Carrier TF ASW air missions?

[sandman2575]

I'm wondering if it's a good idea (or historical?) for carrier A/C to fly ASW missions? Do ASW air missions actually deter sub attacks away from a TF? For my carrier tf's, I usually set the float planes on cruisers entirely to ASW -- I'm wondering if some carrier planes should be doing some ASW too.

So, for example, I'm trying to get Saratoga out of San Diego sometime in Dec '41 / Jan '42. All I really have are a few Clemson class DDs to escort. Obviously then, my ASW capability is quite low.

Should I set my Dauntlesses & Devastators to some percentage of ASW? I of course always have a percentage of them on Naval Search -- is ASW *on top of that* redundant?

Also, am I going to get hit with serious OPs losses if I have carrier dive & torpedo bombers doing ASW at 1000 ft altitude?

[Disco Duck]

ORIGINAL: sandman2575

I'm wondering if it's a good idea (or historical?) for carrier A/C to fly ASW missions? Do ASW air missions actually deter sub attacks away from a TF? For my carrier tf's, I usually set the float planes on cruisers entirely to ASW -- I'm wondering if some carrier planes should be doing some ASW too.

So, for example, I'm trying to get Saratoga out of San Diego sometime in Dec '41 / Jan '42. All I really have are a few Clemson class DDs to escort. Obviously then, my ASW capability is quite low.

Should I set my Dauntlesses & Devastators to some percentage of ASW? I of course always have a percentage of them on Naval Search -- is ASW *on top of that* redundant?

Also, am I going to get hit with serious OPs losses if I have carrier dive & torpedo bombers doing ASW at 1000 ft altitude?

Try running the Saratoga at full speed for a couple of turns to clear the area and then take a non- direct route to Pearl Harbor at mission speed.

In all of my reading I do seem to remember mention of using Carrier planes for ASW. It should be 2000 feet not 1000 and yes it will increase losses depending on the fatigue of the pilots and the planes.

And it doesn't always help.[X(]

[LoBaron]

As long as you can you should prefer land based ASW with decent range, e.g. mediums with nav search help from Cats.
When you spot a sub with CV based aircraft you can bet that the opponent knows where your carriers are.

In open water its a hide and seek game anyway.


OTOH if you want to use ASW hunting groups centered on a CV, thats always an option.

[sandman2575]

Thanks for the replies and tips.

In terms of CV aircraft, I wonder if it makes really any difference for detection of subs to rely on pure "Naval Search" vs. mix of "Naval Search" and "ASW".  For example, if I give my divebombers "Naval Attack" mission, is [20% Naval Search + 20% ASW] going go make any difference versus [40% Naval Search] - ?

Or is mission altitude more of the key factor in detecting subs?  Is ASW at 10-12K ft. just completely pointless?

[HansBolter]

I too place my cruiser escort float planes on ASW in my CV TFs.

With regard to your question about ops losses at 1000 ft, be aware that you cannot set different altitudes for the different missions controlled by the percentage selections. If you choose 1000 feet for effective ASW you will also fly your divebombing, nav search and torpedo bombing missions at 1000 feet.

[Patbgaming]

Here is what I tried and it seems to be working pretty good. On my Carriers I had 1 DB Squadron train up Search and the other ASW. The Squadrons are then set to Naval with 30% either Search or ASW depending on their training. Once they combine later you can adjust the percentage. I leave them both set to 10,000. This does not seem to hinder the DB's spotting or attacking subs that I can tell.



LoBaron does have a point about if your spotting subs with DB's it is a announcement of " Enemy Carriers over here". So when you don't want to be spotted, don't set your DB's to ASW. If you on the other hand are covering Landings or something in that Nature and may be in the area for an extended period, 1) he knows your there 2) he will send subs to try to get a lucky shot in ( at least I know I would ). Even if your DB's don't kill a sub but only spot it, his chance of getting off a torp before an ASW attack just went down significantly.



My 2 cents.

[sandman2575]

helpful stuff guys, thanks --

while on the subject of ASW -- I've always wondered why the game automatically cuts the set search range in half for ASW?  I assume it's to concentrate the search for subs close to you?  (Who cares if a sub is 16 hexes away from your TF?) -- or is there another reason?

[crsutton]

Absolutely. Especially if you are not in fear of running into Japanese carriers. Why would you not? You can't have enough aircraft on ASW. I use my SBDs on mixed search and ASW at max range and set my avengers at 80% ASW at 0 range. ASW set to 0 range will ensure many sightings and attacks vs any sub that is in your hex. You will get multiple attacks this way. If I have a large carrier force I will still sometimes leave one avenger unit on 80 ASW either set for 2 hexes or 0. Later in the war you can spare the one unit.