What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread)

What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific

Message

dgaad -> What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 7:45:18 AM)
A picture of a skip bombing MISS !!! [IMG]http://www.legionhq.net/AHCBA/skipbombing.jpg[/IMG]

dgaad -> (7/14/2002 8:06:44 AM)
Here is a record of the 500th Bombing Squadron. Just one squadron : The 500th Squadron used the following major bases (not including staging bases) in its move northward: Port Moresby, New Guinea; Dobodura, New Guinea; Nadzab, New Guinea; Biak, N.E.I.; Tacloban, Leyte. P.I.; San Marcelino, Luzon, P.I.; Clark Field, Luzon, P.I.; Ie Shima, Ryukyus Islands. The 500th was deactivated at Ie Shima on 11 November, 1945. During the three years of its existence in World War II, the 500th contributed well to the following overall combat record of the 345th Bomb Group: 10,609 Sorties 58,562 Combat flying hours 6,340 Tons of bombs dropped 12,586,000 Rounds of ammunition expended 177 Planes lost 588 Personnel lost on flights 260 Japanese vessels destroyed 275 Japanese vessels damaged 260 Japanese planes destroyed on the ground 107 Japanese planes destroyed in the air

Sonny -> (7/14/2002 8:10:44 AM)
How many of those 260 vessels destroyed were by skip bombing?:)

dgaad -> (7/14/2002 8:11:59 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sonny [B]How many of those 260 vessels destroyed were by skip bombing?:) [/B][/QUOTE] Don't know. Probably less than half. Probably most were small vessels of the kind that don't get added to national ship registries. Probably alot got sunk by .50 cal slugs. Speculation.

Reiryc -> (7/14/2002 8:55:42 AM)
Since they flew b25s and not b17s, which is what all the frenzy is about, what exactly is the point here? Reiryc

Nikademus -> (7/14/2002 9:04:18 AM)
Looks like a low level bombing run to me....conducted against a poor isolated victim ;)

DSandberg -> Re: What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 9:22:37 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dgaad [B]A picture of a skip bombing MISS !!! [/B][/QUOTE] [I]sigh ...[/I] You mentioned in another thread that level bombers are skip-bombing when their altitude is set at 1000 ft, so I imagine that is what you are alluding to here. To that I make the following counterpoints: 1) Page 83 of the UV manual clearly states that aircraft MUST be flying at [B]100 feet[/B] in order to attempt skip bombing. [B]Not[/B] 1000 ft. 2) [I][B]If[/B][/I] this has been changed by Matrix so that 1000 ft. runs actually [B]are[/B] skip-bombing runs, which I doubt, then I'd say they were wrong to do so. I doubt that it is even possible to skip a bomb from that altitude at the speeds attainable by WWII bombers. Try skipping a rock across water with an overhand throw sometime. Okay, maybe Bob Lasko could have skipped rocks with an overhand throw ... and maybe an F-15E could skip-bomb from 1000 ft. :) I've not seen anyone complaining about skip-bombing results when bombers are set to altitudes of 100 ft. My assumption has been and remains that 1000 ft. runs are level bombing runs, as that is what the UV manual indicates.

dgaad -> Re: Re: What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 12:23:51 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DSandberg [B] [I]sigh ...[/I] You mentioned in another thread that level bombers are skip-bombing when their altitude is set at 1000 ft, so I imagine that is what you are alluding to here. To that I make the following counterpoints: 1) Page 83 of the UV manual clearly states that aircraft MUST be flying at [B]100 feet[/B] in order to attempt skip bombing. [B]Not[/B] 1000 ft. 2) [I][B]If[/B][/I] this has been changed by Matrix so that 1000 ft. runs actually [B]are[/B] skip-bombing runs, which I doubt, then I'd say they were wrong to do so. I doubt that it is even possible to skip a bomb from that altitude at the speeds attainable by WWII bombers. Try skipping a rock across water with an overhand throw sometime. Okay, maybe Bob Lasko could have skipped rocks with an overhand throw ... and maybe an F-15E could skip-bomb from 1000 ft. :) I've not seen anyone complaining about skip-bombing results when bombers are set to altitudes of 100 ft. My assumption has been and remains that 1000 ft. runs are level bombing runs, as that is what the UV manual indicates. [/B][/QUOTE] As I said, I have never seen an attempted bomb release by a fighter bomber or level bomber at 100 feet. And I fly them at that range all the time, for strafing purposes. Some of my groups have 80+ experience. I only see bomb drops at 1000 feet, never not once at 100 feet. If 100 feet is the skip bombing altitude, what is the strafing altitude? Don't get all hung up on the actual number in the game - its just a setting and yes AFAIK the manual is wrong. I read the manual on the day the game came out, and went to the part about skip bombing in my first go round. I played and played and tried to get the aircraft to do some bombing at the 100 feet level. Never happened. Has never happened in the more than 1.5 months of play. All that being said, I could still be wrong. Guess I'll keep playing. If I see a skip bomb attack at 100 feet, I'll post it here. Don't hold your breath. More sighs on the way now? ;) This reminds me of the Spinal Tap scene "But, these go to 11."

dgaad -> (7/14/2002 12:27:46 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Reiryc [B]Since they flew b25s and not b17s, which is what all the frenzy is about, what exactly is the point here? Reiryc [/B][/QUOTE] There is no point. That's why its the [I]mystery[/I] thread.

DSandberg -> Re: Re: Re: What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 1:40:28 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dgaad [B] All that being said, I could still be wrong. Guess I'll keep playing. If I see a skip bomb attack at 100 feet, I'll post it here. Don't hold your breath. More sighs on the way now? ;) This reminds me of the Spinal Tap scene "But, these go to 11." [/B][/QUOTE] [I]sigh ...[/I] :D It would be nice if someone in the know at Matrix would weigh in on this, because so much of the B-17 discussion centers on that 1000 ft. altitude that it becomes kind of a critical point. I kind of wish that they had elected to just go with a short list of valid attack options for each aircraft unit ("low level bombing", "high level bombing", "skip bombing", "strafe runs", etc.) rather than having the player set a specific altitude for each unit. In addition to eliminating confusion on this issue, that might also have allowed for some easily implemented historical options along the lines of "only allow skip bombing by appropriately trained units", etc. Oh, and I love that scene! Now you've done it ... I may have to dig out that DVD before hitting the sack tonight.

1089 -> Re: Re: Re: Re: What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 1:59:09 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DSandberg [B] [I]sigh ...[/I] :D It would be nice if someone in the know at Matrix would weigh in on this, because so much of the B-17 discussion centers on that 1000 ft. altitude that it becomes kind of a critical point. I kind of wish that they had elected to just go with a short list of valid attack options for each aircraft unit ("low level bombing", "high level bombing", "skip bombing", "strafe runs", etc.) rather than having the player set a specific altitude for each unit. In addition to eliminating confusion on this issue, that might also have allowed for some easily implemented historical options along the lines of "only allow skip bombing by appropriately trained units", etc. Oh, and I love that scene! Now you've done it ... I may have to dig out that DVD before hitting the sack tonight. [/B][/QUOTE] I stated that I thought 1000 ft was the proper altitude for skip bombing in a thread quite some time ago. Because the B17 or any other bomber simply strafes at 100 ft., I said that Matrix ought to just change the manual, since the results seemed to indicate that 1000 ft. was the correct skip bombing altitude. The torpedo bombers all go down to 200 ft. to make their runs, no matter what altitude (usually 5000 ft. for the Allies) they are set at. So, it figured that if set at 1000ft. the plane would travel there at that altitude, and drop to skip-bombibg altitude for the run. No one from Matrix made any comment at that time either. So, I agree with dgaad, but the Matrix or 2x3 folks may be too busy to answer every thread. kp

1089 -> Re: What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 2:11:53 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dgaad [B]A picture of a skip bombing MISS !!! [IMG]http://www.legionhq.net/AHCBA/skipbombing.jpg[/IMG] [/B][/QUOTE] Yes, but it was a B25. Everyone knows that their experience is too low at the start of the game to be effective at skip bombing, until you train them up with dozens of supply transport missions! You can see what looks like the result of a single B-17 making a single skip bombing attack behind the undamaged ship--two ships with multiple hits and heavily on fire! Unless, of course, the smoke is coming from accumulated system damage from cruising too much without port time! :) Of course the picture's kind of fuzzy back there. It could be just an island with two very large oak trees. kp

dgaad -> Re: Re: Re: Re: What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 4:51:57 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DSandberg [B] [I]sigh ...[/I] :D I kind of wish that they had elected to just go with a short list of valid attack options for each aircraft unit ("low level bombing", "high level bombing", "skip bombing", "strafe runs", etc.) rather than having the player set a specific altitude for each unit. In addition to eliminating confusion on this issue, that might also have allowed for some easily implemented historical options along the lines of "only allow skip bombing by appropriately trained units", etc. [/B][/QUOTE] I think this is one of the best ideas I've seen in my entire time on the forums. Aside from my own of course. :D

dgaad -> Re: Re: What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 4:56:13 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by 1089 [B] Yes, but it was a B25. Everyone knows that their experience is too low at the start of the game to be effective at skip bombing, until you train them up with dozens of supply transport missions! You can see what looks like the result of a single B-17 making a single skip bombing attack behind the undamaged ship--two ships with multiple hits and heavily on fire! Unless, of course, the smoke is coming from accumulated system damage from cruising too much without port time! :) Of course the picture's kind of fuzzy back there. It could be just an island with two very large oak trees. kp [/B][/QUOTE] Unfortunately I have no official caption for my photos. The thing in the back does look like two smokers. I might be able to find a caption for this puppy. Also, there is some impact in the water right next to the ship, just to its starboard. That may be another bomb about to skip in. The two geysers are a bit of a mystery. The geyser in the foreground could not possibly have come from the plane pictured, but the one in the rear could have. Its even possible that the geyser in the rear is the initial impact point of a bomb which skipped, and the secondary impact a few feet to the starboard of the ship is the same bomb, now about to hit. The line of very small geysers to the starboard and aft of the ship are probably AA shots from the ship, fired when the aircraft was on final attack approach a second or two before the photo was snapped. . Bad aim. Who knows. Speculation.

LargeSlowTarget -> (7/14/2002 7:18:25 PM)
To me it looks like the plane in the picture has hit the ship in the background with bombs twice and is now breaking off to the right after having strafed the ship in the foreground (the row of very small geysers could be the bullets from the strafing - the impacts do veer to the right just like the plane does), while the impacts around the ship in the foreground are bombs dropped by the plane from which the picture was taken. Be it as it may, that's an impressive picture. Source?

Didz -> Re: Re: Re: Re: What Everyone Wants . . . (The Mystery Thread) (7/14/2002 8:50:28 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DSandberg [B] [I]sigh ...[/I] :D It would be nice if someone in the know at Matrix would weigh in on this, because so much of the B-17 discussion centers on that 1000 ft. altitude that it becomes kind of a critical point. [/B][/QUOTE] All I will say is that I set all my LB's at 1,000' Altitude and get very good results. At 100' altitude you get nothing but strafing reports from DB's and fighters. At 6,000' LB's don't hit a **** thing. So as far as I am concerned 1,000' is the effective altitude for LB's whatever it represents. Remember this is an abstract representation of warfare so perhaps 1,000' just represents the altitude of the planes at the start of their bomb run and they dive lower in order to make their final approach.

Sabre21 -> (7/14/2002 8:54:06 PM)
Nice picture Dgaad It looks like another aircraft performed a bombing run on the target in the background..the plane can be seen to the upper right of the target. The attack on the ship in the foreground obviously was done by at least a pair of aircraft. The guy that took the picture was most likely the tail gunner and the large splashes on either side of the ship could have come from its attack run. But it could also be from the plane in the foreground that is veering off from its run which I believe is the most likely. You note how he is turning to put the ship directly aft of him...that's to reduce the aa fire on himself while at the same time allowing the tailgunner to provide suppressive fire on the ship on their egress. The small geysers on the right of the ship are from the tail gunner of the plane in view..he just happened to miss on that burst. The captain of the ship is both lucky and good. You see that the large splashes from the attack make it appear as if the bomb skipped over the top of the ship when in fact the ship was most likely not quite there yet and the bomb skipped just in front of the ship. The ship is performing minor turns to throw off the attackers...first a turn to port then back to starboard and as can be seen in the picture he is in the process of another port turn...ziggzagging basically...which is most likely why the tail gunner missed as seen from the bursts..besides...shooting guns from a moving, turning, and climbing airplane onto a moving and maneuvering target ain't easy...been there done that. Now what gives me a bit of a problem are the small circles of waves well in front of the ship on the lower left side of the screen. These did not come from the plane in the foreground. Here I am making an educated guess that it was from the aa fired on the plane that is taking the picture...considering the size of the circles, orientation, and the lack of splashes indicate that they came from the ship. Andy

dgaad -> (7/15/2002 1:06:15 AM)
Andy : very good. I have an opening in image analysis in Pearl for the next war.

dgaad -> (7/15/2002 1:08:30 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by LargeSlowTarget [B] Be it as it may, that's an impressive picture. Source? [/B][/QUOTE] I'm fairly sure I got this picture off a veteran's association site. Cant remember which, where or when. All of my pictures are of the South Pacific Campaign, however. This is somewhere in the New Guinea area. Also, mine are named as found. I didn't create the name "skipbombing.jpg". That's how I found it.

11Bravo -> Ahhhh, my kind of thread (7/15/2002 4:40:23 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dgaad [B] There is no point. That's why its the [I]mystery[/I] thread. [/B][/QUOTE] Good threads in the past have been pointless or mysterious. But only great threads can be both. :)

dgaad -> (7/15/2002 6:17:16 AM)
Everyone : I'm reading a book called "Japan's War" by Hoyt. Imagine my shock when I read the following. There is a chapter about how the war was reported in Japan in 1942, particularly the shift from offensive to defensive that occurred later in 1942 in the South Pacific. So, the book relates a 1942 interview of a Japanese officer from the south Pacific. The interview goes on and its mostly bombastic drivel from the officer. But, the very last question by the Japanese reporter is "what causes you the most problems down there." The officer says : "The four motored American B-17 bomber. . . " and goes on to talk about how hard it is to shoot them down, about how many of "our fighters" don't have the firepower to shoot them down, about how they have alot of bombs, about how they have so many guns our fighters get shot down, etc. etc. Surprisingly this interview was actually printed in Japan in 1942, when one would expect censorship. Anyway, I was laughing while I was reading it. I thought "Imagine all the guys on the Matrix forums who have such a problem with the B-17. They would love this wartime Japanese officer. Or, maybe they would try to shut him up."

dgaad -> (7/16/2002 1:43:53 AM)
Man I leave for one day and the Mystery thread practically drops off the front page. Come on guys, keep pointless but interesting information flowing.

11Bravo -> Picture of B-24 flying over at low altitude (7/16/2002 2:32:32 AM)
Went the airshow on Saturday, got to see my first B-24 and B-29. Crappy picture, blame my experience and fatigue values. :)

11Bravo -> Here is the B-29 (7/16/2002 2:34:03 AM)
Last one in the world...

11Bravo -> Zeroes were shot down by our CAP (7/16/2002 2:35:22 AM)
Ooooops.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.84375