|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 9, 2018 18:36:59 GMT -6
The problems with the AAM in Vietnam was related to problems with the LAU-7A missile launchers and the fact that the missile guidance system had not been coated against moisture and had been tested at Nellis AFB Las Vegas. It is very dry there and nothing like Danang and Vietnam jungle area. The problem with the LAU-7A was the lanyard that pulls after the missile is dropped. The AULT Report details the problems with both the AIM-9 and AIM-7. With the addition of the Sidewinder Extended Acquisition System in the cockpit, pilots only had to turn their head, and the missile seeker head locked on the target, then the pilots could fire the missile. By the end of the Vietnam War, all these issue were corrected. Before that, on the AIM-7, you had to fire the missile in groups to get one missile's motor's to ignite. It was called ripple firing. This was the only way to increase the kill probability. That all illustrates the point that testing of weapons in non-combat conditions is not necessarily indicative of how a weapon system will work in combat conditions. It took actual combat to uncover those issues, and it took time to get them rectified. Which means those early-era missiles in RTW2 should not be expected to perform well, since the technology is new and untried in combat. Wartime experience is what ultimately what gets those weapons systems improved.
Regarding AAM usage over Vietnam, what was the difference in kill rate early in the war as compared to later in the war, after the Ault report?
ETA: Thanks for posting the link, by the way. There were a lot of reasons for the improvements in kill ratios after the Ault Report of 1968. These changes were being enacted before the Ault Report. I will illuminate. The first was the development of the Fighter Weapons School at Miramar NAS (Now Miramar Marine Corp Air base). This began the process of teaching pilot air combat maneuvering or dogfighting using the best characteristics of the F4B/N and the F4J/S. You know this school by its other name: Top Gun. The USAF had the same type at Nellis, Red Flag. After these schools began, ACM began to improve as these pilots went back to their squadrons. The next development was the use of the APX-76 which now had a transponder in it. A pilot could now interrogate the bogie he has detected to determine before he gets into gun range, who that opponent is; Friend or Foe. The next development is the SUU-16-gun pod which gave the F4B/N and other aircraft that were built without a gun, a 20mm Gatling gun in a pod. The next development was the improvement in the reliability of the missiles. These are just some of the development, most occurring at the same time that changed the game against the NVAF. We also developed HARM missiles for SAM missiles and a team of pilots titled Wild Weasels. They were a great team that dealt with many of the missile threats that had plagued the pilots. The next development was the look down, shoot down fire control radar of the F4J/s, the AWG-10. Before this development, the MIG-17’s would dive below a squadron which could not see them in the clutter. They would fly under them and roll back up on their tails. With the Look down, shoot down systems, the US pilots could now seem them and conduct a maneuver to counter them. This was another game changer. There were many other changes, too many to put up here, but these were some of the most important, depending on how you look at it. Missile improvements also made life easier. Just a suggestion. I enjoy discussing the Vietnam Air War but I don't think it is something that will happen in the game. If the team does not matter and the technological discussion is worthwhile, we should continue. I don't know the answer.
|
|
|
Post by grosseadmiralfox on Dec 10, 2018 1:45:38 GMT -6
You know what? I want helicopters. The Germans were quite... enthusiastic in this regard... which is a development starting in 1918 (when Imperial Germany was looking at a Cechz electric-motor powered prototype as a jumping off point to replace their observation balloons).
Perhaps when you first get helicopters, they'll enhance your sub-sighting ability before improving ASW and water-borne rescues before, eventually, carrying AShMs?
|
|
|
Post by hrcak47 on Dec 10, 2018 4:22:04 GMT -6
I am quite certain we'll see these, first helicarrier is well within the timeframe, Kriegsmarine Drache, ex KJRM Zmaj seaplane tender converted to heli carrier.
Helicopters should be an evolution of a floatplane for fire correction, with an added ASW bonus and faster rearm/refuel times (no need to fish it out).
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 10, 2018 16:06:49 GMT -6
Helicopters could probably just be put in as another type of aeroplane. Not sure what the offensive point of them would be until the late 50s (torpedoes?) but an interesting idea.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 10, 2018 16:17:29 GMT -6
Helicopters could probably just be put in as another type of aeroplane. Not sure what the offensive point of them would be until the late 50s (torpedoes?) but an interesting idea. Helo's can be used for 1. Search and Rescue 2. Plane guards 3. Movement of men and supplies between ships 4. Anti-submarine warfare. 5. Insertion and extraction of special units into enemy territory. It will take time for this technology to mature where is can actually do the jobs that I have offered but with time, it could.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 11, 2018 5:14:19 GMT -6
Helicopters could probably just be put in as another type of aeroplane. Not sure what the offensive point of them would be until the late 50s (torpedoes?) but an interesting idea. Helo's can be used for 1. Search and Rescue 2. Plane guards 3. Movement of men and supplies between ships 4. Anti-submarine warfare. 5. Insertion and extraction of special units into enemy territory. It will take time for this technology to mature where is can actually do the jobs that I have offered but with time, it could. But when the majority of the game is concerned with fighting battles, those functions don't really apply without adding more content. Collecting survivors perhaps but the rest isn't really modelled in the playable game as I understand it. The ASW point could just be modelled as an increase in the ASW rating of a carrier. So perhaps a ASW research event but it's not really worth having controllable helicopters.
|
|
|
Post by JagdFlanker on Dec 11, 2018 5:49:42 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by stratos on Dec 11, 2018 7:27:35 GMT -6
The next development is the SUU-16-gun pod which gave the F4B/N and other aircraft that were built without a gun, a 20mm Gatling gun in a pod. AFAIK the USN/USMC never used the gun pods operationally as a A-A weapon.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 11, 2018 9:27:58 GMT -6
The next development is the SUU-16-gun pod which gave the F4B/N and other aircraft that were built without a gun, a 20mm Gatling gun in a pod. AFAIK the USN/USMC never used the gun pods operationally as a A-A weapon. The Navy and Marines did develop a gun pod but did not like it because it was unreliable. The pod was the MK 4 Gun Pod developed by Hughes Aircraft. Most pilots did not carry it because it either jammed completely or simply never worked. In some situations, they jettisoned it. I have the manual on the pod.
|
|
|
Post by corsair on Dec 11, 2018 20:04:55 GMT -6
Some ideas for research areas:
(1) Drop tanks. Researching this allows these to be attached to your fighters, extending their range. Additional levels in this tech could allow for larger and/or more tanks to be attached, further extending the operational radius.
(2) Bomb racks. Researching this allows these to be attached to your fighters, greatly expanding their attack capabilities against land targets, shipping, and light warships. They can also be attached to your torpedo bombers, allowing them to function as light bombers, likewise expanding their attack options. Additional research levels in this tech could allow for more or larger bombs to be attached to an aircraft, up to its takeoff weight limit.
(3) Unguided rockets. Researching this allows these weapons to be attached to your strike aircraft, particularly fighters, expanding their attack abilities against land targets, shipping, and light warships. The U.S. 5-inch HVAR would be the WWII example.
(4) Strafers. Researching this tactic allows you to convert (or purpose build) twin-engine medium bombers into heavily gunned low-level anti-shipping strike aircraft. The aircraft is given a solid nose containing from eight to twelve heavy machine guns. (Only applicable if there are twin-engine medium bombers in the game, of course.)
(5) Skip bombing. This allows the tactic of low-level attacks against shipping in which bombs are bounced off the water and into the side of the ship. This attack tactic can be very effective, but at the cost of requiring a higher-skilled aircraft crew to successfully pull off.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Dec 11, 2018 20:17:31 GMT -6
Autogyros are not helicopters, despite their similar appearances.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 11, 2018 21:45:11 GMT -6
Autogyros are not helicopters, despite their similar appearances. The Autogyro rotors are not powered as with helicopters, they rotate due to the air moving over the blades and forcing them due to the angle of incidence of the blades. However, helicopters can perform that same maneuver- auto-rotate. It's only done in an emergency and not something helo pilots are looking forward to. www.copters.com/aero/autorotation.html
|
|
|
Post by archelaos on Dec 12, 2018 9:27:26 GMT -6
Helicopters could probably just be put in as another type of aeroplane. Not sure what the offensive point of them would be until the late 50s (torpedoes?) but an interesting idea. Helo's can be used for 1. Search and Rescue 2. Plane guards 3. Movement of men and supplies between ships 4. Anti-submarine warfare. 5. Insertion and extraction of special units into enemy territory. It will take time for this technology to mature where is can actually do the jobs that I have offered but with time, it could. The first job considered, I think, was artillery spotting, just by time helos matured, there was no point in spotting as radars were more effective, so they were not really used in this role on ships.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 12, 2018 9:51:05 GMT -6
Helo's can be used for 1. Search and Rescue 2. Plane guards 3. Movement of men and supplies between ships 4. Anti-submarine warfare. 5. Insertion and extraction of special units into enemy territory. It will take time for this technology to mature where is can actually do the jobs that I have offered but with time, it could. The first job considered, I think, was artillery spotting, just by time helos matured, there was no point in spotting as radars were more effective, so they were not really used in this role on ships. The first helicopters were used for amphibious and shipboard operations but included were rescue operations especially during the launch and recovery of aircraft on carriers. The First US helicopter in production was the XR-4. The Bell UH-47 was used for moving wounded and rescue during the Korean War. It was designated the H-13. I've actually flown in one of those years ago. Watch MASH if you want to see them.
|
|
ilyusin28
New Member
I'm Japanese,so I can't write English well.
Posts: 35
|
Post by ilyusin28 on Dec 12, 2018 9:57:58 GMT -6
Ka-1 is not ASW autogyro. Ka-1 was developed for the purpose of Artillery observer. If autogyro can use in RtW2,I think that the mission will be Artillery observer or drowning men rescue.
|
|