Combined Historical Scenario - Aircraft

[Zeta16]

What names are you going to use for the Japanese planes. The Japanese names or the easier allied code names.

[TheElf]

I would like to use the japanese names with the allied code name in parentheses. However This is not possible in all cases due to limited space in the name field. Since we know all the Allied codenames, and many people depend greatly on those codenames for keeping them straight, I am in favor of using both where possible and using only the allied name when necessary.

[Blackhorse]

Lancasters and Lincolns

When Germany surrendered, the allies began shifting Lancaster heavy bombers to the Pacific. Eventually, several hundred would have been available in late 1945 / early 1946.

Does anyone have / can anyone sketch out / the game performance specs for a Lancaster (models I, III or X -- they appear identical except for the country of manufacture) . . . and for its successor aircraft, the Lincoln?

[TheElf]

If you have any reference pics (Preferably Top down and in color) email them to elf30@mchsi.com or post them in the art section.

I have already looked casually for Lanc photos. It is on my short list.

[Lemurs!]

Hi all,

One of the problems i have beenm working on in my mod is how to represent the P40.
The game has 5 classes; 3 American & 2 Commonwealth.

The Americans have the P40B(and C/D odds and ends IMO)
The P40E, including the P40F,K,L
and the P40N

The Commonwealth gets the Kittyhawk I, representing the P40D,E,F&L more or less.

They also get the Kittyhawk III which officially is the K & M which were a pretty minor grouping. The Kittyhawk III should, I think, be changed to the Kittyhawk IV which was the P40N, the most widely used model by the Commonwealth.

Once we get this figured out, what ratings do we give these planes? I have given ratings of between 30-32 Mnvr.
What are your thoughts? The P40N should probably be the highest, or the P40F but that aircraft is not individually modeled. The N had a extra lightweight structure and 2 less guns at first but the armour was increased and the 2 guns were added back on most American N's.
I am unsure how many Commonwealth N's fought with 4 guns and 6 guns.

Anyway, the P40 Mnvr-wise is the lowest rated fighter for its speed in the game. I tried to rationalize the Mnvr values in my most recent mod, especially every carrier aircraft being overrated, but there is still weirdness.

In my opinion (and this is not inviting an argument) the P40 was the 'worst' of the American fighters.
I more or less set 25-30mph difference as worth a mnvr point, good dive or bad dive characteristics being a +/- 1 point, zoom climb could modify the rating etc.

A few aircraft, P40, P39, Zero, Oscar, Claude, Spitfire, Nate, I gave a plus or minus 1 or 2 to represent the general crapiness/quality of an aircraft.

The P40 really hits the bottom of the scale as being lower mnvr than the Wildcat which was 40mph slower and which was a worse diver than the Wildcat. I downrated the Wildcat a bit in my mod as it is.

Anyway, what are our thoughts?

Mike

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

A few aircraft, P40, P39, Zero, Oscar, Claude, Spitfire, Nate, I gave a plus or minus 1 or 2 to represent the general crapiness/quality of an aircraft.

Anyway, what are our thoughts?

Mike

Does this mean your Oscar is weaker than the stock Scenario!?

[Lemurs!]

No, my Oscar ended up about the same as the stock scenario.

I feel that the zero advantage should apply to the zero, oscar, claude, and nate. Then I could rate these aircraft accurately.
The Oscar 1 in my system should be about a 32-33 mnvr.
The Nate should be 31 or so. But, if I do that these aircraft will shoot nothing down and that would be ahistorical.

Mike

[Herrbear]

I think your ratings of 30-32 are fine. You are going to end up with 5 or maybe 4 classes. This will leave the worst with 30 and the best with 32 and the rest of 31.

I don't quite understand how the manuever rating is calculated so it is tough to comment on them. The Gun Value is easy, though one could argue whether bomber gun ratings should be the same as a fighter plane.

By the way, I have really appreciated all the work you have done in modding the game. I am curious since you seem to have a good grasp of what Matrix (or Grigsby) calculates Manuever and Durability, what would you rate the P-43 and the P-66?

Thank you.

[Lemurs!]

I would rate the P43 a 31 mnvr. The P43 could even go as low as a 30. The plane had a serious lack of maneuverability, its low level performance was very poor and if someone had added armour it would have further retarded performance.

The P66 probably i would rate as a 32-33 mnvr, i suspect it was another P35; the P35 was much more maneuverable than the P36 but the P35 had a habit of unrecoverable stalls.

The P66 was a great aerobatic aircraft but the cockpit was cramped which limits maneuverability at high speeds and it took very high operational losses from stall-crashes.

Mike

[steveh11Matrix]

For some info on the use of Lancasters in the proposed UK bomber force, try http://www.dambusters.org.uk/tiger.htm.

I proposed earlier that we could model 617 and 9 Squadrons, with the Tallboy. Perhaps even the Grand Slam. At the time I suggested they be PGM's but can anyone tell me if they's actually been modelled in the game? There's a slot in the database, but do they work? If not, it'll have to be a very accurate bomb, with a house rule for minimum altitude.

Also, by 1946 there were supposed to be some B29's carrying two Tallboys each. Nasty! [:)]

Steve.

[TheElf]

We need to finalize our list of newly added Aircraft, both completely new to the game or variants of current A/C.
Lemurs, Don and I have agreed that your Aircraft additions in your scenario are a good foundation from which to start. If you could post them here, perhaps we could get this discussion started.

I think a very important tool here might be a very simple list (for someone with more time than I of the following aircraft with the following details neatly and briefly added for each:
1. IOC - EOS
2. Production totals for the war
3. For hypothetical A/C Projected Date of IOC, or units equipped at wars end

example: FM-1 31AUG42-14AUG45, 1,151 (312 as Martlet V/WildcatV)

Here is a list of A/C already mentioned, I have starred A/C I think are worth consideration:

China
P-43*
P-66*

RAF/FAA
Lancaster*
Lincoln
Sea Hurricane* replaces Gladiator
Two Variants of the Seafire. 1 Merlin*, 1 Griffon*
Albacore*

USN
A F6F-3 and a F6F-5 (with potential NF variants of each)
F8F(Carrier)*
F8F-1N(Carrier)
F7F (land only)*
F7F (carrier/land)
F7F-1N (Land only)*
F7F-1n (carrier)
Ryan Fireball (carrier)
FG-1D(Carrier)*

P-80
Multiple P-47 variants beyond the C, D and RAF/RAAF T-bolts
P-51H

Here's some of Don's thoughts on Allied carrier aircraft from a previous post.

US Designation = British Designation

F4F-3 = Martlet I/III
Martlets form original French (I) and Greek (III) orders taken over by Britain – none served in Pacific

F4F-4 = Martlet II/IV
Martlet II served in Eastern Fleet from April, 1942. Martlet IV had a different engine and British Model MGs. Carried the U.S. designation F4F-4B but none served with US forces.

FM-1 = Wildcat V
Eastern Built F4F-4, MGs reduced to 4 and ammo increased. British standardized name to Wildcat about same time

FM-2 = Wildcat VI
Lighter version of F4F with better engine – heavily used on US and British escort carriers.

F6F-3 = Hellcat I
Initial version.

F6F-3N = ????
Night Fighter version

F6F-5 = Hellcat II
Slightly faster, lower wing loading.

F6F-5N = ????
Night Fighter version

F4U-1 = Corsair I/II
Corsair I = F4U-1, Corsair II = F4U-1A (I think??)

F4U-1D = Corsair IV
Corsair III similar from alternate U.S. manufactures (F3A, FG)

Notes:
Aircraft in base OOB (Scenario 15) indicated in bold.
Corsair IV is in the OOB but with stats that seem to equate to F4U-1, not F4U-1D
British Carrier Group usage in the Pacific appears about equal for Wildcat V/VI, Hellcat I/II, Corsair II/IV with many groups listing only base type (i.e. Wildcat, Hellcat, Corsair)

We should reserve two of the new spots for F8F and F8FN, putting them in the upgrade path behind F6F/F6FN

I think we need the Martlet for early 1942 deployment – could be named Martlet II or just Martlet. If the FM-1 variant is not worth including for U.S. the equivalent Wildcat V certainly isn’t for British and we can replace it with the Wildcat VI (both V and VI heavily used on British CVE in 1945).

Leaving out the F6F-3/Hellcat I is OK but we might consider renaming Hellcat II to just Hellcat.

Not so sure about Corsairs. If F4U-1/F4U-1D are divided for U.S., maybe should be for U.K. If added, should be Corsair II based on Eastern Fleet deployments. No need to consider alternate manufacturer designations.

Sea Hurricane: not sure what version we should use:
Sea Hurricane I: http://users.belgacom.net/aircraft1/avi ... .html#2822
Sea Hurricane II: http://users.belgacom.net/aircraft1/avi ... .html#1557
Main use in Eastern Fleet was by Indomitable, 880 Squadron, in 1942. These are listed as simply “Sea Hurricane” in 4/42 and 5/42 OOB, then “Sea Hurricane IB” in 8/42 (replaced by Seafire IIC as of 5/43).

Seafire: Both
Seafire IIC: http://users.belgacom.net/aircraft1/avi ... .html#1721
Seafire III: http://users.belgacom.net/aircraft1/avion1/40.html#1722
Used in Eastern Fleet. The version in the OOB appears to be a IIC, with availability of 6/42 (version III dates from 11/43). Should we switch to Seafire III??? Use both with upgrade??

Does anyone know if the British had a carrier-based night fighter???

Only other aircraft I've found that might be worth inclusion is the Barracuda II - a version of the Barracuda with radar. The TBF/Avenger I and TBM/Avenger II set is fine. The British made little use of U.S. Dive Bombers. Albacore would be a bit of a stretch.

On the other side, the Sea Gladiator can be removed and (in needed) the SB2U could be moved to a non-carrier slot.

[Tankerace]

To Help give a rough estimate on the Tbolts, how about this setup:

P-47C
P-47D-10 (Razorback)
P-47D-25 (Bubble)
P-47N
RAF/RAAF Thunderbolt I (Razorback)
RAF/RAAF Thunderbolt II (Bubble).


Thats 6 different planes, and should cover the main spectrume of types. The D-10 can also fill in for the D-22, and the D-25 the D-27. The P-47M, IIRC, was used only in the ETO to chase buzz bombs. Plus, the C and D-10 can share the same graphic... In a pinch so could the N and D-25.

[TheElf]

Given the limit on art slots, I can see a max of:

One US Bubbletop
One US RZRBK
One RAF/RAAF RZRBK
One RAF/RAAF Bubbletop

...for a total of 4 art files. That is my area of concern. In fact that is what is already in the Planetop BMP. Any extra P-47 Additions will have to timeshare their planetop, and planeside art appropriately

[Tankerace]

Well, already in the stock (unaltered) files are 2 US Tbolts, one of which SHOULD be a razorback. So that covers all 4 US T bolt versions. There is also a RAF/RAAF Tbolt II. The Thunderbolt Is will just have to make do with the P-47C/D-10 graphic.

[TheElf]

I already have the US Razorback done, and the RAF Bubbletop. The RAF Razorback and US Bubbletop are next.

The F4f4/FM-1 & 2/Martlet Combo is another area we can conserve Art files. As well as the F6F-3 & -5. Those carrier slots are too valuable. Really ino order to add all the new variants and totally new airframes we'll have to be much more conservative than anyone really wants to be, but that's the price you pay. Til we get a new BMP file with more slots.

[Tankerace]

Yep Yep Yep.

[Don Bowen]

I think the FM-1 Wildcat variant (British Wildcat V) is too insignificant for our limited slots. It was a standard Wildcat with a different manufacturer and two less MG (as weight compensation for additional ammo - which might just be a wash in combat effectiveness).

I think we need two British Wildcats: Martlet II in April, 42 and Wildcat VI (FM-2) later. They can share artwork if need be.

We can replace the existing Wildcat V with Wildcat VI, so I am talking about 1 carrier capable slot and (probably) no artwork slots.

Replacing Sea Gladiator with Sea Hurricane is also "slot free".

I vote for the F8F-1 and F8F-1N, both of which were coming into service as the war ended. The very low production of F8F-1N was due to cancellations at the end of the war.

Most other U.S. and British carrier aircraft fall into the "nice to have" grouping. We have plenty models of Wildcat and really won't gain much by expanding Hellcats (Hell - adding Hellcat I, F6F-3, F6F-3N would eat up half of the new carrier capable slots).

Variations of British made carrier aircraft are also "nice to haves". Albacore was an intended replacement for the Swordfish that was only slightly used in the Eastern/Pacific fleets. Two versions of Seafire is also getting rather fine. I'm not familiar with any other new British aircraft about to come on line at the end of the war - anyone??

Land based aircraft is not my forte (any pilot that takes more than 300 feet to land an aircraft should be ashamed). The P-43 is a nice twist and I've seen one scenario with very effective use of P-38E. Other than that, I'll get out of the way and let the real flyboys decide.

TheElf - Thank You!

[Tankerace]

LOL, My only push on LBA are the Tbolts. My first foray into computer gaming was in flight sims (I love you Jane's WW2 Fighters), and I quickly developed a fondness for the Tbolt.

I do agree though, in the realm of carrier capable a/c, lets limit the planes, i.e. I would suggest ripping out the F4F-3, and have the F4F-4 and FM-2. I mean, at least from the AARs I have seen, everyone upgrades the F4F-3s to -4s before any major combat (sans say, Wake Island). So, we could do this: Make the F4F-3 a USMC only plane, i.e. no carrier units with it, and then have the US CVAGs go from the F2A to the F4F-4. This lets us keep all our current USN/MC Wildcats, and gain a carrier capable slot for other duties.

Also, I vote we rip out the F6F-5N nightfighter. With the nightfighting but still unfixed, it will find only limited employment. That too would be another carrier capable slot.

Another thing we could do is drop the Avenger II torpedo bomber. Aside from only 1 mnvr point and a slight difference in height, the only real difference from the Avenger I is it carries a Mk XV 18in torpedo instead of the MkXII. That too would free up a valuable slot, and release another art slot for use elsewhere aswell.

Also, please, for the love of God (if it hasn't been done already), lets correct Shturmovik to Sturmovik. That drives me nuts every time I see it.

Another thing we could do (Although I am slightly hesitant) is combine the TBF and TBM avengers. Call it the TBF/M Avenger. Increase the build rate, to something between the 90 of the TBF and 200 of the TBM, and that frees up a carrier slot and an art slot.

Just some ideas to get the fire going.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

LOL, My only push on LBA are the Tbolts. My first foray into computer gaming was in flight sims (I love you Jane's WW2 Fighters), and I quickly developed a fondness for the Tbolt.

Could you please provide some production and deployment numbers for the Pacific Theater. Aside from knowing they served in the Pac I have little knowledge of their significance in the Theater. Particularly the -M and -N Models

I do agree though, in the realm of carrier capable a/c, lets limit the planes, i.e. I would suggest ripping out the F4F-3, and have the F4F-4 and FM-2. I mean, at least from the AARs I have seen, everyone upgrades the F4F-3s to -4s before any major combat (sans say, Wake Island). So, we could do this: Make the F4F-3 a USMC only plane, i.e. no carrier units with it, and then have the US CVAGs go from the F2A to the F4F-4. This lets us keep all our current USN/MC Wildcats, and gain a carrier capable slot for other duties.

This is a great idea. Must confess I was thinking along these same lines. I'll go one better. I don't plan on fielding the F2A from the decks of CVs either. What if we just started CV groups with incomplete F4F sqdns and gain ANOTHER CV slot. So the CV groups are in the process of changing over to the F4F-4 at the start of the game. Might be going too far, but we gain a CV slot...thoughts?

Also, I vote we rip out the F6F-5N nightfighter. With the nightfighting but still unfixed, it will find only limited employment. That too would be another carrier capable slot.

Has anyone seen a need in PBEM games to combat large night JAP raids? if NFing is really broke might be worth looking into. Also convinces me the F7F might need to be limited to land-based marine Squadrons.

Another thing we could do is drop the Avenger II torpedo bomber. Aside from only 1 mnvr point and a slight difference in height, the only real difference from the Avenger I is it carries a Mk XV 18in torpedo instead of the MkXII. That too would free up a valuable slot, and release another art slot for use elsewhere aswell.

Another thing we could do (Although I am slightly hesitant) is combine the TBF and TBM avengers. Call it the TBF/M Avenger. Increase the build rate, to something between the 90 of the TBF and 200 of the TBM, and that frees up a carrier slot and an art slot.

Sounds good. Can anyone offer a counter arguement to this idea?

Also, please, for the love of God (if it hasn't been done already), lets correct Shturmovik to Sturmovik. That drives me nuts every time I see it.

Shouldn't be a problem, but out of my hands. I do art[;)]

Just some ideas to get the fire going.

Good ideas. I would love to hear Lemurs take on this subject. What do you think Don? Ron?

[Tankerace]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

LOL, My only push on LBA are the Tbolts. My first foray into computer gaming was in flight sims (I love you Jane's WW2 Fighters), and I quickly developed a fondness for the Tbolt.

Could you please provide some production and deployment numbers for the Pacific Theater. Aside from knowing they served in the Pac I have little knowledge of their significance in the Theater. Particularly the -M and -N Models

I left my huge 500 page encyclopedia of Thunderbolts at my parents house (Just moved back into my dorms). It has the total production run of every model of Tbolt.

From what I have found online, 1667 P-47Ns were built at the Republic Farmingdale plant between Dec. 1944 and Dec. 1945, with another 149 at Evansville. This amounts to 1816 P-47Ns produced, out of the June 20 1944 order of 1900. No P-47Ns served in any theater than the Pacific, being designed primarily to escort B-29s from Iwo to Tokyo and back again.

P-47Cs began operating in the CBI and Southwest Pacific Theaters in 1943, and seem to have outnumbered P-51s. In addition, in 1944 and 1945, Thunderbolts (even newer bubble tops) began equiping nationalist Chinese squadrons.

Throughout the photos I have seen of late war units in the Pacific, about 3/4 of the planes they flew were razorbacks. It seems that the ETO had priority for the D-25 and D-27, with the MTO, PTO, and CBI using razorbacks.

The P-47M, of which only a handful were built, was never sent to te Pacific.

15,579 Thunderbolts were produced by December 1945 when production officially ceased.

Production specifications:

Type, number produced.

XP-47 0
XP-47A 0
XP-47B 1
P-47B 171
P-47C 602
P-47D-RE Blocks 1-22 (Farmingdale razorbacks) 3963
P-47D-RE Blocks 25-30 (Farmingdale Bubbles) 2546
P-47D-RA Blocks 2-23 (Evansville razorbacks) 2350
P-47D-RA Blocks 26-40 (Evansville bubbles) 3743
XP-47E 1
XP-47F 1
P-47G-CU (Curtiss built trainers) 354
XP-47H,J,K,L 1 each
XP-47M 3
P-47M 130
XP-47N 1
P-47N-RE (Farmingdale built P-47Ns) 1667
P-47N-RA (Evansville built P-47Ns) 149

Total run: 15,579 Thunderbolts.

Late in the war ('45) the P-51 once again began to overshadow the Jug, but from 1943-45 it began to outnumber P-38s. Many P-38 units (most notably in the 5th AF in New Guinea) had to convert to Jugs because there were to few Lightnings available. Because my huge P-47 book is away, I can't provide you with actual squadrons that used the Jug.

Hope this helps.