Is no one using float planes for a reason?

[lukasdietrich]

I have seen many designs on these boards by now, and almost none of them are including seaplanes.  
In RL almost everything above CL size including float planes for recon and spotting.  

In game is this just too unmanageable? 
Do ships gain a gunnery advantage by having float planes?  Can they drop flares in night battles?
Are they worth it at all for recon? 

[garrisonchisholm]

I always and only use floatplanes. I put them on my CLs and DDs (1 only allowed) because I don't care if they start and stop to launch pre-catapult.

I think you might be encountering observation bias, because CLs are not the most common type posted.

[rodentnavy]

I use floatplanes on heavy cruisers and battlecruisers, ships I expect to find in a mission wandering around looking lost trying to find some TRs before darkness descends. They turn irritating coastal raids against spread out targets into a moderately easy massacre.

[thesovietonion]

There's a bug right now where they don't auto-launch a search pattern. When that is fixed many, many more of my designs will have floats. I generally keep them on my BBs and BCs where I can spend some extra tonnage. Depending on the rest of my fleet I either keep my CLs somewhat small, with a few guns and maximum mines and speed, or go for fleet support lights that generally drop the mines and some speed for guns and armor. There's room there to squeeze in a FS but not if I have to manually launch every single one.

[snwh]

last game I used floats on basically every ship CL and bigger. anything bigger than a CA had two cats, and at least two floats. But I rarely post designs on here.

However this game I havent been using them near as much in an effort to save tonnage. That doesn't mean they aren't useful however. I'm still just tryng to figure out if they should be default 'must have' equipment

[klavohunter]

I made CLAAs with a pair of floatplanes; my late-game Alaska-style cruiser-hunter/raider BC had a flock of like 8 floatplanes to help her spot targets.

I even had my corvettes mounting floatplanes, though I think they probably had no effect on ASW.


I didn't bother with them on my Battleships, though, since my earlier boats were lacking in a lot of secondary guns and other features to ensure I could keep up in the dreadnought race of main guns and armor. I felt no need to put them on later Battleships since so many other ships had air cover for them.

[brygun]

Ive been trying experiments with bomb capable float planes. Didnt know about the search bug so that seems to be part of my struggles.

There are problems with the auto search like how it grabs many planes and unless you absolutely remember in every battle those floatplanes fly out on recon. This makes it hard to keep a reserve of floatplanes for bombing strike.

Ive made designs which are float plane raiders using AV as the base hull rather than AMC. Cost more but dont disappear when a war ends. IIRC one came in at ~4,500 tons with 6 inch guns in 1,2,3,4 (the two forward and two aft corners), 3-5 floatplanes in a seaplane hanger (representing the plane being lowered into the merchant cargo hold) and auxiallary features. A fair speed is possible as you arent limited to the AMC speed restriction. Im in a battle right now so cant load the design to show.

AV planes as a raider actually seems to go well. The planes give a bonus to the raider function. The speed helps escape which you should always try to do with these. The amount of merchants intercepted seems fair.

I imagine the floatplanes being 1 undergoing maintenance or spares. 1-2 flying long range recon and 1-2 flying bomb loaded shorter recon or awaiting the launch signal. This would have some chance of damaging or inspiring smaller merchants. Either way once the AVR (Aviation Vessel Raider) is shooting the merchant may radio for help and the planes give a long advance warning of incoming ships to run away, at that better speed.

Almost all my CL and CA carry 1 or 2 float planes for fleet recon. My BC, BB and B might carry 1 or might not. I do look at the plane and hanger being a fire risk. The B+ types almost never go into a fight without CL or CA which in my fleet have floatplane scouts.

In carry battles, assuming i remember at the start to block the auto search, I manually ready and launch the floatplanes in a search wave. The carriers are intended to save their attack planes once a target is located. Fighters flying CAP, escort or may be used as recon as even in the mid-air campaign I havent seen much air to air combat.

[noshurviverse]

Jun 1, 2019 20:22:40 GMT -6 brygun said:

Ive been trying experiments with bomb capable float planes. Didnt know about the search bug so that seems to be part of my struggles.

There are problems with the auto search like how it grabs many planes and unless you absolutely remember in every battle those floatplanes fly out on recon. This makes it hard to keep a reserve of floatplanes for bombing strike.

Ive made designs which are float plane raiders using AV as the base hull rather than AMC. Cost more but dont disappear when a war ends. IIRC one came in at ~4,500 tons with 6 inch guns in 1,2,3,4 (the two forward and two aft corners), 3-5 floatplanes in a seaplane hanger (representing the plane being lowered into the merchant cargo hold) and auxiallary features. A fair speed is possible as you arent limited to the AMC speed restriction. Im in a battle right now so cant load the design to show.

AV planes as a raider actually seems to go well. The planes give a bonus to the raider function. The speed helps escape which you should always try to do with these. The amount of merchants intercepted seems fair.

I imagine the floatplanes being 1 undergoing maintenance or spares. 1-2 flying long range recon and 1-2 flying bomb loaded shorter recon or awaiting the launch signal. This would have some chance of damaging or inspiring smaller merchants. Either way once the AVR (Aviation Vessel Raider) is shooting the merchant may radio for help and the planes give a long advance warning of incoming ships to run away, at that better speed.

Almost all my CL and CA carry 1 or 2 float planes for fleet recon. My BC, BB and B might carry 1 or might not. I do look at the plane and hanger being a fire risk. The B+ types almost never go into a fight without CL or CA which in my fleet have floatplane scouts.

In carry battles, assuming i remember at the start to block the auto search, I manually ready and launch the floatplanes in a search wave. The carriers are intended to save their attack planes once a target is located. Fighters flying CAP, escort or may be used as recon as even in the mid-air campaign I havent seen much air to air combat.

A while ago I argued that a CVL would make for a fantastic raider, but I think a seaplane carrier would do just as well. My point of view was that a wing of torpedo bombers would make it so any intercepting ship larger than a destroyer has to have air cover or be in extreme danger.

[brygun]

AVR Aviation Raider sample design.

Total build cost ~16,000 monthly 940. Puts it in the range of a light cruiser. Long range and reliable engines using oil. If you ended up on the tactical map just run away at its high speed. Naked armor. Minimal size floatplane group of 3. Qualifies for airplane bonus as a raider making it good at finding victims and avoiding interceptors.

I tried a micro carrier came out to 8,000 tons (almost twice the size) if I gave it armor and ~6,500 tons without armor. This is with a minimal group of 5 upto 8 depending on what guns etc was being tweaked in. Did notice you can have 6 airplanes with a spot of 6 meaning all could fly out in the strike. 

Cheap raiders work by generating more encounters with merchants to get the victory points and the more important starvation affects.

You could also build a small CL with a float plane. Im putting this up as a demonstration of a possible tactic. I like to think of them of a variant of converted merchant but the cost and build time make them more like using merchant shipping yards to make cost effective raiders.

Attachments:

[brygun]

Jun 1, 2019 21:07:22 GMT -6 noshurviverse said:

Jun 1, 2019 20:22:40 GMT -6 brygun said:

A while ago I argued that a CVL would make for a fantastic raider, but I think a seaplane carrier would do just as well. My point of view was that a wing of torpedo bombers would make it so any intercepting ship larger than a destroyer has to have air cover or be in extreme danger.

Unarmored a flight deck carrier came to ~6,500 and with armor vs destroyer 4-5 in or long range 6" it came to ~8,000 tons.

One thing about the CVL is the mandatory minimum air group is 5 plus you have them in a hanger. My sample was 6-8 planes. 

There was a warning that carriers under 10,000 tons needed catapults to launch fast planes with heavy loads. Dont hae more details on the numbers. A torp bomber is probably going to be okay.

Real life wise a torp bomber raider is going to be devastating. A group of 6 would have 1-2 scouts (depending on if a plane wasnt working) and 4 for the strike team. Most merchants wouldnt stand a chance and would take 1, 2 or more torp hits. 1-2 torp hits could sink or cripple the merchant. Cripple being easy for follow up or it might call for a light cruiser which itself may or may not survive the mini air raid. Meanwhile the CVLR (Carrier vessel light raider) is somewhere in a 100+ nm radius over the horizon.

Done "right" the AVR is going with the wolf in sheep's clothing of looking like a merchant from a distance. Float planes stowed in the cargo. Cranes for handling planes are just cranes. Guns would need covers with that already figured out for AMC and Q-Ships. Float planes with small bombs help but they don't hit very often.

>>>

I just checked and a CVL micro raider is still sailing in my fleets. Thin on guns and AA, no armor, 5 planes, came to 4,800 tons.

All else being equal the tonnage is an approximate indicator of cost as the ship steel and engines scale with displacement.

Attachments:

[noshurviverse]

Jun 1, 2019 22:27:06 GMT -6 brygun said:

<snip>

Not to undermine the effort you went through there, but I actually was talking about in real life. My idea was more of a large raider, something in the 10,000-15,000 range and carrying 20-40 aircraft. That being said, I actually had an "extreme budget" CVL when I did my first post-Versailles German playthrough. It was 3000t, 20kts with a speed focused oil engine and it's armament consisted of a single 10.5 cm SK C/33. Surpirsinly useful, she not only allowed naval aviation to be set to high research, but also had a habit of showing up as often as possible in combat to provide her 6-plane scouting force.

[brygun]

One thing about carriers is that their main firepower, the planes, are easily merged with others. 5 x 6 plane mini CVL field 30 planes just like one mid size carrier.

Part of my posting those designs was a common reference. The 5ish plane CVL came out to around 5,000 - 6,000 tons. The 10,000 ton you mention may have had twice the displacement but it has more than twice the planes. There is effeciency of scale in this case.

For raiders, real life or game, the number of places matters. 2 x 5,000 ton 5 plane raiders search two different places where a 10,000 ton 30 plane raider would have planes searching a similiar radius. The 2 ships likely detect more targets.

However when it comes to defending from a counter attack the 30 plane carrier is much more likely to survive.

Also the 30 plane group can attack hardened, tough or warship targets the likes of which the small ones could detect but not harm.

Lots of pros and cons here. Certainly different doctrines could work.

Back to the original poster though... there are lots of different ideas on carriers and float planes.

As for dropping flares at night I dont know and inclined to think that hasn't/wasn't implemented.

[aeson]

With a real-world raiding carrier, you'd need to worry about a lot of logistical issues that Rule the Waves 2 just sort of elides past. Replacement parts for aircraft, munitions, avgas, replacement aircraft for constructive or actual total losses in accidents and combat, and so on all have to be put somewhere, and you still have to fit the spare parts and fuel for the ship as well as the ammunition for the AA armament and most or all of what would have been the secondary battery on a more conventional large raider.

On top of that, unless you're talking about raiding carrier task forces rather than raiding carriers, this is a ship that's pretty much guaranteed to be without escorts, which might give the argument for a heavy anti-surface battery a lot more weight than it had for later historical carriers intended to operate with a reasonably powerful surface forces - especially since 10,000 to 15,000 tons is a relatively small carrier and ~30 aircraft is a relatively small air group by historical standards, so it doesn't have anything like the punch of a typical fleet carrier - so you might not even be saving as much deck space, tonnage, and internal volume as would be the case were you to entirely eliminate the main battery of a conventional raider and you're starting to look more like a flight deck cruiser (CF) than a light or escort carrier. By that point - if not earlier - you really need to start asking yourself what you're gaining by using a CV or CF rather than a more conventional raider with a few seaplanes.

[brygun]

Jun 2, 2019 12:16:39 GMT -6 aeson said:

 By that point - if not earlier - you really need to start asking yourself what you're gaining by using a CV or CF rather than a more conventional raider with a few seaplanes.

What better way to explore the ideas then to run them in a simulation! Like Rule the Waves 2! 

I suggest that going to 10,000 tons is missing the goal of cost effective raider. You could almost build 2 of the others and thus kill twice as many merchants. Having twice the firepower needed to kill one merchant doesn't help as their are no bonuses for twice-dead.

In terms of the plane's avgas, spares and munitions RTW2 has them in the tonnage used for the plane that far exceeds the plane's weight. Needs for ammunition, fuel and food are an issue for any raider, conventional or not. Graf Spree did what it did in WW2 because of the Altmark. Planes carried in a transport ship as cargo can be deck managed by the Aviation carrier's cranes and its not hard to imagine the transport, or the flat top, having at least one plane-capable crane to stock up the flat top CVLR without needing a flying off deck on the transport.

On an information addition I noticed the AVR I'm building have an ASW of 0 while the CVLR has a rating of 2. So the flat top with torp planes actually is contributing ever so slightly the to the war's anti-submarine effort. Would prefer if the game gave the AVR 1-2 points for its planes though.

>>>>

For consideration and debate:


In terms of comparison lets call the conventional raider with a few seaplanes a CLR, the flat top mini carrier the CVLR and the seaplane aviation raider AVR. Putting a + for an advantage and a - for a comparative weakness major points (in game and/or if really built) for comparison are:

CLR:
+ light armor
+ decent guns
+ can conventional fight an intercepting CL if caught
+ can act as a forward scout in a fleet battle
+ few seaplanes for scouting (like 2 or 3)
- highest build cost of the options
- can't fight a CA or bigger if caught
- little to no over the over horizon attack power
- obvious warship
- would have to stop for air handling ops

AVR:
- little or no armor
- moderate guns possible but not much armor
- can't fight CL or CA so should run on all "unexpected" forced encounters
+ a few or more seaplanes (2,3 up to 5 or 6)
+ lowest cost
+ looks like a merchant so has the best ability to hide
+ looks like a merchant so might trick its way into getting fuel and food, but not weapons nor planes, resupplied at neutrals
- would have to stop for air handling ops

CLVR:
+ only one of these with  an over the horizon attack power
+ torp planes could make an attack on a CA, maybe (only one of the 3 with a plausible chance)
- obvious warship, hard to fake being anything other than a carrier
+ Can fly planes in more weather states than the CLR or AVR
+ Can bomb land targets far inland (not represented in RTW2)
- limited guns
+/- option to build with a little armor and some bigger guns
- moderate cost (needs verifying especially with regards to the cost of the planes)
+ Largest air group so can make the largest searches for targets
+ Can provide planes in fleet actions


There isn't anyone absolute always best so far. The cost-to-benefit isn't well referenced yet. 

Also bear in mind that technology in each game will affect things. At one point only float planes are available making the CVLR not even possible. Without bombs on the floatplanes the CLR has a better case except for the way the AVR could still hide as a normal merchant and the AVR likely costs less.



>>>

Edit:

Sample CLR
6,100 tons, ~22,000 cost to build, 28 knots speed, long range oil fuel
4 x 6 inch guns (2 fore, 2 aft), 8 x 4 in DP (4 to a side), 2 underwater torps (1 p/s), various AA
Belt armor 2.5 in, light armor on 6" main turrets and 1" shields on 4" DP secondaries
2 floatplanes in hanger
cost to build 22,000 (the armor is expensive)

Cost comparison of the samples I've provided
AVR 16,000
CVLR 19,500
CLR 22,000

>>>
Edit 2:

Summary so far:

Most cost effective sea raider: AVR
Most adaptable and expensive: CLR
Best over the horizon ability: CVLR

[aeson]

Jun 2, 2019 18:22:43 GMT -6 brygun said:

What better way to explore the ideas then to run them in a simulation! Like Rule the Waves 2!

Rule the Waves 2 handles commerce raiding, carrier aircraft operations, and logistics far too abstractly to provide any real insight into how well one or another type of ship would work as a commerce raider in the real world.