Close Combat Series :: View topic - Airstrike too weak against tank ?

through

[^/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> CC5 Gold, Juno, Sword

#1: Airstrike too weak against tank ? Author: Massivattack, Location: St Priest (France)

Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:31 pm
—
First I hope this topic is in the right forum
This question come from a notice :
In the game, it is quasi-impossible to damage a (german) tank with aerial support.
However it is well known, that air-force was the best way to "kill" panzer. It is all the more true that fear airplane was a real problem to move armoured units. Panzer units had to move by night to escape "Jabo".
So my question is : would it be possible to improve air-strike efficiency and if yes, how ?
If the mod masters listen to me...
Could it be include inside GVS 4.5 ?

So many newbies questions... Embarassed

#2: Re: Airstrike too weak against tank ? Author: W_Model, Location: sweden

Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 4:23 pm
—

Massivattack wrote:

In the game, it is quasi-impossible to damage a (german) tank with aerial support.
However it is well known, that air-force was the best way to "kill" panzer.

For all I know allied air power was not very effective in hunting german armor. However, the the relative low no. of tanks lost due to CAP might be because germans tried to move during the dark hours.

In GJS it is my experince that a Typhoon attack results in a kill maybe 1/3 of the times. Spitfire run doesn't drop bombs.

#3: Re: Airstrike too weak against tank ? Author: sample,

Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 4:31 pm
—
only 4 % of the german tanks deployed in Normandy were destroyed by direct hits from allied aircrafts

#4: Re: Airstrike too weak against tank ? Author: Massivattack, Location: St Priest (France)

Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:52 am
—

W_Model wrote:

Massivattack wrote:

In the game, it is quasi-impossible to damage a (german) tank with aerial support.
However it is well known, that air-force was the best way to "kill" panzer.

How can u predict which kind of plane is going to support you ?
I hope It s not a random data...

#5: Re: Airstrike too weak against tank ? Author: Massivattack, Location: St Priest (France)

Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:57 am
—

sample wrote:

only 4 % of the german tanks deployed in Normandy were destroyed by direct hits from allied aircrafts

Is it an historical statistic ?
Where did u pick up it ?

#6: Author: Atilla,

Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:33 pm
—
Check this article out:

http://web.telia.com/~u18313395/normandy/articles/airpower.html

Air-to-ground weapons in WW2 where very inaccurate. Bombs, rockets and such had a very slim chance to hit a relatively small target like a tank is.

Besides, while destroing armor might be hard, infantry is vulnerable to attacking aircraft. Tanks without infantry-support are a much easier target for enemy AT-forces.

#7: Author: Tacloban,

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:57 pm
—
Well OK then how about artillery?

In the US Army's history of the Battle of the Bulge, there are repeated references to German armored attacks being repulsed by artillery barrage alone. Certainly there were plenty of misses, but the record seems to indicate that Allied artillery was effective against German armor.

#8: Author: Atilla,

Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:28 am
—
The British tested the effect of an artillery barrage on advancing armor using Churchill tanks I believe. A platoon of tanks advanced trough a heavy 25 pdr barrage. The effect on the tanks was neglectable.

A lucky artillery shell could destroy the engine compartiment of a tank. A torn track would be more frequent. An armor-penetrating hit would have been a very uncommen incident.

The effect of an artillery barrage on an armored attack would be enough to force the accompanying infantry to go down. That would leave the armor virtually 'blind', which would in turn be enough to halt the attack.

#9: Author: ronson, Location: England

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:36 pm
—
I agree with you generally Atilla, the Field artillery shell was HE which relied on blast and splinters to cause damage, these shells had no capability to penetrate armour plate.

However the biggest anomaly to my mind is not with the off field support, but with the 'sniper' like accuracy of the battalion mortars (81mm, 3inch etc.) these weapons are far too over-rated, bringing death and destruction to 1/2 tracks and infantry instantly. This is not just a fault with this mod but seems to occur almost across the board. I will try to explain this........

The standard Battalion mortar of 81mm or 3inch size fired a shell of around 3-4 kg or 8-9lb, This was a thin cased bomb containing an explosive charge designed to break into hundreds of splinters on bursting, it was these which caused the casualties to personnel NOT the explosive charge. The mortar bomb fell at an almost vertical angle which in turn had the effect of spreading these splinters over a very large area, unlike a field artillery round which fell at a much shallower angle, and tended to burrow slightly into the ground before bursting (even when fitted with a graze fuse).
The splinters would be deadly to standing or moving Infantry, but of little value against anything armoured especially if it happened to be moving.
Also to take into account is the delay from the request for fire, as these weapons were almost always used indirectly, to the actual landing of the bomb. The delay, would of course be less with pre-registered targets in a defensive situation or set piece attack and far more in a fluid battle.
The flight time varies with the range but a rough average of 5 seconds from firing to landing would not be too far out. This would have almost no bearing on a static target like an ATG, or even on moving Infantry, but against a fast moving 1/2 track going at approx 25MPH means that the target position could alter by up to 100m in ANY direction during the flight time of the bomb, making it almost impossible to hit.
The rate of fire also has a bearing on this with an mortar crew being able to fire 10-15 rounds per minute, which would create an almost impassable area to infantry and would also effectively suppress any guns, in the open by disabling the crew, or forcing those in gun pits to take cover.
Stationary Vehicles could be affected by a barrage, however here again the target area in which could be damaged is relatively small.

A futher point to consider is the MIMIMUM range of these weapons, which for the 81mm mortar is considered to be 100m, although by the time enemy infantry got within that range your crews clustered around your tubes would most likely be slightly dead!.

I hope these points are of use to you in any updates of your very fine mod, please don't look upon it as criticism, but more as an observation. As I mentioned before this does occur in other mods too, so maybe this should be posted in another thread rather than confined to this one. If this is the case please feel free to move this Smile

.

Cheers
Ronson

PS This applies to Battalion mortars and does not necessarily hold true for small (50mm etc.) or heavy (100mm +) weapons.

#10: Hi Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:08 pm
—
Hi

Good points men

Here is a Germans tank kill report from Normandy:

http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=3443

Example of time in air for 8cm mort:
LG0 = 14 sec
LG1 = 18 sec

Example of average number of 8cm mort need to hit a target 3x4m with ONE round:

Distance 960-1650 m, = 90 rounds..
Distance 260-670 m, = 22 to 23 rounds...

That’s just to hit..
Standing order for tanker when come under barrage is to move, a tank cant stand in HE barrage, the optics and such may be damaged or miss-set.

Stalk

Close Combat Series -> CC5 Gold, Juno, Sword

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1