strategic bombing

[shreck]

I'd like to suggest IF the scenario is going to be about looooong bombing runs, could the T+60 rule be modified so the groups who have bomber duty could plan a creative approach to target. This last frame shows clearly, any deviation from a straight line course would have made the T+60 rule nearly impossible to comply with! Therefore the defenders "knowing active fields" pretty well knew the approach and egress areas without much guess work! Flying bombers is tedious enough, hamstringing them with virtually NO alternative attack planning capability just makes it more tedious!

[PFactorDave]

I'd like to suggest IF the scenario is going to be about looooong bombing runs, could the T+60 rule be modified so the groups who have bomber duty could plan a creative approach to target. This last frame shows clearly, any deviation from a straight line course would have made the T+60 rule nearly impossible to comply with! Therefore the defenders "knowing active fields" pretty well knew the approach and egress areas without much guess work! Flying bombers is tedious enough, hamstringing them with virtually NO alternative attack planning capability just makes it more tedious!

Just curious here, not arguing at all...  Isn't the rule that there must be "a credible" attack by T+60, not that all bombs must be dropped by that time?  Couldn't there simply have been a faster set of medium bombers (or even B38s  ) tasked to get on target fast.  Then the heavies can take their time and choose a longer route because the T+60 rule was satisfied by the faster attack?

Just asking.

[shreck]

Just curious here, not arguing at all...  Isn't the rule that there must be "a credible" attack by T+60, not that all bombs must be dropped by that time?  Couldn't there simply have been a faster set of medium bombers (or even B38s  ) tasked to get on target fast.  Then the heavies can take their time and choose a longer route because the T+60 rule was satisfied by the faster attack?

Just asking.

Hmm, possibly you're correct! I always understood that all 1st hour bombs must be on target by T+60  Hope there is a credible answer from staff coming 

[PFactorDave]

Maybe the bigger issue would be, if you take much more then 60 minutes to put bombs on target, wouldn't you be making it really tough for your bombers to get home to a base at which they can legally land and tower out before the end of the frame...

[shreck]

Maybe the bigger issue would be, if you take much more then 60 minutes to put bombs on target, wouldn't you be making it really tough for your bombers to get home to a base at which they can legally land and tower out before the end of the frame...

Well a creative approach does not mean the return trip is long. Maybe a few waypoints inbound, and a beeline course home! I'm not suggesting taking 1 hr and 55 min to target then augering!! This would be BAD. As an example, this last frame the return trip was much quicker as most of the bombers were already at speed from the initial target and dove slightly toward home maintaning a far higher average speed then was possible on the initial climb out!

[Squire]

No. The T+60 rule is there so that what you just described cannot be used as a tactic. We are not going back to the days where a small # of a/c attack the target to say "see we made our attack", and then play "lets run the defenders out of fuel" games, or other gamey stuff. The strikes will be done within the T+60 time limit.

In real life the Luftwaffe had radar, you could not "hide" a 800 plane bomber stream. There was no "sneaky" way for the 8th AF or RAF Bomber Command to launch a major raid with escorting fighters, so I would not sweat it too much.

If the design needed an extension, thats the perogative of the designer, and it would be specifically written into the setup rules. In this case, there is no such provision. If you are finding the T+60 limit tight, I suggest not climbing to 25k, but perhaps 18-22K, or whatever works. Its up to you guys to decide the best way to conduct the raids, but dont climb up to 25k on a far target and then complain of time being short. You have flexibility.

[shreck]

No. The T+60 rule is there so that what you just described cannot be used as a tactic. We are not going back to the days where a small # of a/c attack the target to say "see we made our attack", and then play "lets run the defenders out of fuel" games, or other gamey stuff. The strikes will be done within the T+60 time limit.

In real life the Luftwaffe had radar, you could not "hide" a 800 plane bomber stream. There was no "sneaky" way for the 8th AF or RAF Bomber Command to launch a major raid with escorting fighters, so I would not sweat it too much.

If the design needed an extension, thats the perogative of the designer, and it would be specifically written into the setup rules. In this case, there is no such provision. If you are finding the T+60 limit tight, I suggest not climbing to 25k, but perhaps 18-22K, or whatever works. Its up to you guys to decide the best way to conduct the raids, but dont climb up to 25k on a far target and then complain of time being short. You have flexibility.

True! although bombers at 18K escorted by p38s against higher fw190s are just fodder! Sounds like an easy go for the focke wulfs 

[PFactorDave]

In real life the Luftwaffe had radar, you could not "hide" a 800 plane bomber stream. There was no "sneaky" way for the 8th AF or RAF Bomber Command to launch a major raid with escorting fighters, so I would not sweat it too much.

Doesn't that statement seem a bit strange in light of the discussion in the other thread regarding the use of single fighters to "flash" bases as a ruse?  Just saying...  Seems contradictory to me...

Other then that, I agree that the answer probably has more to do with not climbing to such an high altitude.

[shreck]

Doesn't that statement seem a bit strange in light of the discussion in the other thread regarding the use of single fighters to "flash" bases as a ruse?  Just saying...  Seems contradictory to me...

Other then that, I agree that the answer probably has more to do with not climbing to such an high altitude.

How about air spawning bombers? this would save time and allow a bit of flexibility! Even if spawned over friendly real estate!

[Motherland]

True! although bombers at 18K escorted by p38s against higher fw190s are just fodder! Sounds like an easy go for the focke wulfs 

Sounds like your P38's need to practice escort

[Nefarious]

How about air spawning bombers? this would save time and allow a bit of flexibility! Even if spawned over friendly real estate!

Some Terrains have them, BOB04 does not. A terrain update would be required.

The T+60 rule makes it tough for the Allies on certain targets, but I also think it levels the playing field in this situation/set-up.

I have flown this setup many times under different event names on Friday Nights over the past 5 or 6 years, Both as Allied and Axis. I also designed two setups for FSO similar to this. These are the events I like, although I like the 1943 plane set the most.

[FiLtH]

  Personally doglegs and stuff are great things to throw off the defenders if combat is to be avoided, but I'd prefer a fight no later than 1 hour. And lots of it.

[shreck]

  Personally doglegs and stuff are great things to throw off the defenders if combat is to be avoided, but I'd prefer a fight no later than 1 hour. And lots of it.

Well, no-one wants to avoid the fight. I think the main motivator for squads in bombers is to hit target! After that I don't think anyone really cares if they get massacred So some flexibilty for ingress I think would only enhance the scenario and the experience for those tasked with bombing!
I know whenever my squad is tasked with bomber duty and we're "not held to a strict flight path", our success it GREATLY improved, as we have the flexibility to plan and execute "our own" approach!