Author Topic: Need Help with some math on carriers (Read 632 times)

stantond · « **on:** October 11, 2004, 02:34:56 PM »

How can a formation of aircraft with 65 ft wing spans (B26's) sink an 83 ft beam carrier (WW2 type) using low altitude level bombing in one strike? I am using one aircraft width and taking half of the wingspan (23 ft) of another which gives an 88 ft wide (minimum) strike width. That (by my math) means only one aircraft could hit the carrier from a stern or bow direction.

Hitting the carrier from the side allows all three aircraft to see the target, but the bomb dispersion means all bombs can't hit it. Diagonal paths dont seem to help much either. If the formation was in line that would work, but it's not. Does someone see my math error here? Maybe 4000 lbs of bombs can sink a carrier? It just doesn't add up for me.

Regards,

Malta

Angus · « **Reply #1 on:** October 11, 2004, 03:42:11 PM »

Was the formation line abreast?
Anyway, I'd guess they could, and the answer would be diagonal, presumably from the rear. Maybe not all bombs hit, but a multi-hit in a narrow part of the ship could easily sink one.
A rocket salvo from a Mosquito was told to be able to sink a destroyer of roughly 1500 tons, would love to have more on that.

Krusty · « **Reply #2 on:** October 11, 2004, 05:48:11 PM »

close misses count.

If it hits the water it will still damage it. Try dropping the big egg from the ju87 NEAR an escort ship. If you land just in the water you will still sink it.

This is historically accurate, as first proven by Billy Mitchell himself, dropping bombs next to a captured battleship to blow in the sides of the hull and sink it.

Angus · « **Reply #3 on:** October 11, 2004, 06:05:44 PM »

And then...also....skip-bombing

Krusty · « **Reply #4 on:** October 11, 2004, 06:40:16 PM »

No, this isn't skip bombing.

Skip bombing is coming in fast on the deck, releasing, and letting the bomb skip over the water to impact with the side of the ship.

What happens in AH is blast radius. Bombs pack a LOT of punch, and when they hit the water they blow up (splashes aren't so good, video-wise). So if a B26 in formation drops all bombs just outside the cv, they hit the water and blow up, doing damage. The second B26 on the other flank does the same. The end result: 3 B26s damaged the cv.

outlaw36 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 11, 2004, 10:07:42 PM »

I could be wrong but the technique of "bomb skipping" was developed to blow dams. The bomb would roll and bounce along the top of the water, then sink to a predetermined depth and explode. There had to be a mechanism to spin the bomb at a certain rpm prior to release.

Besides, this whole article is getting a little to precise. For the most part, the game is to be enjoyed. If I payed $59.99 off the shelf and a monthly fee, I would have some math questions.

Krusty · « **Reply #6 on:** October 11, 2004, 10:20:54 PM »

The dam busters didn't use normal bombs. They skipped because they needed them to counter-rotate when they hit the dam, then using their momentum "roll" down the damn and detonate low under water.

That doesn't mean that is "skip bombing". They're different, despite the fact that both do skip over the water's surface.

stantond · « **Reply #7 on:** October 11, 2004, 11:36:57 PM »

Aaaah, I see. Its that bombs dont sink. The blast radius of a bomb hitting the 'water' is the same as hitting 'land'. That explains why a formation of B26's can sink a carrier at an altitude of 1000 ft. But hey, nothing's perfect.

Very good explanation Krusty. Although, I don't believe bombs in WW2 detonated on hitting water (as you imply).

Regards,

Malta

Schutt · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2004, 02:11:08 AM »

1 b26 is way enogh to sink a carrier, historical or ah2 wise. Also with your calculation the bombs of 2 aircraft could hit the carrier just fine.

I heard bombs would explode once their spinner wheel slowed down, an this way they verry well explode just below waterline.

Angus · « **Reply #9 on:** October 12, 2004, 06:09:00 AM »

Did the dambuster's bombs rotate backwards?
I thought they rotated forwards in order to be able to skip, - they were 10.000 lbs after all.
They were released at a predetermened speed, exact altitude over the water, and with special equip, in an exact distance from the dams. They would do just a predetermined number of skips, then sink.

AVRO1 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 12, 2004, 06:16:48 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Angus
Did the dambuster's bombs rotate backwards?
I thought they rotated forwards in order to be able to skip, - they were 10.000 lbs after all.
They were released at a predetermened speed, exact altitude over the water, and with special equip, in an exact distance from the dams. They would do just a predetermined number of skips, then sink.

I believe they did rotate backward.

Angus · « **Reply #11 on:** October 12, 2004, 06:24:25 AM »

Found it, - you were right:
"Weighing almost 9500 lbs, Upkeep, was cylindrical in shape and was unique in the fact that it rotated backwards at 500 rpm during its release. The speed and altitude of the aircraft was also critical; these having to be maintained at precisely 220 m.p.h. and sixty feet respectively. If these requirements were meet and the weapon was released between 400 and 450 yards away from the dam wall. Then the weapon would literally skip across the surface of the water and over any torpedo nets until it struck the dam wall. With its forward momentum lost, the backwards rotation then forced the weapon to roll down the side of the dam wall; where it was detonated by a hydrostatic fuse at a predetermined depth. The actual breach was made by the combination of the shock wave generated by the explosion; followed by the immense weight of the water pressing against the weakened wall. "

rshubert · « **Reply #12 on:** October 12, 2004, 06:51:15 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by outlaw36
I could be wrong but the technique of "bomb skipping" was developed to blow dams. The bomb would roll and bounce along the top of the water, then sink to a predetermined depth and explode. There had to be a mechanism to spin the bomb at a certain rpm prior to release.

Besides, this whole article is getting a little to precise. For the most part, the game is to be enjoyed. If I payed $59.99 off the shelf and a monthly fee, I would have some math questions.

We're not talking about the barnes-wallis bombs. Skip bombing was developed by Gen. Kenney's 5th air force in the pacific as an anti-ship technique. The bombs were released low, at high speed, with a delay fuse. They skipped across the water, into the side of the target ship. The ship then blew up and sank like a good little target.

Angus · « **Reply #13 on:** October 12, 2004, 08:27:45 AM »

That is truly the skip-bombing.
The British way was the bounce bombing.

indy007 · « **Reply #14 on:** October 12, 2004, 10:23:00 AM »

AH treats water as a solid surface. The only real difference between land & water is the color & the fact one has splash sprites, and the other leaves craters. Dropping short or long on a ship is just like on a hangar. You'll still get your splash damage & soften it with near misses.