Spotting plane for shore bombardment

[Randy Stead]

Guadalcanal scenario, AI is IJN. While the cats [carriers] are away, the rats are playing. Kirishima and from friends showed up at Lunga to bombard my base. I lost a few planes, took some damage to the facilities. When the animation opened it mentioned the plane spotting for the TF. I've had floatplanes along with my shore bombardment missions but never got that message. Obviously I am doing something wrong; must be some setting you can alter. My fleet certainly had enough planes with them.

I was most worried about the mini subs in that area when I bombarded, so I had all of my floatplanes on ASW. I am sure that was the culprit. Oh, well, I am shutting down for the night, will take the manual to bed tonight for a read.

[RangerJoe]

If you bombard at night, you need night recon. If you bombard during the day, you need day recon. Continued obervation is the best een by aircraft other than the ones on the bombardment TF.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Guadalcanal scenario, AI is IJN. While the cats [carriers] are away, the rats are playing. Kirishima and from friends showed up at Lunga to bombard my base. I lost a few planes, took some damage to the facilities. When the animation opened it mentioned the plane spotting for the TF. I've had floatplanes along with my shore bombardment missions but never got that message. Obviously I am doing something wrong; must be some setting you can alter. My fleet certainly had enough planes with them.

I was most worried about the mini subs in that area when I bombarded, so I had all of my floatplanes on ASW. I am sure that was the culprit. Oh, well, I am shutting down for the night, will take the manual to bed tonight for a read.

Exactly on what basis would floatplanes, tasked by the player to conduct the ASW mission, of their own volition and contrary to the orders given by the human, then proceed to conduct the recon mission.

Do you order your torpedo bombers to fly a naval attack mission, equipped with torpedoes, then expect them to disobey orders and instead drop supplies to a land unit in the jungle.

Alfred

[Ian R]

You need at least one floatplane group, flying from a bombarding ship, on the recon mission, best set to zero range, and at about 2000 ft. On night recon if the bombardment TF will go in at night.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

You need at least one floatplane group, flying from a bombarding ship, on the recon mission, best set to zero range, and at about 2000 ft. On night recon if the bombardment TF will go in at night.

Careful, here.

I believe range is overridden when there is a "target" selected.

Why 2000 feet? I would assume that opens you up to being damaged by night time flak easier. I have flown night fighters to intercept night time recon missions.

[Ian R]

Recon at night - lower altitude seems to work better, when correcting fire.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Recon at night - lower altitude seems to work better, when correcting fire.

I remember reading about a light observation plane that was correcting fire at Anzio when it was hit by a 155 mm shell . . . [X(]

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Ian R

You need at least one floatplane group, flying from a bombarding ship, on the recon mission, best set to zero range, and at about 2000 ft. On night recon if the bombardment TF will go in at night.

Careful, here.

I believe range is overridden when there is a "target" selected.

Why 2000 feet? I would assume that opens you up to being damaged by night time flak easier. I have flown night fighters to intercept night time recon missions.

I have done hundreds of bombardments with my night Recon FP set at 1000 feet and never lost any - but then the Japanese land units do not have radar in 1941-43 that I know of.

[RangerJoe]

I usually have them at 6000 feet so the shrapnel from the shells don't bother them too much!

[Randy Stead]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Guadalcanal scenario, AI is IJN. While the cats [carriers] are away, the rats are playing. Kirishima and from friends showed up at Lunga to bombard my base. I lost a few planes, took some damage to the facilities. When the animation opened it mentioned the plane spotting for the TF. I've had floatplanes along with my shore bombardment missions but never got that message. Obviously I am doing something wrong; must be some setting you can alter. My fleet certainly had enough planes with them.

I was most worried about the mini subs in that area when I bombarded, so I had all of my floatplanes on ASW. I am sure that was the culprit. Oh, well, I am shutting down for the night, will take the manual to bed tonight for a read.

Exactly on what basis would floatplanes, tasked by the player to conduct the ASW mission, of their own volition and contrary to the orders given by the human, then proceed to conduct the recon mission.

Do you order your torpedo bombers to fly a naval attack mission, equipped with torpedoes, then expect them to disobey orders and instead drop supplies to a land unit in the jungle.

Alfred

I would not expect them to do otherwise. However, I was not even aware they could assist a bombarding fleet. In the manual section about shore bombardment, 6.4.3, it says jack squat about having planes spot to increase accuracy. The first time for me ever seeing information about a fleet using a spotter plane was when the IJN bombarded Lunga, as above. This is a great game but the manual could have been more forthcoming with useful information.

Ian R, thank you. I will do so in future.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Guadalcanal scenario, AI is IJN. While the cats [carriers] are away, the rats are playing. Kirishima and from friends showed up at Lunga to bombard my base. I lost a few planes, took some damage to the facilities. When the animation opened it mentioned the plane spotting for the TF. I've had floatplanes along with my shore bombardment missions but never got that message. Obviously I am doing something wrong; must be some setting you can alter. My fleet certainly had enough planes with them.

I was most worried about the mini subs in that area when I bombarded, so I had all of my floatplanes on ASW. I am sure that was the culprit. Oh, well, I am shutting down for the night, will take the manual to bed tonight for a read.

Exactly on what basis would floatplanes, tasked by the player to conduct the ASW mission, of their own volition and contrary to the orders given by the human, then proceed to conduct the recon mission.

Do you order your torpedo bombers to fly a naval attack mission, equipped with torpedoes, then expect them to disobey orders and instead drop supplies to a land unit in the jungle.

Alfred

I would not expect them to do otherwise. However, I was not even aware they could assist a bombarding fleet. In the manual section about shore bombardment, 6.4.3, it says jack squat about having planes spot to increase accuracy. The first time ever seeing information about a fleet using a spotter plane when the IJN bombarded Lunga, as above. This is a great game but the manual could have been more forthcoming with useful information.

Ian R, thank you. I will do so in future.

So much to learn, yet so little time!

The day is not wasted when you learn something new!

Think of how large the manual would be if they put everything into it! [X(]

[Randy Stead]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Recon at night - lower altitude seems to work better, when correcting fire.

I remember reading about a light observation plane that was correcting fire at Anzio when it was hit by a 155 mm shell . . . [X(]

Amazingly low-odds collisions occur if not enough things fly around.

This image [hope I can figure out how to post it correctly] is of two bullets that collided in flight during the Gallipoli campaign. An incredibly unlikely thing to happen, yet it did, and then someone had to find them. Considering how many rounds of ammunition have been fired over all the years of conflict, things like this may have happened more than once.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Recon at night - lower altitude seems to work better, when correcting fire.

I remember reading about a light observation plane that was correcting fire at Anzio when it was hit by a 155 mm shell . . . [X(]

Amazingly low-odds collisions occur if not enough things fly around.

This image [hope I can figure out how to post it correctly] is of two bullets that collided in flight during the Gallipoli campaign. An incredibly unlikely thing to happen, yet it did, and then someone had to find them. Considering how many rounds of ammunition have been fired over all the years of conflict, things like this may have happened more than once.

A very nice picture, thank you!

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


I have done hundreds of bombardments with my night Recon FP set at 1000 feet and never lost any - but then the Japanese land units do not have radar in 1941-43 that I know of.

I am pretty sure I managed to get shore bombardment recon planes to not function, especially in my game against Tiemanj where I was bombarded daily for a year. Now, it could simply have been weather...but I was doing everything to interdict them from AA (good 1944 AA) to night fighters on one hex LRCAP.

Early war Obvert used shore bombardments better than anyone I have ever played against...perhaps he flew them at 1000 feet too. Don't know?

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


I have done hundreds of bombardments with my night Recon FP set at 1000 feet and never lost any - but then the Japanese land units do not have radar in 1941-43 that I know of.

I am pretty sure I managed to get shore bombardment recon planes to not function, especially in my game against Tiemanj where I was bombarded daily for a year. Now, it could simply have been weather...but I was doing everything to interdict them from AA (good 1944 AA) to night fighters on one hex LRCAP.

Early war Obvert used shore bombardments better than anyone I have ever played against...perhaps he flew them at 1000 feet too. Don't know?

When I have multiple bombardment TFs on the same turn and the same target, I set the FP for the first ship to fire in each TF to Recon, 0 range no target specified. I set the other ships FPs to Recon that specific target to raise the DL for future bombardments. The only one that shows up in the combat report is the first FP from the first TF to bombard. I think the others are there but just are not shown. Very rarely, I will see a second bombardment TF during the same phase fly its FP as spotter. No idea why that one showed and none of the others did.

I know Alfred says the target should be specified for the spotter aircraft but it doesn't seem to make a difference if you do not specify the target - it still flies as spotter. I suppose one could check by taking a screenshot of the pilot mission count for the FP detachment before and after the turn.

[Alfred]

If you don't specify the target base for the spotter, you run the risk that a different base on the run in will be reconned instead.  It therefore depends very much on the path taken by the Bombardment TF to the target.  If coming in from blue water, not passing by any other bases, you are not going to recon an unwanted base.  Coming in instead from brown water, travelling through a rich base target environment, you run the risk of reconning an unwanted location.
 
Alfred

[Ian R]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

If you don't specify the target base for the spotter, you run the risk that a different base on the run in will be reconned instead.  It therefore depends very much on the path taken by the Bombardment TF to the target.  If coming in from blue water, not passing by any other bases, you are not going to recon an unwanted base.  Coming in instead from brown water, travelling through a rich base target environment, you run the risk of reconning an unwanted location.

Alfred

Apart from all the micro managing, there is also the weather.

No plan survives contact with the enemy.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

If you don't specify the target base for the spotter, you run the risk that a different base on the run in will be reconned instead.  It therefore depends very much on the path taken by the Bombardment TF to the target.  If coming in from blue water, not passing by any other bases, you are not going to recon an unwanted base.  Coming in instead from brown water, travelling through a rich base target environment, you run the risk of reconning an unwanted location.

Alfred

Yes, those are good points for the general situation over time. I am stuck bombarding Truk endlessly and stage my TF to the hexes next to Truk before the run-in. Not the usual dash-bash and flash of most bombardments. When I start my next game I will be mindful of nearby bases before the dash.

[Randy Stead]

I'm happy to report that I am now getting my float planes to spot for bombardments, having done it several turns in a row. The reason I never tried it before was that I had no idea it was available in the game. I was only made aware of it when, for the first time, I saw the text in the animation saying Kirishima's float plane was spotting. Thanks for the advice, everyone.

On a side note, although my battleship and cruiser based planes have not scored any kills yet, they have forced subs to dive several times.

[ITAKLinus]

I've run daily bombardaments with BBs and CAs for years and I have always used ONE spotter per-TF at 3,000ft.

The altitude setting doesn't really matter accordingly to my experience. I set it at 3,000ft in order to switch to NavS with less clicks.

I always set a target because, as Alfred mentioned, not selecting it creates the risk of a wrong target being selected automatically: if you tell them precisely what to do, they won't insubordinate. At least, I hope so [:D][:D][:D][:D]

Sometimes you lose one, I thought it was way more common than apparently it is. I lost quite a decent amount of Jakes over the course of time, never an allied one so far, but I have very few turns under my belly as allied player.