Vote for the June, 2018 scenario

[AKKuya]

I vote C with a side of a 72 hour Scenario.  Separate the men from the boys.   

[Vudu15]

How long is the voting going to go on for?

[waystin2]

I vote C with a side of a 72 hour Scenario.  Separate the men from the boys.   

Holy cow Kuya! You are an animal!

[Arlo]

Holy cow Kuya! You are an animal!

He's a genius. 

[Popsman]

I vote for A

[Vudu15]

So let me lay this out again. We should be voting for the fall scenario. Look at your timeline.

1.vote
2.writeup
3.find COs
4.COs find GLs
5.Plan the event per side.

This setup is absolutely unfair to those folks who may step up as COs. The average pilot won't see this from thier seats. Your not giving enough time to advertise the event let the COs and GLs get thier groups together and actually get their people together to plan the event. Not even speaking on the issue of discrepancies in the event write up as far as aircraft and missions are concerned.

I dont follow why you would rush these events together and continue to either force experienced folks to take the reigns or burn prospective COs on their first attempts at a scenario.

Sent from my LG-H871 using Tapatalk

[BFOOT1]

So let me lay this out again. We should be voting for the fall scenario. Look at your timeline.

1.vote
2.writeup
3.find COs
4.COs find GLs
5.Plan the event per side.

This setup is absolutely unfair to those folks who may step up as COs. The average pilot won't see this from thier seats. Your not giving enough time to advertise the event let the COs and GLs get thier groups together and actually get their people together to plan the event. Not even speaking on the issue of discrepancies in the event write up as far as aircraft and missions are concerned.

I dont follow why you would rush these events together and continue to either force experienced folks to take the reigns or burn prospective COs on their first attempts at a scenario.

Sent from my LG-H871 using Tapatalk

+1 

[Devil 505]

So let me lay this out again. We should be voting for the fall scenario. Look at your timeline.

1.vote
2.writeup
3.find COs
4.COs find GLs
5.Plan the event per side.

This setup is absolutely unfair to those folks who may step up as COs. The average pilot won't see this from thier seats. Your not giving enough time to advertise the event let the COs and GLs get thier groups together and actually get their people together to plan the event. Not even speaking on the issue of discrepancies in the event write up as far as aircraft and missions are concerned.

I dont follow why you would rush these events together and continue to either force experienced folks to take the reigns or burn prospective COs on their first attempts at a scenario.

Sent from my LG-H871 using Tapatalk

Truth

[Brooke]

We have 3 scenarios per year:  approximately February, June, and October.

3 events in a year is not a gigantic feat.

Whether you think so or not, thought, this is a topic -- for anyone who wants to vote -- to write "A", "B", or "C".

[swareiam]

Pantellaria "C"

[Guppy35]

Granted I’m probably to history minded, but it’s hard to vote based on the descriptions.

A-No Tempests or Spit 14s made the run to Norway.  RAF Mustang III and IV did out of Peterhead Scotland.  The 4th FG of the USAAF also escorted to Norway.   Since we don’t have Beaus 😀. Mossies escorted by RAF 51s make sense.  They could escort the Lancs too.  For variety RN Avengers escorted by RN Hellcats and Corsairs makes sense.  No 152s or K4s up that way either.

B-make it 43 and don’t make it offense for both sides.  We made that mistake once before.  In 42 the Tiffie was not being used as an intruder but thier tails were falling off.  hurricane IIs were slaughtered.  The Spit IX barely showed up until the end of the year.   If you do 43 the AH plane set works better.  Tiffie and Mossie Intruders.  RAF Mitchell’s and Boston’s escorted by Spit V and IX.  Spits were also escorting USAAF 26s as well. LW was on defense and knocking down lots of RAF as the Allies tried to keep them busy to relieve pressure on the Russian front.

C-this on is closest in terms of history and the plane set of the three as written.  Seems like we’ve been there before though.

So history wise I’d vote C right now.   I’d love to fly A however as it would be different and could be done more accurately with the AH plane set we have.   As a kid I read about it in Roger Freeman’s book “Mustang at War”.  The chapter was called “A Separate Little War”. I always thought that would be a great title for a scenario 

[KCDitto]

A

[Vudu15]

We have 3 scenarios per year:  approximately February, June, and October.

3 events in a year is not a gigantic feat.

Whether you think so or not, thought, this is a topic -- for anyone who wants to vote -- to write "A", "B", or "C".

Lol yeah beacuse you don't have to lead em...all three of these options are ate up plane wise. And time will be needed to fix the opening write up once you decide what wild DnD time raid were heading out on. You are not making this fun for side COs the average guy will have fun for the most part no matter what is put up. The folks that lead these events shouldnt be thrown through the wringer just to squeeze out 3 event per year.

Sent from my LG-H871 using Tapatalk

[pope14]

C and if you need any help testing flight times or anything ill help out.

[Brooke]

Lol yeah beacuse you don't have to lead em...

Fear not.  I have some relevant experience.

I've flown all frames of 52 scenarios.

I have been CO seven times and GL (where I participated in strategy and led portions of a side) another 25 times.

Some of those where I was CO were among the most-complicated designs.  Also, I was axis CO in Rangoon, '42, which is one of the hardest (perhaps the hardest) on the axis side.

Anyway, despite any of that, history proves that running 3 scenarios per year works just fine.

It has been done many times, and worked out fine.