Wirraway aircraft

Post bug reports and ask for help with other issues here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
jgsIII
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 2:54 pm
Location: Annapolis, Maryland, U.S.A.
Contact:

Wirraway aircraft

Post by jgsIII »

OK, still digesting all the differences between WitP Classic and WitP AE.

The Wirraway aircraft used to be classified as a Fighter-Bomber but is now listed as a Light Level Bomber. Can anybody explain the change?

If it is really just a bomber, does that mean Australia doesn't have any fighter aircraft in Australia or even the surrounding islands at the beginning of the war? That seems kind of odd the homeland wouldn't have any fighters. It's especially odd compared to the restricted headquarters rules in the game that force a play to keep the 'home guard' in place.

Does anybody care?
User avatar
jhdeerslayer
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sat May 25, 2002 3:24 pm
Location: Michigan

RE: Wirraway aircraft

Post by jhdeerslayer »

I wondered the same thing so I care. [:D] A bunch of poorly trained P40's arrive I think in January but then are withdrawn in March. By then planes are being shipped there from the US or at least in my game anyway.
pad152
Posts: 2835
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Wirraway aircraft

Post by pad152 »

The Wirraway was designed as a trainer but, was used in just about every role because they didn't have anything else at the start of the war.

[align=left] [/align]
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: Wirraway aircraft

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: pad152

The Wirraway was designed as a trainer but, was used in just about every role because they didn't have anything else at the start of the war.

[align=left] [/align]

HISTORY

The Wirraway evolved from the North American NA-16 basic trainer. A closely related aircraft was the SNJ/T-6/Harvard advanced trainer. You don't want trainers to be sensitive to their controls, and you most definitely want fighter aircraft to be sensitive. On the other hand, stability is useful in a light bomber--it gives you good bombing accuracy. Using a trainer-derivative in fighter combat was a last resort option, and so I think classifying the Wirraway as a light bomber is better.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
tbridges
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: North Carolina

RE: Wirraway aircraft

Post by tbridges »

I sure care! I've got Jap carriers attacking Brisbane in late December '41 and there is not a single Allied fighter available to defend the port within 1000 miles. This can't be right.
Tom


The easy way is always mined...
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: Wirraway aircraft

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: tbridges

I sure care! I've got Jap carriers attacking Brisbane in late December '41 and there is not a single Allied fighter available to defend the port within 1000 miles. This can't be right.

HISTORY

That was right. Only one Wirraway ever shot down an aircraft. SBDs were better fighters.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
User avatar
wdolson
Posts: 7690
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Wirraway aircraft

Post by wdolson »

The Australians saw that the UK was not going to be able to provide them with enough aircraft when war looked likely with Japan.  They saw they needed to develop a domestic aircraft industry and licensed the trainer from North American as their first project.  The Wirraway was fairly maneuverable for a bomber, but it was really intended as a stop gap and a training project for the fledgling Australian aircraft industry.

It was pushed into the fighter role a few times early on, usually with disastrous results.  As far as maneuverability went, it was probably about the same as the SBD, but had less protection, I think it was lighter armed, and the crews were not as experienced.  Before the war, the USN rotated their pilots from one plane type to another, so a lot of the more experienced SBD pilots had experience flying fighters and had some clue about fighter tactics.  The Wirraway pilots didn't have any such benefits.

It is a little weird that Australia doesn't have any fighters at start, but the Wirraway wasn't really a fighter and it was all that was available.  The Australian fighter pilots were all flying with the RAF in Europe and the Med.  Australia had been stripped of their most experienced pilots for the war on the other side of the world.

The Australian government managed to get a Wing of Australians back, but by the time they arrived, the tide had turned and they saw little action.  They tried to get into action with the 5th AF, but the Americans tended to exclude non-American units to rear area action by late 43.  This short sightedness denied the Allies of some very good units on the front lines.

Bill
WIS Development Team
User avatar
afspret
Posts: 857
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:05 pm
Location: Hanahan, SC

RE: Wirraway aircraft

Post by afspret »

Don't know about ya'll, but when I used them as CAP in WitP they got slaughtered, so I would only use them for ground or naval attack.  I was also initially curious about the change in AE at the beginning as well and in created my own scenerio with them as fighter-bombers, but they got slaughtered again, so maybe leaving them as light bombers ain't such a bad idea. 
John E. McCallum
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”