Japanese fighter cap fighter effectiveness against B-17 or B-17

[Erkki]

ORIGINAL: Commander Stormwolf

Germany failed, 8th Air Force won. Remember Dresden? Hamburg? [:)]

Don't bother looking at german statistics, the general rule of thumb with german claims is to divide their wins by half, and multiply their losses by 3.

For that you're now green buttoned. Bye.

For everyone else interested in WW2 aircraft armament, theres a pretty good online read there: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm and the old MG vs. cannon here: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/CannonMGs.htm

I dont agree with everything in there but those 2 put some stuff I was about to write here(and not the first time) better than I ever could.


kfsgo:

I know what you mean, thats why I used words probability and chance... I dont like absolutes. I'm saying this the 3rd time, but I'm perfectly OK with bombers shooting down fighters. Did and should happen. But 1:1... Really? And really, should Japanese bombers never be able to down a fighter Especially at short range, is there really a difference between rifle cal and 50 cal in their ability to penetrate through an aircraft's skin? I have a feeling some people's conception of "aircraft armor" and where that armor was is somehow different to mine. [&:]

And sure the WW2 aircraft were fragile - some were on average harder to down than others but the thing is a single shell or bullet could down any of them, especially single engine ones. Sometimes they were lucky, sometimes not. And some pilots were better shots than others... Just like warships are stuffed with ammunition, engines and fuel and a single penetrating bomb detonating in a right place can, will and did destroy even the largest of warships. For every P-47 that survived home after multiple 20mm hits there were just as many of those that didnt. Or Fw 190. Or 4E. Or Zeros that were hit by gunners but survived home because the fuel tanks and other on-board systems were intact...

[Grfin Zeppelin]

ORIGINAL: Commander Stormwolf

Dresden?

Not exatcly their finest hour....

[mdiehl]

For every P-47 that survived home after multiple 20mm hits there were just as many of those that didnt.

That is an empirical claim. Do you have a source for that claim or is this just a statement of your perception of things?

A single bullet hit on an engine was extremely unlikely to bring down the plane. Unless it was a Browning .50, it won't even penetrate the exterior of an engine block. On some designs, a very improbably lucky hit could mission kill a plane by forcing a coolant leak. Of necessity, planes vulnerable to that sort of thing had to have a coolant system. In-lines with coolant were more vulnerable to that sort of thing than radials (because radials were air-cooled). Indeed, a WW2 radial was design to keep running even if you broke a piston rod. Just knocking a hole in one would only generate a slow oil leak.

Commander Stormwolf has already made note of the incredible lengths Luftwaffe mechs and pilots had to go to deal with a.c. that had serious armor and self sealing tanks. Why would anyone defend the Oscar of all things because it doesn't do well against anything? After all, the Oscar basically has the same armament as a Sopwith Camel or a Fokker Dr1. Yeah, a little more power than the old Vickers, but not that much more power.

[Crackaces]

Unescorted B-17's Average Defense of 60 flights of 50 are getting damaged/shot down by 8 zeros pretty consistently with no IJ damage June 1942 over the skies of PM..Is the problem that the B-17's do not fall out of the air like unescorted Nell's? They are two seperate aircraft ..[;)]

[Erkki]

Like I said 3 times already, they shouldnt. To me half the issue is the way they shoot down fighters left and right, and the other half of it is how Japanese(or British, although I see British bombers hit and damage Jap fighters every now and then) bombers don't... edit: dont as in never, ever, down an attacker.

Dunno if your post was a reply to mdiehl's.

[Knyvet]

Very interesting PBS show: American Experience - The Bombing of Germany
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/bombing/

The show focuses on the moral issues of city bombing/targeting civilians, but that is not why I am referencing the show.

The show covers Eakers' unescorted B-17 raids on the ball bearing plants in Schweinfurt.

[from the transcript of the show that is online]
"They lose 60 bombers. That’s 600 men. It’s the largest number of Americans lost on a single mission up to this point in the war. Staggering blow for the 8th Air Force."
"They went back to Schweinfurt in October of 1943. And in that raid the losses were truly devastating: another 60 bombers shot down; 138 damaged."
"77% of the guys who flew in the first months are casualties. You have a one in four chance of surviving."
"Eaker remained undeterred, his strategy unchanged. Precision bombing, he insisted, conducted by unescorted B-17s, could do the job."
"In December, 1943, Spaatz replaced Eaker with a legendary airman, General Jimmy Doolittle."

==

With Schweinfurt, the Germans obviously had planes that were effective vs. the B-17, but given the distance and time spent over Germany, the Germans could land and rearm and attack more than once.

[pharmy]

ORIGINAL: Commander Stormwolf

Remember, Luftwaffe had hundreds of FW-190s with extra gunpods, 8x20mm guns in the wings along with 2 .50 on the nose
and they still had a bit of trouble against the masses of 4E

Japan needed to take the fuel out of their Ki-45 and put some more guns on them

This is what an upgraded Nick should have looked like to be effective (attachment)

[mdiehl]

There is a really well written study of the 2nd Scwhft raid in which one of the major problems on that mission was the failure of one of the groups to organize into formation, with the result that they had unusually high losses to fighters.

Wrong Place! Wrong Time! The 305th Bomb Group & the 2nd Schweinfurt Raid, October 14, 1943 by George C. Kuhl

[Puhis]

ORIGINAL: Erkki

Like I said 3 times already, they shouldnt. To me half the issue is the way they shoot down fighters left and right, and the other half of it is how Japanese(or British, although I see British bombers hit and damage Jap fighters every now and then) bombers don't... edit: dont as in never, ever, down an attacker.

Once one of my Helen squadrons had one kill. One and half years of game war and one kill. But that happened only once. It's not right.

IRL there is well documented cases were unescorted japanese 2E bombers shot down more than one allied fighter. Espeacially 20 mm tail gun could be deadly.

[Miller]

ORIGINAL: cavalry

I feel the problem is damaged planes like B17 maybe repairing too fast and maybe planes with higher maintenance numbers need to suffer more op loses.

This is the problem in a nutshell. Whilst the 4E bomber vs Jap fighter losses (roughly 1:1 in my games) are realsitic enough, the fact that the Allied player can up 200 plus 4E raids every other day is not.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: Miller

ORIGINAL: cavalry

I feel the problem is damaged planes like B17 maybe repairing too fast and maybe planes with higher maintenance numbers need to suffer more op loses.

This is the problem in a nutshell. Whilst the 4E bomber vs Jap fighter losses (roughly 1:1 in my games) are realsitic enough, the fact that the Allied player can up 200 plus 4E raids every other day is not.

Hmmm The USAAF was mustering 300 B-29's every other day from Saipan ... that plane type had the worse maintinance record ..

But the problem is deeper .. WitP AE is neither a game according to strict defintions, and certainly not a similation. It is more akin to a story in my opinion. The IJ beats up on the Allies and then all heck breaks loose that leads to the inevitable ..

IJFB's do all they can and try all kinds of rationale to soften the blows that eventually come ..

One of the most interesting conversations I had was with Pax ... I reasoned basing bombers in Russia was an ahistorical "gamey choice" as much as invading Oz since both had political adversity to doing so .. of course .. invading Oz is a differnt situation [;)] also the game does not handle invasions of Oz well as the Allies are defenseless from forming supply lines like the Red Ball express .. of course that is different .. [:'(]

We can argue all day long .. allies produce a lot of stuff and GreyJoy's thread demonstrates that even when down and out scenario #2 under some of the most restrictive home rules .. that stuff can be put to use effectively and turn the tide .. . In fact .. things are deeply in trouble early '44 ,..

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

ORIGINAL: Commander Stormwolf

Dresden?

Not exatcly their finest hour....

We'll try Warsaw, Rotterdam, Coventry, London

the Luftwaffe at its best!

[pharmy]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces



One of the most interesting conversations I had was with Pax ... I reasoned basing bombers in Russia was an ahistorical "gamey choice"

If Russia enters the war then its not a completely gamey choice, although basing would exceed the capacities of the Russians, but shuttling wouldn't, in Europe under operation Frantic, the 15th airforce and on a couple of occasions the 8th did it and certainly the US would have loved to use the Russian Far East. And on occasion it could be a double edged sword, like Poltava (http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Magazi ... ltava.aspx ). I imagine an HR could be used to allow for a single bombing mission to simulate shuttle bombing(with a ferry to, and ferry out of in the previous/subsequent turns) to mount an attack on Northern Japan/Sakhalin/Kuriles. Or even previous to that perhaps in China. Maybe the rule should be a ferry move out not in the next turn, but the next two turns, and that would allow the Japanese a crack a their own "disaster at Poltava".

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

ORIGINAL: Commander Stormwolf

Dresden?

Not exatcly their finest hour....

We'll try Warsaw, Rotterdam, Coventry, London

the Luftwaffe at its best!

I might propose that the crossing at the Dinant bridgehead was the Luftwaffe's finest hour .. 850 aircraft take out and/or interdict an armored division so Rommel can cross the river almost unopposed ... despite the inferior armored tatics if the 1st armored div makes it to the Meuse ...it turns back into a WW1 situation and attrition. Play the Dinant bridgehead in ASL with the optional rules of Char B's already in position to get a feel of what that meant ..

Actually bombing London and Coventry was the begining of the end of the Luftwaffe ...

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
Hmmm The USAAF was mustering 300 B-29's every other day from Saipan ... that plane type had the worse maintinance record ..

Saipan in late 44/early 45 represented one of the most concentrated logistical support efforts in history. As it was, there were still serious issues with aborts when LeMay arrived to take things to task. You can't compare the situation on Saipan to the situation say, in Australia in 1942.

And yes......the underlying issue is repair from damage, not losses. Planes in general, not just 4E's are not shot down in droves, nor is there an exponential increase based on gun size.