Torpedo bombers and bombing accuracy

[mogami]

Hi, So transports off loading get hit more then ships at sea. [>:]

[mind_messing]

Quote from TheElf.

Here are the answers for all those with panties in a proverbial bunch...Nice catch guys!

Attack bomber functions as:

1. Altitude set <6000, attack altitude is "low level". >6k' they are treated as normal LB at altitude selected.

2. AB flights are split up into pairs (or two pairs against land targets) if low level (doctrinal)

3. Due to the order of combat, the pair bomb target at 100 and then strafe at 100.

4. Strafing by AB adds to flak suppression. Higher SKILL_STRAFE value (70+) increases suppression more.

5. Non-attack Level Bombers bombing at <1000 gain a higher fatigue from the firing Flak.

6. Bombing accuracy for non-attack LB attacking at <6000 with low morale or high disruption is lowered.

7. Bombing accuracy of LB against TF at <7000 is reduced. AB accuracy is increased <6000.

@ Mike Sholl
8. No experience/skill minimum to execute an attack by non-AB planes but the attack impacted as mentioned above.

fb.asp?m=2558015

[spence]

The previous post seems to deal with Attack Bombers. 9% accuracy by Torpedo Bombers dropping bombs, especially from high altitude, is outlandishly unhistorical but since it seems that the game only allows obsolete Allied aircraft to hit anything at all its a great game mechanic. The key word is obsolete though. Too bad the Allies only get such meager replacements for their Vildebeests and Swordfish.[;)] [:@]

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Quote from TheElf.

Here are the answers for all those with panties in a proverbial bunch...Nice catch guys!

Attack bomber functions as:

1. Altitude set <6000, attack altitude is "low level". >6k' they are treated as normal LB at altitude selected.

2. AB flights are split up into pairs (or two pairs against land targets) if low level (doctrinal)

3. Due to the order of combat, the pair bomb target at 100 and then strafe at 100.

4. Strafing by AB adds to flak suppression. Higher SKILL_STRAFE value (70+) increases suppression more.

5. Non-attack Level Bombers bombing at <1000 gain a higher fatigue from the firing Flak.

6. Bombing accuracy for non-attack LB attacking at <6000 with low morale or high disruption is lowered.

7. Bombing accuracy of LB against TF at <7000 is reduced. AB accuracy is increased <6000.

@ Mike Sholl
8. No experience/skill minimum to execute an attack by non-AB planes but the attack impacted as mentioned above.

fb.asp?m=2558015

That post is very old. At least three years ago an update changed the threshold for Low Level bombing to < 2000 feet. Against targets with poor AA I often bomb at 3000 feet (above most IJ MGs) - makes quite a difference compared to 6K. During that update, glide bombing was eliminated and there may have been some changes to bombing accuracy calculations.

[Yaab]

Well, I will continue gathering combat reports with TBs bombing, but I already have a hunch why Devastators got the name - they devastate enemy TFs by bombing them from high altitude.

[Dili]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Dili

ORIGINAL: mind_messing




If you check the database in game, the bombs that torpedo bombers use in lieu of torpedoes has no greater accuracy that the equivalent bombs used by other aircraft.

You've posted two combat reports. In the first, the target was a slow merchant steamer. In other words an easy target. In the second, the hit rate for the torpedo bombers was 9%. Hardly amazing accuracy as you claim.

Bold- irrelevant if the code for torpedo bombers is different than level bombers.

Not bold - i did not posted what you say i posted.

The only difference in code (as far as I'm aware) is that planes carrying torpedoes drop to 200ft before releasing their armament. When carrying bombs on naval attack they perform conventional NavB or LowNav attacks. They get no inherent advantages at naval attack than any other airframe.

Sorry, I thought I'd quoted Yaab's silliness and not yours.

Well you don't know, neither do i the code. But the results are clearly different from a bomber.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Quote from TheElf.

Here are the answers for all those with panties in a proverbial bunch...Nice catch guys!

Attack bomber functions as:

1. Altitude set <6000, attack altitude is "low level". >6k' they are treated as normal LB at altitude selected.

2. AB flights are split up into pairs (or two pairs against land targets) if low level (doctrinal)

3. Due to the order of combat, the pair bomb target at 100 and then strafe at 100.

4. Strafing by AB adds to flak suppression. Higher SKILL_STRAFE value (70+) increases suppression more.

5. Non-attack Level Bombers bombing at <1000 gain a higher fatigue from the firing Flak.

6. Bombing accuracy for non-attack LB attacking at <6000 with low morale or high disruption is lowered.

7. Bombing accuracy of LB against TF at <7000 is reduced. AB accuracy is increased <6000.

@ Mike Sholl
8. No experience/skill minimum to execute an attack by non-AB planes but the attack impacted as mentioned above.

fb.asp?m=2558015

That post is very old. At least three years ago an update changed the threshold for Low Level bombing to < 2000 feet. Against targets with poor AA I often bomb at 3000 feet (above most IJ MGs) - makes quite a difference compared to 6K. During that update, glide bombing was eliminated and there may have been some changes to bombing accuracy calculations.

Have you a source for that? Just as I've a post from Alfred suggesting otherwise-

fb.asp?m=2752253

The value of Alfred is that he's rarely wrong.

[Rising-Sun]

Well not only that, but I did find something odds that I-153 Russian Fighter Plane had extreme agility and extreme accurate with those guns. So did some research and find that, that plane did having trouble hitting the targets due to really agile airframe. The airframe are so small and can be difficult to fly straight with the stick and wouldn't take much of left or right, up and down would be too much. Larger airframes such as P-51s or Spitfires have better Aerodynamics, but some having lower agile turn depend on the speed and weight, etc.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Quote from TheElf.




fb.asp?m=2558015

That post is very old. At least three years ago an update changed the threshold for Low Level bombing to < 2000 feet. Against targets with poor AA I often bomb at 3000 feet (above most IJ MGs) - makes quite a difference compared to 6K. During that update, glide bombing was eliminated and there may have been some changes to bombing accuracy calculations.

Have you a source for that? Just as I've a post from Alfred suggesting otherwise-

fb.asp?m=2752253

The value of Alfred is that he's rarely wrong.

The thread you are referencing is dated in 2011, just a couple of years after the game came out. I could not find the list of official patches with the change lists, but I am sure that is where I first saw the stuff about the changes in altitude for low/high and elimination of glide bombing. You can test it yourself - set a fighter unit to train ground attack for one or two days at 2000 feet. The experience gains will be in the GrdB category, not LowG.

[rustysi]

That post is very old. At least three years ago an update changed the threshold for Low Level bombing to < 2000 feet. Against targets with poor AA I often bomb at 3000 feet (above most IJ MGs) - makes quite a difference compared to 6K. During that update, glide bombing was eliminated and there may have been some changes to bombing accuracy calculations.

Have you a source for that?

I don't have a source either, but I can tell you that its obvious some changes were made. I consistently bomb with LB below 5k, especially in China and bombers bomb with a full bomb load. When the game came out these were supposed to use the the reduced extended range BL.

Just what all the changes were I could not say, just that some were made.

[Yaab]

Another record set - 33,33% hit rate!

This is from scen001 updated recently by AndyMac.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Kota Bharu at 51,75

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 9 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Allied aircraft
Buffalo I x 2
Vildebeest III x 3

Allied aircraft losses
Vildebeest III: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
BB Kongo, Bomb hits 2

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x Vildebeest III bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb GP Bomb

[Dili]

I think i got better that that sometimes around 50%

[obvert]

If what you're saying is happening, dust off the scenario editor and create a test bed. Try what you think is happening about 50 times, and try it with other bomber types. Try it with 2E level bombers, try it with DB (at altitudes where they're not diving) and try it with fighters and FB.

Try it with bombers that carry 2 x bombs across platforms. The editor and a real testbed with multiple iterations is the only way to discover if you're onto something odd (which you're not) and whether it should be fixed (which it won't be since no one is here to fix anything in game now).

You leave so many factors out of your posts of "evidence" that they're just ridiculously irrelevant.

One item you didn't mention in your Nell LB 'misses' example was that there were thunderstorms. The examples from the TB are mostly decent weather; light cloud, overcast or clear sky. Hmmmmm ...

They're also trying to hit tiny motor launches, not lumbering coastal steamers. We have no idea in the one above if they were trying for DD Pillsbury or the TK. There is a difference.

[Gridley380]

Query: *in reality* a well-trained group of torpedo bombers attacking together would have a much higher chance of getting a hit vs. the same number of torpedo bombers (with equivalent pilots) attacking separately, as they could (and did) attack from multiple bearings, thus reducing or eliminating the ability of the target ship to turn into the spread (and thus reduce its target profile). A 'hammer and anvil' attack is a term I've seen used, can't remember if it is contemporary or modern. Is this replicated in the game at all?

The defender would also have to split their AA fire or ignore some attackers, making the attack runs easier, but I believe this is reflected in the game in general for air attacks.

[spence]

In an old thread (El Cid Again I think) Fuchida Mitsuo's analysis of level bombing torpedo bombers called for sections of 5 bombers simultaneously releasing their 800kg bombs from 9000 ft to guarantee one hit on the inboard battleships in Pearl Harbor (20% hit rate). Although many of the bombs were in essence duds, the total hit rate of 800kg bombs against inboard battleships exactly matched Fuchida's prediction (10 hits out of 50 bombers). He was recognized within the IJN as being the expert on level bombing.

As I mentioned much earlier in this thread I routinely move my Vildebeests and Swordfish to Borneo so that they won't be intercepted by IJ fighters. As long as they don't have to contend with fighters they always exceed Fuchida's prediction regardless of experience when bombing from 2000 ft. Generally they also can't hit the broadside of a barn with a torpedo from any altitude.

[Dili]

The expectation of hits by level bombing against warships in movement was about 1-2% maximum, and the maximum height was about 4000m or so for that to be valid, it was considered that the ship had time to maneuver if the bombs were released from higher level.

[Barb]

IIRC the USAAF calculated that they needed big number of B-17s pattern bombing at height to have a decent chance to score a single hit on moving warship. Up till 1943/1944 there were hardly that number of B-17/B-24s available to produce formation that big.

[fcooke]

I don't recall off the top of my head but wasn't it only 6-8 Kates that put two torps into Yorktown at Midway?

[JeffroK]

How does the accuracy of the weapon affect the result??

The accuracy of bombs seem to be related to their weight?

What is the rationale behind torpedo accuracy?

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: JeffroK

How does the accuracy of the weapon affect the result??

The accuracy of bombs seem to be related to their weight?

What is the rationale behind torpedo accuracy?

Just a figure used in calculating whether a hit was achieved or not - along with pilot skill in using that weapon, altitude (for bombs), naval skill of the ship CO, maneuverability of the ship, ship speed, perhaps crew experience (spotting torps?), weather, and probably some random die roll!

Heavier bombs are less affected by cross winds so they will not drift as far from the ballistic calculation made by the bombardier's equipment.