Eastern Front 1943 -- which plane set is better

[GScholz]

You know, it was really quite surprisingly fun.  I honestly thought it would be completely useless cannon fodder against US planes.  I was completely wrong.  Its firepower is so amazing against bombers, and because it can get up to pretty high speeds in a dive, and because it is a pretty good turner, it isn't horrible in a many-on-many fight.

You know, I started flying the 110 as a fighter in the MA back in 2003, just as a challenge. Soon found out what a great ride it can be if flown to its strengths. Also read up on the real thing and found out that its bad reputation is mostly undeserved. Early in the war the 110 was a match for any fighter, except the Spitfire and 109. Those two were in a league of their own back then. In the Med and North Africa the 110 performed well against a force of mostly Hurricanes and P-40s.

[GScholz]

Btw. Brooke, do you know what fuel burn setting will be used in the Dnieper campaign?

[Brooke]

Btw. Brooke, do you know what fuel burn setting will be used in the Dnieper campaign?

It is 2.0, but everything is close together:



In addition, the rules require bombers and attack aircraft to do three attacks per frame, and there is an alt cap of 20k.

The rules are meant to provide the more tactical-style fighting on the Eastern Front, where alts were not that high and many groups were based close to front lines, flying several missions per day.

[Brooke]

For anyone interested in more details, full rules writeup is here:

http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201606_BattleOfTheDnieper/rules.htm

"It's 1943, and one of the largest battles of WWII is underway.  The Germans and the Soviets are slugging it out on a continent-wide front along the Dnieper River.

Gone are the Wehrmacht's quick early gains on the Eastern Front.  The Red Army has grown gigantic and is taking back vast regions of land.  Now, it is the Germans' turn for desperation.  They are back across the Dnieper river but making the Soviets pay dearly for every crossing.  In September, '43, men, tanks, and aircraft fight over the mud and in the skies.

In the air, it is the Bf 109's, FW 190's, and Ju 88's of the mighty Luftwaffe vs. the La-5's, Yak-9's, Yak-7's, P-39's, Il-2's, and Tu-2's of the surging VVS -- in air-to-air combat, bombing, ground attack, escort, and intercept.  On the ground, Panzer IV H's slug it out with T-34/76's.

Please join us for this monumental battle between the Germans and the Soviets."

[GScholz]

Tell me... Is the altitude performance range also scaled down? Obviously not. This is what I hate about the fuel burn multiplier. It penalizes high alt performance fighters because we need to expend twice the amount of fuel just to get to altitude. This forces the fight down low. OK, the MA is gamey in nature, I get that, but for a supposed historical scenario this is a major let down.

[artik]

@Brooke

The problem with 2.0 is that it cripples Russian planes significantly. Most of the fuel would be wasted on climbout and considering the LW counterparts have significantly better range it would hurt Russian planes significantly. Because the change in loiter time isn't proportional to 2.0.

For example if a plane spends 12minl for climb and the rest for loiter and have 45 min total flight time i.e. 12 min climb and 33 min loiter on FBR=1 than if you increase FBR to 2.0 than you still have 12 min climb but only 22.5 min of total time so you left with only 10.5 min of loiter. Now if you take a plane that have 1.5 hours total flight time and 12min climb than by increasing FBR to 2.0 you reduce total flight time to 45min and loiter time to 33m instead of 78 min - i.e. for a plane with 1.5 total flight time you reduced loiter time to ~42% while for a plane with 45min flight time you reduced the loiter time to ~32% of original.

And for a mission loiter time is much more important than climb time. So I think that high FBR always hurts plane with short flight time much more. It is especially significant on Eastern front. For example I-16 is totally crippled at MA by high fuel burn rate because if its low flight time.

[Brooke]

No need to be let down.

German fighters get to 20k in about 6 minutes for the 109G-6 and 8 minutes in the 190A-5.  That's not much subtraction of time aloft.  Also, if you want more time aloft, both of them can take drop tanks.  Burn of 2.0 wasn't even a problem in Southern Conquest, where flight routes were much longer than they are likely to be in this one.

However, thanks to you bringing it up, it does trigger my thought that many Soviet fighters do not have drop tanks available, and for them it is thus much more an issue, and I need to think about that.

[Brooke]

@Brooke

The problem with 2.0 is that it cripples Russian planes significantly.
[etc.]

I agree.  It's an issue I think that I need to adjust, not because of German planes (which are fine) but because of Soviet ones.

Many thanks, guys, for bringing this up.

[GScholz]

The Yaks actually have better endurance than the G6. Drop tanks were rarely used on the Eastern Front. There is a reason why most Soviet fighters didn't even have the option. German DT's also degrade performance even after they're dropped due to the rack. Climbing alone to 20K on WEP may take about 6 minutes, but you'll spend longer if you're trying to stay in a group. When you get to 20K you will have spent nearly half your fuel in the G6. That may be fine in the MA, but in a scenario not so much...

Why would anyone impose such a gamey and arbitrary restriction on a historical scenario? What is the purpose?

[Zimme83]

22 mins in the La, it will have an effective combat radius of about one sector in the scenario.

[GScholz]

24 minutes for the 109, and 29 minutes for both Yaks.

[Zimme83]

30 minutes on the 109.

[GScholz]

30 minutes on the 109.

Not at max power, which is what you'll use for climb and combat.

"Downwind will be enabled at 20k ft."

I'm out. Might as well just fly in the MA. It's less gamey and arbitrarily limited. This is a fantasy scenario, not historical. LW fighters did not fly at low altitude in the East (or anywhere) it is a myth.

"Once committed to an attack, fly in at full speed. After scoring crippling or disabling hits, I would clear myself and then repeat the process. I never pursued the enemy once they had eluded me. Better to break off and set up again for a new assault. I always began my attacks from full strength, if possible, my ideal flying height being 22,000 ft because at that altitude I could best utilize the performance of my aircraft. Combat flying is based on the slashing attack and rough maneuvering. In combat flying, fancy precision aerobatic work is really not of much use. Instead, it is the rough maneuver which succeeds."

— Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, aka Karaya One, the World's leading ace, with 352 victories in WWII Jagdgeschwader 52.

[Zimme83]

Not at max power, which is what you'll use for climb and combat.

"Downwind will be enabled at 20k ft."

I'm out. Might as well just fly in the MA. It's less gamy and arbitrarily limited. This is a fantasy scenario, not historical. LW fighters did not fly at low altitude in the East (or anywhere) it is a myth.

"Once committed to an attack, fly in at full speed. After scoring crippling or disabling hits, I would clear myself and then repeat the process. I never pursued the enemy once they had eluded me. Better to break off and set up again for a new assault. I always began my attacks from full strength, if possible, my ideal flying height being 22,000 ft because at that altitude I could best utilize the performance of my aircraft. Combat flying is based on the slashing attack and rough maneuvering. In combat flying, fancy precision aerobatic work is really not of much use. Instead, it is the rough maneuver which succeeds."

— Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, aka Karaya One, the World's leading ace, with 352 victories in WWII Jagdgeschwader 52.

For comparison i just use the numbers presented in the Hangar. How much you use WEP is up to you. (and its often offset by the fact that you dont use 100% throttle all the time.

[Bruv119]

how about not climbing to the 20k alt cap, going to about 6k, flying to target, hitting it, then fighting your way out.   You won't waste 6 minutes of fuel then.

I was under the impression the eastern front was down and dirty.