1000 Pounders versus Battleships

[Feinder]

Except for the fact that in WitP Japanese torpedo bombers always carry the 800kg AP bomb or Torpedo on Port Attack.
 
[:(]
 
-F-

[Panther Bait]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

What was needed was a much more realistic damage model, which included such things as differentation between flight deck and main deck armour (magazine armour 4 decks down should not make the wooden flight deck armour plated) basically making CVs with internal protection armoured flight deck with full a/c capacity, differentation between armoured and non armoured areas of the hull and superstructure...c.mon, if a shell hit an unarmoured spot like say, the bow, it should penetrate, not bounce off because the belt is a certain thickness. Flooding, hull and superstructure damage should have been more permanent requiring serious yard time as should machinery damage. Crew factors needed to finally make it into a game which deals with individual pilots and weapons for a change too.

Do remember that the unarmored sections of the big ships were generally considered non-crucial areas. So, while hits there should penetrate, they should be limited in their effect on the ship. Probably SYS damage and maybe fires, but probably little FLD damage and no critical hits (at least for BBs).

Hits in these areas should send the BB to the yard, but probably never be a serious danger to sink it.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Except for the fact that in WitP Japanese torpedo bombers always carry the 800kg AP bomb or Torpedo on Port Attack.

[:(]

-F-

Yeah, especially whacked when they almost always carried smaller AP and GP bombs. This is a problem with all torp bombers in the game. Am I to understand that in AE torpedoes will be a production item like mines?

[Mynok]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Except for the fact that in WitP Japanese torpedo bombers always carry the 800kg AP bomb or Torpedo on Port Attack.

[:(]

-F-

Always!?!? Are you 100% certain of that? I don't use animations, so I never noticed this.

[Nikademus]

Japanese torp capable aircraft roll for use of torps or 800kg when on port attack.

[bradfordkay]

Nik, are you saying that they will only get either the 800kb AP bomb or the torpedo, or that there is also a chance that they'll use a lesser bomb in the port attack?

[Nikademus]

either torp or 800kg. This is for torp capable bombers only.

[Akos Gergely]

What was needed was a much more realistic damage model, which included such things as differentation between flight deck and main deck armour (magazine armour 4 decks down should not make the wooden flight deck armour plated) basically making CVs with internal protection armoured flight deck with full a/c capacity, differentation between armoured and non armoured areas of the hull and superstructure...c.mon, if a shell hit an unarmoured spot like say, the bow, it should penetrate, not bounce off because the belt is a certain thickness. Flooding, hull and superstructure damage should have been more permanent requiring serious yard time as should machinery damage. Crew factors needed to finally make it into a game which deals with individual pilots and weapons for a change too.

Not to add to the rant but IMHO as it stands divebombers are way to effective espeically if they have crack crews and especially if a ship had already been jit in that round of attack. So it is quite common that a ship can evade 2-3 bombers in feirst wave then it gets hit then every single bomber coming down after it places a hit again....so I think this is partly compensated for with the bouncing 500 pounders of the wooden flight decks (which btw have a very strong steel plating and girder system under them of ocurse . So that is why the game sometimes produces really odd hit numbers, in my recent CHS PBEM Repulse had been hit by 100+ 250kg bombs, simply because after the first 1 or 2 hits all the bombers scored....

[John Lansford]

I have seen horizontal bombers target a crippled Shokaku and repeatedly bounce 500 pound bombs off her flight deck, even though it was only lightly armored.  Aside from the fires, the only other damage they'd cause was to weapons and the bridge.  OTOH, those same horizontal bombers found Hiyo and put 20 500# bombs onto her, and HER flight deck was completely unarmored...
 
The Allied dive and horizontal bombers should have some chance to carry an AP version of their standard 500 and 1000 pound bombs.  They were available (especially for the carrier based planes) but there're none in the game.
 
What's odd is if your level bombers hit those same ships while they're in port, they generate a lot more damage to them.  I've sunk heavy cruisers with 500# bombs when they're in port, even though those same bombs hitting them at sea do nothing at all.
 
 

[niceguy2005]

Not to add to the rant but IMHO as it stands divebombers are way to effective espeically if they have crack crews and especially if a ship had already been (h)it in that round of attack.

This is a very good point IMO. I could see how a critical hit could make a significant difference, but a single hit early in an attack and a ship is toast.

[mlees]

Does anybody have a link to some data for bombs?
 
I was frustrated just last night, watching my LBA bounce 40-50 500lb and 1000lb General Purpose bombs off the deck of the Kinugasa. Not a single penetration, even though I probably wiped out a lot of deck guns.
 
For example, how much armor will a 1000 lb GP bomb penetrate at various altitudes? Ditto 500lb, 250lb, etc...

[Akos Gergely]

The Allied dive and horizontal bombers should have some chance to carry an AP version of their standard 500 and 1000 pound bombs. They were available (especially for the carrier based planes) but there're none in the game.

They already have, I think from late 1942 they start to carry AP versions as well, decided by a dice roll as well.

What's more this is completely historical AFAIK, the USN lacked 1000 pounder AP bombs in the early month in the war. At Midway all the DBs carried GP bombs (though in that case perhaps that was the better choice ).

On the other hand the Japanese attack againt Yorktown with 250kg GP bombs would have done little more than put some nice little holes into the flight deck and perhaps some local fires in the hangerdeck (as the Yorktown's hangerdeck were armoured so not further penetration).

[John Lansford]

The photos of Mikuma's superstructure basically destroyed by Enterprise's DB's at Midway, but the hull still remaining relatively intact, appear to indicate that the effects of DB weaponry in 1942 in WiTP are fairly accurate.  IIRC she did not sink from the damage, but because the plane that crashed into her started a fire that was sucked into the engine room, killing everyone in there and disabling the ship.
 
In fact, how many warships were sunk IRL by USN divebombers early in the war?  Other than the four carriers at Midway, Mikuma and Kinugasa (sunk off of Guadalcanal), were there any others?  Hiei was scuttled more because of the damage done to her during the night surface action than the pounding by DB's in the daytime, but were there any other CA's sunk by dive bombers in 1942?

[Akos Gergely]

I'm not saying that DB weaponry was ineffective just that it's not correct that after only one-two initial hits the hit rate jumps to nearly 100% almost always...

You brought up Mikuma: just check how many SBDs attacked her for maybe 4 or 5 clean hits and the damage would have been much less had the damage-control officer taken the step to jettison her Long Lances (as did Mogami's thus saving his ship).

So USN SBDs with GP bombs would be hard pressed to kill alone a battleship in 1942 ('cos BBs were lightyears bette armoured on their horizontal) and that's what I think the japs realized after their Midway defeat and this put the BBs in to the forward van for the coming SoPac CV battles. Doing so at Midway could have impacted the strikes on their CVs in a great way...but again this is an other topic I guess

[niceguy2005]

All this discussion about how ineffective bombs are against BBs yet with the advent of carriers BBs were essentially dead as a surface fighting ship (too big, too slow, too expensive, it only took that one lucky hit).  The fact is BBs were pretty vulnerable to air power of all types.  They might not be easily sunk, but they could be rendered ineffective.  I don't see this modeled in the game, IMO.

[Zebedee]

I remember from my reading on Bomber Command that US gp bombs were a lot less effective than the RAF ones primarily because they had a substantial amount less explosive in them. But for piercing armour, they surely must have been more effective.

Also, how effective is skipbombing? Very few people seem to try it from the AARs I've read.

Oh, not against armour plate, but these are the guideline depths for unexploded bombs used by the MOD (Britain):

Assumptions: >5000m (c.15000') release, velocity impacy of 340 m/s, no retarder devices on bomb, soil is wet sand, dry chalk or dry clay

Weight of bomb (kg) Depth of Penetration (m)

50 - 3.7
100 - 4.6
500 - 9.1
1000 - 10.7
2000 - 12.2
4000 - 15.2

(amazing what scraps you pick up from trade papers - that's from one about building underground railways!)

[Feltan]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

All this discussion about how ineffective bombs are against BBs yet with the advent of carriers BBs were essentially dead as a surface fighting ship (too big, too slow, too expensive, it only took that one lucky hit).  The fact is BBs were pretty vulnerable to air power of all types.  They might not be easily sunk, but they could be rendered ineffective.  I don't see this modeled in the game, IMO.

Quite true.

In fact, US Battleships (and other nations I am sure too) suffered a number of electrical and communication malfunctions when firing thier own broadsides. After a few volleys, these ships were basically unable to use most of their communications gear.

When I was on active duty, I saw a 500 lbs bomb hit. One time. About two miles away. Dry land. Let me tell you, the thump you feel in your chest is palpable at that distance. I can't imagine the shock of one hitting a ship, let alone a bomb twice that size. It may not penetrate thick armor, but I bet it would have the aforementioned affect on electronics, and knock equipment off its mounts, and cause casualties from the sheer shock and blast affects.

Not being a Navy guy, I am extrapolating experience here. Perhaps one of our seafaring collegues can tell us the secondary affects of a large explosion on board ship.

Regards,
Feltan

[Feinder]

I think most folks don't use skip-bombing because -
1.  The exp requirement is too high.  You get zip under 70 exp, and begin to results over 80.  You're better served just dropping level bombs from 12 - 15k (whatever your house rules).  In point of fact, the whole point of skip bombing was to create a method that was could be quickly taught and learned, that would prove more accurate than level-bombing.  If anything, the exp requirement to achieve par hits with level bombing should be substantially -lower-, as that was entire point of the excersise.
2.  Big hit to morale and much greater flak losses, means you don't fly as often and take more losses when you do.
3.  If you think trying to penetrate the deck armor with a 500# GP is tough to do from level bombing, what 'til you try to roll vs. the BELT armor doing a skip-bombing attack.
 
Essentially, skip-bombing is completely useless in WitP.  THAT would be why folks don't use it.  [;)]
 
-F-

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Feltan

In fact, US Battleships (and other nations I am sure too) suffered a number of electrical and communication malfunctions when firing their own broadsides. After a few volleys, these ships were basically unable to use most of their communications gear.

I only ever heard of this on South Dakota during a Solomon Islands battle. Where there any other examples?

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: mlees

Does anybody have a link to some data for bombs?

I was frustrated just last night, watching my LBA bounce 40-50 500lb and 1000lb General Purpose bombs off the deck of the Kinugasa. Not a single penetration, even though I probably wiped out a lot of deck guns.

For example, how much armor will a 1000 lb GP bomb penetrate at various altitudes? Ditto 500lb, 250lb, etc...

Your not likely to find any hard figures because GP/HE bombs wern't designed to penetrate substantial armor , thus no serious testing was done. In reality the type has very little chance of doing so. Same goes for most SAP types as well in terms of finding hard figures for pen. GP/HE weapons were prized for their heavy blast and destructive ability to lighter structures, devices and of course....crew. (Also good against wooden flight decks!) Their "penetrative" characteristics were well characterized when striking Japanese carriers.

For AP though, there are some estimates available.

The USN Mark I AP bomb of 1600lbs was estimated at being able to defeat 7inches of US Class B armor from 10,000 feet. From 4500 feet the estimate was 5 inches.

The more standard USN Mk 33 1000lb AP bomb mentioned in this thread (and others) was rated to be able to penetrate a 5inch deck (US class B) from 10,000 feet or from 6500 feet in 300kt 60degree dive.

For Japan, the Type 99 no.80 Mk 5 used at Pearl Harbor was rated at 5.9inches from 10k.

The Type 2 No.50 Model 1 SAP bomb of 491kg (1,082lb) was rated at 3.15inches armor plate 10k