Night Bombing w/GPS??

[spence]

Somebody said that the RAF did better dropping bombs at night than the 8th AF did in the day. They forgot to mention that the target for the 8th AF was a single building in a factory whereas the RAF hoped to put its bombs somewhere within the city limits of its target for the night. IRL night bombing in WWII had success only against civilian area targets. Such successes as it did have have since been deemed atrocities by many (not that I necessarily agree). Only very rarely did a night bombing attack achieve anything of immediate military importance.

It does seem to me that the only Allied bomber that can hit a Japanese ship in the early going is a Swordfish or Vildebeest dropping bombs (they don't do nearly as well with torpedoes). Same sorta goes for TBFs but their doctrine (with bombs) was to attack by glide bombing or at masthead height rather than by level bombing at altitude. IJN Doctrine for B5N Kates was to level bomb at altitude which was no more effective against moving targets than similar attacks by B17s.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: spence

Somebody said that the RAF did better dropping bombs at night than the 8th AF did in the day. They forgot to mention that the target for the 8th AF was a single building in a factory whereas the RAF hoped to put its bombs somewhere within the city limits of its target for the night. IRL night bombing in WWII had success only against civilian area targets. Such successes as it did have have since been deemed atrocities by many (not that I necessarily agree). Only very rarely did a night bombing attack achieve anything of immediate military importance.

It does seem to me that the only Allied bomber that can hit a Japanese ship in the early going is a Swordfish or Vildebeest dropping bombs (they don't do nearly as well with torpedoes). Same sorta goes for TBFs but their doctrine (with bombs) was to attack by glide bombing or at masthead height rather than by level bombing at altitude. IJN Doctrine for B5N Kates was to level bomb at altitude which was no more effective against moving targets than similar attacks by B17s.

Wrong Spence. In the cases I was referring to the targets were identical..., French Railway yards attacked under the "Transportation Plan" to disrupt German abilities to react to the Normandy Landings. And Bomber Command had the best results.

Reason? Bomber Command aircraft bombed individually, while the Eighth (and Ninth) Air Force bombers bombed as a formation. So once the Pathfinders had "lit up" a target, the Brits were much more effective at destroying it.

[Zemke]

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

I have found that placing a CAP at night does a lot of good in reducing the effectiveness of the bombers.

It may, I have not tried, mostly because night fighters without radar should have very very poor results against night bombers, as history showes us in Europe. My point, fighters without radar should have poor results, and the same applies to bombers hitting point targets at night, the effects should be far less than they are in the game if we are trying to model historical realities.

I will give due to mike scholl 1 that the RAF did have better results, I am not going to look it up, perhaps a railroad yard is larger than a runway, and harder to repair, not sure. I would think it would be. I would also bet that the number of bombers involved were larger than what I am getting bombed with at night or it was sustained over a longer period of time. I just think night bombing of point targets is too effective with the number of planes in too short a time. I keep looking for the "new" Allied GPS upgrade in my Allied game, have not found it yet.

[jomni]

ORIGINAL: Zemke_4
but this night bombing thing is really not very historically accurate at all IMHO.

Maybe you want to get rid of pilot training as well because it's not historical.

[Zemke]

Not sure what your point is, these are not related at all. How a player manages pilots is up to him, night bombing accuracy of point targets is hard coded, and IMO night bombing was not accurate enough to render much damage to air fields with the technology on hand during WW II, while in the game you can bomb air fields into dust at night. This simply did not take place that I know of, or if it did, I would think it would have taken a lot of bombers based on the accuracy of night bombing raids over German Cities by the RAF in WW II. If this makes sense.

Area bombing of Cities was done, the US Army Air Corps did it on scale over Japan that was never seen before and wasted entire Cites with fire bombing, same for the RAF over Dresden, I got that. Hitting an air base at night is a lot harder than hitting a city.

I am just advocating for a better model, and hey if I am wrong and this it was routine to bomb air fields at night in the Pacific and it worked, then cool. I just find it unrealistic based on what I know about the war no matter which side is doing it.

[jomni]

I just like to troll around bashing WITP AE for torturing us with so much detail that opens the flood gates for nitpickers.  Anyway, these nitpicks do make a better game. So keep going.  [:D]  But I am an advocate far a simpler WITP with all the details hidden.  And I guess I'm in the minority. My reaction to this issue is not to complain about historical accuracy but find a way to counter it using game mechanics (CAP, evacuating the base, striking his bases, etc.). It's a game anyway.

On a technical note, I remember the devs say that the code breaks down during extreme cases.  Remember Death Star Artillery stacking? Ultra high altitude sweeping?  You may be right... maybe this night bombing devastation is also a similar case (too many big planes doing the night bombing). So I hope they can fix this. If not then you can have house rules if you want historical accuracy in the way you and your opponent sees it.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Zemke_4

What I would like is this to be patched at some point so it does not affect either side, as I think it is unrealistic and not very historical.

Another time this came, maybe 6-8 months ago, someone posted an account of the Japanese bombing Wake (?) with Betties, from some huge range away. It did happen. Moonlight, good dead-reckoning, and a steady hand on the stick helped I'm sure. An island is very much easier to bomb, if you can find it, than forested, rolling European countryside, from 20,000 ft. When I night bomb, I usually use 8,000 feet. Sometimes I get hits, often I don't. But it's worth the harrassment factor, certainly for the Allies early in places like Burma, where the devs gave the Japanese massive advantages in planes and pilots. Daylight anything as the allies is hopeless there in 1942.

I would be very much opposed to patching this out. If it's not favored by a playing pair, HR it.

concur

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: jomni

I just like to troll around bashing WITP AE for torturing us with so much detail that opens the flood gates for nitpickers.  Anyway, these nitpicks do make a better game. So keep going.  [:D]  But I am an advocate far a simpler WITP with all the details hidden.  And I guess I'm in the minority. My reaction to this issue is not to complain about historical accuracy but find a way to counter it using game mechanics (CAP, evacuating the base, striking his bases, etc.). It's a game anyway.

On a technical note, I remember the devs say that the code breaks down during extreme cases.  Remember Death Star Artillery stacking? Ultra high altitude sweeping?  You may be right... maybe this night bombing devastation is also a similar case (too many big planes doing the night bombing). So I hope they can fix this. If not then you can have house rules if you want historical accuracy in the way you and your opponent sees it.

LOL!!! I think you are the first....

[Alfred]

It is an abstraction. When one bomb airfields at night, one in a sense is undertaking area bombing, not point bombing. In AE the potential size of an airfield takes into account the amount of suitable land within the total 40 squared miles of the hex to accomodate multiple airfields. A base with a level 9 airfield represents a total area with several airfields present, not just one huge airfield. That is why you don't see atolls with a SPS capability to build up to level 9.

Alfred

[Zemke]

Don't know the code, the game replicates a lot well, maybe this is not possible, or not desired. 
 
Got it, a HR is the solution, if not a fix.

[Alpha77]

Well depends how much aircraft are used - if you use 200 the chance is better than 20 - logical. My understanding of the RAF campaign was that they did´t aim to hit anythning special (except house) - they just "aimed" at the complete city to firebomb it. They even researched which house (I mean civilian houses) types burn best [8|] But this is a more morale debate I guess. Would say night bombing should not be very effective unless luck and huge numbers are in play.

Btw.: Which allied bombers do night bombing in 42 ? I set some of the Blenheims and Wellingtons (these ARE night bombers!) to night but they did not fly (4/1942). Is there another requirement to night bombing? These sqs fly at day btw. So they are not cowards. Will night bombing for allied become available later ? I also gave them a specific target, but they won´t attack at night [:o]

[Zemke]

To answer your question, the current game time is Sept 43, and any level bomber seems to be able to night bomb. In my other game, playing the Allies, Japan is night bombing with Betties and Nells in Oct 42. I know of no specific date, I thought either side could at any time, but who knows.

[Alpha77]

Thanks, I will try it again, maybe comanders or morale whatever was too bad, so they decided to not get airborne at night. But the Wellington should be the correct plane type (it is a night bomber).

[oldman45]

Zemke, I know the engine doesn't give the results you think it should but there is documented evidence of the US using bombers in the pacific at night. When the 10th AF went to India they launched night missions against Rangoon. This was May of 42 if I remember right. In 44 they used bombers out of Tarawa to bomb the atolls in the Marshals to suppress them and they flew at night because they did not have any fighters available to escort them. The Rangoon mission did hit the piers but there were very few planes available at the time so the damage was limited. The atoll missions were successful because its kind of hard to miss an atoll even at night considering the altitude they were flying at.

I agree that night bombing into a jungle hex hoping to hit infantry should be a waste of ammo, but hitting airfields cut out of the jungle or atolls should be rather successful.

[noguaranteeofsanity]

I don't think it needs a fix, but don't get spectacular results from night bombing that seem to be the cause of the complaint.  I have maybe 60 or 70 bombers flying night raids against Japanese occupied Burma, with pilots who have an average general experience level of around 65 and similar ground bombing skill levels.  I fly them at 10,000 feet and get maybe 2 or 3 hits on the airbase or runway, with maybe 1 or 2 aircraft destroyed on the ground, every other turn, with similar results if they fly port attack.  They certainly can't cause enough damage to close the airbase or port.

[John Lansford]

What about the attack 2E bombers flying at night?  I've got several squadrons of B-25D1's and B-25G's that when set to bomb at night, still drop down and strafe their targets and suffer little operational damage from the attempt.  They don't do much damage, of course, but I can send them out repeatedly with little loss in night flying ability.

[Alpha77]

Seems only the Chinese can bomb at night at the beginning on allies side ? The Brits won#t fly bombing missions from Burma at all (mostly Blenheim). But I know they CAN fly cause they do it later I retreated them back to India with more supply maybe then they will fly also at night. But I still guess that there are limits on night mission, maybe I should read the manual again [;)]

[VSWG]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

But I still guess that there are limits on night mission,

No limits.

Prbably bad weather (monsoon?) grounded your night bombing missions in Burma.

[Zemke]

I never said this was not done, only the results are off.  If you have good recon of a base and bomb it at night your results will be better, and perhaps better than what is getting reported due to FOW.  Next, this was not routinely done, it was the exception, rather than the rule.  I ask only people to see results of night bombing in Europe.

[Zemke]

Regardless, I have taken all the night bombing I can stand.  There is no reason for any Jap planes to stay in the area, they only die on the ground, requiring more replacements, which means more HI burned to produce planes I should not have needed to produce.  There is no way to stop the Allied bombers at night, (hell you cannot stop 4E during the day) and once they get going they cannot be stopped.  I have tried CAP, more CAP, moving around, bigger air bases, more flak, it is not working.  What is the point, when Allied bombers can bomb your bases into dust at night with impunity?  In my other game as Allies I have refused to try this, but for all of you playing Allies, start night bombing the Japanese air fields and you will never lose a plane, except for the rare flak hit.  The longer you do it, the better they get, maybe it is a hidden skill, but it is an air war winner!  I don't see the point, other than it works too well.  Yeah, I am not a happy camper right now.
 
In all my future games as either side, there will certainly be a HR on night bombing air fields.  I just don't know what would be best, higher altitudes or less planes, a combination, any suggestions?