Approx Date?

[Hajo]

Concerning the Beau.  I've got some drawings of the Beau.  Skeleton, panels etc. I got them from the NASM.

Dan has done much of the work on the Beau.

Shortly I should be receiving more prints and a Pilots manual.

I will send them to Dan and he will forward to Pyro once they are reviewed by Dan (if he has time).

Dan started this conun...conandri....conundr.. .crap! I just tagged along.  

[humble]

But the A-20 is already in the Scenario.

Actually the boston is subbing for it. I'll gladly fly the boston as an A20-A but its anti shipping capability is limited compared to the Beau (half the bomb load and .303's vs 20mm). Given the victory conditions and the fact that coastal command was primarily responsible for anti shipping in the Med I think the A-20G (as a sub for the Beau) makes a lot of sense historically. Maybe fly the G in the "shipping" sets and the boston in the other 2 (same pilot base) to reflect the different situations...

[humble]

How many didn't see that coming. 

[Delirium]

I'm looking for a 109F slot, if at all possible.

I don't want to be carrying eggs and I don't want to be in a 38.

[Brooke]

How many didn't see that coming. 

Heh!  Humble was quite good in that "Beaufighter" in Rangoon, wasn't he?

[humble]

Heh!  Humble was quite good in that "Beaufighter" in Rangoon, wasn't he?

Most fun I can recall, I'd love a A-20A (boston slot) in this one, but after reading the write up I was surprised that the Beau/A-20G wasnt included simply because it was a primary ride for coastal command.

[Fencer51]

There were several reasons it was not included.

1.  There are oodles of other aircraft not included, Wellingtons, Blenheims, Swordfish, Albacores, Halifaxes, Walruses, and Sunderlands.  All contributed but are not necessary enough to the scenario to warrant a plane substitution. 
2.  It was hardly the primary ride of N.A . Coastal Air Force.  For example, in Oct 1942 there were two squadrons (46,89) plus a detachment assigned Malta in the Med.
3.  I hate plane substitutions in historical events.
4.  The number and type of ship targets are so restricted I did not see the need to have a dedicated ship strike aircraft.
5.  The majority of the Beaufighters were based on Malta that contributed to the battle at this phase.  This map does not have Malta.
6.  I hate plane substitutions in historical events.
7.  This is not the sea battle of the Med, but a land battle for Tunisia with some resupply elements thrown in.  We have enough aircraft and units to handle that without delving into plane substitutions. (See 3 and 6).

Cheers

[texastc316]

what are your thoughts on plane substitution in an historical event?

[Fencer51]

About what I think of people who have quotes in the signature that they themselves ignore.

[fudgums]

PWND!!!!!!

[Brooke]

Hmm.  That seems a harsh response for a question that doesn't seem unreasonable.

I think plane substitution is fine.  We do it in scenarios whenever the actual plane isn't available.  For example, in Battle of Britain, we've used Ju 88's, as there are no He 111's available.  In Japanese scenarios, we've used the Ju 88 instead of the Betty, as it's not available.  We've used the F4F for the Brewster, and so on.

Given that the substitute might be better or worse than the real plane (usually better), we keep that in mind in designing the rules, the side balance, and the victory conditions.

[Fencer51]

Brooke he knew what my thoughts were.. see the post above his.

[Babalonian]

We really really really need to get this scenario up soon before we start getting prematurely violent twords each other before we get in a plane (cabin feaver).

[Delirium]

Brooke he knew what my thoughts were.. see the post above his.

Agreed, it smelled like a troll to me.

[Krusty]

Just a really quick question:

In the rules writeup it says no 2x1000lb on the P-38s, then lower on it says max 2x500lbs, but what about the option to carry 1x1000lb? Is that allowed or not?

Not a vital question, just a curiosity.