RE: Skip Bombing Question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Skip Bombing Question

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 >> RE: Skip Bombing Question

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/10/2009 8:56:13 PM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

I wasn't aware they made any changes to bombing in the patch.

Well, I did bring it up and posted that combat report a while back, I was assured it was fixed.

_____________________________

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 31

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/14/2009 2:08:24 PM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

More data.

Morning Air attack on TF, near Bandjermasin at 59,100

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 42

Allied aircraft
139WH-3 x 24
CW-21B Demon x 8

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
139WH-3: 7 destroyed, 12 damaged
CW-21B Demon: 1 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CVL Zuiho, Bomb hits 2, on fire
CVE Hosho, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CVL Ryujo
BB Hyuga

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x 139WH-3 attacking from 100 feet
Naval Attack: 3 x 300 kg SAP Bomb
3 x 139WH-3 attacking from 100 feet
Naval Attack: 3 x 300 kg SAP Bomb
2 x 139WH-3 attacking from 100 feet
Naval Attack: 3 x 300 kg SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Ryujo-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 4 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 9 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 8000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 31 minutes
12 planes vectored on to bombers
Zuiho-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 11 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 5 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 12000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
11 planes vectored on to bombers
Hosho-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 4 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 4 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 25000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 26 minutes
10 planes vectored on to bombers

In the Dutch defence they had been trained, and had low level naval bombing at an average of about 45, which is better than the 15 they start off with.

Thoughts?

I feel very driven towards skip bombing in AE because simply, nothing else works.

_____________________________

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 32

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/14/2009 3:15:09 PM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

Since I only play against the AI, I feel that using skip bombing is a fine option. I won't skip bomb with a 4 engine bomber but any light or meduim will work in a pinch.

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 33

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/14/2009 9:18:29 PM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

If you want your Allied 2E bombers to do any good at all vs naval shipping, you'll have to use skip bombing to get any results. It's July 42 in my game and I doubt I've hit 10 ships with level bombers since 12/41, but I've hit that many in a month with skip bombing tactics.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 34

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/14/2009 10:21:21 PM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

The "original" skip bombing attacks were made by B-17s in mid-1942 against ships in Rabaul harbor. The results were impressive enough to prove the tactic. 5th Air Force decided that using cheaper, faster, more numerous twin engine bombers would risk fewer aircrew than using 4E bombers but would be just as effective. Thereafter they started modifying twin engine bombers which basically were ready for employment at the time of the Battle of the Bismark Sea.

Low level attacks by USN 4Es were routine against merchies and submarines. The armament fit for the PB4Y-2 Privateer was specifically designed to provide for flak suppression (a "broadside of 8-10 .50cals) and low level attack.

PB4Y-1 attack

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by spence -- 11/14/2009 10:23:15 PM >

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 35

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/14/2009 10:31:21 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

It had not really dawned on me how dangerous that technique would've been until I watched the little anim on the skip bombing wiki page. I would think that crashing into the antennae or tower of some ships was a real danger for this technique, not to mention being an easier target for some AA mounts, and also being at risk of getting damaged by your own bombs if they "bounce over the target and explode as an air burst" !!

Does skip bombing cause more operational losses?

_____________________________

The x-ray is her siren song. My ship cannot resist her long. Nearer to my deadly goal. Until the black hole. Gains control...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkIIlkyZ328&feature=autoplay&list=AL94UKMTqg-9CocLGbd6tpbuQRxyF4FGNr&playnext=3

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 36

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/16/2009 12:30:22 AM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid
Does skip bombing cause more operational losses?

I don't know about that but it certainly makes a mess of the bombers who do it. Fatigue way up, and almost all the aircraft damaged is my experience.

I assume thats AA fire at 100' doing that, though.

_____________________________

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 37

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/16/2009 10:11:36 PM

Barb

Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline

This one well known photo is a nice illustration. Look at it properly and tell us what do you think about it.

Actually the pilot pulled up too late, hit the masts of the ship, ditched his plane and get his gunner killed... He was rescued a day or two later by dumbo or PT (dont remember that).

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 38

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/16/2009 11:01:28 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

That looks hazardous for everyone involved.

_____________________________

(in reply to Barb)

Post #: 39

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/17/2009 2:30:00 PM

morganbj

Posts: 3634
Joined: 8/12/2007
From: Mosquito Bite, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

That looks hazardous for everyone involved.

That is an unofrtunate characteristic of war.

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 40

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/17/2009 5:27:59 PM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

Remember what that picture represents is what not to do when skip bombing

There was a magazine printed in 1943 - 45 that if your lucky you can find it in a hard back series called Impact. Its an 8 volume set that will change your views on air power and how it attacked shipping. It was not for public consumption and only distributed to the various commands. Pretty interesting read.

(in reply to morganbj)

Post #: 41

RE: Skip Bombing Question - 11/17/2009 5:35:57 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

That looks hazardous for everyone involved.

That is an unofrtunate characteristic of war.