Help with B29s!

[LoBaron]

Against well trained opposition I would expect a high attrition rate of the B29s if they are not protected at all.

Also, at 10k a certain percentage of your losses will be due to AAA. B-29s have extremely bad mvr, and for bombers
mvr means the capability to evade flak.

I do not believe that you got 30 Superfortresses damaged by 18 Zekes. You are too low, not because high alt enables you to
evade fighters, but because you get further away from optimal AAA effectiveness.

I have a very high mission frequency on my B-29 units at the moment, but a recent result looks like this:
(two day turns, screenshot is from the days of the combat reports posted below)

I have to point out that this strike was supported by fighter sweeps, but as you can see there was
active CAP against the bomber formation itself.



2 day of attacks, range 17, enemy CAP present, 151 missions flown total, 4 bombers lost.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Sapporo , at 120,51

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 23,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 1
N1K1-J George x 29
Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 16



Allied aircraft
B-29-1 Superfort x 78


Japanese aircraft losses
N1K1-J George: 1 destroyed, 3 damaged
Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 1 destroyed
Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 6 destroyed on ground
D4Y2 Judy: 2 destroyed on ground
D4Y1 Judy: 4 destroyed on ground
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 11 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-29-1 Superfort: 2 destroyed, 4 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
18 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled



Airbase hits 26
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 53

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on Sapporo , at 120,51

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 26 NM, estimated altitude 22,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 9
N1K1-J George x 2
Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 11
Ki-61-Id Tony x 1



Allied aircraft
B-29-1 Superfort x 73


Japanese aircraft losses
N1K1-J George: 2 damaged
N1K1-J George: 2 destroyed on ground
Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 11 damaged
Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 4 destroyed on ground
Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 3 destroyed on ground
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 1 destroyed on ground
D4Y1 Judy: 2 destroyed on ground
D4Y2 Judy: 3 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-29-1 Superfort: 4 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
5 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled



Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 37

PS:
Imagine what could have happened to the Schweinfurth-Regensburg attack had they not been escorted by about 300
fighters on part of the inbound leg. The true loss rate of 60 bombers shot down and close to 100 heavily damaged would
have been exceeded by far.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

PS:
Imagine what could have happened to the Schweinfurth-Regensburg attack had they not been escorted by about 300
fighters on part of the inbound leg. The true loss rate of 60 bombers shot down and close to 100 heavily damaged would
have been exceeded by far.

Look at the B-29's self-defense versus a B-17's as well. If there is CAP, they need escorts. Or night.

[JocMeister]

LoBaron,

That could explain it to some degree. As I wrote I have not been able to replicate the 21/18 loss ratio again. But I did not notice any damage from flak but I´ll try to dig up the replay and look again. And it doesn´t explain the high losses I have been suffering in the sandbox. Usually 8-12 B29s lost against 18 Zeroes. There is no flak present. I´ve run enough tries in sandbox now (well over 100) to feel fairly certain that losses like that are what to be expected.

Is your game a PBEM or a AI game?

[JocMeister]

Here is another quick test:

Attacker:
100 B29s EXP 60. AF attack 20k ft. Range 4 from Target

Defender
18 A6M5c (same I encountered in the PBEM), EXP 70, 50% CAP range 0 ALT: 15k. Radar present, no FLAK at base.

[JocMeister]

Now it become really interesting! I´ve set it up similar to what you encountered in your game. Pretty dramatic difference. Why? [&:] I ran it enough times to make certain the results wasn´t some kind of fluke.

My test is consistent with everything I learned about the game so far and my own tests. How are you avoiding this? Only thing I can think of is that in your game the CAP has significantly lower EXP. I did a quick test lowering EXP of the defender to 30 and the results were pretty close to what you were getting. A lot of damaged planes (15-20) but only 2-5 actual losses. I guess fatigue caused by your earlier sweeps could also play a major part?

Attacker:
Same as above but 20% rest added

Defender
Same setting before on both groups

[LoBaron]

JocMeister, simply combine the information from The Moose´s and my post, and then reconsider what you actually want to find out. [:)]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Is your game a PBEM or a AI game?

PBEM

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Now it become really interesting! I´ve set it up similar to what you encountered in your game. Pretty dramatic difference. Why? I ran it enough times to make certain the results wasn´t some kind of fluke.

My test is consistent with everything I learned about the game so far and my own tests. How are you avoiding this? Only thing I can think of is that in your game the CAP has significantly lower EXP.

--------->

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
Against well trained opposition I would expect a high attrition rate of the B29s if they are not protected at all.

--------->

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
I have to point out that this strike was supported by fighter sweeps, but as you can see there was
active CAP against the bomber formation itself.

--------->

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
Look at the B-29's self-defense versus a B-17's as well. If there is CAP, they need escorts. Or night.

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
I guess fatigue caused by your earlier sweeps could also play a major part?

Absolutely. As well as causing morale drops resulting in less repeated attacks.



- You are expecting the B-29 of ´44 to perform as the B-17 of ´42. It is much more fragile in relation to the average opponents.

- You are expecting a situation usually not encountered by B-29s historically (which would be low losses against numerous, well organized, high skill opposition, with ample early warning), to produce a historical outcome.

Simply put, your expectations are wrong.


The B-29 is no air superiority weapon. It excells because of its range, and payload, and speed.
Range and payload do not tell you anything about performance in the face of opposition, speed advantage can be mitigated by early detection (in you example 65nm) and the speed of enemy fighters.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

- You are expecting the B-29 of ´44 to perform as the B-17 of ´42. It is much more fragile in relation to the average opponents.

- You are expecting a situation usually not encountered by B-29s historically (which would be low losses against numerous, well organized, high skill opposition, with ample early warning), to produce a historical outcome.

Simply put, your expectations are wrong.

The B-29 is no air superiority weapon. It excells because of its range, and payload, and speed.
Range and payload do not tell you anything about performance in the face of opposition, speed advantage can be mitigated by early detection (in you example 65nm) and the speed of enemy fighters.

I´ve come to realize this over the last few days. I´ll be the first one to admit I´m quite disappointed I´ll not be able to launch a strategic campaign like I envisioned. But then again its not the first time this game has that effect on me! [:D]

Its a slow process but I´m getting there. Its a game. Not reality. [:)]

EDIT: Messed up the quote...thingie!

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

- You are expecting the B-29 of ´44 to perform as the B-17 of ´42. It is much more fragile in relation to the average opponents.

- You are expecting a situation usually not encountered by B-29s historically (which would be low losses against numerous, well organized, high skill opposition, with ample early warning), to produce a historical outcome.

Simply put, your expectations are wrong.

The B-29 is no air superiority weapon. It excells because of its range, and payload, and speed.
Range and payload do not tell you anything about performance in the face of opposition, speed advantage can be mitigated by early detection (in you example 65nm) and the speed of enemy fighters.

I´ve come to realize this over the last few days. I´ll be the first one to admit I´m quite disappointed I´ll not be able to launch a strategic campaign like I envisioned. But then again its not the first time this game has that effect on me! [:D]

Its a slow process but I´m getting there. Its a game. Not reality. [:)]

B-29 results are markedly different once you have P-51Ds in numbers in 1945. Until then, do nights, do deep and try to find bases without CAP. If you fly in daylight into 1944 "game" CAP you will be in pain. Don't fight it, just go along with it. 1944 is not like 1945 is not like 1942. [:)]

[nashvillen]

Just keep them in CONUS and train with them. [;)]

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

B-29 results are markedly different once you have P-51Ds in numbers in 1945. Until then, do nights, do deep and try to find bases without CAP. If you fly in daylight into 1944 "game" CAP you will be in pain. Don't fight it, just go along with it. 1944 is not like 1945 is not like 1942. [:)]

Roger roger! [:D]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: nashvillen

Just keep them in CONUS and train with them. [;)]

And work on the nose art.

[Schanilec]

This is all very interesting. I'm at the point in my game (1 April 1944) where I have B-29's arriving at Aden in the last few days. Twentieth Air Force and 20th HQ sailing to Aden from EC.

But in the mean time, over in the Marshall's. I'm having a hell of a time dislodging the Japanese form Roi-Namur and at the same time I'm also making a landing on Eniwetok.

But from what I have read on this thread the B-29 situation should be very interesting once they reach India and China .

Thanks boys.[&o]

What great fun.[:)]

[JocMeister]

For those interested I found this site yesterday:

http://www.usaaf.net/digest/t165.htm

According to that site the XX Bomber command lost 22 planes to enemy fighters between 7/44 and 8/45. Something I managed to lose in one day. [:D]

[LoBaron]

Historically, B-29s had an extremely low mission frequency (sometimes several weeks between major raids)
- usually against unprepared targets.

If intercepted at all in ´44 it was done by green pilots in small unorganized attacks. Most of the veterans
were either dead or flying combat in the PI, or the Bonins.

Initially the HI defense fighters flew airframes lacking the ability to climb to alitude fast enough for interception,
or dropped in performance so much that they were outrun by the heavies. There was only basic air raid warning, often
spotters only, cutting the reaction times down to a fraction of the required.

In early ´45, when finally slightly better equipped and trained HI defense units were available, they were kept at bay
by LR fighter escorts and sufferd extreme loss rates per mission.

Only few enemy fighters ever reached the B 29. Most Superfortress´ lost in a2a were due to unconventional attacks,
usually ramming by indvidual attacking fighters.

Thats the reason for the low a2a loss rate, and the reason why most PBEMs never match ingame situations in that regard.
All Japanese players know the B-29 will come and are prepared. They have the radar, the Pilot quality, the numbers, and
the plane types to counter.

I always have to smile when such comparisions are attempted. It is as futile as comparing in game sub war to reality.
No Japanese PBEM Player is dumb enough to replicate the ASW tactics used by the Japanese in WWII.

20/20 hindsight is a b**ch... [:D]

[JocMeister]

LoBaron,

Just for the record I was not trying to make a comparison with the game. [:)] I have been trying to read up on the subject as I have little knowledge of this part of the war. I found the numbers quite interesting. Especially when compared to the ETO (something I have better knowledge of). The strategic bombing of Japan seems pretty dull compared with the German one. [:)] As you say when B29s entered the war it was already more or less won in the air. Hence the astonishingly low losses.

I´ve actually have had quite a hard time locating books on the subject. So tips on that would be welcome! Some equivalent of "The mighty Eighth" that gives a broad overview for someone not well read on the subject.

[LoBaron]

Sorry JocMeister, I did not want to suggest you personally were making this comparision.

I just wanted to point out what to consider if one attempts to compare, as this topic simply is bound to produce comparisions.
If an unexpected result requires investigation, and a historical example exist that offers itself to base a comparision
on, the first question always needs to be:
"Does the historical situation REALLY mirror the situation ingame down to a detail level known and supported."

If the answer is "no", this does not make comparision impossible per default, but then such a comparision needs to be
always done with the identified differences in context.

If this prerequisite for comparision is skipped, the comparision is worthless. Happens much too often on the forums.



Re B-29 literature: Yes, I know what you mean, there is not too much available, and TBH many books are simply boring.
The rest is at least 50% Enola Gay stuff.

A long time ago I read a very good book written from a Japanese perspective, about the Japanese Superfortress intercepters. Don´t
remember the exact name, something like "Fighting the Dragon", or "Dragon Fighters" I think. Enjoyed it very much but am not
completely sure about the accuracy.

What I can also reccommend is "Final Assault On The Rising Sun: Combat Diaries of B-29 Air Crews Over Japan" Chester W. Marshall
and Warren E. Thompson.

Rest on my knowledge on that topic is from the internet and minor chapters where it is addressed in other books, like Ronald
H. Spectors great "Eagle against the Sun".

[obvert]

Now that my AAR has caught up to this date, I'd like to add a few details. Such an odd turn after a few years gameplay with very mediocre results trying to hit much slower, less durable, less powerful 4E bombers with much better planes and more experienced pilots.

This was a strange situation for me, as I didn't plan on having the A6M5c there. At 335mph I didn't think they'd even get a shot at B-29s. They were set 2k above the bombers, so I guess had a dive, but how didi they hit so many? There is a bit of AA in the base, but not enough to produce that result.

The most interesting part of the result for me is that no Japanese fighters were lost. NONE. These are still zeros, even if they do have armor, and should suffer quite a lot against the defenses of 101 B-29s. My usual 'successful' rate of loss vs kills against 4Es is approaching 1:1 when massed at 100+ bombers and not escorted.

Only 7 fighters were airborne when the attack was seen by radar, and the raid was detected 19 minutes before arrival, but the fighters needed 34 minutes to get all planes to altitude and in position. The pilots were only 50-55 exp and 70 skill, with one 70 exp group leader. I had thought I'd put a better group here but later realized it was sent elsewhere and I had another here stood down upgrading planes. I must have thrown this one in as a stop-gap.

Finally, the bombing mission was actually quite a success. THe raid destroyed more than 2/3 of the oil at Medan, in one day.
[font="Trebuchet MS"]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Medan , at 46,76

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 63 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5c Zero x 18

Allied aircraft
B-29-1 Superfort x 101

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-29-1 Superfort: 2 destroyed, 30 damaged

Oil hits 139 That's a lot of oil hit for one strike!

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet *
City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
254 Ku S-1 with A6M5c Zero (2 airborne, 5 on standby, 11 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 34 minutes [/font]

The very same day I had a crack group of 34 J2M3 Jack at Hollandia take on roughly 200 4E, so the ratio of fighters to bombers is nearly the same. They did significantly worse than the fighters at Medan, had much better and more experienced pilots 60-75 exp), and lost quite a few planes. (I think about 4-5 from the first wave shown below, then more later battling with the stragglers).

The Jacks also had a shorter time listed to get all planes into the fight, in this case well below the time to target for the raid.
[font="Trebuchet MS"]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 78 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 22 minutes

Japanese aircraft
J2M3 Jack x 34

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 22
B-24D Liberator x 10
B-24D1 Liberator x 57
B-24J Liberator x 99
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 11
PBJ-1D Mitchell x 15


Japanese aircraft losses
J2M3 Jack: 1 destroyed, 7 damaged
J2M3 Jack: 1 destroyed on ground
D4Y3 Judy: 4 destroyed on ground
A6M5 Zero: 4 destroyed on ground
B6N2 Jill: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 3 damaged
B-24D Liberator: 1 destroyed, 4 damaged
B-24D1 Liberator: 2 destroyed, 10 damaged
B-24J Liberator: 13 damaged
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 1 destroyed, 4 damaged
PBJ-1D Mitchell: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged

Airbase hits 37
Airbase supply hits 13
Runway hits 92

Aircraft Attacking:
13 x PBJ-1D Mitchell bombing from 10000 feet
Airfield Attack: 6 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
S-602 Hikotai with J2M3 Jack (0 airborne, 23 on standby, 0 scrambling)
11 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 15 minutes [/font]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

For those interested I found this site yesterday:

http://www.usaaf.net/digest/t165.htm

According to that site the XX Bomber command lost 22 planes to enemy fighters between 7/44 and 8/45. Something I managed to lose in one day. [:D]

Yeahbut their fighters flew on avgas, not rice. [:)]

[LoBaron]

Just a wild guess with not enough data, but I dont see anything too surprising. And it has less to do with your own units than
with the B-29 crews.

It is def skill that hurts attacking fighters. Def skill works two ways, because it improves chance to kill/damage opposing fighters,
and this is logically followed by less fighters attacking every round, less repeated attacks by those still attacking, and lower morale
and higher fatigue on average. Over the time of the battle this has an extremely strong cumulative effect.

The units arriving with B-29s have close to no def skill (and exp avg in the med 30s). On the contrary, other units using
heavies usually already had a lot of time to up their stats.

Most of my veteran heavies already hit or have long passed the 70exp/65-70 def skill mark, the B-29 crews are completely green in
comparision...

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Sorry JocMeister, I did not want to suggest you personally were making this comparision.

I just wanted to point out what to consider if one attempts to compare, as this topic simply is bound to produce comparisions.
If an unexpected result requires investigation, and a historical example exist that offers itself to base a comparision
on, the first question always needs to be:
"Does the historical situation REALLY mirror the situation ingame down to a detail level known and supported."

If the answer is "no", this does not make comparision impossible per default, but then such a comparision needs to be
always done with the identified differences in context.

If this prerequisite for comparision is skipped, the comparision is worthless. Happens much too often on the forums.



Re B-29 literature: Yes, I know what you mean, there is not too much available, and TBH many books are simply boring.
The rest is at least 50% Enola Gay stuff.

A long time ago I read a very good book written from a Japanese perspective, about the Japanese Superfortress intercepters. Don´t
remember the exact name, something like "Fighting the Dragon", or "Dragon Fighters" I think. Enjoyed it very much but am not
completely sure about the accuracy.

What I can also reccommend is "Final Assault On The Rising Sun: Combat Diaries of B-29 Air Crews Over Japan" Chester W. Marshall
and Warren E. Thompson.

Rest on my knowledge on that topic is from the internet and minor chapters where it is addressed in other books, like Ronald
H. Spectors great "Eagle against the Sun".

No problem! Just wanted to make it clear. [:)]

The realization that this game is just that (a game) and has very little to do with the actual war besides names and location was a pretty sad one. But as I wrote in CRs AAR I guess we should be happy the Jap side has been given a big boost or we wouldn´t see many games at all.

But I wonder how a game with a historical Japan would look. I´m starting to think the devs might have gotten it very close to reality gameplay wise. Strip away the fantasy pilot training, Air ASW, PDU ON and give Japan the historical production and resources and I think we would perhaps get pretty close to the actual war. Would love to see such a game AARed! [:)]

For example, how would my B29 raid have looked against Oscars with EXP 20-30? As someone wrote in CRs AAR it quite funny how some Japanese players make claims on how unhistorical an allied advance in Burma is while they themselves play a Japanese side almost completely stripped of all the historical restraints Japan suffered from. Not intending this as a JFB/AFB thing but rather a reflection on how quickly both sides draws comparisons with the real war.

Uhm, kind of got off topic there...!

Thank you for the tip on the books. I´ll go on Amazon hunting for them!