PBY Catalina and Combat Examples

[weby]

Originally Posted by Engurrand

Consolidated BPY Catalina, USA, Canada, USSR, 1936-1945

Military models have six fold-out bunks, a galley, a chemical toilet and a radio. Crew includes Pilot, Co-pilot, Navigator, Radio operator, Nose gunner/bombardier, 2 blister gunners, 1 ventral gunner, and a flight engineer. Cost is $1,500,000. Armament was typically four Browning M2HB machine guns (Ht133), one in the nose, one in each "blister" turret, and one in the rear ventral position. Hardpoints under the wings carried up to 2 tons of bombs a/o torpedoes, or four 325 pound depth charges. Late war models replace the nose gun with two 7.62 machine guns, and add a radar operator to the crew.

TL	Vehicle		ST/HP	Hnd/SR	  HT	Move	LWt.	Load	SM	Occ.	DR	Range		Cost		Locations	Stall
6	Catalina	110	-2/3	  12	3/43*	17.7**	2***	8	9A	3	2,520†		$1,500,000	g,rR2,rW,Wi,t4	33

*This number is arbitrary. By raw [B466] an air vehicle’s cruising speed is 1.6xTop Speed, and its max speed is 2xTop Speed. The Catalina’s cruising speed should be 62 and top speed 93 so that would make its particularly ill-termed game “Top Speed” either 39 or 47 (rounded). I picked the mid-point but I prefer to use the actual cruse speed and top speed, as those are known.
**This is the Max takeoff weight from wheels. The LWt is 17.25 when taking off from water, and 13.65 from rough water.
***This is Load when taking off from wheels. Water liftoff Load is 1.5. Rough water liftoff Load is -2. The negative (-) is not a typo. To lift off from rough seas the pilot is obliged to dump a weight of fuel (and/or gear, people etc) equal to 2 tons + the weight of remaining occupants and cargo. The Catalina’s max fuel load is 5 tons so this will severely adversely affect range.
† The longest recorded flight was from Perth Australia to Colombo Sri-Lanka, 4133 miles!

What version of the catalina are you trying to do?

The PBY-5 and 5A (1940-43) had top speeds of 196 mph that is move 98.

The typical ranges given for it are the 2500 miles at about 125mph. The top speed burns a lot more fuel, not the +50% given in campaigns.

The very long range flights like the Perth Australia to Colombo Sri-Lanka are achieved by traveling at only slightly over stall speed further reducing fuel use.

A more typical armament for such is 2-3 .30 MGs(1-2 frontal+ventral) and 2 .50 MGs(sides). But there was a big variation.

Combat examples I'm working up:
Strafing of stationary ground target.

Realistic:
You approach a ground target in your slow, large and not very agile target.
Anti-air defenses shoot you down.

Semi-Cinematic: There are no anti-air defenses except something like ground troops with light machine guns and rifles:
You circle at long range and fire one of your side .50 cal staying out of the effective range of the ground fire. It will be all suppressive fire.

Bombing run of stationary ground target.

Realistic:
As above against most types of targets.

Really out of the way places with limited air defenses might allow high altitude bombing attacks with only a fairly high probability of being shot down. Going down where light AA can hit is suicide in such a slow clumsy target.

Semi-Cinematic: On targets other than cities and other well defended areas that would have radar:
You approach in the clouds using cinematically good navigation skill to be near target and quickly drop out of clouds, drop your bombs and go back to the clouds before the defenders can react.

Air to Air Engagement vs FW-190.

Realistic:
The FW-190 pilot is good: The FW-190 comes from below or other dead angle and shoots the catalina down.
The FW-190 pilot is not so good: FW-190 approaches from front and you can use your frontal single or dual .30 cal to try to hit the agile target before he uses his canons to rip you apart.

Semi-Cinematic: the FW-190 comes from behind, giving you longer time to try to hit it and allowing the pilot to twist the catalina to allow the defense to be from a .50 cal, giving a small chance of success. Basically the catalina would likely open fire at (much) longer range than the FW-190 and hope for the near impossible hit before the FW-190 is close enough to want to fire(it has low number of cannon shells so wants to hit with most). Then using the cinematically good gunner skill to shoot down the FW-190 as it approaches.

[safisher]

Originally Posted by weby

Realistic:
You approach a ground target in your slow, large and not very agile target.
Anti-air defenses shoot you down.

Or:
http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/P/b/PBY_Catalina.htm

Black Cats. A handful of PBY-5A Catalinas equipped with early ASV radar had reached the Pacific by August 1942 and participated in the Battle of the Eastern Solomons. In December 1942, the Americans deployed a full squadron of PBY-5As to operate at night in the Solomon Islands. This "Black Cat" squadron (VP-11) painted its aircraft black, except for a squadron insignia that started out as a basic cat outline. Eyes were added after the second mission, teeth and whiskers after the third, and, allegedly, "anatomical insignia of a more personal nature" after the fourth mission (Morison 1949). The Black Cats participated in search, strike, and gunfire spotting missions, taking off at about 2230 each night and returning after daybreak. Over time, other squadrons began flying Black Cat missions, and Creed (1985) claims most of the squadrons in the South and Southwest Pacific had rotated through Black Cat tours by the end of the war.

The Catalinas proved well suited for these missions. The black paint and the flame dampers that were later installed over their exhaust ports made them all but invisible in the darkness. If a Japanese night fighter did locate a Black Cat, the Catalina would drop to very low altitude, where it was almost impossible for a night fighter to engage without crashing into the sea. This tactic was aided by radar altimeters installed on most of the Black Cats. The radar altimeters also allowed the Cats to fly the last 100 miles (160 km) to their targets at 50' (15 m) altitude to evade radar. The slow speed of the Cats was actually advantageous for night attacks at mast height.
Initially, the Cats dropped illuminating flares before attacking, but this proved counterproductive. Torpedoes also proved ineffective because of their unreliability. Eventually the tactic that was settled on was to locate targets by radar, then visually, before attacking from the quarter with a salvo of four 500 lb (227 kg) bombs with 5-second-delay fusees dropped from 50 to 150 feet (15 to 45 meters) altitude. A flare was sometimes dropped with the bombs to blind enemy gunners, and some Cat crewmen tossed parafrag bombs from the blisters or ventral hatch to further suppress antiaircraft fire. The gunners held their fire until the bombs were released to further increase the element of surprise. Black Cat search missions in the Solomons included "Mike Search", a three-hour course up "The Slot" and through Indispensable Strait between Santa Isabel and Malaita. Three circuits could be flown in a single night. By August 1943 the Cats were flying "ferret" missions with electronic warfare technicians to locate Japanese radar installations for later air strikes. A number of Cats in the Southwest Pacific were field modified with four 0.50 machine guns in the nose, turning them into potent strafers and making them highly effective at night barge hunting.

[weby]

The thing is, against the Japanese the tactic worked because of the lack of radar. Around the Mediterranean where the OP is placing things the probability of eventually being too close to some place with air defense radar is high and then night will not help that much.

It should also be noted that the Germans had on average more anti-air capability included in their ground forces than the Japanese.

[Engurrand]

Originally Posted by weby

The thing is, against the Japanese the tactic worked because of the lack of radar. Around the Mediterranean where the OP is placing things the probability of eventually being too close to some place with air defense radar is high and then night will not help that much.

It should also be noted that the Germans had on average more anti-air capability included in their ground forces than the Japanese.

Hmm... we're in 1937 so no radar yet. But could WWII era radar detect you at mast height? I was given to understand it would have some trouble, but maybe over the ocean? Not sure. Will research.

[weby]

Originally Posted by Engurrand

Hmm... we're in 1937 so no radar yet. But could WWII era radar detect you at mast height? I was given to understand it would have some trouble, but maybe over the ocean? Not sure. Will research.

No, radar at 1937 was not a thing you would likely have to face on the Med. But as your original writeup seemed to have a later Catalina and a FW-190, I assumed war years.

Basically there were radars in 1937, but they were experimental beasts with a lot of downtime and low coverage. They also existed only in few places.

A late WWII era radar can detect things quite well at mast height as long as you are not behind horizon, but the early air warning radars could generally not. As example the radar chain covering the channel in 1940 for the Battle of Britain could not detect thing really low.

[adm]

Yeah, the FW-190 threw me as well, since it was a post Battle of Britain aircraft. Quick look up, August 1941.

[acrosome]

Originally Posted by Engurrand

Hmm... we're in 1937 so no radar yet. But could WWII era radar detect you at mast height? I was given to understand it would have some trouble, but maybe over the ocean? Not sure. Will research.

1937? It's probably a PBY-1, then, not a PBY-5. And there are only 60 in existence- all of them property of the United States Navy. I don't think the PBY-5 entered service until 1940.

Are you're characters US military? If not, how about a surplus P2Y or F5L, or one of the PN aircraft instead? I tend to favor a surplus F5L for "totally not Call of Cthulhu" campaigns. Chaosium's Secrets of the Congo includes some information on the license-built Curtiss models.

And the Grumman Goose is, of course, awesome as well. But it was just in prototype in 1937.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by acrosome

And the Grumman Goose is, of course, awesome as well. But it was just in prototype in 1937.

Several commercial land-based planes were fitted with twin floats at some point: Beechcraft Model 18, Ford Tri-Motor, de Havilland Dragon Rapide and Lockheed Vega. All but the Beech 18 were flying before 1937.

[smurf]

I always liked the look of the PBY. It was quirky and yet functional.

The Germans made an equivalent: Dornier_Do_24

The armament is a bit beefier.

As for an aircraft for a group of PCs to use it is ideal (both of them).

Other useful aircraft that could be met on patrols could be:

Bristol Beaufighter
de Havilland Mosquito
Lockheed P-38 Lightning
Petlyakov Pe-2

Creating a platform for too many guns could be:

Lisunov Li-2
Douglas DC-3
Douglas C-47 Skytrain

Of course these would be anachronistic versions of a Douglas AC-47 Spooky (aka Puff the Magic Dragon).

Ideally you would want an aircraft which is simple like the PBY and or has many operators so that raiding for spares can be made easy.

Main or front line aircraft would be required for duty and maybe these 'work horses' could be excused for other duties.

[Rupert]

You left out the Short Sunderland. Like a Catalina, but bigger.