Speaking of "What-If" scenarios....

[Saxman]

Fencer,

Would North Sea provide enough of Denmark to suit this purpose? I'd need to find a map to know if any of Holland would be covered by EITHER North Sea or BOB.

[Fencer51]

A small potion of Holland is on Bob04, but not alot.  Almost none of it is on Northsea.  Denmark in it's entirety is there though.

[Stoney]

Besides, I would not put the V1 sites where they were historically, other than 'on the coast'. Finding them would be half the fun and make more sense imho.

I need to do more research on this to be certain, but...  For the most part, these types of strikes would hit known target areas.  They would not have sent out squadrons to just rove about the airspace looking for sites.  The purpose of the low-altitude training was merely for the delivery of the Tiny Tim, not so they could visually ID the targets before hitting them.  The U.S. Navy, in particular, was very detailed in its pre-strike intelligence gathering, and would have done so in this case.

One thing that is not represented in most history books is the immense amount of aerial photographic intelligence that was conducted by all sides throughout the war.  For example, the U.S. had practically every visible enemy emplacement on Iwo Jima charted prior to the landings.  Destroying them efficiently was another matter.  If the Marines were going after V-1/V-2 emplacements, they would have known which ones they were attacking prior to launch.

Even with the air superiority achieved at this point in the war by the Allies in ETO, heavy fighters cruising around on the deck was very dangerous due to the amount of flak that was available and employed by the Germans.  The danger in this mission was during the Tiny Tim delivery.  Flak around these installations was extremely heavy.  If we can find the resources and documentation, I believe we'll find that a medium-to-high altitude ingress, with a steep dive rocket attack, followed by a medium-to-high altitude egress, would have been the planned mission profile.

Regardless, this could be an interesting match up if the game and map mechanics can be worked out.

[Saxman]

Fencer,

Would you be in agreement, then, that North Sea would then be the better choice after all, due to the July start date? Certainly, as in my initial thoughts, North Sea would offer FAR more room to position the Allied carriers.

Stoney,

From what I can dig up, this would then mean the Germans had TWO strategies in defense: Early on more permanent structures, while later as the sites had started to be hit, they altered their designs to make them easier to put back into commission again. Not quite MOBILE, but certainly less permanent. Even if the early sites were heavily armed, the later practice seems to suggest the Germans would have relied more on secrecy and air defenses in the surrounding area than heavy AAA on the site itself, while only major sites like Peenemundë retained the real heavy local air defenses. Granted, based on the dates the sites I listed here were bombed (available in the Wiki article on Crossbow) the July time frame would seem to indicate the earlier practice.

I do still believe that, due to the small probable size of the target, each Corsair Squadron should be given a specific sector to attack, with 2-3 V-1 sites in each sector. A Corsair with 2x500lb bombs, and 8x5" HVAR carries 2000lbs of ordinance. Multiply that by the max end of a 7-10 squadron (10 standard, 12 with +2 allowance) you're talking 20,000-24,0000lbs of ordinance for a site that may not require more than 2000-3000. Remove the rockets and you're still looking at over-kill. However, if each squadron must hit 2-3 sites in their sector of operations, you've just given the squadron commander a critical tactical decision: Keep his squadron together in hopes of making it through the air defenses to each site sequentially by numbers and attrition, or should he risk dividing his squadron in an attempt at striking all the sites at once in hopes that they can make it through on at least one or two, with enough ships left over to rearm and make a second pass on any that are missed?

Additionally, I also still believe the German pilots should be instructed ONLY to defend a specific sector, (or maybe a group of sectors) which contains both V-1 sites AND a potential alternate target (port, V-base, etc). That way the Axis won't know in advance if they're looking for Corsairs striking the V-1s, or TBMs or jabo F6Fs/FM-2s after a different target.

Also, I mentioned before but what sort of German iron would be available for July 1944? I know for certain Ju-88s and Bf-110Gs (Fw-190Fs I think would also likely be available) for the Luftwaffe strike packages, but what about air-to-air? Would the same Axis plane set as Kanalkampf be applicable?

[Valkyrie]

Saxman,

The Germans did everything you mention, but as they withdrew from occupied territory they carried their AAA back with them whenever possible, note the amount of equipment in photos of the Falaise pocket. Some of the final bombing and strafing missions of the war were infact the most dangerous missions flown. The documentary "A Fighter Pilots Story" covers this well as does the history channel program WW2 in color when they followed a P-47 group all the way to the Rhine. They were losing 1-2 A/C a mission to ground fire into May of 45.


Valkyrie

[Delirium]

I have a few questions;

1. How long did it take to erect a V1 launching platform? If it took 48 hours or less, you could actually respawn targets, or the Axis Commander could choose to move them. If movement is possible, you'd have to consider an incentive to spread them out (ie V1s can strike more cities).

2. A zone defense for a 'fixed' ground target against fighter aircraft is next to impossible without overwhelming numbers of aircraft. Do you want this scenario to allow the Axis Commander to choose what sites to protect (ie he who protects everything, protects nothing... consolidation of fighters is key once he discovers a CV's location).

3. Do you plan on ack having any teeth this scenario?

[Stoney]

Also, I mentioned before but what sort of German iron would be available for July 1944? I know for certain Ju-88s and Bf-110Gs (Fw-190Fs I think would also likely be available) for the Luftwaffe strike packages, but what about air-to-air? Would the same Axis plane set as Kanalkampf be applicable?

Well, I believe we should probably find a Air Order of Battle for the Luftwaffe in the vicinity of this time period.  That would give us a first read on what a historical match-up would have been.  Then, we can make the necessary adjustments for balance.  Again, finding some good resources would make this idea really flourish...

[Saxman]

2. A zone defense for a 'fixed' ground target against fighter aircraft is next to impossible without overwhelming numbers of aircraft. Do you want this scenario to allow the Axis Commander to choose what sites to protect (ie he who protects everything, protects nothing... consolidation of fighters is key once he discovers a CV's location).

3. Do you plan on ack having any teeth this scenario?

2. Just as the commander of the F4U squadrons would have to make a decision on whether to concentrate on one site at a time, or split up and strike them individually, the Axis CiC would face the same hard choice.

3. That hasn't been completely settled yet, but there's likely going to be some guns on the ground.

[Saxman]

Stoney,

Still waiting to hear back from WW to see if he has any more specific information on this, but here's what I've been coming up with regarding Luftwaffe aircraft in the region via Google (currently assuming North Sea would be the map to use) in July 1944:

Ju-87 (no specification of type)
Ju-88D
Bf-110G
Fw-190A (generally no more specific than that, though I've found at least one squadron equipped with A8s)
Bf-109G (no specification of type).

[ghostdancer]

Once again have to look at the map and also see if Dux can build in custom destroyable objects (V1 bases) that can be placed in a sector but not show as bases. Right now we have FSO through October. So if we did this it would be several months out.

Now Delerium most likely how the V1 bases would be handled would be the same as how we handle the CVs in FSOs. The allies would be told there is a base(s) in this sector(s). With a CV we usually tell the attacker that somewhere within these 3 to 4 sectors is the enemy fleet.

If we can place custom objects that can be targeted and destroyed then probably would do the same thing. Somewhere within this sector(s) is a V1 base. Now probably would have to experiment and have it down to 1 or 2 sectors. Since a fleet is easy to spot from up high while the V1 base (if I understand what Saxman would like) would be difficult to spot. Meaning planes would have to come in low to medium alt to find it (just like we had to do when train hunting in some of the old Tunisian FSOs).

So the defender would know where he has to defend, just like when he had a normal base. The attacker though would have a bit of scouting to do on top of dealing with the defenders.

As for the F4U commander, remember ALL targets must be attacked by T+60. So a CiC could decided to hit this one or two targets with F4Us but the other targets still need to be attack by other allied planes.

Lastly, an order battle is nice to go by but remember we can and do make accomodations / modifications for playability. So while only one reference to that A8 has been found keep in mind what the Germans are facing .. F4Us, etc. You want to make sure that they have planes that have a reasonable chance of competing. So have to research the A5 and A8 and see how they stack up against the F4U you are thinking of using. Also even if say you can't find plane types in use in the area you can stretch and include them for play balance if you think it is reasonable or plausible for them to be in the area (especially as this is a what if).

[forHIM]

The problem with an object that is destroyable on the map, but not noted on the clipboard map is that it is stationary.  So as soon as the map is downloaded, the Allied players could pre-scout the sector and find it with ease.  So not having it on the clipboard map doesn't really help what you're striving for.

Now if there was something similar to a CV/task force that took as much ordinance to kill, but moved around the map at a slow rate, that would be something.

[Saxman]

Well, based on other comments it sounds like the Allies--at least in the July time frame--would have known right where those sites were located anyway, so hiding them wouldn't really be necessary. However if they don't appear on the in-game map it would give the more pro-active Allied C/Os (either frame CiCs, or individual squadron commanders) a little more pre-planning to do, to find the exact location of the sites and mark it for their own use so they know where they are. However even if they're in the right keypad, they'd still need to visually locate the targets (It's not too disimilar to CVs as it is. You can have a scout call out a KP of the boat's location, but the guys coming behind still have to find it. The only difference is the task groups are much larger, and much more easily seen from altitude).

[Fencer51]

Stoney,

Still waiting to hear back from WW to see if he has any more specific information on this, but here's what I've been coming up with regarding Luftwaffe aircraft in the region via Google (currently assuming North Sea would be the map to use) in July 1944:

Ju-87 (no specification of type)
Ju-88D
Bf-110G
Fw-190A (generally no more specific than that, though I've found at least one squadron equipped with A8s)
Bf-109G (no specification of type).

Yes I would suggest North Sea, look at it this way, why use CVs in the English Channel?  I would bet that their intention all along was to operate in the area off of northern Holland.  But realistically, this was a really bad idea, exposing the CVs for so little return.  Don't forget there were UBoats around too.

I have alot of Luftwaffe OOB stuff but this week is crazy for me at work (two projects due) and it will take time to pull it together.  Maybe this weekend if WW hasn't gotten to it by then.

[Guppy35]

I read the thread from the beginning but must have missed the part where this is July 44.

The Allies were going after No-Ball targets as early as November 43 with RAF and USAAF mediums and mossies.  The pilots didn't know what they were going after other then it was potential sights for German rockets.  They were hard to spot from the air.  They tried Spits dive bombing them, Tiffies, you name it.

I'd think you'd want a mix of real and not so real emplacements that the Allied pilots would have to find and destroy.  I don't think all the sites were known or pin pointed by Allied intelligence.  This was a fairly large part of the operations pre-D-Day.  Any particular reason for July 44 instead of prior to the invasion?  Just curious

[Saxman]

This was part of Operation Crossbow, which puts it after D-Day. Additionally what information on Project Danny I can find also indicates a start date of at LEAST July 1944.