FSO Channel Dash Frame 2

[tedrbr]

Some observations from the logs

Logs can be found at:  http://ahevents.org/site/index.php?option=com_staticxt&Itemid=112

Members of the LCA were wondering why we had no luck finding Ju-88's in our AO while on CAP, and where all the fighters were coming from; a quick look at the logs showed problems for both sides:

On the Axis side only the Nightmares VMF-101 lifted any Ju-889's, and then only 6 of their 22 pilots took Ju-88's up (are drones supposed to be counted in the 50/50 split of plane types for larger squadrens that chose to life 2 plane types??). ...and they were down around V116 around 12-9.... not in our AO.  Most of the Axis 138 pilots were in fighters.  Were they not supposed to be hitting any ground targets this frame?  Only 6 buff pilots?  Only 4 objects destroyed?  Maybe that is how the Axis orders read, I don't know.

The Allies 117 pilots flew a number of TBM's and Boston III's: (~~~FATE~~~ Pilots: 10, all TBMs), III./JG44 Night Hawks 4 of 11 pilots in Boston III's (yes Allies should get penalized for this.... need to be in a larger group to split plane types IIRC, then a 50/50 split is dictated between plane types), BadCompanyClan stats 3 of 7 Pilots in TBMs (same penalty), 327th Steel Talons had 8 pilots take TBMs with 2 gunners, !347th fighter wing! 11 of 22 pilots in TBMs.  36 attack or buff types and at least 2 dedicated gunners all together from 117 pilots.

Obviously there is a problem in discipline among some the squadrens participating in the FSO.

[Nefarious]

This seems to be a growing discussion.

Both sides shared three major Objectives...Niether side was told which Target was which. I am no longer going to continue to do this because we saw a few squads that saw no action.

Ships - (Attack/Defend)
Ground Target - (Attack/Defend)
Fighter Sweep - (Sweep/Defend)

In your case you found the fighter sweep. In the objectives I sent to your Side CO, he was warned that both fields could be attacked. Thats why you were tasked to defend it. For you the situation played out how it was supposed too, for others it did not.

116 was the Axis Ground Target, There was Four Targets at 116, The Three Vehicle Hangars, and the Radar Tower.

As for the squad splitting...That will be looked at.

[doobs]

Originally posted by tedrbr
 III./JG44 Night Hawks 4 of 11 pilots in Boston III's (yes Allies should get penalized for this.... need to be in a larger group to split plane types IIRC, then a 50/50 split is dictated between plane types),
 [/B]

We usually are a larger group we usually field 23 just about every week.

Our problem this week was the patch. Alot of the Squad couldn't get it together quick enough.

Otherwise we would of had 5 in buffs and 18 in fiters.


And we still managed to make it to target which would of been flattened
if our buff drivers knew that the calibration mode was the old style.

[RSLQK186]

I no longer have the side objectives. I'm a clean freak.

When I glanced at the note on the objectives about spliting large squads, I took it to mean for seperate tasks. The Nightmares were sent for one task only. Now that I have re-read the official FSO rules the meaning is clear.

They were the only squad that requested an attack role and I was trying to give it to them, but did not see the need for so many Ju88s. Had them take twice what was needed for insurance. I should have gave the bombers to a smaller squad and let the 'Mares wack the CAP. Or send a 110 hord.

I simply overlooked it as a first time CiC. My squad is not that large, so we have never split. It wasn't from lack of trying, I started fuel range, plane v plane, and alt/vis checks 2 weeks ago.

Another item on my long list of "it won't happen again".

[ghostdancer]

Nightmares followed the orders given to them. The insinuation that we purposefully and willfully ignored the orders relayed to us by the Axis CiC is not at all appreciated.

Obviously there is a problem in discipline among some the squadrens participating in the FSO.

I believe if you ask around are history and willingness to do what is needed for our team in each FSO, since the inception of the FSO several years ago, speak for themselves.

[96Delta]

Originally posted by doobs
buff drivers knew that the calibration mode was the old style.

Is that new since the patch or only in the SEA?

David

[FiLtH]

Ya we're a bunch of mavericks :/

[doobs]

Originally posted by ghostdancer
Nightmares followed the orders given to them. The insinuation that we purposefully and willfully ignored the orders relayed to us by the Axis CiC is not at all appreciated.



I believe if you ask around are history and willingness to do what is needed for our team in each FSO, since the inception of the FSO several years ago, speak for themselves.

Ghost glad u went first. was biting tongue.

[doobs]

strac ya got a pm

[Hornet33]

Originally posted by tedrbr
III./JG44 Night Hawks 4 of 11 pilots in Boston III's (yes Allies should get penalized for this....

Not that it's any of your concern but JG44 was ordered to take NO MORE than 14 bostons airborne. Had the patch not screwed things up for a majority of our squad we would have had numbers in the 20-23 area, and we would have had 14 pilots single ship in Bostons with the rest flying escort. Due to the shortage of pilots (again due to the patch) we chose to up 4 pilots with formations for a total of 12 Bostons and have the other 7 pilots fly escort. So in reality we had more bombers in the air than fighters. Every bomber counts as points and kills so your argument is completly groundless. Our numbers were as even as we could make it and complete our mission.

For a squad (LCA) that has only been in FSO for a very short time, and if I recall correctly, last FSO counldn't follow your own orders well enough that you lost the bombers you were supposed to escort, you might want to sit back and observe before you spout off about an established squad, and for lack of a better term, accuse us of cheating somehow. Thats how your comments come across and I for one don't appreciate it. We kept our numbers as even as we could under the circumstances.

[Hornet33]

Originally posted by 96Delta
Is that new since the patch or only in the SEA?

David

I don't know. It took us by surprise. We were not prepared to have to do the old style Cal so most of our drops were way off target.

[tedrbr]

Originally posted by ghostdancer
Nightmares followed the orders given to them. The insinuation that we purposefully and willfully ignored the orders relayed to us by the Axis CiC is not at all appreciated.

I believe if you ask around are history and willingness to do what is needed for our team in each FSO, since the inception of the FSO several years ago, speak for themselves.

(sigh)  I have no idea what the oders from the Axis CiC were to the Nightmares.  Nor was my intention to claim such was bing done, so my comment on discipline WAS out of line.  My apologies.

 I AM however referring the numbers represented in the logs as they pertain to Rule 6, under Responsibilities of Squad Operations CiC where it states:

- Frame C.O.�s may spilt larger squads (11-15 or larger) as deemed necessary. Larger squads must aim for a 50/50 spilt or as close as possible when using 2 aircraft. Larger squads may only fly 2 different aircraft.

- Frame C.O.�s may not split smaller squads (7-10 or smaller).

That can be found here:
http://events.hitechcreations.com/squadops/rules.phphttp://events.hitechcreations.com/squadops/rules.php

And yes, LCA is new to the FSO, though we've had pretty good turnouts so far each frame.  So, I require a little clarification on Rule #6 it seems: Do drones count toward that 50/50 split for larger groups utilizing 2 plane types? Are those splits reserved for larger squadrens?  Can Frame C.O.s  issue orders that countermand that rule after all?  What is the bottom line here?

I can also understand how mistakes can be made in learning to operate in the SEA format, and how the new patch created problems for many units.

I simply noticed a large discrepancy in the logs on both sides this frame in relation to the rules as I've read and understand them.

[ghostdancer]

After checking with 68falcon rule 6 was implemented around 2/24/2006 (about 3 months back). However, as Doobs stated and actually I will to several squads were not aware of it. I actually have been going back through my emails and have not found a notification of rules changes as of yet but I still have quite a bit of email to go back through.

Previously FSO stated a minimum number and maximum number of plane types that had to be flown by a side and let the CiC split them anyway he wanted.

Nightmares in the past have been used to flying up to three plane types when misions have called for them (bombers, escort, and scouts). Doobs and us was operating under over how things used to work since we were not aware of the change in rules.

[BlkKnit]

OK, look.  The squads that were split are (I'm pretty sure), all 11-15 or larger sized units and are thus eligible to be split.  Just because they had less than 11 show was due to the patch and so I personally see no problem here.

As for the 50/50 split, not sure if drones count but IMO they should.  Anyway, that rule is for the sole purpose of preventing a CiC from assigning 1 B5N and 12 N1K2-J's to a squad just to cover a requirement to use B5N's in the frame.

Frame CiC's have ignored the split rule a couple of times and the side was penalized for it.

Thats my un-official opinion, being as I am NOT an FSO CM (I am however, my squads CiC nominee) and have no say-so on any of this.

[Mystic2]

I have been CiC a couple of times and have asked the larger squads to split duties..  and have had no problems with the results.... This past FSO was basically a mess due to the new patch.... things were so screwed up...... so basically I am waiting until this upcoming FSO to see how things pan out..... and im willing to bet that it goes back to the way it was supposed to be..... a good time for all....  hopefully