Next new plane

[bozon]

Neither was anything else 

The Illustrious class was designed to be self reliant for defence, i.e. not dependent on it's fighter cover.  Hence the armour and an armament that would put the cruiser to shame!

except that the cruiser in AH can be sank with a hand granade.

[LCADolby]

except that the cruiser in AH can be sank with a hand granade.

Good luck not only lifting a 2000lb hand grenade but throwing one!

[Rich46yo]

Illustrious Class is a interesting suggestion. By no means was it an "escort CV" but they were smaller then  the Essex and could fit the "escort" role.

Even better if we got the Fairy Firefly with it.

[save]

When you see me-410s strafe down a cruiser you go hmmmm, cant complain about those guns.

except that the cruiser in AH can be sank with a hand granade.

[F77]

Hmmm, Battle of Taranto scenario anyone?  Illustrious & lots of Swordfish!  

Also given the armament of Illustrious an AA Cruiser wouldn't be necessary.  Repulse or Renown?

[SmokinLoon]

When you see me-410s strafe down a cruiser you go hmmmm, cant complain about those guns.

Do the math.  The 410 can deliver a massive amount of damage via the guns.  Ever done the math on the 6/20mm?  Or the dual 30mm?  Impressive.

[Karnak]

Speaking of straffing ships down, perhaps we ought to ask for the tank armor model be applied to the ships rather than the simplistic x amount of damage to destroy like hangers model.  Armor the cruiser and kill straffing it down with any airplane goodbye.

[Fish42]

Speaking of straffing ships down, perhaps we ought to ask for the tank armor model be applied to the ships rather than the simplistic x amount of damage to destroy like hangers model.  Armor the cruiser and kill straffing it down with any airplane goodbye.

+1

Though ship damage would have to be remodeled. Magazine hits would be 1 hit, no matter the size of ord as long as it penned. Hitting the boilers on the ships would cause a lose of speed and force the ship to drop out or lag behind the fleet. The CV if slowed would be harder to launch from with heavy fighters, so it would not be a all or nothing airbase.

[Widewing]

Do the math.  The 410 can deliver a massive amount of damage via the guns.  Ever done the math on the 6/20mm?  Or the dual 30mm?  Impressive.

In game; in the real world all that would be required is a painting detail to be mustered.... For game play, the effectiveness of short to medium range triple A of a late war carrier and escorts is turned way down. An Essex class CV could put 46,000 lbs of anti-air ordnance (all types) into the sky every 60 seconds. A Baltimore class heavy cruiser could put up 34,500 lbs per minute (by comparison, an Iowa class BB could put up 49,000 lbs per minute).  Fletcher class DDs could put up just over 12,000 lbs. So, in the 60 seconds a formation of low bombers is within range of long (5"/38), medium (40mm) and short (20mm Orlikon), how much ordnance could be fired at them? The total available is 128,500 lbs. Figure on no less than half that if the bombers are the only target. That's real world... Not in Aces High.

Since the AI shoots at targets based upon closest first, much of the CV group's firepower is wasted on inconsequential targets. I don't believe any 40mm is fired, except that which is manned. Random 5" and 20mm are the defense if no guns are manned by players. This is the major reason aircraft can easily get to a carrier...  

If the game truly reflected the defensive firepower of a actual carrier battle group, very few aircraft would get anywhere near the CV, especially level bombers flying a steady course at a steady speed. The radar directed 5" guns would obliterate them miles out.

[Widewing]

+1

Though ship damage would have to be remodeled. Magazine hits would be 1 hit, no matter the size of ord as long as it penned. Hitting the boilers on the ships would cause a lose of speed and force the ship to drop out or lag behind the fleet. The CV if slowed would be harder to launch from with heavy fighters, so it would not be a all or nothing airbase.

CVs had bow cats, meaning that they could launch aircraft from anchor. I took a few cat shots (waist cats) while at anchor in the late 70s. The biggest threat to carriers was fire....  I can't think of one U.S. fleet carrier that was sunk by bombs alone.

[Saxman]

CVs had bow cats, meaning that they could launch aircraft from anchor. I took a few cat shots (waist cats) while at anchor in the late 70s. The biggest threat to carriers was fire....  I can't think of one U.S. fleet carrier that was sunk by bombs alone.

Something I find more interesting: None of the American fleet carriers (except maybe Ranger) made it out of 1942 without taking severe damage. However Yorktown, Hornet, Lexington and Wasp all shared one thing in common that Enterprise didn't: They were all torpedoed, and that provided the fatal damage (Saratoga was torpedoed, too, but she managed to make it home).

I would LOVE to see more depth to the task group damage model. IE, the ineffectiveness of small-caliber guns (aside from maybe being able to take out the 20mm and 40mm emplacements), differences in the effects of torpedo hits vs. bomb hits, and even implementing the damaging effects of near-misses. Just having "X lbs of damage sinks the ship" is really oversimplifying things.

[Brooke]

differences in the effects of torpedo hits vs. bomb hits, and even implementing the damaging effects of near-misses. Just having "X lbs of damage sinks the ship" is really oversimplifying things.

That's implemented already.  lbs damage that a bomb does is just a measure of cumulative effect.  Mk 14 torpedoes had 643 lbs of explosive, but they do something like 4000 lbs of damage in AH.  An AN-M65 1000 lb GP bomb had 595 lbs of explosive and does 1000 lbs of damage in AH.  Also, the GP bomb has a blast radius, so if you drop it in the water close enough to a ship, some amount of damage (depending on how close it is) affects the ship.  AP does more damage if it hits and has less blast radius, and so on.

It's not easy to estimate the effect of different types of hits.  It depended a lot on the situation.  There are ships that survived lots of hits, and some that were sunk (or nearly sunk) with one bomb hit.

Also, historically, CV's taking a hit or two or a kamikaze, even if not sunk, tended to be knocked out of operation.  In AH, they stay in operation until they sink.

Some historical stats for US BB's and CV's -- see section "Ship Hardness" at the end of this document:
http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/200706_husky/rules.html

[Saxman]

Pretty sure it had been stated before that bombs don't cause damage on a near-miss, it's got to actually hit.

[Skuzzy]

Pretty sure it had been stated before that bombs don't cause damage on a near-miss, it's got to actually hit.

Brooke has it correct.

[Lusche]

Pretty sure it had been stated before that bombs don't cause damage on a near-miss, it's got to actually hit.

Damage happening from a near miss (2000lb GP bomb):