Matrix Games Forums

I found - investigating problem reports re an RAAF ground unit - that we had a poor model of the RAAF in WITP (as inherited - and dating all the way to stock in its present form). Essentially we had two command HQ - 91 and 92 Group - each of which was essentially duplicated as a support unit. They represented a gigantic unit - impossible for any group - and appeared late in 1942 and 1943 respectively. Other than that, RAAF had no actual HQ or support elements.

Now aircraft support elements also existed in base forces - RAN and RAAF - and possibly in other fixed base organizations. These do not make for a flexable force - and players wanting to take advantage of a number of additional bases we have added to the map would have to put US or other mobile support assets in them - when available in Australia.

We found that Australia went over to using a different organizational terminology during the war: the term Wing seems to have replaced Operational Group, since both are collections of squadrons and a wing is not a collection of groups. These groups were at first few in number and at times larger than the typical group (which is 3 squadrons - something that happened also in USAAF at times). So we adopted the Wing to create a sense of Aussie terminology (as distinct from RAF terminology - which seems to have retained Group). In all CW air forces, we eliminated duplicated units - and put the aircraft support elements directly into the HQ formation. We also made them all have small defensive elements of infantry and larger defensive elements of AAA and detection equipment. Groups (and Aussie Wings) have aircraft support squads for 80 machines (= 5 squadrons of 16). Not because a group always has 5 squadrons, but because it can control as many as 5 or 6. Except for RAF squadrons that start on the map, all such Groups/Wings ALSO have a small forward air station element, able to support one more squadron, with a tiny security element of infantry and MMG, and a detection squad. These units are meant to help mitigate the loss of vast numbers of air support squads. Both these HQ with aircraft support in numbers, and the small forward station units may move to any location - under player control.
Australia gets a 9th Air Wing, a 10th Patrol Air Wing, a 79th Air Wing and an 86th Air wing - plus the First Tactical Air Force. This latter is three times the size of a normal Wing and comes with a forward air station able to support yet another Wing worth of aircraft.

RNZAF is approximately an air Wing in its own right. By midwar it gets a EAB able to support 5 squadrons - a mobile unit that means New Zealand can control where it concentrates its air power defensively - or can move out offensively with its own air support. Before that it also gets a small forward air station unit - able to man a base which has no aircraft support - permitting a squadron (of 16) machines to operate.

This is semi-abstract modeling. We lack the slots to add all the Aussie Wings as such. The actual 1st Tactical Air Force had a significant number of wings - most of which were not quite as large as ours here. Our 1 TAF represents about 6 plus typical operational wings/groups - and is a good compromise because the Aussies can then concentrate offensive air power if they need to for later war operations. Before that the Aussies can operate from fixed base forces - and as time passes - moderate amounts in SE Australia, Northern Australia and Western Australia (each of which eventually gets a Wing). One Wing (86th) seems to appear late - it really seems to have been focused on air transport - and it can be used for any function a player might desire for concentrating air operations. Most Aussie Wings / Groups appear as part of the 1st TAF. [Note here the 10th Patrol Air Wing is not the same as the 10th Operational Group - which was the precursor of the 1st TAF - and then part of it]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I found - investigating problem reports re an RAAF ground unit - that we had a poor model of the RAAF in WITP (as inherited - and dating all the way to stock in its present form). Essentially we had two command HQ - 91 and 92 Group - each of which was essentially duplicated as a support unit. They represented a gigantic unit - impossible for any group - and appeared late in 1942 and 1943 respectively. Other than that, RAAF had no actual HQ or support elements.

No arguments there. Any resemblence to historical organisation is purely coincidental. (Above squadron level anyway) [:D]

A good reference if you can get a hold of it is:
"Units of the Royal Australian Air Force, A Concise History"
"Volume 1 - Introduction, Bases, Supporting Organisations"
Compiled by the RAAF Historical Section

Now aircraft support elements also existed in base forces - RAN and RAAF - and possibly in other fixed base organizations.

The designations, organisation and number of these units is nowhere near accurate. A lot were fixed, some were mobile and others are difficult to categorise as they were tailored to specific needs. (see reference above).

This link to the Australia at War site lists a lot of units based in Australia including Operational Base Units. These are more fully described in the reference above. You might find some info about them Official History Index (link below) page 510 (which will direct you to the text reference).

These do not make for a flexible force - and players wanting to take advantage of a number of additional bases we have added to the map would have to put US or other mobile support assets in them - when available in Australia.

Agree.

We found that Australia went over to using a different organizational terminology during the war: the term Wing seems to have replaced Operational Group, since both are collections of squadrons and a wing is not a collection of groups. These groups were at first few in number and at times larger than the typical group (which is 3 squadrons - something that happened also in USAAF at times). So we adopted the Wing to create a sense of Aussie terminology (as distinct from RAF terminology - which seems to have retained Group).

The RAAF in fact followed the British model closely. Confusion can come about when things were changed slightly to adapt to local conditions but the underlying model remained intact.

The unit heirarchy in the RAAF (and RAF) is three Squadron to a Wing and then three wings to a Group. The Commonwealth Group is a very different animal to an American Group. Wings (3 or so Squadrons of similar types) tended to be the common operational unit which was deployed later in the war.

Australia used Groups but could not often field large enough operational forces to apply their organisation in a consistant manner though No.9, No.10 and No.11 Groups were formed. These units appear to be geographic in nature with specific zones of operation with operational units assigned as required. For example, No.9 Group commanded all RAAF Squadrons in New Guinea in 1942/43 and was eventually redesignated 'Northern Command'.

1st TAF came about due to the need for support major land forces for the offensive operations in the South West Pacific area (remote from the Australian mainland). It was designated as a Tactical Air Force as it was to contain integrated support elements making units under it's control in excess to a normal RAAF Group. Also the title was more indicative of it's role as a 'Mobile Striking Force' and would differentiate it from an American Group of 4 squadrons. Initial organisation was one 'Attack' Wing (No.77), two 'Fighter' Wings (No.s 78 and 81) with one more to follow (No.79), two airfield construction Wings (No.s 61 and 62) together with their medical, stores, base and repair and servicing units. It eventually grew to over 18,000 men by 1945.

Ref: Official Histories – Volume II – Air War Against Japan, 1943–1945 pages 296-299.

In all CW air forces, we eliminated duplicated units - and put the aircraft support elements directly into the HQ formation. We also made them all have small defensive elements of infantry and larger defensive elements of AAA and detection equipment. Groups (and Aussie Wings) have aircraft support squads for 80 machines (= 5 squadrons of 16). Not because a group always has 5 squadrons, but because it can control as many as 5 or 6. Except for RAF squadrons that start on the map, all such Groups/Wings ALSO have a small forward air station element, able to support one more squadron, with a tiny security element of infantry and MMG, and a detection squad. These units are meant to help mitigate the loss of vast numbers of air support squads. Both these HQ with aircraft support in numbers, and the small forward station units may move to any location - under player control.
Australia gets a 9th Air Wing, a 10th Patrol Air Wing, a 79th Air Wing and an 86th Air wing - plus the First Tactical Air Force. This latter is three times the size of a normal Wing and comes with a forward air station able to support yet another Wing worth of aircraft.

RNZAF is approximately an air Wing in its own right. By midwar it gets a EAB able to support 5 squadrons - a mobile unit that means New Zealand can control where it concentrates its air power defensively - or can move out offensively with its own air support. Before that it also gets a small forward air station unit - able to man a base which has no aircraft support - permitting a squadron (of 16) machines to operate.

This is semi-abstract modeling. We lack the slots to add all the Aussie Wings as such. The actual 1st Tactical Air Force had a significant number of wings - most of which were not quite as large as ours here. Our 1 TAF represents about 6 plus typical operational wings/groups - and is a good compromise because the Aussies can then concentrate offensive air power if they need to for later war operations. Before that the Aussies can operate from fixed base forces - and as time passes - moderate amounts in SE Australia, Northern Australia and Western Australia (each of which eventually gets a Wing). One Wing (86th) seems to appear late - it really seems to have been focused on air transport - and it can be used for any function a player might desire for concentrating air operations. Most Aussie Wings / Groups appear as part of the 1st TAF. [Note here the 10th Patrol Air Wing is not the same as the 10th Operational Group - which was the precursor of the 1st TAF - and then part of it]

This sounds like a good approach. I like it.

BTW, No. 86 Wing was an attack unit and consisted of No.1 Squadron (with Mosquitos) and No.93 Squadron (with Beaufighters) and was assigned to the 1st TAF for the Borneo operations in March 1945.

I cannot find references to No.9 or No.10 Wing. Are you sure of your references on this one? Go to page 508 of the index to the Official History link above and it will give you the list of the Wings established by the RAAF.

If it's not to much to ask, could you use the correct designations of RAAF units. The contempoary designation is 'Number 1 Squadron RAAF' and 'Number 86 Wing RAAF' not the 86th Wing (or Air Wing) with the prefix often being abbreviated to No. The only exception to this is the First TAF.

I was a bit hesitant to reply to this as though I have a bit of knowledge of the subject, I don't have the time to follow it up properly. Still I hope you found these snippets useful.

Did anybody ever see these online books??

http://www.diggerhistory2.info/

ORIGINAL: Reg

If it's not to much to ask, could you use the correct designations of RAAF units. The contempoary designation is 'Number 1 Squadron RAAF' and 'Number 86 Wing RAAF' not the 86th Wing (or Air Wing) with the prefix often being abbreviated to No. The only exception to this is the First TAF.

I was a bit hesitant to reply to this as though I have a bit of knowledge of the subject, I don't have the time to follow it up properly. Still I hope you found these snippets useful.

In RHS we always follow the Empire name scheme for air units: thus you have the RAAF No. 120 Squadron. It is similar in RCAF, RAF, IAF and RNZAF (seems the Indian AF isn't Royal!) But in the HQ and base units we have problems with this - purely technical problems of field length - so we don't use it. If the name fields had more characters we would do so. I always use the "native" language - or a literal translation - whenever possible - because it is delightful chrome and helps players get the "flavor" of the units - which otherwise seem very similar.

9 and 10 Groups are from stock and CHS - and presumed to be correct. I seem not to have understood the British meaning of "group" as different from the US one - assuming "English is English" can be invalid! I never understood a "group captain" to be some sort of general - figuring he was the superior of a "squadron leader." So I may have misnamed these units. The 10th Operational Group is actually present now as part of 1st TAF - which it eventually became. The 10th Wing presented in the current release is an entirely different unit - the 10th Patrol Wing - formed out West near Darwin. Actually I could not find a 9th Operational Group as such either - but assumed CHS and stock must be right - so I made it an alternate name for the Central Command area - which I could show formed up early.

Some material I read implies that "Northern Command" was the original designation - similar to Central Command - and that 10th Operational Group was a later/alternate designation for the same thing. In its original conception this was responsible for defense of Darwin and Northern Australia - only later moving to New Guinea for offensive operations.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

In RHS we always follow the Empire name scheme for air units: thus you have the RAAF No. 120 Squadron. It is similar in RCAF, RAF, IAF and RNZAF (seems the Indian AF isn't Royal!) But in the HQ and base units we have problems with this - purely technical problems of field length - so we don't use it. If the name fields had more characters we would do so. I always use the "native" language - or a literal translation - whenever possible - because it is delightful chrome and helps players get the "flavor" of the units - which otherwise seem very similar.

'Delightful chrome'. That is a very appropriate term and I totally agree. If I'm going to be staring at the screen for the next 700 turns, the least I would expect is that the unit names are correct. [:D] Just ask Hard Sarge on the 'Bombing the Reich' forum about the problem as he's running into exactly this issue....

9 and 10 Groups are from stock and CHS - and presumed to be correct. I seem not to have understood the British meaning of "group" as different from the US one - assuming "English is English" can be invalid! I never understood a "group captain" to be some sort of general - figuring he was the superior of a "squadron leader." So I may have misnamed these units. The 10th Operational Group is actually present now as part of 1st TAF - which it eventually became. The 10th Wing presented in the current release is an entirely different unit - the 10th Patrol Wing - formed out West near Darwin. Actually I could not find a 9th Operational Group as such either - but assumed CHS and stock must be right - so I made it an alternate name for the Central Command area - which I could show formed up early.

The RAAF upper level unit organisation was constantly changing for political and personality reasons as well as adapting to the changing strategic situation and the division of responsibilities with USAAF forces. A further complication was the presence of the Generals Macarthur and Kenny who both imposed their influence on the conduct of RAAF affairs. Reading the histories (see the references below) you can see that it became an endless battle of wills between between the War Cabinet (Curtin), the Air Board (Drakeford), Chief of Air Staff (Jones), the RAAF Command (Bostock), the US Generals, the South Pacific geography and occasionally the Japanese had some inflence as well.

I would be hard pressed to describe all the changes to the RAAF organisation over this period, let alone trying to model it with any degree of accuracy. El Sid, I wish you well in the endeavor.

For your information I have attached brief(??) extracts of the Group histories so you can see an outline of their development. (Squadron histories are easy to find but higher units are a bit harder to come by...)

A potted history of No.9 (Operational) Group

Official Histories - Volume I - Royal Australian Air Force, 1939-1942 page 588.

The exception among the R.A.A.F. operational units to come under the control of R.A.A.F. Command were, as mentioned, all Australian operational air units serving in New Guinea. These units, originally controlled from North-Eastern Area Headquarters, had already been brought within the control of a R.A.A.F. group-No. 9 Operational Group-which had been formed on 1st September 1942 to provide what in effect was a mobile offensive force. Under the strong leadership of Group Captain Garing, its first commanding officer, the group quickly achieved cohesion among the R.A.A.F's operational squadrons, forming them into an effective striking force at the most critical combat period in the New Guinea campaign. Initially the group came under the operational control of Allied Air Forces Headquarters, a control soon to be exercised by Whitehead as Commander of Advanced Echelon, Fifth Air Force.

Official Histories - Volume I - Royal Australian Air Force, 1939-1942 page 633.

At Port Moresby the R.A.A.F's No. 9 Operational Group had been working at full pressure during these operations and in close harmony with Whitehead's Advance Echelon of the Fifth Air Force. As Garing saw
the group's purpose it was that of a mobile task force for service with the forward elements of the main Allied forces-a role for which he, as commander, was admirably suited. In organisation, as he saw it, the immediate objective was a seven-squadron formation. At the end of October 1942 he had under his command only four of these units- a torpedo-bomber unit (No . 100 Beaufort Squadron), a long-range fighter unit (No. 30 Squadron), an attack bomber, or, as the R.A.A.F. termed it, "intruder" unit-No. 22 (Boston) Squadron only then moving in
from the mainland-and a general reconnaissance unit-No . 6 (Hudson) Squadron which had moved from Horn Island that month. The other three squadrons Garing considered necessary to give his force tactical balance were a dive bomber unit, and two escort fighter squadrons, one for medium-altitude and one for high-altitude operations.

Official Histories - Volume II - Air War Against Japan, 1943-1945 page 24.

When formed in 1942, No. 9 Group had only operational control of the squadrons in New Guinea, administrative control being exercised by North-Eastern Area, with headquarters at Townsville, Queensland. However, on 1st January 1943, No . 9 Group became a separate command and Hewitt had complete operational and administrative control of it. In February 1943, Air Force Headquarters issued orders setting up two subordinate wing headquarters within the group: No. 71 at Milne Bay and No. 73 at Port Moresby.

Official Histories - Volume II - Air War Against Japan, 1943-1945 page 198.

Concurrently with the withdrawal of No. 10 Group from Nadzab, Kenney was reorganising areas of responsibility . On 26th February he had issued instructions that by 1st March, Bostock's command was to take over control of No. 9 Operational Group, but not its tactical units (except one Beaufort squadron). At the same time he extended the responsibility of R.A.A.F. Command to include the Port Moresby-Milne Bay areas, for which, up to then, the Fifth Air Force had been responsible. This was an extension of the area system of command prevailing on the mainland of Australia. Bostock was to take over anti-submarine patrol and passive defence measures and set up at Port Moresby operational training facilities for R.A.A.F. crews who were to join operational squadrons in the South-West Pacific Area.
After this reorganisation, Bostock, on 2nd March, informed Air Force Headquarters that he desired the title of No. 9 Group changed to "Northern Area" and the title of No. 10 Group changed to "Tactical Air Force, R.A.A.F. ". He also proposed "to seek the approval of the Commander, Allied Air Forces, for the transfer of the maximum number of squadrons from the defensive areas to the Tactical Air Force". The effect of this policy would be to reduce No. 9 Group to a line of communication are a similar to those in Australia, and build up No. 10 Group to a large mobile tactical force.

A potted history of No.10 (Operational) Group

Official Histories - Volume II - Air War Against Japan, 1943-1945 page 182.

The two R.A.A.F. organisations which controlled nearly all the experienced squadrons in contact with the enemy were North-Western Area and No. 9 Group. At the end of 1943 the North-Western Area force was committed to the dual task of defending northern Australia and aiding New Guinea operations by attacking the Japanese rear and flank. Earlier the R.A.A.F. had intended that No. 9 Group should be a mobile force capable of rapid movement, but in fact it was not. It had become a standard area force, similar to those of other R.A.A.F. areas on the mainland, and its mobility was limited. Air Vice-Marshal Bostock proposed that its name be changed to "Northern Area" so that its function would be better understood.
In September 1943 General Kenney asked Bostock to provide him with a mobile Australian force . By that time the R.A.A.F. had received more than 100 Vultee Vengeance dive bombers . It was therefore decided that the new force would consist of a dive bomber wing and a fighter wing, with their servicing and other necessary units. The fighters would protect the dive bombers during their attack missions. The group was to be ready for action at the end of 1943, and would probably be assigned to the New Britain area.
.
.
On 13th November Air Force Headquarters issued orders creating the new formation, which was to be known as No. 10 (Operational) Group. It was assigned as a subordinate force within No. 9 (Operational) Group. The units placed under the new group were:

No. 10 (Operational) Group Headquarters (Group Captain Scherger)
No. 13 Signals Unit.
No. 25 Stores Unit.
No. 11 R.A.A.F. Postal Unit.
No. 10 Replenishing Centre.
No. 7 Transport and Movements Office.
No. 2 Malaria Control Unit.
No. 77 Wing Headquarters (Wing Commander Fyfe)
No. 21 Dive Bomber Squadron.
No. 23 Dive Bomber Squadron.
No. 24 Dive Bomber Squadron.
No. 47 Operational Base Unit.
No. 11 Repair and Salvage Unit.
No. 23 Medical Clearing Station.
No. 78 Wing Headquarters (Wing Commander Brookes)
No. 80 Fighter Squadron.
No. 452 Fighter Squadron.
No. 457 Fighter Squadron.
No. 111 Fighter Sector Headquarters.
No. 48 Operational Base Unit.
No. 22 Repair and Salvage Unit.
No. 24 Medical Clearing Station.

Some of these units were not yet in existence and had to be formed and ready for movement by 1st December. Shipping was asked for to transport the group from Brisbane on 1st December. Preparing the group within five weeks posed a difficult problem and in spite of great efforts the departure from Australia had to be postponed until 1st January 1944.

See the final entry for No.9 Group for the next stage of No.10 Group's evolution.
(Note the embedded Operational Base Units in the Wings to support their mobile role).

No.11 (Operational) Group
Formed out of elements of Tactical Air Force and Northern Command in July 1945 on Morotai, it was too late to take over it's responsibilities before the war ended. The 1st TAF had started to 'bog down' and this organisation was intended to free the force of it's 'administrative tail' and carry out garrison tasks. The initial sphere of influence was to include Dutch territory, British North Borneo and Sarawak.

BTW, I still can't find any info on No.10 Wing. I have No.76 Wing conducting operations with No.s 20, 42 and 43 Squadron minelaying Cats so if you can give me the Squadrons in No.10 Wing, it might help me place it. (I still have No.11 Squadron unattached to a Wing so that might be it).

Keep it up, you're doing a great job.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Did anybody ever see these online books??

http://www.diggerhistory2.info/

I've heard about these beauties before. A snapshot of real history unblemished by contempory thinking. (The old I was there magazines). I'm glad someone has put them on line.

Apparently they are very collectable and difficult to get as a full set. So if you have a few of these hidden under your bed gathering dust, just let me know and I'll take them away for you..... [:D]

We cannot list 11 Group - as it formed from 1 TAF - so it would duplicate. For the same reason we don't list 10 group - because 1 TAF formed from it. But I have renamed 9 group as a group vice a wing - or co/named it with Central Command.