PDA

View Full Version : WW2 footage of planes strafing ships



Wannabe-Pilot
03-19-2004, 04:19 PM
I've seen probably dozens of WW2 documentaries that feature planes strafing ships with 2-3 second burst after which they (the ships) simply explode. Many of these I've recognized to be from the Pacific. Now I know that every US fighter apart from the Aircobra was armed only with .50 cal machineguns. Even heavy two engined attack bombers like the B-25 mostly used only .50 cal. Also, judging by the sound, the shape and colour of the tracers and hit marks on and around the ships, these planes were definetly using light guns or .50 cal machineguns since no other higher caliber weapon can have such a high rate of fire.

So the million dollar question is: How can you make a ship explode just by strafing it with .50 cal (20 mm guns max) machineguns? What were these ships made of, paper?

Wannabe-Pilot
03-19-2004, 04:19 PM
I've seen probably dozens of WW2 documentaries that feature planes strafing ships with 2-3 second burst after which they (the ships) simply explode. Many of these I've recognized to be from the Pacific. Now I know that every US fighter apart from the Aircobra was armed only with .50 cal machineguns. Even heavy two engined attack bombers like the B-25 mostly used only .50 cal. Also, judging by the sound, the shape and colour of the tracers and hit marks on and around the ships, these planes were definetly using light guns or .50 cal machineguns since no other higher caliber weapon can have such a high rate of fire.

So the million dollar question is: How can you make a ship explode just by strafing it with .50 cal (20 mm guns max) machineguns? What were these ships made of, paper?

Waldo.Pepper
03-19-2004, 04:24 PM
They are filled with munitions or fuel. Do a search for Halifax Explosion and be in awe.

A130
03-19-2004, 06:02 PM
On a similar note, back in January I recall watching a show on the Discovery Wings channel featuring Mosquitos giving some German shipping a hard time. Very cool footage, but two things struck me: first, that the Mosquitos were engaging from very long distances, probably to avoid flak (which was light); secondly, that their marksmanship was AWFUL. They seldom hit with their cannon fire and they fired their rockets so early and from so far away that some of them arced out of the guncam's view before they hit the water.

So, if any of you are like me, and shoot so badly that you can't successfully attack a hangar when you're parked in one, don't feel bad -- at least several Mosquito pilots were even worse.

Helonwhls87
03-19-2004, 06:15 PM
It could also be a boiler explosion. Ever seen a clip of train strafing. Locomatives didn't carry explosive fuel. But they have a major explosion from boiler bein ruptured.

Captain_Avatar
03-19-2004, 07:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Helonwhls87:
It could also be a boiler explosion. Ever seen a clip of train strafing. Locomatives didn't carry explosive fuel. But they have a major explosion from boiler bein ruptured.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rather doubt it would be a boiler explosion. The boilers and Steam turbines were typically below the waterline and along the keel. A .50cal, 20mm, or even a 30mm would have a hard time penetrating that far. Besides boilers are made very strong to withstand the pressures in a steam system (300-1200 psi). In effect they are armored to a degree.

One sure way you can tell a boiler has exploded is a white or grey plume. A lot like a steam train when it's hit.

Helonwhls87
03-19-2004, 07:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Captain_Avatar:
Rather doubt it would be a boiler explosion. The boilers and Steam turbines were typically below the waterline and along the keel. A .50cal, 20mm, or even a 30mm would have a hard time penetrating that far. Besides boilers are made very strong to withstand the pressures in a steam system (300-1200 psi). In effect they are armored to a degree.

One sure way you can tell a boiler has exploded is a white or grey plume. A lot like a steam train when it's hit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I guess It would all depend on the size on the boat. Most of the strafing clips I've seen were on smaller types of vessels. Which I think would be possible to get a boiler explosion. If you can get a locomotive which as you stated would be armored to a degree to explode by rupturing it's boiler I'd think it would be possible with a small ship as well.

I'm not claiming to be a expect on explosions or boilers. Just stating another option as to why sometimes there is a huge explosion. Just my .02

[This message was edited by Helonwhls87 on Fri March 19 2004 at 07:09 PM.]

MustangWZI
03-19-2004, 08:07 PM
I guess the next logical question is this modeled in FB? I haven't tested the durability of the ships except with the torpedo bombers available now much less with guns.

http://server6.uploadit.org/files/MustangWZI-sig5.JPG
Like the moon over
The day, my genious and brawn
Are lost on these fools
~Haiku

zacklaws
03-20-2004, 05:06 AM
&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;On a similar note, back in January I recall watching a show on the Discovery Wings channel featuring Mosquitos giving some German shipping a hard time. Very cool footage, but two things struck me: first, that the Mosquitos were engaging from very long distances, probably to avoid flak (which was light); secondly, that their marksmanship was AWFUL. They seldom hit with their cannon fire and they fired their rockets so early and from so far away that some of them arced out of the guncam's view before they hit the water.

So, if any of you are like me, and shoot so badly that you can't successfully attack a hangar when you're parked in one, don't feel bad -- at least several Mosquito pilots were even worse. &lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;


Hi

These Mosquito pilots you may have noticed where doing it for real, not playing FB or IL2 where you get more than one chance at a mission if you screw up. Would you press home an attack in real life in the same way that you do in FB? or would you prefer to give yourself a chance of seeing another day and firing of your ordnance at maximum range in order to do so? A plane or pilot lost for real cannot be replaced by simply pressing "Refly"

Consider the reasons why the marksmanship was awfull? Jinking to avoid real ammunition coming at you and probably a lot more than you could see on the filmage was probably a good enough reason. Perhaps the orders given for the mission dictated that they are not to get in close. Don't confuse real combat with computer games or range firing.

Zack Laws

Wannabe-Pilot
03-20-2004, 05:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MustangWZI:
I guess the next logical question is this modeled in FB? I haven't tested the durability of the ships except with the torpedo bombers available now much less with guns.

http://server6.uploadit.org/files/MustangWZI-sig5.JPG
Like the moon over
The day, my genious and brawn
Are lost on these fools
~Haiku<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This was why i posted this thread. P-47 is useless (so attacking ships with .50 cal is a no-no in FB), but I've also tried Fw-190 with 20 mm and 103 gunpods 30 mm, the Aircobra with the 37 mm, the 108 gunpods on Fw-190, Il-2 3M (not sure about the designation, the '43 model with 2 37 mm anti-tank guns)...- pretty much everything except Yaks with big guns. None of those worked. Of course, I WAS attacking smaller ships eg. german gunboats (those slow 8 knot ships you can find in the object viewer) and schnell-boot, soviet gunboats and submarine chasers. At least the Sturmovik should make an impact, if the thing was capable of destroying tanks it should definetely be able do destroy german gunboats with 20 mm armour max. If the theory about boiler rooms is correct (it probably is, thanx guys) then we should see a big bang after releasing 100-200 AP and HE-I projectiles. It was by far the most effective way of attacking small shipping-just pound them with high caliber shells roaring away at high speed and they can't touch you. Well, that would be true if only the guns could do some damage.

The reason for this thread was that I just remembered that FB is more than dogfighting so I decided to try a little anti-shipping missions. Started with the soviets and torpedo armed Il-2 but the flak is just awful. You have to come in low at medium speed and I never make it, if I do manage to release a torpedo I never manage to run away without significant damage. Once I attacked a convoy consisting of Admiral Murgesku and 2 german gunboats with a flight of 4 torpedo armed Il-2s and everyone was downed before ever reaching the target. Very dangerous business, torpedo attacks on ships. Plus the ships seem too immune to even torpedo hits. A broadside hit to Admiral Murgesku and it went on as if nothing had happened. A ship of that size (basicly a small destroyer-frigate) would be crippled if not completely sunk by just one torpedo hit. Well, since there is no Pe-2, that is about it for soviet bombers. Next I tried the germans, but it is even worse with them. He-111 is way to big and slow to be an effective torpedo bomber against anything other than unarmed merchant ships, it is just too big a target not to get caught up in flak. Pity since it has a pretty decent payload. Stuka was very precise anti-shipping weapon but not in my hands can't hit sh*t with it. So I was left looking for alternatives to attack ships and I suddenly remembered all those footage I saw. I realy expected that I'd be able to do some damage to smaller ships with fighters armed with 20-30 mm guns and rockets, but no. Guns are pretty much useless, even though pilots used them quite succesfully in RL agyinst smaller ships and merchantmen, even .50 cal machineguns. The rockets are pretty useful though.

I think the Pe-2 and Ju-88C-6 would add a lot to anti-shipping missions, not the mention the Beaufighter and the Mosquito. Pe-2 is, I think, more manuverable than the He-111 and could carry a bigger payload than Il-2 (one torpedo that doesn't make enough damage), plus a dive attack would be quite precise. Ju-88, Beau and the Mossie would be the best though, since a combination of large payload of rockets/bombs plus more effective 20 mm guns and large caliber guns would be devastating. Plus, you have two engines to soak up the damage, and defensive gunners for Ju-88.

Menthol_moose
03-20-2004, 06:07 AM
You get a lucky shot on a ammo cache and its game over. The HMS hood was completely destroyed from one lucky shot that crashed into the ammo storage section. Only 3 men survived.

Check the world at war series for some train straffing footage. The explosion from the ammo carriages is staggering.

http://images.somethingawful.com/mjolnir/images/cg09162003/Solvalou.jpg

essemm
03-20-2004, 06:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
These Mosquito pilots you may have noticed where doing it for real, not playing FB or IL2 where you get more than one chance at a mission if you screw up. Would you press home an attack in real life in the same way that you do in FB? or would you prefer to give yourself a chance of seeing another day and firing of your ordnance at maximum range in order to do so? A plane or pilot lost for real cannot be replaced by simply pressing "Refly"

Consider the reasons why the marksmanship was awfull? Jinking to avoid real ammunition coming at you and probably a lot more than you could see on the filmage was probably a good enough reason. Perhaps the orders given for the mission dictated that they are not to get in close. Don't confuse real combat with computer games or range firing.

Zack Laws<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said Zack

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/141103-warloch_small.jpg

A130
03-21-2004, 09:55 PM
Zack: perhaps I should use more smilies in my posts. I was making an admittedly dry attempt at humor. I'm in agreement with you.

Still, they really could've held the noses a little higher when they launched those rockets...

SheerLuckHolmes
03-22-2004, 12:48 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Wannabe-Pilot:
I've seen probably dozens of WW2 documentaries that feature planes strafing ships with 2-3 second burst after which they (the ships) simply explode. Many of these I've recognized to be from the Pacific.
Japan lost over 3000 fishing ships during war... I believe they were not armored.
Perhaps this is why they were so easy meat.

SheerLuck Holmes

Xnomad
03-22-2004, 03:17 AM
The Hood sank because the Bismark, a ruddy great big battleship fired massive shells at it (and the Hood was the pride of the Royal Navy and not some Japanese trawler). From a long range the shells come straight down on top of a ship where the armour isn't as strong as the sides. So it is by no means a comparison to a 50 Cal strafing. The Hood would have been better off facing the Bismarck at closer range where the shells wouldn't have arched that high.

Also gun cam footage may make it seem like just a few burst but they didn't show other planes firing at the same target or previous runs by the same plane.

And A130 was by no means making fun of Mosquito pilots where on earth did people get that idea from???

Back to the topic I remember some of those PTO gun cam films and one of those ships really goes up there is a huge shock wave that can be seen spreading across the water, quite scary stuff!

http://www.xnomad.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sig.jpg

Scen
03-22-2004, 12:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Xnomad:
The Hood sank because the Bismark, a ruddy great big battleship fired massive shells at it (and the Hood was the pride of the Royal Navy and not some Japanese trawler). From a long range the shells come straight down on top of a ship where the armour isn't as strong as the sides. So it is by no means a comparison to a 50 Cal strafing. The Hood would have been better off facing the Bismarck at closer range where the shells wouldn't have arched that high.

Also gun cam footage may make it seem like just a few burst but they didn't show other planes firing at the same target or previous runs by the same plane.

And A130 was by no means making fun of Mosquito pilots where on earth did people get that idea from???

Back to the topic I remember some of those PTO gun cam films and one of those ships really goes up there is a huge shock wave that can be seen spreading across the water, quite scary stuff!

http://www.xnomad.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sig.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Ummm Being kind of an expert on Naval Gunfire the shells can't really land on top of the ship. Naval gunfire is designed much like a rifle it's not like artillary at all.

I know because I was a Naval Gunfire Spotter in the Marine Corps and naval gunfire hasn't changed much over the past 100 years.

Just fyi... The Bizmarck just stayed out of the Hood's range...

Back to the Topic. 50 cals are very much under-rated in IL2. 50 cals are pretty nasty when there are 6 or eight being fired at the same time.

SeaFireLIV
03-22-2004, 12:25 PM
Well, I think Xnomad is right. I saw a documentary saying that the shell went through the weaker deck of the ship into the armoury were the shells were kept. Also, in the program, divers went down and looked at the Bismarck hull to confirm this.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/Spitfeur2.jpg
Achtung! IT`S HERE!

Snow_Wolf_
03-22-2004, 01:04 PM
maybe it because of all the ammo that on the ships. I mean look at destoryers they got Depthcharges at the back which i think a couple of 50cal API rounds may cause an explsion. Then you still got all the ammo which is at the AA gun stations.

http://manganet.free.fr/mononoke/logog.jpg

Scen
03-22-2004, 01:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Well, I think Xnomad is right. I saw a documentary saying that the shell went through the weaker deck of the ship into the armoury were the shells were kept. Also, in the program, divers went down and looked at the Bismarck hull to confirm this.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/Spitfeur2.jpg
Achtung! IT`S HERE!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not saying it's impossible it's just unlikely... It could be that they (Bizmarck) extended it's range to keep the Hood out of range and that could be why the rounds where raining down... We would sometimes have the ship move out further away to get the same effect. Also it would get rid of the Range Dispersion problem along the guntarget line.

The other way they can do it but it doesn't make sense is to ask for what they call reduced charge. In modern ships much harder to do because the guns are automatic and it would require unloading them. Older ships in this case Battleships are hand loaded guns... They simple remove charge bags to get the same effect.

Either way I was saying that Naval gunfire is normally high velocity unlike artillary. The idea is to punch holes through the ship much like tanks. Same idea.

5 Inch guns can whisle through most ships as they aren't armored like Battleships.

As I'm sure it was noted it's was the turning point for the way a nation projects power. At one point it was the mighty battleship then it changed to the aircraft carrier.

Although most people wouldn't be happy having one hanging offshore. Not bad considering it was built in WWII.

WTE_Grendal
03-22-2004, 03:16 PM
In the gun cam film of ships sunk by strafing, are the ships carrying fuel or gas?

I too would question whether the damage model on ship is not a bit too hard.

I have read a bit about torpedo attacks from submarines and in WWII. A single accurate hit from a torpedo would have sunk most smaller destroyers or cargo ships. Cruisers and Battleships would take a number of hits though. Maybe even four or five torpedoes on a larger battleship or carrier unless it hits a critical spot.

I have no idea if the plane carried torpedoes had the same explosive capacity as the torpedoes carried on submarines. There is also the fact that especially in the early parts of the war that dud torpedoes were a real problem. If FB is modeling the dud hits then they need to get rid of the explosions when the torpedo makes contact.

http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/grendal/image/4THERC_AA_logo.gif

Xnomad
03-23-2004, 11:20 AM
Yep I probably saw the same Docu as SeaFire, I think it was called "The Battle Hood and Bismarck" and the CGI of the battle they showed the shells coming down much like artillery, I think at that range it was the only way to hit.

Here is some more info from http://www.gnt.net/~wright/bismarck.html

"Holland tried to close the range as quickly as possible to flatten the trojectoires as quickly since Hood's light deck armor wasn't up dealing the plunging shots from Bismarck. The Heavy Cruiser Prinz Eugen struck first blood where an 8 inch salvo started a fire on Hood's boat deck and on Bismarck fifth salvo a shell penetrated exactly where Hood was the most vanurable and set off a major detonation of the ships ammunition which vented forward thought the engineering spaces and touched off the forward magazines. The recent exploration of HMS Hood by David Mearns and Rob White during the summer of 2000 located the wreck in 9,200 feet down in the Denmark Strait. The survey concluded that Hood was blown in three pieces. Order from www.pbs.org (http://www.pbs.org) the video "The Battle of Hood and Bismarck" which covers this outstanding expedition. The Hood was lost in two minutes under a 600 foot high plasma jet of fire and molten steel as 200 tons of ammunition exploded at once."

http://www.xnomad.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sig.jpg