Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Tanatoy

ST - skip-bombers

38 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[WG]
WG Staff, Administrator, Community, WG Team
4,559 posts
3,873 battles

In the near future a new type of aircraft carrier squadrons - skip-bombers, will be tested. Please note that if this concept is successfully tested, detailed information on its application will be announced later. 

 

Read more

 

Please note that all information in the development blog is preliminary and subject to change during testing. Any showcased features may or may not end up on the main server. The final information will be published on our game's website.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6,145 posts
10,639 battles

Looks ... interesting. But why tested on a KM CV? Weren't historically the Brits more invested in skipping bombs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,920 posts
16,150 battles
1 minute ago, Allied_Winter said:

Weren't historically the Brits more invested in skipping bombs?

The US and British land-based air forces made extensive use of the technique. But WG does as WG will. The RN was the first navy to sink an enemy ship in wartime with dive bombers, but the RN CVs don't have any.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[XTREM]
Players
1,693 posts
13,813 battles

I'm excited, if nothing else it's interesting. Think of how it could be used. 

 

 

 

And I'm ready to be crucified now. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAF]
[FAF]
Players
361 posts
16,964 battles
11 minutes ago, Tanatoy said:

In the near future a new type of aircraft carrier squadrons - skip-bombers, will be tested. Please note that if this concept is successfully tested, detailed information on its application will be announced later. 

 

Read more

 

Please note that all information in the development blog is preliminary and subject to change during testing. Any showcased features may or may not end up on the main server. The final information will be published on our game's website.

WG simply cant stop pumping new things out that we dont need and that makes CVs even stronger right @Tanatoy ??

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AMOK]
Players
1,961 posts
8,597 battles

This is excactly what the game needed....not :fish_palm:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6,145 posts
10,639 battles
3 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

but the RN CVs don't have any.....

Yet. Only thing I know about them is, that they were dropped from a Lancaster. 

 

Maybe WG found sekrit documents of a Navy version of the Lanc. :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,566 posts
3,209 battles
Proprio ora, Allied_Winter ha scritto:

Weren't historically the Brits more invested in skipping bombs?

I don't really know about it, but they werent the only ones to use it; the Germans used it especially JG 2  and JG 26 attacking ships in the Channel. The americans used it tho not that much. 

 

Also Dambusters time

 

 

Fun fact; the Dambusters attack inspired the Fjord run of 633 Squadron, and basically both, inspired the Star Wars 4: A New Hope trench run.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,566 posts
3,209 battles
2 minuti fa, Allied_Winter ha scritto:

Maybe WG found sekrit documents of a Navy version of the Lanc. :cap_haloween:

It's called HMS Habakkuk

iceberg-aircraft-carrier.jpg

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6,145 posts
10,639 battles
1 minute ago, wot_2016_gunner said:

Also Dambusters time

Ahhh yes.

 

Imagine, steering a squadron of 3 Lancasters towards a Kurfürst...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,566 posts
3,209 battles
Proprio ora, Allied_Winter ha scritto:

Ahhh yes.

 

Imagine, steering a squadron of 3 Lancasters towards a Kurfürst...

it was mostly for the main theme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,566 posts
3,209 battles

also, the Mosquito had a bouncing bomb (it could carry 2), and there was a naval version of the Mosquito, so...

bb3074a3b08c7021343aa2c46ad92462.jpg

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG]
WG Staff, Administrator, Community, WG Team
4,559 posts
3,873 battles

Although the Dambuster squadron is really known for their feat, this method was also used for example by the US in the Pacific against IJN shipping. The destroyer Hayashio was for exemple destroyed by this method. This testing is to check if an armament like this, which will be more difficult to use, but could be more rewarding (a bit like the AP rockets) will fit into the game. 

 

As usual guys, remember it's a concept which will enter a testing phase. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAF]
[FAF]
Players
361 posts
16,964 battles
1 minute ago, Tanatoy said:

Although the Dambuster squadron is really known for their feat, this method was also used for example by the US in the Pacific against IJN shipping. The destroyer Hayashio was for exemple destroyed by this method. This testing is to check if an armament like this, which will be more difficult to use, but could be more rewarding (a bit like the AP rockets) will fit into the game. 

 

As usual guys, remember it's a concept which will enter a testing phase

Yes and asual we then know it will come sorry to say that @Tanatoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
9,832 posts
8,982 battles
Quote

Skip-bombers do not need to fly close to the ship to perform an attack, which reduces the time spent in the target ship's AA defense zone;

 

So now you are inventing active counters against your counters? Sounds great, so when do we get Radar-counter for DDs, Citadel-counter for Cruisers and Torpedo-counter for BBs?

 

Quote

The planes are more vulnerable to AA defense fire during and after an attack than other bombers;

 

Squad shortening or just simply pressing F after first attack dont seem to exist in WGs gameplay :fish_book:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quality Poster, In AlfaTesters
1,528 posts
13,801 battles

Skip bombing technique most commonly used by Americans, Commonwealth forces...

...and Italy.

 

It looks as though the concept was considered for German CVs as a way to AP bomb with a different method to that of existing AP bombs, but I guess it didn't work out?

 

Skip bombing was done with more agile bombers than the Lancasters most would associate it with from the above mentioned Dambuster, like Ju87s, A-20 Havocs and IL-2 Sturmoviks.

 

The dispersion area and low number of bombs, looks like they will be less effective against small ships even if you can take a more direct route and bomb them in a conventional manner, and against ships with good AA you can attempt to strike from a greater distance utilising the skipping (looks around 4km?) but the bombs take ~8s from release time to reach their maximum range which, combined with the 3s wind up time and the approach time, this can be quite a long reaction time.

 

Curious ordnance indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EUTF]
Players
150 posts
5,929 battles

If i post a dolphin doing sea jumps would it be consider trolling or funny meme :Smile_hiding: ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PGT2P]
Players
57 posts
6,124 battles
13 minutes ago, Astolfo_Is_My_Waifu said:

 

The dispersion area and low number of bombs, looks like they will be less effective against small ships even if you can take a more direct route and bomb them in a conventional manner, and against ships with good AA you can attempt to strike from a greater distance utilising the skipping (looks around 4km?) but the bombs take ~8s from release time to reach their maximum range which, combined with the 3s wind up time and the approach time, this can be quite a long reaction time.

 

Curious ordnance indeed.

There's no attempt at historical accuracy nor acceptance of the laws of physics in this game, so who knows what will end up happening if skipping bombs are introduced - another dose of fantasy to compliment the rock radar etc etc. Skipping bombs weren't an option in most engagements due to size/launch restrictions, enemy AA, sea state (try skipping anything on water with waves - just try), anyhow, optimised "skippers" make it less than 0.5km in ideal conditions launched by custom load/launch bays. 

 

If there was a game mode/scenario where the goal was sinking ships at anchor in sheltered waters, bay or harbour, then skipping bombs might make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,169 posts
9,048 battles

Seems kinda useless. I mean, can be memey if you try to just hit that camping BB/Stalingrad, but otherwise, drop at altitude to get kinda normal DBs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quality Poster, In AlfaTesters
1,528 posts
13,801 battles
1 minute ago, Birkebein said:

There's no attempt at historical accuracy nor acceptance of the laws of physics in this game, so who knows what will end up happening if skipping bombs are introduced - another dose of fantasy to compliment the rock radar etc etc. Skipping bombs weren't an option in most engagements due to size/launch restrictions, enemy AA, sea state (try skipping anything on water with waves - just try), anyhow, optimised "skippers" make it less than 0.5km in ideal conditions launched by custom load/launch bays.

500m would equate to 1.3km ingame, but yes, WoWS was never an attempt to simulate history, it is an arcade game based on real world ships and weapons. This concept is based on the technique of skip bombing and has been designed with impracticalities that make it distinct from existing CV attack methods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAF]
[FAF]
Players
361 posts
16,964 battles

This one here and with the new and rerwork of captain skills that most likely will come it makes sense why we need new skills and it is totally nutts 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,774 posts
17,292 battles
1 hour ago, wot_2016_gunner said:

also, the Mosquito had a bouncing bomb (it could carry 2), and there was a naval version of the Mosquito, so...

bb3074a3b08c7021343aa2c46ad92462.jpg

 

 

Looks awesome.

9o6g7Bu.jpg

 

 

 

Highball bombs were designed for the Fleet Air Arm to sink Tirpitz. :cap_like:

 

618 Squadron  was the group formed to use them (interesting read)

 

It's a shame WG don't use history more for premiums. BPF Indomitable + 618 would be epic.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×