We shall overcome

[rroberson]

Well they remain on the ground. On a slightly happy note they were responsible for spotting his task force this turn. Maybe they will all get together soon put down their protest placards and actually fly a mission in a day or two.

[tsimmonds]

I still say you should try putting them on 100% search. Maybe rein them in to 10 hexes instead of 13.

[Toro]

Something I do with my B-17s is split them right off. That provides me with three groups that I can keep rotating on missions (one or two flying, one down for repair, morale improvement).

Something else I noticed: you have a mediocre leader for that group. Swap him out for someone with more inspiration. You'll see your morale improve quicker, and they'll fly more often.

[donkuchi19]

I have two full squadrons running out of PM. I have to rest them periodically because they keep going out on missions, getting beat up, and having morale drop to where they won't fly. I rest them up until they hit 60 or so for morale, let them loose, they fly about two missions and need to rest again. They keep hitting the Japanese bombardment missions sent to Lae.

I have been now rotating them so that I don't have all of my squadrons resting at the same time. (I have some Australian units there now too (Beauforts)) I have lowered the attack radius to 8 because they keep going after Rabaul if I set it out to far and then their morale really drops.

[Mr.Frag]

You moved in any escort yet? They will not go against a CV that has 50+ aircraft flying cap without at least a token escort.

Even a useless group of Kittyhawks at Cooktown set to escort should get them going.

[Nikademus]

smart buggers.....i just raided Brisbane and badly damaged it's resource centers. The AI has alot of B-17's at Cairns, but they havn't tried attacking my ersatz Death star (playing the post 42B scenerio...Midway happens leaving Japan with it's second team)

[mogami]

Hi, They are not flying 13 hexes missions no matter what the range is set to. The airfield is only a size 3. B-17 require a size 5 airfield. Bombers flying from too small an airfield are treated as flying at extended range.

OK 37 bombers on hand minus 20 percent flying search=30

minus 25 percent for no HQ=22
1 escort required for every 2 expected enemy CAP (Frag: US Heavy Bombers do not check for enemy CAP on attacks against ground targets. Do they check on attacks against TF?) If so then this is why the aircraft refuse to fly.

However they still have 3 more tests to pass to fly. Each failure reduces the number of aircraft by 25 percent. (I think the too small airfield also reduces number by 25 percent. )


Move some escort and build the airfield to level 5 and bet all the problems cease to prevent them from flying. (Or Move them to a size 5 airfield)

[Mr.Frag]

Frag: US Heavy Bombers do not check for enemy CAP on attacks against ground targets. Do they check on attacks against TF?

In all my tests they refused to fly against a CV group without a token group of escorts.

I don't blame them ... it's one thing to go sneak over some base and drop bombs from up high. It is something else to line up for naval strikes while being fired on by cap that can see you coming from 20 miles [:D]

They will fly if he gives them a small group of escort ... even if the escort is flying to it's extreme range, even with the undersized airfield. (the airfield = 25% reduction to planes but it does not prevent the mission)

The no escort is preventing the mission flat out.

If it was just one CVL, they would go without an escort, but they need something to go against a deathstar ... Luke's not the pilot! [:D]

[mogami]

Hi, But even with escort the base number of aircraft that would check to fly is reduced to around 15 (HQ,airfield, search)
Then these 15 must pass leadership, experiance and morale. (each failure reduces another 25 percent) The leader might simply say "too few to go"

[Nikademus]

one argument i can understand is....how did the buggers 'know' there was or would be a serious CAP over the target when they get there? [&:]

(note: for the AI this "Spidie sense" is pretty important)

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

one argument i can understand is....how did the buggers 'know' there was or would be a serious CAP over the target when they get there? [&:]

(note: for the AI this "Spidie sense" is pretty important)

The search mission that found them determined that there was CAP flying. What I think is kind of odd is that we do not get to see CAP information on spotted TF's.

[Mr.Frag]

First:

-25% due to Air HQ
-25% due to runway size
Morale check roll if morale < 50 ... failure = -25%

Since he's not below 50, that check is skipped.

so we are 37 aircraft -9 (hq) -9 (runway) or 19 that can fly

the escort follows the same rules but it's a -10% for no hq

3 more checks run

experience check
leadership check
morale test (governs if all the aircraft fly or not)

each one of these further reduce the group by 25% if failed. Doubt his are failing here.

As long as 2 aircraft are left, they will fly.

He is getting hung up on the cap check which comes right at the top of the list for target selection. It is simply refusing the TF as a valid target. It happens during the target determination phase before all this stuff happens that will cut back what actually flies.

[Mr.Frag]

Whoops, one more check in there to see if the 20% he had running seach join in the strike ... always forgetting *that* one [:D]

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, They are not flying 13 hexes missions no matter what the range is set to. The airfield is only a size 3. B-17 require a size 5 airfield. Bombers flying from too small an airfield are treated as flying at extended range.

OK 37 bombers on hand minus 20 percent flying search=30

minus 25 percent for no HQ=22
1 escort required for every 2 expected enemy CAP (Frag: US Heavy Bombers do not check for enemy CAP on attacks against ground targets. Do they check on attacks against TF?) If so then this is why the aircraft refuse to fly.

However they still have 3 more tests to pass to fly. Each failure reduces the number of aircraft by 25 percent. (I think the too small airfield also reduces number by 25 percent. )


Move some escort and build the airfield to level 5 and bet all the problems cease to prevent them from flying. (Or Move them to a size 5 airfield)

Just want to reiterate something I pointed out in UV and with WITP. I've never understood the design concept where portions of a group "decide" not to fly. Unheard of. The group either goes or it does not. Other groups assigned said target should either go with the entire Base's air complement or stay with the lead group on the ground. What's the basis for this design?

And what does morale have to do with strike numbers? They may perform poorly due to bad morale but no pilot will go AWOL on his flight. Death penalty for cowardice comes to mind. This is the air bosses job, not flight commanders or individual pilots. What kind of military organization are we talking about here?

[mogami]

Hi, Ron the portions are not refusing to fly they are not ready to fly.
The size 3 airfield cannot arm a B-17 group fast enough for the entire 37 ac to fly.
The lack of HQ prevents all the aircraft and support.

Rather then different aviation support requirments for each size field and each type aircraft these other rules fill in for the fact a size 3 airfield is built for single engine aircraft and there are no parts and such for B-17.
The pilots do not refuse to fly. The aircraft are not ready (dispite being listed as ready) The aircraft are air worthy but not mission ready.

[Nikademus]

It could represent the fact that as Mog said, the planes are being reported "not ready" by the pilots and mechanics. If they have really low morale they would probably be more inclined to report such incidents at the slightest excuse.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Ron the portions are not refusing to fly they are not ready to fly.
The size 3 airfield cannot arm a B-17 group fast enough for the entire 37 ac to fly.
The lack of HQ prevents all the aircraft and support.

Rather then different aviation support requirments for each size field and each type aircraft these other rules fill in for the fact a size 3 airfield is built for single engine aircraft and there are no parts and such for B-17.
The pilots do not refuse to fly. The aircraft are not ready (dispite being listed as ready) The aircraft are air worthy but not mission ready.

I'm referring to the multiple checks. It already takes longer to repair a 4E bomber than it does a 1E or 2E aircraft so why the extra penalty based on CAP, experience, morale, fatigue? These are not unit decisions but HQ decisions.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

It could represent the fact that as Mog said, the planes are being reported "not ready" by the pilots and mechanics. If they have really low morale they would probably be more inclined to report such incidents at the slightest excuse.

And be shot...[:-]

[Mr.Frag]

Just want to reiterate something I pointed out in UV and with WITP. I've never understood the design concept where portions of a group "decide" not to fly. Unheard of. The group either goes or it does not. Other groups assigned said target should either go with the entire Base's air complement or stay with the lead group on the ground. What's the basis for this design?

You are thinking too tactically. You are not the raid commander. The raid commander and the base commander are fighting out what flies. As long as the commanders (local ai) deem that a strike is worth flying with a minimum of 2 aircraft (ie: worth the gas), something should fly. Holding back the entire contents of multiple bases jsut because 1 little thing happened to be wrong makes no sense at all.

This is a good example ... the local boss is simply saying that I don't have the skills to fly unescorted against a group of carriers that have a boatload of cap flying! Give me some escorts and I'll go.

If the CV's cap was lower, they would fly on their own. I don't know what the threshold value of cap to escort is, but when you start scenario #15, the allied B-17's fly against the CVL so we know there *is* a threshold value of some measure. Since they are flying from a size 4! (not proper size) base, we can assume that the airbase size does not prevent the flights.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

And be shot...[:-]

well yeah....if it were proven to be so blatant, like when the Canopus's chief engineer reported his ship unfit.