Bomb question RL vs AH

[whels]

in real life i know they had regular gp(general purpose) bombs, and then specialized AP(armor percing) bombs for hitting ships and such.  in RL if they dropped a GP 1k bomb onto  a ship, would it blow up on contact with the top deck? or maybe slightly bleow it?  I know the AP  bomb was designed to pass several decks before blowing up so that it
did more damage.


In AH we have gp bombs, good for hangers and such, and  GVs.
but id think GPs would be hurtfull to ships but should/would
take alot of them to sink a Cruiser or Carrier. this is where APs would be required to penatrate the decks to do  enough damage to be able to even sink a CV or CA without needing extra tonage of GPs(id say 15k worht). use APs and need maybe 5 to 8 k.

but here is another question and thought. did fighters carry
AP bombs in RL or was it just GPs? if they didnt carry APs then
they should be relatively inaffective vs capital ships, if they did carry AP then ok. but if not then we should have AP bombs
selectable by the planes like, Val, SDB,TBM and such that carried them, so that if u wana sink capital ships, u need the correct plane with APs not just any old fighter with suicide GPs .
even rockets should be fairly useless vs  the 2 big capital ships
since the rockets blow on impact and the CV/CA havve thick decks and sides.


just thoughts/questions on RL vs AH and how to stop the silly
suicide fighters somewhat. u want to sink a capital ship off ur
base, makem take up a apporpreate plane for the job.


whels

[Shane]

Originally posted by whels
just thoughts/questions on RL vs AH and how to stop the silly
suicide fighters somewhat. u want to sink a capital ship off ur
base, makem take up a apporpreate plane for the job.

whels

i kinda agree, but the fleet acks might need to be toned down... you ever watch rl footage?  a lot of planes could make it thru the acks to drop their torp or divebomb, or at least get fairly close...  as things stand now, it simply generates all them suicide dweebs because the ack (not the  puffball) is so lethal - or rather so intense... maybe reduce fleet ack lethality or accurracy a teeny bit more?

i dunno, but the sbd/tbm missions i'd like to run are generally a non-interest due to low survivability.  it'd be nice if the dmg model on ships was changed, too... right now if you actually do get a hit, you get nothing for it unless it was the final sink-shot... so why bother (in terms of point-weenies).

[Shiva]

in RL if they dropped a GP 1k bomb onto a ship, would it blow up on contact with the top deck? or maybe slightly bleow it? I know the AP bomb was designed to pass several decks before blowing up so that it
did more damage.

It wasn't that the AP bombs were designed to go through several decks before exploding -- that's a function of the impact delay on the fuze -- but that the AP bombs had a heavier bomb casing with a thicker and differently-shaped nose so that the bomb would penetrate the deck armor of capital ships. How far the bomb would penetrate before exploding was determined both by the actual penetration ability of the bomb and by the delay set on the fuze. GP bombs will generally be fitted to take fuzes on both nose and tail, while AP bombs are only fitted for tail fuzes (the impact would destroy a nose fuze).

General Purpose bombs were about 50% explosive by weight; Armor Piercing bombs were about 25% - 30% explosive by weight. However, since blast effects are a cube-root function of the explosive yield, the blast radius of a 500-lb AP bomb is about 60% of a 500-lb GP bomb.

Navy dive bombers generally used AP bombs when attacking capital ships, and GP bombs when attacking smaller ships.  When used against ships with little or no deck armor, AP bombs were still effective, although the delay had to be set carefully -- a bomb that passed completely through a ship and detonated under its keel could break the ship's back, but if the delay was set too high, the delay would leave the bomb too far underneath the ship when it detonated. GP bombs were more effective for the smaller warships.

Fighters were generally loaded with just GP bombs, with AP and penetration bombs being issued on an as-needed basis for special missions; bombers would be loaded with either AP or GP bombs, depending on their target, and sometimes bomber formations would get mixed loads -- the lead boxes would get AP bombs to break up the target, following boxes would get GP bombs to scatter the pieces, and trailing boxes would get incendiaries to burn the pieces.

[whels]

Originally posted by Shiva




General Purpose bombs were about 50% explosive by weight; Armor Piercing bombs were about 25% - 30% explosive by weight. However, since blast effects are a cube-root function of the explosive yield, the blast radius of a 500-lb AP bomb is about 60% of a 500-lb GP bomb.

but since the AP we designed to blow up farther into ships. wouldnt the effect of blast  be great then a GP?

whels

[Widewing]

Originally posted by whels
in real life i know they had regular gp(general purpose) bombs, and then specialized AP(armor percing) bombs for hitting ships and such.  in RL if they dropped a GP 1k bomb onto  a ship, would it blow up on contact with the top deck? or maybe slightly bleow it?  I know the AP  bomb was designed to pass several decks before blowing up so that it
did more damage.


In AH we have gp bombs, good for hangers and such, and  GVs.
but id think GPs would be hurtfull to ships but should/would
take alot of them to sink a Cruiser or Carrier. this is where APs would be required to penatrate the decks to do  enough damage to be able to even sink a CV or CA without needing extra tonage of GPs(id say 15k worht). use APs and need maybe 5 to 8 k.

but here is another question and thought. did fighters carry
AP bombs in RL or was it just GPs? if they didnt carry APs then
they should be relatively inaffective vs capital ships, if they did carry AP then ok. but if not then we should have AP bombs
selectable by the planes like, Val, SDB,TBM and such that carried them, so that if u wana sink capital ships, u need the correct plane with APs not just any old fighter with suicide GPs .
even rockets should be fairly useless vs  the 2 big capital ships
since the rockets blow on impact and the CV/CA havve thick decks and sides.


just thoughts/questions on RL vs AH and how to stop the silly
suicide fighters somewhat. u want to sink a capital ship off ur
base, makem take up a apporpreate plane for the job.


whels

Lots to address here.

There were many different types of bombs in use, as well as many different fuzing options (delay, instantaneous, etc). So, let's cut to the chase....

Could fighters carry AP or SAP bombs? You betcha. Did they carry them? They sure did, especially U.S. Navy fighters, which were frequently employed in attacking surface vessels.

I'm afraid that any aircraft that could lift the weight, could carry AP and SAP bombs. So, we probably can't look at A/C types as a solution.

However, if fuzing was modeled differently, IE: Higher minimum drop time or altitude to arm. Most bombs had rotating arming vanes that were locked with copper safetywire, which broke upon being dropped. These vanes had to rotate a specific amount of turns for the bomb to arm. If the programming were written to specify a minimum altitude of 3,000 ft for all bombs weighing more than 250 kilos, I believe it would partially eliminate the suicide dives.

Furthermore, bombs were almost exclusively released electrically. Therefore, set a damage limit, that once exceeded assumes that the related wiring and solenoids have been damaged and bombs cannot be dropped.

I believe combining these two changes will end the suicide runs.

My regards,

Widewing

[Shiva]

Furthermore, bombs were almost exclusively released electrically. Therefore, set a damage limit, that once exceeded assumes that the related wiring and solenoids have been damaged and bombs cannot be dropped.

Heh. And while we're at it, if it isn't being done already, expand the target locations of an aircraft carrying ordnance to allow the ordnance to be hit by incoming fire. Solid projectiles wouldn't do it, but if an explosive shell was able to penetrate the bomb or rocket casing, there should be a chance to detonate the bursting charge. Bombers were lost over Germany from taking flak and cannon fire in the bomb bay and setting off the bomb load; fighters are more maneuverable and carry fewer bombs, so hitting a bomb would be harder, but having a 1,000-lb bomb go off while slung under your wing is certainly going to ruin your day.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Shiva


Heh. And while we're at it, if it isn't being done already, expand the target locations of an aircraft carrying ordnance to allow the ordnance to be hit by incoming fire. Solid projectiles wouldn't do it, but if an explosive shell was able to penetrate the bomb or rocket casing, there should be a chance to detonate the bursting charge. Bombers were lost over Germany from taking flak and cannon fire in the bomb bay and setting off the bomb load; fighters are more maneuverable and carry fewer bombs, so hitting a bomb would be harder, but having a 1,000-lb bomb go off while slung under your wing is certainly going to ruin your day.

How's this for an example:

This unfortunate P-47 was the victim of a 500 pound bomb which fell from its fuselage shackle and exploded. The pilot, Lt. Hallberg had been unable to release the bomb and was forced to land with it. Somehow, the safetywire preventing the fusing vanes from turning had broken. The result was that the bomb had armed. As Hallberg taxied across the rutted field, the demolition bomb fell off and detonated. Amazingly, the Lt. Hallberg suffered only minor injuries and was flying again within days, albeit with the radio volume turned up considerably. If there was ever a testimony to the ruggedness of the Thunderbolt, this incident is proof positive.


My regards,

Widewing

[Innominate]

Hmm, this is a good diea...

AP vs GP bombs could turn the real ship killers into effective ones, while leaving them fairly safe from jabos...  As things stand now, a true divebomber can easily survive dropping his bombs, the dive brakes give you more time to line up, drop your bombs, and pull out.  Unfortunatly, suiciding in them would still be common.

The SBD and val are useless in destroying ships because of the sheer tonnage needed, not so much because of thier performance in any other area.

[Shiva]

The SBD and val are useless in destroying ships because of the sheer tonnage needed, not so much because of thier performance in any other area.

Well, as a game tool, you could do something arbitrary like making all 250-lb or larger bombs loaded on SBDs and D3As armor-piercing, which makes them count double for bomb damage to task force ships. That would give people incentive to use those planes, because it would take fewer of them to sink a CV.

[SKurj]

Didn't the D3a carry 1,840lb modified AP shells at Pearl Harbor?



SKurj

[gatso]

Would love to see the appropriate bombs hanging off aircraft.  I was amazed at the diversity used in WW2 when I did a little digging a while ago.

The Warbirds Resource Group (Luftwaffe) has what I think is the definitive specs for all the German bombs used in WW2, (link below), just wish I could find something similar for British/US/Russian.

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/bombs.html

We have specialized aircraft here, why no give them their appropriate ord?

Gatso

A couple more links for you.  The 1st one links to the munitions page but the whole site is pretty interesting...

http://www.danshistory.com/ww2/bombs.shtml
http://www.nucleus.com/~ltwright/bombs&mines.htm

[Shiva]

The Warbirds Resource Group (Luftwaffe) has what I think is the definitive specs for all the German bombs used in WW2, (link below), just wish I could find something similar for British/US/Russian.

A wonderful resource.

Several weeks back in one of the bombing threads, I posted about wanting to get the SD 4 HL bomblet (74 bombs in AB 500-1 container, 40 bombs in AB 250 container) as one of the Luftwaffe ordnance loadouts. A shaped charge at proper standoff distance has a penetration of approximately 4.5 times the charge diameter; halve that for reduced standoff and non-perpendicular impact, and I think 6" of armor penetration is enough to wax any of the GVs we have currently; you have to get a lot closer to use them effectively, but cluster-bombing a tight group of GVs sitting just outside a VH would be a lot of fun...