Apollo_EAF331

Originally Posted by Apollo_EAF331

Good turn out yesterday, thanks gents.

The recording of our first Zero vs Hellact DF is uploaded to the EAF Wiki.
EAFwiki/Tracks/Apollo tracks.

It's a large file, but it shows some very good teamwork by the Hellcats using fluid four initially and then converting to gaggle doctrine with mutual support by presence

More to come on:

1. Anti shipping mission.
Observations:I recommend attacking fast ships from the Bow(front) aiming for the bow of the ship and releasing at 230-300 meters. If you must release higher you need to aim a bit in front of the bow, but I have not tried it. Preferred aircraft: is the TBF-1C/TBM-3 w 2000lb bomb.

2. Ground attack Bunker and AAA.
Observations: AP HVAR are the most effective and aim with the pipper 1 line above the bunker to account for gravity drop. Bombs(250lb) must score a direct hit to destroy the bunker. Did not test 500lb or 2000lb bombs. Bombs are more effective on AAA as you do not need a direct hit.

3. Ground attack Radar station.
Observations: We need a narrative from the guys in 51 as they were tasked with this. But there were many soft targets that can be destroyed with Bombs,rockets and .50 cals.

4. ACM gaggle and Fluid four.

Shaw says this:

Comparison of Fluid Four and Gaggle Doctrines

For example, assume that two four-plane divisions engage with
similar aircraft, weapons, and pilot capabilities. One division employs
modified fluid four, allowing its engaged section to split (two independent
elements) for loose deuce maneuvering, while retaining a free element in
fighting wing (one element) for cover. This arrangement effectively yields
a total of three separate elements.
Meanwhile, the opposing division uses
gaggle tactics, splitting into single fighters (four independent elements). By using this method the gaggle division effectively outnumbers the fluid four division and can be expected to have the better day. This is the same principle which gives a double attack or loose deuce section dominance over opponents in fighting wing.
In situations where the friendly force outnumbers the enemy, the added
offensive power of gaggle doctrine may not justify the reduced defensive
capability.
Inefficiency results when an overwhelming number of fighters
are involved on any one side. These pilots are likely to spend much time
staying out of each other's way and reacting offensively or defensively, at the expense of combat effectiveness, to unidentified aircraft that are later found to be friendly. Under such circumstances, holding free elements out of the engagement in the fluid four manner can pay dividends.
The number of engaged elements maintained should equal or slightly exceed the number of the enemy. When modified fluid four is used with more than four fighters, the result is a combination of the two doctrines, with the engaged fighters employing gaggle tactics and the free fighters fluid four.