Air Transport still bugged under 1.8?

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
In UV the H6K2-L was ... So we could either roll this back and just make the HK62-L's ...

heeheehee ... what about this post gives you something in common with a certain Captain Shepard?

I'm a true American Patriot !!! [:D][:D][:D] and no one knows very much about me !

http://www.gaspee.org/CaptShepard.htm

[Nemo121]

Would it be possible to remove the ability to upgrade to non-airtransportable equipment from these parachute units as I'm quite sure no airborne CO would be insane enough to accept ATGs which he couldn't bring into combat with him.

Oh and thanks a lot for looking into the issue. If all it means is that I have to leae my 47mm guns as a unit fragment somewhere while the rest of the unit fights then that I can live with.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Would it be possible to remove the ability to upgrade to non-airtransportable equipment from these parachute units as I'm quite sure no airborne CO would be insane enough to accept ATGs which he couldn't bring into combat with him.

Oh and thanks a lot for looking into the issue. If all it means is that I have to leae my 47mm guns as a unit fragment somewhere while the rest of the unit fights then that I can live with.

Sure, I think some of the mods have handled the heavy airborne equipment issue in different ways[by lightening the guns], but a straight forward approach would be for you to go in and just delete these devices from the units, with the database editor, of course you'd have to restart your game and you seem to be doing pretty well, so you might want to continue this game anyway !

Another way would just be to point the predecessor guns (37mm I think) to themselves, in the database, from an upgrade perspective, but then no unit would upgrade to 47mm whether airborne or not.

The "official" releases rarely change the data in the scenarios (I think it has happen once so far out of about 7 releases) so if this is important to you, you might not want to wait for the official scenario to change !

[dtravel]

Just to play Devil's Advocate for a moment. Historically, the unit may have actually received guns that couldn't not be airdropped. Like the Germans did after Crete, the Japanese may have decided at some point to not make any more airborne assaults. In which case why not equip the formerly airborne units with heavier weapons?

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
In UV the H6K2-L was ... So we could either roll this back and just make the HK62-L's ...

heeheehee ... what about this post gives you something in common with a certain Captain Shepard?

I'm a true American Patriot !!! [:D][:D][:D] and no one knows very much about me !

You know, that's a very interesting bit of information on that link, thank you.

Actually, I was thinking of the Capt. Shepard played by Kenneth More in "Sink the Bismarck." He was concerned about stripping the heavy escort from troop convoy WS-8B in order to add ships to Home Fleet for the Bismarck chase. In response to a question from the First Sea Lord, he referred to the convoy as "W8-SB," an error not corrected for the final print of the film.

I know, I know, I'm a goofball for noticing this kind of minutiae, but what the hey ... I still have my Air Force Serial Number memorized (yeh, I was in before they started using SSANs).

In any event, it seems realistic to me that a parachute unit's non-air-droppable equipment would be left behind, later to be matched back up with the parent unit after the operation (I can't think that it's a very wise thing to drop paratroops somewhere, then expect that unchallenged air transport will be able to evacuate them. Seems to me an irresponsible exposure of troops. I would plan a paratroop operation as part of a larger effort to secure an objective, not just a raid. What if they don't capture and secure an airfield? I would not, myself, leave lightly equipped troops on their own in this way, but maybe it's just me).

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Just to play Devil's Advocate for a moment. Historically, the unit may have actually received guns that couldn't not be airdropped. Like the Germans did after Crete, the Japanese may have decided at some point to not make any more airborne assaults. In which case why not equip the formerly airborne units with heavier weapons?

But in the above case in question, the airborne unit flew, or airdropped into Merak without the 47mm gun .. then unpacked some of its supply .. and lo and behold there was a 47mm AT gun in the boxes of supply, they assembled it but then when the transports came to pick them up, the assembled AT gun was too large to fit back aboard the planes that had brought it over previously when it was packed up. At least this would be the story of we tried to exactly interpret what happened in the game. Obviously a case where the abstraction seems a bit of a stretch. If we for example, had a separate AT gun company LCU ... and brought that in via ship, then that would be fine, and maybe that is what we should do at some point.

[dtravel]

*cue Ron's "add water and stir" line about the game's supply system*

[juliet7bravo]

Why not have an "Air Evac" mission for transport AC's, and anything not air-transportable belonging to the target unit is "destroyed" when the first elements of the unit are loaded? Basically, at the transport unit(s) home base, you give it an air evac mission, a "target", the unit to pick up, and the transport AC unit(s) run the route till the entire unit is picked up or halted. It would even be historical.

"it seems realistic to me that a parachute unit's non-air-droppable equipment would be left behind"

The use of gliders springs immediately to mind...

"leave lightly equipped troops on their own"

Seems to have happened almost every time Airborne troops were used on a largish scale in WW2.

Besides, it's altogether waaaaay to common, even today. Look at the 82nd ABN, who's (worthless) Sheridans were finally pulled, and then they cancelled the truly outstanding "Armored Gun System" intended for our Airborne/Air Mobile units. Then you had the rocket scientists who came up with the "Light Infantry" concept, aka "The guys with REALLY heavy rucksacks". Today we have Rumsey with his Stryker (aka the "ZIPPO") family of wheeled armored vehicles at $17 mil a copy (IIRC), which only marginally out-perform a fully tricked out/modernized M113 @$250k. So we had guys scavenging in junkyards for scraps of metal to armor their utility vehicles when we have thousands of already paid for M113's sitting in depots. And yeah, it truly sucks to have to start a firefight out of a unarmored vehicle, or cruise down the road in one waiting for an IED to go off.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: juliet7bravo
"it seems realistic to me that a parachute unit's non-air-droppable equipment would be left behind"

The use of gliders springs immediately to mind...

When were gliders used to transport heavy equipment? In Normandy, they carried mostly troops. At Arnhem, the silly idea of MG-equipped jeeps failed when the gliders were lost.

"leave lightly equipped troops on their own"

Seems to have happened almost every time Airborne troops were used on a largish scale in WW2.

Not intentionally. The Germans used paratroops in a shock (and untried) role at Eben Emael to clear the way for the following groundpounders. On Crete, the paratroops were to seize key points, particularly the airfield at Malame, and hang on until units with heavier equipment arrived by air transport and by sea. the 82nd Airborne near-fiasco on Sicily was fully in support of the 7th Army's amphibious invasion. By the same token, the three divisions dropped at Normandy were to seize key points, wreak havoc on German rear areas, and hold on for linkup with the amphibious forces. At Arnhem, the idea was to seize and hold bridges long enough for British 30 Corps to roll on through. Even Montgomery's goofy waste of elite airborne at the Weser was supposed to be in support of a mechanized river crossing.

What I meant to suggest was that it seems to me a bad idea to design operations where airborne troops (or other light forces, for that matter) are supposed to carry the offensive load and depend on "iffy" contingencies like air evacuation to bail them out. Historically (and the failures and near-failures seem to me even then to outweigh the successes), airborne operations were subordinate to, and integrated into, a larger scheme that always depended on the paratroops being relieved within a reasonable time by troops better equipped for sustained combat.

It's sort of like my old high-school strategy of "once I get a hand inside her bra, maybe I can bring up the heavy equipment." Of course, the failures and near-failures then were pretty numerous, too...

[juliet7bravo]

"the failures and near-failures"

Any operation is subordinate too, and integrated with, a larger scheme at some degree of perspective. Unfortunately, almost by definition, Airborne ops (especially WW2) seem to be totally unrealistic in execution due to unrealistic expectations and the over-confidence of the commanders involved. Resulting in "iffy" contingencies to bail them out being not so iffy after all. You had "crack" outfits filled with some of the best soldiers, and the most "gung ho" commanders, all of whom were watching the war pass them by. With higher going "why do we have these uppity prima donnas sitting around eating their heads off when I could be using them as shock troops in a leg infantry role".

When were gliders used to transport heavy equipment"

Normandy...I'd have to look, but the 82nd alone had 3 battalions of organic arty. Lotsa pics of jeeps, pack howitzers, and AT guns. Each line battalion, IIRC, had an organic mortar section with tubes, jeeps, and trailors. Lotsa gliders, lotsa big heavy stuff...

Market Garden..."Gliders also brought in 1,689 vehicles, 290 howitzers and 1,259 tons of ammunition and other supplies"

Arnhem; Pic being worth a thousand words...Polish AT gun brought in by glider. Looks like a 6 pdr./57mm

[bradfordkay]

"ut in the above case in question, the airborne unit flew, or airdropped into Merak without the 47mm gun .. then unpacked some of its supply .. and lo and behold there was a 47mm AT gun in the boxes of supply, they assembled it but then when the transports came to pick them up, the assembled AT gun was too large to fit back aboard the planes that had brought it over previously when it was packed up."


Joe, have you ever been backpacking? It's quite common for stuff that fit in your pack when you loaded in at home to refuse to go back in when you're trying to break down a soaking wet camp after an overnight storm! [;)]

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"ut in the above case in question, the airborne unit flew, or airdropped into Merak without the 47mm gun .. then unpacked some of its supply .. and lo and behold there was a 47mm AT gun in the boxes of supply, they assembled it but then when the transports came to pick them up, the assembled AT gun was too large to fit back aboard the planes that had brought it over previously when it was packed up."


Joe, have you ever been backpacking? It's quite common for stuff that fit in your pack when you loaded in at home to refuse to go back in when you're trying to break down a soaking wet camp after an overnight storm! [;)]

Especially when you're trying to cram something into your pack that you didn't bring in in the first place. [:D]

[JeffroK]

Gliders bringing in heavy equipment.

Yes, the Brits & US Airborne units used gliders to bring in heavy equipment in Normandy & Holland. 6 & 17pdr & 57mmAT, 75mm Pack Howitzers, Jeeps for Recce Sqns etc.

Also, at Nadzab(nr Lae) Aussie Gunners and their Guns paradropped to support the US PIR.

As to picking up guns, I cant see anyone loading even small guns such as 2pdr/37mm AT guns into a Dakota, Ju52 or Japanese transport types.

[juliet7bravo]

Just to confuse the issue further with the facts...weren't we originally talking about IJA paratroopers and 47mm AT guns? The Indian Army, Dutch, and the IJA all used that cute little Austrian Bohler 47mm AT gun that could be broken down like a pack howitzer. The Dutch and Italians built them under license. The IJA got theirs by capturing them from the Dutch NEI and (later) from the Indian army. The British (Indians) got them by capturing them from the Italians. Probably one of the most widely used little guns of the war, truth be known.

[juliet7bravo]

C-47:
The personnel door on the left side was made much larger to accommodate cargo loading. The door is split into three sections with the main two opening as a clamshell door. The third door, which is part of the forward door, can be opened to provide access for personnel via an air-stair, similar to an airliner door. The door is large enough to accommodate a complete Jeep with trailer or a 37MM anti-tank gun.

[juliet7bravo]

Okay, I'll quit after this...but a heckuva lot more stuff being hauled around by air transport and/or gliders than people generally think...

This Clarkair Crawler Model CA-1 tractor was developed by the Clark Equipment Company for the Army during WWII. Its small size permitted airlift by glider or other large cargo aircraft to locations where it could be used to construct landing strips or other facilities. An example of the use of these tractors was following the airborne landing of Allied forces behind Japanese lines in Northern Burma. On the night of Mar. 5 1944, more than 30 gliders carrying men, pack animals, lighting equipment, and tractors of this type landed at a jungle clearing designated as "Broadway." In 24 hours, airborne engineers had prepared a landing strip ready for use by more gliders and troop Carrier Command C-47s landing more men, animals, and supplies. (Pic of model dozer and attached scraper)

[pasternakski]

Well, it's no biggie, and I think you're pretty much right, J7B. I guess my definition of what is "heavy equipment" that allows units to sustain combat is different from other people's.

[Brady]

Japanese Paratroop Forces of WW II p.22

"The Lake Tondano landing groupe of 22 men would depart Davo on January 11th aboard two H6K5 "mavis" Flying Boats, to land on the lake. This party comprised the AT Gun unit 10 men (1x 3.7cm AT gun) and the medical section (11 men)"

The above is part of the section in the book covering the operation at Manado, by the Yokosuka 1st SNLF Jan. 1942.

[juliet7bravo]

I think it's highly likely that the guys who ended up fighting German armor with hand grenades would (if they were around to ask) tend to agree with your definition...

[bgibs]

I tried picking up some elements of the lark force from rabaul to port moresby, and during the execution phase they just transported supplies to rabaul. I was useing Catalina I fload planes and the orders were definatly set to pick up troops. This is Vers 1.8 of the game. Am I doing something wrong?