AE Air Issues and Air OOB Issues [OUTDATED]

[Mike Solli]

I've got a pilot replacement question.  I assume it goes here.....
 
I tried to add pilots to the Tainan daitai hoping to get Saburo Sakai or some of the other elite pilots that are assigned to that unit but in the Reserve pilot pool.  Here's what the manual says about drawing replacement pilots:
 
When a pilot is required in a group, he is selected in the following order:
1. Pilot is in the group’s pool assigned by editor, or
has returned from being wounded, etc
2. Pilot is in the pilot reserve, has not been assigned to a particular group
and has flown a similar type of plane (fighter, Level bomber, etc.)
3. Pilot is pulled from the Trained pool
4. Pilot is in the Pilot reserve but has flown a different
type of plane (experience penalty)
5. Pilot is pulled from the Trainee pool
 
I ended up getting "trained" pilots with avg experience in the 30s.  Doesn't #1 say we'll get pilots who are assigned to that particular unit but in the group's pool?  What's the group's pool, anyway?  It's all very confusing. 
 
Thanks.

[BeastieDog]

I had the same results: click on add a pilot and I get 3x experienced pilots.

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: DBS

ORIGINAL: bsq

Working on the guns for the Lancaster Marks with a view to find a source other than that in Wikipedia. -**edit** found it...

All would also be fitted with H2S.

I note that the data for H2S and H2X appear not to have been implemented in AE - there are entries in the database for both but they have ranges listed as 9999. So unless there are special range considerations for nav radars, these would need adjusting before the devices could be modded in?

Bombing radar is not implemented. We have search radar, but that's it.

if that part of the code is still the same as BTR, that is correct, it is a Nav radar, not a bombing radar (you could pick out a AREA target with a Nav Radar)

BoB and BTR used the same numbers for Search radars

[timtom]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I've got a pilot replacement question.  I assume it goes here.....

I tried to add pilots to the Tainan daitai hoping to get Saburo Sakai or some of the other elite pilots that are assigned to that unit but in the Reserve pilot pool.  Here's what the manual says about drawing replacement pilots:

When a pilot is required in a group, he is selected in the following order:
1. Pilot is in the group’s pool assigned by editor, or
has returned from being wounded, etc
2. Pilot is in the pilot reserve, has not been assigned to a particular group
and has flown a similar type of plane (fighter, Level bomber, etc.)
3. Pilot is pulled from the Trained pool
4. Pilot is in the Pilot reserve but has flown a different
type of plane (experience penalty)
5. Pilot is pulled from the Trainee pool

I ended up getting "trained" pilots with avg experience in the 30s.  Doesn't #1 say we'll get pilots who are assigned to that particular unit but in the group's pool?  What's the group's pool, anyway?  It's all very confusing. 

Thanks.

Looks like we might be dealing with a bug. If you have a savegame, Michael will delve into it -> showprofile.asp?memID=3086

[pad152]

Of the 9 different Allied RC aircraft listed in the replacement pool for 12/41, none of them have any production, replacements or spares, is this correct?

Blenheim IF - get "0" production/replacements ?

No US medium bomber production, replacements, spares for 4 months 12/41-3/42.  How is this historic ?

Yes I know you still get new airgroups but, with varible replacements set to max you could end up with no medium bombers for 90 days!

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

ORIGINAL: DBS

ORIGINAL: bsq

Working on the guns for the Lancaster Marks with a view to find a source other than that in Wikipedia. -**edit** found it...

All would also be fitted with H2S.

I note that the data for H2S and H2X appear not to have been implemented in AE - there are entries in the database for both but they have ranges listed as 9999. So unless there are special range considerations for nav radars, these would need adjusting before the devices could be modded in?

Bombing radar is not implemented. We have search radar, but that's it.

if that part of the code is still the same as BTR, that is correct, it is a Nav radar, not a bombing radar (you could pick out a AREA target with a Nav Radar)

BoB and BTR used the same numbers for Search radars
[/quote]

Like I said, not implemented. And not the same as BTR; I thought so too at first, but sadly, no...

[JeffroK]

In lieu of check 47 pages, maybe already noted

scen 1

Aircraft type 187 Hudson I (RAAF version)

Has a climb rate of 12820

I think this should be 1280 (Same as C IV version)

[bsq]

ORIGINAL: timtom

ORIGINAL: timtom

ORIGINAL: bsq

1. Lancasters.
Listed is B Mk1 (FE), guns are that of a B Mk VII (FE). FE's had a bomb bay fuel tank that took the place of the 4000lb 'cookie' (indeed one questions the need for the 4000lb HC given the experiences of the B-29 raids)

My understanding is that the armament of the B.1 (FE) was 2x.303 Browning MK II in a F.N.5 nose turret, 2x.303 Browning MK II in a F.N.150 mid-upper turret, also removable if the 400 gal BB tank(-s) was carried, and 2x0.5 Browning Mk II in an F.N.82 or 121 rear turret. Don't know how many, if any, came with the F.N.79 turret.

The Mk VII, I believe, had a similar armament suite except the upper turret was a Martin housing 2x0.50's.

What do you hold the correct armament to be, Robert?

ORIGINAL: bsq

I was happy with the guns just that the mark was wrong - of course if you are making an amalgam, then fine that represents the best compromise - especially as chatting to a colleague today has led me to believe that many of the late war B Mk 1's had mods that made a right hotch-potch of gun armaments.

Well, the B.1 isn't really meant to represent an amalgam. There's enough a/c slots to go around. However in practise we had to draw the line somewhere to allow the art team some peace to do their thing.

In your opinion, if we had both a Mk I and a VII (and a X for that matter) what would their gun suites look like?

ORIGINAL: bsq

The fuselage tank on the other hand that was added to some test aircraft was, by all accounts, problematic as it altered some of the handling characteristics of the Lancaster to such a point that it was disliked by the test crews (and if the test pilots don't do it then who are we to argue). Indeed do not forget that the Lancaster (unlike the B-17, 24 and 29) was a single pilot proposition and if it couldn't be 'trimmed out' taking the weight off the stick then the pilot would be the proverbial 'one armed paper hanger'.

I take it you're refering to the saddleback tank?

ORIGINAL: bsq

Personally I would delete the cookie, replace two of the 1000lb bombs with 4lb incendiaries (cheaper to make especially as there was no steel casing and proven to work well on Japanese construction by Lemay).

I'm afraid you're overestimating the ordnance code. It's a good deal more primitive than that (long story).

I guess we went with the cookie because it was different. A decision of how to handle the "hypothetical" period post 8/45 came late in the process and as far as the air OOB is concerned could benefit from a bit of polish. For my own part I'm a tad confused about the proposed role of Tiger Force, other than as a political statement. I can see how the Tallboy could be useful, but 20th AF was perfectly capable of burning down Japan's cities a second time if that was needed.

Done some more research.

Late war models of the Lancaster were fitted to carry the 8000lb and 12000lb HC - the only aircraft that could carry bombs that big without significant modification (as per the aircraft that carried the heavier atomic weapons).

The 12000lb HC is not the same as the tallboy - it has a completely different mode of employment. The tallboy/grandslam were the ultimate penetration weapons of their time - designed to penetrate yards of earth or feet of concrete before exploding. The HC's were designed to have maximum blast effect with an explosive load of around 90% of total weapon weight as opposed to the less than 70% of more conventional HE bombs.

You asked what Tiger Force could be used for, well there is a definite use - carrying large HC bombs which no other aircraft could do.

That would be something worthwhile seeing, especially in the Downfall scenario that Terminus has alluded to. (Else I'll have to mod them in my self to a full war game and then wait the 1400 turns to see what they actually do [>:])

[timtom]

ORIGINAL: pad152

Of the 9 different Allied RC aircraft listed in the replacement pool for 12/41, none of them have any production, replacements or spares, is this correct?

RC? Roman Catholic? But yeah, the Allied player will find himself tight up for replacements over the first few months.

ORIGINAL: pad152

Blenheim IF - get "0" production/replacements ?

AHQFE had 12 IF's on hand at the outbreak of war with Japan, all of which with 27 Sqn. The sqn was knocked out of the running pretty much immediatly and was disbanded 18/02/42. With any luck the player will find himself forced to do the same [evil cackle].

The early-war Allied air OOB is deliberately designed to lack depth, which IMO is an accurate representation of the historical situation.

ORIGINAL: pad152

No US medium bomber production, replacements, spares for 4 months 12/41-3/42.  How is this historic ?

Below is an extract from Table 91: Airplanes on Hand in Theaters vs Japan, by Type and Principel Model from the Army Air Force Statistical Digest, World War II.



"On hand" just means "allocated to theatre" and could as well be a crated aircraft somewhere in CONUS as over Rabaul.

The MB "other" category is actual B-26's because this is how 5th AF categoried them for some reason. "2nd Line and Misc." by a process of elimination must be the B-18. Curiously the A-24 is booked as a fighter, maybe because its single-engined.

What you're essentially seeing is the arrival of 3rd (A-20, A-24, B-25) & 22nd BG's (B-26) plus a few 7th & 11th AF squadrons. As is evident, bar the B-18, medium bombers weren't available in any kind of numbers until March.

To make matters worse, the Dutch, Americans, and Ozzies have to share the early, meager allocation of B-25's...

ORIGINAL: pad152

Yes I know you still get new airgroups but, with varible replacements set to max you could end up with no medium bombers for 90 days!

With respect, isn't that the point of the variable reinforcement option?

[Kull]

I'm moving this here from my Aleutians thread since there may be some kind of bug at work:

The Rufe unit was moved from Kiska to Attu early in the scenario, and no matter what CAP settings I give it, the unit frequently shifts over to LR CAP in support of a nearby Task Force (in the graphic, it is flying from Attu to Kiska). This happens even if I set the max range at one hex. The only way to stop the activity is to put the unit on standby. For three turns in a row, I changed the settings to Escort, 50% CAP, 0% LRCAP, and target at "Commander Discretion" - yet every following turn it reset to LRCAP 100% and target "TF 4" (the transport group slowly unloading at Kiska).

Under the assumption that "commander discretion" was responsible for the behaviour, I set the Target as "Attu", but it flipped back to "commander discretion" on the next turn. On the other hand, the next three turns in a row passed with no LRCAP events, even though Kiska was raided twice.

Not sure what's going on, but I'd really like to know if the air code now allows air unit commanders to arbitrarily wander off on Long Range CAP missions.

[DBS]

ORIGINAL: bsq
Done some more research.

Late war models of the Lancaster were fitted to carry the 8000lb and 12000lb HC - the only aircraft that could carry bombs that big without significant modification (as per the aircraft that carried the heavier atomic weapons).

The 12000lb HC is not the same as the tallboy - it has a completely different mode of employment. The tallboy/grandslam were the ultimate penetration weapons of their time - designed to penetrate yards of earth or feet of concrete before exploding. The HC's were designed to have maximum blast effect with an explosive load of around 90% of total weapon weight as opposed to the less than 70% of more conventional HE bombs.

You asked what Tiger Force could be used for, well there is a definite use - carrying large HC bombs which no other aircraft could do.

That would be something worthwhile seeing, especially in the Downfall scenario that Terminus has alluded to. (Else I'll have to mod them in my self to a full war game and then wait the 1400 turns to see what they actually do [>:])

But the 12000lb HC needed a special model of Lancaster, which was only ever issued to 617 Squadron. Used from 1943 until the Tallboy came along in June 1944. They were intended for attacking canal banks and viaducts, but actually proved more effective vs conventional industrial targets. To be honest, I don't see it being a weapon of choice for Tiger Force - it was a swine of a weapon to handle (the bomb trolley only had 4.5 inches of ground clearance and that proved troublesome enough on a nicely built pre-war airfield in Lincolnshire, let alone a rapidly built field somewhere on a Pacific island) - and the only squadron that could use it was better employed with Tallboys and Grand Slams.

The 8000lb HC could be carried by umodified Main Force Lancs and Halifaxes, but again I don't see this being a major Tiger Force option, even if the bomb bay fuel tank would have permitted it. Compared to the 4000lb HC, the 8000lb obviously had greater effect on point targets, but the 4000lb seems to have been more effective for its weight in general city or industrial attacks. The classic late-war bombload for a Main Force Lanc on a city attack was 1 x 4000lb HC, and 1060 4lb incendiaries (the latter in 10 x aimable clusters @106 4lbs). For a precision industrial or transport attack, the incendiaries would be replaced by 16 x 500lb MCs, with perhaps the odd GP swapped in if they wanted a few delayed action fuses to bugger up the enemy's clearance efforts.

During the war, Bomber Command dropped, among many other natures:
41 x Grand Slams
854 x Tallboys
193 x 12000lb HC
1088 x 8000lb HC
68000 x 4000lb HC
28633 x 2000lb HC

3 million 30lb phos incendiaries
80 million 4lb incendiaries


David

[sven6345789]

Yokosuka Naval yard
Helen factory and Toka Factory seem to be producing already (14 and 2 respectively); are listed as R&D in the replacement list in the intelligence screen.

[Grotius]

I've posted this suggestion before, so apologies for duplicating my thoughts, but this seems to be the "official" thread for air issues. Might the team consider embellishing the combatreport.txt (or maybe in-game animation text) with some indication that CAP disrupted x number of bombing runs? That might reassure people that their now-leaky CAP is still helping protect their ships. Just a thought; obviously not a high-priority thing when compared to bugs etc.

[timtom]

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

Yokosuka Naval yard
Helen factory and Toka Factory seem to be producing already (14 and 2 respectively); are listed as R&D in the replacement list in the intelligence screen.

There's an odd one...what scenario is that? Would you mind posting a screenie?

[JeffroK]

Scen 1

Air Unit 3211 - No 100 Sqn RAF has Australian nationality

The RAAF formed a separate 100 Sqn.

IFF it was done because Australian pilots/crews were in the unit, more than half of the RAF should be tagged as Australian, New Zealand or Canadian.

[bsq]

ORIGINAL: DBS

ORIGINAL: bsq
Done some more research.

Late war models of the Lancaster were fitted to carry the 8000lb and 12000lb HC - the only aircraft that could carry bombs that big without significant modification (as per the aircraft that carried the heavier atomic weapons).

The 12000lb HC is not the same as the tallboy - it has a completely different mode of employment. The tallboy/grandslam were the ultimate penetration weapons of their time - designed to penetrate yards of earth or feet of concrete before exploding. The HC's were designed to have maximum blast effect with an explosive load of around 90% of total weapon weight as opposed to the less than 70% of more conventional HE bombs.

You asked what Tiger Force could be used for, well there is a definite use - carrying large HC bombs which no other aircraft could do.

That would be something worthwhile seeing, especially in the Downfall scenario that Terminus has alluded to. (Else I'll have to mod them in my self to a full war game and then wait the 1400 turns to see what they actually do [>:])

But the 12000lb HC needed a special model of Lancaster, which was only ever issued to 617 Squadron. Used from 1943 until the Tallboy came along in June 1944. They were intended for attacking canal banks and viaducts, but actually proved more effective vs conventional industrial targets. To be honest, I don't see it being a weapon of choice for Tiger Force - it was a swine of a weapon to handle (the bomb trolley only had 4.5 inches of ground clearance and that proved troublesome enough on a nicely built pre-war airfield in Lincolnshire, let alone a rapidly built field somewhere on a Pacific island) - and the only squadron that could use it was better employed with Tallboys and Grand Slams.

The 8000lb HC could be carried by umodified Main Force Lancs and Halifaxes, but again I don't see this being a major Tiger Force option, even if the bomb bay fuel tank would have permitted it. Compared to the 4000lb HC, the 8000lb obviously had greater effect on point targets, but the 4000lb seems to have been more effective for its weight in general city or industrial attacks. The classic late-war bombload for a Main Force Lanc on a city attack was 1 x 4000lb HC, and 1060 4lb incendiaries (the latter in 10 x aimable clusters @106 4lbs). For a precision industrial or transport attack, the incendiaries would be replaced by 16 x 500lb MCs, with perhaps the odd GP swapped in if they wanted a few delayed action fuses to bugger up the enemy's clearance efforts.

During the war, Bomber Command dropped, among many other natures:
41 x Grand Slams
854 x Tallboys
193 x 12000lb HC
1088 x 8000lb HC
68000 x 4000lb HC
28633 x 2000lb HC

3 million 30lb phos incendiaries
80 million 4lb incendiaries


David

The specials are in the game and as for 617 being the only ones to drop the 12000lb, that's more down to circumstance than any thing else as they were not the only Lancaster Sqn equipped with specials, 9 Sqn also carried weapons to 12000lb and could have dropped either the Tallboy (as it did on the Tirpitz raids) or the larger HC. It appears that the early testing of this weapon was carried out by 617 and it wasn't used much operationally due to the limited number build and some issues with the weapon in some of its deployment modes (it didn't always go completely 'bang' being made up of 3 x 4000lb modules)

In this case the 'special mod' only required a bulge to be placed in the bomb bay doors to accommodate the weapon, whereas Grandslam required the removal of the doors and the replacement of them with the cradle and fairing for the bomb and this mod was only ever applied to 32 Mk I specials flown from Woodhall Spa.. By the end of the war in Europe only 5 of the original specials (Op Chastise) - the others being replaced with B Mk I or B Mk III (with the door mods).

My research so far has turned up the following Squadrons with B Mk I and B Mk III aircraft which were fitted with the mods to allow the carriage of weapons to 12000lb

9 Sqn
44 Sqn
57 Sqn (from where 617 often had to borrow trolleys!)
75 (NZ) Sqn
617 Sqn

I'm sure there will be others.

Point of fact, whilst the Halifax was the first to carry the 8000lb, it only did so by some local modifications to the bomb bay doors (involving tarpaulin) as they could not completely close around the weapon.

As for the point about operating from island airfields etc, Tiger Force was to operate from Okinawa, hardly an atoll with poorly prepared surfaces. Handling would still have posed the same problems as it did here at Scampton and Woodhall Spa, but no more so. There was also talk about some of the aircraft being fitted as tankers and the others as receivers, so whilst the larger two weapons and the 400 Gal tank were mutually exclusive, the range issue may not have been as big a problem if the tank were not used.

[bsq]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Scen 1

Air Unit 3211 - No 100 Sqn RAF has Australian nationality

The RAAF formed a separate 100 Sqn.

IFF it was done because Australian pilots/crews were in the unit, more than half of the RAF should be tagged as Australian, New Zealand or Canadian.

As stated elsewhere, 100 Sqn RAF was based in the far east under RAAF chain of command until it disbanded to be replaced (ultimately) by 100 Sqn RAAF, in the same role. The original, upon reforming in the UK, changed from Light to Heavy Bombers ending up with Lancasters as part of No 1 Group, which would mean that would not have returned as part of Tiger Force.

[sven6345789]

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

Yokosuka Naval yard
Helen factory and Toka Factory seem to be producing already (14 and 2 respectively); are listed as R&D in the replacement list in the intelligence screen.


There's an odd one...what scenario is that? Would you mind posting a screenie?


Can't post one right now, am at work
it is Scenario 1
The factories are listed as (0)14 and (0)2; all other R&D Factories are listed as (3)0 for example; in the replacement list, they are listed as R&D.
how do you post a screenie? never did this before.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: bsq

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Scen 1

Air Unit 3211 - No 100 Sqn RAF has Australian nationality

The RAAF formed a separate 100 Sqn.

IFF it was done because Australian pilots/crews were in the unit, more than half of the RAF should be tagged as Australian, New Zealand or Canadian.

As stated elsewhere, 100 Sqn RAF was based in the far east under RAAF chain of command until it disbanded to be replaced (ultimately) by 100 Sqn RAAF, in the same role. The original, upon reforming in the UK, changed from Light to Heavy Bombers ending up with Lancasters as part of No 1 Group, which would mean that would not have returned as part of Tiger Force.

What RAAF Chain of Command??
Even 1,8,21 & 453 flew under RAF Command?

No. 100 Squadron was formed at RAAF Base Richmond on 15 February 1942. The Squadron was formed from a nucleus of No. 100 Squadron RAF, which had been destroyed during the Malayan Campaign, and was named in this Squadron's honour. Despite this link No. 100 Squadron RAAF was an Australian squadron throughout its existence and should not be confused with its British namesake, which was re-formed as a heavy bomber squadron in Britain on 15 December 1942.

From the RAAF History.
The first unit to receive the new aircraft was No . 100 Squadron R.A.A.F. The
number was derived from the R.A.F. squadron that had fought with forlorn
distinction in Malaya until its obsolete Vildebeeste aircraft and mos t
of its pilots had been lost.

[bsq]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: bsq

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Scen 1

Air Unit 3211 - No 100 Sqn RAF has Australian nationality

The RAAF formed a separate 100 Sqn.

IFF it was done because Australian pilots/crews were in the unit, more than half of the RAF should be tagged as Australian, New Zealand or Canadian.

As stated elsewhere, 100 Sqn RAF was based in the far east under RAAF chain of command until it disbanded to be replaced (ultimately) by 100 Sqn RAAF, in the same role. The original, upon reforming in the UK, changed from Light to Heavy Bombers ending up with Lancasters as part of No 1 Group, which would mean that would not have returned as part of Tiger Force.

What RAAF Chain of Command??
Even 1,8,21 & 453 flew under RAF Command?

No. 100 Squadron was formed at RAAF Base Richmond on 15 February 1942. The Squadron was formed from a nucleus of No. 100 Squadron RAF, which had been destroyed during the Malayan Campaign, and was named in this Squadron's honour. Despite this link No. 100 Squadron RAAF was an Australian squadron throughout its existence and should not be confused with its British namesake, which was re-formed as a heavy bomber squadron in Britain on 15 December 1942.

From the RAAF History.
The first unit to receive the new aircraft was No . 100 Squadron R.A.A.F. The
number was derived from the R.A.F. squadron that had fought with forlorn
distinction in Malaya until its obsolete Vildebeeste aircraft and mos t
of its pilots had been lost.

Post 1355 in this thread would seem to indicate something slightly different and that after the Malaya campaign, 100 Sqn RAF was based in NSW until it's personnel were subsumed into another Sqn and the name plate 'retired' until it stood up again in the UK. At the point of 100 Sqn RAF's demise, 100 Sqn RAAF stood up using the aircraft previously assigned to the now defunct 100 Sqn RAF.
Reading between the lines of the RAAF Stn Cdr's letter, there appears to be a feeling that after the beating 100 Sqn took in Malaya, the intense dislike of the new frame and the fact that the RAF Personnel had been in 'exile' for 4 years, the best bet was to start afresh.
So for the purists perhaps a withdrawal of 100 Sqn RAF follow by the arrival of 100 Sqn RAAF is the exact answer.