Howard Mitchell
Posts: 449
Joined: 6/3/2002 From: Blighty Status: offline
|
Just finishing reading the second volume of ‘Bloody Shambles’ by Shores, Cull and Izawa covering the air war in SE Asia up to May 1942. (Excellent books, fantastic amount of detail and well recommended). What struck me reading them was the effectiveness of attacking airfields, especially strafing by fighters. In UV attacking an airfield often results in damage to the runway but few if any kills of aircraft on the ground. Bloody Shambles is full of incidents of numerous aircraft being destroyed or rendered unserviceable from attacks, especially by strafing. If an airfield lacked defences it was often well and truly worked over by strafing fighters. For example, when Broome was attacked on the 3rd March 1942 by 9 A6M2s led by a C5M of the 3rd Kokutai they destroyed 15 flying boats, 7 aircraft on the ground and 2 in the air in a 15 minute long rampage. (As an aside, flying boats seemed particularly vulnerable. By their very nature they tended to be big aircraft which could not be hidden or camouflaged in any way. Additionally float planes could of course sink at their moorings from a few holes which in a land plane would just be patched up). UV covers a different theatre at a different date, and more radars are available to give advanced notice of incoming attacks, but I have had airfields reduced to rubble by massed flights of B-26s with the aircraft on them grounded not destroyed. Any thoughts anyone? Should strafing be more effective, or do the differences in circumstances make the current game match history closely enough?
_____________________________
While the battles the British fight may differ in the widest possible ways, they invariably have two common characteristics – they are always fought uphill and always at the junction of two or more map sheets. General Sir William Slim
|