Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design, art and sound modding and the game editor for WITP Admiral's Edition.

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

Post Reply
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by RedLancer »

I've been looking at the electronic warfare flag for aircraft and the ELINT, Jammer and Detector Flags for devices with interest - however a search of the manuals and the forums didn't give any clues on usage and effects.

I added an EW flagged Dauntless (improbable I know) to the Guadalcanal scenario and have discovered that it limits the Squadron serviceable size to 3 a/c only (remainder in reserve) and mission types to naval attack, airfield attack, training and stand down.

Similarly if I wanted to add AEW aircraft such as the TBM-3W with AN/APS-20 it seems to me that I would have a dilemma on how to label their type. To get them as part of the CAP (and look for incoming aircraft) it would have to be as FBs but then they would engage incoming aircraft so not such a good idea. If I set them as Recon and gave them a localised recon task would they pick up incoming aircraft at all? I suppose the final option is setting them as patrol aircraft though as I understand this would make them seaplanes.

Has anyone else experimented at all?
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by RedLancer »

Have tested a number of things and have discovered that aerial depth charges don't work and neither do my attempts at creating an AEW aircraft. Oh well next idea is a MkX depth charge in lieu of a destroyer torpedo tube!
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
User avatar
chesmart
Posts: 904
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:51 pm
Location: Malta

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by chesmart »

Try setting depth charges as bombs i think cid had tried in RHS.
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by RedLancer »

That works but then you don't get the depth factor of depth charges.
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
User avatar
Nemo121
Posts: 5838
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 11:15 am
Contact:

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by Nemo121 »

I don't think the depth factor really matters as the vast majority of the time they are just spotting subs on the surface anyway.

I'm intrigued by the AEW and Electronic Warfare planes... Can you explain what you did and why it didn't work? We might be able to brainstorm a workaround.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by RedLancer »

I fitted a Wellington with a Mk XI AI Radar - a Mk X but with 100 miles range then created three distinct variants - one tagged as recon, one as NF and one as level bombers . I then put a sqd of each in Brisbane with an Aircobra sqn as CAP. I tried them in a range of mission types whilst launching bomber attacks from Noumea. Whilst the CAP responded I got nothing to indicate that they were detected on radar. I'm not confident that I covered all the bases so am very open to suggestions.
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
Dili
Posts: 4742
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:33 pm

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by Dili »

So you have put the wellington as night fighter? i think the radar might be a air to air simple bonus and maybe that in a plane like Wellington(too bad performer) will not give much benefit.
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by RedLancer »

ORIGINAL: Dili

So you have put the wellington as night fighter? i think the radar might be a air to air simple bonus and maybe that in a plane like Wellington(too bad performer) will not give much benefit.

Yes - that was one of the options. What I was trying to discover was whether the presence of an aircraft with a powerful radar on a 'mission' would allow earlier detection of incoming aircraft in order to give the CAP a better response capability. Nothing that I see in the reports shows that happening. I agree that the AI Radar probably only gives an air to air bonus - but for completeness needed to check whether it allowed CAP to detect further out. I chose NF as they have radar as standard so to speak rather than plain fighters or FBs.

As for the recon and nav search missions. Those missions would seem to look down rather than around. As I posted earlier the EW aircraft are limited in mission type.
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
Dili
Posts: 4742
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:33 pm

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by Dili »

Well, well so you wanted a AWACS in 1942 and you are surprised it didn't worked Don't you think you are asking too much? [:D]

User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by RedLancer »

Can I presume that you 've never heard of the Wellington ACI?

A Wellington was lent to Telecommunications Reserach Establishment for the trials in Feb 1942, the task being to create an Airborne platform that could find the FW Condors transitting from N/W France to spot convoys for the Submarine Wolf Packs that were decimating UK supplies from America at the time, and direct long range fighters on to them. Events overtook the situation with the solution being found in Hurricanes on catapults on Merchant Navy ships. The Wellington was then used in May 1942 operating from Wick in Scotland to try and find the Battleship Lutzow on the Norwegian Coast. It was also used to try and locate the coastal raiding E- Boats in the North Sea.

Many commentators have assumed that these trials were conducted using modified ASV Radar sets but this was a misconception. As this fit with the Yagi aerial was the first time a rotating time base radar was transmitted and recieved through the same aerial in an aircraft. The main reason the trials were pulled were that the radar fitted to the Wellington was a metric radar and advancements were so rapid at the time (before MIT and Project Cadillac in America) that centimetric radars and smaller cavity magnatrons were coming on line that made the ACI obsolecent before it could enter service. Churchill then directed that all of our reserach and technical knowhow should be handed over to the US, who had the numbers of people, money and facilities to develop the kit quicker than the UK possibly could have done.

It's amazing what us Brits had learned and tried by 1942 - including how to lose 3 x Fleet carriers, 3 x BB/BCs and plenty of cruisers!

Joking aside I really wanted to add was either the Avenger AEW or the Spearfish Guppy project.

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
User avatar
R8J
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Shelby County, Tennessee

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by R8J »

Could 07-Electronic Warfare be jamming? Aircraft with electronic jammers or chaff. 
 
Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.

Who Dares Wins.

You smell like dead bunnies.
Dili
Posts: 4742
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:33 pm

RE: Electronic Warfare Aircraft etc

Post by Dili »

Red didn't know that but a NF Beaufighter also can ask for help. And of course that depends how the command structure works. Seeing how the game still have troubles with simple things -some aren't but appear to be- expecting that a 100 miles aerial radar will trigger a fighter response i think it is expecting too much even for this monster of the game.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”