PDA

View Full Version : Ship AA Accuracy



Sakai9745
06-24-2004, 03:23 AM
I've been flying the IL2T in preparation of the PF torpedo bomber missions, typically against the Tirpitz BB as she (or he for the purists) is the more modern warship there. In one mission, I was #2 in a flight of nine against two BBs. In the end, maybe three of us got close enough to deliver our shots, and only two of us were able to survive the run as a whole and get away.

Where is this going? I have to wonder what AA will be like in PF. It wouldn't surprise me if the US would be able to massacre low level topedo bombers like that, considering 5" shells, 40mm, and 20mm under accurate fire control. I was more curious as to the IJN's ability to shoot down planes. Especially towards the end of the war, the Japanese naval gunnery crews were notoriously ineffective against attacking aircraft.

Just curious. Cheers all!

Al - SF, Calif

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid."

Sakai9745
06-24-2004, 03:23 AM
I've been flying the IL2T in preparation of the PF torpedo bomber missions, typically against the Tirpitz BB as she (or he for the purists) is the more modern warship there. In one mission, I was #2 in a flight of nine against two BBs. In the end, maybe three of us got close enough to deliver our shots, and only two of us were able to survive the run as a whole and get away.

Where is this going? I have to wonder what AA will be like in PF. It wouldn't surprise me if the US would be able to massacre low level topedo bombers like that, considering 5" shells, 40mm, and 20mm under accurate fire control. I was more curious as to the IJN's ability to shoot down planes. Especially towards the end of the war, the Japanese naval gunnery crews were notoriously ineffective against attacking aircraft.

Just curious. Cheers all!

Al - SF, Calif

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid."

EmbarkChief
06-24-2004, 07:50 AM
Personally I feel that if you attack a warship with one plane you should be shot down 99.9% of the time. This percentage should decrease as you add more attacking planes. A ship can only effectively engage so many targets at once...

Yellonet
06-24-2004, 01:51 PM
Torpedo bombing sure is a challenge, luckily the fear of death isn't modeled http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


- Yellonet

Sakai9745
06-24-2004, 05:00 PM
Aye, Yellownet. I suspect torpedo-bomber pilot was quite the pessimist during the attack run. "Altitude good... Why the h**l am I doing this? Lined up on the target... Why the h**l am I doing this? Speed on the mark... WHY THE H**L AM I DOING THIS???" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Al - SF, Calif

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid."

Yellonet
06-24-2004, 05:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sakai9745:
Aye, Yellownet. I suspect torpedo-bomber pilot was quite the pessimist during the attack run. "Altitude good... Why the h**l am I doing this? Lined up on the target... Why the h**l am I doing this? Speed on the mark... WHY THE H**L AM I DOING THIS???" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Al - SF, Calif

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Those TB crews really had to be "eating iron, cr*pping chain" kind of guys.


- Yellonet

Latico
06-24-2004, 05:48 PM
Attack approaches from multiple directions almost simutaniously was an effective tactic for assaulting combat ships by air. This divided the attention of teh AA crews and lessened the ammount of defensive fire the pilots had to endure.

This might include fighters straffing a ship from stem to stern as TB's or SBD's commenced their attacks.

Another tactic was always attack coming out of the sun, making it hard for spotters and gunners to take aim on the approaching aircraft. I don't know if this will help much in FB or PF.

During the BAttle of Midway, after the desasterous results of the first TB strikes, Spruence passed the order down thruough the CAG's to the TB squadrons that, if they should incounter any resistance during their approach of the IJ fleet they were to abort thier mission and return to the carrier. They did make several attempts to get within range against resistance and in doing so deverted much of the CAP and AA towards them, while the SBD's dived in from high altitude with very successful strikes.

Gentlemen (and ladies) there is much to be said for coordinated tactics.

Sakai9745
06-24-2004, 08:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Latico:

During the BAttle of Midway, after the desasterous results of the first TB strikes, Spruence passed the order down thruough the CAG's to the TB squadrons that, if they should incounter any resistance during their approach of the IJ fleet they were to abort thier mission and return to the carrier. They did make several attempts to get within range against resistance and in doing so deverted much of the CAP and AA towards them, while the SBD's dived in from high altitude with very successful strikes.

Gentlemen (and ladies) there is much to be said for coordinated tactics.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow! I never heard of that order! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif If true, it truly catapults those Devastator crews beyond the status of heroes! (rest in peace, brave members of VT-3, VT-6, and VT-8).

I think tonight, I'll attempt to employ a classic 'anvil attack'. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Al - SF, Calif

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid."

Fliger747
06-24-2004, 10:57 PM
Out of three "tor******" squadrons, some 48 planes or so, only FOUR returned, and I believe only six pilots and four gunners survived.

A friend of mine from years ago was a bosun's mate on the Hornet at Midway. Read Buell's "Dauntless Helldivers", or Lundstrom's "First Team" for some insite into these battles.

unseen84
06-24-2004, 11:20 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Latico:
During the BAttle of Midway, after the desasterous results of the first TB strikes, Spruence passed the order down thruough the CAG's to the TB squadrons that, if they should incounter any resistance during their approach of the IJ fleet they were to abort thier mission and return to the carrier. They did make several attempts to get within range against resistance and in doing so deverted much of the CAP and AA towards them, while the SBD's dived in from high altitude with very successful strikes.
[QUOTE]

That was when Spruance sent out Enterprise's 3 remaining TBDs to attack Mogami and Mikuma. These were the only TBDs to survive the fighting on June 4. Like Latico said, they had to turn back with out carrying out an attack.

It is also notable that this was the Devastators' final combat mission.

Latico
06-25-2004, 05:53 PM
The low return of TB's during the Battle of Midway does not mean that all were shot down. A bunch of them just ran out of fuel on the way back to their carriers.

Also, there were 6 of the new Avengers on Midway that particpated in the hunt for the IJN fleet. Only one of them returned to base and it crash landed, being shot all the hell.

Sakai9745
06-25-2004, 07:04 PM
The various references put it at six or seven TBDs (2 from VT-3 and 4 or 5 from VT-6) that survived the Japanese defenses. So a minimum of a 82% loss rate to enemy fire, not counting the ditchings. Slightly better than the typically advertised 90%, but not by much.

I've read that in the Battle of the Coral Sea, the TBDs fared a whole lot better. As previously metioned by Latico, "there is much to be said for coordinated attacks".

Al - SF, Calif

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid."

xenios
06-26-2004, 01:04 AM
The infamous slaughter of TBDs at Midway was not caused by AA; all were shot down by Zeroes. Look at how well Swordfish (the slowest, most obsolete of all WWII tordpedo bombers) survived against the Bismark (zero shot down) and at Taranto (only 2 lost to sink most of the Italian fleet). The Swordfish did very well when there was no fighter opposition. When Swordfish tried to attack the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau as they made their mad dash through the Channel, they were shot down by the score by fighters, not AA.

Early war ship AA was not very effective against torpedo bombers, fighters were the real threat. Late war naval AA is another matter, especially on U.S. ships. But I have a bad feeling that early war AA will be exaggerated in PF.

Latico
06-26-2004, 10:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by xenios:
The infamous slaughter of TBDs at Midway was not caused by AA; all were shot down by Zeroes. Look at how well Swordfish (the slowest, most obsolete of all WWII tordpedo bombers) survived against the Bismark (zero shot down) and at Taranto (only 2 lost to sink most of the Italian fleet). The Swordfish did very well when there was no fighter opposition. When Swordfish tried to attack the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau as they made their mad dash through the Channel, they were shot down by the score by fighters, not AA.

Early war ship AA was not very effective against torpedo bombers, fighters were the real threat. Late war naval AA is another matter, especially on U.S. ships. But I have a bad feeling that early war AA will be exaggerated in PF.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe this is correct, as far as Midway goes, anyway. The first 15 TB's that flew from the Hornet on 4 June were all shot down by Zekes. I read somewhere that the commander of the IJ fleet had enough confidence in his fighters that he ordered all AA to be withheld, allowing the CAP to protect the fleet.

Also, when enemy planes were spotted by radar approaching the CV5 on 4 June,the commander of the Yorktown AG gave orders to his intercept pilots not to follow enemy planes into the Carrier groups airspace if they got through so as not to risk getting shot down by friendly AA.

While battling enemy attackers over friendly AA installations in FB, I know I've been hit several times by friendly fire.

owlwatcher
06-26-2004, 06:10 PM
Wonder on effective fire from non radar ships.
Went on a cruice today on a Liberty ship the John Brown.
They flew low almost mast top on a light haze in the air.
Just using a camera with a slow sutter speed I was only able to click 3 times before the planes L-5 , Val (?) and B-25. Spit and Hurr did not show because of weather.
The lens can see about as good as I can.
AN old timer onboard said that was about all the rounds that you shot whlle standing in a 3" gun tub with a 5/38 near by.
Just an observation on seeing a target,

Latico
06-27-2004, 12:19 AM
The bigger AA guns weren't intended for close up defense. That's what the smaller MG's were for, like the .50 cals on the US ships. They could be swung around pretty fast.

The bigger guns were intended for stopping planes further out, preferably, much further out. Like, before they could get in range to release a bomb.