B-17s and other Aircraft Issues

[Don Bowen]

In response to the lively debate going on about B-17s, I did a little research. Aircraft ain't my thing but:

B-17E production in the Combined Historical Scenario is:
10/month "Off Map" (defined on aircraft listing)
50/month at on map factory (Seattle).

The number of squadrons flying B-17s is approximately correct (see below) but the total initial strength is too high.

I propose the following changes:

Production
1. Remove off-map production for B-17E (was 10) and set pool to 10
2. Retain factory at Seattle producing 50/month


Squadrons
1. Adjust Panama for total of 8 B-17 (never mind - most were detached to Caribbean Bases - will be a reinforcement)
2. Adjust Pearl Harbor for total of 24 - 12 B-17D in service, 12 B-17E damaged (to simulate unarmed aircraft arriving during attack). Since 4 squadrons there flew a mixture of B-17D and B-18, pick one and set to B-17D, set other three to B-18.
3. Group of three squadrons at Spokane, 1 D and 2 E
4. 35 "D" in four squadrons in Philippines
5. Three additional squadrons arrive in California in the first week with B-17. As I understand the airgroup arrival process, there must be enough aircraft in the pool for these squadrons or they will be shifted to other aircraft (is this correct?). To simulate the immediate reinforcement with B-17 squadrons from the East Coast, I will move these squadrons to the United States Base (330), set arrival to December 7, and set all aircraft to damaged.


Off-Map Production: We have lagging production set for a number of obsolete aircraft whose production runs had ended. Some of this may be to simulate transfers from europe. I think most (or all) of this should be removed:
F2A-2 Buffalo (1)
F2A-3 Buffalo (15)
F4F-3 Wildcat (1)
SB2U Vindicator (1)
TBD Devastator (1)
Singapore (1)
Mohawk IV (15)
Hawk 75A (1)
CW-21B Demon (1)
Brewster 339D (1)
Buffalo I (1)
Vildebeest IV (10)
T.IVa (5)
Blenheim I (30)
Martin 139 (1)
P-26A (1)
P-35A (1)
P-36A Mohawk (1)
B-18A Bolo (10)
B-17D Fortress (1)

I am leaning to removal of production from all of these, with the addition of aircraft to the pool for Mohawk IV, B-18, and possibly Blenheim I, Vildebeest and F2A-3 Buffalo (advice appreciated)

[Zeta16]

planes in pool does not affect allied groups coming.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Zeta16

planes in pool does not affect allied groups coming.

Are you sure? I've run tests that show the opposite. If a group arrives with 12 B-17E assigned and there are no B-17E in the pool, I believe the group will be shifted to arrive with some similar aircraft that does have aircraft in the pool. In my test it was a B-17E group actually arriving with B-18.

[Ron Saueracker]

I'm in favour of ditching the production of obsolete Allied aircraft.

[Don Bowen]

Digging a little deeper, there is a significant overstatement of total bomber aircraft in Hawaii in our Alpha. My error - when breaking up the airgroups into squadrons I paid insufficient attention to numbers of aircraft assigned. Insufficient attention, by the way, is programmerese for "completely ignored".

The stock Scenario 15 has two bomber groups (7th, 11th) at Pearl with the correct total of 12 B-17 and 33 B-18. There were a total of seven squadrons (bomber and heavy recon) in these two groups, with a combined total of 45 aircraft - just under 7 per squadron.

I will correct our scenario to reflect these totals, with a bit of guessing as to actual squadron assignements. All seven of the squadrons are listed as having both B-18 and B-17 assigned:
42nd Bombardment Squadron (Heavy) (B-17, B-18)
31st Bombardment Squadron (Heavy) (B-17, B-18)
26th Bombardment Squadron (Heavy) (B-17, B-18)
23rd Bombardment Squadron (Heavy) (B-17, B-18)
4th Reconnaissance Squadron (Heavy) (B-17, B-18) = 394th Bombardment
50th Reconnaissance Squadron (Heavy) (B-17, B-18) = 431st Bombardment
72nd Bombardment Squadron (Heavy) (B-17, B-18))

If anyone has detailed aircraft-to-squadron data I'd very much appreciate seeing it.

Note that Heavy Reconnaissance Squadrons were equipped just like Heavy Bombardment Squadrons and were re-designated as Bombardment Squadrons in early 1942. We carry them under their Bombardment Squadron designations.

[m10bob]

Don,I think I saw that same thread you were referring to regarding B 17's,and I think your research will improve the game (if implemented)..
I saw another thread requesting "balance".I am NOT for this whatsoever.I am for sticking with history as much as possible,(which I don't feel bad about since this is a "history" game).If they seek "balance",they might like Milton Bradley's "Risk",or "Axis and Allies"??
The Japanese bombers generally had much greater range,but were bullet magnets with no armor.The Allies generally had planes with greater payloads.Just don't want to see some mod coming out dumbing-down either side just to appease a few looking for balance at the expense of historical fact.[8D]

[Zeta16]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Zeta16

planes in pool does not affect allied groups coming.

Are you sure? I've run tests that show the opposite. If a group arrives with 12 B-17E assigned and there are no B-17E in the pool, I believe the group will be shifted to arrive with some similar aircraft that does have aircraft in the pool. In my test it was a B-17E group actually arriving with B-18.

My bad I was thinking of the pilots for the allies

[Herrbear]

I agree with dumping production for those a/c that were no longer being produced.

[pad152]

Maybe after the release of Witp Plan Orange, Matrix will consider a new add-on, "Witp - production", giving us, the player full control of Allied/Japanese production of aircraft/ships/etc. Now that would be something worthing buying![;)]

[Don Bowen]

Here they are, totaled by type and location. There are also 12 P-26A of the Philippine Air Force.

[scout1]

50/month at on map factory (Seattle).

Don,

Does this represent the total production for both the ETO and PTO ?
Also, does WitP modify this during the war, as the American's ramped up production ?

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: scout1

50/month at on map factory (Seattle).

Don,

Does this represent the total production for both the ETO and PTO ?

Just the Pacific

Also, does WitP modify this during the war, as the American's ramped up production ?

I don't think so.

[m10bob]

Excellent.....[&o]

[Lemurs!]

Don,

I do not know how you ended up with 50 B17E production in Seattle.
My copy of scn 55 has 15 in Seattle for a total production of 25.
25 is about correct for B17s serving in the Pacific in 41-43.

If you want remove offmap production and put 25 in Seattle.

The F2A3 was in production during this time period. Leve it alone.
The Blenheim I has a small production to represent aircraft from Europe. It could be reduced to 10 as the Blenheim IV was the main model.
Mohawk IV was being sent from Europe as late as '43 and thus should stay.
Vildebeest & Bolo are my mistakes, they should be at 1 or 0.

All of the other 1 production aircraft I like leaving at 1 to represent canibalization of worn out aircraft to get another damaged plane flying.
1 a month won't hurt anyone.

Mike

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Don,

I do not know how you ended up with 50 B17E production in Seattle.
My copy of scn 55 has 15 in Seattle for a total production of 25.
25 is about correct for B17s serving in the Pacific in 41-43.

If you want remove offmap production and put 25 in Seattle.

The F2A3 was in production during this time period. Leve it alone.
The Blenheim I has a small production to represent aircraft from Europe. It could be reduced to 10 as the Blenheim IV was the main model.
Mohawk IV was being sent from Europe as late as '43 and thus should stay.
Vildebeest & Bolo are my mistakes, they should be at 1 or 0.

All of the other 1 production aircraft I like leaving at 1 to represent canibalization of worn out aircraft to get another damaged plane flying.
1 a month won't hurt anyone.

Mike

I disagree leaving planes in production for the duration just because it was produced for a short period during first period of the game. Set them to zero and up the pool a bit to make up the difference...less damage done this way considering most of the units using them will upgrade, therefore limiting the draw on the pool.

[Lemurs!]

Why does it hurt having planes in production for the duration?
It will not help the allies in any way and they will not be in production for the duration. The factories will stop producing when their is a good amount in the pool.

Having a large pool at game start allows the allies to build an airforce in dec '41 that they did not historically have.

Mike

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Don,

I do not know how you ended up with 50 B17E production in Seattle.
My copy of scn 55 has 15 in Seattle for a total production of 25.
25 is about correct for B17s serving in the Pacific in 41-43.

If you want remove offmap production and put 25 in Seattle.

The F2A3 was in production during this time period. Leve it alone.
The Blenheim I has a small production to represent aircraft from Europe. It could be reduced to 10 as the Blenheim IV was the main model.
Mohawk IV was being sent from Europe as late as '43 and thus should stay.
Vildebeest & Bolo are my mistakes, they should be at 1 or 0.

All of the other 1 production aircraft I like leaving at 1 to represent canibalization of worn out aircraft to get another damaged plane flying.
1 a month won't hurt anyone.

Mike

I can't seem to find any copy of the scenario that has anything but "50" for B-17s in Seattle. Scenario 15, copies of "Base" scenario, backups of CHS - I am confused.

I'll make the adjustments to B-17, Vildebeest, and Bolo as you suggest. I have also made a few more adjustments to the pool to support squadrons that arrive in December, 1941 - enough aircraft to allow them to arrive with historic aircraft. If this becomes a problem I'll have them arrive 12/7/41 at United States (base 330) with proper aircraft - all damaged.

How about removing "offmap" production for Blenheim I, Mohawk, and F2A3 and using a small factory??

Don

[Ron Saueracker]

Having a large pool at game start allows the allies to build an airforce in dec '41 that they did not historically have.

Then why not turn production right off for these obsolete short term duration production aircraft? If the planes don't really matter as you say, this does the least amount of damage. AND...it will negate alot of the instantaneous reinforcements the Allies get in areas isolated by Japan and historically incapable of receiving the aircraft anyway. I dislike this ability as modelled immensly and getting rid of it during such a crucial period as Japan's expansion phase by getting around the rule by eliminating production suits me fine.

[Lemurs!]

Don,

Probably my fault on the file; It was probably one of my changes that i made on my copy of 55 that somehow or another never made it to you.... my bad!

The problem with using a factory for some of these aircraft is then the factory will upgrade to something else increasing that production. We will have to lower production for the later aircraft.

Ron,
?????
15 production gives 1 plane every 2 days, that is not instant reinforcements in say Jave. having 100 or so in the pool is instant reinforcements.

Mike

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Don,

Probably my fault on the file; It was probably one of my changes that i made on my copy of 55 that somehow or another never made it to you.... my bad!

The problem with using a factory for some of these aircraft is then the factory will upgrade to something else increasing that production. We will have to lower production for the later aircraft.

Ron,
?????
15 production gives 1 plane every 2 days, that is not instant reinforcements in say Jave. having 100 or so in the pool is instant reinforcements.

Mike

I meant in addition to what I wrote immediately above .

Then why not turn production right off for these obsolete short term duration production aircraft? If the planes don't really matter as you say, this does the least amount of damage. AND...it will negate alot of the instantaneous reinforcements the Allies get in areas isolated by Japan and historically incapable of receiving the aircraft anyway. I dislike this ability as modelled immensly and getting rid of it during such a crucial period as Japan's expansion phase by getting around the rule by eliminating production suits me fine

Doing the above and not adding extra to pool.