Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

About Long Lance and Norden Bomb

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> About Long Lance and Norden Bomb Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
About Long Lance and Norden Bomb - 3/3/2003 11:52:10 PM   
feryveroweb

 

Posts: 24
Joined: 2/13/2003
Status: offline
Please anybody can explain me these weapons ?
Post #: 1
About CAP altitude - 3/4/2003 12:04:32 AM   
feryveroweb

 

Posts: 24
Joined: 2/13/2003
Status: offline
Hi friends some questions for you:

1.The altitude is an advantage in air combat not ?.Well i set altitude for my Wildcats over 20000 or 25000 ft and they .... kill :(

2.They must climb to engage Zeroes when escort to Bettys!!!

3 I read the handicap for P40 and P39 over 10000 ft but also Zeros over 20000 ft lose his advantage.

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 2
Longlance! - 3/4/2003 12:20:54 AM   
SamRo

 

Posts: 94
Joined: 3/23/2002
From: UK
Status: offline
http://www.combinedfleet.com/torps.htm

damd cool site!!!:D

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 3
Re: About Long Lance and Norden Bomb - 3/4/2003 2:46:43 AM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

[QUOTE]Originally posted by feryveroweb
[B]Please anybody can explain me these weapons ? [/B][/QUOTE]

Long lance was very long range IJN torpedo that was secret to allies (and it
took almost several years of fighting in Pacific for them to learn about it).

Although Long lance was formidable weapon its actual battle success was not so
great due to extreme ranges it was fired from.


The Norden bomb sight ([B]_NOT_[/B] Norden bomb) is advanced aiming device
made for US medium/heavy bombers. It was designed with automatic mechanical
calculator in it that predicted where the bombs would fall. It's most famous
carries was, of course, B-17 Flying Fortress...


Hope this helps a bit (and you can always do search of UV forums here to find
out many many interesting discussions about Long Lance, Norden bomb sight and
all other interesting things from the past).


Leo "Apollo11"

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 4
- 3/4/2003 3:20:11 AM   
Full Moon

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 1/25/2003
From: Texas
Status: offline
Long Lance was a Japanese oxygen-powered torpedo that could deliver a 1,000lb warhead at 49 knots over almost 11 miles.

Specification
Design YMD 1933 01 01
In Service YMD 1935 01 01
Diameter Inch 24.016
Overall Mass 2.7 Mg
Warhead Mass 490 kg
Payload Percent 18.148
has Explosive Japanese Type 97
has Torpedo Propulsion Wet Heater
Maximum Knot 50
Range At Max Speed Metre 20 k


Inside look of Long Lance
[edit]Sorry. The picture I first posted was not Long Lance. It was British torpedo BR 21in Mark IX, so I changed the link.[/edit]

[IMG]http://www.warbirdpix.com/ZPark/Torpedo-2.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.warbirdpix.com/ZPark/Torpedo-1.jpg[/IMG]

_____________________________

"War is a series of catastrophes that results in a victory."
Georges Clemenceau

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 5
- 3/4/2003 4:04:35 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline
A tidbit on the Long Lance :


On September 13, 1942, in what may be the most spectacular – albeit unplanned – submarine event of all time, the Japanese I-19 launched a spread of six torpedoes at the aircraft carrier "Wasp." Three hit, sinking the ship. The others continued running for twelve miles, into another task group, where one caused fatal damage to the destroyer "O'Brien" and other send the battleship "North Carolina" to the shipyard for two months. The sixth cruised on, into the unknown.


Also be advised...

There is no altitude issue with the P-40. It is the P-400 and the P-39 that lacked super-chagers and have performance issues over 10,000'.

It is possible to set your CAP too high. Yes, diving on planes is alot easier (and to your advantage), than climbing to intercept. However, diving from 25,000 on Betty's that are dropping torpedos at 200', means you're probably not going to catch them.

Also, be aware that not all of your aircraft are actually on patrol at whatever altitude you specifiy. Your airbase will also keep a number of aircraft on "Ready 5" (ready in 5 minutes), and it is likely that these are the aircraft that are climbing to the threat.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 6
- 3/4/2003 4:11:04 AM   
SoulBlazer

 

Posts: 839
Joined: 10/27/2002
From: Providence RI
Status: offline
I'm SURE I've seen that Long Lance in person -- where did that picture come from?

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 7
- 3/4/2003 4:32:58 AM   
Full Moon

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 1/25/2003
From: Texas
Status: offline
The British one came from
[URL=http://navalhistory.flixco.info]Naval History Of World War Two [/URL]
The Long Lance came from
[URL=http://www.warbirdpix.com/]WarBird Photos[/URL]

_____________________________

"War is a series of catastrophes that results in a victory."
Georges Clemenceau

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 8
- 3/5/2003 1:06:53 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Pretty much any 1st generation fighter in the Pacific suffered poor performance at higher altitudes. I don't think any had superchargers. P 40, Zero, Wildcat all really suffered at higher altitudes. Of course the heavier American planes could dive down fast. I suppose the game designers figured that all other things being equal. The performance issue between these planes just sort negated each other. Except for the pitiful P-39 which just could not hack it over 10,000 ft.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 9
Re: About CAP altitude - 3/5/2003 2:38:35 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
Hi feryveroweb,

[QUOTE]Originally posted by feryveroweb
[B]Hi friends some questions for you:

1.The altitude is an advantage in air combat not ?.Well i set altitude for my Wildcats over 20000 or 25000 ft and they .... kill :(

2.They must climb to engage Zeroes when escort to Bettys!!!

3 I read the handicap for P40 and P39 over 10000 ft but also Zeros over 20000 ft lose his advantage. [/B][/QUOTE]

1 & 2. Keep in mind that not all of your planes are up at 25000 feet. A small CAP is kept aloft. Others may be returning to the field, others climbing to altitude, others waiting to scramble. Although UV doesn't display this, it keeps track of these things. As a result, you'll almost always see some planes climbing, others diving, etc. Also, depending on how long it takes to dive or climb to the right altitude, bombers may have an easier time getting through.

3. That's my understanding as well, but it's not currently modeled as engagements above that altitude were rare. The P-39 decreases in effectiveness with altitude but there's no penalty for the Zero at high altitudes (other than climbing time for those that are not already there).

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 10
- 3/5/2003 3:07:45 AM   
Von_Frag

 

Posts: 105
Joined: 5/7/2002
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by crsutton
[B]Pretty much any 1st generation fighter in the Pacific suffered poor performance at higher altitudes. I don't think any had superchargers. P 40, Zero, Wildcat all really suffered at higher altitudes. Of course the heavier American planes could dive down fast. I suppose the game designers figured that all other things being equal. The performance issue between these planes just sort negated each other. Except for the pitiful P-39 which just could not hack it over 10,000 ft. [/B][/QUOTE]

The Allison engine was designed to use mechanical turbochargers ala P-38. ( I get turbo and supercharger mixed up ) That combo was effective. The P-40 had a single stage blower where the Merlin and DB-601 had 2 stage blowers. NACA castrated the P-39 by recommending the removal of the supercharger. The F4F actually did have a 2 stage blower, but even with that 1200 hp was not enough to make it effective at altitude. In fact the ground crews at Cactus wired the blowers open relegating engine life to about 15 hours. I'm not sure if the Zero had any help in that regard. Later FM-2's with 1350 hp Cyclones were thought to be equal with the A6M5.

A note on the P-38. There was a proposed version called the 38K that had an entirely re-designed oil intercooler ( which showed up on the L model ) and larger diameter props. This bad boy had a climb rate of 4000 fpm and a top speed of 450 mph at 20,000 ft in 1943!!!!! The armaments board vetoed it because they did not want to disrupt production. Let me see if I can find a link to the info. I believe the info on the FM-2 is on the same site.

Did anyone watch lost squadron on History channel last night? Glacier Girl took to the air in October of 2002, a beautiful sight to behold.

Here is that FM-2 aar I alluded to earlier. Note, mispellings are not mine.

The FM-2 vs. the Zero

On board the Gambier Bay, Ensign Joe McGraw of Composite Squadron 10 (VC-10) raced for his FM-2 Wildcat as the battleships Yamato, Nagato, Kongo and Haruna and heavy cruisers Kumano, Suzuya, Chikuma, Tone, Haguro and Chokai opened fire with 8-inch to 18-inch guns. His story is excerpted from Barret Tillman's Wildcat Aces of World War 2, which is reviewed later in this issue:

"I got off as the last fighter, I think, as I had to dodge a big hole on the forward port corner of the deck just as Capt. Viewig was throwing the ship into a turn."

Armed with small bombs, 0.50 caliber machine guns and 5-inch rockets, the Wildcats and Avengers attacked the Japanese ships, many FM-2 pilots making strafing runs on the bridges of the battleships. Planes from Taffy 1 and 2 plus those from land bases joined the attack, the carriers of Taffy 1 and 2 landing and rearming the planes as quickly as possible. On McGraw's third launch, his flight was vectored to attack a number of Val dive bombers and Zero fighters. He describes his FM-2's combat with a well-flown A6M5 Zero:

"The leader of the Zeros was good and he hit our division leader in the engine, putting him in the water (he was later picked up). As I had pulled up so hard and steep, I lost my wingman, but avoided the Zeros as they dove by." McGraw described how he got in position to shot down the Zero leader's wingman, and described what happened next:

"That either surprised or made the Zero lead really mad, because he did the tightest turn I've ever seen to try to get on me. Bit I also pulled up into a tight climbing left turn into him, and he missed his shot behind me. The FM-2's tight turn must have surprised him because I got around quickly on him into a head-on, and put a fast burst into his engine. That really made him mad, because he quickly pulled into me in what I thought was an attempt to ram. I had also pulled up hard to avoid him; it was a close thing."

McGraw last saw the Zero smoking heavily and diving for the clouds. He continued:

"I had the feeling he was an old hand and had expected the old Wildcats to be easy prey, so he was surprised and let his temper get the better of him – he probably didn't know about the much-improved FM-2 version. I don't know what happened to him, but with his engine shot up I don't suppose he made it back to base." By dark, McGraw had flown 11 hours in three missions and had to land aboard Manila Bay, his own ship, Gambier Bay, having been sunk by gun fire.

This battle also saw the first organized use of suicide planes, or kamikaze, by the Japanese, with several striking the little escort carriers. The CVEs proved much tougher than anyone had imagined, only the St. Lo being sunk when the kamikaze went through her flight deck and detonated the bombs and torpedoes in her hanger.

and here is a link to the archives, great site for aviation buffs.

http://rwebs.net/dispatch/art_idx.asp

Von Frag

(in reply to feryveroweb)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> About Long Lance and Norden Bomb 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

5.032