|
Post by Adseria on Feb 12, 2019 1:00:50 GMT -6
Will it possible for an aircraft to carry multiple different sizes of bomb in the same load? For instance, the Stuka B-2 could carry a 550lb (250kg) bomb under the fuselage and 4 110lb (50kg) bombs, 2 under each wing. Is this possible in-game, or is an aircraft limited to one size of bomb in any given loadout?
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Feb 12, 2019 3:03:41 GMT -6
Will it possible for an aircraft to carry multiple different sizes of bomb in the same load? For instance, the Stuka B-2 could carry a 550lb (250kg) bomb under the fuselage and 4 110lb (50kg) bombs, 2 under each wing. Is this possible in-game, or is an aircraft limited to one size of bomb in any given loadout? From one of the released screenshots you can see different ranges and bomb/torpedo load for aircrafts. So I think yes, but how it would work in game I do not know.
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on Feb 12, 2019 4:25:53 GMT -6
Will it possible for an aircraft to carry multiple different sizes of bomb in the same load? For instance, the Stuka B-2 could carry a 550lb (250kg) bomb under the fuselage and 4 110lb (50kg) bombs, 2 under each wing. Is this possible in-game, or is an aircraft limited to one size of bomb in any given loadout? From one of the released screenshots you can see different ranges and bomb/torpedo load for aircrafts. So I think yes, but how it would work in game I do not know. If you're talking about this screenshot:
Then yes, I know you can have different bomb loads. My question was about having multiple types of bombs in the same load.
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Feb 12, 2019 17:56:10 GMT -6
This has never come up in conversation, so we'll have to wait for Fredrik or William to chime in. In testing we've seen 500 pound bombs, 1600 pound bombs, and 100 pound bombs cause damage, but I've seen no sign that a mixed load was carried by a single aircraft.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Feb 12, 2019 18:21:39 GMT -6
This has never come up in conversation, so we'll have to wait for Fredrik or William to chime in. In testing we've seen 500 pound bombs, 1600 pound bombs, and 100 pound bombs cause damage, but I've seen no sign that a mixed load was carried by a single aircraft. The SBD-3/5 would carry a 500 lbs. bomb underneath the fuselage and two 100 lbs. bombs underneath each wing. There could be combinations of a centerline fuel tank and HVAR rockets under the wings for the F6F or two bombs. It all depends on the mission.
|
|
|
Post by orkel on Feb 12, 2019 18:27:55 GMT -6
This has never come up in conversation, so we'll have to wait for Fredrik or William to chime in. In testing we've seen 500 pound bombs, 1600 pound bombs, and 100 pound bombs cause damage, but I've seen no sign that a mixed load was carried by a single aircraft. Are the bomb sizes also randomized when the companies propose new aircraft to you? For example, could the bombs be anything between 100-2000 pounds? Or are they limited to certain weights - for example as you say, 100 pound, 500 pound, 1600 pound, etc?
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Feb 12, 2019 18:38:11 GMT -6
This has never come up in conversation, so we'll have to wait for Fredrik or William to chime in. In testing we've seen 500 pound bombs, 1600 pound bombs, and 100 pound bombs cause damage, but I've seen no sign that a mixed load was carried by a single aircraft. Are the bomb sizes also randomized when the companies propose new aircraft to you? For example, could the bombs be anything between 100-2000 pounds? Or are they limited to certain weights - for example as you say, 100 pound, 500 pound, 1600 pound, etc? The bomb size carried is based mostly on the time frame/period, the load capacity of the aircraft, and the type (dive bomber, fighter, med bomber, etc) of aircraft.
Also, IIRC, the 1600 lb-class AP bomb is something you need to develop before it can be deployed (plus you need to have a plane that can carry it!)
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Feb 12, 2019 18:40:26 GMT -6
Well, let’s see, there was the following:
20-lb Frag, AN-M41
90-lb Frag
100-lb Fragmentation clusters M1A1 500-lb Frags 260-lb Frags 100-lb G.P. 250-lb G.P. 500-lb G.P. 1000-lb G.P. 2000-lb G.P. 4000-lb Demolition 500-lb SAP 1000-lb SAP 1600-lb A.P.
Source: Office of the Chief of Ordnance Terminal Ballistic Data Volume 1 Bombing - And yes, I have volume II and III. - Dtd 1944
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on Feb 13, 2019 14:47:35 GMT -6
While I remember the discussion coming up several months, I don't think we ever got a definitive answer to the question of whether suicide "kamikaze" attacks can take place. Some thoughts I had regarding the idea was that they could have a small chance of occurring when an attacking aircraft was damaged, with the chance increasing in relation to a nation's deficit in victory points. This would lead to scenarios where the player might be winning a war by a large margin, only to find that enemy pilots have become desperate enough to defend their country that they are now willing to sacrifice their own lives in order get a hit on a player's ship. Of course, these attacks would have a higher chance to hit. After a certain point, when a nation is under a severe deficit of victory points, making suicide attacks doctrinal might become available.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Feb 14, 2019 4:00:06 GMT -6
While I remember the discussion coming up several months, I don't think we ever got a definitive answer to the question of whether suicide "kamikaze" attacks can take place. Some thoughts I had regarding the idea was that they could have a small chance of occurring when an attacking aircraft was damaged, with the chance increasing in relation to a nation's deficit in victory points. This would lead to scenarios where the player might be winning a war by a large margin, only to find that enemy pilots have become desperate enough to defend their country that they are now willing to sacrifice their own lives in order get a hit on a player's ship. Of course, these attacks would have a higher chance to hit. After a certain point, when a nation is under a severe deficit of victory points, making suicide attacks doctrinal might become available. individual pilot’s decision to ram a target when their planes became hopelessly damaged are very different from organized kamikaze attacks however. In the former case, I know for certain that both chinese and japanese pilot have done so long before organized kamikaze strike happened, and I wouldn’t be surprised if individual pilots from other countries did so on occasions. But an organized kamikaze attack is very different from individual pilot being more prone to suicidal attacks when their aircrafts are damaged. (I’m not 100% sure if the team planned to model kamikaze attacks at all, and if they haven’t i think it wouldn’t be included until after release). Also I’d be weary of making these attacks happen whenever a country is loosing by a large margin. War are fought with different stakes, I cannot see UK going for kamikaze strike no matter how badly it’s losing the Falkland war for example. (It’s also a potentially sensitive topics on whether this should be a “japan only” thing)
|
|
|
Post by alexbrunius on Feb 14, 2019 9:41:25 GMT -6
individual pilot’s decision to ram a target when their planes became hopelessly damaged are very different from organized kamikaze attacks however. In the former case, I know for certain that both chinese and japanese pilot have done so long before organized kamikaze strike happened, and I wouldn’t be surprised if individual pilots from other countries did so on occasions. But an organized kamikaze attack is very different from individual pilot being more prone to suicidal attacks when their aircrafts are damaged. (I’m not 100% sure if the team planned to model kamikaze attacks at all, and if they haven’t i think it wouldn’t be included until after release). Also I’d be weary of making these attacks happen whenever a country is loosing by a large margin. War are fought with different stakes, I cannot see UK going for kamikaze strike no matter how badly it’s losing the Falkland war for example. (It’s also a potentially sensitive topics on whether this should be a “japan only” thing) Kamikazes are not so different from individual pilots crashing into targets when aircraft are damaged. It's the same thing just on larger scale. In both cases the motivation is because the pilot has a very small chance of survival whatever he does. In the case of Japanese Kamikaze they knew about not having much chance of surviving even before take-off on normal attack missions so they prepared to make the most of it...
|
|
|
Post by corsair on Feb 14, 2019 10:11:57 GMT -6
But an organized kamikaze attack is very different from individual pilot being more prone to suicidal attacks when their aircrafts are damaged. (I’m not 100% sure if the team planned to model kamikaze attacks at all, and if they haven’t i think it wouldn’t be included until after release). Also I’d be weary of making these attacks happen whenever a country is loosing by a large margin. War are fought with different stakes, I cannot see UK going for kamikaze strike no matter how badly it’s losing the Falkland war for example. (It’s also a potentially sensitive topics on whether this should be a “japan only” thing)
My thought is that the kamikaze option should be a national trait and restricted to Japan as a result, similar to how specific nations in RTW can receive benefits in certain training areas.
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on Feb 14, 2019 10:28:19 GMT -6
individual pilot’s decision to ram a target when their planes became hopelessly damaged are very different from organized kamikaze attacks however. In the former case, I know for certain that both chinese and japanese pilot have done so long before organized kamikaze strike happened, and I wouldn’t be surprised if individual pilots from other countries did so on occasions. But an organized kamikaze attack is very different from individual pilot being more prone to suicidal attacks when their aircrafts are damaged. (I’m not 100% sure if the team planned to model kamikaze attacks at all, and if they haven’t i think it wouldn’t be included until after release). Also I’d be weary of making these attacks happen whenever a country is loosing by a large margin. War are fought with different stakes, I cannot see UK going for kamikaze strike no matter how badly it’s losing the Falkland war for example. (It’s also a potentially sensitive topics on whether this should be a “japan only” thing) Kamikazes are not so different from individual pilots crashing into targets when aircraft are damaged. It's the same thing just on larger scale. In both cases the motivation is because the pilot has a very small chance of survival whatever he does. In the case of Japanese Kamikaze they knew about not having much chance of surviving even before take-off on normal attack missions so they prepared to make the most of it... As I recall, Japanese planes taking off with the specific intention of launching a kamikaze strike were loaded with as much fuel as possible, or a large bomb, basically anything that would explode after impact, or worsen the subsequent fire. They would also have anything unnecessary removed. Further, they even used craft specifically designed for the role, like the Ohka, basically a manned glide bomb, or the Ki-115 Tsurugi, a very cheap, wood-and-steel plane with no gun armament but the ability to carry a single 1800lb bomb. Even the landing gear would detach immediately after take-off, to be re-used.
In other words, kamikaze strikes are very different from individual choice.
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Feb 14, 2019 10:58:18 GMT -6
While I remember the discussion coming up several months, I don't think we ever got a definitive answer to the question of whether suicide "kamikaze" attacks can take place. Some thoughts I had regarding the idea was that they could have a small chance of occurring when an attacking aircraft was damaged, with the chance increasing in relation to a nation's deficit in victory points. This would lead to scenarios where the player might be winning a war by a large margin, only to find that enemy pilots have become desperate enough to defend their country that they are now willing to sacrifice their own lives in order get a hit on a player's ship. Of course, these attacks would have a higher chance to hit. After a certain point, when a nation is under a severe deficit of victory points, making suicide attacks doctrinal might become available. The use of unmanned aircraft must also be considered. In Italy an SM.79 was converted into a radio-controlled "kamikaze", remotely guided by a CANT Z.1007. It was used on August 12, 1942, taking off from Sardinia's Villacidro airbase to attack the Pedestal convoy. Due to a breakdown the S79 ceased to obey to the radio-control input and, continuing its flight, finally hit the ground on a mountain in Algeria. In the meantime, the much cheaper AR was developed (see photo). The first test flight (with a human pilot) was in June 1943. It seems that a similar use to that of the German "Mistel" was also under study.
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on Feb 14, 2019 11:04:21 GMT -6
individual pilot’s decision to ram a target when their planes became hopelessly damaged are very different from organized kamikaze attacks however. In the former case, I know for certain that both chinese and japanese pilot have done so long before organized kamikaze strike happened, and I wouldn’t be surprised if individual pilots from other countries did so on occasions. But an organized kamikaze attack is very different from individual pilot being more prone to suicidal attacks when their aircrafts are damaged. (I’m not 100% sure if the team planned to model kamikaze attacks at all, and if they haven’t i think it wouldn’t be included until after release). Also I’d be weary of making these attacks happen whenever a country is loosing by a large margin. War are fought with different stakes, I cannot see UK going for kamikaze strike no matter how badly it’s losing the Falkland war for example. (It’s also a potentially sensitive topics on whether this should be a “japan only” thing) I'm alright with dedicated kamikaze being restricted to certain nations, but I feel that the occasional suicide attack from a fanatical pilot would make for some very memorable moments in-game. Of course, this would probably have to be a sub-1% chance, or else you'd be seeing it way too often. Kamikazes are not so different from individual pilots crashing into targets when aircraft are damaged. It's the same thing just on larger scale. In both cases the motivation is because the pilot has a very small chance of survival whatever he does. In the case of Japanese Kamikaze they knew about not having much chance of surviving even before take-off on normal attack missions so they prepared to make the most of it... What's interesting is that while kamikaze attacks were often considered wasteful as far as resources and pilots, the opposite may have been the case. Conventional attacks had such a poor success rate that the number of planes and pilots required to achieve a hit were great, while those same numbers were considerably less for kamikaze attacks. The following video shows this idea off rather interestingly.
As I recall, Japanese planes taking off with the specific intention of launching a kamikaze strike were loaded with as much fuel as possible, or a large bomb, basically anything that would explode after impact, or worsen the subsequent fire. They would also have anything unnecessary removed. Further, they even used craft specifically designed for the role, like the Ohka, basically a manned glide bomb, or the Ki-115 Tsurugi, a very cheap, wood-and-steel plane with no gun armament but the ability to carry a single 1800lb bomb. Even the landing gear would detach immediately after take-off, to be re-used.
In other words, kamikaze strikes are very different from individual choice.
Kamikaze strikes also had a handful of other advantages. The effective range of a kamikaze strike was much longer than a traditional attack, since there would be no need to return to base. Alternatively, a short range strike didn't need to be given any fuel beyond that required to get them to the target, if fuel stocks were short. The Japanese also could utilize aircraft that otherwise would be useless, such as biplane trainers. Flying at night, these were particularly dangerous as the American proximity fuses often didn't work against them. Also, the Ohka had a rocket engine. There was also a quite interesting animated short made in 1993 about the Ohka.
|
|