Testing air defanse part II

Please post any bugs or technical issues found here for official support.

Moderator: Joel Billings

Post Reply
Sly
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:26 am

Testing air defanse part II

Post by Sly »

As I mentioned in the previous post, I have doubts about how ground anti-aircraft defense works.
Below are the results of my tests (T2).

The test is for the H2H game. Soviet PVO battalion is attached directly to city / airfield, so have AA fire bonus.
Nevertheless, in my opinion the results of the air raids are completely unrealistic.

1 air attack per day, per turn, no other air activity

Target : Ventpils (port and airfield),

Soviet AA Defanse: 3 x 85 mm 8 x 76.2 mm, 3 x37mm, 2x 12,7mm

German 2 raids, Ju-88 50 bombers (2x50) total :100+:


1. Altitude: 4000 ft

Firing : 3x37mm, 2x12,7 mm (as attack is below 5000ft, all medium guns didnt fire, as manual says)

Logistic Phase Air Execution data:

Aircraft destroyed: 5

Aircraft damaged: 79

Total damage points: 272

Yes, three 3,7 mm guns and two DshK hits 79-84 aircraft from 101 total.

12,7 mm DshK has effective cieling up to 3000 ft, so most damage done 3x37mm AA Guns.


2. Altitude :9000ft

Firing: 3 x 85 mm 7 or 8 x 76.2 mm, 3 x37mm (as altitude is over 4200ft 12.7 guns didnt fire),

Logistic Phase Air Execution data:

Aircraft destroyed: 3

Aircraft damaged: 75

Total damage points: 529 (twice as at 4000ft)


3. Altitiude: 27.000 ft

Firing: 3 x 85 mm 7 or 8 x 76.2 mm (as altitude is over 21.000ft 37mm guns didnt fire)

Logistic Phase Air Execution data:

Aircraft destroyed: 2

Aircraft damaged: 38

Total damage points: 108


My comment: I see a problem with the game engine, not a tactical shortcoming on my side, referring to the previous comments of my esteemed colleagues.
Of course, comments from all sides are still welcome :-).

User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: Testing air defanse part II

Post by KenchiSulla »

Just checking (perhaps you can post a screenshot): Did you reroute your aircraft to only meet flak @ destination hex?
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
Sly
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:26 am

RE: Testing air defanse part II

Post by Sly »

Hi
there was no need, in the first round I swept everything on my way to Ventspils (Courland), there is nothing Soviet on the way.
Of course, I would give a screen, but I don't know how to do it ;-)
Besides, I basically do all the tests in real time, I can fly there again at any time ;-)
Mehring
Posts: 2473
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:30 am

RE: Testing air defanse part II

Post by Mehring »

Do aircraft accrue damage just by flying? The actual losses seem reasonable.
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
Sly
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:26 am

RE: Testing air defanse part II

Post by Sly »

Hi
as I indicated on the beginning this is Logistic Phase Air Execution data, not from the combat report, because there you can check how many planes were actually hit and how much damage they received.Damage is more like a hit in this case.

on this basis, i claim that aa fire is too strong.
Answering your question, this is how all these ju88-s were damaged during an air raid and only from anti-aircraft fire.

of course, the number of planes destroyed may not be impressive, although on the other hand three 37mm guns and two DshKs are weak AA defenses and yet they destroyed 5 bombers.
Soviet defense experience 35-50 at that time.
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”