PV-1 Ventura

[DuckofTindalos]

That's subchaser's UV work, as far as I can see. Go to Spooky's, click on "UV section", then "Files", scroll down to "Art", and you'll find it somewhere in there...

[spence]

Japanese air bases in the Marshall Islands. The targets were on the atolls of Milli, Maloelap, Wotje, Kwajalein and Jaluit, which ranged from 300 to 800 miles north of Tarawa and on Nauru and Ocean (Banaba) Islands, southwest of Tarawa

Got this on a PV-1 website which details the operations of one of the squadrons. The 800 mile figure for "routine" bombing missions would be 13-14 hexes, same as B-17/B-24 seemingly. I know that PV-1s were used as "pathfinders" for B-24 raids on the Kuriles because they carried an excellent surface search radar.

My father flew these birds in WWII. He said that they were a "hot handling" plane landing and taking off which put off some pilots who liked or were used to a nice docile plane (like the Hudson) in those circumstances but that the hotness was a pure joy to have when one was manuevering and/or making an attack.

My father mostly flew ASW patrols of 6-7 hours duration in the South Atlantic. Said he carried 6 depth bombs and 8 x 5" rockets for these patrols (in 1944-45). His plane, like most apparently, at the end of the war, had the "chin-pack" of 3 extra .50 cal MGs.

[el cid again]

So, what did the range for the Ventura end up being in RHS?
In hexes.

164 mph x 607 minutes = 99548 / 3600 = 27.6 (that is, 27 hexes, almost 28 hexes, transfer range /3 = 9 hexes extended range = 6 hexes normal range). It does NOT have drop tanks and it DOES have a torpedo and depth charges for normal range missions (because it is a patrol bomber).
It only changes to bombs for certain missions (e.g. attacks on a land target or extended range missions when it cannot carry a heavy load).

[el cid again]

I am no expert on aircraft, but this thread has prompted me to look at the performance of the Ventura. From what I have read about the missions it performed, I think that its range should be increased from its current values, to something more like 29/7/9 max/extended/normal.

Which puts Andrew's calculations exactly in sync with my calculations and with those Black Mamba originally advocated - but which I disputed for a while until she overwhelmed me with sources - and eventually I figured out why some reference materials seem to conflict with others? This is an aircraft for which a great variety of configurations and missions existed, and what was "normal" is somewhat subject to interpretation. My conclusions were, however, identical with Andrew's present ones.

[el cid again]

Is the problem that the standard PV-1 was capable of the ranges as shown by the game.

But when lumping around 2 x 115 gal Drop tanks and another 250? gal tank in the bomb bay it had far better range (and far lesser bomb load)

Try fitting the extra fuel and see whether the range then fits your understanding of the range.

The problem is that the game is only electrons. Software believes whatever we tell it - lies or truth. So many planes in the game have quite fictional ranges - often double or more - or far less - than reality. There is simply NO way to tell INSIDE the game if the data is valid or not? I am aware of the 250 gallon internal tank - but not of drop tanks. IF there were wet hard points, I suppose drop tanks could have been carried. It may be that the depth charges were carried on external hard points - and if wet the could have been exchanged for drop tanks. Regardless, I think it is wrong to describe such an aircraft as "non-standard" - for it is much more likely all aircraft were similarly fitted. Drop tanks do not really change very much: if they are carried in addition to weapons they change nothing at all really in WITP terms: our game NEVER permits ANY bomber to carry its full rated load in bombs - even though at short ranges all could and did just that. And in WITP terms drop tanks NEVER are used at normal range - ONLY at extended range (or for transfer missions). They really matter for recon planes and fighters attempting long range escort or sweep missions - but they have no meaning for bombers at all.
Our settings of cruising speed and endurance determine range - period - and drop tanks actually change them - but we have to then redefine the endurance backwards - until the result is the same. To do that I have a special test bed - the only one I know of - and it is a bit of work to figure out. Not worth it for a bomber - even if one existed that actually carried them. It might matter logistically - IF drop tanks are treated as ordnance and consume extra supplies - something I am not sure about? But it would NOT change the stated range one hex - or even one mile.

[el cid again]

Got this on a PV-1 website which details the operations of one of the squadrons. The 800 mile figure for "routine" bombing missions would be 13-14 hexes, same as B-17/B-24 seemingly. I know that PV-1s were used as "pathfinders" for B-24 raids on the Kuriles because they carried an excellent surface search radar.

And, indeed, in RHS the PV-1 carries ASV Radar. This is because of its value for patrol missions. One of the first planes to do so standard. [Many heavy bombers had a few fitted with special electronics - but not many outfitted the entire fleet - the PV role caused an exception]

Note also that our interpretation of the data does NOT permit these real missions: 9 hexes = 540 miles - nothing like 800 miles. I am sure the data above is correct - but not germane in terms of the definitions in play here. We get 1/3 of transfer range as extended range for all planes - even if it isn't the real extended range.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Is the problem that the standard PV-1 was capable of the ranges as shown by the game.

But when lumping around 2 x 115 gal Drop tanks and another 250? gal tank in the bomb bay it had far better range (and far lesser bomb load)

Try fitting the extra fuel and see whether the range then fits your understanding of the range.

The problem is that the game is only electrons. Software believes whatever we tell it - lies or truth. So many planes in the game have quite fictional ranges - often double or more - or far less - than reality. There is simply NO way to tell INSIDE the game if the data is valid or not? I am aware of the 250 gallon internal tank - but not of drop tanks. IF there were wet hard points, I suppose drop tanks could have been carried. It may be that the depth charges were carried on external hard points - and if wet the could have been exchanged for drop tanks. Regardless, I think it is wrong to describe such an aircraft as "non-standard" - for it is much more likely all aircraft were similarly fitted. Drop tanks do not really change very much: if they are carried in addition to weapons they change nothing at all really in WITP terms: our game NEVER permits ANY bomber to carry its full rated load in bombs - even though at short ranges all could and did just that. And in WITP terms drop tanks NEVER are used at normal range - ONLY at extended range (or for transfer missions). They really matter for recon planes and fighters attempting long range escort or sweep missions - but they have no meaning for bombers at all.
Our settings of cruising speed and endurance determine range - period - and drop tanks actually change them - but we have to then redefine the endurance backwards - until the result is the same. To do that I have a special test bed - the only one I know of - and it is a bit of work to figure out. Not worth it for a bomber - even if one existed that actually carried them. It might matter logistically - IF drop tanks are treated as ordnance and consume extra supplies - something I am not sure about? But it would NOT change the stated range one hex - or even one mile.

What are you trying to say, in as few words as possible.

True or False.

If I allocate 2 x 115gal tanks to a Standard PV-1 it will not extend the range (In WITP)?

This extends the extended range?

If I select a target at max range the aircraft will carry whatever boblaod WITP shows less the "weight" of the drop tank?

PS Has anyone fitted saddle tanks to any Lancasters they have added in their mods??

[el cid again]

What are you trying to say, in as few words as possible.

True or False.

If I allocate 2 x 115gal tanks to a Standard PV-1 it will not extend the range (In WITP)?

IF the modder properly calculates the endurance value for the actual range of the plane, FALSE. That range does not change - you just enter a reduced endurance value to compensate for the effect of the tanks.

This extends the extended range?

FALSE. What happens is:

1) At normal range you carry normal weapons load and NO drop tanks;

2) At extended range you carry drop tanks and reduced weapons - or even no weapons. This latter effect occurs IF the weight of the drop tanks EQUALS max load of the aircraft. There is nothing left for weapons - so you get none - something common with fighters.


If I select a target at max range the aircraft will carry whatever boblaod WITP shows less the "weight" of the drop tank?

TRUE

PS Has anyone fitted saddle tanks to any Lancasters they have added in their mods??

As far as I know, I am the first to systematically use drop tanks - which were in the stock database. As far as I know, I have the only test bed allowing one to figure out what range you get for any given drop tank/plane combination. As far as I know, no bomber of any sort has ever been tried with drop tanks. But what people have done privately is unlimited in potential - and there is no reason I would know of something not widely advertised.

[spence]

Note also that our interpretation of the data does NOT permit these real missions: 9 hexes = 540 miles - nothing like 800 miles. I am sure the data above is correct - but not germane in terms of the definitions in play here. We get 1/3 of transfer range as extended range for all planes - even if it isn't the real extended range.

I guess because my father flew this thing I have a personal interest in it but if you count the hexes on the stock map Attu to Paramushiro is 10 hexes and raids by
PV-1s on islands in the Kuriles were not some exceptional kind of mission but more or less routine.

[DuckofTindalos]

Amazing that those missions became routine, given the crap weather up there...

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: spence

Note also that our interpretation of the data does NOT permit these real missions: 9 hexes = 540 miles - nothing like 800 miles. I am sure the data above is correct - but not germane in terms of the definitions in play here. We get 1/3 of transfer range as extended range for all planes - even if it isn't the real extended range.

I guess because my father flew this thing I have a personal interest in it but if you count the hexes on the stock map Attu to Paramushiro is 10 hexes and raids by
PV-1s on islands in the Kuriles were not some exceptional kind of mission but more or less routine.

While researching the PV-1 I found the info on missions to the Kuriles as well, but I was reluctant to increase its range that much because I was not sure how repesentative those missions were of the "normal" usage of the aircraft. In other words, did they modify the aircraft so that it could perform those missions, or was that range within its normal capability? Also, the current increase is so big that I worried about boosting the range even further.

As El Cid mentions, the game calcualtes mission ranges from the ferry range, and I also based the new Ventura stats using the quoted ferry ranges. This makes its extended range just too short to allow it to fly from Attu to the Kuriles, but if this was not an exceptional mission then I am prepared to bump up the range a little more.

Andrew

[spence]

Forgot the name I assigned this picture...hoping it is the membership card of a VPB-135 Ensign in the "Empire Express'. VPB-135 (or VB-135 depending on date) flew bombing and recon from Attu to Paramushiro as its principle mission. (Also VB-131, VB-136 and VB-139). It appears the Ensign flew 12 missions to Japan.

A lot of good stuff on any USN Patrol type plane/squadron at VP Navy.com

[spence]

OOPS - that is a trackline for one of the bombing missions, notable perhaps in that the PVs are approaching Paramushiro from the West....and thus had sufficient gas for a bit of finesse in making their attack.
Here's the card I think

[spence]

There's a bunch of documentation for the attack for which I provided the track map. The bombload of one of the PVs is noted.

[Ron Saueracker]

interesting stuff there

[Alhazred]

Here is the link to an interesting article on the Ventura, by a member of VB-142. According to him (and he is biased of course), the plane was the best thing since sliced bread.

http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/v ... tura_1.asp

[spence]

It sure was a d@mn sight better than the game stats it has.

There's a Signal Publications booklet on the PV (PV-1 Ventura/PV-2 Harpoon). They never actually carried a torpedo on an operational mission (though they did prove the capability in tests) so the Betty and Nell fans shouldn't worry.

[el cid again]

I guess because my father flew this thing I have a personal interest in it but if you count the hexes on the stock map Attu to Paramushiro is 10 hexes and raids by
PV-1s on islands in the Kuriles were not some exceptional kind of mission but more or less routine.

You cannot tell distances on the map by counting hexes. The map is full of errors - sorry to say. It is not possible to do a flat map of a sphere without errors! [I want a spherical projection - but we ain't got there yet].
Andrew's map is accurate ON THE AVERAGE - NOT point to point in all cases. Big difference. No specific point can be used to calibrate a plane being "right" - exception: there are a number of points where the map is perfect - they can be so used.

[el cid again]

Amazing that those missions became routine, given the crap weather up there...

Something you learn if you live in Alaska:

people who do NOT live in Alaska "know" many things about Alaska which are generally false

We all have amazing stories - about people who think we do not use US currency - are not US citizens - or that the weather is fill in the blank:

1) we live in igloos ( we never see igloos - and they could not exist anywhere to live in - they were temporary shelters in certain weather in certain places - and no more)

2) there is perpetual dark or daylight ( below the arctic circle, utter nonsense - above it - you get at least ONE DAY per year of both - not perpetual)

3) there is snow everywhere (some places in Alaska have NO snow most years - including in the Aleutians)

4) the weather is awful - it can be - but it is nothing like Japan for bombing (85% of the time Japan is socked in) -

Alaska is a vast area - not only 1/5 of US land mass - but spread over a LARGER area than the Continental USA - farther east to west than from San Francisco to New York - it used to have 5 time zones - and it has 75% of US coastline. Weather varies vastly over this region - and it is not possible to make ANY statement that is generally true.

[akdreemer]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I guess because my father flew this thing I have a personal interest in it but if you count the hexes on the stock map Attu to Paramushiro is 10 hexes and raids by
PV-1s on islands in the Kuriles were not some exceptional kind of mission but more or less routine.

You cannot tell distances on the map by counting hexes. The map is full of errors - sorry to say. It is not possible to do a flat map of a sphere without errors! [I want a spherical projection - but we ain't got there yet].
Andrew's map is accurate ON THE AVERAGE - NOT point to point in all cases. Big difference. No specific point can be used to calibrate a plane being "right" - exception: there are a number of points where the map is perfect - they can be so used.

That is as it may be, however, there are time when we need to "bite" the bullet and restore historical reality if at all possible.