Bombing Bridges in Operation bodemplate?

[Oscar19681]

I was wondering the other day, how come for the allies we never have bridges as Bombing targets? It seemed quite commen historicly 

[Burdokva]

39 minutes ago, Oscar19681 said:

I was wondering the other day, how come for the allies we never have bridges as Bombing targets? It seemed quite commen historicly 

 

By late 1944 even the greatest optimist in the Axis could see that Germany was loosing the war. In fact, many in the Allies armies on the Western Front had expected that it would be over by the end of the year and the German army would collapse.

 

Even if the expectation that the war's end was imminent was clearly wrong, it was a clear end. The Allies wanted those bridges intact so they could move their armored columns easily and quickly, and exploit a breakthrough once one presented itself. Bridges were in fact the main goal of Market-Garden in September 1944 - to be captured intact.

 

It was the Germans who were mostly concerned with destroying them once their positions became untenable.

 

I'd say that if the Allies hadn't acquired an intact bridge over the Rheine, the German army in the West might pulled back in an enough organized manner to put up a serious fight for two or three weeks more.

 

In brief, because the Allies didn't want to destroy bridges in North-Western Europe in that timeframe. They wanted to capture them intact.

[Yogiflight]

Bridge destroying on allied side might be more something for BON, to stop german reinforcements and supply for the front lines after the landing.

[cardboard_killer]

From page 8 of D-Day1944: Air Power Over the Normandy Beaches and Beyond by Richard P. Hallion. The WAllies figured out early on thatstrategic interdiction depended on a surprising few number of bridges, almost all locomotive bridges.

 

Quote

The bridge campaign, which aimed at isolating the battlefield by cutting Seine bridges below Paris and Loire bridges below Orleans, began on D minus 46. Here, fighter-bombers proved more efficient than medium or heavy bombers, largely because their agility enabled them to make pinpoint attacks in a way that the larger bombers, committed to horizontal bombing runs, could not. The fighter-bombers also had the speed firepower, and maneuverability to evade or even dominate the Luftwaffe.

 

Edited March 24, 2020 by cardboard_killer

[Jaegermeister]

5 hours ago, Burdokva said:

 

In brief, because the Allies didn't want to destroy bridges in North-Western Europe in that timeframe. They wanted to capture them intact.

 

All true for the most part but there were a lot of exceptions. The fighter bombers frequently got missions to bomb bridges as they were very difficult for the larger bombers to hit with the bad weather. Railway bridges were a frequent target, fighter bombers repeatedly bombed the bridge at Bullay, north of Remagen, and the Army Rangers stopped the 5th Panzers by blowing up the bridge at Dinant during the Battle of the Bulge.

[Blitzen]

Slightly OT but close: what can & cannot be destroyed on the Bodenplatte map and what will it take? I’ve tried rockets with little or no effect.Of course it may be that I’m not hitting them in the critical spot,What about buildings , hangers etc? I imagine the DM is the same as other maps and like TC & FC?

[Jade_Monkey]

7 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

Slightly OT but close: what can & cannot be destroyed on the Bodenplatte map and what will it take? I’ve tried rockets with little or no effect.Of course it may be that I’m not hitting them in the critical spot,What about buildings , hangers etc? I imagine the DM is the same as other maps and like TC & FC?

All objects can be destroyed but it might take more firepower than you can carry individually.

[BornToBattle]

Even more OT but eagerly awaiting to see how the new damage modeling affects ground structures, if anything.

[Oscar19681]

Which brings me to the next question, how come we don’t see any train attack missions? Ive seen tons of footage of P-47,s & P-51,s strafing trains.

[LukeFF]

7 minutes ago, Oscar19681 said:

Which brings me to the next question, how come we don’t see any train attack missions? Ive seen tons of footage of P-47,s & P-51,s strafing trains.

 

That mission type hasn't been created yet.

[Lusekofte]

18 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

That mission type hasn't been created yet.

You mean by the mission makers? 
 

 

18 hours ago, Oscar19681 said:

Which brings me to the next question, how come we don’t see any train attack missions? Ive seen tons of footage of P-47,s & P-51,s strafing trains.

You should take this to serverhosting section. 
Combatbox can sure make those missions. 
my problem with those kind of targets is that unless it is a train yard you need to go down low. 
No matter if you fly a 262 you are dead if target make you go low. 
fighters protecting it then knows excactly where to be. And your dead and soon no longer wish to  attack trains. 
 

[Yogiflight]

@216th_LuseKofte I think he is talking about the career mode, not MP.

[Lusekofte]

Oh well they are a bit repetative

[LukeFF]

58 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

@216th_LuseKofte I think he is talking about the career mode, not MP.

 

Yes, career mode. The only mission type for bridge bombing right now is for bombers. 

[Oscar19681]

23 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

That mission type hasn't been created yet.

So  we might see something like that?

[Yogiflight]

7 minutes ago, Oscar19681 said:

So  we might see something like that?

Would be nice, but we do not have anti shipping missions either, however Battle of Kuban is running quite a bit longer now.