Suicide diving level bombers

[paulobrien6969]

if i hear cries on country channel
please kill the cv at xxx when i die or land(die mostly)
i jump in a lanc  b17 or b26 and up it
i get whatever alt i can depending on how far out it is
1500-5000(as much as i can) and aim the plane at the cv
put it on auto level and jump in the f6 possition and calibrate and drop,whether i get this far depends on how many people are defending the cv and whether the cv has a good gunner.
if 1 or both of these factors stop me hitting the cv i up from a base
25-50k away ,get to 10k and get it that way
i can only think of maybe 2 times ive ever dive bombed a cv and that was because i had had both my drones shot to peices and i was seconds away from death unless i took drastic measures so dived away from the x amount of cons on my 6 toward the cv
cant remember if i hit it or not   i know i definatly died though
i think these dive bombing bomber pilots should learn to
calibrate and bomb targets properly  
once learned its a hell of alot more accurate than dive bombing

[dedalos]

Just curius.  If I have JU88s at 7K and as I get close to the CV I put them in 10deg nose down so I can get some speed and get out of the ack and the reds on my six, is that considered dive bombing?  If not, would it be if I had LANCs instead?  How about KIs and Bxx?  

I ask cause I have never seen level bombers go nose down on a CV.  I have seen what I described.

[DoKGonZo]

We're talking about a flight of Lancs or B17's at about 500-1000 ft off the deck ... that then pitch forward into something akin to a kamikaze dive and just barf their bombs out at point blank range.

[peterg2]

Originally posted by Stang
When the tards got shot down they just came right back and did it repeatedly until they finally sank the CV.  A typical run for them was climb to 3k, head straight for the flattop, dive in, drop eggs at 800 feet and BOOM!  Total lameness, IMO the biggest problem with gameplay in the MA.  

One way to stop suicide bomber runs is to perk the bombers. Maybe if the bombers were hardened a bit and perked, people would take the time to climb to alt, drop bombs, and attempt to make it home.

They might even request fighter escorts from their squad mates.

[TBolt A-10]

Originally posted by Westy
IMO what DoK said above is a prime solution.  Model airfame stress, if HiTech's software is able,  

AW tried to model airframe stress in its bombers, didn't they?  The wings would rip with just a nudge sometimes in the FR Pac arena...drove me nuts.  Modelling airframe stress can be buggy.  

I prefer Easy's idea to lock the bombs if the heavy bomber (only Lanc & B-17, at this point) is at an angle of attack that can't be considered "level flight."

Just my 2 cents.

[DoKGonZo]

Originally posted by TBolt A-10
AW tried to model airframe stress in its bombers, didn't they?  The wings would rip with just a nudge sometimes in the FR Pac arena...drove me nuts.  Modelling airframe stress can be buggy.  

I prefer Easy's idea to lock the bombs if the heavy bomber (only Lanc & B-17, at this point) is at an angle of attack that can't be considered "level flight."

Just my 2 cents.

Well, you can get creative. How about a simple deal where if you exceed 2G's with full racks you get a simple "bomb release failure." In other words, the bombs are stuck in the racks because they bent the damn things from bouncing around. Now you're stuck with the extra weight and no choice but to auger or go home.

If the release is locked at non-level flight you'll guys diving in at bizarre speeds and then leveling to drop at tree-top. If you model it my way, when they pitch over or pull out of this dive, they mess up the release mechanism. It'd still be possible to pull this stunt, but your envelope gets a lot narrowed.

Or you could model both. I'd like to see people who've been pulling this crap find themselves over target with bomb release malfunctions looking all stoopidly and ewesless.

[TBolt A-10]

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
If the release is locked at non-level flight you'll guys diving in at bizarre speeds and then leveling to drop at tree-top. If you model it my way, when they pitch over or pull out of this dive, they mess up the release mechanism. It'd still be possible to pull this stunt, but your envelope gets a lot narrowed.

Or you could model both.  

I almost feel like, as long as the bombing was done in level flight, allow it.  I'll have to go offline in B-17's and see how easy it is to fly at 10k, dive to 2k, pull up successfully, calibrate the bomb sight while holding high speeds; then, drop successfully.  It sounds like a lot of work.  

I know...HT just needs to disable the bombs when the pilot is in F3 mode.  Plain 'n simple.  U know most of our gamers are bombing while diving in F3.  

[DoKGonZo]

2K? Ho ho ho.

Nah, if you only disable the release when non-level they'll dive in to their usual 500 ft. F3 view is a crutch only, there are "other ways" ... I'm sure the duhweebs will figure 'em out.

You need to disable bomb release from anything but the bombardier view ... and even then, I know it'll be gamed (i.e. eyeball it in F3, open bay, a few seconds before it's "just right" go to bomb view, one-one-thousand, two-one-thousand, barf). Not as accurate - as just using F3 ... but have you seen how accurate these 'tards are as it is?

I don't want to make it too messy with sight calibration because that penalizes the guys who fly these planes right - they need to be able to jump to gunner positions and then return to the bomb sight and have it be as they left it.

If you allow bomb release only from the bombardier position that adds enough extra uncertainty to render such attacks much less effective. Add to that the "rack failure" due to excessive G's and suddenly you need to be very gentle in coaxing that big bird out of a dive (as well you should). Given the way these guys fly, I doubt many will be able to handle it.

    -DoK

[Easyscor]

We’ve been through this so many times.  A player should be able to break from calibration and defend himself.  He should be able to drop his bombs even if he’s lost 3-4 engines and is dropping like a brick, desperate as the attempt may be.  Most of the time, I can’t imagine why anyone would drop from the F3 view but there is a case where it is practically required because you have a terrible time calibrating at 500-1000ft and 200+ mph as you must in some scenarios or snapshots..  Take Ploesti, the Ploesti raid was one of my favorite snapshots and it would be ruined without outside views, or if a 500-1000ft limit was imposed.

[Easyscor]

Rack damage is an interesting idea but opens it up to damage from guns as well.  Who wants to fly for an hour if a 110 can make a single pass and knock out all three bomb racks.

[Tilt]

Other than an arguement that F3 replaces the 10 pairs of eyes that a bomber has looking for enemies I cant see any reason for not forcing F6 to be the only place from which one could drop bombs........

Including Ploesti.....where infact most of the low level raid was blinded by smoke ............

I dont believe the 10 pairs of eyes arguement to have sufficient force that it should prevent the solutions that are derived from forcing release from F6. (As above I would only apply this to pure "bombers" and formations)

Even so DoK is correct it would bring about the F3 ingress with almost macro like keying to switch thru F6 to release.

I think disabling bombs from enemy fire  is as valid as disabling guns from enemy fire..........

The only reservation I would have is the validity of using G based bomb jamming as a fix if it turns out we are simply inventing something. I note that AH does not jam guns that are fired under high G yet this was some times the case.

However it does seem valid that bombs would only release under favourable (stable) g conditions............and most probably not under the pitching incurred when F6 is trying to correct a shallow dive to level flight.

Hence my take for a 1st step .......



For all attack/bombers where formation is chosen they assume the  status of "bomber".

For all bombers where the status is bomber only they assume the status of "bomber"

Else they are "attack"

For all "bombers"........

Bombs can  only be released from bomb aimers position F6.

For all "attackers"

Bombs can only be released by the pilot

A second step (given the first was insufficient) would be to add AoA factors for "bombers".

[onions4u]

How about we do away with bombers, base takes, Killing HQ, killing troops killing the ords, and what little fuel we can kill now, La 7s, 262s, 163s(won't need any more) and the cv's (there to easy to kill or the 5 inch guns kill to well. Then we can have 3 bases for each chess piece with unlimited fuel then the furballers can say they won.

[Kweassa]

How about we do away with bombers, base takes, Killing HQ, killing troops killing the ords, and what little fuel we can kill now, La 7s, 262s, 163s(won't need any more) and the cv's (there to easy to kill or the 5 inch guns kill to well. Then we can have 3 bases for each chess piece with unlimited fuel then the furballers can say they won.

 Why?

 Are you perchance confusing the argument to fix game exploits, with the argument to get rid of buffs entirely?

[hitech]

My view:
1. I do not wish to disable shallow angle dive bombing from buffs.
2. I do wish it to be with in the limits of what realy could be done.
3. I do not wish to disable it, just because it wasn't done much in real live, if it could physicly be done.

The arguments I agree with so far.

1. Disabling bomb droping when in external mode.

2. Find out what the limits on bomb drops are.

(btw people are mixing terms ,please do not use the term AOA, for climb angle)

Climb or descent angle by itself should not effect if a plane can release or not. If realy should be based on the direction of the total force vector from the plane, along with the length of that vector.

Anyone care to do some research on the drop paramaters of different bomb racks?


HiTech

[DoKGonZo]

This is anectodal about what happens when bombs are free of their rack restraints: http://www.stripes.com/ww2/stories/rooney05.html

There must be an operational manual somewhere which spec's out the rack system.

    -DoK