Allied Air Force vs. Submarine

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by Hooston

AI finds text on the internet matching your question, combines it with your question and spits it back at you. It has no real understanding or knowledge, no quality control, and makes stuff up to fill in gaps. Which is what makes it seem human I guess!!! Wikipedia says U-976 was bitten by a mkXVIII Tse-tse, and includes a proper reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Mosquito. ...I wonder how much of Wikipedia is being edited by AI! We really are living in a post-truth age.
I'm not sure about 20mm cannon. Although there was an "armour piercing incendiary" round I think this was more designed for thin aluminium aircraft armour and would struggle against 18.5mm high tensile steel. The British must have developed the Tse-tse for a reason! I'd be interested in any hard data. I read an account of a British Cromwell tank that was shot at by a German 20mm flak and all the rounds stuck in the armour instead of bouncing off. It turned out the crew had been given a mild steel training tank by mistake. They decided to keep it because it was a lot faster than the rest of the troop.

Your regular Mosquito FB mkVI, and the Beaufighter had four 20mm cannon which would certainly make a hell of a mess of everything outside the pressure hull. The U-Flak boat U-441 got a good working over from 3 Beaufighters which killed 10 men and wounded 13. However despite this the boat was able to dive away and made it back to port under the command of the boat's doctor https://uboat.net/boats/u441.htm.

AI just does the same as what you or I do with Google/Site searches and comparing different results - just faster and with out too much scrutiny or predjudice. But yeah, its still at the mercy of the source info being wrong, as are we, so not a huge difference really. In some cases it might even be advantageous as its less likley to dismiss 'a truth' based on its own stupid political bias/ emotionally driven narrative which many humans relegiously adhere to. At least that what the term 'post truth' means to me alot of the time: 'It must be true if it confirms what I already believed' and 'its cant be true if it makes me feel uncomfortable.' Maybe the term should swapped for 'Post adult'.

Anyway, Im ranting...
According to Uboat.net (if they are to be belived) the pressure hull was typically 18mm thick steel, so I guess we just need to know if a 20mm Hispano could penetrate 18mm of steel, if yes then there is your answer if you want to look. Personally Im already quite satistfied I have read enough to suggest it could (within a set of variables, attack angle, range, ammo type etc). Also in the case of something like the Beaufighter or Mosquito which had 4 cannons, keep in mind those guns were set to converge at a certain range, like 400-600 meters, so 4x 20mm concentrated at one spot is going hurt more than a single 20mm gun.

[Hooston]

Well i found a useful source and the answer is YES... but NO.... but YES.... but maybe.
See
http://www.wwiiequipment.com/index.p...kets&Itemid=60


The HE and ball ammo would not cut it. So NO
The armour piercing round (many flavours used!) would penetrate around 20mm of armour plate at 200yds at 0 degrees incidence. So YES
Most attacks would have to be at a shallow dive angle and I'd guess around 3-400 yds. For shallow incidence shots there's not a lot of difference between armour plate and high tensile steel and the penetration drops off (reference only goes up to 40 degree incidence). The thin deck plates would also get in the way a bit. So NO, but YES against conning towers and the thin unpressurised saddle tanks. Some boats had added armour on the conning towers (I guess for this reason).
Seems to me that you should incur a lot of damage to deck crew, guns, periscopes and deck plates, a bit of damage to the conning tower and a slight nibble at the hull integrity (never enough to sink the boat).
Looks like we are not too far off!

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by Hooston

Well i found a useful source and the answer is YES... but NO.... but YES.... but maybe.
See
http://www.wwiiequipment.com/index.p...kets&Itemid=60


The HE and ball ammo would not cut it. So NO
The armour piercing round (many flavours used!) would penetrate around 20mm of armour plate at 200yds at 0 degrees incidence. So YES
Most attacks would have to be at a shallow dive angle and I'd guess around 3-400 yds. For shallow incidence shots there's not a lot of difference between armour plate and high tensile steel and the penetration drops off (reference only goes up to 40 degree incidence). The thin deck plates would also get in the way a bit. So NO, but YES against conning towers and the thin unpressurised saddle tanks. Some boats had added armour on the conning towers (I guess for this reason).
Seems to me that you should incur a lot of damage to deck crew, guns, periscopes and deck plates, a bit of damage to the conning tower and a slight nibble at the hull integrity (never enough to sink the boat).
Looks like we are not too far off!

Ha, nice find, well I say let the planes a little charitable wiggle room on the power of their 20mm - to compensate for their overall stupidity, predictability, massivley easy detection, inability to shoot fixed guns at all at certain attack angles and pretty poor bomb accuracy. when you factor all that in, what's a little damage buff to their cannons? And TBH if I fight them rather than evade, well maybe I deserve the hull integrity of a collander

[Hooston]

Originally Posted by JU_88

And TBH if I fight them rather than evade, well maybe I deserve the hull integrity of a collander

Yeah, it's not really important given the limitations baked into the game's damage model. The important thing is to discourage players from unrealistically fighting it out on the surface against cannon armed fighters, whilst not having boats behaving realistically sunk by strafing (other than Tse-tse). I think that's where GWX KC is at.

[Captain Drastic]

I spend most of my patrol time out of sight of planes anyway, with no eternal view to remind me of their presence.

[Raf1394]

When my crew spots an aircraft. I always dive.
I go flank speed ahead and change direction to be sure.

Then i wait for the aircraft to drop the bombs, if it missed me, i go to periscope depth.Then i can observe it.
I see the aircraft usually doing some few attack runs and dropping bombs on the wrong location. If i see he suddenly goes away, after a while i surface.

I never try to fight and shoot a aircraft surfaced. Its suicide. Its not worth the risk, only if i have no other choice. When that happens, i go like half speed and right before he zero's on me. I go flank speed and go full rudder left or right, if you time it good, the bombs will miss.

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by Raf1394

When my crew spots an aircraft. I always dive.
I go flank speed ahead and change direction to be sure.

Then i wait for the aircraft to drop the bombs, if it missed me, i go to periscope depth.Then i can observe it.
I see the aircraft usually doing some few attack runs and dropping bombs on the wrong location. If i see he suddenly goes away, after a while i surface.

I never try to fight and shoot a aircraft surfaced. Its suicide. Its not worth the risk, only if i have no other choice. When that happens, i go like half speed and right before he zero's on me. I go flank speed and go full rudder left or right, if you time it good, the bombs will miss.

Agreed, only time i might have a shoot out with one is if im out torpedos and on my home anyway, as Im unlikley to need to go deep again for that patrol, that and if the plane type isnt anything too nasty.

[Navigator777]

Originally Posted by JU_88

Ha, nice find, well I say let the planes a little charitable wiggle room on the power of their 20mm - to compensate for their overall stupidity, predictability, massivley easy detection, inability to shoot fixed guns at all at certain attack angles and pretty poor bomb accuracy. when you factor all that in, what's a little damage buff to their cannons? And TBH if I fight them rather than evade, well maybe I deserve the hull integrity of a collander

I asked chatGPT for statistics and numbers about losses and this is what I got:

The exact number of attacks where aircraft actually detected and attacked a submarine varies by source, but approximately 2,500-3,000 attacks were recorded during World War II.

Breakdown by year (approximate data):
1942 - about 500 attacks, as aircraft were not yet that effective.

1943 - the peak of combat, about 1,000-1,500 attacks, due to improved detection technology.

1944-1945 - about 700-1,000 attacks, as submarines began to avoid surface navigation due to the threat of aircraft.

Not every attack resulted in a sinking:

On average, only 10-15% of attacks ended in the sinking of the submarine.

Another 20-30% caused serious damage, forcing the submarine to abort the mission.

The remaining 50-70% of attacks either did not cause critical damage, or the attack was unsuccessful (the submarine managed to go under water).

Reasons for unsuccessful attacks:
Weather conditions - poor visibility and rough seas interfered with aiming.

Submarine maneuvers - sharp turns and emergency diving.

Aiming problems - depth charges often exploded either too early or too late.

Anti-aircraft fire - submarines could sometimes repel an attack, especially in 1943-1944, when they began to be armed with 20-37 mm anti-aircraft guns.

Thus, out of approximately 15,000 submarine-hunting sorties, approximately 2,500–3,000 ended in attacks, and approximately 300–350 submarines were sunk (success rate ~10–15%).

[Hooston]

This link mentions the Coastal Command effort in support of D-Day:
"During these operations, aircraft of Coastal Command flew 2,197 ASW (Anti-submarine Warfare) sorties in the Channel and Western Approaches. 72 submarines were sighted, 40 were attacked. Coastal Command anti-shipping and strike squadrons flew 1,672 reconnaissance and 315 strike sorties."
So the total number of sorties during the war was waaaaay more than 15000 and the chance of seeing a uboat on one of these was small. You have to be really careful with ChatGPT. uboat.net (and even wikipedia) is very carefully researched and much more trustworthy. Look here.
In trawling through this I found this image of Beaufighters attacking destroyers with rockets. Look at all the splashes in the water literally miles from any target!

[Navigator777]

Originally Posted by Hooston

This link mentions the Coastal Command effort in support of D-Day:
"During these operations, aircraft of Coastal Command flew 2,197 ASW (Anti-submarine Warfare) sorties in the Channel and Western Approaches. 72 submarines were sighted, 40 were attacked. Coastal Command anti-shipping and strike squadrons flew 1,672 reconnaissance and 315 strike sorties."
So the total number of sorties during the war was waaaaay more than 15000 and the chance of seeing a uboat on one of these was small. You have to be really careful with ChatGPT. uboat.net (and even wikipedia) is very carefully researched and much more trustworthy. Look here.
In trawling through this I found this image of Beaufighters attacking destroyers with rockets. Look at all the splashes in the water literally miles from any target!

I agree, statistics and figures need to be checked. That's why I wrote where I got these approximate figures from. It's probably very difficult to get exact figures from somewhere. But at least approximate ones.
And the same uboat mentions that according to some sources, submarine hunters, the Royal Air Force Coastal Command, lost 700 aircraft for various reasons.
It turns out that hunting for submarines was not an easy task. https://uboat.net/history/aircraft_losses.htm

[Navigator777]

You can immediately feel the difference in the large expansion of the scenario compared to the basic SH3 game and the game assembly with supermods that I am currently playing.
I have made several careers in the game and am moving from one to another for the sake of interest.
One of the unusual careers for me is the career in the Mediterranean Sea, which has a lot of both aircraft actions on both sides and convoys.
For example, in December 1942, in the Tripoli area, when enemy aircraft were already frequently pestering in the sky, I met a convoy of blues at a speed of 6 knots. 5 large merchant ships, 1 small one, 3 escort destroyers and my seven submarines, and everyone had their own anti-aircraft weapons.
Enemy aircraft began to fly in and, despite the anti-aircraft fire, knock out the merchant ships one by one.
It was big news for me, the opportunity to meet friendly convoys in the new assembly. In the basic SH3, this never happened. I also noted that the general anti-aircraft fire of this entire convoy did not particularly prevent the flying boats from knocking out the merchants one after another.
At that time, the anti-aircraft guns of my seven could do nothing at all. Even when I installed a quadruple 20 mm anti-aircraft gun and a twin 37 mm - all in vain.
Moreover, the 37 mm turned out to be much worse than the quadruple 20 mm. Heavy, clumsy, slow and no effect even when hitting, unlike the basic SH3, in which the 37 mm anti-aircraft gun is very effective.
But now, when I play in June 1943, I met a practically military convoy going somewhere on its own business at 9 knots.
I also joined the convoy to watch the convoy's anti-aircraft guns work. The convoy consists of three light cruisers of the Duca d'Aosta and Garibaldi type in the center
anti-aircraft armament of which
4×2 - 100 mm
4×2 - 37 mm
4 ×2 -13, 2
And four small merchants with them in the center.

Two destroyers and small nosed boats along the perimeter
And each of them with its own anti-aircraft armament.

We didn't have to wait long and one after another the enemy planes started flying in. I was interested to see how long the plane would hold out against such a combined anti-aircraft fire of the convoy. This Sunderland held out for 3 whole minutes and even sank one small transport in the end.

I apologize for the poor quality of the image. I took it on my phone just to at least somehow illustrate what was written.

[Navigator777]

[Navigator777]

[Shadowblade]

I shot down some biplanes (Fairey Swordfish), but usually my command is:



the renown for aircraft is not worth to risk the damage.

[Raf1394]

Originally Posted by Shadowblade

I shot down some biplanes (Fairey Swordfish), but usually my command is:



the renown for aircraft is not worth to risk the damage.

Totally agree