Author Topic: 1K vs 500 Pounders  (Read 1532 times)

Offline Mongoose

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1603
      • Kentwood Station
1K vs 500 Pounders
« on: December 27, 2012, 03:19:40 PM »
  Here is a question for you P47 pilots.

  Suppose you are attacking a town.  The center of town, all the high density buildings, is down.  Now you have to destroy the buildings that are spread out in the outer sections.  Do you prefer,

A:  1K bombs X2   -or-
B:   500 pound bombs X3

   My thinking is that I can either aim very carefully with 1K bombs, and try to get as many buildings as I can in the blast radius.  Or I can lay down a string of 500 pounders and have a better chance of catching more buildings with a single spread.

  Which would you prefer?
My Aces High training site:
www.kentwoodstation.com

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2012, 01:22:21 PM »
Six one and a half dozen another.  With the 2/500lb bombs in tandem you can have a slightly elongated blast zone but remember the 1k bomb will have a larger diameter splash zone to begin with.  I have not actually tested the bomb blast radius (not sure who has), I know a person with the 4/2k bombs (B24) will actually do more damage than using the 8/1k bombs if only 1 pass is going to be made.

So I will go alone with the same-same when comparing the 2/500 lb vs 1k lb bombs.  Do you want a blast zone an inch in diameter or two 5/8th blast zones stacked (comparatively).
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2012, 01:36:30 PM »
Loon, in the OP's post he's considering 2x 1,000 lbs or 3x 500 lbs. That's 2,000 lbs spread on two bombs vs. 1,500 lbs spread on three. I'd go with the 2x 1000 lbs option. Wider blast radius and if you need a longer blast area just increase the ripple time.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2012, 01:38:59 PM »
Loon, in the OP's post he's considering 2x 1,000 lbs or 3x 500 lbs. That's 2,000 lbs spread on two bombs vs. 1,500 lbs spread on three. I'd go with the 2x 1000 lbs option. Wider blast radius and if you need a longer blast area just increase the ripple time.

oops.  My bad.  I read too fast.   :bhead

Same theory applies though.  A more logical comparison would be 2/1ks and 4/500lb.   
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Mongoose

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1603
      • Kentwood Station
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2012, 09:57:53 PM »
Same theory applies though.  A more logical comparison would be 2/1ks and 4/500lb.   

  Yes, but the P47 doesn't carry 4/500lb, it can only carry three.  I am thinking of setting up a mission, and I am wondering whether I should equip the P47's with 2/1k or 3/500lb. 

  If I have the time, and I aim carefully, I can bomb one of the less-dense cluster of buildings, and sometimes destroy 2-4 buildings with a single 1k bomb. But if I am rushed, say, if some defenders are after me, then I have to rush my drop, and don't get as much bang for the buck.  I was thinking that spreading out some 500 pounders would give better results.

  I have tested this in offline mode, and get mixed results.  So I figured I would check in to see what an experienced Thunderbolt pilot might say. 

  As you said, it seems to be six of one, half dozen of the other.  But thanks, everyone, for weighing in.
My Aces High training site:
www.kentwoodstation.com

Offline bangsbox

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1017
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2012, 10:04:02 PM »
Why not 2x 1000 and 1 500 lber  :banana: and don't forget a side of rockets

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2012, 10:18:15 PM »
Why not 2x 1000 and 1 500 lber  :banana: and don't forget a side of rockets

What I was thinking.

If you're heavy, you can always drop ord for combat, but if you start out light, you can't just magically get more ordnance if you don't see a single fighter the whole sortie.
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #7 on: December 29, 2012, 06:17:24 PM »
  Yes, but the P47 doesn't carry 4/500lb, it can only carry three.  I am thinking of setting up a mission, and I am wondering whether I should equip the P47's with 2/1k or 3/500lb. 

  If I have the time, and I aim carefully, I can bomb one of the less-dense cluster of buildings, and sometimes destroy 2-4 buildings with a single 1k bomb. But if I am rushed, say, if some defenders are after me, then I have to rush my drop, and don't get as much bang for the buck.  I was thinking that spreading out some 500 pounders would give better results.

  I have tested this in offline mode, and get mixed results.  So I figured I would check in to see what an experienced Thunderbolt pilot might say. 

  As you said, it seems to be six of one, half dozen of the other.  But thanks, everyone, for weighing in.

If the goal is to level a town then I say the 2/1k bombs would go a lot further.  But remember you can carry 2/1k's and a single 500 lb too.   ;)
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Latrobe

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5975
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2012, 11:15:09 AM »
I've always preferred 2 1,000lbers. More things go boom when you drop them  ;) . And don't forget about the 3,400 rounds of 50cals you have in 8 guns! They can do quite a lot of damage too!  :D

With the 2 1,000lbers + 1 500lber + 10 rockets + largest gun package, 1 P47 can drop 2 hangars easy.

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23930
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #9 on: December 30, 2012, 11:21:32 AM »
I've always preferred 2 1,000lbers. More things go boom when you drop them  ;) . And don't forget about the 3,400 rounds of 50cals you have in 8 guns! They can do quite a lot of damage too!  :D

With the 2 1,000lbers + 1 500lber + 10 rockets + largest gun package, 1 P47 can drop 2 hangars easy.


With that loadout, you are carrying 2000+562+1560+3978 = ~6700lbs of destruction  :old:
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #10 on: December 31, 2012, 02:09:56 PM »

With that loadout, you are carrying 2000+562+1560+3978 = ~6700lbs of destruction  :old:

It does add up.  Some time ago I compared the heavy hitters in the game in terms of direct fire ground attack aircraft.  keep in mind this list is only a "total damage available to be handed to enemy OBJ" set of numbers and does not take in to consideration damage over time or the ability of the aircraft themselves.  Obviously, the heaviest hitters do not always make for the best platform for a specific duty.

B25H = 9392 lbs (6/500lb, 3200rd in 8/.50 cals, 21rd 75mm HE)
Bf110g-2 = 8515 lbs (2/550kg, 4/50kg, 255rd in 2/30mm, 750rd 2/20mm)
P47D-40 = 7398 lbs (2/1k, 1/500lb, 10/5in rkt, 2800rd in 8/.50 cal)
Me410 = 7349 lbs (1500rd in 6/20mm, 2200rd in 4/13mm)
A20 = 6953 lbs (8/500lb, 2100rd in 6/.50 cal)
Mossi FB Mk IV = 6352 lbs. (2/500lb, 8/3in rkt, 700rd 4/20mm, 3120rd in 4/.30 cal)

For comparisons sake:
IL-2 = 3472 lbs (4/100kg, 4/132 rkt, 100rd 37mm, 1500rd in 2/.30cal)
P51D = 5136 lbs (2/1k, 6/5in rkt, 1880rd in 6/.50cal)
P38L = 6505 lbs (2/1k, 10/5in rkt, 150rd in 1/20mm, 2000rd in 4/.50cal)
Typhoon = 4256 lbs (2/1k, 560rd in 4/20mm)
George = 4701 lbs (2/250kg, 900rd in 4/20mm) [rather the N1K2 "nikki" for you newbs ;) ]
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #11 on: December 31, 2012, 03:20:26 PM »
I've always counted the P-38L as one of the heavy hitters.  In fact my initial intention on comparing performance of fighter-bombers was just the A-20G, Bf110G-2, Mosquito Mk VI, P-38L, P-47N and P-51D.

It has since exploded into anything that can carry 1000lbs or more equivalent ordnance.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline bangsbox

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1017
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #12 on: January 01, 2013, 11:30:30 PM »
its below a mossy just from gun diff....i never would have thought either and im a mossy perk farmer lol.

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: 1K vs 500 Pounders
« Reply #13 on: January 02, 2013, 06:51:48 AM »
its below a mossy just from gun diff....i never would have thought either and im a mossy perk farmer lol.

The Mossi is certainly a surprise when compared to other ground pounders, it does not have the "total" weight others do but it does have the initial hit strength thanks to 4/500 lb bombs or the 2/500 lb and 8/3in rockets.  Not to mention the quad nose mounted 20mm Hispanos.  Do not underestimate the Mossi FB Mk IV in any way shape or form, I'm surprised it has the ENY it does.
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.