Bombs and rockets and ground missions on 20 December!

[=38=Tatarenko]

Looking forward to that. I hope the bombs do proper damage (I.e more than in IL-2!)

 

Can't wait to try them out!

[ParaB]

I haven't played IL2 in a long time, so forgive me when I ask: did IL2 model fragmentation effects for bombs?

 

How does RoF do it?

 

I know that the DCS series doesn't model it, which leads to some underwhelming performances of several bomb types.

[OBT-Psycho]

I am not exactly sur about fragmentation, but I would say no. You had to drop the bomb direct on target or really close to it. even with large bombs as SC500, you had to land it in a couple of meters to see stuff blow up. 

 

don't know for RoF as I didn't have a chance to extensively attack ground target, and shooting at a truck with a couple of peashooters isn't that fun to me. But I tried last weekend to shoot a few trucks, and it looks really good.  can"t wait to do it with a sturmovik with flak whizzling around my hears

[Georgio]

I just hope that the 37mm's in the Stormovik sound really, really meaty. Something akin to having a telephone directory ripped in half...:D

[Fifi]

Also looking forward to that.

Will BOS stand up the challenge?...cause never really found a good bomb render in any sim (even in ROF).

Time will tell.

[YoYo]

Also looking forward to that.

Will BOS stand up the challenge?...cause never really found a good bomb render in any sim (even in ROF).

Time will tell.

 

Dont forget about DCS....

[Mogster]

The small bombs carried by IL2s aren't going to damage armoured vehicles though are they, unless you can get one underneath, same goes for the mgs, even the 37mm. Soft targets will be damaged or destroyed of course, but that's assuming your weapons are on target.

 

You can see why the Russians were so keen on massed air attacks, and the RAF as well. Keep the pressure on and crews will abandon their vehicles without damage, either that or panic and get them stuck on unsuitable terrain. Either way you have chaos and disabled vehicles. It'd be nice to see tanks being abandoned or driven wildly as you attack.

[ll./JG77_JadeBandit]

The small bombs carried by IL2s aren't going to damage armoured vehicles though are they, unless you can get one underneath, same goes for the mgs, even the 37mm. Soft targets will be damaged or destroyed of course, but that's assuming your weapons are on target.

 

You can see why the Russians were so keen on massed air attacks, and the RAF as well. Keep the pressure on and crews will abandon their vehicles without damage, either that or panic and get them stuck on unsuitable terrain. Either way you have chaos and disabled vehicles. It'd be nice to see tanks being abandoned or driven wildly as you attack.

 

 IL2's had the PTAB cluster bomb in the battle of Kursk which was supposed to be effective against armored targets, I don't know if they were ever used in the Stalingrad engagement though. Still would be neat to see the in game render from a bunch of IL's dropping cluster bombs and rockets over targets.

 

 I think its the rockets I'm looking forward to the most, I always wondered just how hard it really was to actually hit anything with them. the few reels of film footage I have seen with rockets being used look to be challenging to say the least.

[Skoshi_Tiger]

On the topic of rockets, it hasn't really been covered in any sim I've seen but I hope the rockets flight model and ballistics cause them to weather vane into the prevailing wind while under power. Make them nice and interesting to use. An accurate flight model for the rockets plus wind would make pilot actually think about their environment before rushing in for the attack.

Edited December 14, 2013 by Skoshi_Tiger

[LukeFF]

 IL2's had the PTAB cluster bomb in the battle of Kursk which was supposed to be effective against armored targets, I don't know if they were ever used in the Stalingrad engagement though. Still would be neat to see the in game render from a bunch of IL's dropping cluster bombs and rockets over targets.

 

PTABs were first used at Kursk.

[RAF74_Winger]

 

Just had to do it. 

 

w.

Edited December 14, 2013 by RAF74_Winger

[=38=Tatarenko]

Yes it is a pity the PTAB can't be used at Stalingrad as it is by far the most effective weapon for single pass kills.

 

Still, strafing with the IL-2's VYa guns should be fun! I've been having a practice in the LaGG.

 

 

[ACG_Kraut]

On the topic of rockets, it hasn't really been covered in any sim I've seen but I hope the rockets flight model and ballistics cause them to weather vane into the prevailing wind while under power. Make them nice and interesting to use. An accurate flight model for the rockets plus wind would make pilot actually think about their environment before rushing in for the attack.

 

I can tell you that the rockets in RoF are modeled very well and those are just firecrackers compared to WW2 rockets. They modeled the erratic flight path of the early rockets very well, they scatter pretty good when you ripple them.

Not sure if they are affected by wind in RoF, I'd like to think so, but just don't know for sure. Would be really cool to have that in BoS.

[Jaws2002]

Wake me up when we get the Il-2 and a QMB.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Jaws2002

[jaydee]

Wake me up when we get the Il-2 and a QMB.

Hey Jaws,Youd better buy youself a Cryogenic chamber ! You are going to be sleeping for awhile ! ~S~

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

Wake me up when we get the Il-2 and a QMB.

 

It's the thing I'm waiting for too. That, and a decent modern computer...

[BigPickle]

are you sure were are getting bombs and rockets on the 20th?  I've not seen any news about it.

[Finkeren]

I haven't heard it as well, when/where was it announced?

 

It'll be nice to get a real taste of ground pounding. However, unlike most folks here, I don't hope they increase bomb effectiveness too much compared to the old IL-2, since it never struck me as being that out of place. IRL the small bombs carried by the IL-2 were notoriously ineffective, not only because there was no good way to aim them, but also because their effective radius was quite small. Even the heavy payload of the Pe-2 was seldom enough to do any damage against dug-in troops.

[dburne]

I haven't heard it as well, when/where was it announced?

 

 

 

Perhaps it was discussed in the live feed, I have not heard it either but did not watch the feed or video from the latest update...

[Matt]

I would also be interested in the source for this. Did they mention it in the live stream?

 

 

The small bombs carried by IL2s aren't going to damage armoured vehicles though are they, unless you can get one underneath, same goes for the mgs, even the 37mm.

The 37mm cannons and to some degree the 23mm should be good enough to atleast disable some tanks. But of course you would need to attack from a steep angle and shoot from short distance.

[Finkeren]

Well, at the time of the Battle of Stalingrad German armoured targets would be pretty much limited to light and medium tanks and APVs wouldn't they? IIRC the NS-37 was found adequate against the Pzkw II and III as well as the Pzkw 38(t) and all targets with less armour than that, but insufficient against the Pzkw IV and heavier because of the steep angle needed to penetrate the top armour.

 

The NS-37 should be pretty devastating against the targets, we're gonna get. (Panzer IV and Sturmgeschütz III being the exception)

Edited December 16, 2013 by Finkeren

[=38=Tatarenko]

Yes the official trials concluded that the 37mm needs a high degree of pilot skill to use but the PTABs didn't and were more effective so they ditched the 37mm. I think the PTABs were the best anti-armour weapon used by any combatant in WW2 apart from Little Boy.

[Finkeren]

Make that "the best airborne anti-armour weapon used by any combatant in WW2" and I would agree.

 

Simple to use, very effective, relatively light weight and low cost, the signs of an effective weapon. 

Edited December 16, 2013 by Finkeren

[SimFreak]

Was there any word on adding targets for Lagg? A nice bomber or such...

[Potenz]

Loft and jason said it on the livestream also we standard preorders we will have access too

Edited December 16, 2013 by potenz

[Jaws2002]

Hey Jaws,Youd better buy youself a Cryogenic chamber ! You are going to be sleeping for awhile ! ~S~

 

 

Yeah. that's what I'm afraid of.

   There's so little you can do right now with this few missions, it's painful. I can't understand why they limit the whole thing to few silly missions with about zero ability to control the environment. You can't change anything in the missions, no weather, no time of day change, no ability to set up few different scenarios, to make things less boring.

 

I played four hours in the first day it came out, two hours second week and few hours last two days and I'm bored with it already.  

 

Releasing only few hard scripted missions, without giving us any kind of ability to make things more interesting is something I will never understand.

 

It was the same with ROF. The quick mission builder came a long time after release. They didn't learn much from that experience.

[BigPickle]

Loft and jason said it on the livestream also we standard preorders we will have access too

awesome they said it will be in on the 20th. That's great but there's a lot they are aiming to achieve this week so I wouldnt place all your eggs in one basket (that's not to say 777 cant achieve it though)

Edited December 17, 2013 by BigPickle

[Matt]

It was the same with ROF. The quick mission builder came a long time after release. They didn't learn much from that experience.

Maybe they just don't want to waste time releasing the QMB for this small test map, when the Stalingrad map will be ready in January.

[damar]

I hope there is bomb blast wave to overturn ground objects :D

[Georgio]

If the explosion of aircraft cratering in is anything to go by then the bombs should be nice and visual at least.

I was always under the impression that aircraft bombs had to actually hit very close to a tank to knock it out?

Rockets on the other hand were modified 60 pounder shells and combined with the extra punch of the rocket motor would quite happliy toast anything they hit.

My Grandad observed the carnage at the Falaise gap from a mile away and reckoned that the Typhoons were absolutely terrifying to be on the wrong end of.

 

Talking of existing sims that model bomb blasts very well, I seem to remember B17 II did a pretty good job albeit that you're 4 miles or so away....

Edited December 17, 2013 by Georgio

[JtD]

I was always under the impression that aircraft bombs had to actually hit very close to a tank to knock it out?

Absolutely. Even fairly big bombs needed to land somewhere within 5-10 meters to reliable knock out a typical ww2 tank. I hope the developers go with actual weapons performance and a good ground damage model and do not just cater the hollywood-based expectations of the average gamer, where you level a hangar with a 50kg, and a city block with a 500kg bomb.

[Jaws2002]

But it's very different with BoS right now as it's only 35% complete. We're something like 6 months away from release.

This early access is meant to be a taster of what we can expect when the game is released.

You should be glad we have this when we could be waiting another 6 months before we get to fly BoS.

 

 

The lack of some sort of quick mission builder was one of the big complains with ROF.  I understand the early beta thing, but they released the track recorder this early, witch is a lot less important than some sort of tool we can use to spice up our experience.  They had time for that.

Did they released the track recorder, so users can make cool movies to advertise their product?....

Edited December 17, 2013 by Jaws2002

[Wind]

Rockets on the other hand were modified 60 pounder shells and combined with the extra punch of the rocket motor would quite happliy toast anything they hit.

My Grandad observed the carnage at the Falaise gap from a mile away and reckoned that the Typhoons were absolutely terrifying to be on the wrong end of.

 

The actual effectiveness of planes flying rhubarb missios agains tanks (rockets + cannons) were relatively low according to few post war

assments. If I remember right, most of the tanks destroyed after Normandy invasion, was from AT & Tank fire, the losses from air attacks

being something like 2%.

The rocket attacks were very inaccurate and even when hit, they could end up doing "only" a mobility kill.

Where they excelled was of course strikes agains soft/lightly armoured targets and logistics.

 

Absolutely. Even fairly big bombs needed to land somewhere within 5-10 meters to reliable knock out a typical ww2 tank. I hope the developers go with actual weapons performance and a good ground damage model and do not just cater the hollywood-based expectations of the average gamer, where you level a hangar with a 50kg, and a city block with a 500kg bomb.

 

There are differences. For example the US army studies of 155mm artillerys effectiveness against tank formations can paint a bit different picture.

Massed artillery of ,say, 155mm dont need direct hits to get kills, let alone mobility/mission kills. Blown tracks, destroyed vision blocks, perforated engine

housings etc are about given in the 15-20m radius of a 45-50kg 155mm arty shell.

But, it has a lot do with fusing. Airburst/ground level bursts are obviously much more effective than delay bursts.

Even a big 500kg bomb can be almost ineffective against tank formation if the fuse is set so that the bomb digs itself into 5-10m depth of the pusta and

explodes there..

 

Dont know how the BoS is going to model the fusing. I think it could be nice if one could decide the bomb type/fusing.

Imagine loading your stuka with some AP slow fuse bunker busters, to see your team mates destroy the bridge under your nose...AND find

a column of T-34 parked right next to the bridge...damn...

[JtD]

At a distance of 30' the US GP 500lb as of WW2 produces 2480 splinters capable of penetrating half an inch of mild steel, for about 3.9 fragments per square meter. Assuming an average tank profile 2m high, 6m long/wide, this gives you 46 fragments hitting the tank, not 10m away, that can do reasonable damage to soft components.

If you take splinters the size and velocity of heavy machine gun fire (but worse AP capabilities), you may get to about 300 hits at that distance. At twice the distance, not even 20 m, the numbers are down to 8 and 60 and at 30 meters, you're at 1.5 and 14, respectively.

 

It is my assumption that if heavy machine gun fire was capable of reliably knocking out tanks with as little as 14, 60 or even 300 hits, no one would have bothered to use large cannons as AT guns. Which essentially leaves tank kills to gas pressure damage, which again is ineffective against tanks and requires a close hit.

 

Of course, you can always hope for a lucky hit with one of the splinters, but you can't always count on it, so that goes against the premise of "reliably" killing them. I wouldn't think the army study you referred to considers a single 155mm shell within 15-20m as a way to reliably kill a tank.

 

You're absolutely right with the bomb fuses, I hope to see the same level of detail to which I'm used to from Il-2:1946. I also hope we'll be getting different bomb types, which specific types of damage.

Edited December 17, 2013 by JtD

[Blitzen]

I can't seem to find the keystroke command for firing rockets...Of course I'm still trying to figure out firing flares...

[Matt]

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=1479018#p1479018

 

Not sure how reliable that source is.

[Wind]

Of course, you can always hope for a lucky hit with one of the splinters, but you can't always count on it, so that goes against the premise of "reliably" killing them. I wouldn't think the army study you referred to considers a single 155mm shell within 15-20m as a way to reliably kill a tank.

 

Here is one version of the report, couldnt find the original from the net as the link is down and my pdf archives are a mess...

 

http://sill-www.army.mil/firesbulletin/archives/2002/NOV_DEC_2002/NOV_DEC_2002_FULL_EDITION.pdf

 

pages 8-24

 

 

Edit:

 

1. And I would not use "reliably kill" as a yardstick.

 

Mobility / mission kill might be all that is needed, if you cant operate the tank, it is out of the action.

A total loss is also relative, some tanks that were "destroyed" with the crew killed, were returned to service after

a small repairs & cleanup.

The "total" losses of M1s that were destroyed in iraq war, can basically be counted with two hands.

Even the burned and those hit by massive IEDs were transported back to states and repaired+updated.

 

2. Aand, one more point. The ammo/shells have evolved since WW2, so that pdf does not necessary

correlate what the effectiveness of artillery was during the ww2, it was not as effective, is pretty much safe to say.

Edited December 17, 2013 by Wind

[JtD]

Thanks for the links, Matt & Wind.

[Aracno]

 

There are differences. For example the US army studies of 155mm artillerys effectiveness against tank formations can paint a bit different picture.

Massed artillery of ,say, 155mm dont need direct hits to get kills, let alone mobility/mission kills. Blown tracks, destroyed vision blocks, perforated engine

housings etc are about given in the 15-20m radius of a 45-50kg 155mm arty shell.

 

 

 

 

I have been in the military in artillery a long time ago, FH70 155 mm, but I think I remember that when the target was an armored concentration,  training manuals provided for dozens of bullets (over 50) for a radius of 50 meters .....

This means the whole artillery group shooting in the same 50 meter for several rounds. 

[dkoor]

Looking forward to that. I hope the bombs do proper damage (I.e more than in IL-2!)

 

Can't wait to try them out!

Mee too!

 

It's great gift for my birthday