Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

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

User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Lowpe »

Additionally, you need to watch malaria...and fly them from large well staffed air bases in the monsoon areas. I believe size 5+ is what you need there.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20415
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Additionally, you need to watch malaria...and fly them from large well staffed air bases in the monsoon areas. I believe size 5+ is what you need there.
Malarial effects are not totally suppressed until level 9 development (AF + port). But you are right that around level 5 the effects are much less severe than at level 1 or 2. And some locations in the malarial zones are worse than others. Places in open terrain are often less badly affected than places in Jungle or Swamp terrain.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 7273
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: West Yellowstone, Montana

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Nomad »

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Is what is being described in reference to weather apply equally when the transport mission is to a friendly airbase as compared to air-drop? I think I've noticed that transport missions of greater distance will occur when to a friendly airbase.

You can air transport supply, from a 1+ base to a 1+ base, up to 50% of max range.
you can air drop supply, for a 1+ base to any hex, up to normal range.

See michaelms post in this thread https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2483507
User avatar
CaptBeefheart
Posts: 2601
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:42 am
Location: Seoul, Korea

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by CaptBeefheart »

They say when the last 747 is flown to the boneyard the flight crew will be brought back in a DC-3. Years ago I worked at Douglas in Long Beach and my boss mentioned that when Donald Douglas designed the DC-3, he used a safety factor of 30% for the structure. That and the lack of pressure cycles means metal fatigue pretty much doesn't exist for that bird. You'll probably see them flying from unimproved strips in Africa and South America for another 50 years.

Back to the game: I try not to micromanage air supply ops, but 30% rest seems to keep ops losses fairly reasonable.

Cheers,
CB
Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5475
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Yaab »

OK, I give up.

My DC-2s fly in Clear/Partly Cloudy weather and BAM! An ops loss. Plane fatigue under 10, and still a DC-2 is a total write-off in just one turn.

I am clutching at the straws here, but my last theory is that transport aircraft follow the level bomber airfield equation as per manual p.213, and this feature failed to be documented for transport aircraft.

Thus, a DC-2 with load of 2400 points, should use airfield 4, possibly on both ends.

Level bombers require an airfield equal to size 4 + (bomb load / 6500) rounded down.

DC-2 (load 2400)
4 +(2400/6500) =4 + 0,36= 4,36 =rounded down =4

Right now, I fly from Ledo(airfield 3) to Myitkina (airfield 2), and the loss rate is not sustainble (2 aircraft lost in just 5 mission days)

User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20415
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by BBfanboy »

Yaab, where did you get the Size 4 AF as a start point for calculating the Level Bomber AF size? A single engined bomber like the Wirraway, Mary, Sonia and Ida is a level bomber and most certainly do not need a level 4 AF. Level 2 is the minimum for an offensive mission, so that seems like a good start point for the calculation.

Also, you get info on the weather at target in the combat report, but you never know the weather at your originating base. Taking off on wet and windy runways is always dicey!
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: Yaab

OK, I give up.

My DC-2s fly in Clear/Partly Cloudy weather and BAM! An ops loss. Plane fatigue under 10, and still a DC-2 is a total write-off in just one turn.

I am clutching at the straws here, but my last theory is that transport aircraft follow the level bomber airfield equation as per manual p.213, and this feature failed to be documented for transport aircraft.

Thus, a DC-2 with load of 2400 points, should use airfield 4, possibly on both ends.

Level bombers require an airfield equal to size 4 + (bomb load / 6500) rounded down.

DC-2 (load 2400)
4 +(2400/6500) =4 + 0,36= 4,36 =rounded down =4

Right now, I fly from Ledo(airfield 3) to Myitkina (airfield 2), and the loss rate is not sustainble (2 aircraft lost in just 5 mission days)


Is it monsoon season?

From the patch notes:

71. Tweak Added monsoon effect to aircraft support affecting AF (0-4) service level


"In the latest beta (1108q9), I have also added monsoons to Aviation Support and Pilot fatigue recovery after watching several old newsreels on the Burma Campaign.

During the monsoon period and at bases where monsoons have affect, if the AF is less than level 5, the pilots of groups stationed there gain some fatigue and the Service Level of the AF for maintaining a/c is lowered affecting repair/maint.

I have only included less developed AFs as more developed AF should have better repair/maintence facilities and better accomodation for the pilots to counter such affects."



_____________________________

Michael



A quick example...probably more there
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18281
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Yaab, where did you get the Size 4 AF as a start point for calculating the Level Bomber AF size? A single engined bomber like the Wirraway, Mary, Sonia and Ida is a level bomber and most certainly do not need a level 4 AF. Level 2 is the minimum for an offensive mission, so that seems like a good start point for the calculation.

Also, you get info on the weather at target in the combat report, but you never know the weather at your originating base. Taking off on wet and windy runways is always dicey!

No it is not. It is fun to hydroplane from a large puddle at speeds of 50 mph+ or 80 kph+ and then hit a relatively dry spot . . . [;)]
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Lowpe »

I have no clue if it is meaningful or just a default number but tracker has the required size for all transports at AF size 2.



Image
Attachments
a.jpg
a.jpg (249.64 KiB) Viewed 1390 times
User avatar
Treetop64
Posts: 933
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:20 am
Location: 519 Redwood City - BASE (Hex 218, 70)

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Treetop64 »

I suspect it's a bug, miscalculated coefficient, etc. of some kind. Ops losses are inevitable but frankly the C-47 losses are ridiculous.

Literally all other transport groups on the entire map go unused or are stuck with training, including 272 Fifth AF C-47s in the SW Pacific, because the aircraft replacement rate barely keeps up with absurdly high ops losses of four squadrons in SE Asia and two in China. That, even with a 30% rest setting at Lvl 7 bases (and building) for those units. The smallest supply destination airbase is a Lvl 4. And they're not even flying over the Hump.
Image
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5475
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Yaab »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I have no clue if it is meaningful or just a default number but tracker has the required size for all transports at AF size 2.



Image

It also has airfield 4 for light bombers, so Tracker cannot process the relevant data correctly.
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5475
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Yaab »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
ORIGINAL: Yaab

OK, I give up.

My DC-2s fly in Clear/Partly Cloudy weather and BAM! An ops loss. Plane fatigue under 10, and still a DC-2 is a total write-off in just one turn.

I am clutching at the straws here, but my last theory is that transport aircraft follow the level bomber airfield equation as per manual p.213, and this feature failed to be documented for transport aircraft.

Thus, a DC-2 with load of 2400 points, should use airfield 4, possibly on both ends.

Level bombers require an airfield equal to size 4 + (bomb load / 6500) rounded down.

DC-2 (load 2400)
4 +(2400/6500) =4 + 0,36= 4,36 =rounded down =4

Right now, I fly from Ledo(airfield 3) to Myitkina (airfield 2), and the loss rate is not sustainble (2 aircraft lost in just 5 mission days)


Is it monsoon season?

From the patch notes:

71. Tweak Added monsoon effect to aircraft support affecting AF (0-4) service level


"In the latest beta (1108q9), I have also added monsoons to Aviation Support and Pilot fatigue recovery after watching several old newsreels on the Burma Campaign.

During the monsoon period and at bases where monsoons have affect, if the AF is less than level 5, the pilots of groups stationed there gain some fatigue and the Service Level of the AF for maintaining a/c is lowered affecting repair/maint.

I have only included less developed AFs as more developed AF should have better repair/maintence facilities and better accomodation for the pilots to counter such affects."



_____________________________

Michael



A quick example...probably more there


No, monsoon is May-October. It is still, unsurprisingly, December 1941 in my game.
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5475
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Yaab »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Yaab, where did you get the Size 4 AF as a start point for calculating the Level Bomber AF size? A single engined bomber like the Wirraway, Mary, Sonia and Ida is a level bomber and most certainly do not need a level 4 AF. Level 2 is the minimum for an offensive mission, so that seems like a good start point for the calculation.

Also, you get info on the weather at target in the combat report, but you never know the weather at your originating base. Taking off on wet and windy runways is always dicey!

Manual, page 213. The formula is for medium and heavy bombers. Maybe it also affects transport aircraft?
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5475
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Yaab »

Think I have found the answer.

You need to have ADEQUATE aviation support numbers at both bases.

Say, you want to fly 50 transport aircraft on the Ledo-Chengdu route on daily basis. You have 50 (or more) Aviation Support in Ledo. You need also to amass 50 Aviation Support in Chengdu to reduce the op losses.

I am running a tailored air group on a Ledo-Burma route and I have finally reduced my op losses to 0.

Wish this info was in the manual!
User avatar
Platoonist
Posts: 3042
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 4:53 am
Location: Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems

Re: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Platoonist »

Yaab wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:41 pm Think I have found the answer.

You need to have ADEQUATE aviation support numbers at both bases.

Say, you want to fly 50 transport aircraft on the Ledo-Chengdu route on daily basis. You have 50 (or more) Aviation Support in Ledo. You need also to amass 50 Aviation Support in Chengdu to reduce the op losses.

I am running a tailored air group on a Ledo-Burma route and I have finally reduced my op losses to 0.

Wish this info was in the manual!
Eureka! If it turns out to be the answer. Image

But as an Allied player I just hope I never need transport planes at Eureka. Image
Eureka.jpg
Eureka.jpg (21.24 KiB) Viewed 1309 times
Image
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 14355
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

Re: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by btd64 »

Yaab wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:41 pm Think I have found the answer.

You need to have ADEQUATE aviation support numbers at both bases.

Say, you want to fly 50 transport aircraft on the Ledo-Chengdu route on daily basis. You have 50 (or more) Aviation Support in Ledo. You need also to amass 50 Aviation Support in Chengdu to reduce the op losses.

I am running a tailored air group on a Ledo-Burma route and I have finally reduced my op losses to 0.

Wish this info was in the manual!
This sounds about right. Will check it out...GP
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050

AKA General Patton

DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20415
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by BBfanboy »

Yaab wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:41 pm Think I have found the answer.

You need to have ADEQUATE aviation support numbers at both bases.

Say, you want to fly 50 transport aircraft on the Ledo-Chengdu route on daily basis. You have 50 (or more) Aviation Support in Ledo. You need also to amass 50 Aviation Support in Chengdu to reduce the op losses.

I am running a tailored air group on a Ledo-Burma route and I have finally reduced my op losses to 0.

Wish this info was in the manual!
Interesting! Although 50 AS for 50 aircraft is "adequate" in one way, it fails on the number of engines (2 per transport aircraft) vs AS check. But getting to zero Ops Losses says that's OK. Hmmmm. :?:
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 12589
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

Re: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Sardaukar »

For extensive air supply you need:

1. Large airfield, preferably 8-9 both ends. Smaller AFs, more Ops losses.
2. Extra aviation support (remember that AF 8+ size, aviation support in base doubles, mitigating the problem quite a lot)
3. Add extra pilots and planes to Transport squadrons to help with fatigue issues.

I have miniscule Ops losses with these measures, supplying both Chengtu from Ledo and Port Moresby from Townsville etc.
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5475
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by Yaab »

BBfanboy wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 4:10 pm
Yaab wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:41 pm Think I have found the answer.

You need to have ADEQUATE aviation support numbers at both bases.

Say, you want to fly 50 transport aircraft on the Ledo-Chengdu route on daily basis. You have 50 (or more) Aviation Support in Ledo. You need also to amass 50 Aviation Support in Chengdu to reduce the op losses.

I am running a tailored air group on a Ledo-Burma route and I have finally reduced my op losses to 0.

Wish this info was in the manual!
Interesting! Although 50 AS for 50 aircraft is "adequate" in one way, it fails on the number of engines (2 per transport aircraft) vs AS check. But getting to zero Ops Losses says that's OK. Hmmmm. :?:
I can tell you I tailored my aviation support numbers to the number of aircraft only. Would love to double AV to match engine numbers, but AV is in short supply. As of January 15, 1942 I haven't lost a single DC-2 aircraft, flying all the time, only resting the aircraft on days with Thunderstorms or Rain weather.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18281
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: Transport Aircraft - High Ops Loss Rates

Post by RangerJoe »

I stated one time that I like one AS per engine, Alfred said that was not needed, just one AS per aircraft. I still like to have excess AS with my 4Es.

For transport aircraft, I try pick a unit commander with a low or very low aggression. In the 20's would be nice, he would be careful about having aircraft fly into bad weather!
Attachments
babys in orchid flower.png
babys in orchid flower.png (351.17 KiB) Viewed 1080 times
Last edited by RangerJoe on Wed Dec 14, 2022 10:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”