EDBTR Database Project

[warshipbuilder]

Various distances that were employed in WWII by American fighters using .50 inch (12.7 mm) heavy machine gun rounds include 500 ft (150 m), 750 ft (230 m), 900 ft (270 m) and 1,000 ft (300 m), with the longer distances favoured later in the war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_harmonisation

According to the P-51 Pilots Manual there are 400 rounds in the inboard guns and 270 each in the centre and outboard guns and that they are normally set to converge between 250 and 300 yards but they can be adjusted to the pilots preference.

[Turner]

Found the setup for the P47.

[Turner]

[Turner]

Later in the war longer distances were favored because of the higher speeds. Higher speeds meant greater separation during combat and longer shooting distances. So it became necessary to adjust accordingly.

[Turner]

Anyone happen to have a list of which rows in the 'aircraft' tab of the DB editor needs to be empty?

[Turner]

This seems to be a 'device' tab problem and related to production. The 'aircraft' tab seems to be unrestricted in terms of #of aircraft types. The limit seems to be that the number of 'device' rows is limited.

Devices or aircraft production data entered below row ~270 or thereabouts are not pooling when built.

Anyone know more about this????

[Creeper]

Is the pooling issue solved?
I could investigate if needed.

[rob89]

As well known, if the start-date of a model has been advanced by R&D, the related (up-gunned) sub-version doesn't.

Is it possible, by the editor, to link the version and sub-version start-dates, to bypass that problem ?

thank you

Rob

[Turner]

No it is not possible to link them, the only way around that if you want to make a sub-version available at the same time as the main type is to set the availability date for the sub-version to a earlier date than the buildable model. Since the sub-type is only accessible through manufacturing the main type it won't matter if the sub-type is available from start, if you want them to become available at the same time. It won't affect research. This setup may be desirable in some cases and some other times not. I chose to lock the sub-types of the Ta152A versions to a later date in my mod because of game balance, imho it would also be too ahistorical to have such heavy hitters available earlier.

[warshipbuilder]

How about adding 413 Squadron RCAF for April 1, 1945 flying Lancasters? The squadron had been recalled from the far east to do just that, but it was decided to disband it instead.

[Turner]

Do you have a roster? Also which base did they deploy to?

[warshipbuilder]

They were at Bournemouth and they were disbanded on Feb 28 1945. They were suppose to go to Linton-on-Ouse as part of 6 Group, flying Lancs. April 1st is a ball park figure, they should have been operational around that time. That is all I got.

It would have been the Lanc X. The Canadian government was very anxious for the RCAF to start flying Canadian made aircraft.

[Turner]

So the unit was historically speaking disbanded on Feb 28 instead of being deployed to 6 Group in April? To implement it the minimum info needed is the name and rank of Squadron CO, and aircraft performance data. Since the Lancaster X is not in the game currently.

[warshipbuilder]

Last commander was W/C SR McMillan. Lanc X was a Canadian built III, so no problem using that instead.

[Turner]

Ok!

[Turner]

413 Squadron RCAF is in from April 1st 1945. Flying Lancaster IIIs only the CO is on the roster so they will be reinforced to full strength from replacements.

Wrapping up v1.03 now.

[warshipbuilder]

Bravo Zulu!

[warshipbuilder]

Here is the amended OOB for the RCAF. As you can see it is a lot different than what is in the game. You are going to have to get a little creative when dealing with 420, 424 and 425 squadrons. [:D]

[rob89]

Does anyone know if/how the code 'type' = 01 of the device tab (= 'GA rocket', i.e. Ground-to-Air rocket ???) work ?

thank you in advance

Rob

[warshipbuilder]

It seems rows 1-200 are for axis a/c and 201-400 are for allied, below that there are a number of allied a/c that are repeated, plus the pacific a/c. Did you notice that some of the stats are different for the repeated allied a/c?

Did you also notice the B-36 in bmp slot 131? Just sayin'.

Do the P-47M, XP-72 or P-51H show up in any of the games? If not, I think they could be usable slots for other allied a/c not already on the roster.

By making any mods to the game, does that mean you won't be able to PBEM with another player who has the "original" game?