AE Air Issues and Air OOB Issues [OUTDATED]

[Dili]

This is a generic perception and not a careful study but i am finding torpedo bombers at 5000 ft more effective(much more hit rate) with bombs than with torpedoes with similar crew competence in naval bombing and naval torpedo.

[Yaab]

Yes, have seen the same thing very often. On Dec 7, there are some Swordfish of Vildebeest in Malaya which level bomb the Japs ships at Kota Bahru from 5000 feet. The pilots sometimes get a 50% hit rate. They are highly skilled but not in Naval Bombing.

[Dili]

Yeah it was the the Vildebeest

[Korvar]

Hmmm, for carrier ops I think the coordination benefits with dive bombers and escorts would probably be more beneficial, but it could have implications for 'mop up' operations after a battle, when the on-board torp supply tends to be depleted anyway.

Are torp bombers somehow treated differently where the advantages of the dive bombing altitude band are negated?

[BBfanboy]

There are also accuracy advantages from bombing at a lower altitude. AFAIK that is the only advantage the TBs get using bombs.

[Yaab]

You may be onto something. I dimly remember that during some of my Coral Sea tests the Devastators scored several hits with bombs.

[BBfanboy]

I only put torpedoes on my TBs when the initial battle is over and there is a high value cripple that they have a good chance of hitting. Otherwise, they seem to waste the torps trying to hit DDs or xAKLs.

[Dili]

Yes but that is an issue.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Yes but that is an issue.

Because of AA? I am prepared to take losses to get high value targets.

In the Marianas scenario I used the TBs as described in the first clash against the KB/Yamato TFs just after they arrived on map. The TBs at 2000 feet were the best anti-DD aircraft by far. Except for Taiho, the TB 500 lb bombs also penetrated flight decks and sometimes caused secondary explosions.

By the next day a lot of the screen DDs and cruisers and smaller carriers were gone so I could load up torpedoes to hit the BBs and surviving CVs. All of these had considerable system damage and diminished AA so it was not a difficult nor costly attack.

So yes, I am convinced TBs should carry bombs at fairly low levels.

If that is not the issue you refer to, please explain.

[Dili]

BBfanboy just saying that hit odds appear off( too many hits) for torpedo bombers while employing bombs. They are comparatively superior to dive bombing, fighter bombers and even from torpedoes from torpedo bombers.
That with crews on 40-50% capability for naval bombing.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Dili

BBfanboy just saying that hit odds appear off( too many hits) for torpedo bombers while employing bombs. They are comparatively superior to dive bombing, fighter bombers and even from torpedoes from torpedo bombers.
That with crews on 40-50% capability for naval bombing.

OK - now I understand your issue and I can't say one way or the other whether I agree with your impression - I just don't know what would be reasonable in RL.
The only thing that tilts me toward the TBs is that the USN cut back on DBs and put more TBF/TBD types on their carriers later in the war.

[Dili]

If you can please keep looking for occurrences. For example B5N2 bombing at extreme range and such.