Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

[JeffroK]

FT,
 
I thought, and am quite likely wrong, that units that did a transfer were limited in the missions they could perform.
 
I'm not anal enough to keep track of exactly who does what and when, the only ones I notice have been Tpt Sqns which sometimes fly same day, and sometimes dont. This is probably due to fatigue which could be a way of limiting same day missions (i.e Give them 50% fatigue or X% for every hex in transit)

[bradfordkay]

The transfer and flying mission deal is easily handled with house rules. Chez and I did not include this HR in our game, but I religiously restrict myself with it anyway. My personal rule has long been that any squadron can perform a mission after transferring only if the transfer took four hours or less at cruise speed. This allows for some of the missions that used refueling stops, but doesn't allow me to exploit them.

Some people just ground all aircraft that transfer, which is also reasonable.

[mdiehl]

In the real world if you had a (Large) Long Range CAP above a Base for a whole 24 Hour Period,

In the real world there was nothing like LRCAP as conceived in WitP. There were efforts by several nations in effect at cab rank air dominance sorties, used to good effect in the early months of the war by the Japanese army, in the early days of Barbarossa by the luftwaffe, and to devastating effect by the USAAF in the ETO in 1944-1945. But the idea that some remote pacific airbase would sustain a vast fleet of aircraft over some other remote pacific airbase is fiction. Even more unrealistic is any hope that anyone could have maintained cab rank coverage over an air base (enemy or friendly) from some other airbase for an interval of 24 hours. The noteworthy thing about cab rank was that until the Allies refined it in 1944, it was only executable in small numbers operating from one airbase (where command and control had a firm grip on the whole thing).

As to the 2nd Schweinfurt raid, the problem in that raid was that the USAAF bomb group in question failed to properly organize before leaving UK airspace. It was a complete FUBAR caused by the bomb group's CO (a guy named Maj. Normand) who deviated several times from the flight plan with his (the lead) plane, resulting in his group being strung out all over the sky in line astern (more or less) over an interval of some 80 miles. If they'd formed up properly and held a tight formation their losses would have been greatly reduced. And yeah, it was October 1943, not August 1942.

[Japan]

Yes,  But:
 
 
When lets say Berlin was Bombed,  Fighters from Bremen, Kiel and Hanover engaged the Bombers first,
then Fighters from Wolfsburg, Magdenburg and Berlin.
 
While the Bombers was attacked on the Approach to Berlin, the Fighters from Bremen, Kiel and Hanover landed and re-armed and refuled.
 
After the Bombing attack, and when the Bombers was on the way back to UK the Bremen, Kiel and Hanover Fighters was on the wings and hit them aigan.   Then the Bombers in total had been striked 3 times by fighters, as Fighters from nerby bases was called in to do so.
 
This is what i mean should be better simulated in WITP.
 
Have nerby bases sending 80% of the Fighters there to defend "the more inportant" target, as well as hitting them when thay are on way back to UK...
 
 
 

[mdiehl]

Why does that need to be simulated in WitP? The Japanese in WW2 never had early warning or fighter coordination remotely approaching that of either the Luftwaffe over Germany or of RAF Fighter Command over Britain. It's "imaginable" to think that WitP might grant the Japanese limited capability to try something like that in the Home Islands, but silly to imagine some sort of cab rank interception of a bomber force striking at Rabaul from, for ex, Port Moresby using Japanese fighters in Gasmata or Lae or Buna. Japanese outlying bases did not operate under single centralized command structures, and lacked the radar and intel to provide real time information sufficient to "remote intercept" a strike in that fashion.

[Flying Tiger]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

FT,

I thought, and am quite likely wrong, that units that did a transfer were limited in the missions they could perform.

I'm not anal enough to keep track of exactly who does what and when, the only ones I notice have been Tpt Sqns which sometimes fly same day, and sometimes dont. This is probably due to fatigue which could be a way of limiting same day missions (i.e Give them 50% fatigue or X% for every hex in transit)

I dont think there is any limitation on missions after a transfer? Although certainly fatigue is high (particularly after a long transfer) so you will rarely get a full complememnt of aircraft in any strike.

[Flying Tiger]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

The transfer and flying mission deal is easily handled with house rules. Chez and I did not include this HR in our game, but I religiously restrict myself with it anyway. My personal rule has long been that any squadron can perform a mission after transferring only if the transfer took four hours or less at cruise speed. This allows for some of the missions that used refueling stops, but doesn't allow me to exploit them.

Some people just ground all aircraft that transfer, which is also reasonable.

Sounds fair. But again, my argument is that if house rules are required then the code needs 'adjusting'. If a reasonable house rule can be agreed on then include it IN the game.

[JeffroK]

Hopefully what japan is after will be covered in Battle of Britain/Bombing the Reich which Matrix is developing (And will probably arrive about 12 mths after AE)