Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Altitude and Interception

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Altitude and Interception Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Altitude and Interception - 5/30/2014 6:31:34 PM   
Gaspote


Posts: 303
Joined: 6/30/2013
From: France
Status: offline 		It just happen in my PBEM.

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Canton Island at 153,143

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 37 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 18 minutes

Japanese aircraft
E13A1 Jake x 3

Allied aircraft
P-40E Warhawk x 8

No Japanese losses

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
xAP Wollongbar, Bomb hits 1, on fire

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x E13A1 Jake bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
15th FG/45th FS/B with P-40E Warhawk (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(4 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 29000
Raid is overhead
15th FG/45th FS/A with P-40E Warhawk (1 airborne, 3 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters to 1000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 14 minutes


I'm the jap but still surprised. I know using fighter at the max altitude will reduce their interception capability. In this case I expect my jake to attack the ships but to get intercepted when they come back. The P40E failed to intercept though.

"Estimated time to target is 18 minutes"
"4 plane(s) intercepting now."
"Time for all group planes to reach interception is 14 minutes"

Watching the replay the P40E didn't shoot or intercepted the jake. I don't understand because they got 4 min and then after the attack to shot down those slow jake. The jake all reached their base undamaged.

Any ideas ?

"scrambling fighters to 1000." Don't understand. Why did they try to reach 1000 feet ?
Post #: 1
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/30/2014 7:13:41 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		A small accumulation of factors:

Only 3 attacking planes (difficult to get a fix on)
Only 8 planes on CAP total (works similar, low numbers mean less spotting/interception rolls)
An altitude delta of 24000(!!!) feet - this was the factor that changed the chances for a successful intercept from immprobable to impossible

The fighters are scrambled to 1000 ft as there is a random factor involved simulating uncertainties in contact altitude and errors.

Overcast probably did not help either, although I doubt clear sk would have made any difference.


I would bet that with this exact setup the attack gets through unmolested by fighters 9 out 10 attempts.


_____________________________


(in reply to Gaspote)
Post #: 2
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/30/2014 8:05:08 PM   
Gaspote


Posts: 303
Joined: 6/30/2013
From: France
Status: offline 		It's the second time the raid cross untouched. So it means with a faster bomber like G4M or D4Y, the interception have no chance to happen, keeping this altitude ?

edit : Is the few number of bomber the real factors that make it untouched ? I remember getting bigger formation of G3M intercepted with the same parameters.

< Message edited by Gaspote -- 5/30/2014 9:07:11 PM >

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 3
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/30/2014 8:14:41 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

It's the second time the raid cross untouched. So it means with a faster bomber like G4M or D4Y, the interception have no chance to happen, keeping this altitude ?

edit : Is the few number of bomber the real factors that make it untouched ? I remember getting bigger formation of G3M intercepted with the same parameters.


As I said, with this alt delta the interception chances are lowered significantly.

You second question is pretty difficult to answer. You got a lantern, a campfire, and a flashlight. Is the lantern the real factor it isn´t dark? But, yes, it has an impact.

_____________________________


(in reply to Gaspote)
Post #: 4
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/30/2014 8:50:07 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		It is all chance due to the factors that Lo Baron mentioned. Small units flying low will sometimes evade CAP flying high. And, then sometimes they get creamed.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 5
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/30/2014 9:32:28 PM   
EHansen


Posts: 360
Joined: 12/6/2013
Status: offline 		I have had fighters at the same altitude miss a small flight of bombers. Stuff happens.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 6
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/31/2014 1:29:25 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		CAP isn't perfect. In the real war there are many cases where a small group or single planes slipped through the CAP. The hit on the Princeton during Leyte is one example. CAP was very busy that day and did intercept most of the attacks, but a single Judy slipped through and plants a bomb on the Princeton.

In the original WitP, massive CAP could essentially wipe out an attacking force which allowed the side that had the upper hand to sail their carriers into situations with impunity that would have been considered very risky in the real war. The US did go into Japanese home waters with carriers late in the war, but they were considered risky missions and they did take a lot of damage from them. The Franklin was almost lost just off the Japanese coast.

In the development of AE, a lot of attention went into making CAP more realistic (it helped we had an active duty USN fighter pilot on the team). No matter how thick the CAP, there is always a chance the bombers will get through. In this case the huge altitude difference was a factor, but they still might have slipped through. Staggering CAP at high altitude and lower altitude would probably help intercept the low altitude bombers trying to slip in. You need multiple fighter units for that.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to EHansen)
Post #: 7
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/31/2014 10:44:10 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson
...
In the development of AE, a lot of attention went into making CAP more realistic (it helped we had an active duty USN fighter pilot on the team). No matter how thick the CAP, there is always a chance the bombers will get through ...


"I think it is well also for the man in the street to realise that there is no power on earth that can protect him from being bombed. Whatever people may tell him, the bomber will always get through, The only defence is in offence ..."

Stanley Baldwin, "A Fear for the Future" addressed to the British Parliament in 1932; Baldwin believed that regardless of air defenses, sufficient bomber aircraft will survive to destroy cities.
Apparently it applies at sea as well.

http://www.ask.com/wiki/The_bomber_will_always_get_through?o=2801&qsrc=999&ad=doubleDown&an=apn&ap=ask.com

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 8
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/31/2014 2:10:34 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Yes. I still think the CAP is too powerful in their interception chances.

_____________________________


(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 9
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/31/2014 2:17:57 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		Problem is, opinions are like a**holes. Everybody got one.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 10
RE: Altitude and Interception - 5/31/2014 5:26:26 PM   
msieving1


Posts: 526
Joined: 3/23/2007
From: Missouri
Status: offline 		CAP at 29,000 feet has very little chance of seeing enemy bombers at 8,000 feet, much less intercepting them. 

_____________________________

-- Mark Sieving

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 11
RE: Altitude and Interception - 6/1/2014 2:48:19 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Problem is, opinions are like a**holes. Everybody got one.


and no one wants to see anyone else's

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 12
RE: Altitude and Interception - 6/2/2014 2:54:19 PM   
linrom

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 2/20/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CAP at 29,000 feet has very little chance of seeing enemy bombers at 8,000 feet, much less intercepting them.



This is simply not true!

How does a sqn of Hurricanes at +32000 CAP intercept Sallys at 8,000 when there is less than 4 minutes to strike and it'll take Hurricanes 41 minutes to intercept? I see this all the time: the AI code will pounce on any unescorted Jap bombers regardless.

Also why fighters at 10,000 CAP engage enemy fighters sweeping at 32,000? If CAP has time to intercept enemy fighters, then they all meet at the same altitude, and there should be no altitude advantage?

Now if opposing fighters come in at 18,000ft and CAP is at 10,000 then yes sweeping fighters do have initial altitude advantage.

< Message edited by linrom -- 6/2/2014 3:55:36 PM >

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 13
RE: Altitude and Interception - 6/2/2014 5:41:20 PM   
Gaspote


Posts: 303
Joined: 6/30/2013
From: France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: linrom

quote:

ORIGINAL: CAP at 29,000 feet has very little chance of seeing enemy bombers at 8,000 feet, much less intercepting them.



Also why fighters at 10,000 CAP engage enemy fighters sweeping at 32,000? If CAP has time to intercept enemy fighters, then they all meet at the same altitude, and there should be no altitude advantage?

Now if opposing fighters come in at 18,000ft and CAP is at 10,000 then yes sweeping fighters do have initial altitude advantage.


I think it's fighter at 32000 feet that dive gradually and then intercept the fighter at 10000 feet. It's why using mixed CAP altitude worked better than more plane at the same alt.


(in reply to linrom)
Post #: 14
RE: Altitude and Interception - 6/3/2014 12:12:00 AM   
msieving1


Posts: 526
Joined: 3/23/2007
From: Missouri
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: linrom

quote:

ORIGINAL: CAP at 29,000 feet has very little chance of seeing enemy bombers at 8,000 feet, much less intercepting them.



This is simply not true!

How does a sqn of Hurricanes at +32000 CAP intercept Sallys at 8,000 when there is less than 4 minutes to strike and it'll take Hurricanes 41 minutes to intercept? I see this all the time: the AI code will pounce on any unescorted Jap bombers regardless.



It's magic. The AI has it's own private teleporter.


_____________________________

-- Mark Sieving

(in reply to linrom)
Post #: 15
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Altitude and Interception Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.844