Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: caldera on February 01, 2013, 02:01:05 PM
-
Despite the absolutely ridiculous number of hours flown last tour (due to the usual winter time layoff - and having no life ;)), I mostly stayed away from CV groups and Strats. That is because it is finally starting to sink in through my thick skull, that a defending fighter is in far more danger from auto-puffy than enemy bombers are. I learned this the hard way, by getting shot down just about every month by friendly fire.
Truth be told, I have actually seen Strat puffy kill a bomber (including one B-29) exactly 5 times in the many years that I have been hunting them - so it does happen, just not too often. Have witnessed bombers getting torched over CVs, but can't confirm if those were from auto or manned puffy ack.
Anyway, I estimate that I have tried to kill enemy bombers over friendly CVs and Strats a maximum of 25 times this month. In those few times, my plane has been insta-killed four times by friendly puffy. :bhead :bhead :bhead :bhead No other hits were taken prior to the insta-kills. The number of deaths is atypically high, but it does happen much more often than it does to the intended targets of the ack.
Yeah, it's only four deaths - who cares? It's the seeming invulnerability of level bombers that is in question here. Of course friendlies should get killed in the ack, but why wouldn't straight and level bombers take damage or die much more often than they do? Just who is it that the auto-ack is targeting anyway? It seems amazing that bombers so rarely catch fire or get pilot kills like this. Do bombers have puffy-proof glass? The puffy explodes all around the formation, making a nice safe coccoon of doom for a fighter to try and wade through.
These guys weren't even firing at me (I have all the films, if anyone wants):
Exhibit A - F4U-1C:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-1b.png)
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-1.png)
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-1a.png)
Exhibit B - F4U-4:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-2.png)
This one hit so close, I just went poof before the blood hit the windscreen.
Exhibit C - Spit XVI:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-3-a.png)
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-3b.png)
Exhibit D - Tempest:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-4.png)
This hit wasn't even close. :mad:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-4b.png)
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/puffyinsta-death-4c.jpg)
There you have it. <F> Puffy Ack.
<end whine>
-
These were not the pictures I was hoping for o_o ... *sigh* but I agree
-
Stop Flying into the Flak, or if you do you accept the risk.
-
Note that all of the bombers the puffy was firing at are untouched ;)
-
Puffy ain't nothin but hoe's and tricks compared to 5" guns... just sayin.
-
More fun - pop 3K in a CV battle, *ping*. "Oh, you wanted to fight? Here, have a (insert damage here) instead."
-
You want to test this? Up a set of B17s and meet a friend from the other side over a cv group. Fly a nice tight formation with your friend in the enemy buff and count the hits you both take, and how many trips over the CV you have to make to lose a buff, 2 or all 3. Then compare notes.
-
Wirb ace for Ehrler :aok
-
Friendly puffy whammied me last night for the first time all month. I noted my wreckless and agressive behavior, made a record of the results, and will further continue with slightly more effort (now) at avoiding friendly puffy (particularly when I'm slow).
-
Whammy!
(http://anchorman2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/champkind1.png)
-
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-I6CbloNwI8M/TsVgXCfWKpI/AAAAAAAAANs/wPQtY5zQLrI/s1600/whammy.gif)
You fly into Flak you press your luck
-
last time I flew b26's to sink the cv I got about 2 or 3 kills from their own ack while I was in the bombers postions :banana: :banana: :banana:.
midway
-
Had a enemy 262 dogging my FM2 a couple of Weeks ago. Couldn't get an angle on him and there was a enemy cv close by, I flew into the edge of the enemy cvs puff range and kept it there. The tactic worked the 262 had to egress with a smoking engine.
-
I wonder how many complains it will take before something is done about puff ack
-
For the thousands of puffy ack that have gone "puf" around me, I can say that it is inevitable that I am sometimes going to be hit. If this was an every mission/every flight sort of thing, I'd wonder. but as it is it is real simple: the longer you are in puffy ack the more likely you are to get hit. Also, HTC is on record saying that puffy ack is in a box around a plane. When you are in range of a CV you will in range of the puffy and when in range of the puffy you get the imaginary box around your plane. The best way to avoid puffy damage is to get out of the range of the CV. Roll the dice and take what you get.
I personally dont have an issue with take some damage from puffy ack, friend or foe, it is a "simulation" risk and either way I dont lose any sleep over it one way or another.
I'll vote for HTC to keep it as it is.
-
Friendly Puffy ack has sent me to the tower or a home field more times than I can count. Also cost me 2 jets... Nevermind.
I feel that as Puffy can hit both sides, so should the field ack. That'll stop ponys fleeing to ack only to be 'friendly fired' :D
-
Except this isn't a sim, it's a game. I want to fight (and kill/be killed by) other human players, not some random AI that decides "oops, you're going to die now." It doesn't work in a full multiplayer game like AH. This only pertains to CV puffy ack, because the auto 20mm ack, it prevents people from vulching and adds as a layer of deterrent to base grabbers. What the heck does puffy ack add to? They don't kill bombers, they ruin any fight that happens over 3K, and once a CV get close enough to shore, it acts as a tool to deny any alt advantage in a fight.
I say remove the damn thing completely, and replace it by giving the 5" gunners more guns to control. So that three to five guns are slaved to one position. What does this do? It now actually poses a threat to bombers. If you can't aim in a 5", then you can't kill. However, if you CAN aim, then you are rewarded with kills. And honestly, most players can't hit anything past 5K with the 5 inchers anyways, even more so if their target is a fast moving fighter.
-
I feel that as Puffy can hit both sides, so should the field ack. That'll stop ponys fleeing to ack only to be 'friendly fired' :D
That happens already, but rarely.
-
Caldera,
It has been explained over and over and over and yet you and others keep creating these stupid threads. Bombers do get hit more than fighters do by far. The issue you see is that a single hit will kill or cripple a fighter but a bomber is usually unaffected other than losing some hit points from the section that took the hit.
Why?
Bombers are much, much tougher than fighters.
Solution:
HTC increases the puffy ack damage by 100, thus any hit to any plane is fatal.
Result:
Players see that bombers get hit much more often than fighters. Bombers are slaughtered by CV groups and by strats.
-
On some maps to have any sort of air combat you have to fly in puff ack. And it certainly tempers the fun for everyone.
-
seems I only die in ack when I'm in a perk ride
-
Bombers are much, much tougher than fighters.
Are bomber pilots tougher than fighter pilots? 3/4 of these were insta-kills on the pilot, with the 4th lighting up the Corsair for an almost as quick death. Given that the ack is aiming for the bombers, shouldn't puffy bursts hit the cockpit of the bomber far more often than the fighter trying to kill it? :rolleyes:
How many of those pilot kill graphics have you seen happen to bombers flying through ack. I haven't seen a single one. Ever.
-
It doesn't make sense to me that you turn off friendly fire but not turn off damage from friendly ack.
Just sayin'.
-
Bombers are slaughtered by CV groups and by strats.
I've done the tests: as it is currently set up the auto puffy flak has a 10% chance of disabling one buff out of a set of three before it drops on the CV and zero percent chance of killing more than one. In other words the current puffy ack does not protect the CV... ever. So instead of "bombers are slaughtered by CV groups" it's the other way around, CV groups are slaughtered by bombers with pretty much nothing stopping them (except occasionally player manned 5", but even that is really hard). So to protect the CV, players in planes have to try to intercept the bombers and they are rewarded by occasionally being blown up by their own flak.
-
Are bomber pilots tougher than fighter pilots? 3/4 of these were insta-kills on the pilot, with the 4th lighting up the Corsair for an almost as quick death. Given that the ack is aiming for the bombers, shouldn't puffy bursts hit the cockpit of the bomber far more often than the fighter trying to kill it? :rolleyes:
How many of those pilot kill graphics have you seen happen to bombers flying through ack. I haven't seen a single one. Ever.
No, but there are usually TWO of them (pilot & co-pilot). I hit CVs with bombers all the time, and it is a rare time where I don't have a 5" gunner take out at least one of my drones. Puffy ack rarely, if ever, accounts for kills against me and I am not coming in at high altitude on a CV. Usually you will find me under 10K, so I am easily in range of the puffy for a good minute before the 5" gunners start popping off.
I'm a buff geek so you will find me at your strats, or on your CV taking puffy - and I can't think of the last time puffy even damaged me, much less got a kill.
Two suggestions I would make for puffy tweaking:
1. The slower you move in the puffy box, the more puffy you should take - and not just because you are in the box longer. Slower moving planes should have more bursts concentrated on them because the aiming point is smaller.
2. I'd eliminate pilot wounds from the possible outcomes of a puffy hit and replace that with an engine hit. I think there would be a lot less whining if the insta-kill pilot hits were removed from this "random element" AI that no player can avoid. Replacing it with an engine hit would be more realistic - I fly B-17s a LOT and have NEVER lost an engine to puffy ack. It would actually make it more realistic (and more entertaining) if I had to complete a bomb run on 3 engines and try to get back home with an engine or two shot out.
-
needs to be fixed as a matter of priority I'm afraid.
can't hit 200mph box formations for love or money and gets a fighter doing 400mph @ 3.0k first ping, from 20k away absolute nuts!!!
and yes this did just happen to my perk plane after fighting and killing 5 guys single handed. :cry
-
Had a enemy 262 dogging my FM2 a couple of Weeks ago. Couldn't get an angle on him and there was a enemy cv close by, I flew into the edge of the enemy cvs puff range and kept it there. The tactic worked the 262 had to egress with a smoking engine.
:rofl I'm going to have to remember that.
-
No, but there are usually TWO of them (pilot & co-pilot). I hit CVs with bombers all the time, and it is a rare time where I don't have a 5" gunner take out at least one of my drones. Puffy ack rarely, if ever, accounts for kills against me and I am not coming in at high altitude on a CV. Usually you will find me under 10K, so I am easily in range of the puffy for a good minute before the 5" gunners start popping off.
I'm a buff geek so you will find me at your strats, or on your CV taking puffy - and I can't think of the last time puffy even damaged me, much less got a kill.
Two suggestions I would make for puffy tweaking:
1. The slower you move in the puffy box, the more puffy you should take - and not just because you are in the box longer. Slower moving planes should have more bursts concentrated on them because the aiming point is smaller.
2. I'd eliminate pilot wounds from the possible outcomes of a puffy hit and replace that with an engine hit. I think there would be a lot less whining if the insta-kill pilot hits were removed from this "random element" AI that no player can avoid. Replacing it with an engine hit would be more realistic - I fly B-17s a LOT and have NEVER lost an engine to puffy ack. It would actually make it more realistic (and more entertaining) if I had to complete a bomb run on 3 engines and try to get back home with an engine or two shot out.
caldera is right about the puffy ack and buffs. to sink a cv I will fly at 5.5 and it is rare that the puffy ack or mg's alone will cause damage to my buffs. but if I come up at 3001 alt then my figher is a goner the first time puffy acks hits.
his suggestions are good.
midway
-
Friendly Puffy ack has sent me to the tower or a home field more times than I can count. Also cost me 2 jets... Nevermind.
I feel that as Puffy can hit both sides, so should the field ack. That'll stop ponys fleeing to ack only to be 'friendly fired' :D
Field ack isn't friendly safe at all.
I've had 3-4 situations where I've had a pilot wound or sheared wing from friendly field ack attack. It's usually because they're firing at the guy I'm chasing, and as their shots are usually missing behind the plane, they're whizzing past me as I follow.
-
needs to be fixed as a matter of priority I'm afraid.
can't hit 200mph box formations for love or money and gets a fighter doing 400mph @ 3.0k first ping, from 20k away absolute nuts!!!
and yes this did just happen to my perk plane after fighting and killing 5 guys single handed. :cry
Wrong. It hits the planes. It kills the planes. The problem is you cannot count on it killing the planes.
Stop caring about the CVs and this issue does away.
Not directed at you Bruv but there are lots of DA crybabies in this thread. There is a reason. Just saying.
-
Field ack isn't friendly safe at all.
I've had 3-4 situations where I've had a pilot wound or sheared wing from friendly field ack attack. It's usually because they're firing at the guy I'm chasing, and as their shots are usually missing behind the plane, they're whizzing past me as I follow.
And the funniest thing is that if manned ack hits you by accident that won't do damage at all.
-
Its a disgrace I flew over enemy cv and had two kills I dive down onto to set of Lancasters that was flying for CV ack cover, TKO and Twinboom saluted me for my efforts. :old:
To be honest it was two sectors to get home and it was a godsend :rofl
I logged forwith and went for a plop and to get ready to do the weekly shop :)
-
I've had cv puffy ack take out a drone and more than once.
I've had strat puffy take out my lead plane and/or a drone countless times, and none of these times (strats) was I less than 12k or greater, i.e. so it was not auto-ack.
It does happen.
:salute
-
I think it HTC's way of saying don't fly perk planes near the carrier, and nobody should be flying a spit XVI :lol. If you were flying a VAL you probably would have been fine :neener: I agree though, Buffs do seem to get through the auto ack fairly easily.
:salute
BigRat
-
Caldera,
It has been explained over and over and over and yet you and others keep creating these stupid threads. Bombers do get hit more than fighters do by far. The issue you see is that a single hit will kill or cripple a fighter but a bomber is usually unaffected other than losing some hit points from the section that took the hit.
Why?
Bombers are much, much tougher than fighters.
Solution:
HTC increases the puffy ack damage by 100, thus any hit to any plane is fatal.
Result:
Players see that bombers get hit much more often than fighters. Bombers are slaughtered by CV groups and by strats.
OR....
The Puffy shuts off in the presence of a friendly fighter. The fighter is much more of a threat to the buffs than the puffy is. So the puffy is making the carier more vulnerable. Certainly not the intention.
In real life, wouldn't they cease firing, if friendly planes were moving in to attack enemy planes?
wouldn't that make everyone happy?
Win win. :salute
-
OR....
The Puffy shuts off in the presence of a friendly fighter. The fighter is much more of a threat to the buffs than the puffy is. So the puffy is making the carier more vulnerable. Certainly not the intention.
In real life, wouldn't they cease firing, if friendly planes were moving in to attack enemy planes?
wouldn't that make everyone happy?
Win win. :salute
+1 but I can imagine the difficulty to coad it
-
OR....
The Puffy shuts off in the presence of a friendly fighter. The fighter is much more of a threat to the buffs than the puffy is. So the puffy is making the carier more vulnerable. Certainly not the intention.
In real life, wouldn't they cease firing, if friendly planes were moving in to attack enemy planes?
wouldn't that make everyone happy?
Win win. :salute
Nice Vink! This is the idea we have been waiting on. :salute
-
OR....
The Puffy shuts off in the presence of a friendly fighter. The fighter is much more of a threat to the buffs than the puffy is. So the puffy is making the carier more vulnerable. Certainly not the intention.
In real life, wouldn't they cease firing, if friendly planes were moving in to attack enemy planes?
wouldn't that make everyone happy?
Win win. :salute
Probably be easier to make friendly Puff non damaging to you.
-
OR....
The Puffy shuts off in the presence of a friendly fighter. The fighter is much more of a threat to the buffs than the puffy is. So the puffy is making the carier more vulnerable. Certainly not the intention.
In real life, wouldn't they cease firing, if friendly planes were moving in to attack enemy planes?
wouldn't that make everyone happy?
Win win. :salute
Vinkman, Vinkman, Vinkman...................... ...........so simple....................... ................love this idea man, well done. You gotta know HTC can do this, he's kind of a big deal in the world of code......
-
My favorite is when I'm getting shot at my puffy and the cv is almost completely out of sight! I swear it shoots well beyond 20k radius.
Another favorite of mine is when the cv shoots me when I'm trying to defend the base from the horde and I can't even get up over 3k with out getting shot at even more. :rolleyes:
-
My favorite is when I'm getting shot at my puffy and the cv is almost completely out of sight! I swear it shoots well beyond 20k radius.
This happened to me a couple weeks ago. Climb out to kill buffs inbound to CV, make passes (puffy popping all around - no hits on me), climb back out for more inbound... climb, climb climb, ping... dead. Our CV was to my dead 6, no puffy popping, no enemy near, and the CV was a good ways back. It was weird enough I thought I had run into an enemy CV.
Squaddies told me I was just stupid. :cry
-
If something like that happens, it'd be the best time to send in a lottery ticket, too. People really do get jackpots, as often as someone gets killed by their own puffy ack compared to the amount of sorties. Or, if you like, calculate the possibility of this true event: A hunter saw a wood grouse sitting on top of a spruce. He shot at it and missed, instead the bullet killed his brother who was sitting with other hunters at a fire two miles away. I'm surprised that those hording fluffy dust bunnies don't kill more.
-
Nice Vink! This is the idea we have been waiting on. :salute
Thanks. Headed to the Wish list. ;)
-
+1 but I can imagine the difficulty to coad it
HTC already calculate which enemy is the closest to the CV and then calculates a puffy box around the enemy based on speed and course changes. So it might be really simple...
IF friendly in Puffy-box THEN choose different enemy.
So if all the bandits have friendlies near them...no puffy.
-
Interesting idea. Either that, or have puffy ack actually hit what they are aiming at once in a while. :aok
-
wouldn't it be closer to RL ,IF bombers flying straight for the CV, they would pay the penalty for it ? if you followed the buff set ,it would be your funeral as well,
The game would change to dive bombing the CV, with heavy singe/twin engine fighters, not killed by buffs flying slow and straight for the CV in formation.
My 2 cents.
-
wouldn't it be closer to RL ,IF bombers flying straight for the CV, they would pay the penalty for it ? if you followed the buff set ,it would be your funeral as well,
The game would change to dive bombing the CV, with heavy singe/twin engine fighters, not killed by buffs flying slow and straight for the CV in formation.
My 2 cents.
I like that idea, however I don't think HTC will change the hit % of auto puffy on buffs
-
I don't think you can show where the average number of shots fired to hits against bombers is changed in any way by their direction of flight.
There was a reason that defensive fighters did not often attack inside of the flack killing fields. It is actually easier in AH from everything I have read.
-
There was a reason that defensive fighters did not often attack inside of the flack killing fields. It is actually easier in AH from everything I have read.
True, but in real life straight and level buffs in on a cv would have likely been torn apart where here in the game the auto puffy will almost NEVER down a buff.
Something needs to change...
-
True, but in real life straight and level buffs in on a cv would have likely been torn apart where here in the game the auto puffy will almost NEVER down a buff.
Something needs to change...
Just man the 88mm. Straight flying buff is easy pickins for it.
-
Just man the 88mm. Straight flying buff is easy pickins for it.
?? there's no 88 mm on the CV. And have you ever actually tried to hit anything with the 88 mm (or the 5" on the CV for that matter)?
-
In real life, wouldn't they cease firing, if friendly planes were moving in to attack enemy planes?
No, the gunners would still keep on firing until the threat has passed, regardless if there was a friendly plane in the AAA zone making an attack on a bandit.
ack-ack
-
No, the gunners would still keep on firing until the threat has passed, regardless if there was a friendly plane in the AAA zone making an attack on a bandit.
ack-ack
This is true, I think I read where McCampbell dove in behiind some enemy dive bombers as they went into their dive and his friendly ack was shooting at them and he said he was scared he was going to be hit by his own gunners...
:aok
-
No, the gunners would still keep on firing until the threat has passed, regardless if there was a friendly plane in the AAA zone making an attack on a bandit.
ack-ack
But in real life the gunners were lethal. Puffy isn't.
-
Let me see if I can summarize my take on all this:
Auto Puffy is ineffective against enemy buffs. It does not down them nor prevent them from dropping their ordnance. The only thing it is good for is occasionally downing friendlies that are actively trying to engage the threat to the cv group. This in no way benefits the cv group defensively.
I believe there are multiple options here:
1. Either remove the puffy vs buffs because it doesn't do anything except occasionally help the enemy buffs (pretty sure that is not the intent).
2. Code the auto puffy to become more accurate vs enemies the longer you fly straight and level. Every time the enemy varies a certain % of their direction and altitude, the auto puffy will have to recalibrate the lead/alt of their position. This would encourage an actual attack from dive bombers and torpedo bombers to down a CV group as utilized in WW2.
Disclaimers/Assumptions:
1. Yes, we all understand a 5" gunner can hit the buffs (but we're not talking about manned guns here, we're talking about auto puffy).
2. Yes, we all understand friendly fire happened in WW2; however, I'd be willing to bet puffy downed more buffs than friendly defenders, otherwise why would they use it?
3. We are not talking about enemy fighters here, only buffs. The code for fighters already seems effective enough to disable an enemy fighter quickly.
-
Flak now targets bombers in preference to fighters. A fighter must be at least half the distance of the bomber before the flak will target the fighter over the bomber.
Flak will stop firing at at enemy planes that have a friendly plane within 1000 yards of it. It will either switch to a different target or stop firing if no other targets are available.
-
Wish Granted!! Sweet!
-
...
In real life, wouldn't they cease firing, if friendly planes were moving in to attack enemy planes?
...
Nope.
Read any tactical account of CV battles in the PTO (i.e. "Clash of the Carriers" by Tillman & Coonts) and you'll find at least one description of USN interceptors flying into friendly fire to chase IJN attackers.
-
Flak now targets bombers in preference to fighters. A fighter must be at least half the distance of the bomber before the flak will target the fighter over the bomber.
Flak will stop firing at at enemy planes that have a friendly plane within 1000 yards of it. It will either switch to a different target or stop firing if no other targets are available.
hallelujah!!
this was done within 2 days of suggesting WHY??? have we suffered many a :ahand :cry :cry :cry :cry all these years :( was this for your own perverted amusement!!??
Looking forward to examining the effects of the changes :salute
-
Yes Bruv your whines have now officially lamified AH. Fighters no longer have anything to fear from attacking bombers in puffy ack while the pilot is busy and head down. So, the next whine will be:
"Fighters that shoot bombers down get too many points for no threat of danger." When that changes the lamification will continue until only girl scouts and den mothers like this game.
-
Yes Bruv your whines have now officially lamified AH. Fighters no longer have anything to fear from attacking bombers in puffy ack while the pilot is busy and head down. So, the next whine will be:
"Fighters that shoot bombers down get too many points for no threat of danger." When that changes the lamification will continue until only girl scouts and den mothers like this game.
Actually, your mere presence "lamifies AH". At least Bruv will fight.
-
Actually, your mere presence "lamifies AH". At least Bruv will fight.
Hey, without Chalenge we wouldn't know the proper way to conserve fuel at 30,000ft.
ack-ack
-
The whines have paid off.
Bless the COADers!
Thank you! :pray
-
For the thousands of puffy ack that have gone "puf" around me, I can say that it is inevitable that I am sometimes going to be hit. If this was an every mission/every flight sort of thing, I'd wonder. but as it is it is real simple: the longer you are in puffy ack the more likely you are to get hit. Also, HTC is on record saying that puffy ack is in a box around a plane. When you are in range of a CV you will in range of the puffy and when in range of the puffy you get the imaginary box around your plane. The best way to avoid puffy damage is to get out of the range of the CV. Roll the dice and take what you get.
I personally dont have an issue with take some damage from puffy ack, friend or foe, it is a "simulation" risk and either way I dont lose any sleep over it one way or another.
I'll vote for HTC to keep it as it is.
to late and it seems that all ack has been nerfed :bhead
-
Nope.
Read any tactical account of CV battles in the PTO (i.e. "Clash of the Carriers" by Tillman & Coonts) and you'll find at least one description of USN interceptors flying into friendly fire to chase IJN attackers.
I do remember reading about B-17s, B-24s, and Lancasters with IJN markings attacking US carriers utilizing straight and level bombing from altitudes between 7000 and 14000 ft. :rofl
-
I do remember reading about B-17s, B-24s, and Lancasters with IJN markings attacking US carriers utilizing straight and level bombing from altitudes between 7000 and 14000 ft. :rofl
Japanese regularly used level bombers to attack Allied ships.
ack-ack
-
Japanese regularly used level bombers to attack Allied ships.
ack-ack
This is true, I've seen video of high japanese bombers bombing ships.... I think it was in the south pacific, early in the war...
-
Japanese regularly used level bombers to attack Allied ships.
ack-ack
CV groups? Did they get torn apart?
-
If I recall they were wholly ineffective. This is why the same Japanese planes often carried torpedoes, and would come in low to use them against ships.
-
CV groups? Did they get torn apart?
Against any shipping they encountered and yes, for the most part they were chewed up.
ack-ack
-
G4M Betty's sank Prince of Wales and the Repulse... And those Betty's set on fire if you look at them funny.
-
The whines have paid off.
Bless the COADers!
Thank you! :pray
Indeed, bombers are more confident and much more reckless. I ran out of BK5 ammo dinking around without tracers last night, and the poor B24 pilot didn't realise he was being distracted and herded twords our 163 base until he was over halfway into the fields radar and the first 163s launched were co alt.
-
Flak will stop firing at at enemy planes that have a friendly plane within 1000 yards of it. It will either switch to a different target or stop firing if no other targets are available.
Thank you HTC, for addressing the issue. :salute
-
Against any shipping they encountered and yes, for the most part they were chewed up.
ack-ack
The film I saw the planes were real high, and missed badly... none were shot down by the AAA.... IIRC they were in the same formation as AH three plane wedge!
-
G4M Betty's sank Prince of Wales and the Repulse... And those Betty's set on fire if you look at them funny.
I doubt either of those two ships had the kind of AA firepower modeled in our CV groups. IIRC, that was also one of the first (or at least the first major wartime example) of air power flexing muscle against Sea targets.
-
The ships had state of the art AA at the time, but it wasn't working. Heat and humidity killed their radar, so their radar-guided AA wasn't functioning. Their 2-pound ammo had also disintegrated due to time in tropical environments.
The level bombers were entirely ineffective. Of 9 G3M Nell bombers that dropped 1 500lb armor piercing bomb each onto the same destroyer target, none scored any hits and turned back. 8 G4M Betty bombers dropped on Prince of Wales and only one scored a hit that did no real damage and the ship continued on in full fighting condition.
It was an entire flight of torpedo bombers that came in low which doomed the PoW. She took a torpedo in the prop shaft which ruined the joint into the hull. They tried to repair it but it flooded many compartments, caused a rather major list, and shut down electrics. This means that the guns on one side could not depress down low enough to shoot at attacking bombers later, and the power was cut out to the electronically controlled guns, and the twin 5" turret was also without power, sitting unused. The electrically controlled rudder was crippled and the ship was running on just 1 of 3 prop shafts, effectively critically injured from 1 single torpedo hit.
A follow up attack landed 3 or 4 more hits on the starboard side, which was exposed due to the list, and undefended because guns could not aim at the attackers. This finished the ship off, though she didn't sink right away.
Meanwhile, Repulse was dodging some 19 or 20 torpedo attacks and got caught mid-dodge from both left and right at the same time and took her first torpedo hit. Moments later she took 3 more. Repulse did not have modern anti-torpedo construction or compartmentalization, being an older design. Crew were ordered overboard and she listed heavily for about 6 minutes then capsized and sank. The entire attack until she was gone lasted some 13 minutes or so.
Basically these ships were sunk for many factors, but NOT because of level bombers.
-
According to Ira Jones there was a squadron of Brewster Buffalo's in the air at the time of the attack but were instructed by higher command to rtb because the ships firepower was sufficient to defend them against air attack :bhead
-
Another of the many problems. The commander/admiral at the time underestimated the force that was hunting him. Keep in mind NO capital ship had been sunk by bombers at this point in the war. There was still an air of invincibility about battleships in 1941. He also felt they were well out of range of any attackers. There were some available forces, but they were also in the wrong place and weren't called at the appropriate time. Something like that. They buzzed the rescue efforts and kept CAP as long as they could but this is all well after the fact and all the attackers had left.
From the ferocity of the attack, and the known quality of the Brewsters used, I don't think they would have stopped the end results, even if they had been there.