Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Droz1937

CV attack patterns

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

76
[RTR]
Beta Testers
168 posts
5,420 battles

At one point I read that US Attack planes pattern is meant to hit the broadside of ships and IJN Attack planes were intended to hit the length of a ship. (Wide vs Long dispersion.) Except, I can't find where I read this a while back. Is this still true? Where do the Brit/German CVs fall in with this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,310
[MUDDX]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
22,441 battles

I don't have a clue where you read that but IJN torpedo tactic was to from several angles at once. This increased the chances of a hit whether the target turned or not. In the game this is referred to as Cross Drops. It was very effective in the previous CV play version and appears to be effective post rework though not a devastating. It would make sense for any Navy to use this tactics. As far as I know the USN Torpedo bombers at Midway made a scattered broadside approach but were decimated by the IJN Cap and AA and scored no hits.

As far as Dive Bomber attacks I would think the aiming along the length of the target would be better. Approaching from the stern the best. In game you have several planes dropping bombs simultaneously and I suppose they are to be considered dropping from the same point but in reality they would not be able to. Two objects can't occupy the same space at the same time. So the planes left of the center line bombs are going to fall left of center, the right side planes right of center both having a reduced chance of a direct hit. The center line plane would have a better chance of a direct hit. Planes flying in line and dropping bombs one after the other would give each a better chance of a direct hit.

In any case it is a game and whether the previous system using manual drops or the current system of aiming and dropping at just the right time being consistently successful requires a great deal of practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,344 posts
3,206 battles
44 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

I don't have a clue where you read that but IJN torpedo tactic was to from several angles at once. This increased the chances of a hit whether the target turned or not. In the game this is referred to as Cross Drops. It was very effective in the previous CV play version and appears to be effective post rework though not a devastating. It would make sense for any Navy to use this tactics. As far as I know the USN Torpedo bombers at Midway made a scattered broadside approach but were decimated by the IJN Cap and AA and scored no hits.

As far as Dive Bomber attacks I would think the aiming along the length of the target would be better. Approaching from the stern the best. In game you have several planes dropping bombs simultaneously and I suppose they are to be considered dropping from the same point but in reality they would not be able to. Two objects can't occupy the same space at the same time. So the planes left of the center line bombs are going to fall left of center, the right side planes right of center both having a reduced chance of a direct hit. The center line plane would have a better chance of a direct hit. Planes flying in line and dropping bombs one after the other would give each a better chance of a direct hit.

In any case it is a game and whether the previous system using manual drops or the current system of aiming and dropping at just the right time being consistently successful requires a great deal of practice.

For DBs, it's usually best to approach from the bow; your closing velocity is higher on the approach, and you exit their AA faster after the drop. It's your speed PLUS theirs, thus reducing your total AA exposure.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,344 posts
3,206 battles
1 hour ago, Droz1937 said:

At one point I read that US Attack planes pattern is meant to hit the broadside of ships and IJN Attack planes were intended to hit the length of a ship. (Wide vs Long dispersion.) Except, I can't find where I read this a while back. Is this still true? Where do the Brit/German CVs fall in with this?

Brit and German rocket planes both have a "long" orientation. The GZ's is fairly narrow and long, while the RN CVs' is closer to a large circle (still longer than wide, though). IJN rocket planes are a fairly small circle.

Note for USN- the standard rockets are a wide pattern, but Tiny Tims have a long pattern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
187
[CWM]
[CWM]
Members
609 posts
6,288 battles

After playing the level bombers of RN dive bombing is much easier to do. The RN bombs drop so freaking slow it feels impossible to time the drop right in the the ship is sitting still. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
76
[RTR]
Beta Testers
168 posts
5,420 battles
40 minutes ago, Frenotx said:

Brit and German rocket planes both have a "long" orientation. The GZ's is fairly narrow and long, while the RN CVs' is closer to a large circle (still longer than wide, though). IJN rocket planes are a fairly small circle.

Note for USN- the standard rockets are a wide pattern, but Tiny Tims have a long pattern.

Thank you. I love how I reference Attack planes and then the others talk about DBs and TBs. :Smile_facepalm:

 

Knowing the fire pattern of the attack planes helps DDs in defensive maneuvers :cap_rambo:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
432
[MPIRE]
[MPIRE]
Beta Testers
1,821 posts
10,838 battles
3 hours ago, Droz1937 said:

Thank you. I love how I reference Attack planes and then the others talk about DBs and TBs. :Smile_facepalm:

 

Knowing the fire pattern of the attack planes helps DDs in defensive maneuvers :cap_rambo:.

Unfortunately the attack plane terminology does tend to get mixed up a bit...  most people around here say rocket planes for that reason I think.

As far as defensive maneuvers go it's almost always better to go broadside to rocket planes, since they're almost all "long" patterns instead of "wide".  The only exception is the Lex and Midway with HVARs, which hit wide and can make for some very awkward first encounters when you realize you've lined yourself up for massive alpha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,344 posts
3,206 battles
12 hours ago, Droz1937 said:

Thank you. I love how I reference Attack planes and then the others talk about DBs and TBs. :Smile_facepalm:

 

Knowing the fire pattern of the attack planes helps DDs in defensive maneuvers :cap_rambo:.

With old CVs, "attack planes" often referred to DBs and TBs, to differentiate them from the strictly air-to-air fighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
76
[RTR]
Beta Testers
168 posts
5,420 battles
18 hours ago, Frenotx said:

With old CVs, "attack planes" often referred to DBs and TBs, to differentiate them from the strictly air-to-air fighters.

And like the old CVs...that terminology died too. The 'Rocket Planes' are called Attack Aircraft...in the game...under modules. Thus, calling them Attack planes should not be confusing at all. :cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,344 posts
3,206 battles
10 minutes ago, Droz1937 said:

And like the old CVs...that terminology died too. The 'Rocket Planes' are called Attack Aircraft...in the game...under modules. Thus, calling them Attack planes should not be confusing at all. :cap_book:

I agree. That said, "should" is a nasty, dirty, dangerous word. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×