Air losses against no air GS dat Flak

[AlbertN]

In general flak was not a killer but had a dissuasive / disrupting factor.

Unless the airplanes had to get down to the target but that was more something pertinent to the naval war.

People can discuss and bait around bushes for an amount of time though; in the end of the day the boiling issue is 'air war' - and how often players use bombers, and if bombers help in a commesurate way to their logistic weight and cost.

The historical mainstream is that the airforce was a constant and perpetuum of its use.

Here in WITE is pretty much 'peak effort jolly card play' by what I believe is the majority of players already. So a big digression from history. And to some there is the extreme 'park them in the Reserve'.

Flak is one of the big issues - I do agree with it, and needs to be toned down. At least Soviet flak. German flak for all I see is baffling and ridiculous.

[xhoel]

ORIGINAL: king171717

This is exactly the kind of crazy results we are talking about. 21% loss rate to flak is just out of this world. I posted this in the other thread too but am posting here again:

Operation Tidal Wave (the American bombing of Ploesti in 1943) came up against heavy Flak attack as well as German and Rumanian fighters and out of 177 bombers, 53 were lost in the raid for a 30% loss rate. This was a combo of heavy fighter presence and AA fires. It was considered one of the costliest raids of the war.

So these kind of results should not be coming from standard GS missions.

[ShaggyHiK]

ORIGINAL: xhoel

What are you showing a screenshot of the final result?
As if chemical weapons were found in Iraq.

To understand what exactly is happening, you need to look where the flight is from, at what altitude, watch the route used, at the stage the planes are shot down by anti-aircraft guns.
This can be both a loss from a direct hit and a loss from damage received when an inexperienced pilot fights on landing.
I do not exclude the possibility that not all weapons that fire are shown in the statistics.

Note that Soviet fighters are participating in the battle.
Are you sure that if planes are damaged in battle by both planes and anti-aircraft guns at the same time, who will be counted for the downing?

[Hardradi]

ORIGINAL: Stamb

Yep. Isolated and probably with low TOE as it was turn 2.

Yes, I get similar results against isolated units although my loss ratio is more 50:50 flak vs Ops though.

[Dreamslayer]

ORIGINAL: PeteJC

I looked around a bit on the internet to find some credible #s on Luftwaffe Russian front operational losses and flak losses. Did not have any real success. Does anyone know of a credible source? While I find losing on average 8-9% of my bombers to flak & operations per mission I must admit I have no idea if it is historically accurate. My main concern with this game is that it keeps its high level of historic accuracy. If 8-9% losses are accurate then I am fine with it. I will just use my bombers less often. Just want the game to realistic.

You can try these articles in Russian - http://airwar.ru/history/av2ww/axis/axis.html#Poteri , part "Luftwaffe's losses" ("Потери Люфтваффе"). Beside that articles in Russian you also should to figure it out that there is a specific German rating system of aircrafts losses.

[DeletedUser44]

Guys,

Don't really know what is going on now.

This is Turn 6 Odessa assault and I expected FLAK losses to be 2-3x this.

There is like 80 Soviet FLAK Guns defending?

20 out of 296 AC downed by 80 Soviet FLAK Guns in a fortified city (Odessa).

These losses are very reasonable. Agree?

53,4,Bf 109F-2 damaged by FLAK
53,4,Bf 109F-2 damaged by FLAK
53,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
53,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
53,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
53,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
53,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 Destroyed by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,IAR 80A damaged by FLAK
53,4,Bf 109F-4 damaged by FLAK
53,4,IAR 80A damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 112B (RU) damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 112B (RU) damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 Destroyed by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-6 damaged by FLAK
53,4,Bf 109F-2 damaged by FLAK
53,4,Bf 109F-2 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
53,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK

[AlbertN]

I am dubious 20 out of 300 is reasonable for what the air units do.

For a single mission the Allies considered 5% losses (between fighters, flak and whatnot) a tragedy, for their strat-bombing missions.
I am aware Germans and Russians may be more prone to accept losses. But in general losses were well below that dreaded 5%.

And that was a mission of a lot of mileage and enemy flak shooting and firing, and potentially fighters intercepting (depending on the time of the war).

Then we've to weight the effect of the bombers too.

PS: You're missing on damaged planes I suspect! You're just eyeing the ones that have been terminated!

[DeletedUser44]

This is the Odessa Turn6 Assault summary tab, for reference

[AlbertN]

You can see from that bit that your airplanes destroyed 1 ground element consisting of 3 men (a mortar team or so?), and disrupted 110 elements (probably a good mix of rifle squads and the like since it's roughly x10 the men).

I am not sure if you can see how many of your airplanes got damaged though! If in the combat log somewhere there in Air Combat; or if you have to check the airbases.

[DeletedUser44]

ORIGINAL: AlbertN

I am dubious 20 out of 300 is reasonable for what the air units do.

For a single mission the Allies considered 5% losses (between fighters, flak and whatnot) a tragedy, for their strat-bombing missions.
I am aware Germans and Russians may be more prone to accept losses. But in general losses were well below that dreaded 5%.

And that was a mission of a lot of mileage and enemy flak shooting and firing, and potentially fighters intercepting (depending on the time of the war).

Then we've to weight the effect of the bombers too.

PS: You're missing on damaged planes I suspect! You're just eyeing the ones that have been terminated!

You are comparing apples to oranges when trying to correlate Allied Strategic Bombing to German Tactical Bombing losses.

The damaged planes are listed in the log, which I posted. (however, it is my understanding, that the same plane can be damaged multiple times)

KG 27 - 82 Rdy, 3 Damaged
KG 4 - 72 Rdy, 6 Damaged
JG 52 - 77 Rdy, 2 Damaged
1st Rum. Ftr Fl - 122 Rdy, 0 Damaged

At most, 11 Dmg? (don't really get that worked up over dmg AC, until they are deemed non-repairable)

EDIT: Had to look it up...

Germany, historically, is losing over 250 (dmg + destroyed) Twin Engine Bombers a month on the Eastern Front (through Nov 1941)

I don't think the AC losses for this battle is going to put Germany in danger of exceeding that.

----
Some 1941 Eastern Front Luftwaffe loss tables, for reference:

https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/AA ... ffe-3.html

[AlbertN]

On the contrary - this is Flak damage on 'flyover' as Soviets were headed in for Air Supply. (Exerpt from my AAR)

[DeletedUser44]

On the contrary - image of opposites.

[dudefan]

I am no ww2 superhistorian, but my experience with the airgame is also mixed.

I just cannot believe that if 50 german fighters met 50 soviet fighters in the sky the kill ratio was like 47 to 3 for axis.

I do believe before 47 fighters are killed they would break up the attack and flee...


Also imo flak was mainly scary for bombers and made bombers less effective but weren't the classic killing instrument it seems to be in wite2.


As stated, that's just my knowledge and I could be wrong.

[christenberryd]

As German on turns 6-8 I too am seeing up to 20% loss attacking single divisions just through flak and ops losses. I've done several attacks. Sometimes the divisions are cut off! I'll try 15k altitude then, but basically this is good sized problem. AlbertN has this right, flak made pilots stop their attack, didn't knock them down like flies esp in '41 on the low density eastern front! And as Albert said, 5% was catastrophic.

[xhoel]

@Sauron_II: you lost 23 bombers in a GS that barely did anything to the enemy. Not exactly the best trade off. AlbertN is showing that Soviets flying and being hit by heavy flak barely does anything to them, which is a fair point, although I think not the best comparison since GS missions and transport missions are not the same.

ORIGINAL: AlbertN

disrupted 110 elements (probably a good mix of rifle squads and the like since it's roughly x10 the men).

Actually, for some reason GS tends to disrupt support a lot, so a lot of those squads could just be support squads that dont really play a role in combat anyway and have 20 men in them which increased the men disrupted numbers. So that actual disruption of combat elements is lower. I almost never see rifle squads get disrupted by GS for example.

Here is an example: