bombers+fighters operational level

[dog of war]

will we be able to have bombers attack targets behind enemy lines(troop staging areas fuel+ammo dumps etc). i also wanted to be able to use fighters to defend against above bombers before they got to the tactical level of cmbb with only a random number of bombers getting through

[PzKpfwIII]

Originally posted by dog of war:

will we be able to have bombers attack targets behind enemy lines(troop staging areas fuel+ammo dumps etc). i also wanted to be able to use fighters to defend against above bombers before they got to the tactical level of cmbb with only a random number of bombers getting through

Medium bombers seem to have been relatively more rare in the Luftwaffe and Red Air Force than in the USAAF and RAF, and I would suggest that their tactical use was almost unheard of.

Even in the west, tactical use of medium and heavy bombers was a rarity, and on those rare occasions they were employed, the results were not good; the short bombing incidents during COBRA and TOTALIZE are well known.

Can you think of a specific incident on the Eastern Front in which medium bombers were used tactically to good effect? By tactically I mean used against troop concentrations or staging areas in direct support of an operation, as opposed to bridges, railyards, etc.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Russophile:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by dog of war:

will we be able to have bombers attack targets behind enemy lines(troop staging areas fuel+ammo dumps etc).

Medium bombers seem to have been relatively more rare in the Luftwaffe and Red Air Force than in the USAAF and RAF, and I would suggest that their tactical use was almost unheard of.</font>

[Count D'Ten]

Originally posted by Sergei:

Anyway, no airforces for the initial release.

Sorry to be obtuse, :confused: but does that include the almost random straffing and bombing that does take place now in CMBB?

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Originally posted by Count D'Ten:

Sorry to be obtuse, :confused: but does that include the almost random straffing and bombing that does take place now in CMBB?

As I understand it, since there will be no aircraft use in CMC, initially, all scenarios played in BB will, therefore, have no aircraft on either side.

I hope that air attacks on units behind the front line, in transit etc, will eventually be modelled, but I don't mind if aircraft never find their way into the actual battles.

[Count D'Ten]

Originally posted by Vergeltungswaffe:

I hope that air attacks on units behind the front line, in transit etc, will eventually be modelled, but I don't mind if aircraft never find their way into the actual battles.

Kind of hard to imagine a Blitzkreig without some kind of Stuka effect. (He's looking up, not being critical).

CdT

[Peterk]

Last time I tried doing an assault on a prepared position with lots of stukas, the planes constantly attacked my infantry moving up to the attack instead of all the juicy pillboxes and trenches 1000 meters away. I tried starting the scenario 3 times to see if it was just bad luck and it was the same thing each time.

Trust me, it will probably be a good thing not to have any planes onboard in the scenario. Simulate the effect in CMC instead.

[Bigduke6]

Medium bombers seem to have been relatively more rare in the Luftwaffe and Red Air Force than in the USAAF and RAF, and I would suggest that their tactical use was almost unheard of.

Even in the west, tactical use of medium and heavy bombers was a rarity, and on those rare occasions they were employed, the results were not good; the short bombing incidents during COBRA and TOTALIZE are well known.

Can you think of a specific incident on the Eastern Front in which medium bombers were used tactically to good effect? By tactically I mean used against troop concentrations or staging areas in direct support of an operation, as opposed to bridges, railyards, etc.

Here's one. During the first week of the Lvov-Sandomirz operation, 1st Ukrainian Front shifted its forces and rammed two Tank Armies through a narrow breakthrough zone called the Kotlov corridor. The Germans attempted to hit the front end of the breakthrough with the greater part of a Panzer Korps (I forget which one, it can be looked up) but this counterattack failed because Sturmovik aircraft from 2nd Air Army intercepted the German armored blow. This was supposedly the first time the Soviets turned back a German counterattack with aircraft alone.

This in turn allowed 1st Ukrainian Front's armor to break into the German rear area. The result was the effective destruction of Armee Gruppe Ukraine Nord, and the transfer of the Red Army to the west side of the last major terrain barrier between Germany and the Red horde: The Carpathian Mountains. So I would call that a fairly successful use of air, from the Soviet perspective.

Air strikes into the operational area were a normal part of Red Army technique by, say, mid 1944. This is not to say they weren't trying earlier - witness the failed premptive mass raid on German airfields at the outset of Kursk.

What the Soviets did not do, as much as the Anglo-Saxons, was try to use air power to strike the enemy's transportation and supply networks. Part of logic was doctinal - the Soviets viewed ground support more or less as flying artillery, so if the target had nothing to do with a battle, they were unlikely to hit it.

The other factor was where the air support was used: in Russia and East Europe, where the transportation networks are not so hot to start out with, and the terrain open enough so that it's fairly easy to bypass a road section destroyed by air attack. Admittedly rail nodes were better air targets, but the Soviets generally preferred to risk partisans, rather than valuable aircraft, when attacking German rail lines.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Peterk:

Last time I tried doing an assault on a prepared position with lots of stukas, the planes constantly attacked my infantry moving up to the attack instead of all the juicy pillboxes and trenches 1000 meters away. I tried starting the scenario 3 times to see if it was just bad luck and it was the same thing each time.

Trust me, it will probably be a good thing not to have any planes onboard in the scenario. Simulate the effect in CMC instead.

However, there's initially no "simulating the effect", either. I do, however, hope that both bombing runs (simulated) and occasional CAS in tactical battle (depending on air dominance) will be added soon.

It can wait for the inclusion of Finnish army, though.

Originally posted by Count D'Ten

Kind of hard to imagine a Blitzkreig without some kind of Stuka effect.

The Luftwaffle wasn't that effective, so it should be doable.

[PzKpfwIII]

Originally posted by Bigduke6:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Medium bombers seem to have been relatively more rare in the Luftwaffe and Red Air Force than in the USAAF and RAF, and I would suggest that their tactical use was almost unheard of.

Even in the west, tactical use of medium and heavy bombers was a rarity, and on those rare occasions they were employed, the results were not good; the short bombing incidents during COBRA and TOTALIZE are well known.

Can you think of a specific incident on the Eastern Front in which medium bombers were used tactically to good effect? By tactically I mean used against troop concentrations or staging areas in direct support of an operation, as opposed to bridges, railyards, etc.

Here's one. During the first week of the Lvov-Sandomirz operation, 1st Ukrainian Front shifted its forces and rammed two Tank Armies through a narrow breakthrough zone called the Kotlov corridor. The Germans attempted to hit the front end of the breakthrough with the greater part of a Panzer Korps (I forget which one, it can be looked up) but this counterattack failed because Sturmovik aircraft from 2nd Air Army intercepted the German armored blow. This was supposedly the first time the Soviets turned back a German counterattack with aircraft alone. </font>

[RawRecruit]

I can think of a couple of occasions where the Luftwaffe bombed on mass. The Blitz for one, and the reduction of Stalingrad to rubble is another.

[Renaud]

I think Russophile is referring to airsupport in a tactical CMBB-size battle, as in called by a forward air controller or other luftwaffe liaison officer in direct support of the immediate tactical objectives of a regiment, battalion, whatever. Or just wandering the battlefield looking for individual vehicles, troop columns, batteries.

As you say, they did use the medium bombers like the Dornier, JU88 and HE111 for planned strikes on railyards, troop concentrations, ships, fortifications, cities, etc.