Using the various mortar & rocket options with the FW-190 & later Messerschmitts including the upcoming 262?

[Blitzen]

I was always a rotten shot using these German weapon options, possibly because i never knew at what range they reach their optimal convergence and have usually demurred from using them as an option.I have always believed in real life the underwing mortar tube success really was a matter of luck more than skill, given their arching flight path....but we now have the 24 mini rocket option as well with the Dora and they fly pretty straight. As a matter of fact  I just had an amazing experience when using the 24 rocket option with the fw-19D :I must have gauged the range just about right because the il-2 I was aiming at simply disappeared in the resultant hit(s.) Probably lucky , because i launch a bit beyond where gunfire range while using the yellow diamond aiming helper.

So my question or request is help in determining how where & when to best get any air to air effect from these 'in game".I'm not sure that stats taken from WW2 reports will be that much help. getting useful information will really help when we get the 262 in hitting and/or dispersing Pe-2 formatios out of gun range before their AI pilots start to break. It may turn out to be the best use of the 262's straight arrow speed but lack of maneuvering ability  to go in and get hits from out of range of the Russian & yet to come American gunners in the A-20 & soon to be introduced AI B-25.

Thanks!

[CUJO_1970]

The guy that approved under-wing mortars should have been court-martialed.

[LukeFF]

Paragraph breaks plz. 

[PatrickAWlson]

My best understanding is that the German fighters fired the rockets into the box from beyond gunnery range and then tried to mop up the wounded.  The 262 pilots seemed to love the R4 rockets.  With the speed of the 262 the performance penalty was not that big of a deal.  Thing is, everything that I have read indicates that they were not terribly accurate, but if you're firing 24 of them into tight box of bombers you can do lots of harm.  Don't recall ever hearing anything about use against small formations or single planes. 

 

Everything that I have read about the 2x mortars is that they were useless.  Pretty sure they were not used much after P-51s started providing escort all the way to the target.  I never managed to hit anything with them in IL2/46 and I'm not sure that real German pilots ever hit anything with them either.

 

[Luftschiff]

1 hour ago, CUJO_1970 said:

The guy that approved under-wing mortars should have been court-martialed.

 

They very well might have been, though not for that.

I really like the Werfergranate, but not in the anti bomber role. The absence of large formations in the game make them (and the other rockets) less useful than they would supposedly have been, but once you learn to aim the Wfr.Gr they make fantastic anti tank weapons. Not historical, perhaps, but I'll take what I can get against soviet tanks.

[TP_Silk]

I'm just reading the JG26 war diaries from 43-45 and in there it says that they were used quite extensively on Jabos after the Allies landed in June '44. 

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Don't recall ever hearing anything about use against small formations or single planes. 

 

There is one account I've seen (in the big multi-volume work on the 262), where a pilot had the opportunity to fire R4Ms against a Mustang, which totally obliterated the plane.

Edited April 4, 2019 by LukeFF

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

There is one account I've seen (in the big multi-volume work on the 262), where a pilot had the opportunity to fire R4Ms against a Mustang, which totally obliterated the plane.

 

I remember some guy in the old sim getting very angry with me over chat for obliterating his 109 with rockets (I was flying a Rata)

Accusing me of cheating...AS IF an air to air rocket shot on a maneuvering fighter is an easy thing to pull off....what a tool.

Funny as hell though...I think I did that twice.

[MarderIV]

The R4M's are sweet. I just don't know if the AI using them is actually set to use those rockets against air targets - either planes making rocket passes singly or en masse. If they weren't I imagine it'd be a waste to have them equipped and cause drag when it won't be used at all; or just dumped the minute the squad comes into contact. 

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, MarderIV said:

I just don't know if the AI using them is actually set to use those rockets against air targets - either planes making rocket passes singly or en masse. If they weren't I imagine it'd be a waste to have them equipped and cause drag when it won't be used at all; or just dumped the minute the squad comes into contact.

 

It's something that I think is planned for the AI.

[MarderIV]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

It's something that I think is planned for the AI.

 

Thanks for the heads up. That should be very interesting to see - at least if they're putting in that kind of improvement on the AI, it makes me wonder what else they might be able to squeeze in. 

[Blitzen]

   So, so far no one knows anything about the optimum range to launch the mortars or the rockets? I can hardly believe someone hasn’t figures this out yet.

     In any case, until we get “stable” formations ( I.e  predicable , some might say 'majestic'. Those of you who trace their sim flying back to original Il-2 or the still evolving Cod Blitz will see the difference  bombers in either sim fly in strict formation discipline on their way to their target .General Frank Savage of Twelve O'Clock High would be proud.)of bombers basically flying to a navigation point or IP  or turning towards an Aiming Point AP in a steady stream and not behaving like startled Starlings when attacked as we have with Pe-2s in GB, then even the mortars a chance ( admittedly small) chance of hitting something, and a somewhat better chance with the underwing rockets, BUT one just has to know more about the flight characteristics ( range,firing angles,etc.,) of these weapons. The Luftwaffe undoubtedly gave pilots some sort of guidelines and I would guess Studio 777 designers have looked these over &  might be able to give us a clue? After all , as I mentioned we will be getting AI  B-25’s (soon I hope,)and these ,one would hope will behave like real medium bombers did, in other words fly in a predictable ,steady ( what made them so dependable bombing platforms in the first place,) fashion.( I briefly flew a stripped down B-25 some time ago & it handled a lot like a large truck...very very steady and very slow response to control input...In real life I think it might be impossible for medium bombers to do any sort of complex maneuvers  without tragic results both the plane & the pilots limitations argue against flinging planes around & about on their way to a target & in formation.)

    BTW slightly OT I remember many years ago reading “I flew for the Fuhrer” by Heinz. Knoke and he wrote about experiments in bombing B-17 formations ,unescorted B-17’s I might quickly add ,with their Bf-109s. I gather success we’re small as actually aiming bombs while flying straight & level at some height above the formations was nearly impossible.Truly a hit & often miss affair....

Edited April 5, 2019 by Blitzen

[Elem]

20 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

The guy that approved under-wing mortars should have been court-martialed.

Yep! I can assure you they do nothing against ships. 6 direct hits on the same part of the deck...not a scratch!

[-TBC-AeroAce]

20 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

The guy that approved under-wing mortars should have been court-martialed.

He will be "mortified" when he learns of the court martial. 

[CrazyDuck]

There are some common misconceptions about rockets/mortars in air to air role.

 

1. They were/are meant to be used against entire formations of a large, straight flying, non-maneuvering, predictably behaving objects (and not against single, small and evading planes - which is a common scenario of a modern simmer to judge a WW2 air to air rocket), with attacker(s) approaching directly from behind and firing rockets just out of defensive gunners range to soften the formation up before going to gun range "melee".

 

2. It's a little known fact that besides famous WG 21 also Russian RS-82 is meant to be used as an air to air weapons which explodes at a predetermined distance and does not require a direct hit! However, since it was/is also used in air to ground role, player has to pick a detonation mode or fuse if you will - it's "contact" by default (for air to ground), but for air to air, you can choose between 600, 800 and 1000 m. With a bit of practice you can reliably hit a formation of 4 Heinkels from 1km away with 4 or 6 RS-82 rockets, damaging them (or occasionally even scoring a kill) before moving in for the gun kills.

 

Edited April 5, 2019 by CrazyDuck

[Jaws2002]

The heavy rockets were successful in their intended role. That role was to break up big formations, so the fighters can pick on the individual planes, that were not covered by the defensive firepower of the whole box. 

They were not meant to be used in dogfights with fighters.

When used in their intended role, and aimed following  procedures, the heavy mortars did their job. I  read that the US bomber crew were very worried about this kind of attacks.

   Actually, the first noticeable effect of the introduction of P-51 for escort, was that rocket attacks by groups of Ju-88 and BF-110s were virtually stopped. 

  The heavy, slower German rocket armed fighters, were intercepted by the mustangs before they were able to setup the attack. 

 

Some pilots had luck with them. Some pilots scored multiple kills with a single launch. 

Edited April 5, 2019 by Jaws2002

[Blitzen]

JAWS2002...That is what i've read as well, but I have a nagging question: were these  weapons only good against extremely large formations of bombers that extended in length & depth for quite a ways as they did during the period 1943-1945 ? This would make it unnecessary for an attacking pilot to really aim or even care where the heavy rocket exploded as long as it did its perceived job of shaking up a formation because of its large ( i suppose) blast effect somewhere deep within the formation? A Luftwaffe pilot must have had some idea of when to launch against the rear (?) of a formation, probably out of MG range- he had to have some idea of how far it might go before it exploded wouldn't he? So far i at least haven't a clue , not that it really matters because we will never see really large formations of bombers sticking in a tight formations that these might effect or AI pilots reacting to a large explosion nearby like 8th Air Force pilots back in the day would.Of course after launching the pilot could get rid of the tubes & quite a bit of drag as well swearing "good riddance..' or something like that in German.

  Early on when these were first introduced in the game I gave them to Ai pilots in some QMB missions.The results were pretty funny as the rockets were released with absolutely no rhyme or reason all over the sky...You might try this sometime.Good for a laugh.

[Jaws2002]

They had launching and aiming procedures. I know i read about this somewhere, but i don't remember where.

 

They were judging range and aiming with the gunsight.

 The fifteen degrees upwards angle of the tube,  sent the rockets  upwards through the gunsight and then back down into the gunsight at 1000m ahead of the plane.  That's when they were supposed to explode. I read about one FW-190 A5 pilot that scored direct hit on two bombers with a single launch, but God knows how many times he hit just empty sky.

 

This is from Wiki:

 

"A time fuse detonated the warhead at a pre-set distance of 600 metres (2,000 ft) to 1,200 metres (3,900 ft) from launch point, resulting in a lethal blast area approximately 30 metres (98 ft) wide."

 

 

Edited April 5, 2019 by Jaws2002

[Bremspropeller]

IIRC the R4M has similar ballistics to the MK 108 round, so it can be aimed accordingly.

The natural spread of a full barrage should cover the area of a bomber when shot at a certain distance. I'd have to look it up, to state specifics.

 

The R4Ms were very interesting to the Americans, triggering development of an entire generation of interceptors whose main weapon-system consisted of a bunch of 2.75'' rockets.

 

Just think about it: Flying your Sabre Dog through the weather, steering that collision-dot on your radar-screen to a perfect launch solution, squeeze off 24 Mighty Mouse rockets, yank on the stick and hope that the crazy-butt maneuver keeps you out of the enemy's combat box. Too bad it's night and you're inside a 20000ft thick stratus layer.

But hey, at least you have an afterburner. Well, sometimes, if that high-tech electrical wize-a$$ engine-control won't call it a day and tries killing you for moving the throttle a crack of an inch...

 

Did I mention I like 40s-60s jets?

Edited April 7, 2019 by Bremspropeller

[gorice]

On 4/5/2019 at 12:18 PM, CrazyDuck said:

2. It's a little known fact that besides famous WG 21 also Russian RS-82 is meant to be used as an air to air weapons which explodes at a predetermined distance and does not require a direct hit! However, since it was/is also used in air to ground role, player has to pick a detonation mode or fuse if you will - it's "contact" by default (for air to ground), but for air to air, you can choose between 600, 800 and 1000 m. With a bit of practice you can reliably hit a formation of 4 Heinkels from 1km away with 4 or 6 RS-82 rockets, damaging them (or occasionally even scoring a kill) before moving in for the gun kills.

 

Out of curiosity, I tried this in a quick battle, firing the rockets from 600m (40 mils). Took me a few attempts, but it actually works! You can even hit individual planes, and I've managed to score a few kills with rockets alone. The problem is that you need to fire from dead 6 and judge the range with perfect accuracy. Presumably, there is some way of calculating deflection against a turning target, but I found it impossible.

[Sublime]

anyone ever read about the Luftwaffe flying above the bombers esp at Schweinfurt and dropping aerial bombs? Did that work at all?

2nd in Il246 you couldd get pretty big bomber groups. Not real life size but 40 or 59 b29s or 60 b17s is impressive.

Still does anyone know if we.ll be seeing large western bomber formations in BoBP?

[Blitzen]

See earlier post- its referred to in Heinz Knoke's book I Flew for the Fuhrer...

[Heliopause]

5/JG11 used the bombing method for a while.

 

 

[Sublime]

On 4/7/2019 at 3:56 PM, Blitzen said:

See earlier post- its referred to in Heinz Knoke's book I Flew for the Fuhrer...

I saw that on a second read through. Thanks

2 hours ago, Heliopause said:

5/JG11 used the bombing method for a while.

 

 

Awesome thanks for this

Since the Luftwaffe had nothing like VT fuzes and it makes no mention of a command detonation that means it was either set to detonate after a few seconds, or at a height...

That makes it even more impressive when you think about it - not only did he time it so his bomb dropped into the formation (on his first try ever) but it detonated at the optimal time!

[ACG_KaiLae]

 

[Blitzen]

Absolutely perfect...finally I have a clue...at least about this!!!!?

[E4GLEyE]

tried them yesterday after watching the awesome tutorial from above... No luck on my side, with the smallest 800 fuse they fly a bit ahead of target and explode without effect... Still had lots of fun with the D9 against 8 A20s that kept their formation... mostly

[Heliopause]

btw: Japanese navy also used aerial burst bom against B-24's from Rabual base (followed by the army air force in New Guinea).

 

[Sublime]

Thanks for this 

So these aerial bombs.  Obviously they must have had a fuse set to detonate after so many seconds post drop? Or some altimeter/barometer set to burst at a height? (Though this would probably have to be set on the ground?)

Seems like a lot of work, precision, and luck.. For better alternatives.

 

The most effective air to air bombing seems to have been blue on blue accidentally

[MarderIV]

12 hours ago, Sublime said:

So these aerial bombs.  Obviously they must have had a fuse set to detonate after so many seconds post drop? Or some altimeter/barometer set to burst at a height?

 

Post drop, no air-burst stuff in the sim save for the rockets. Though still very useful for low-level attacks. Really fun stuff to do with the A-20; kinda wish the AI would do the same instead of sticking to level bombing in the career all the time. 

[Sublime]

I noticed that. Often with the A20 I peel off and just do a shallow dive bomb.  Especially with the 16 or 20 Fab100s.  Btw whats the difference when a T or an M is after the bomb whats that designate?

I think you misunderstood I didnt mean in the sim. Dropping bombs on planes would be a waste unless theyre gonna bring bomber formations *at least* as big as Il2 46 in.  I meant IRL howd the bombs detonate.  The Germans didnt have proximity fuzes and the US/Brits only got them late 44

[EAF19_Marsh]

Note that in the RLV orders for mid-‘43, the rocket-equiped fighters were given an exemption from mandated second attacks on unbroke bomber groups, but were instead allowed officially to chase damaged bombers.

 

Can be interpreted as an understanding that it was a difficult role and that the equipment imposed restrictions on how the aircraft could be used.