mosquitoman
Master Sergeant
Must have divided the flak between the 2 planes, poor gunners can't have known if they were coming or going
Best ship buster.....
- Thread starter cheddar cheese
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
GermansRGeniuses
Tech Sergeant
Yep, though as far as I know, that's not a real tactic - I dreamt it up yesterday to show in theory how two Torbeaus could devastate a ship...
Also, both attacks would render flak fairly helpless, as the one coming in with rockets at first would also use cannons, and the rocket blasts would destroy or render the guns useless, as would the torpedo, and then the attack would be repeated, vice-versa.
It's a good system for having been dreamt up by a thirteen year old.
If anyone brings up escorts, I have mentioned that two loaded down planes wouldnt go in alone, simply that this would work, even more so with Mustang I escorts, as the RAF liked to use for the Med and N. Europe, since Spits lacked the range...
Also, both attacks would render flak fairly helpless, as the one coming in with rockets at first would also use cannons, and the rocket blasts would destroy or render the guns useless, as would the torpedo, and then the attack would be repeated, vice-versa.
It's a good system for having been dreamt up by a thirteen year old.
If anyone brings up escorts, I have mentioned that two loaded down planes wouldnt go in alone, simply that this would work, even more so with Mustang I escorts, as the RAF liked to use for the Med and N. Europe, since Spits lacked the range...
mosquitoman
Master Sergeant
Even the escorts could bring their guns to bear on the ships to supress the flak or to attract it, leaving the bombers a clear run-in.
Erich
the old Sage
no actually it was like 3-6 Mossies or Beus attacking a single ship or ships and no protective escorts in 44-45. would attack in one direction but when over flying would split up to make target difficulty for the light Fla on the ships.
do wonder how effective the KM was against RAF coastal command in this regard ? As many of the cargo type Sperrbrecher's made it through the war as well as Minenschiffe.
E ~
do wonder how effective the KM was against RAF coastal command in this regard ? As many of the cargo type Sperrbrecher's made it through the war as well as Minenschiffe.
E ~
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
wow that pic made very little sence to me.............
KraziKanuK
Banned
- 792
- Jan 26, 2005
A book worth reading is Canadian Squadrons in Coastal Command by Andrew Hendrie. ISBN 1-55125-038-1
- Thread starter
- #67
cheddar cheese
Major General
GermansRGeniuses said:
No comments on this, then?
Nice idea....
I am sure that the Fairey Swordfish sunk more tonnage than any other aircraft during the 2nd World War, so that would make it the ultimate ship buster.
The Teste Mosquito could carry either 4 X Rocket Launcers and 2 long range fuel tanks, or 8 x Rocket Launchers, this would make it a very effective submarine hunter.
Also I read in "They Gave me a Seafire" that several Seafires were strafing a Japanese Destroyer, which promplty blew up.
The Teste Mosquito could carry either 4 X Rocket Launcers and 2 long range fuel tanks, or 8 x Rocket Launchers, this would make it a very effective submarine hunter.
Also I read in "They Gave me a Seafire" that several Seafires were strafing a Japanese Destroyer, which promplty blew up.
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
In the PTO the P-38 was quit effective but the B-25 was great! I've never seen tonnage sunk records but I have seen many accounts of both planes together and seperately sinking large numbers of ships.
GermansRGeniuses
Tech Sergeant
cheddar cheese said:GermansRGeniuses said:
No comments on this, then?
Nice idea....
Fuck yer!
I might have to make a mission like this in PF, only there will only be one strike per weapon type, since you can't select rockets and torpedo, only one choice...
- Thread starter
- #71
cheddar cheese
Major General
My PF doesnt work any more...I click on start FB+AEP+PF and the picture of the Avenger comes up, goes off and then it doesnt load...
What was the tonnage total sunk for the D3A 'Val'Lightning Guy said:
I have a figure of over 363,000 tons for the Fw 200 Condor
For the Allies I have a figure of 500,000 tons just for the Fairey Swordfish operating out of Malta ( not including the various battleships, submarines and the like
)
Erich
the old Sage
Red, what is your source(s) for the Fw 200 Kondor figure ?
thank you
E ~
thank you
E ~
DaveB.inVa
Airman 1st Class
- 225
- Dec 20, 2004
The B-25's were pretty good in the Pacific, especially versions with all the 50 calibers in the nose. Go to www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com and check out "Winged Artillery". Its currently on the front page, watch the video. It has some great shots of 75mm cannon armed B-25's doing some good work on land based targets. I know its not ship busting but it is a lot of fun to watch!!
Personally I'd rather have all the 50s over 2 50s and one 75mm. All the firepower certainly would help with suppressing return fire from the ship your about to skip bomb.
What about mines? Does this conversation consider aircraft dropping mines?
Personally I'd rather have all the 50s over 2 50s and one 75mm. All the firepower certainly would help with suppressing return fire from the ship your about to skip bomb.
What about mines? Does this conversation consider aircraft dropping mines?
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
i would think so.............
Erich
the old Sage
got a wmv file coming showing FW 200 Kondor action. buty for now this off ebay.de, some stills showing Kondor attacks on merchant shipping. sadly the owner has put his release through the center of the pics....
also concerning some talk on another thread about the best bomber: U-boots ceased the carrying of the 88 and 105mm forward guns come late 43 for use was nil agasint shipping. the fact that increasing amount of aerial acctivity was coming into play forward and rearward turms became standard. Twin 2cm, two of them installed and a reaward 2cm Flakvierling or single 3,7cm weapon. some U-boots also had a forward 3.7cm weapon as well and these were standard U-boots and not Flak boots. also during late 44 refits, select boots were retrofitted with the new twin 3.7cm Fla weapon replacing the slower firing 3.7cm single. Also although for short range only MG 34's were also brought up, several in fact per boot.............why ? ok here are the Kondor pics as promised.....
also concerning some talk on another thread about the best bomber: U-boots ceased the carrying of the 88 and 105mm forward guns come late 43 for use was nil agasint shipping. the fact that increasing amount of aerial acctivity was coming into play forward and rearward turms became standard. Twin 2cm, two of them installed and a reaward 2cm Flakvierling or single 3,7cm weapon. some U-boots also had a forward 3.7cm weapon as well and these were standard U-boots and not Flak boots. also during late 44 refits, select boots were retrofitted with the new twin 3.7cm Fla weapon replacing the slower firing 3.7cm single. Also although for short range only MG 34's were also brought up, several in fact per boot.............why ? ok here are the Kondor pics as promised.....
Attachments
The problem with this, is its often impossible to identify what mines were air-dropped, and those planted by naval forces.DaveB.inVa said:
But having said that, here's some more figures to play with.
According to Stephen Roskill's, The Navy at War, a history of the RN in WW2.
Some of the losses and the causes of the losses suffered by the German Merchant Fleet in NW Europe in WW2 were as follows;
604 ships of 660,000 tons to mines
289 ships of 574,000 tons to direct air attacks on shipping.
104 ships of 318,000 tons to RN submarines
86 ships of 303,000 tons to RN surface warships.
The losses of Allied shipping to mines (in all theaters) is 534 ships of 1,406,037 tons
Erich
the old Sage
here is an interesting figure given by FAGr 5 archival notes in the Freiburg RM files
The Ju 290's of the two staffeln operating the craft helped monitor Allied shipping operations directing Fw 200's to their targets and U-boots.
A interesting development happened here: from November 15, 1943 to 15 December 1943, Ju 290's reported through 29 op missions sosme 6 convoys, totally 238 ships-merchant, a battleship, 10 destroyers, 9 corvettes and 20 patrol boats/ships. Estimated tonnage was some 1.7 to 2 million BRT. Out of this Fw 200 Kondors from II./KG 40 were directed by FAGr 5 and the Kondors sank an estimated 18,000 BRT. U-boots were directed by Ju 290's to the areas and sank a big 0.
E ~
The Ju 290's of the two staffeln operating the craft helped monitor Allied shipping operations directing Fw 200's to their targets and U-boots.
A interesting development happened here: from November 15, 1943 to 15 December 1943, Ju 290's reported through 29 op missions sosme 6 convoys, totally 238 ships-merchant, a battleship, 10 destroyers, 9 corvettes and 20 patrol boats/ships. Estimated tonnage was some 1.7 to 2 million BRT. Out of this Fw 200 Kondors from II./KG 40 were directed by FAGr 5 and the Kondors sank an estimated 18,000 BRT. U-boots were directed by Ju 290's to the areas and sank a big 0.
E ~
Attachments
Nonskimmer
Captain
A battleship, eh? Interesting. Nice figures, and a good pic too. 8)
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
