saw those in land base TO&Es), and 75mm guns would all cover 100' to 25,000'.

There would be heavy flak low, and high (ie..over 25,000)

[timtom]

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: treespider

I hope everyone realizes this is not a JFB vs. AFB thing... the same applies to ineffectual Allied AA at low levels as well...

Absolutely, I raised this to ask legit. questions, not to be viewed as FB anything.

Anything that challenges FB convictions is by definition not legimite [:-] ...........[:'(]

[Nikademus]

There would still be guns not firing below however....for example the US 90mm or Russian 85mm as well as the 105mm.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

There would still be guns not firing below however....for example the US 90mm or Russian 85mm as well as the 105mm.

Sounds like we need the 100 line algorithm.....JoeW are you there??[:D]

[Nikademus]

i'd settle for just removing the min alt rule. 100 lines of algorithm is SO 20th Century..... [;)]


However....it might be useful to add disruption to the bombers aim from flak.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

There would still be guns not firing below however....for example the US 90mm or Russian 85mm as well as the 105mm.

Then raise it to 90mm and less. 105's suffering an altitude minimum doesn't bother me - especially since something has to shoot over 25,000 [:)]

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

i'd settle for just removing the min alt rule. 100 lines of algorithm is SO 20th Century..... [;)]


However....it might be useful to add disruption to the bombers aim from flak.

And Balloons...

[jwilkerson]

However....it might be useful to add disruption to the bombers aim from flak.

This is where the 100 lines comes in ... [:)]

[Nikademus]

i'd rather have the removal, and the 100 lines for that other lil prob. [:)]

(and a Guinness)

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

However....it might be useful to add disruption to the bombers aim from flak.

This is where the 100 lines comes in ... [:)]

its easy....just fix the code. everyone always says so! [;)]

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

i'd rather have the removal, and the 100 lines for that other lil prob. [:)]

(and a Guinness)

Well perhaps - but I was thinking in terms of what modders can do now...without code changes [;)]

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: treespider



Then why don't you find us some real data on the 13mm before coming out with your bombastic statement that the research for the game sucks....

The graphic earlier presented similar style info...effective vs. maximum ceiling...

"Spider" I direct your attention to the "effective ceiling" shown for the German 20mmL65 (a better weapon by far than the Japanese 13mm HMG). It shows the shells will reach to almost 15,000 feet, and I venture to guess they would explode and do damage at 13,000 if they hit something. But the "effective" ceiling is shown at less than 5,000, because the chance of actually hitting something went to almost "nil" at that point. The table shown in the forum for the German AAA uses a more stringent and accurate definition of the term "effective"..., which is the point I was making. The chart you posted gives the "theoretical effective range" of the shell, while the one on German AA weapons shows the "realistic effective range" of the weapons system. And I maintain that the chart based on real life performance is a much more accurate evaluation of "effective".

I'll "see" your statement and raise you with the data for the german 20mm from the same source I quoted before...

Range
.
Elevation With 0.300 lbs. (0.134 kg) HE Shell
Range @ 45 degrees 5,360 yards (4,900 m)
AA Ceiling @ 85 degrees 12,140 feet (3,700 m)

According to Navweapons the german 20mm max altitude does not even equal the 13mmm effective altitude...

You are really determined to be obtuse about this. OK..., a .22 long rifle round can be fatal if it strikes you even if fired from over a mile. Borrow one and try to hit anything on purpose at 1/4th of a mile. Now try it with a moving target. The point being that the round is "effective" at a much greater range than the weapons system is. In military terms, fire is only "effective" when you can reasonably expect to hit the target you are aiming at. Otherwise you are just wasting ammunition "spraying and praying".

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl





"Spider" I direct your attention to the "effective ceiling" shown for the German 20mmL65 (a better weapon by far than the Japanese 13mm HMG). It shows the shells will reach to almost 15,000 feet, and I venture to guess they would explode and do damage at 13,000 if they hit something. But the "effective" ceiling is shown at less than 5,000, because the chance of actually hitting something went to almost "nil" at that point. The table shown in the forum for the German AAA uses a more stringent and accurate definition of the term "effective"..., which is the point I was making. The chart you posted gives the "theoretical effective range" of the shell, while the one on German AA weapons shows the "realistic effective range" of the weapons system. And I maintain that the chart based on real life performance is a much more accurate evaluation of "effective".

I'll "see" your statement and raise you with the data for the german 20mm from the same source I quoted before...

Range
.
Elevation With 0.300 lbs. (0.134 kg) HE Shell
Range @ 45 degrees 5,360 yards (4,900 m)
AA Ceiling @ 85 degrees 12,140 feet (3,700 m)

According to Navweapons the german 20mm max altitude does not even equal the 13mmm effective altitude...

You are really determined to be obtuse about this. OK..., a .22 long rifle round can be fatal if it strikes you even if fired from over a mile. Borrow one and try to hit anything on purpose at 1/4th of a mile. Now try it with a moving target. The point being that the round is "effective" at a much greater range than the weapons system is. In military terms, fire is only "effective" when you can reasonably expect to hit the target you are aiming at. Otherwise you are just wasting ammunition "spraying and praying".

When you bring some data then I may shut up - until then I've quoted a source that says the "effective" ceiling of 13mm was 13,000 feet...