Rockets in the Typhoon

[RedKestrel]

Well I took the Typhoon up for a few flights last night. Aside from getting used to its handling I tried a few rocket attacks.

The rockets in the Typhoon seem to have more significant drop than other rockets I've used in the sim, to the point that they seem to strike well below the nose of the aircraft  in a slight dive. Historical sources I've read have mentioned this but I'm not really sure how to accurately compensate for it. I see that there are adjustment nobs available on the gunsight but I have no idea how to tell how much adjustment one should make.

The other thing I noticed is that they seem to be a bit more powerful than the M8 rockets from the american planes. I don't think I've ever used the RP-3 rockets in-game until last night so I may be imagining it, but I usually have a very hard time killing tanks with rockets and with the Typhoon I got two on a single pass.

Anyone got some advice for making rocket attacks in the Tiffy? And am I just imagining the increased damage of the RP-3?

[Gambit21]

13 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Well I took the Typhoon up for a
The rockets in the Typhoon seem to have more significant drop than other rockets I've used in the sim, to the point that they seem to strike well below the nose of the aircraft  in a slight dive. Historical sources I've read have mentioned this but I'm not really sure how to accurately compensate for it. I see that there are adjustment nobs available on the gunsight but I have no idea how to tell how much adjustment one should make

 

As an aside, ground assessment after the fact determined that only a tiny percentage of rockets found their mark - a vast majority missed. I can’t quote the hit rate atm but it was pathetically minuscule.

 

What I’m saying is, if you’re missing just about always, well that’s about right.

 

[No_85_Gramps]

Next to the sight, on the right, is a dial marked in degrees that is used to adjust for rocket aim. Someone else posted a setting of 1.6 degrees. There are key binds but I have not set them up yet. Heck, I still trying not to ground loop in this thing.

[PatrickAWlson]

Dive steeper?  Of course then there is the small issue of pulling up, but that's the only way I can think of to compensate for greater drop other than "git gud".

 

Are the M8 rockets HE?  The Typhoon MkI and MkIII both come in AP flavors, so they are designed for purpose.

 

From wiki:

The M8 showed poor effectiveness against hardened targets;^[6] this resulted in the development of the Super M8, which had larger fins, a more powerful rocket and a more powerful warhead. The Super M8 underwent testing in late 1944, but failed to see combat.^[6] The M8 was replaced by the improved spin-stabilized M16 rocket during 1945.

 

 

[RedKestrel]

10 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

As an aside, ground assessment after the fact determined that only a tiny percentage of rockets found their mark - a vast majority missed. I can’t quote the hit rate atm but it was pathetically minuscule.

 

What I’m saying is, if you’re missing just about always, well that’s about right.

 

I remember reading some of the reports, the hit rate was in the ballpark of 5% or something like that. I figure that the rocket drop was part of it, and if you attack in a steep dive to compensate for the drop a little bit, then you have to fire from pretty far away to give you time to pull out, so you would not be able to be very accurate. And in real life I would be pulling out from an attack dive a LOT sooner than in the simulator, LOL. 

I've never been much good with rockets with other aircraft and my go-to ground pounding setup has been 2 X 1000lb, 1 x 500lb and 6 rockets in the P-47. I do the bombs in one pass and then fire all the rockets at a single target in another to try and guarantee a hit/kill. With the Typhoon I think I will have to get better with the rockets to get the most out of it, since its a bit harder to spread the ordnance around with only 2 bombs OR 8 rockets (well, 12 if you double them up on the rails). Of course the 4X 20mm is great for soft targets, but in multiplayer those get cleaned up pretty quick, and somebody has to take care of the harder targets.

 

7 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Dive steeper?  Of course then there is the small issue of pulling up, but that's the only way I can think of to compensate for greater drop other than "git gud".

 

Are the M8 rockets HE?  The Typhoon MkI and MkIII both come in AP flavors, so they are designed for purpose.

 

From wiki:

The M8 showed poor effectiveness against hardened targets;^[6] this resulted in the development of the Super M8, which had larger fins, a more powerful rocket and a more powerful warhead. The Super M8 underwent testing in late 1944, but failed to see combat.^[6] The M8 was replaced by the improved spin-stabilized M16 rocket during 1945.

 

 

I don't think the M8 rockets in the game have an AP version - when they hit, they explode, though I think it might be smaller than the RP-3s.. The first time I went up I accidentally used the AP rockets for the RP-3 and there was no explosion at all, but I did manage to hit an artillery unit and it disabled it (smoking, crew scattered).

When I killed the tanks it was with HE rockets. I got lucky and lined up both tanks and ripple fired off all my rockets, with a pair each hitting near one of the tanks, but I don't think I got a direct hit. They were moving tanks in the QMB, not static, so they would have the complex vehicle DM.

Maybe the biggest problem is I haven't played as much lately, so I don't know if its just my memory, some new effects I hadn't seen yet, or what.

[migmadmarine]

In reality the M8 should be a HEAT round shouldn't it? Since there is HEAT for tank crew, I imagine the game would model it as such. 

[DBFlyguy]

 

[Rokychuchi]

A quote from: "Scott, Desmond. Typhoon Pilot" (It's neither a tutorial about about rocket deployment nor about statistics; it's just to ambient the Tiffy arrival) :
"As I sped to the head of this mile-long column, hundreds of German troops began spilling out into the road to sprint for the open fields and hedgerows. I zoomed up sharply over a ploughed field where 20 or 30 Germans in close array were running hard for a clump of trees. They were promptly scythed down in spurts of dust by a lone Mustang which appeared from nowhere. The convoy’s lead vehicle was a large half-track. In my haste to cripple it and seal off the road, I let fly with all eight rockets in a single salvo; I missed but hit the truck that was following. It was thrown into the air along with several bodies, and fell back on its side. Two other trucks in close attendance piled into it. There was no escape. Typhoons were already attacking in deadly swoops at the other end of the column, and within seconds the whole stretch of road was bursting and blazing under streams of rocket and cannon fire. Ammunition wagons exploded like multi-coloured volcanoes. A large long-barrelled tank standing in a field just off the road was hit by a rocket and overturned into a ditch. Several teams of horses stampeded and careened wildly across the fields, dragging their broken wagons behind them. Others fell in tangled, kicking heaps, or were caught up in the fences and hedges.
It was an awesome sight: flames, smoke, bursting rockets and showers of coloured tracer—an army in retreat, trapped and without air protection. The once-proud ranks of Hitler’s Third Reich were being massacred from the Normandy skies by the relentless and devastating firepower of our rocket-firing Typhoons."

[busdriver]

1 hour ago, RedKestrel said:

Anyone got some advice for making rocket attacks in the Tiffy? And am I just imagining the increased damage of the RP-3?

 

If carrying rockets DON'T select the option of Gunsight Without Reflector. In my limited testing, I found setting the depression to ~1 degree works for my typical rocket pass where I'm in a 15-20 degree dive (using my Mark 1 eyeball to measure) and about ~600 feet AGL when I pickle with the pipper on target.

 

I tried larger depression settings but I always pickle too far out and the rockets fall short.

 

And don't forget to reset the depression to ZERO for strafing.

 

[edit]

 

Again in limited testing using rockets and selecting Gunsight Without Reflector I found that if I put the pipper slightly above the target and pickle when the target gets just above/inside the bottom edge of the reticle circle I got pretty close. This was from a 15-20 degree pass and pickling ~600 feet.

Edited June 2, 2021 by busdriver

[AndytotheD]

4 hours ago, DBFlyguy said:

 

I always wonder about this; everyone focusses on the efficacy, or lack thereof against armor, but what about the effect against logistics vehicles?

[Cybermat47]

5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

As an aside, ground assessment after the fact determined that only a tiny percentage of rockets found their mark - a vast majority missed. I can’t quote the hit rate atm but it was pathetically minuscule.

 

What I’m saying is, if you’re missing just about always, well that’s about right.

 

Apparently, post-battle analysis of Operation Goodwood confirmed 10 of the 222 tank kills claimed by Typhoon pilots, so that’s a kill rate of about 5%.

 

21 minutes ago, AndytotheD said:

I always wonder about this; everyone focusses on the efficacy, or lack thereof against armor, but what about the effect against logistics vehicles?

I’d assume that the HE rockets and Hispanos would take care of them with no problem.

 

I wouldn’t be surprised if targeting the logistics vehicles turned out to be a more effective way of dealing with German tanks. The Axis was running out of fuel in 1944, and the big cat AFVs needed a lot of fuel to be effective, so destroying fuel trucks would have turned the tactical fuel situation from bad to catastrophic.

Edited June 3, 2021 by Cybermat47

[US103_Baer]

From the gun camera film here many of the attacks are much steeper angle than I expected. Look at 1:27- 1:50. The ground to air film could have been setup so an really not sure about that. 

 

Thought also that increasing launch speed would increase destructive capability, so steeper attacks might serve to improve accuracy and damage. 

 

 

Edited June 3, 2021 by US28_Baer

[Diggun]

The oft quoted 5% hit ratio is specifically against tanks and vehicles, and despite its fame (and Airfix box-art notwithstanding...), I don't think that that kind of anti armour duties was the bread and butter of your average Rocketphoon squadron. 

 

Also the 60lb rockets are an altogether different beast to your jumped up bazooka rounds. Even allowing for very poor accuracy, a squadron of 12 Typhoons turning up and delivering 96 60lb rockets in the space of a few minutes is going to make a real mess out of (and leave everyone in the vicinity in need of a strong cup of tea and a lie down somewhere quiet) your average port / defensive position / barge / communications hub / marshaling yard / HQ / hell, lob 'em in the general direction of a strategically important crossroads and you'll make it a right PITA for the next convoy that wants to use it. 

 

It's an effect that's basically not possible to model in game, but the 'annoyance' factor of this kind of attack was hugely important - sort of 'we probably won't destroy target x, but if we can turn up and wreck it so much that it doubles the amount of time it takes the enemy to do y, that's a tactical win'. Rockets are *great* for that kind of thing. 

 

In my (minimal so far) experience of the Tiffy in game, and realising my lack of accuracy with even weapons that go where they're supposed to, I've limited myself to not chucking a rocket at anything smaller than a bunker. The splash damage of them is pretty good, so it's best used in a group, raining rockets down on a target, and then using the Typhoons amazing (for an allied plane) 18 whole seconds of ammo to go and delete the smaller stuff... 

 

Edited June 3, 2021 by Diggun

[the_emperor]

The Wikipedia Article is quite detailed about the effect of the Typhoon Rocket attacks:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Typhoon#Operational_service

 

Cheers

[RedKestrel]

25 minutes ago, Diggun said:

The oft quoted 5% hit ratio is specifically against tanks and vehicles, and despite its fame (and Airfix box-art notwithstanding...), I don't think that that kind of anti armour duties was the bread and butter of your average Rocketphoon squadron. 

 

Also the 60lb rockets are an altogether different beast to your jumped up bazooka rounds. Even allowing for very poor accuracy, a squadron of 12 Typhoons turning up and delivering 96 60lb rockets in the space of a few minutes is going to make a real mess out of (and leave everyone in the vicinity in need of a strong cup of tea and a lie down somewhere quiet) your average port / defensive position / barge / communications hub / marshaling yard / HQ / hell, lob 'em in the general direction of a strategically important crossroads and you'll make it a right PITA for the next convoy that wants to use it. 

 

It's an effect that's basically not possible to model in game, but the 'annoyance' factor of this kind of attack was hugely important - sort of 'we probably won't destroy target x, but if we can turn up and wreck it so much that it doubles the amount of time it takes the enemy to do y, that's a tactical win'. Rockets are *great* for that kind of thing. 

 

In my (minimal so far) experience of the Tiffy in game, and realising my lack of accuracy with even weapons that go where they're supposed to, I've limited myself to not chucking a rocket at anything smaller than a bunker. The splash damage of them is pretty good, so it's best used in a group, raining rockets down on a target, and then using the Typhoons amazing (for an allied plane) 18 whole seconds of ammo to go and delete the smaller stuff... 

 

There's quite a few scholarly articles on an Ontario university website that I've crawled through a while back, and I found this one about attacks on 'special targets' that looks like its a contemporary report of tactics used against enemy HQs and river locks. In both these cases the rocket-carrying planes were employed as anti-flak, while the bombers attacked the target itself. A barrage of rockets and cannon fire from range would allow a fighter to suppress a flak gun, whereas to put a bomb on target means you can only kill the flak gun after he's had all day to shoot at you. Destroying the gun is not necessary, just keep it from shooting down your bombers and it fails its mission to protect the target. So in a crude way this is kind of a precursor to 'wild weasel' planes clearing air defenses for followup strikes.

Tactics Employed by Fighter-Bombers Operating Against Special Targets (wlu.ca)

There's a bunch more articles on air power in the Normandy campaign, but they are more high level (pun intended). "The Fighter Bomber in the Normandy Campaign" spends a lot of time on the rockets vs. vehicles discussion and talks about enemy morale suffering from these attacks, but there's little discussion of rocket attacks on enemy positions or artillery, which must have been common. It's main goal seems to have been addressing the 'tank killer' mythos, in the same theme as some of the videos above in the thread. 

Air Support in the Breskens Pocket: The Case of the First Canadian Army and the 84 Group Royal Air Force (wlu.ca)
The Fighter-Bomber in the Normandy Campaign: The Role of 83 Group (wlu.ca)
Tactical Air Power Controversies in Normandy: A Question of Doctrine (wlu.ca)

 

10 hours ago, AndytotheD said:

I always wonder about this; everyone focusses on the efficacy, or lack thereof against armor, but what about the effect against logistics vehicles?

From what I've read the forward-firing guns were always shown to be the most likely to get a kill on a vehicle in post-battle analysis, with rockets and bombs not really coming close. Its all on target size I think. The inverse square law is a b**** , and even a relatively near miss from an explosive projectile might not destroy a truck, while one shell in the engine block would. And with guns you can correct your aim - with rockets or bombs, you let it go and it is what it is.

As Diggun points out above though, we fixate on the vehicles and especially armour when this would probably not have been the Typhoon's primary target most of the war. A lot of missions likely just involved firing rockets at troop concentrations or where they were dug in, or at infrastructure behind the lines. Just put some HE down range and try not to get killed by flak.

The Fighter-Bomber in the Normandy Campaign: The Role of 83 Group (wlu.ca) talks about how there were more vehicles killed by Spitfires than by Typhoons. Spits were more likely to be running 'armed recce' flights behind the lines where they specifically hunted vehicles with guns, and maybe had a bomb for other targets. The Typhoon was more likely to be hitting the enemy front or bomb/rocket worthy targets in the rear.

That said I think its hard to evaluate the tactical bombing/rocket use because so much of its value is in disruption and delay, which is hard to quantify in after-action reports. 

[Sky_Wolf]

All sorts of details on the Typhoon, including its armament:

 

 

[Diggun]

26 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Tactics Employed by Fighter-Bombers Operating Against Special Targets (wlu.ca)

Intriguing that they talk about attacking an HQ with  1x 'section' of 4 aircraft with bombs and 2x 'sections' of RP armed aircraft. iirc, in the RAF Typhoon squadrons specialised in either rockets or bombs. Were things different for the Canadians? Or would it be flights from different squadrons?

[CAFulcrum]

I had much better success firing from a steep dive (ie 60 degrees and up) at low speed, finding the rockets land within around a degree of the reticle.  The typhoon is maneuverable enough that it isn't too hard to pull out of, plus the rockets aren't going to have as much 'distance error.'  Against panzer IIIs I noticed I was making kills even when two rockets straddled the tank's location.  

The higher angle exposes the tank's top and creates a larger 'target' to shoot at as well.

 

11 hours ago, US28_Baer said:

From the gun camera film here many of the attacks are much steeper angle than I expected. Look at 1:27- 1:50. The ground to air film could have been setup so an really not sure about that. 

 

Thought also that increasing launch speed would increase destructive capability, so steeper attacks might serve to improve accuracy and damage. 

 

 

 

11 hours ago, US28_Baer said:

From the gun camera film here many of the attacks are much steeper angle than I expected. Look at 1:27- 1:50. The ground to air film could have been setup so an really not sure about that. 

 

Thought also that increasing launch speed would increase destructive capability, so steeper attacks might serve to improve accuracy and damage. 

 

 

 

At 2:05 it kind of looks like the rockets are going off in singles... in game we're only limited to pairs and all?

[RedKestrel]

Just now, Diggun said:

Intriguing that they talk about attacking an HQ with  1x 'section' of 4 aircraft with bombs and 2x 'sections' of RP armed aircraft. iirc, in the RAF Typhoon squadrons specialised in either rockets or bombs. Were things different for the Canadians? Or would it be flights from different squadrons?

That is interesting! I hadn't picked up on that.

I'm not 100% sure but I think the RCAF squadrons operated under RAF command and followed the same doctrine. So I think it would be separate squadrons, which seems clunky. But you likely had several squadrons operating from each airfield, so you just had e.g. 442 Canuck Rocketeers* covering for the 443rd Fighting Hosers** when they went in for a bomb run.

*not a real unit
**definitely not a real unit

[Diggun]

1 minute ago, RedKestrel said:

442 Canuck Rocketeers* covering for the 443rd Fighting Hosers** when they went in for a bomb run.

With high level support from British XIV squadrons No. 603 City of London 'Erect Pinkies'* & No. 83 Norwich 'The Old Stiff Upper Lips'**

 

*Not as rude as it sounds

**Probably as rude as it sounds.

[Blitzen]

18 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

As an aside, ground assessment after the fact determined that only a tiny percentage of rockets found their mark - a vast majority missed. I can’t quote the hit rate atm but it was pathetically minuscule.

 

What I’m saying is, if you’re missing just about always, well that’s about right.

 

Yes but they must have scared the hell out of the Germans on the other end…

[Gambit21]

2 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

Yes but they must have scared the hell out of the Germans on the other end…

 

I think plenty came out their other end.

 

[Avimimus]

Something that seems to have been missed:

 

The 25lb AP rocket has a much higher velocity and a flatter trajectory (higher velocity than even the HVAR and almost twice the M8)!

 

The 60lb SAP/HE rocket has a relatively low velocity but has more than twice the explosive power of any rocket in game.

 

 

 

Diving attacks with the 60lb rocket

 

So you'll have to aim differently depending on the variant. Typhoons often released their 60lb rockets in a dive... which enhanced accuracy... so I'd recommend that - I've wiped out entire convoys using dive-rocket attacks (and I find them considerably more effective than the M-8 or RS-82).

 

Naval attacks with the 25lb rocket

 

Also, it is worth noting that the 25lb AP warhead is a solid shell taken from naval use and lacks a bursting charge entirely... so it is basically a hunk of shaped metal - requiring a direct hit to do any damage. However, it is capable of arcing underwater so, under the right circumstances, rockets falling short may actually still hit a ship... and do so below the waterline. While the added flooding damage from below-water-line hits doesn't seem to be modelled in the sim, the ability of this rocket type to travel underwater is.

 

So the take-away is that the more accurate 25lb rockets are more suitable for anti-ship work than anti-vehicle work... and the gains in accuracy from the high velocity will still make hitting a tank unlikely.

 

I hope that helps.

 

P.S. The 25lber and 60lber terms refer to the warheads - the actual rockets weighed 21kg (46lb) and 37 kg (81.5lb) respectively... which means the 25lb rocket weighs almost as much as an RS-132 and the 60lb weighs twice as much as an M8 rocket... it is only if they added the HVAR to the game that we'd have an allied rocket that outweighs them (although the Werfer-Granate 21 is in a class of its own at >110kg).

[Diggun]

7 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

I hope that helps.

Corr... I love a graph, me!

[RedKestrel]

8 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

Something that seems to have been missed:

 

The 25lb AP rocket has a much higher velocity and a flatter trajectory (higher velocity than even the HVAR and almost twice the M8)!

 

The 60lb SAP/HE rocket has a relatively low velocity but has more than twice the explosive power of any rocket in game.

 

 

 

Diving attacks with the 60lb rocket

 

So you'll have to aim differently depending on the variant. Typhoons often released their 60lb rockets in a dive... which enhanced accuracy... so I'd recommend that - I've wiped out entire convoys using dive-rocket attacks (and I find them considerably more effective than the M-8 or RS-82).

 

Naval attacks with the 25lb rocket

 

Also, it is worth noting that the 25lb AP warhead is a solid shell taken from naval use and lacks a bursting charge entirely... so it is basically a hunk of shaped metal - requiring a direct hit to do any damage. However, it is capable of arcing underwater so, under the right circumstances, rockets falling short may actually still hit a ship... and do so below the waterline. While the added flooding damage from below-water-line hits doesn't seem to be modelled in the sim, the ability of this rocket type to travel underwater is.

 

So the take-away is that the more accurate 25lb rockets are more suitable for anti-ship work than anti-vehicle work... and the gains in accuracy from the high velocity will still make hitting a tank unlikely.

 

I hope that helps.

I did use the 25lb AP rockets (by accident) and you're right, there is no explosion whatsoever. A hit on a vehicle disabled it but that was accomplished by firing all the rockets at once at low altitude, so not really efficient. I didn't try to use them on ships yet, I may try that out and see if in-game they are better than HE at taking out ships. I suspect HE will be king regardless of target type.

[Avimimus]

8 minutes ago, Diggun said:

Corr... I love a graph, me!

 

Thanks! I put it together a few months ago in anticipation. I might do a few more (e.g. FC related).

 

7 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

I did use the 25lb AP rockets (by accident) and you're right, there is no explosion whatsoever. A hit on a vehicle disabled it but that was accomplished by firing all the rockets at once at low altitude, so not really efficient. I didn't try to use them on ships yet, I may try that out and see if in-game they are better than HE at taking out ships. I suspect HE will be king regardless of target type.

 

I discovered that the arcing was modelled a few months ago while doing tests with the Spit IX... I could take out small boats that way. However, even a full salvo of eight rockets doesn't seem to do much to harm a tanker.

 

Ships have pretty simple damage models. I don't think water-line hits are modelled as doing extra damage or causing extra flooding. In real life having six or eight holes simultaneously punched into the side of a freighter below the water line would have a good chance of dooming it. But generally speaking, the effects of AP rounds against larger targets aren't well modelled. In my experience, ships are always much more vulnerable to HE cannonfire than they are to AP rounds (even large AP rounds)... so it may be a while before our Coastal Command Mosquitoes are really effective... hopefully they will eventually revise the damage models to make the RP-3 25lb AP and the 57mm Tse-tse more effective against cargo ships. Anyway, let us know if you have any success!

[Requiem]

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

Something that seems to have been missed:

 

The 25lb AP rocket has a much higher velocity and a flatter trajectory (higher velocity than even the HVAR and almost twice the M8)!

 

The 60lb SAP/HE rocket has a relatively low velocity but has more than twice the explosive power of any rocket in game.

 

 

 

Diving attacks with the 60lb rocket

 

So you'll have to aim differently depending on the variant. Typhoons often released their 60lb rockets in a dive... which enhanced accuracy... so I'd recommend that - I've wiped out entire convoys using dive-rocket attacks (and I find them considerably more effective than the M-8 or RS-82).

 

Naval attacks with the 25lb rocket

 

Also, it is worth noting that the 25lb AP warhead is a solid shell taken from naval use and lacks a bursting charge entirely... so it is basically a hunk of shaped metal - requiring a direct hit to do any damage. However, it is capable of arcing underwater so, under the right circumstances, rockets falling short may actually still hit a ship... and do so below the waterline. While the added flooding damage from below-water-line hits doesn't seem to be modelled in the sim, the ability of this rocket type to travel underwater is.

 

So the take-away is that the more accurate 25lb rockets are more suitable for anti-ship work than anti-vehicle work... and the gains in accuracy from the high velocity will still make hitting a tank unlikely.

 

I hope that helps.

 

P.S. The 25lber and 60lber terms refer to the warheads - the actual rockets weighed 21kg (46lb) and 37 kg (81.5lb) respectively... which means the 25lb rocket weighs almost as much as an RS-132 and the 60lb weighs twice as much as an M8 rocket... it is only if they added the HVAR to the game that we'd have an allied rocket that outweighs them (although the Werfer-Granate 21 is in a class of its own at >110kg).

Yeah that sounds about right. I've been messing about with them for a few hours today and the AP rockets are pretty useless against tanks, but you can kill tanks easily using a pair of HE rockets.

[von_Tom]

 

A gratuitous rockets shot.  (Not from a Typhoon sadly).

 

 

von Tom

[Avimimus]

12 minutes ago, Requiem said:

Yeah that sounds about right. I've been messing about with them for a few hours today and the AP rockets are pretty useless against tanks, but you can kill tanks easily using a pair of HE rockets.

 

Well... the 60lb rocket has a peak kinetic energy which is 28% higher than the 25lb rocket (assuming the data I have is accurate).

 

Additionally, it has quite a bit of explosive power with 5.45 kg - which is roughly comparable to a 152mm round... and should be more than enough to destroy any tank (if it hits the top part of the tank at least) and even kill the crew without penetrating in some cases.

 

If I recall correctly the actual development was:

Anti-aircraft rocket -> Anti-submarine rocket with solid warhead (later used against ships by aiming at the waterline) -> 60lb SAP/HE warhead for ground targets -> Improvised use on tanks -> Land Mattress surface-to-surface artillery system.

 

So the 25lb rocket wasn't optimised for anti-tank work... rather it was a quickly developed anti-submarine weapon.

 

Note: The anti-aircraft rocket launchers were also used in a direct fire role against ground targets in North Africa (would be cool to see added to Desert Wings).

[fjacobsen]

I use a sight depression of 2.0, attacking with a dive angle of 20-30° starting at 3000 ft at 240 mph.

The rockets hit very close to the center of the sight.

 

But historically they where not very effective for actually blowing up Tanks, but psycologically they where effective, often scaring the crews out and disbanding the Tank.

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, fjacobsen said:

But historically they where not very effective for actually blowing up Tanks, but psycologically they where effective, often scaring the crews out and disbanding the Tank.

 

Largely due to failing to hit tanks I suspect a direct hit would be pretty effective. There is a report somewhere on the forum that I posted a few years ago about attacks on trains - and there the information was unclear as almost no train crews were aware of having been attacked by rockets (probably due to the fact that a steam locomotive produces a lot of steam which makes it hard to see an attack, and obviously only infantry could hear an attack). I suspect that a 60lb hit could also be interpreted as a bomb hit after the fact. The British analysts thought they'd found a couple of glancing hits on surviving locomotives though... speaking of - does anyone know if they ever used the 25lb warhead against rail locomotives?

Edited June 3, 2021 by Avimimus

[LukeFF]

8 hours ago, Diggun said:

The oft quoted 5% hit ratio is specifically against tanks and vehicles, and despite its fame (and Airfix box-art notwithstanding...), I don't think that that kind of anti armour duties was the bread and butter of your average Rocketphoon squadron. 

 

Also the 60lb rockets are an altogether different beast to your jumped up bazooka rounds. Even allowing for very poor accuracy, a squadron of 12 Typhoons turning up and delivering 96 60lb rockets in the space of a few minutes is going to make a real mess out of (and leave everyone in the vicinity in need of a strong cup of tea and a lie down somewhere quiet) your average port / defensive position / barge / communications hub / marshaling yard / HQ / hell, lob 'em in the general direction of a strategically important crossroads and you'll make it a right PITA for the next convoy that wants to use it.

 

Exactly - most of the time, Typhoons were attacking what we would refer to as "area" targets, so there wasn't any need for exacting pinpoint accuracy. People should think of rocket attacks like aerial mortar barrages - the point isn't just to destroy targets but to make the position so untenable for the enemy that they hunker down or retreat somewhere else.

6 hours ago, Diggun said:

Intriguing that they talk about attacking an HQ with  1x 'section' of 4 aircraft with bombs and 2x 'sections' of RP armed aircraft. iirc, in the RAF Typhoon squadrons specialised in either rockets or bombs. Were things different for the Canadians? Or would it be flights from different squadrons?

 

Definitely different squadrons - all three of the Canadian Typhoon squadrons (438, 439, and 440) used bombs exclusively. It was the same with all other Typhoon squadrons - they either employed bombs or rockets, but not both at the same time. This was to simplify logistics and pilot training.

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

So the take-away is that the more accurate 25lb rockets are more suitable for anti-ship work than anti-vehicle work... and the gains in accuracy from the high velocity will still make hitting a tank unlikely.

 

Correct, and to that end, the 2nd TAF used the SAP/HE rocket exclusively by 1944 - again for logistical reasons and because it was the best all-around weapon for the targets they were attacking.

Edited June 3, 2021 by LukeFF

[RedKestrel]

32 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

Exactly - most of the time, Typhoons were attacking what we would refer to as "area" targets, so there wasn't any need for exacting pinpoint accuracy. People should think of rocket attacks like aerial mortar barrages - the point isn't just to destroy targets but to make the position so untenable for the enemy that they hunker down or retreat somewhere else.

 

Definitely different squadrons - all three of the Canadian Typhoon squadrons (438, 439, and 440) used bombs exclusively. It was the same with all other Typhoon squadrons - they either employed bombs or rockets, but not both at the same time. This was to simplify logistics and pilot training.

 

Correct, and to that end, the 2nd TAF used the SAP/HE rocket exclusively by 1944 - again for logistical reasons and because it was the best all-around weapon for the targets they were attacking.

Yeah I was just reading through a summary of air support in the Breskens pocket and almost all of the targets they list were static, area targets - troop concentrations, machine gun emplacements, mortar and artillery positions. They do mention armed recce sorties to interdict supply lines, so that would be the classic attacks on vehicle convoys, but most of what the ground troops wanted was disruptive attacks on areas they were taking fire from or attacking. 

[Avimimus]

So I've done some testing with the AP 25lb rocket...

 

It appears to have less than half the firepower it had before this patch. Prior to this patch I could take out a light ship (German landing craft) with a pair of AP rockets... and now it takes six to sink a landing craft or submarine (often without giving a kill credit for some reason). The full barrage also seems unable to sink the riverine paddle-wheeler (gunboat).

 

In contrast two or three 60lb rockets can take out a gunboat... and one or two can take out a landing craft. A full barrage of eight 60lb rockets can sink a 7000 ton transport ship.

 

So, for some reason, they made the 25lb rocket much less effective than it used to be (when used by the Spitfire) and much less effective against ships than the 60lb SAP is... do you think we should file a bug report?

 

Another question: The HE 60 lb "F"., No. 1, Mk. I had a smaller bursting charge than the SAP... but would that translate into larger fragments capable of travelling further? I don't have much expertise in warhead design to be honest. In any case, we're unlikely to get a third type of rocket modelled and I gather they weren't widely used.

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

... or retreat somewhere else.

 

Das poop and scoot.

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

all three of the Canadian Typhoon squadrons (438, 439, and 440) used bombs exclusively.

Do you know, if our Typhoon will be equipped with bombs?

I know I can use the Tempest but it is often restricted to only fighter in servers

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, RedKestrel said:

Yeah I was just reading through a summary of air support in the Breskens pocket and almost all of the targets they list were static, area targets - troop concentrations, machine gun emplacements, mortar and artillery positions. They do mention armed recce sorties to interdict supply lines, so that would be the classic attacks on vehicle convoys, but most of what the ground troops wanted was disruptive attacks on areas they were taking fire from or attacking. 

 

Yep. And, since I love researching this sort of stuff, here is the breakdown of the mission types flown by 175 Squadron, a rocket-armed Typhoon unit, from mid-April 1944 to the end of the August:

 

Anti-Flak: 4

Armed Recon: 42

Barge Attack: 1

Bridge Attack: 2

Chateau Attack: 1

Close Support: 11

Coastal Defenses Attack: 3

Dug-In Tanks Attack: 4

Gun Position Attack: 10

House Attack: 2

Infantry and Mortar Position Attack: 3

Pontoon Attack: 1

Radar Station Attack: 6

Railyard Attack: 14

Ranger: 1

Scramble: 7

Self-Propelled Guns Attack: 1

Strongpoint Attack: 3

Tank Column Attack: 7

Troop Barracks Attack: 1

Troop Concentration Attack: 14

Top Cover to other Typhoons: 2

Vehicle Column Attack: 3

Viaduct Attack: 2

Visual/Forward Control Point (aka the "Cab Rank" missions): 28

Woods Attack: 2

 

They really did attack anything and everything.

 

Just now, LuseKofte said:

Do you know, if our Typhoon will be equipped with bombs?

I know I can use the Tempest but it is often restricted to only fighter in servers

 

Yes, hopefully sooner rather than later.

[ww2fighter20]

From the ingame stats (from Quick Mission and the specifications which you can see before you start flying and in careermode) we have the following info for rockets:

For the Soviets we have :

 

ROS-82 (Most soviet aircraft can carry this rocket)

Weight Rocket: 7kg

HE Payload mass 2.5kg

 

RBS-82 (All 3 IL-2 and the U-2)

Weight Rocket: 15kg

HEAT payload mass 7.2kg

 

ROS-132 (Both Pe2 and the U-2)

Weight Rocket: 23kg

HE payload mass 9.1kg

 

ROFS-132 (All 3 IL-2)

Weight Rocket: 42kg

HE payload mass 21.3kg

 

 

For the western allies the payload mass is not listed and the spitfire weird enough has an different weight for the rockets (looking at ammunition mass in Quick Mission and dividing it by the number of rockets) compared to the typhoon :

 

M8 4.6 in (P38J/Both P47 and the P51)

Weight Rocket: 19.3kg

 

RP-3 S.A.P. 60lb. mk.II (Typhoon IB and Spitfire IXe)

Weight Rocket: 38kg

Weight Rocket for the spitfire: 43kg

 

RP-3 A.P. 25lb. mk.II (Typhoon IB and Spitfire IXe)

Weight Rocket: 21.25kg

Weight Rocket for the spitfire: 27.5kg

 

 

For the germans similarly the payload mass is not listed and again an difference in weight with both the WGr.21 and R4M rockets (looking at ammunition mass in Quick Mission and dividing it by the number of rockets) :

 

WGr.21 (Bf109G6 Late/Bf109G14/Fw190A6/Fw190A8/Fw190D9)

Weight Rocket: 112kg

Weight Rocket for the Fw190A6: 94kg

 

R4M (Fw190D9/Me262)

Weight Rocket for the Fw190D9: 3.35kg

Weight Rocket for the Me262: 3.04kg

 

R-HL Pz.Bl. 1 and R-Sprgr. M8 (Fw190A8 (F8 Modification))

No extra info

[sevenless]

4 hours ago, von_Tom said:

 

A gratuitous rockets shot.  (Not from a Typhoon sadly).

 

Here you go.

 

2ND TACTICAL AIR FORCE, 1943-1945. Still from film shot by a Hawker Typhoon of No. 181 Squadron RAF while attacking trucks in railways sidings at Nordhorn, Germany, showing a salvo of 60-lb rocket projectiles heading for the target, which has already been hit.
Datum    Aufgenommen am 30. März 1945

 

 

Search our collection | Imperial War Museums (iwm.org.uk)

 

And an interesting article here:

 

No 121 Wing Typhoons rocket men Aeroplane__Issue_563__March_2020.pdf | DocDroid

 

From above article. Once we are getting droptanks in the sim, things can get a little special with the Tiffy and rockets.

 

Edited June 3, 2021 by sevenless

[Avimimus]

LukeFF - you really should write a history book someday - or perhaps a history guide to the history behind what is in the sim!

 

Q: What constitutes a "Cab Rank" mission?