AE Air Issues and Air OOB Issues [OUTDATED]

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Wellington IC should be replaced by IIIC, Unsure of what units were equipped with, they may have arrived in theatre with IC but upgraded to IIIC Looking further.??

Thanks

Wellington MkICs were in India and were fairly common, but the MkIII and MkX the more usual types as the war progressed.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Dixie

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Wellington IC should be replaced by IIIC, Unsure of what units were equipped with, they may have arrived in theatre with IC but upgraded to IIIC Looking further.??

Thanks

Wellington MkICs were in India and were fairly common, but the MkIII and MkX the more usual types as the war progressed.

Thanks Dixie,

On reading further I found that the early squadrons arrived with the Well IC but later were using the Well X.

I dont know that much changed between types except for the powered turrets on the later models.

PS I read your PM after this, thanks for the information.

[W T Door]

I'm curious about changes to some of the planes in AE (it's sounding pretty good already).
 
Will the US four engine transports such as the C-54 appear?
 
Some of the patrol planes such as Ventura/Harpoon series aren't terribly useful now, even though with the addition of radar, early sonobuoys and MAD they should be much more effective than in stock. Has this been addressed?
 
How a back of the envelope comparisson of the PB4Y and PB4Y-2?
 
Will we have the C-46? I don't have any references handy, but believe it was pretty common in the Pacific theater.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: W T Door

I'm curious about changes to some of the planes in AE (it's sounding pretty good already).

Will the US four engine transports such as the C-54 appear? Yes

Some of the patrol planes such as Ventura/Harpoon series aren't terribly useful now, even though with the addition of radar, early sonobuoys and MAD they should be much more effective than in stock. Has this been addressed? Yes

How a back of the envelope comparisson of the PB4Y and PB4Y-2? ????

Will we have the C-46? I don't have any references handy, but believe it was pretty common in the Pacific theater. Yes

[W T Door]

I was wondering how much of a difference there is, in game terms, between the PB4Y-1 (slightly modified B24D, already present in the stock game) and the PB4Y-2?

[TheElf]

In addition to the following stats Thomas (brilliantly) often uses A/C of different series to help control the supply of those A/C in the game. So while two models might otherwise be identical aside from designation it benefits the pace of the game and realism to seperate the two so that the impact from production dleays, ramp ups, etc. may still be felt

PB4Y-1:
1 Top Turret, 1 Bottom Turret (both 2 x .50)
10 x 500lb internal
ASB Radar
Cruise Speed = 200
Max Speed = 303
Available 12-42
Max Range = 77 hex (3043 nm)
Norm Range = 20 Hex (792 nm)
Ext Combat RNG = 25 Hex (989 nm)
Max Alt = 32k'

PB4Y-2:
2 Top Turret (both 2 x .50)
8 x 500lb internal
ASG Radar
Cruise Speed = 158
Max Speed = 249
Available 7-44
Max Range = 64 hex (2522 nm)
Norm Range = 17 Hex (656 nm)
Ext Combat RNG = 21 Hex (820 nm)
Max Alt = 18.3k'

[witpqs]

Okay - why the large drop in performance for the newer model? Was the new radar that much heavier/more wind resistant?

[W T Door]

Probably the lack of supercharged engines and typically lower altitude flight profiles. The engines can't be run as lean at lower altitudes that search and ASW missions will tend to dictate and the Navy used the non-supercharged engines since they didn't feel that there would be any need for high altitude flight. This is probably also the reasoning behind replacing the ball turret with a radar, the radar would enhance the search capability of the plane while the lower altitude flight path would largely preclude attacks from below.
I'm pretty sure that the LOFAR buoys that they used back then were dropped from a pretty low altitude, too. Consequently ASW flights tended to be low altitude for this reason and to accomaodate MAD. I had a shipmate who had been an accoustic operator on S2s and trained in TBMs. The method they employed was to drop a bouy, an accoustic charge and a dye marker. Apparently this was the genisis of the "now, now, now" call when launching bouys today, it timed the sequence of the drops for all this stuff.
 
It will also be interesting to see how the blimps operate in AE.
 
Thanks for the info, that's what I was looking for, now to sweat out the release date.....

[Cathartes]

Okay - why the large drop in performance for the newer model? Was the new radar that much heavier/more wind resistant?

PB4Y-1 is essentially the 'navalized' version of the B-24D, a Liberator.

PB4Y-2 is the Privateer with the large, single tail fin.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: W T Door

Probably the lack of supercharged engines and typically lower altitude flight profiles. The engines can't be run as lean at lower altitudes that search and ASW missions will tend to dictate and the Navy used the non-supercharged engines since they didn't feel that there would be any need for high altitude flight. This is probably also the reasoning behind replacing the ball turret with a radar, the radar would enhance the search capability of the plane while the lower altitude flight path would largely preclude attacks from below.
I'm pretty sure that the LOFAR buoys that they used back then were dropped from a pretty low altitude, too. Consequently ASW flights tended to be low altitude for this reason and to accomaodate MAD. I had a shipmate who had been an accoustic operator on S2s and trained in TBMs. The method they employed was to drop a bouy, an accoustic charge and a dye marker. Apparently this was the genisis of the "now, now, now" call when launching bouys today, it timed the sequence of the drops for all this stuff.

It will also be interesting to see how the blimps operate in AE.

Thanks for the info, that's what I was looking for, now to sweat out the release date.....

This is a great explanation. Couldn't have said it better.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

In addition to the following stats Thomas (brilliantly) often uses A/C of different series to help control the supply of those A/C in the game. So while two models might otherwise be identical aside from designation it benefits the pace of the game and realism to seperate the two so that the impact from production dleays, ramp ups, etc. may still be felt

PB4Y-1:
1 Top Turret, 1 Bottom Turret (both 2 x .50)
10 x 500lb internal
ASB Radar
Cruise Speed = 200
Max Speed = 303
Available 12-42
Max Range = 77 hex (3043 nm)
Norm Range = 20 Hex (792 nm)
Ext Combat RNG = 25 Hex (989 nm)
Max Alt = 32k'

PB4Y-2:
2 Top Turret (both 2 x .50)
8 x 500lb internal
ASG Radar
Cruise Speed = 158
Max Speed = 249
Available 7-44
Max Range = 64 hex (2522 nm)
Norm Range = 17 Hex (656 nm)
Ext Combat RNG = 21 Hex (820 nm)
Max Alt = 18.3k'

You know I scratched my head when I saw those range figures at first. THen the lightbulb went off and I remembered: 40 nm hexes. DOH!

[dwbradley]

Here’s a thought for discussion. If it seems to have merit then I would hope it might be grist for a future patch.

It has always struck me that when replacing pilots for aircraft that carry more than one crew member the pilot pool ought to be debited by more than one.

A possible scheme for this would be:

Single-engine a/c: debit pool by one
Two-engine a/c: debit pool by 2
Four-engine a/c: debit pool by 3

This would reflect the loss of co-pilots and other crew. It would make the WITP player just a little more careful in the care and feeding of his larger and more valuable aircraft. Initial pool sizes and replacement rates could be increased to compensate so that “normal” losses would decrease the pools at about the same proportional rate. Rash behavior, such as sending large unescorted bomber raids, would thus reflect increased risk of personnel losses. This is something a commander should have to assess, whether real-life or virtual.

Dave Bradley

[JeffroK]

Dave, you'd have to similarly increase the pilot pool, which can easily be done (at least in WITP)

[bradfordkay]

Will there be a "stand down" option for air units set to night operations? 

[Barb]

Someone pointed out that allied (US especially) air units will be in size of squadrons. What will the names be like?
As in WITP aka: 90th BS
or with name of their Group aka: 90th BS / 3rd BG

Could make identification much easier - especially when each Group = 4 squadrons...

[Cathartes]

Someone pointed out that allied (US especially) air units will be in size of squadrons. What will the names be like?
As in WITP aka: 90th BS
or with name of their Group aka: 90th BS / 3rd BG

Yes.

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: Cathartes

Someone pointed out that allied (US especially) air units will be in size of squadrons. What will the names be like?
As in WITP aka: 90th BS
or with name of their Group aka: 90th BS / 3rd BG

Yes.

Which?[:@]

[Barb]

Do you want the red one or the blue one?
The One please! [:D]

[Yamato hugger]

The bomb group is part of the name. Assuming it actually has one.

[bradfordkay]

As long as it isn't 3rd BG/A, I'm happy... I want the correct squadron numbers.