B-29 Attack on Carriers from 26 Hexes

[ctangus]

I'm an AFB, but that's definitely a cheesy move. What does your opponent have to say about it?

[ChezDaJez]

B-29's do cruise a bit faster than you are giving them credit for

Hi, Mike. I used 220 kts for computations figuring that fuel might be an issue so they wouldn't be using a fast cruise speed. Then again... if the target is important enough...

Chez

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

Just thought I'd share that in my PBEM, 2 or 3 of my fleet carriers were wrecked by B-29s flying out of Darwin, hitting my TF on the north side of Mindanao, Phillipines. 26 Hexes, baby.

1,560 miles each way. Strategic bomber. Gotta love it.

This highlights another weakness in WitP's tactical routines. It applies to ALL long range tactical aircraft but I'll use Duke's example.

Consider that for a B-29 unit to attack ships at 1560 miles, they would need a minimum of 12 hours to prepare and fly to the target. Figure 2 hours for the sighting report to work its way through the system and get to where someone can make a decision. Then another 3 hours to load the aircraft and brief the crews, take off and form up. Then 7 hours of flight time to the target. During that time the warships (assuming a cruise speed of 20 knots) could move up to 240 miles from the initial point of detection. The yields a theorectical search area of something over 180,000 square miles.

It would take several hours to search that area. Totally unrealistic to expect them to do that free from interception.

BTW, I agree with 1275PSI. Anyone who uses B-29s in a naval attack role won't be included in my list of people to play.

Chez

This same "problem" applies to some degree to any anti-shipping strike. I seem to recall that the program is supposed to take this into account (and it may not be doing so enough in most people's opinions), but even so long range strikes like that are going to sometimes work.

(BTW, was the B-29 equipped or equippable with some form of search radar?)

Oh, and if this is so unacceptable for B-29s to do why is it okay for Betties/Nells?

[The Duke]

ORIGINAL: ctangus

I'm an AFB, but that's definitely a cheesy move. What does your opponent have to say about it?

I've asked him to reconsider Superforts for naval.....no firm answer yet. We are playing PDU-on and haven't really set any sort of pregame arrangements....we're playing the full scenario so I sure wasn't looking ahead to May '44 and B29s roaming the skies above my TF.

He also says that only 45 B29s attacked, and only 1 carrier was seriously damaged (Hiryu)....and he complained that the bombs that hit Shokaku and Taiho bounced off the armored flight decks. [8|]

I thought about quitting the game then, but he's a good friend and perhaps just made a quick decision - I had just gotten the better of him in a big exchange, shooting down about 1200 allied aircraft in the preceeding 4 days (plus sinking CV Hornet and crippling Lexington and Yorktown).....I'm guessing the naval attack order came in a fit of anger. If this becomes a pattern (i.e. any more) then we'll have another chat and see if this goes any further.

I mean, its PDU on....he's got every danged 2 engine squadron he wants upgraded to B17s, B24s, and now B29s.....he's wiped a few of my airfields off the map with ~500 to ~1000 plane raids.....I don't think he needs to resort to B29s on naval attack, I think that's obscene.

[The Duke]

ORIGINAL: dtravel

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

Just thought I'd share that in my PBEM, 2 or 3 of my fleet carriers were wrecked by B-29s flying out of Darwin, hitting my TF on the north side of Mindanao, Phillipines. 26 Hexes, baby.

1,560 miles each way. Strategic bomber. Gotta love it.

This highlights another weakness in WitP's tactical routines. It applies to ALL long range tactical aircraft but I'll use Duke's example.

Consider that for a B-29 unit to attack ships at 1560 miles, they would need a minimum of 12 hours to prepare and fly to the target. Figure 2 hours for the sighting report to work its way through the system and get to where someone can make a decision. Then another 3 hours to load the aircraft and brief the crews, take off and form up. Then 7 hours of flight time to the target. During that time the warships (assuming a cruise speed of 20 knots) could move up to 240 miles from the initial point of detection. The yields a theorectical search area of something over 180,000 square miles.

It would take several hours to search that area. Totally unrealistic to expect them to do that free from interception.

BTW, I agree with 1275PSI. Anyone who uses B-29s in a naval attack role won't be included in my list of people to play.

Chez

This same "problem" applies to some degree to any anti-shipping strike. I seem to recall that the program is supposed to take this into account (and it may not be doing so enough in most people's opinions), but even so long range strikes like that are going to sometimes work.

(BTW, was the B-29 equipped or equippable with some form of search radar?)

Oh, and if this is so unacceptable for B-29s to do why is it okay for Betties/Nells?

Bettys and Nells were naval attack aircraft....both were used extensively in this role through the war. The Repulse and Prince of Wales were sunk on 12/10/41 by Nells launching aerial torpedos.

There is absolutely no precedence for B29s to attack task forces. Outside of industrial targets, and eventually just aimlessly firebombing cities, I'm not sure how else they were used.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: The Duke
Bettys and Nells were naval attack aircraft....both were used extensively in this role through the war. The Repulse and Prince of Wales were sunk on 12/10/41 by Nells launching aerial torpedos. True..., about 540 miles from their Indo-China Bases. In the game they are doing it at up to 1,000 miles, which was the point being made in the post.

There is absolutely no precedence for B29s to attack task forces. Outside of industrial targets, and eventually just aimlessly firebombing cities, I'm not sure how else they were used. To sink a lot of Japanese shipping and close most of Japan's ports with areal minelaying

[dtravel]

Well, that doesn't answer the question of "If B-29s can't find ships at that range, why can Betties/Nells?".  I also have some issue with the argument that just because some USAAF generals were too bull-headed to allow them to be be used for anything but attacking industry and fire-bombing the player can't either.  They were physically capable of it (and given how many bombs they carried carpet-bombing sections of ocean was certainly an option) as well as bombing airfields and ports.  I seem to remember something about the USN requesting B-29 strikes against known and suspected kamikaze supporting airbases.  Apollo11 did some significant testing a long time ago and found that even against ships disbanded in port, the US 4-engine bombers were hitting with only about 1% to 2% of the bombs they dropped.  IIRC someone recently posted a cite showing that IRL it was around 3%.

[ChezDaJez]

Oh, and if this is so unacceptable for B-29s to do why is it okay for Betties/Nells?

It's not but obviously you missed the part of my post where I specifically said that it applies to ALL long range tactical aircraft but that I would use Duke's example for illustration purposes.

The B-29's radar was was used for radar bombing, not for surface search. It had a very limited range.

Chez

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

Oh, and if this is so unacceptable for B-29s to do why is it okay for Betties/Nells?

It's not but obviously you missed the part of my post where I specifically said that it applies to ALL long range tactical aircraft but that I would use Duke's example for illustration purposes.

The B-29's radar was was used for radar bombing, not for surface search. It had a very limited range.

Chez

Well, my argument wasn't meant to specifically flame you Chez. My apologies if it seems like it was.

And thanks for the info on the B-29 radar.

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: The Duke
Bettys and Nells were naval attack aircraft....both were used extensively in this role through the war. The Repulse and Prince of Wales were sunk on 12/10/41 by Nells launching aerial torpedos. True..., about 540 miles from their Indo-China Bases. In the game they are doing it at up to 1,000 miles, which was the point being made in the post.

There is absolutely no precedence for B29s to attack task forces. Outside of industrial targets, and eventually just aimlessly firebombing cities, I'm not sure how else they were used. To sink a lot of Japanese shipping and close most of Japan's ports with areal minelaying

As far as I am aware I've ever had a Betty or Nell find and attack a TF outside of 8 to 9 hexes (480-540 miles) in any game I have yet played. And I agree with Chez, sending aircraft over 1,000 miles to attack a spotted target should be next to impossible to succeed.

The only possibility I could see of B-29s finding ships to bomb at 1,000+ miles out is in a case, as dtravel says, where planes are sent out with anti-shipping ordinance to a specific location and told to simply attack anything they find. And I just don't see sending any planes, let alone B-29s out over a thousand miles of ocean in hopes of finding a needle in a haystack somewhere. It would be much more profitable to send them to mine harbors or some other target with a relatively high probability of success. Otherwise it's almost sure to be a waste of gas and potential operational losses.

[goodboyladdie]

ORIGINAL: SamCole

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I won't comment...[8D]

This is the most suprising post of the month.

[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
As far as I am aware I've ever had a Betty or Nell find and attack a TF outside of 8 to 9 hexes (480-540 miles) in any game I have yet played. And I agree with Chez, sending aircraft over 1,000 miles to attack a spotted target should be next to impossible to succeed.

The only possibility I could see of B-29s finding ships to bomb at 1,000+ miles out is in a case, as dtravel says, where planes are sent out with anti-shipping ordinance to a specific location and told to simply attack anything they find. And I just don't see sending any planes, let alone B-29s out over a thousand miles of ocean in hopes of finding a needle in a haystack somewhere. It would be much more profitable to send them to mine harbors or some other target with a relatively high probability of success. Otherwise it's almost sure to be a waste of gas and potential operational losses.

EXACTLY!!!

[spence]

I can't see any USAAF General ordering 100 B-29s (I don't know how many did this thing)to fly off to some piece of ocean 1000 miles away either. US Navy PB4Ys did this sort of thing though they didn't operate in large numbers (1-2) and they didn't go tangle with Jap CVTFs other than to report position, course and speed.

In a game where the IJN and IJA get along just fine (in the AARs one sees Oscars, Tonys and Franks escorting G3s/G4/D4s/B5s etc all the time) its somewhat difficult to get too outraged about this particular exploit. It's not historical but hardly the only thing that is not historical and as far as historical is concerned the game is not all that demanding of the Japanese Player.

[mogami]

Hi, The fix is easy. (and something I have done since my very first game) Never let any type of aircraft make a naval strike beyond it's escorted range. You don't actually have to provide escorts. (so Betty/Nell never attack beyond 11 hexes and allied strikes are limited even further before long range fighters arrive)
 
It's silly to use B-29 on naval strikes. Just bomb the ports (dummy)

[ChezDaJez]

Just bomb the ports (dummy)

Now don't go giving them any more ideas, Mogami! [:-]I'm having a hard enough time as it is! [:D]

Chez

[ChezDaJez]

Well, my argument wasn't meant to specifically flame you Chez. My apologies if it seems like it was.

No worries, dtravel. No apology was necessary.

Chez

[pauk]

i'm intersted which patch original poster uses?

I have impression that in last patch long range strikes are penaltized if not forbidden...

(inmy experience 80 % Allied or Japanese LBA wont attack their targets outside the escort range - i had problems with Japs LBA to attack target 8 hexes away although i had escort assigned and no enemy CAP was present)

[mogami]

Hi, Allied heavy bombers never check for escorts. (However I don't let them make naval strikes beyond escort range)

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Allied heavy bombers never check for escorts. (However I don't let them make naval strikes beyond escort range)

Problem is two-fold. First, with their "Flying Fortress" idea the Allies didn't think they needed any escorts. Secondly, because of number one, they didn't have any long-ranged escorts available until mid-war. Even the designers of this game would have had a tough time justifying limiting the range of a B-17/24 to than of a P-40 "escort". Personally, I only permit myself "naval strikes" with the B-17's in the Philippines, and against KB if it shows up in range----both of which are basically "all hands to the pumps" situations in my opinion.

[Kadrin]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Allied heavy bombers never check for escorts.

I have a feeling this isn't true.

I've had a few opportunities for Beauforts, B-24's, IL-4c's and Swordfish (Hermes disbanded in port) to hit the mini-KB off Ceylon during a 3 day raid. No fighter escort was availible (all was on CAP over Colombo) and all planes on Naval Attack, max range, altitude 10,000. Yet during the 3 days of the raid only the Swordfish off Hermes launched, and then proceeded to get thoroughly annihilated.