Most effective way to bomb as a fighter pilot?

[simplyjames]

When I'm dropping a bomb on a ground attack mission as a 109. Whats the most effective way? Dive bombing seems so risky since you don't have air brakes. Is that really the best way to do it?

[Finkeren]

If by 'best' you mean 'most accurate' then yes, there is no substitute for dive bombing.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Either dive bombing or (the more risky way) strafe bombing, means handing it over personally. For first one keep your dive angle just steep enought to recover from it and don't go too fast either so you can overcome the pressure forced ("stiffening") of your elevator.

You can partly use combat flaps and / or low prop pitch settings for additional braking force though on most fighters it isn't nessecary. Just make sure you enter the dive at slow speed and cut your throttle.

 

For second method use a bomb timer, otherwise you'll share your fate with the target. Approach from shallow angles low abve the target and release it just before passing it, you should hit easily this way.

 

Apart from that there's pretty much no effective alternative.

Edited October 30, 2014 by [Jg26]5tuka

[Y-29.Silky]

Diving from an angle seems hard at first, but try to set a speed and altitude, for an example 250kph from 800m, to get used to, and always bomb at that speed/alt and you'll get it..

Edited October 30, 2014 by Silky

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

I normally do a 5-15° dive and pull up the last second, and simulatneously drop me bomb.

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

I find that my most effective bombing happens when I dive at the target, keeping my desired point of impact centered in my reticle as much as possible until the game switches to an external view. 

 

If the mission profile actually calls for releasing the weapon far enough away to not be its blast radius or not being part of the crater my accuracy drops a lot.  I consider myself to be doing well if the bomb lands somewhere on the planet.

 

For a few frustrating weeks I tried dive bombing with the Stuka, but the bomb always released about the time the nose came level with the horizon on the pull out, or slightly before or after, and I never could figure out the delay.

[Elbows]

I was curious when looking at the bomb loads on some of the fighters.  What was the historical tactic used for small bombs on fighters - dive bombing as we do in the game?  And how effective were fighters dropping small numbers of bombs.  Was this normally a last ditch effort when no proper aircraft were around, or was this seen as an effective use of airpower against ground units?

 

Were fighters used for precision bombing of targets, or did small groups (4-6 aircraft) simply drop bombs into an "area" hoping to kill some infantry or blow up some artillery pieces? 

[Y-29.Silky]

I was curious when looking at the bomb loads on some of the fighters.  What was the historical tactic used for small bombs on fighters - dive bombing as we do in the game?  And how effective were fighters dropping small numbers of bombs.  Was this normally a last ditch effort when no proper aircraft were around, or was this seen as an effective use of airpower against ground units?

 

Were fighters used for precision bombing of targets, or did small groups (4-6 aircraft) simply drop bombs into an "area" hoping to kill some infantry or blow up some artillery pieces?

That's a great question! Especially knowing there was a 190 ground attack variant. But I'm sure it was the shallow dive.

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

I used to skip bomb in '46 with great success, drop short of your target and bounce it right in,water or land. I find I haven't be able to do it in here as well. I am great at blowing up some snow and dirt though. I guess the shallow dive is the way to go.

[Jaegermeister]

I was curious when looking at the bomb loads on some of the fighters. What was the historical tactic used for small bombs on fighters - dive bombing as we do in the game? And how effective were fighters dropping small numbers of bombs. Was this normally a last ditch effort when no proper aircraft were around, or was this seen as an effective use of airpower against ground units? Were fighters used for precision bombing of targets, or did small groups (4-6 aircraft) simply drop bombs into an "area" hoping to kill some infantry or blow up some artillery pieces?

 

Fighter-bombers were used more for small scale tactical strikes than attacking large targets. They were reasonably effective when used as ground support to take out smaller targets close to friendly troops where larger bombers were less accurate. They would have used shallow angle dive bombing most of the time since the reflector gunsight was the only consistent aiming reference on a fighter.

 

There were mixed feelings about "Jabos" and many tactical commanders thought it was a waste of a good fighter to slow it down by carrying bombs. Time proved that to be true in some cases when air superiority was the main focus like when the Me262 jet fighter was tasked as a bomber. On the other hand, some fighters like the P47 Thunderbolt and the F4U corsair turned into very effective ground attack aircraft that could do as much damage as an IL2 and still fight their way out of the combat area if necessary.

 

The German fighters like the Me109 and FW190 were hung with bombs more as a stopgap when bomber squadrons were not available than as a tactical specialty. There were some dedicated ground attack Jagdbomber units but they were the minority. They would have attacked in schwarm strength (squadron) with top cover provided by unburdened fighters.

 

I am not familiar with the details of Russian fighter-bomber tactics, so maybe someone else can add in on that score...

Edited October 31, 2014 by Jaegermeister

[PostumusAgrippa]

Bombing with small numbers of 50 or 100 kilo bombs like you will see on fighters, you have a choice of either a steep dive, or a shallow dive. 

 

A steep dive with dinky bombs is hair raising, because you have to basically buzz your target in order to get consistent hits (1s bomb delay or die).  The blast radius on the small bombs is about the size of an AAA emplacement, so even a near miss can do nothing.  The upside to diving steeply is that there is less deviation between your flight path and the bomb trajectory.

 

A shallow dive is easier to execute, and harder to hit with.  Again, you need to be using bomb delay, and basically the idea is to gently toss the bomb onto the target just before scraping your underbelly across the snow.

 

In real life, pilots likely just kind of winged it, because you're with like 12 other dudes dropping bombs, and no one's gonna know you're the guy that blew up the snow bank instead of the artillery, and anyway AA fire is freaking scary when you're in a barely armored light fighter so screw diving low.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

, some fighters like the P47 Thunderbolt and the F4U corsair turned into very effective ground attack aircraft that could do as much damage as an IL2 and still fight their way out of the combat area if necessary.

Because they had total air superiority at that time of the war. The germans also used their 109s as Jabos during early war stage in Poland and France but couldn't afford it at the end of the war with the overwhelming number of allied fighters appearng on all fronts. Jabos are compromise in terms of flexibility, it saves ressources to create a do-it-all fighter plane rather than producin a number of different bomber types and training crews their crews seperately.

 

Accurancy was a big concern among Jabos though. The Fw 190 F, which was meant to replace the Stuka (and was flown by many Stuka pilots) wasn't popular among them. Less accurancy and the fact it coulnd#t effectively enter steep dives without danger of not being able to pull up again made many of them preferring their old Ju-87.

 

The Bf 109 on the other hand - while being more effective in ground attacking - suffered from weak wing structure, great weight limitations and also a flimsi inline engine tending to be very vulnerable to ground fire.

 

But yea ingame they're both quite good. You can easily dive bomb with the 109 while you have to be more carefull with the 190.

Edited October 31, 2014 by [Jg26]5tuka

[Finkeren]

Concerning the VVS fighter-bomber methods, I'm not really sure there were any fixed doctrines. The Soviet Union only really had one dedicated purpose built fighter-bomber during the war: the Yak-9B. Most other designs were fitted with bombs as stop-gab solutions.

 

On the other hand we have the IL-2, more or less the only purpose built single engined attack plane to serve throughout the war. From what I've read, it seems that bombs were generally dropped at shallow angles that didn't differ greatly from the attack angles used when firing guns or rockets. Some accounts from ground troops even leaves the impression, that bombs were dropped almost as an afterthought at the end of a strafing run.

 

In any case it seems clear, that bombs were regarded by friend and foe alike as by far the least dangerous weapon in the IL-2s Arsenal. The rockets were inaccurate and had weak warheads, but the bombs just went all over the place and rarely hit anything, much less the intented target.

 

It's no wonder that the VVS shifted focus to bigger guns for ground attack and the PTAB cluster bombs for smaller targets (which proved far more effective) The Yak-9B was built primarily to carry PTAB.

 

So the short answer is: For the VVS the historically correct attack angle is shallow (propably 15 - 20 degrees) but the most effective is still dive bombing.

[unreasonable]

Prien's book on JG3 notes that the Jabo style attacks started in October 1940 when the day bombers were called off, more as a propaganda device than anything else. At this time one Staffel per Gruppe (often 2 Staffel) was designated as the Jabos.

 

He notes that the pilots seemed pretty happy to dump their bombs as soon as possible! He also mentions a thin red line painted inside the canopy marking a 45% degree dive angle.

 

I use that approximate angle starting from about 1,000 meters altitude - gives better visibility than a shallow angle, but not so steep as to be dangerous to pull out. Not sure I ever hit anything though: I do better strafing.

 

My take on the historical effectiveness is that it was hugely effective if it could catch rear area transport in a concentration, but used on the front lines it is a waste of an expensive fighter. The undoubted morale impact of seeing enemy aircraft overhead was probably not worth the cost.

[VRPilot]

fighterbombin: here you go

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12249-close-air-support-or-fighter-bombing-how/

 

or in short:

 

[malcheus]

 until the game switches to an external view. 

 

For a few frustrating weeks I tried dive bombing with the Stuka, but the bomb always released about the time the nose came level with the horizon on the pull out, or slightly before or after, and I never could figure out the delay.

 

Which game are you talking about?

BoS never switches view unless you press a button. 

Also, I never noticed a delay in bomb release, you press the button and then pull up, and the bomb will land where you were going, more or less. 

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

Which game are you talking about?

BoS never switches view unless you press a button. 

Also, I never noticed a delay in bomb release, you press the button and then pull up, and the bomb will land where you were going, more or less. 

 

Sounds like you might be the one thinking of a different game.  In BoS, if you fly into the ground hard enough to die, the game switches to an external view.  It has been that way since the very beginning.

[Jaegermeister]

Quotes from Luftwaffe Fighter Ace by Norbert Hannig...

"On one Jabo sortie our task was to destroy the railway line east of Lyuban which the Soviets were using to bring supplies up to the front. It was an unpopulated area, covered in peat bogs and vast tracts of forest. Taking care to cross the front line with sufficient height to keep well clear of ground fire and light flak, we set course eastwards. At the estimated time the target hove into view. We dropped down to 500 metres before lining ourselves up with the tracks and commencing a shallow dive. We released our bombs and watched their fall. They hit the cinder bed of the track, but then bounced back up into the air before exploding harmlessly in the peat bog alongside. Disappointed, we turned away and headed towards home."

Then a later mission...

"But we had little time to romanticize over the wonders of nature. By the time we reached Leningrad we had to be at 7,000 metres; a tough haul when toting a 250-kg bomb. As the city came into view we opened up into a wider formation than usual, knowing full well what lay in store for us. The goods yards where the supply trains entering the city from the east ended their journey were clearly visible, as were the trains themselves, some of the engines enveloped in steam. As we crossed in over the city the muzzle flashes of the anti-aircraft guns winked up at us. We began the ‘Flak Waltz’—up a little, down a little, left a little, right a little. The gunners had their eye in. Flak bursts blossomed exactly level with—but fortunately in between—our two widely spaced Gustavs. It was time to start the dive; gently at first, but then ever more steeply, trying all the while to keep the target centred in the sights. At 3,000 metres we pulled back the three marks on the stick that would put us at exactly the right angle to launch, pressed the bombrelease switch, and banked away to watch the bombs disappear beneath us. It took several seconds before explosions erupted on the ground. One of the bombs must have hit a munitions train, to judge from the fireworks display that resulted. The other struck a building in the yards, causing it to collapse in on itself. There was still a lot of heavy flak, but it was behind and above us. The gunners had been unable to follow our steep descent."

Depends on the mission tasking I guess. Good book BTW.

Edited October 31, 2014 by Jaegermeister