x.7851 aircraft change summary

[el cid again]

Since the problem being addressed was the sum of Allied on map factory production and Allied off map "replacement" production, the review focused on Allied plane types. Since the production on the map is concentrated on the USA, Canada and Australia, the review focused on Aussie and US plane types. [There is one Allied aircraft plant on the map in India - owned by the former China Aircraft Corporation - it starts with 100 kits for Hawks - and it still exists - as Hindustan Aircraft - still making military fighter type aircraft]. Since some inconsistencies were found, a more general review of Allied monthly plane rates was also done. These reviews resulted in changes of all sorts, increases, decreases, adding plants, deleting plants and moving plants. They also found a small amount of eratta, and it was corrected. The biggest example is the P-80 Shooting Star - which lost maneuverability but gained endurance ratings - using the revised RHS scales.

A set of working rules was established: the normal (CVO/BBO) case is 25% of US aircraft are sent to PTO (because, in spite of the nominal 15% resource allocation, that is closer to the average case); in such cases EOS was given half again as many, and EEO twice as many. In some cases, aircraft were divided by 50% - because of priority for them in PTO - and in this case EOS got 125% of that base value - while EEO got 150% of it. In still other cases, ALL aircraft went to PTO - and in such a case CVO/BBO = EOS = EEO. Commonwealth rules were different: 100% of Australian production remains PTO, but only 16 2/3 % of other Commonwealth production goes to PTO. The overall impact of these rules being applied generally is that there is an increasing divergence between "strictly historical" scenarios and the EOS/AIO case, and the (not yet out) EEO case: the latter are presumed to allocate differently because of indications there is a greater threat in PTO. We adopted the proposal to use 50% as the base case for EEO, except where it already was 50%, in which case we made it increase to 75%. We then split the difference for EOS/AIO. Another impact is that these are somewhat different than previous rules, which considered the large number of aircraft not sent to ANY forward area: we ignore that here so the absolute number of aircraft available is somewhat larger in enough cases that the total quantity of Allied aircraft is higher in every month. Nevertheless, it is not high enough early in the war, and until mid-1943 it is something of a horserace in terms of getting enough planes into all the units that want them, and most pools are not filling to the point they can never be drained (which happens increasingly in 1944 and 1945). Some effort was made to sunset production of types that were not produced for the whole war, and which will certainly not be wanted in the later period.

AI vs AI testing indicates the Japanese still have an initial advantage in air combat, but it is not as great as it was - and it turns around sooner. When is a function of luck - it is usually in 1943 - but it can be in 1942. It appears we may have better relative ranking between aircraft - and that what matters is not just one thing - but maneuverability, firepower, durability, roc and speed all contribute (not all in all missions) to the relative value of an aircraft. In other words, it appears the engine is more sound at its root than we might have suspected - and it was masked by inconsistent ratings of different aircraft.

[Ian R]

Sid,
 
do the Australian factories change to P51D/Lancaster (and Mosquito) production in early 1946?
 
Ian

[el cid again]

No - but note there is no 1946 in RHS. Production ends for everything except aircraft at the end of September, 1945. The game itself is forced to end on 1 January 1946, and it is recommended it end sooner: 1 Sept if atom bombs are used or 1 November if they are not used (but players are not forced to stop on either date: they ARE forced to stop on 1 January 1946). This freed vast numbers of slots of all types - and allows RHS to be rich in things that actually have a chance to be used. Even late war stuff should have a few months to be used in most instances. The game engine has severe problems playing after late 1943 - particularly as AI - and it is difficult to get a game even to the end of 1945, never mind 1946. And we needed slots - so we combined these practical considerations with the USSBS conclusions - that the war was not going to last into 1946 in any case - even without atom bombs or invasion of Japanese home islands - and say "if the Allies do not win by the end of 1945, they have lost." I don't actually think victory is entirely a yes no computer function - meaning I don't think that it is always indicated clearly by victory points or any other measure - and I am content if each side comes to its own (and presumably more complicated than yes no) conclusions. IMHO if Japan has a viable autarky - a functioning economy - when the game ends - it has won a strategic victory. This is something that should almost never happen. If it ever happens, regardless of how or why, we should enter the game in some sort of RHS Hall of Fame record. On the other hand, if the Allies can shut down the economy of Japan, sink all its carriers, and have recovered most of the SRA, all without phyrric losses of their own, it would pretty clearly be the reverse case.

[Ian R]

[font="times new roman"]More to the point, then some of the RAAF squadrons should pugrade to P51Ds starting in mid 1945. . In 1944, 100 P-51Ds were shipped from the US in kit form to inaugurate production at CAC, 80 were put together, 20 kept for spares.[/font]
[font="times new roman"][/font] 
17 Mustangs reached the front line squadrons of the 1st Tactical Airforce  by the time World War II ended in August 1945, but more were coming:
[font="times new roman"][/font] 
86 Sqn (commencing June 1945), 84 Sqn (reduced to cadre May 1945 pending re-equipment with Mustangs), then 77 and 78 Sqns. The first two had been withdrawn to Australia to re-equip, the latter two were operating with 1st TAF in Kittyhawks at the war's end.

[el cid again]

Well - we do have all four squadrons. But none upgrade to Mustangs. There is no Commonwealth Mustang in non US colors in RHS (or any other version of WITP as far as I know). We could assign them planes in US markings I suppose.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Sid,

do the Australian factories change to P51D/Lancaster (and Mosquito) production in early 1946?

Ian

Adding the P-51D upgrade would work best by using a separate RAAF Mustang, which would require use of an aircraft slot. Otherwise the RAAF squadrons might start upgrading as soon as there are enough P-51Ds in the pool. The aircraft has an arrival date of 9/44 (in CHS).

What squadrons were going to use the Lancaster?

Andrew

[Ian R]

Sid/Andrew,
 
I'll get out Gavin Long's book this evening and look at this more closely, but off the cuff:
 
1. Engine production (or most of it) was switched form Wasp radials to US pattern Merlins. The US version of the Merlin was marginally different in component sizes to the original Rolls Royce, and the required precision tools were more readily avialable from the US. The Hercules powered Beaufighter and Wasp powered Boomerang were discontinued.
 
2. The Mustang was not the UK version, it was the P51D, starting with the 80 kits and then a series of complete manufacture contracts. it was to be built by CAC at Fisherman's bend.
 
3. The Packard Merlins were also used to power the Australian built Mosquitoes, and eventually the Lancaster (which became the Lincoln post war)
 
4. The grand plan was to have three types - P51D, Mosquito, Lancaster, all powered by Packard Merlins, ultimately replace all the diverse types in use in the fighter, light and heavy bomber units.
 
5. The Lancaster project didn't produce before 1946, but was maintained post war to develop a multi-engine manufacturing capability.
 
 
 
 

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Sid,

do the Australian factories change to P51D/Lancaster (and Mosquito) production in early 1946?

Ian

Adding the P-51D upgrade would work best by using a separate RAAF Mustang, which would require use of an aircraft slot. Otherwise the RAAF squadrons might start upgrading as soon as there are enough P-51Ds in the pool. The aircraft has an arrival date of 9/44 (in CHS).

What squadrons were going to use the Lancaster?

Andrew

The P-51D also arrives on 9/44 in RHS - but not by inheritence. We have more P-51s, researched all of them, and concluded CHS data was correct for PTO operations. We could give up one of three P-51s in US colors for one in Aussie colors - but it is hard to justify that - because of the great change between P-51A - P-51B and P-51D. We have three other P-51s however - and maybe we don't need them all: F-6A, F-6D (recon) and A-36 (attack)? But that means we would have to change the air art packages.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Sid/Andrew,

I'll get out Gavin Long's book this evening and look at this more closely, but off the cuff:

1. Engine production (or most of it) was switched form Wasp radials to US pattern Merlins. The US version of the Merlin was marginally different in component sizes to the original Rolls Royce, and the required precision tools were more readily avialable from the US. The Hercules powered Beaufighter and Wasp powered Boomerang were discontinued.

2. The Mustang was not the UK version, it was the P51D, starting with the 80 kits and then a series of complete manufacture contracts. it was to be built by CAC at Fisherman's bend.

3. The Packard Merlins were also used to power the Australian built Mosquitoes, and eventually the Lancaster (which became the Lincoln post war)

4. The grand plan was to have three types - P51D, Mosquito, Lancaster, all powered by Packard Merlins, ultimately replace all the diverse types in use in the fighter, light and heavy bomber units.

5. The Lancaster project didn't produce before 1946, but was maintained post war to develop a multi-engine manufacturing capability.

When - and where - were Mosquito's produced? And which? And how many?

We don't really need the F-6D - no unit uses it or upgrades to it (except optionally). Only one unit upgrades to the F-6A - 82nd Tactical Recon - and only one other unit logically might - 110th Tactical Recon. F-6D could be an Aussie P-51D.

[m10bob]

I'm also for dumping the F 6 if one needs brought in.
For art'sake, we might even consider a "generic" planeside on certain planes?

[Ian R]

[font="times new roman"]Sid:[/font]
 
There were three main production facilities (and many component subcontractors):
 
Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation, ("CAC") privately owned, with factories at Fisherman's Bend in Melbourne, and at Lidcombe in Sydney which was mainly for
engine production, initially of Twin Wasp engines. CAC built Wirraways and Boomerangs, then Mustangs.
 
DeHavilland ("DH") at Bankstown in Sydney, also a private corporation. DH built Tigermoth basic trainers, DH 84 Dragons (used as multi engine and aircrew trainers), and later Mosquitos (FBVI with Packard Merlins).
 
The Aircraft Production Section of the Government supply Department ("DAP") who set up shop in among other places some commandeered railway workshops at
Mascot in Sydney, near the main airport. DAP built Beauforts, then Beaufighters.
 
In engine production, single row Wasp engine production ran down to a halt early in the war and the twin row was built for use in Beauforts, Boomerangs. They intended to use it in the Beaufighter but Hercules engines from the UK became available. Production took place at GMH, an automobile manufacturer also situated at Fisherman’s Bend (GMH was a major shareholder in CAC) and at CAC in Sydney and Melbourne. Gypsy engines were also produced for the Tigermoths and the DH 84s.
 
CAC kept producing Boomerangs in late 1943 and early 1944 in order to maintain the production line and labour force pending production of license
produced P 51Ds, see below. The RAAF didn't want any more Boomerangs. The last one was produced in mid 1944, destined for the stockpile.
 
DH commenced production of Mosquitos (FB Mk 40, based on the FBVI with Hamilton Standard  or Australian built De Havilland hydromatic propellers) in 3/43 but although the first plane flew in 7/43 deliveries didn't flow until 3/44. The reason for this was  that the Mosquitoes were to be powered by Merlins license built in the USA, 660 of them and there was some delay in delivery. The first 100 aircraft were built with Packard Merlin 31 engines, thereafter, Packard Merlin 33 engines, and paddle-blade propellers. There were limited numbers of PR.40 photo-reconnaissance aircraft built or converted (only 6, delivered May-October 1944) with Packard Merlin 31 engines, and later the PR.41 with Packard Merlin 69 (two stage, supercharged) engines, but not until 1947. There were also  20 xT43 trainer versions with dual controls, delivery commenced 27/06/44. 12 UK built PRXVI aircraft were allocated to the RAAF to make up a shortfall in Australian production of PR Mosquitos, the first one entered service  on 1st March 1945..
 
In 6/44 CAC switched to P51 production, 80/100 kits were assembled then 350 new build were ordered, not many delivered, before the war ended. The engines for these were to be produced at the Lidcombe plant, which switched to Merlin production, but eventually engines sourced in both the US an UK were also used.
 
Late in the war DAP commenced a changeover from Beaufighters to production of Avro Lincoln bombers (i.e. late mark Lancasters). None were delivered before the end of the war. Initially they were to be powered by Pratt and Whitney 2,800 engines but this became unnecessary after CAC Lidcombe started producing Merlins under license. Production of this aircraft was really an attempt to create some multi engine expertise in the aircraft industry for post war purposes.
 
At war's end production was of P51s by CAC, Mosquitoes by DH and Lincolns by DAP. All were powered by license built or imported Merlin engines.
 
Numbers:
 
Lancaster/Lincoln - none before VJ day. The first flight took place on 12 March 46.
 
P51 80 + 22 out of 350 ordered from CAC before VJ day.
 
Breakdown figures: 80 kit build “Mustang 20” with V-1650-3 engines; 26 new build CA-18 Mustang 21 with V-1650-7 engines, 28 Mustang 22 (PR models); 66 Mustang 23 with imported UK Merlin-70 engines.  299 P-51D and P-51K were also supplied from the US.
 
Mosquito - 115 out of 370 ordered before VJ day.
 
Mosquitos were in use in #1 Sqn (1/45 - reported to have used 38 MkVI imported from the UK), & #87 Sqn (5/45), also #94 Sqn, which did not reach operational status before the end of the war and was disbanded in 1/46.  And No.87 (Photo Reconnaissance) Squadron.
 
See also  http://www.home.gil.com.au/%7Ebfillery/mossie05.htm 
 
I can’t find any specific plans for any particular squadron to switch to the Lancaster/Lincoln. 2nd and 6th Sqns  (permanent RAAF sqns) used it post war, starting conversion in early 1946. 12 Sqn used B-24s February 1945-March 1946 and then commenced re-equipping with Lincolns.
 
In addition to previous P51 squadrons mentioned, No 82 Squadron converted to the P51 in March 1946, and moved to Bofu Japan as part of the occupation force.
 
Also note RAAF squadrons in the European theatre flying the Mustang III were as I understand it supplied from RAF stocks. 3rd Sqn from 13 November 44, & 450 Sqn in 1945– as were Beaufighter and Mosquito squadrons.
 

[m10bob]

FWIW one of the threads I posted in the above sub forum called "Research,etc" has the history of every Aussie unit with their planes and their dates of use.


May have been this one??

http://home.brisnet.org.au/~dunn/raaf/raaf.htm

[Ian R]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

FWIW one of the threads I posted in the above sub forum called "Research,etc" has the history of every Aussie unit with their planes and their dates of use.


May have been this one??

http://home.brisnet.org.au/~dunn/raaf/raaf.htm

Some very nice photos and detail information, but I'm wary about the accuracy of some of his more general statements - eg he says #1 Sqn used Australian made Mosquito FBVI, but if so then they would be FB Mk40. See site above with serial number detail.

[JeffroK]

http://www.adf-serials.com/

Go to RAAF Series 2,  A-52  DH Mosquito for a story on just about every one used by the RAAF

The English built versions are towards the end with serials starting at 500

[Ian R]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

http://www.adf-serials.com/

Go to RAAF Series 2, A-52 DH Mosquito for a story on just about every one used by the RAAF

The English built versions are towards the end with serials starting at 500

[font="Times New Roman"]Great site Jeff, although you need to trawl through the notes to sum up the details.

I noticed a couples of things relevant to Sid's enquiries and Mustangs:

83 P51K were supplied from the US in April/May 45 and went to 84 and 86 squadrons and associated OTU and OCU units;

There were 100 P-51D-20-NT received from the US between May and July 1945, and although some were issued to 2 OTU, most seeme not to have been used operationally, and stored as spares.

There where 114 P-51D-25-NT received from the US in the period July - September 1945 and issued to 76, 77 and 82 Sqns in the period September/October 45 and continuing to 1946 and the deployment of 81 Wing to Iwakuni.[/font]

[JeffroK]

Gday Ian,
 
Yep, I do a lot of trawling
 
But I also have a book which has the numbers but not the service details
 
 

[m10bob]

Still not the detail od serial#'s etc, but this is the RAAF squadron history I meant to refer to.

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-air ... istory.htm


Some of the squadrons used planes which were in vanilla but removed in mods.

[Ian R]

The one thing not discussed yet is the ratio of aircraft produced to those used in squadrons.

Reading the serial number details it seems the RAAF experience on Mustangs in 1945 is its about 1:1, 50 machines resulting in a 24 machine squadron - if you ignore the P51Ds that were maybe stockpiled for the other Kittyhawk squadrons to take up, eventually - about half the planes seem to be taken up by:

- "lemons" which just don't work properly are not accepted for service on testing and are broken up for parts

- machines that go to OTUs and OCUs to train the pilots

- those that are stockpiled and used as spares for the combat squadrons

I suppose its conceptually like large LCUs where there is a big logistics tail with more service and support troops than riflemen - you need a surplus of service-persons and tools/machines to produce the finished sharp end product.

Making a broad brush assumption that by 1945 the RAAF produced very well trained pilots and a high serviceability level, reflected in the experience of the pool pilots and the number of aviation support squads, and not necessarily the absolute size of the aircraft pool, maybe all applicable raw production numbers ought to be discounted to account for these "off map" factors.

The discount would be less for nations with a lower % experience pilot pool who did not direct as many machines and resources to training units - eg Japan.

Sid, did the RHS work this into its calculations on aircraft production? There is a practical difficulty in the sense that a lot of US production for "Europe" also was expended in training etc, but was any discount factor applied?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

The one thing not discussed yet is the ratio of aircraft produced to those used in squadrons.

Reading the serial number details it seems the RAAF experience on Mustangs in 1945 is its about 1:1, 50 machines resulting in a 24 machine squadron - if you ignore the P51Ds that were maybe stockpiled for the other Kittyhawk squadrons to take up, eventually - about half the planes seem to be taken up by:

- "lemons" which just don't work properly are not accepted for service on testing and are broken up for parts

- machines that go to OTUs and OCUs to train the pilots

- those that are stockpiled and used as spares for the combat squadrons

I

This was a feature of RHS - which was just removed. Statistical analysis of the B-24 fleet, which I had down to the last serial number, indicated that only about 40% (I forget the exact fraction - 42%? maybe) were used as such. But now we are using 90% of the total number sent to theater.

We do have a problem: because our rate of production does not change - we use total number we want divided by the number of months in production average - it can be there is a too low rate per month for types that are in production too long. We may be about to fix that too - thinking about it.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Ian R


Sid, did the RHS work this into its calculations on aircraft production? There is a practical difficulty in the sense that a lot of US production for "Europe" also was expended in training etc, but was any discount factor applied?

Originally, that was not done directly, but in the fact that major types only got 42% of their actual theoretical commitment to PTO. Now we do it the other way around - we do this FIRST - we take 10% for diversion to special machines, attrition, training, etc - and we THEN figure out how many go to PTO - and we divide that figure by the production period in months. I also assume production ends in Aug 1945, but of course the game can go on producing after that - if the war lasts longer - I don't penalize you for planes that were not produced because the war ended.