# of Groups on a runway?

[bsq]

Here's a picture to illustrate the issue then, clearly shows Tinian overstacked both by engines and by groups - a size 7 AF with an AHQ.

[bsq]

Here's one of Rabaul, a real size 9 AF with an AHQ - I have no desire to argue either, just pointing out that your statement is not correct and that you need a real level 9 AF to act without penalty.

[freeboy]

yeppers, this is one of my bitches, so totally needs to be changed imo,
the total planes makes sence, but the unit figurs are WAY out of line !!!

[ckammp]

My statement has two sources - the manual, and TheElf (head of the Air team). I doubt they're both wrong(maybe the manual, but never TheElf).[:)] 
 
As for why you are seeing Administrative overstacking, I suspect the answer is the groups present have a different HQ than the Twentieth USAAF, or the base itself belongs to a different command.
 
And while I'm sure I could provide a screen shot supporting my statement, I honestly would rather spend my time playing the game than arguing about it. I again, however, urge you to simply use the editor to self-correct any perceived errors in the game.  
 
Again, have a nice day.

[freeboy]

[&o][X(]perhaps a compromise for types of planes... Ie fighters are weighted at a certain weight verses twin or 4 engine bmbr, penalties for different nationalities at bases, all givving us a more realistic big base picture... All my float planes could be handled by the float plane guys, not much difference telling three strggles in a differrent p38 unit to fly as part of group X, this one issue really bugfs me.. thanks for fixing it promptly[:-][&o][X(]

[bsq]

ORIGINAL: ckammp

My statement has two sources - the manual, and TheElf (head of the Air team). I doubt they're both wrong(maybe the manual, but never TheElf).[:)] 

As for why you are seeing Administrative overstacking, I suspect the answer is the groups present have a different HQ than the Twentieth USAAF, or the base itself belongs to a different command.

And while I'm sure I could provide a screen shot supporting my statement, I honestly would rather spend my time playing the game than arguing about it. I again, however, urge you to simply use the editor to self-correct any perceived errors in the game.  

Again, have a nice day.

Just changed the groups to all belong to the XX Bomber Command, which belongs to Pacific Ocean Areas as does Tinian.

The same shows and when you go to the transfer to base dialog (taking a group from Guam to Tinian), the base shows as red - which means its overstacked and has penalties.

So whilst I appreciate you would rather play than discuss, lets keep the discussions both cordial and factual. The manual says that you can increase the number of groups by up to the command radius of the best AHQ - which means 5 extra groups - it does not make the airfield either phyiscally or virtually larger.

Most people won't edit the game, so they will get this anomaly and that's not through laziness, its because they want to play the game as is, assuming that the devs have done the best they can (which they have), but to dismiss something because it doesn't fit your point of view is a very narrow way of looking at things and I am sure that the devs can stand up for themselves and welcome comment where it seems to challenge their belief - especially where it can be backed up.

The problem as I found is that you have to invest a lot of time and effort into the game to get to the point 'where there be dragons' and having found the 'dragons', you don't necessarily want to go back to the beginning and edit them out. I would rather bring them to the attention of the devs (which I have) and then carry on the best I can despite the issues (which I have). I also wanted to share with the OP some of my observations and issues with the SPS effects of certain airfields.

I have also used the editor to create a copy of the scenario where Tinian has an SPS of 6 to see if the same stuff happens or not - results probably in another 4 months[;)]

[castor troy]

while the stacking limits about groups perhaps works most of the time it becomes completely ridicoulos in the examples people have pointed out here. Put 5 squadrons with 1 aircraft on a level 4 airfield and it´s overstacked = BS IMO... same goes for only a hundred B-29s on Tinian, when you know how many there were in real life... don´t know what the devs really were thinking about this one. I guess we´re only told we should stop bitching around though.

[KenchiSulla]

I am not a moderator or anything but.... here goes

I see a lot of good arguments here and I am pretty sure the design team would fix any problems. I also see comments here that would make me think "screw this" if I was a dev.....

Just my 2 cents, keep it civil and constructive. We are all human and we all love the game....

[wwengr]

Not for argument here. Just some information.

At peak, Tinian had two airfields with nine B-29 Groups operating (including the 509th Composite Group). Including the 509th CG, a total of about 245 authorized B-29's at peak. This is 980 engines versus the 350 (87 planes) that a level 7. It is also 28 total squadrons versus the 12 group administrative limit for a size 7 base with a Radius 5 air HQ.

It appears that the only way to stay below the stacking limit at maximum strength for the peak historical deployment is to stand down all but 8 planes at once.

In all of the Marianas bases there were a total of 61 B-29 Squadrons with about 635 authorized B-29's. From June 44 through August 45, these groups lost 414 aircraft. 267 of these were operational losses (not enemy action) (See http://www.usaaf.net/digest/t165.htm).

Additionally, most big raids over Japan from all of the Marianas bases were around 100 aircraft. The biggest raid was about 300 planes.

Anecdotally, the various histories indicate that overcrowding was a problem at Tinian. Every time there was a mishap, they had to move aircraft all over the place to keep operating.

[bsq]

The largest raid was of 324 B-29's on March 9, 1945.

By the end of war Tinian alone had nearly 1000 B29's (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... tinian.htm) and was the largest airbase in the world.

North Field had 4 x 2600 metre runways

West Field had 2 x 2600 metre runways

Saipan wasn't much smaller (see here http://www.nps.gov/archive/amme/wwii_mu ... tions.html the photo of the lined up B-29's has more than 130 frames in the shot!)

[jomni]

ORIGINAL: castor troy
same goes for only a hundred B-29s on Tinian, when you know how many there were in real life... don´t know what the devs really were thinking about this one. I guess we´re only told we should stop bitching around though.

Ah. But looking at the wwengr's post seems to say that Tinian was overstacked. [:D]
If the Japanese were to bomb that air base, there will be a lot of easy targets.

No one is stopping you from stuffing a lot of air groups and air planes in an airfield in the game anyway. You will just get more damaged planes and operiational inefficiency.

But the case of overstacking by having too many groups with one plane each is sort of funny. Could there be some balance between administrative and the number of planes?

[ETF]

Bsq thanks for bringing up some excellent points. I hope the dev's see some of your logic!

[ckammp]

The following post may be helpful to this discussion:
 
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2219116&mpage=2&key=aircraft%2Crestrictions?
 
Have a nice day.[8D]

[Marty A]

ORIGINAL: ckammp

The following post may be helpful to this discussion:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2219116&mpage=2&key=aircraft%2Crestrictions?

Have a nice day.[8D]

I see post 43 on this where elf say bad rule. i fail to see how you use this as your argument in support.

[wwengr]

Not going tit for tat, but I have been seeking sources about how many B-29's were on Tinian. I found this SeaBee history that says that Tinian accomodated 450 B-29's by the end of the war. See TINIAN IN WWII – TEAMWORK AND EFFORT.

Another interesting link: From the memoirs of Col. Charles T. VanVliet.

Crews did one day mission prep, mission day (15.5 hour round trip), and one day rest. This would equate to having each unit do a cycle of one day training, one day bombing mission, and one day rest. That implies 1/3 of all aircraft flying missions on any given day (at the maximum rate).

[michaelm75au]

Whole purpose of the stacking is to limit planes (using engines as the yardstick) and active groups (from an administrative or control perspective) on a AF for offensive missions.

You can "overstack" an airfield.

It wont stop air ops.
But it will affect how many aircraft fly per phase, makes them more prone to taking hits when attacked on the ground, affects air support.

[bsq]

It ramps up losses to the point where offensive ops are unsustainable in any shape or form, aircraft take a month (sometimes) to repair and average over 14 days - clearly an effect of an over-stacked airfield.

BTW this is Tinian/Saipan and Guam in late 44 early 45, just where are the air attacks going to come from to cause me damage? The losses I saw were entirely due to the overstacked operation of these bases and not from any Japanese attack.

ckammp - I see your post, I see The Elf's comments and with the greatest respect it does not seem to work like that. Level 7 airfields with a resident HQ overstack and suffer penalties, so the rule is right (as per the manual), the interpretation as presented elsewhere is wrong. You like quoting - so here's a quote for you...

[center]when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth (Arthur Conan Doyle) [;)][/center]

[Ghertz]

deleted

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

I am not a moderator or anything but.... here goes

I see a lot of good arguments here and I am pretty sure the design team would fix any problems. I also see comments here that would make me think "screw this" if I was a dev.....

Just my 2 cents, keep it civil and constructive. We are all human and we all love the game....

What he said (the silver-tongued devil [:D])

[88l71]

I love this game but I must ask who in their right mind thought of such a complicated, confusing, multi-faceted answer to a simple question like "how many planes can I have at an airfield"?

I like this game and I enjoy the level of detail but things like this are downright tedious and unneccisarily time-consuming.