Author Topic: Another post of JABO's  (Read 2130 times)

Offline Viper61

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 585
Another post of JABO's
« on: September 11, 2010, 11:01:25 PM »
ALLIED side statement and request:

JABO's aren't working at all.  They didn't work for Frame 01, they didn't work for frame 02.  The scenario set up isn't good for them regardless of the squad that flys them or the tactics the CIC can come up with.  The only hope is that the AXIS side would forget to defend a target so they can get in.  And that ain't likely to happen.

The heck with the points and the target values for frame 3 as we have probably lost anyway.  So lets have fun and at least even the kill ratio's.

Send in small bomber formations to every target.  Put the rest into good fighters with a 2 or 3 times figure of escorts to bombers and lets have at it.  If nothing else lets have a good classic 43' 44' high altitude fight and finish this scenario.

Just my 2 cents.

Offline Becinhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2633
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2010, 12:05:48 PM »
Doesn't help that in 2 frames so far the strike groups I was part of weren't together. Frame 1 we were escorts. Our attack group launched 6 sectors away and got jumped by fighters at the air spawn. Frame 2 we flew mossies.  Our escorts never showed up. When we asked where they were they were 4 sectors away. Our secondary attack group had to go clean to escort us to target.
412th Braunco Mustangs OG
412th FNVG FSO
80th FS "Headhunters" MA

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2010, 01:12:14 PM »
I agree it's not ideal, however.... The strike package the USMC/71Sqn were sweeping in front of was able to make it to the target. There was some enemy engaging them, for sure, but most of them got near the target and dropped ord on it. Not all made it back, but they definitely got TO the target.

That said, in Frame 1 we were strike and didn't even make it halfway to the target zone before 3 different squadrons tore into us. I personally think it's the air spawns. The axis know exactly where we will be, what direction we will come from, and so they sit there waiting in the stratosphere, rather than patrolling along a wider front, rather than trying to guess any 1 of multiple entry routes, etc.

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2010, 01:15:31 PM »
Doesn't help that in 2 frames so far the strike groups I was part of weren't together. Frame 1 we were escorts. Our attack group launched 6 sectors away and got jumped by fighters at the air spawn. Frame 2 we flew mossies.  Our escorts never showed up. When we asked where they were they were 4 sectors away. Our secondary attack group had to go clean to escort us to target.

Even if we had hooked up with those guys last week, and the others this week, we'd still have a problem.  In order for Jabos to work, you have to create and maintain air superiority over the target area until the Jabos can get their mission accomplished and get into a position to defend themselves.  Once that's accomplished, you have the flak guns to deal with, which in this game are lethal, unless the ack is dialed way down.  Even at the .3 we have this frame, flying A-20s or Mossies into a medium field is murder unless there's been some sort of coordinated ack suppression mission.  Ack suppression means more Jabos--tough to manage.

Level bombers provide at least a partial solutions to both problems.  They possess a credible self-defense capability that allows them to operate without air superiority and make up for when the escorts have their hands full.  They also can drop accurately clear of the ack over those bigger airfields.  

Who knows what we'll get in frame 3, but I agree with Viper61--get rid of the Jabos and lets roll B-17s/B-24s with lots of escorts.  I don't know which of the Brit fighters has the longest legs (probably the Tempest), but throw some drop tanks on and lets rock...
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Drano

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4129
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #4 on: September 12, 2010, 03:07:18 PM »
In frame 1 the Damned were in Mossies and with good comms with our escort were able to get in, hit our target (a refinery) and get out with the loss of one to enemy fighter which the rest of us killed. We reloaded and hit a secondary target before the LW dogpiled that target-which was already down and we were all killed. Should have just gone home when the place went down to save our planes but we hung around a minute too long and paid for it.

Frame 2 we escorted the 9GIAP's Mossies to their target on a similar mission and with good comms between us they were able to get in and hit their target. We engaged the cap fighters a sector or so out and killed them or distracted them long enough for the Mossies to drop and then they went offensive and killed several more of the defenders at the target. All reloaded, talked it up and hit a secondary target again encountering NME defenders in the area. While we escorts were all killed in the process we got our jabos in to the target and many of them got home safe at endframe. I thought it was a fun frame. Good flying and good teamwork all around. <S> to the 9GIAP and 801Sqn FAA.

I gotta disagree with the Jabo thing. Both frames we were made almost straight away from the air spawn by jet scouts that called in fighters to us and were able to slip them. Maybe we were just lucky but I'd be inclined to chalk it up to good mission discipline and excellent communication. Seems to me the nights we have a better mission in FSO the groups assigned stuck to the plan and did their jobs. The nights we didn't it was usually a cluster. And we've all been there!

Can't be the planes as the allied birds are more than capable. If you wanted to put the shoe on the other foot they're WAY more capable at high alt than the LW birds are but that's another whole argument.

I will agree tho having posted before on this subject that I think the ack guns are a little on the strong side. While I know the settings that we use in FSO themselves haven't changed, I wonder if something about the guns has changed within the game that we don't see. I've been killed with a single hit by ack low over a field a couple of times recently and I never remember this having happened in the past. So yeah having to knock out the acks so you can even GET to the hangars(or whatever) has apparently become a PITA.
"Drano"
80th FS "Headhunters"

S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning In A Bottle)

FSO flying with the 412th Friday Night Volunteer Group

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #5 on: September 12, 2010, 10:00:48 PM »
Simply stacking the level bombers with formations at 30k doesn't help the axis either... They're rather over-modeled in this game and totally give the allies superior numbers, superior force, and superior firepower.

I like a mixed bag, jabo and heavies. I think that we have to keep working to find the balance that makes everybody happy, but we're on the path.

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2010, 11:13:17 PM »
Simply stacking the level bombers with formations at 30k doesn't help the axis either... They're rather over-modeled in this game and totally give the allies superior numbers, superior force, and superior firepower.

I like a mixed bag, jabo and heavies. I think that we have to keep working to find the balance that makes everybody happy, but we're on the path.

Without getting into a discussion of performance modeling, we can probably all agree that, borrowing from my original thread on the matter, 7-8 formations of heavies, escorted by 15-20 fighters flying towards a target at 25,000 +/- a few thousand is realistic and balanced, if the intercepting force has 25-30 fighters.  The bomber force has sufficient numbers to bring a competitive fight, defend itself, and get to the target without bringing an overwhelming force against the defenders.  The defenders, likewise, have enough aircraft to engage the escorts and attack the bombers simultaneously, with a force that doesn't overwhelm the attackers.  This hypothetical would be an enjoyable fight for both sides, with enough balance and immersion to provide a realistic approximation of a small scale, group level effort against a target, within the constraints of playability and game mechanics.  Yes?

The problem with Jabo tactics in general is that, borrowing operational doctrine that goes back to the period and is still current today, you must have local air superiority to use strike fighters.  Heavy/strategic bomber doctrine is the only doctrine that allows for the attacking aircraft to fight their way in, survive, and withdraw.  Jabos must have a covering force, and the ability to operate practically unmolested over the objective area in order to succeed.  This is especially difficult to achieve in FSO in a manner that results in a competitive fight for both sides.  Either the defenders get steam-rolled by a large attacking force or the attackers are overwhelmed.  It doesn't happen every time, but often enough to make me hate to see my squad assigned to a Jabo force, either as the strikers or the escorts.  

Just my opinion...
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2010, 11:28:06 PM »
I'm sure the 8th AF would have loved to have equal numbers of escorts for every bomber in the air.

Problem with a setup like that is that outside of the 109K4, the entire LW planest still suffers above 25k.

On top of that, many bombers flew much lower than 25K in a 1000-plane formation, allowing the LW fighters to pick on the lower, easily attackable boxes, which isn't something you get here in FSO.

Then there's the problem of jamming so many bombers, so many escorts, then twice as many attackers (so, as you say, they can hit bombers and escorts at once) that with short icons and lag you'll be lucky to get any icons at all until an enemy shoots you down at 800 yards. Doesn't happen AS bad as it used to, AH had a patch that increased the number of icons it can display, but it'll still have issues with massive hordes.


I honestly think FSO should go with full icons. It would change some of the "social dynamics" (so to speak) and I think it might be better when you get large-plane formations like we do.

Offline thorsim

  • Parolee
  • Restricted
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
      • The Luftwhiner Lounge
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #8 on: September 13, 2010, 01:31:49 AM »
fall 1944 had jabo and bomber raids, personally i think it is the 50/50 split that may be the problem ...

of course the 10-1 historic split would not be fun but i would think a jabo/escort #s roughly = to the interceptor #s
and then add the buffs so the axis allied split would be something like 225 - 175 ...

also timing is everything and the t+70 rule gives the allies a lot more options than they have been using timing and altitude wise ...

imo there is nothing in the set up that severely overburdens the allies, and as some have said the plane match up favors the allies at least at the higher altitudes if not totally.  

imo the allies just have not solved their problems as well as the axis have this time.  i think some good thought and effort in planning and good execution the allies should be very competitive here.

i will post more after the series and we can see if my thoughts are undermined by the special rules or something  i am missing ...

++S++

t
THOR C.O. II ~JG-27~ Afrika-AH
Axis Co-Op
Quote from: any number of idiots here
blah blah Blah
Quote from: oldman
Good call.  Ignore the people who actually flew the real planes against each other.

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #9 on: September 13, 2010, 07:57:59 PM »
A few comments I would like to make.

Average bombing alts for the 8th AF over Occupied Europe was at least 20,000 feet. Raids were done between 20k and 29k. There were several reasons for this; The first of which is that the B-24s best alt is 25k and the B-17s is 29k. Both bombers could fly faster the higher they flew from S.L. to 25,000 feet. Secondly was the Flak. Flying below 20k was not done because of the heavy AAA defenses, not even at night. Lastly the escort fighters operated at best at alts above 20k, especially the P-47 series.

Escort to bomber ratio. Well, this varies a lot depending on the year. The 8th AF flew from 1942-45 and peaked @ mid 1944 as far as total combat power. In June of 1944 it could muster @ 2000 heavy bombers and @ 950 fighters. Thats operational and crewed a/c that could actually roll on a mission. Many times missions were flown with as many escorts as fighters, but the ratio depended on the exact raid. It could easily fly 3 x 300 bomber raids and have them all escorted with an equal # of fighters at that point of the war. To put it in FSO perspective, for every 12 formations of B-17s or B-24s, you could have anywhere from 18-36 escorting fighters.

LW fighter tactics tended to be to attack bomber groups and formations that had suffered losses already just like you tend to see in FSO. Stragglers and bomber flights that were damaged or missing a plane were singled out. Reasons are obvious enough to anybody that has tried a run on a tight bomber group.

"1000 plane raids". Were not the rule. They tended to "up" that #, but usually bombed several different targets. Again, it was specific to the mission. Anywhere from 100-800 heavies, escorted by fighters could be expected to raid any specific target on any given operational day, with the total # of a/c upped anywhere from several hundred to several thousand.

Added to that from June 1944-May 1945 is the two ETO Tactical Air Forces (RAF and USAAF) which could muster @ 800 bombers and @ 2000 fighters combined that flew medium bombers and fighter-bombers. They could easily escort any bomber group with many fighters if they chose to do it.

RAF Bomber Command had 1100 heavy bombers that usually operated at night (Lancs, Halifaxes and Mosquitos) for those interested in the #s there. Same thing, some raids were all on one target, often they attacked several different targets.

The notion that somehow bombers flying high or without a decent escort is somehow wrong or innacurate just isnt the case. Also the logs dont show the LW doing poorly in setups like these despite some claims to the contrary: "Mighty Eighth", "Der Kanalkampf", "Point Blank Range", "High Blue Battle", and this one "Should Have Been a Milk Run"...the LW has scored more kills, not less, and thats just a few I looked at featuring Allied heavies vs the LW in the ETO. Plane performance issues or no, they seem to make out ok.
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #10 on: September 13, 2010, 08:46:18 PM »
One question about 9th Air Force.  By the time the 9th hit its peak capability, it was benefiting from theater-wide air superiority and localized air supremacy over parts of France.  There are not many historical examples of 9th AF aircraft getting tangled up in major furballs or suffering large air-to-air losses from German interceptors, are there?
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #11 on: September 13, 2010, 10:10:55 PM »
Well as far as FSO goes and im not telling you anything you dont know already its made to be challenging and historical. Nobody wants to fly a bunch of Jabo runs and not see any air action at all so the ratios get tweaked of course. Jabo duty in FSO has always been "busy" to say the least. At least the times I have done it  ;)

The Tactical Air Forces saw a lot of action but it tended to be low-med alt stuff and spread over a larger area with smaller units involved. After all they were covering the Allied armies on the move so they were not flying large scale raids like the strategic air forces were. It was a different kind of air war in that respect. Many of the encounters tended to be smaller scale. For that matter the bulk of the Eastern Front was like that as neither the LW nor the VVS flew large scale strategic missions in the way that was done in the West. More attritional I guess you could say. The MED and the PAC also had times where it was more of a tactical air contest.

Just commenting on the history of it not so much re this design per se. Some setups have Jabos some dont. Its nice to have a mix so they all dont feel the same but I know everybody has their favorite styles.
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline thorsim

  • Parolee
  • Restricted
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
      • The Luftwhiner Lounge
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #12 on: September 14, 2010, 12:35:25 AM »
a couple of points ...

it is not the altitude that is in question so much, it is the bombing accuracy at altitude that is a little hard to take.

i.e. there should be a drawback to flying above the possibility of effective enemy fighter contact.

yes the 8th AF could put up a lot of fighters but most of the time most of them were not on station for the entire trip, or even at the same time for that matter, so that even late in the war the Luftwaffe often managed local air superiority.

i.e. there should be combat time limitations to extremely long escort missions.

as i see it anyway.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2010, 01:22:04 AM by thorsim »
THOR C.O. II ~JG-27~ Afrika-AH
Axis Co-Op
Quote from: any number of idiots here
blah blah Blah
Quote from: oldman
Good call.  Ignore the people who actually flew the real planes against each other.

Offline oakranger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8380
      • http://www.slybirds.com/
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #13 on: September 14, 2010, 12:42:56 AM »
So i guess it will not be possible to have a new ETO event "Bloody Summer of 43' " where U.S. bomber flew into Germany unescorted do to extended range of the fighters.

That is one event i would love to see, all allies squads (200+ ppl) in B-17s and B-24 (targeting factories, cities) while the Axis defends with 109G-2/6 and 190A-5 and 110C.  
Oaktree

56th Fighter group

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Another post of JABO's
« Reply #14 on: September 14, 2010, 05:48:54 AM »
So i guess it will not be possible to have a new ETO event "Bloody Summer of 43' " where U.S. bomber flew into Germany unescorted do to extended range of the fighters.

That is one event i would love to see, all allies squads (200+ ppl) in B-17s and B-24 (targeting factories, cities) while the Axis defends with 109G-2/6 and 190A-5 and 110C.  

That should be a lot of fun for the bomber pilots...
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech