I have some questions about aircraft weapon OLI in QJM and TNDM. For example - if aircraft has 4 500-kg bombs, which rate of fire and for how much weapons ( 1 x 4 or 4 x 1 ) I have to apply?

Could somebody give me a calculation sample for aircraft weapon OLI for aircraft with 4 23-mm guns with RoF by 1200 and 6 500-kg bombs.

Thank you

You have pre-empted a topic i was going to enter in the near future -- the QJM means of modeling Air-to-Ground weapons.

My analysis of the original QJM Aerial Delivered Ordnance concept is that there is substantial room for improvement. For example:

In NPW, Page2 26-27, in which a P-47 Fighter Bomber is modeled, the resultant OLI (415 per Page 29) is based on Weapons Operational Lethality of approximately 45 -- dividing the shown TLI values by the WWII dispersion of 3000.
I have intuitive agreement that the same Weapon used in a Fighter-bomber is much more effective than say used as part of an Infantry Battalion -- due to Aerial Observation, direct fire, etc -- but I disagree with the use og Mobile Fighting Machine(MFM) factors to improve the Weapons Lethality.
My point is the following: I will contend that a 500 KG bomb delivered by a JU-87 will likely have more impact than if such was delivered by the described P-47, due to accuracy of delivery. Yet in regards to range, speed, armor, the MFM factors, the P-47 delivery would result in a higher OLI value than the same ordnance delivered by a JU-87.
The counterpoint to my argument is the affect of Anti-Aircraft fire, with the counter-counterpoint being to what degree does AA fire affect ordnance delivery as opposed to affect loss/damage to delivering aircraft? Detailed points for another time.

Regarding the specifics of your question, I have done some very brief experimentation with Air-to Ground ordnance, as follows:

1) Using a Luftwaffe 500 KG bomb (SC 500) there is an approximate CWR (Charge to Weight ratio) of 55%. That means 55% of the bomb weight is HE material -- 275 KGs of TNT / equiv.
2) A 15 cm or 155 mm Artillery shell will have close to 6 KGs of TNT/equiv.
3) According to NPW, Page 192, the Rate of Fire for a 150 mm Weapon will be approximately 50 rounds per hour.
4) Therefore, 50 150mm shells, with 6 KGs per shell = approximately 300 KGs of TNT delivered in 1 hour -- reasonably close to the explosive delivery of a single 500 KG bomb.
5) OLI for 150/155 mm Artillery is listed as 394 for the "Long Tom" (NPW Page 29)-- less for shorter ranged Howitzers of the same caliber.

HOWEVER, there are some other critical considerations that require inclusion:
a) Fragment/Shrapnel spread will obviously be much greater for 50 Artillery shells that a single bomb (DUH!) -- so if the target is "soft" (INF, Trucks, etc) Artillery will be more effective by a wide margin
b) Hard Targets, say concrete emplacements or AFVs will be much more adversely affected by the single, placed bomb, than dispersed artillery shells.
c) Accuracy of delivery goes to the single bomb -- qualified by type of aircraft, if Air Superiority enables spotter aircraft to mark the ground target clearly (could apply to artillery also), if the ground target is not sufficiently camouflaged to be visible by the delivering aircraft.
d) Unit employment of Air Support must be considered. Specifically, are there say Luftwaffe Air Controllers on the ground identifying targets best suited to aerial delivered ordnance, and who are in radio contact with the delivering aircraft (the Stuka model), or is there a pre-planned aerial bombardment as part of Preparatory fires without clear ground control.

Another means of using the QJM would be to derive a "Caliber Equivalent" of the 500 KG bomb -- thereby using the provided graphs to determine the Rate of Fire, and Targets per Strike. Weapon Range doesn't seem to be as straighforward. Based on my readings of WWII weapons, the closest 2 are as follows:
1) German 35.5 cm M1, 575 KG shell
2) German 38 cm "Siegfried" Railroad gun, 800 KG shell containing 110 KGs of TNT/equiv.

The standard OLI process for the 23mm Cannon you identify seems very straightforward -- with the additional multiplier for Aerial dselivery being the obvious point in question.

While the QJM was specifically described as NOT in existence to compare weapons systems, but instead as a means to predicting combat results, perhaps not all of the above applies in full detail to the overall objective.

My intuitive response is that the QJM as described in NPW correctly multiplies a Weapons TLI by some multiple for Aerial delivery -- due primarily to the 2 factors of 1) direct observed accuracy in delivery that is significantly superior to direct-fire ground weapons 2) The aircraft wide ranging ability to delivery the ordnance over miles of battlefield at the most critical points to influence the battle.

You are right about aircraft OLI. Nobody can be agree with OLI calculation in QJM and TNDM not only for aircraft. For example who will agree that one M1 tank is equal 4000-5000 men with M16A2? Using the same dispersion factor for bullet and shell is funnily. Man with rifle do not shoot from the sky vertically down (only in this case you can apply dispersion as is). Real OLI for the rifle (or other bullet weapon) will inversely to dispersion square root and much more than in QJM.

But my question was how aircraft OLI is calculated in QJM? I understand as OLI for one 500-kg bomb was calculated. But what mean 6 500-kg bombs? One weapon with 6 barrels (to apply MBE factor) or 6 different weapons (to apply MBE factor from second weapon as for AFV).

Sorry for my English

Best Regards

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vasiliy:
Hi, J Gilbert.

You are right about aircraft OLI. Nobody can be agree with OLI calculation in QJM and TNDM not only for aircraft. For example who will agree that one M1 tank is equal 4000-5000 men with M16A2? Using the same dispersion factor for bullet and shell is funnily. Man with rifle do not shoot from the sky vertically down (only in this case you can apply dispersion as is). Real OLI for the rifle (or other bullet weapon) will inversely to dispersion square root and much more than in QJM.

But my question was how aircraft OLI is calculated in QJM? I understand as OLI for one 500-kg bomb was calculated. But what mean 6 500-kg bombs? One weapon with 6 barrels (to apply MBE factor) or 6 different weapons (to apply MBE factor from second weapon as for AFV).

Sorry for my English

Best Regards

Vasiliy

---

Vasiliy,

Firstly your English is just fine -- I have no trouble understanding your intent -- I sort of diverted to a more general answer.

Regarding the multiple bombs issue -- I see no clear discussion of such in my readings of NPW, so I will risk "TOTAL HUMILIATION" at the hands of Chris if he reads this and shows me up as wrong --

I would put forth that the Multiple Barrel reduction for OLI ground weapons is based on a "target rich" battle scenario -- division level. If your platoon is being attacked by an enemy Company or Battalion, there are lots of targets to choose from.

THEREFORE, having 2 single-barreled weapons would likely be more effective in that 2 separate targets could be engaged simultaneously. Inherent in this assessment is that different crucial targets can be simultaneously engaged -- thereby more effectively engaging the enemy. Additionally, it would take 2 direct hits by the enemy to eliminate two single-barreled waeapons, as opposed to a single hit on a multi-barrel weapon.

My risky contention is that this DOES NOT ANALOGOUSLY APPLY to Air-to-Ground engagements! Here is why:
1) For anti-aircraft weapons, it is very difficult to hit moving aircraft without modern day deflection computation by radar & computers, VERY DIFFICULT. Therefore, the more shells directed at a target per unit time, especially with a dispersion pattern from multiple barrels, the better the chance for a hit. This is borne out by the effectiveness of the Quad Weapons -- US Maxson Mount and the German FlakVierling 38. Therefore, I contend for AA fires, multiple barrel weapons should be enhanced in value, not reduced.
2) Anti-Aircraft Weapons are very seldom targets of Air attack. The only times I recall them being so were in preparation for an Air drop (Paratroops or Supplies) to protect the very vulnerable transports. Therefore, the fewer targets to be destroyed for same reduction in gun power seldom applies to AA weapons.
3)For point ground targets being bombed, point number 1 applies. Specifically, I recall the FW 200 Condors deliberately dropping 5 bombs (I think) at one time in order to get a spread to make a hit on the Merchant Ship target very likely. The surprise attack could only occur once, so a spread pattern of bombs was determined to be the most effective tactic.

So, if the 6 bombs you mentioned are intended to hit a single point target, I would contend dropping all 6 at once makes a hit more likley than dropping 2.46 bombs (The 6 barrel MBE value).

Additionally, there is the 6 individual attacks scenario, dropping a single bomb for each run. That would provide the pilot 6 chances to make a hit, with possible correction on each subsequent run -- probably the best chance for a hit albeit the most dangeropus in terms of 6 exposures to AA fire.

That is a summary / brief explanation as to why I would propose that if QJM dealt specifically with your 6 bombs question, the answer would be to count them as 6 individual weapons, and not use any mutiple-barrel reduction.

John Gilbert

But in this case (each bomb is one weapon) in QJM one aircraft sortie with 6 500-kg bombs is equal 6 280-mm guns. But 6 280-mm guns can fire 108 shells by one hour. 108 is not equal 6.

Thanks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vasiliy:
Hi, John

But in this case (each bomb is one weapon) in QJM one aircraft sortie with 6 500-kg bombs is equal 6 280-mm guns. But 6 280-mm guns can fire 108 shells by one hour. 108 is not equal 6.

Thanks

Vasya

---

Please re-read my original reply -- I provided a rationale for comparing 1 hours worth of 150/155 mm firing into approximately equivalent delivery of High Explosive material -- albeit with some differences based on soft or hard targets

To use a 280 mm Gun as an example, the 4 German Railroad Guns of that caliber (see Ian Hogg's German Artillery of World War Two) have between 18.7 and 21.9 KGs of TNT/Amatol within each shell.With a Rate of fire of 18 per hour, that equals approximately 360 KGs of TNT/equiv delivered (18rph x 20 KGs) -- somewhat more than the 275 KGs within a single 500 KG GP bomb, but in the range. Then the positive multipliers come into effect for Aerial Delivered Ordnance.

The idea is the QJM concept of Number of Potential Targets per Strike (PTS) -- my analogy of delivered TNT/equiv -- should show some level of reasonableness to the approximation of a single 500 KG General Purpose Bomb having a level of destructivenss equivalent to an hour of firing of Artillery (understanding the different effects of target type -- hard vs. soft, single vs. multiple, etc)

To reiterate, there is still some form of multiplier necessary for the superior delivery capability of Aerial Ordnance in terms of direct sight accuracy, and range of delivery onto the most critical targets during a battle.

John Gilbert

Concurrent to this, it seems to me that the range of a mobile weapon is actually its maximum speed (per hour), with total maximum range being some kind of modifier of this.

In my own calculations, this has worked.

"The OLI values calculated for aircraft...are considered to represent the value of an aircraft for one sortie, whether the specific individual aircraft appears once or many times a day over the battlefield."

Does this mean that the OLI value does NOT depend on the number of sorties? To put it another way, is the OLI of a Soviet Air Army multiplied by three if its planes fly an average of three combat sorties each?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Dickson:
I have a question about air power from page 72 of NPW, the 1985 edition. It reads:

"The OLI values calculated for aircraft...are considered to represent the value of an aircraft for one sortie, whether the specific individual aircraft appears once or many times a day over the battlefield."

---

Hi Gary,

Yes, the OLI value for aircraft is per sortie. So in a 24-hour period if the same aircraft makes three sorties, then the OLI value would be counted three times.

Does this mean that the OLI value does NOT depend on the number of sorties? To put it another way, is the OLI of a Soviet Air Army multiplied by three if its planes fly an average of three combat sorties each?