Effectiveness of AA guns

[RodBorza]

Hello all!
I was wondering what was the effectiveness of AA guns in real life. If they used it to their intended use or not. Also, I would like to know if US subs in WWII got to shoot down some airplanes.
Because in the game, and I am early 1942 with a single 20 mm and when I detect a plane coming my way all that I do is "go for a dive and hide".

I'm playing TMO 2.0 (with Vickers Xmas Tree - It's eye candy, but a very nice one :D) and RSRD v550.

[Diopos]

If it is "coming your way", diving is the proper AA tactic. And in TMO diving deeper is even more "proper". Against aircraft, the AA gun is - or should be- a last resort thingy. Subs are way to fragile, to slug it out with aircraft on a regular basis.



.

[Thrair]

Yah, planes are bad. Only time I'll try to use the AA gun on one is if I've taken too much damage to risk diving. Otherwise I dive deep and stay deep. Until night. I fear planes more than DDs.

Course, I run TMO, so not only are planes tougher to shoot down, but they also report your position and can see you submerged if you're not deep.

With Stock, the planes are a lot less of a threat and can be shot down by AI gunners quite easily. But it's still not worth it because A) They are worth no renown, and B) They have a chance of nailing you with a bomb and causing heavy damage or sinking you outright. High risk, nil reward.

As to real life, I don't know of any subs that shot down planes. But I know of a lot of subs that were sunk by them.

[Armistead]

Sometimes you have to deal with planes, shallow water, doing end arounds chasing fast TF, can't dive. Still, until I get a full load out of two AA guns or the third AA gun TMO gives later war I prefrer to dive. Late war I like the Formosa convoys that hug the coast, you seldom have more than 50 ft of water. I'll certainly try to wait until night.

Now, if the damage was realistic, I would never fight a plane, but you can take direct hits from bombs and usually get no more than 20% damage.

[Thrair]

20% hull damage, yah. But I've found those bombs have an annoying habit of hitting the worst spot.

"Diesel Engines Destroyed, Sir!"

[RodBorza]

20% hull damage, yah. But I've found those bombs have an annoying habit of hitting the worst spot.

"Diesel Engines Destroyed, Sir!"

LOL. True. Almost like they were laser guided or something.

Thanks for the input, mates! It seems I'm doing the right thing.
Old Plunger will survive. The first patrol I was w/o SD radar and got back with 60% hull damage. Now with radar, I'm uncasthed.

Regarding the SD radar, I read somewhere in the forums that in real life they couldn't tell the direction of planes coming at them.
Can someone confirm that?

[Armistead]

20% hull damage, yah. But I've found those bombs have an annoying habit of hitting the worst spot.

"Diesel Engines Destroyed, Sir!"

Never happened to me once, not that I stay up and fight planes unless I have a better objective. Sometimes you have to chase a fast TF on the surface and deal with planes or let it go, I'm sure I choose to chase them because the bomb damage is unrealistic. In real life one bomb or even one 5inch deckgun shell went through the ship you were done for, maybe lucky if you got back to base.

[DaveyJ576]

Regarding the SD radar, I read somewhere in the forums that in real life they couldn't tell the direction of planes coming at them.
Can someone confirm that?

That is true. SD radar was non-directional, it was used as an early warning set and gave a range only. It was reasonably accurate, but was detecable by later IJN airborne radars by interference on their own screens, thus giving away the presence of the boat. Because of this many skippers used it sparingly and counted on their eagle eyed lookouts to keep them safe. It wasn't until late in the war (mid summer '45) that the much more effective and directional SV series radars became available. Only a few sets made it to the boats before the war ended. Most boats finished up with the SD.

[subskipper53]

LOL. Yesterday i shot down like four F1M2 Petes in the Formosa Strait. had no other choice.

(TMO 1.9 and RSRDC w/ patch)

[RodBorza]

LOL. Yesterday i shot down like four F1M2 Petes in the Formosa Strait. had no other choice.

(TMO 1.9 and RSRDC w/ patch)

LOL. Nice one. As Armistead put it, depending of your set of machine guns and location (Formosa Strait is a tricky place) better be up and fight.

[Thrair]

Never happened to me once, not that I stay up and fight planes unless I have a better objective. Sometimes you have to chase a fast TF on the surface and deal with planes or let it go, I'm sure I choose to chase them because the bomb damage is unrealistic. In real life one bomb or even one 5inch deckgun shell went through the ship you were done for, maybe lucky if you got back to base.

Yah, I'm not surprised it doesn't happen often to you. In that you seem to know what the hell you're doing and don't overuse time compression like my impatient self. :P

As to damage realism (or rather, lack thereof), I saw a picture a while back of a sub that they were going to abandon due to damage, but the captain and the chiefs decided to try and bring it home. They left a skeleton crew on and had another ship shadow them just in case it started to sink.

What catches your eye is that this "critical" damage was a hole in the upper section of hull perhaps 12 inches across. And they didn't think they could keep it afloat at all.

[WernherVonTrapp]

It was reasonably accurate, but was detecable by later IJN airborne radars by interference on their own screens, thus giving away the presence of the boat. Because of this many skippers used it sparingly and counted on their eagle eyed lookouts to keep them safe. Just out of curiosity and in the interest of continued research, from what book did you read that? (Include chapter and page if possible).

[Dogfish40]

Hello all!
I was wondering what was the effectiveness of AA guns in real life. If they used it to their intended use or not. Also, I would like to know if US subs in WWII got to shoot down some airplanes.
Because in the game, and I am early 1942 with a single 20 mm and when I detect a plane coming my way all that I do is "go for a dive and hide".

I'm playing TMO 2.0 (with Vickers Xmas Tree - It's eye candy, but a very nice one :D) and RSRD v550.

During WW2 The basic AA flak guns were used for more than just aircraft. They were used as anti-personnel and used against ships to try and keep 'their heads down' . Against aircraft, even the best AA gunners could only shoot down aircraft by aiming in front of the planes direction and hoping to land a few lucky shells in the fuel tanks. Fortunately, for the US overall, some of the JP planes ex; the Zero, were built for speed, so they were built with almost no armor and one or two lucky wing hits would make the plane explode. Did subs ever shoot down any aircraft? I can't find a single report that they did, and I'm still looking.
In the game, I always make sure I have at least three gunner specialists so that if the situation arises, I don't have to worry about the gunner hitting the plane, I just have to place the ship at an angle favorable for the gunner. A good gunner may save the sub if the planes catch you off guard.
One last thing, I always upgrade the 20mm gun to the twin barrel 20mm. Two barrels are better than one! That goes for the deck gun as well.
Good Hunting.:salute:
D40

[CCIP]

Submarines are generally poor gunnery platforms, and that certainly applies to AA guns as well. They're unstable, inaccurate, and most importantly vulnerable. Even when you look at you look at German U-boats in the extreme circumstances (i.e. obeying the Stand-and-Fight order, or U-Flak boats), their successes when actually confronting aircraft were poor. I believe the absolute record for any submarine against aircraft (over a career) was 4.

From the plane's perspective, even a 20mm gun is no peashooter and could be absolutely fatal. In a shootout, the aircraft was still about 3 times more likely than a submarine to be destroyed. However when you consider the cost and compliment of an average ASW aircraft vs. that of a submarine, it becomes apparent that even at that success ratio it was extremely prudent for airplanes to keep pressing. So airplanes, provided they have any kind of armament capable of actually destroying a sub, are always an EXTREME danger. Dive when able.

The one caveat to this, though, is that the best time for an airplane to attack is WHILE the submarine is diving, when it's slowest, most exposed, least maneuvarable, most likely to go to the bottom if hit, and 100% blind. So you really have to judge the distance before diving, and do it really fast. Oftentimes it is better to drive off one hostile pass on the surface, while maneuvering at speed, and then pull the plug while the plane is coming around. You don't want to get hit in the time it takes you to dive.

[WarlordATF]

The only sub kills i know of was during the Pearl Harbor attack, the USS Narwhal split two kills with the USS Tautog.

[CCIP]

Actually, I got a little wrapped up in U-boats with my thinking and forgot about one decisive advantage that the US submarines had from quite early on in the war: effective, working SD radar. The SD radar honestly does do wonders, and while you still need to react to its signals in time to avoid a threat, if you dive as soon as it makes contact, the dive time is usually a non-issue. Even early SD radar will generally allow you to get under before the plane actually gets close enough.

SD radar, not AA guns, is a fleet boat's real plane antidote :up:

[TheBrauerHour]

So far, in 3 patrols of the USS Barb that I am reading in "Thunder Below", the only time AA guns have been used is in attacking junks/sampans. He also ordered the 40mm and 20mm guns manned for true AA duties when they were rescuing shipwreck survivors since they had to come to a stop. Otherwise, Fluckey never even thought to duke it out with an airplane.

The preferred method of dealing with airplanes is to yo-yo (dive and wait until the plane leaves, then surface)