Author Topic: Bombs/rockets vs GV's (Read 4230 times)

BALSUR · « **on:** December 11, 2005, 07:25:27 PM »

Does anybody out there have any information that can support the effectiveness of bombs and rockets on tanks? Everything I am finding , surveys conducted by the British and Americans during and after the war suggests that bombs and rockets were not very successful at all. I have even found documentation on a tiger company that was bombed around the clock by over 800 allied bombers. They only lost 2 tanks. 1 drove into a crater and got stuck and another flipped over on its side. SO, if there is not any good information to support the bombs shouldn't the damage ratio be changed in AH?

LYNX · « **Reply #1 on:** December 11, 2005, 07:47:39 PM »

Umm IL2 Stuka Hurri D were GV killers. Level bombing Gv in RL wasn't to good as opposed to idiots in AH. As for rockets they were used mostly on road convoys and trains.. I believe.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #2 on:** December 11, 2005, 08:03:49 PM »

Considering the many aspects of GV battle and damage that are lacking, I think the compromise we currently have is well suited to gameplay, if not to precise simulation.

MadSquirrel · « **Reply #3 on:** December 11, 2005, 08:26:21 PM »

There was a document that I found ages ago that was a report on the effectiveness of air attacks on armor. I have since tried to find it with no luck.

What it said was in essence this: Many P-47s and Ponies claimed kills on Tigers and other German armor while strafing and attacking with rockets. What was discovered is that many times what the pilots observed and claimed as a kill, was the external fuel tanks exploding and burning. The pilots saw a large fireball and just assumed and reported the tank destroyed. Bombs were also ineffective other than a large explosion tipping the tank over or having it tip into the crater. Many pilots also claimed that strafing the top of the turret resulted in kills due to the limited armor thickness. Here again, what was discovered were fuel tank explosions. Armor thickness is thinner on top, however unless a vertical attack was done the bullets were hitting the armor at an angle, which increased the armors thickness due to angle penetration. And in spite of what occurs in AH, vertical attacks didn't occur for that purpose.

But as always occurs, there will be an outcry of "The tanks aren't modeled right cause I can't strafe a panzer with my Spit and take out his turret". This is if HT made armor react properly to bombs and bullets. This has been brought up many times in the past. I am afraid it is this way for arcade purposes, not "Realism".

LTARsqrl

Morpheus · « **Reply #4 on:** December 11, 2005, 08:56:55 PM »

These guys might say other wise.

MadSquirrel · « **Reply #5 on:** December 11, 2005, 09:19:14 PM »

What would they say other wise?

That lightly armored vehicles pre-dating 1939 are the same as Tigers and Pzr IVHs? Or that Propaganda films show what actually occured on the battlefield?

The little tanks that blew up are little more than scouts. Heck, in AHII, you can bounce an 8.8cm AP round off the side of an M-3 at 90 degrees. Lets film it and send a bunch of M-3s to France as front line Armor Protection.

LTARsqrl

jon · « **Reply #6 on:** December 11, 2005, 09:26:56 PM »

was that one tank a t34:huh

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #7 on:** December 11, 2005, 09:40:09 PM »

I'm pretty sure that the "Hardness" of GV's was upped to make gameplay better.

No tank should survive a 1k pounder going off anywhere near it.

MadSquirrel · « **Reply #8 on:** December 11, 2005, 09:44:24 PM »

No, I think the one that blew up was a Hotchkiss H35. Real top of the line in 1934. 40mm of armor at it's thickest. Not quite the 80mm of the Pzr IVH.

Hotchkiss H-35 Photo

The sequence of Tanks blowing up there is a rather interesting developent. The very first frame of the tanks shows that what appears to be a Hotchkiss H35 expolde, then a more distance film shot shows what I believe are some other Hotchkiss H-35s and it looks like a bomb hits it. However if you watch, all that happens to the tank is it tips over.

This is my point. Pilots many times reported tanks destroyed when all that happened were they were tipped or looked destroyed.

The others look like light armor as well.

Anyone else have a different idea of what the tank is?

LTARsqrl

BALSUR · « **Reply #9 on:** December 11, 2005, 11:04:55 PM »

Actually a 1k doesn't do much damage to a heavy Tank at all. There Are documented cases of Panther's that were abandoned by thier crews with 500 lb bomb craters right next to the tank. Also if you look at the physics aspect of it. The General Purpose bombs dropped during that time were high explosive. Do you have any idea how much Direct impact HE it would take to destroy those heavy tanks? Not to mention that the explosion is like a bullet in the fact that it takes the path of the least resistance. Meaning most of the blast would go up and away from a hardened steel object.
The bottom line is during WW2 bombs could only disable not destroy an buttoned up heavy tank. Rockets couldn't destroy heavy tanks. The air power's effect was very minimal on destroying tanks. The biggest input that air power had was the effect on fuel and supplies. I have no idea why the armored vehicles in AH run forever on unlimited fuel that would be a great equalizer in the game play.

BTW nice early war film Morph, but did you notice in the end those 2 tanks bombed neither was destroyed, 1 was blown into the air and the other only caught some debris that was on fire. Those were extremely light tanks that were easily dispatched with handheld anit-tank weapons.

Mr No Name · « **Reply #10 on:** December 11, 2005, 11:11:36 PM »

Balsur, that light tank was totally in flames... Plus just the concussion of a 250LB bomb going off NEAR a tank can render a crew useless, a 1,000 pounder nearby can leave them on the "Coloring Book and soft toys only" Christmas gift list from now on.

Morpheus · « **Reply #11 on:** December 11, 2005, 11:16:24 PM »

Do you have any idea what a 1000 lb bomb would do to a tank crew Balsur? They'd be less than useless.

Not to mention what happens when the ammo in the tank lights up inside from the concussion of a bomb.

BALSUR · « **Reply #12 on:** December 11, 2005, 11:21:15 PM »

Let me ask you this can concusion waves penetrate armor? As for fire when your cooking on the stove you usually put your food into a pan than put over a fire right? When you first put your cold food in a cold pan over the fire does the food start burning? No, it takes a while. How long do you think that fire outside that tank lasted? 2 maybe 3 secounds, hardly long enough to bake anyone inside.

In a few minutes, I am going to find a case in story. Written by a Tiger Commander, who states " only the inexperienced crews would get out of thier tanks during an air raid and they usually died" "you were usually just fine as long as you stayed buttoned up"

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #13 on:** December 11, 2005, 11:24:27 PM »

Balsur, conduct the following experiment for us. Place a friend of yours on the other side of a wall.

You be on the opposite side. Tell him to bang on the wall.

Now tell us if you feel him doing it.

Do you think now that the insides of a tank would be anything but mush after a 1k pound bomb?

Karnak · « **Reply #14 on:** December 11, 2005, 11:29:06 PM »

BALSUR,

A rocket that hits really, really close to a tank should do nothing to it, but an actual hit by a HVAR rocket on a tank could very well destroy it, even an IS3 or Tiger II.

Bombs likewise, if it misses by enough to have the tank out of the crater the tank will probably be ok though the crew may be out of it for a little while. A closer hit and all bets are off. An actual strike on the tank by a GP bomb would blow the tank to pieces.

In AH I hit a Tiger I with a 500lb bomb dropped from my Mossie. I saw the hit sprite and the bomb I dropped with it exploded along side. The only result was that the tank driver exclaimed on the open channel "That was LOUD!!". There is no way a Tiger I could take a 500lb bomb and not be utterly destroyed in reality.