AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Eagle Day to Bombing of the Reich is a improved and enhanced edition of Talonsoft's older Battle of Britain and Bombing the Reich. This updated version represents the best simulation of the air war over Britain and the strategic bombing campaign over Europe that has ever been made.

Moderators: Joel Billings, harley, warshipbuilder, simovitch

Post Reply
User avatar
RyanCrierie
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:15 am
Contact:

AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by RyanCrierie »

From "The Air Plan that Defeated Hitler"
When we made our first estimates of the total force required for the air offensive against Axis Europe, current information indicated that the air base requirements in England exceeded the capacity of those in existence or planned. As a result, we considered providing double crews for the B-17s, B-24s, and B-29s to be based in the European Theater. In this way, we hoped to increase aircraft utilization pending construction of additional bases and the availability of a large number of B-36 type aircraft with a 4,000 mile radius of action. We anticipated that ultimately twelve groups of B-29s would be deployed in the Mediterranean basin, probably in the vicinity of Cairo. Twelve more were scheduled for Northern Ireland. The B-36s would operate from the Western Hemisphere.

In contemplating the optimum force structure for the Air Force, we naturally gave attention to the two other prime tasks levied upon us, i.e., support of ground operations, strategic defense in the Pacific, and defense of the Western Hemisphere.

Support of ground operations gave us some concern, primarily because of our fear that strategic forces would be diverted to ground support. This opened up a whole new area of problems, not the least of which was weakening the strategic offensive itself and the inevitable problem of trying to recover forces once they had been "loaned" out.

Basically, however, the problem was one of numbers and in this regard we came up with what we felt were adequate tactical air forces, so that demands upon the strategic air forces would be minimal. The Plan called for tactical air forces in both England and the Mediterranean. In the aggregate, these amounted to thirteen groups of light bombers, such as the A-20, and thirteen groups of dive bombers, along with two photo-recon squadrons, 108 observation squadrons, and nineteen transport groups. In addition, ten Pursuit groups were scheduled for England and six for Cairo. Five pursuit groups would be set up as a reserve.

In defense of the Western Hemisphere, the Plan called for bombers to cover the coastal areas of the Atlantic and to support defensive operations in the Pacific to protect our possessions in Hawaii and the Philippines against attack. We expected that those aircraft deployed in the Western Hemisphere for example would be useful in anti-submarine operations, in much the same manner as the RAF operated bomber types under Coastal Command. To meet the air requirements for the Western Hemisphere, the Plan called for 25 Bomber Groups and 32 Pursuit Groups. This included Hawaii. The Plan presumed that the major burden of defense of the Far East would be borne by the U.S. Navy relying primarily on its carriers and battleships. In the latter area, air forces could act in support of or in lieu of the fleet.

Overall Force Requirements

Overall, the number of organized combat air units recommended by AWPD-1 came to 207 groups without the B-36 type bombers, and 251 groups with them. This came to 11,853 unit equip. combat aircraft. This massive combat force was to be backed by 37,051 trainers, fora total of 61,799 operational aircraft, including 3,740 B-36s. (Twenty-one percent of the aircraft in this total force, 109 percent of the combat aircraft, would be in reserve depots. The forces were to be manned by 179,398 officers and 1,939,237 enlisted men.)

To understand the scope of AWPD-1, it must be remembered that the stated objectives required not only the production of vast quantities of aircraft but also the training of enormous numbers of personnel. The Plan called for 135,526 pilots, navigators, bombardiers, observers, and machine gunners, 862,439 technicians, 60,153 non-flying officers, and 1,106,798 non-technical, but trained, personnel. This amounted to some 2,164,916 men.

The total number of aircraft of all categories required to accomplish the objectives stipulated in AWPD-1 came to 68,416. In addition, vast numbers of replacements would be required. As mentioned earlier, 37,051 of this number were earmarked for training. Anticipated attrition called for a monthly replacement rate of some 2,133 aircraft.

In short:
10 Groups of 1,060 Medium Bombers (B-25/B-26) in ETO
20 Groups of 1,700 Heavy Bombers (B-17/B-24) in ETO
24 groups of 2,040 Very Heavy Bombers (B-29/B-32) in ETO
44 Groups of 3,740 Very LONG Range Bombers (B-36) in very edge of US; probably Maine, or Bermuda.

Attachments
AWPD-1 Plan Small.gif
AWPD-1 Plan Small.gif (124.75 KiB) Viewed 305 times
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by Hard Sarge »

well, i been waiting for others to speak up, but

interesting, how War Plans can be made up, with out having the planes even close to being built and in use, for your plans

also, not really fair to be showing that, as it is also, set up with the idea that a War in the PTO, would be a naval affair, so the drain on Airpower would not be too large and almost all of it would be used in the ETO

also, odd, the 4000 mile range for the Very Heavy bomber, that is not enough for anything, the plans for the Me 264 called for a plane with a range of 12428 miles

plans for raids on NYC from bases in southern France were worked out to be 7,457 miles (So if that 4000 mile range is really radius, it is still too short)

the Ju 390, was 11 feet longer then the B-29 and the wingspan was 40 foot wider

(hate writers that mix Range with Radius, even worse it they do it back and forth)

Ju 390 in a recon model, range of 6000 miles, with bombs 5,750 (with a 2 ton bombload)

He 277, had a range of 4,474 (with 4 2060 hp engines !)

a interesting one, was the Ta 400, would of used 6 BMWs (later planned to add two Jumo Jets) range of 5000 miles, with a Bombload of 11 tons

of course, if you want to dream, you got the Ho 18, 850 mph and range of 6,835


Image
User avatar
von Shagmeister
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Dromahane, Ireland

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by von Shagmeister »

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

.... if you want to dream, you got the Ho 18, 850 mph and range of 6,835

The Horten brothers were way ahead of their time.

Did you know that Walter Horten served as T.O. JG 26 from 1939-1941 before transferring to the RLM. (He is included in the OoB already so you probably did).
Per Speculationem Impellor ad Intelligendum

User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by Hard Sarge »

Well, that was going to be part of my Answer, but yes, I knew about him and his time with JG 26 before I got into the Horten planes

those wings were somethings


Image
User avatar
RyanCrierie
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:15 am
Contact:

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by RyanCrierie »

interesting, how War Plans can be made up, with out having the planes even close to being built and in use, for your plans

You have to start somewhere so that you can lay down the plans for airbase construction, etc, start the training programs.
also, odd, the 4000 mile range for the Very Heavy bomber, that is not enough for anything

4,000 mile radius: "B-36 type aircraft with a 4,000 mile radius of action".

According to this:

http://gc.kls2.com/

A great circle route from Limestone AFB, Maine (ME16) to Berlin (EDDI) is 3,467 miles; well within the combat radius of a B-36.
the plans for the Me 264 called for a plane with a range of 12428 miles

That was the range of the long range reconnaisance version. The bomber version was to be shorter legged.

Me-264B - Long Range Bomber Version:
4 x BMW 801E Radials + 2 x Jumo 004C Jets
Top speed of 407 MPH at 21,918 feet using jets
7,208 mile range (3,604 mile radius) with no jets used; with a 6,614 lb bombload
5,282 mile range (2,641 mile radius) with jets used; with a 6,614 lb bombload
plans for raids on NYC from bases in southern France were worked out to be 7,457 miles

Great Circle Route from Paris (LFPG) to NYC (KJFK) is 3,639 mile radius. (7,278 miles)
Great Circle Route from Bordeaux (LFBD) to NYC (KJFK) is 3,606 mile radius. (7,212 miles)

So it comes out to basically, if the nazis did have a Me-264B, and stripped the jets off of it, and went on a weight reduction program, they could have bombed the US from French bases, albeit ineffectively.

Okay, enough nitpickery. HOW did the US war planners come up with AWPD-1 force structure:

Basically; there were 154 target points in the AWPD-1 plan; divided into the following categories, in order of importance:

1. German Air Force (30 targets)
----18 x Aircraft factories
----6 x Aluminum plants
----6 x Magnesium plants

2. Electric Power (50 targets)

3. Transportation (47 targets)
---3 x Ship Elevators (East West Canal System)
---9 x Locks (East West Canal System)
---1 x Inland Harbor at Mannheim
---1 x Inland Harbor at Duisburg

4. Petroleum Refineries and synthetic plants (27 targets) This target set produced 80% of Germany's Aviation Gasoline.

Each target's destruction level was set at 90% probability; this gave an acceptable rate of destruction, while not requiring an excessive number of sorties; and in figuring out the number of sorties required to achieve this level of destruction, they were guided by two sets of data:

1. Bomb Accuracy Data from USAAAF units in Training during Jan-June 1940; which told them that a single US Bomber in a training flight had a 1.2% chance of hitting a 100x100 foot target from 20,000 feet. Cranking the numbers into a calculator, they found that you needed 220 bomber sorties (six bomb group missions) to get a 90% chance of success.

2.) British AARs from 15 attacks on the Scharnhorst in July 1941. This showed that when people actually had to worry about dying and all the miscellaneous stuff involved in combat flying, the rate of bomb group missions required to achieve a 90% probability of destruction rose to 30.

So they used the final 30 group mission number as a guideline for the rest of their calculations.

For example, to execute the refinery destruction mission, with it's 27 target points would need 810 bomb group missions (27 x 30 = 810).

Because a bomb group was expected to fly eight missions a month, for a total of 48 missions in the six months of favorable weather that planners expected; it meant that seventeen bomb groups (810 / 48 = 16.875 BGs) would be required to destroy the oil target set.

This procedure was then repeated for the other target sets; and helped drive other plans.

Production: In order to keep a heavy bomb group at the level where it could contribute it's allotted establishment of 35 aircraft for each mission over the six-month campaign, you needed to produce another 50 aircraft for depot reserves and initial replacements; giving you a total of 85 B-24s or B-17s that had to be built for each BG.

The tables for different groups for AWPD-1 were:

Type of Group: Allotted Establishment/Reserves/Total

Very Long Range BG: 35/50/85
Very Heavy BG: 35/50/85
Heavy BG: 35/50/85
Medium BG: 57/49/106
Light BG: 37/35/72
Dive Bomb Group 57/39/96
Fighter Group: 80/82/162
Transport Group: 52/4/56
Observation Group: 52/18/71

So for example, if you wanted 15 Fighter Groups in the UK, you would have to build 2,430 fighter aircraft to not only provide the FGs with their initial allocation of aircraft, but to keep them at their allotted level of 1,200 aircraft over for months.

Base Planning:

It took one airfield to house and maintain a heavy bomb group.
It took three airfields to house two light/medium bomb groups.
It took two airfields to house one fighter group

Because the initial structure called for 10 Medium Bomb Groups, 20 Heavy Bomb Groups, 20 Very Heavy Bomb Groups, and 10 Fighter Groups in the UK; this meant that:

15 Airfields for B-25s/B-26s would need to be built
20 Airfields for B-17s/B-24s would need to be built
20 Airfields for B-29s/B-32s would need to be built.
20 Airfields for Fighters would need to be built

This was 75 airfields; which would have to be built, and at the time, we didn't think we could stuff any more into england, hence the emphasis on B-29s in Northern Ireland and Cairo....fortnuatel;y, the British found a way to shove even more airfields into their country....
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by Hard Sarge »

No, you don't make war plans, based on stuff that is not made yet, and most of the plans, show how dumb most of there thinking was, it wasn't even close to what was needed, or used (plus, AWPD-1, was soon followed by AWPD-2 and then others)

the B-36 flew it's first flight in 46, wasn't ready until 48, great plan

a war plan to defeat a Enemy that is kicking everybody they meet in the teeth, with a plane that is going to take 9 years before it is ready for use ?

I believe the over the pole route was worked out later on, during the war, it was a bit more Dangerous then it would be come later

don't forget, the 264 changed and changed as it was being planned, many different load outs and ranges and engines

plus one of the big ideas that the high command kept saying no to, was the 2 planes for a one plane raid, the one is used as a air to air refueler

(now I do like the idea of the He 177 as a fighter, get it into the air ferry routes and clean house (maybe the first time))

also, remember based on the plan, the FGs are there to help defend England, not for the attack on Germany

the 4000 mile "Radius" (they claimed range) is still not enough, it is fine for a one plane raider, not a BG, the group has to take off and form, and they are not going to fly over the Pole and back, how many losses are you going to take, crashing on the way home ? (if they were going to bomb from the US, they would do shuttle raids, which if you can have a place to land, there no reason not to base the planes there to start with)

AWDP-1 was too much rose color glasses stuff, using planes that were not built yet (once the 36 finally came out and was ready to use, what kind of defence fighters would the LW of had ? not to mention how close they were to ground to air missle defence systems

and just in case, the plans should be called, ADWP-1, ADWP-42, ABC-1, plus was to change a few more times

also, ADWP-1 was set up, to get the AIR FORCE made, at the time, there were only 41 4 engine bombers in the Army Air Corps
Image
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4142
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by wernerpruckner »

ORIGINAL: RyanCrierie

From "The Air Plan that Defeated Hitler"
When we made our first estimates of the total force required for the air offensive against Axis Europe, current information indicated that the air base requirements in England exceeded the capacity of those in existence or planned. As a result, we considered providing double crews for the B-17s, B-24s, and B-29s to be based in the European Theater. In this way, we hoped to increase aircraft utilization pending construction of additional bases and the availability of a large number of B-36 type aircraft with a 4,000 mile radius of action. We anticipated that ultimately twelve groups of B-29s would be deployed in the Mediterranean basin, probably in the vicinity of Cairo. Twelve more were scheduled for Northern Ireland. The B-36s would operate from the Western Hemisphere.

In contemplating the optimum force structure for the Air Force, we naturally gave attention to the two other prime tasks levied upon us, i.e., support of ground operations, strategic defense in the Pacific, and defense of the Western Hemisphere.

Support of ground operations gave us some concern, primarily because of our fear that strategic forces would be diverted to ground support. This opened up a whole new area of problems, not the least of which was weakening the strategic offensive itself and the inevitable problem of trying to recover forces once they had been "loaned" out.

Basically, however, the problem was one of numbers and in this regard we came up with what we felt were adequate tactical air forces, so that demands upon the strategic air forces would be minimal. The Plan called for tactical air forces in both England and the Mediterranean. In the aggregate, these amounted to thirteen groups of light bombers, such as the A-20, and thirteen groups of dive bombers, along with two photo-recon squadrons, 108 observation squadrons, and nineteen transport groups. In addition, ten Pursuit groups were scheduled for England and six for Cairo. Five pursuit groups would be set up as a reserve.

In defense of the Western Hemisphere, the Plan called for bombers to cover the coastal areas of the Atlantic and to support defensive operations in the Pacific to protect our possessions in Hawaii and the Philippines against attack. We expected that those aircraft deployed in the Western Hemisphere for example would be useful in anti-submarine operations, in much the same manner as the RAF operated bomber types under Coastal Command. To meet the air requirements for the Western Hemisphere, the Plan called for 25 Bomber Groups and 32 Pursuit Groups. This included Hawaii. The Plan presumed that the major burden of defense of the Far East would be borne by the U.S. Navy relying primarily on its carriers and battleships. In the latter area, air forces could act in support of or in lieu of the fleet.

Overall Force Requirements

Overall, the number of organized combat air units recommended by AWPD-1 came to 207 groups without the B-36 type bombers, and 251 groups with them. This came to 11,853 unit equip. combat aircraft. This massive combat force was to be backed by 37,051 trainers, fora total of 61,799 operational aircraft, including 3,740 B-36s. (Twenty-one percent of the aircraft in this total force, 109 percent of the combat aircraft, would be in reserve depots. The forces were to be manned by 179,398 officers and 1,939,237 enlisted men.)

To understand the scope of AWPD-1, it must be remembered that the stated objectives required not only the production of vast quantities of aircraft but also the training of enormous numbers of personnel. The Plan called for 135,526 pilots, navigators, bombardiers, observers, and machine gunners, 862,439 technicians, 60,153 non-flying officers, and 1,106,798 non-technical, but trained, personnel. This amounted to some 2,164,916 men.

The total number of aircraft of all categories required to accomplish the objectives stipulated in AWPD-1 came to 68,416. In addition, vast numbers of replacements would be required. As mentioned earlier, 37,051 of this number were earmarked for training. Anticipated attrition called for a monthly replacement rate of some 2,133 aircraft.

In short:
10 Groups of 1,060 Medium Bombers (B-25/B-26) in ETO
20 Groups of 1,700 Heavy Bombers (B-17/B-24) in ETO
24 groups of 2,040 Very Heavy Bombers (B-29/B-32) in ETO
44 Groups of 3,740 Very LONG Range Bombers (B-36) in very edge of US; probably Maine, or Bermuda.


????
huch
????
and what has that to do with the RL AWPD-1 ????
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4142
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by wernerpruckner »

User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by Hard Sarge »

Well, since he is quoteing the guy who helped write it


Image
User avatar
RyanCrierie
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:15 am
Contact:

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by RyanCrierie »

and what has that to do with the RL AWPD-1 ????

That IS the real life AWPD-1.
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4142
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by wernerpruckner »

mea culpa
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4142
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by wernerpruckner »

I probably confused it with the CBO [X(][8|]
User avatar
Once Joey
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:14 am
Contact:

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by Once Joey »

The fabled Me 264 Prototype, in all its glory - details on Projekt 1062 Projekt 1061, and the plans to bomb New York City (including a penetration depth chart of the Me 264 from May 12, 1944), found below at luft46.com

http://www.luft46.com/prototyp/me264.html


...I have always thought that this was one of the more bizzare/ambitious projects of WWII, simply thought I would share it here (after all these years, a reason to post this weblink!!). I am sure Hard Sarge has come across this at least once, as he has referred to this site a few times before.
"I am not now, nor have I ever been mechanically inclined."
jjjanos
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 12:56 am
Location: Wheaton, MD

RE: AWPD-1 - Defeat Nazi Germany in Six Months!

Post by jjjanos »

ORIGINAL: RyanCrierie

Each target's destruction level was set at 90% probability; this gave an acceptable rate of destruction, while not requiring an excessive number of sorties; and in figuring out the number of sorties required to achieve this level of destruction, they were guided by two sets of data:

1. Bomb Accuracy Data from USAAAF units in Training during Jan-June 1940; which told them that a single US Bomber in a training flight had a 1.2% chance of hitting a 100x100 foot target from 20,000 feet. Cranking the numbers into a calculator, they found that you needed 220 bomber sorties (six bomb group missions) to get a 90% chance of success.

2.) British AARs from 15 attacks on the Scharnhorst in July 1941. This showed that when people actually had to worry about dying and all the miscellaneous stuff involved in combat flying, the rate of bomb group missions required to achieve a 90% probability of destruction rose to 30.

And then they went and had everyone drop on the lead plane effectively turning that 220 plane sortie into a single plane sortie. The 1.2% base chance modified by all that misc. stuff is if the planes aim independently.

Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich”