Author Topic: New bombers...... (Read 419 times)

Shiva · « **Reply #15 on:** July 22, 2002, 02:11:24 PM »

Quote

BTW, 200 bombers for an airfield? Nah... for Ploesti oil fields... yes... for an airfield? Not even close.

To be doing sufficient damage to effectively close it? Yes. During the summer of 1944, 47 B-29s raided the Yawata steel works from bases in China; only one plane actually hit the target area, and with only one of its bombs. This single 500 lb general purpose bomb (which hit a powerhouse located 3,700ft from the far more important coke houses that constituted the raid’s aiming point) represented one quarter of one per cent of the 376 bombs dropped over Yawata on that mission.

In the fall of 1944, only seven per cent of all bombs dropped by the Eighth Air Force hit within 1,000ft of their aim point; even a fighter-bomber in a 40 degree dive releasing a bomb at 7,000ft could have a circular error (CEP) of as much as 1,000ft. It took 108 B-17 bombers, crewed by 1,080 airmen, dropping 648 bombs to guarantee a 96 per cent chance of getting just two hits inside a 400 by 500ft German power-generation plant.

Here's some data on the average % of bombs dropped which fell within 1,000 ft (610 m) and 2,000 ft (306 m) of pre-assigned MPI's on visual missions under conditions of good to fair visibility:

Distance: | ---------- 1,000 ft (305 m) ---------- | ---------- 2,000 ft (610 m) ---------- |
Date: | 1st Div. | 2nd Div. | 3rd Div. | 8th AF | 1st Div. | 2nd Div. | 3rd Div. | 8th AF |
| B-17 | B-24 | B-24/B-17 | | B-17 | B-24 | B-24/B-17 | |
Jan-Mar 43 | 18 | - | - | 18 | 36 | - | - | 36 |
Apr-Jun 43 | 13 | - | 11 | 12 | 32 | - | 29 | 30 |
Jul-Sep 43 | 13 | - | 19 | 16 | 31 | - | 48 | 38 |
Oct-Dec 43 | 25 | 32 | 27 | 27 | 46 | 58 | 47 | 48 |
Jan-44 | 34 | 23 | 41 | 35 | 61 | 48 | 60 | 58 |
Feb-44 | 42 | 26 | 46 | 39 | 76 | 49 | 77 | 69 |
Mar-44 | 31 | 20 | 39 | 31 | 64 | 36 | 70 | 58 |
Apr-44 | 34 | 21 | 32 | 29 | 62 | 43 | 58 | 55 |
May-44 | 44 | 34 | 33 | 37 | 68 | 64 | 62 | 65 |
Jun-44 | 49 | 32 | 35 | 40 | 81 | 62 | 65 | 71 |
Jul-44 | 42 | 26 | 44 | 37 | 73 | 56 | 77 | 69 |
Aug-44 | 54 | 36 | 42 | 45 | 84 | 65 | 72 | 65 |
Sep-Oct 44 | 29 | 32 | 46 | 38 | 61 | 56 | 72 | 65 |
Nov-Dec 44 | 24 | 24 | 25 | 25 | 54 | 44 | 47 | 48 |
Jan-45 | 29 | 34 | 24 | 29 | 59 | 61 | 56 | 59 |
Feb-45 | 50 | 57 | 40 | 49 | 80 | 81 | 69 | 77 |
Mar-45 | 40 | 45 | 30 | 38 | 76 | 73 | 58 | 69 |
Apr-45 | 64 | 58 | 52 | 59 | 91 | 79 | 80 | 85 |

ET · « **Reply #16 on:** July 22, 2002, 02:33:23 PM »

AKSwulfe.... Since you don't fly bombers much, exactly what is the challenge you refer to. Do you even understand what the bomber guys are talking about.

You mentioned the Ploesti raid. It was the worst planned mission in USAAF history. The B24s went in at 500 feet as ordered. The pilots were dodging smoke stacks.One group who got lost came in from the opposite direction and the planes were dodging head ons. The gunners were dueling with machine gun nests on the ground. They went in without fighter cover. When the mission totals were added up they said that 16% of the planes were lost. That is sixteen percent. The loss rate in AH is probably 90%. That is a far cry from what is happening in AH. I have yet to land 30% of my bombing runs in a tour and I usually try to land.

Whats happening is that in reality more than 50% of the pilots in WW2 flew bombers.In AH, 95% of the pilots are fighter jocks. So the bombers go up against odds that are not the same. Add to that the lack of available targets that mean something to the effort, most guys quit bombing and voice their complaints here.

I see the flights of 3 bombers coming in and I watch them get killed over and over again.So if there is a challenge, they seem to have accepted it. What they are asking for is a fair playing field
where when they do exert the effort, they at least have a chance to contribute to their country's war effort.

Pin point bombing may have been hokey but since not that many guys fly bombers the results were probably closer then what is happening now.

Not every one in here wants to be an exclusive fighter jock or jabo artist or a tanker and for a lot of guys who like to fly bombers the FUN has been taken out the game.

Just my thoughts on the situation.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #17 on:** July 22, 2002, 02:45:27 PM »

AKSwulfe.... Since you don't fly bombers much, exactly what is the challenge you refer to. Do you even understand what the bomber guys are talking about.

I see, well I flew bombers way back when they were easy mode. Point and click, that was it. I have tried the new bombing method offline. It's identical to the way B17II does it for the most part. Some slight differences. I got real good at B17II, could hit my target with every bomb. I don't think it'll be too long until I figure it out here... of course, I won't be using it too much in the MA since I find bombers boring as hell unless I'm flying with my squad.

You mentioned the Ploesti raid. It was the worst planned mission in USAAF history. The B24s went in at 500 feet as ordered. The pilots were dodging smoke stacks.One group who got lost came in from the opposite direction and the planes were dodging head ons. The gunners were dueling with machine gun nests on the ground. They went in without fighter cover. When the mission totals were added up they said that 16% of the planes were lost. That is sixteen percent. The loss rate in AH is probably 90%. That is a far cry from what is happening in AH. I have yet to land 30% of my bombing runs in a tour and I usually try to land.

I mentioned Ploesti in terms of planes going to a specific target. Hundreds of bombers rarely, if ever, hit airfields. Couple dozens, yes. Of course, when you send a couple hundred bombers in formation versus THREE!!! then you can expect much higher losses than they did in WWII.

Whats happening is that in reality more than 50% of the pilots in WW2 flew bombers.In AH, 95% of the pilots are fighter jocks. So the bombers go up against odds that are not the same. Add to that the lack of available targets that mean something to the effort, most guys quit bombing and voice their complaints here.

Bombers rarely go up against odds that aren't the same... most guys don't waste their time climbing up to 20+K to shoot down bombers. If you get a wingman, you got 6 bombers. You get 2 wingmen, 9 bombers.. and so on. It can't be THAT hard to find 4 likeminded indvidiuals.

I see the flights of 3 bombers coming in and I watch them get killed over and over again.So if there is a challenge, they seem to have accepted it. What they are asking for is a fair playing field
where when they do exert the effort, they at least have a chance to contribute to their country's war effort.

So before, they exerted NO effort. Now they exert SOME effort, but they don't want to exert A LOT of effort to really master the new system.. it ain't a wham, bam, thankya mam deal... you wanna have an impact on something? Get 4 guys who have PRACTICED with the bombsight and go wreak havoc. It takes fighter guys a LOT of practice to do really well in the MA... why can't the same be asked of bomber pilots?

Pin point bombing may have been hokey but since not that many guys fly bombers the results were probably closer then what is happening now.

Before they flew unmolested for the most part at 30K and had pin point accuracy. That ain't closer to anything.

Not every one in here wants to be an exclusive fighter jock or jabo artist or a tanker and for a lot of guys who like to fly bombers the FUN has been taken out the game.

So now they get a challenge, and the fun gets taken out... well I guess I can see what you mean... half the "fighter jocks" here fly Spits or something as equally easy.

Aces High
"If it's easy... it's FUN!"

-SW

Karnak · « **Reply #18 on:** July 22, 2002, 02:46:48 PM »

Please read and comment on this thread:

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59623

Something that the fighter guys should understand, nobody is calling for a return to lazer guided bombs. There needs to be meaningful targets, strategic ones preferably, for the level bombers.

hazed- · « **Reply #19 on:** July 22, 2002, 04:21:50 PM »

I see all the points i was trying to make were completely ignored by you SW.
Its the method of bombsight calibration which Im asking for change in not the idea of harder bombing.
I'll take on any challenge as long as it can be learned and put into practice consistantly.
Ive had good drops where it seemed to work well and thought the sights worked excellently and that 'ive got it' only to have a similar run and miss by huge amounts.nothing done different (yes pedantic types,other than the mark target part!)
I dont call for super buffs or anything to be added, if you READ it i said tougher but weaker gunned the idea being JUST extended engagements with similar results in terms of winners/ losers. I merely said what id hoped for and why.
Ive got a problem with the new system not because it is hard but because its pointless and seems random in its accuracy rather than me doing something wildy wrong.
This sort of 'it was 200 bombers per field in WW2','No it was less',add infinitum pantomime roadkill is typical of how every thread seems to end up.

you take one statement and argue over it endlessly with a new handsomehunked name to call each other every week.what are we now 'buff-whiners'? 'calibration sissy's'? go on make a lame assed name up and start another rant.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #20 on:** July 22, 2002, 05:02:58 PM »

Yes Hazed, I missed every one of your points.

Of course, where exactly was I replying to you?

Ah, no where.

So there's another rant, learn to read who is arguing with who's points before you start squeaking aimlessly yourself.
-SW

john9001 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 22, 2002, 05:05:24 PM »

1st i'm a fighter pilot , not a good one , but thats what i fly, i'll also fly bombers , C47's or a GV, whatever my side needs.

i don't want bombers made harder to damage or easier, don't want the bomber guns more or less powerfull, just want them as close as to RL as can be ( no gameplay adj )

as to bombers hitting targets, RL bombers missed targets also, i miss targets , but i also hit targets, last night i planned to bomb a base we were about to attack, i pulled up a map of the field picked out the targets i wanted to hit ( 2 FH ), figured out the heading i would need , alt (10k to 12k )( the lower you are the better you hit), salvo 3,( thats 9 1000# per FH )figured out my flight plan, flew there , did all the cal, click one , click two, both FH destroyed.

remember if you can't bomb you can always fly lala7's or niki's or if you really bad spits

44MAG

Innominate · « **Reply #22 on:** July 22, 2002, 05:45:40 PM »

The bombsight calibration is fine.
The targets are the problem.

Wotan · « **Reply #23 on:** July 22, 2002, 06:03:35 PM »

bombers are a bit fragile it seems

the calibration model is not a problem

Bombers should not impact gameplay like they could when we had laser guided bombs.

I have seen the effect of good bomb drops on an airfield and at the towns.

In the island map it seemed the factories were incapable of recieving damage. I dropped 3 x 4000lbs dead center with no effect on a training facility.

I have always argued that the roll of base capture should be the job of the jabo.

we could use bigger towns cities factories etc. About the size of maybe 2 depos. But other then that practice. The new bomber model seperates the fluffers from the dedicated bomber pilot/squad.

Innominate · « **Reply #24 on:** July 22, 2002, 06:31:43 PM »

Lets just remove bombers.

It seems that the vast majority only want bombers as easy targets for thier fighters. Nobody wants bombers that can have any effect on the game, so why bother having them at all?

I have a better idea, AI bombers! They'll periodicly take off from friendly bases, and fly over enemy fields(without dropping any bombs of course, we cant have them affecting anything) They would also have no gunners, that might make them too difficult to kill. This way people can shoot down bombers all day, without having to convince buff pilots to fly them. Plus you get to avoid the pesky whines about "those bombers killed my field" or "i lined up alone on the buff's six and died"

Then we dont even need bombers!

Kweassa · « **Reply #25 on:** July 22, 2002, 07:24:13 PM »

Quote

Sure, you say it now requires teamwork. Granted. Twelve of my squadmates upped B-17s to try to flatten an airfield the other day so the Knights could move in and capture a key base. Of the twelve players, only one managed to hit a fighter hanger and only then, because one of the first to drop reported hitting west and long on the target

Easyscor, if 12 people with 36 bombers can hit only 1 hangar in a bombrun, I'm sorry to say this but you guys didn't practice enough.

I checked your scores on a short notice, and I see you have a bombing accuracy of 67%. I use exclusively four engine bombers for bombing, and I have an accuracy of 236%. Other people may have higher accuracy but that is mostly from JABO/attack runs. Mine's almost entirely from using level bombers.

I understand what you guys are frustrated about, but what I don't understand is howcome I can drop bombs where I want then? This, is obviously not some universal problem. Nobody complained about the learning curve being high when flying fighters, so then, why should anyone complain the learning curve is high with the bombers?

Kweassa · « **Reply #26 on:** July 22, 2002, 07:29:45 PM »

What I'd like to know is how some people are doing the calibration process, especially the marking of the cross hairs. I've heard of people doing marking sequences to targets closer to them, but I always prefer to find my target on the horizon and mark directly on it. Perhaps that has something to do with it. One thing for sure, any instance when I miss the drops and they fall too short or too long, it had a good reason. When I feel I calibrated things right, I never had an occasion where I felt the bombs dropped in an inadequate place.

Innominate · « **Reply #27 on:** July 22, 2002, 07:33:32 PM »

There are two things people are doing wrong.

1. People are holding the mark for the minimum two seconds, not long enough for an accurate calibration. 10-20 more reliable.

2. Failing to fly straight and level long enough for speeds to level out. They climb to target, level for a minute, turn to target, calibrate, and then drop, all while still accellerating.

If you hit long constantly, it's most likely #2. You really need to fly straight and level for at least 10-15 miles to get a decent drop. Longer depending on the plane.

Puke · « **Reply #28 on:** July 22, 2002, 07:39:56 PM »

Fighter guys typically take off with a friend or two or tag along with a big group of other fighters so that there is a coalition of force. The bomber guys seem to me to be a different breed and want to go it alone into enemy territory. Survival will require some forethought and planning. Get just nine pilots together and you have about 27 bombers the enemy has to deal with. With a couple of escort fighters and you have an imposing threat! What fighter pilot wouldn't want to tag along with a formation like that and give escort??

Innominate · « **Reply #29 on:** July 22, 2002, 07:43:54 PM »

Or get nine pilots together, put them in tiffies, bring a goonn, and take a field.