Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Hajo on May 08, 2009, 11:36:58 PM
-
I had a blast....I never knew the LW made so many 190s and 109s :lol
Great job by all!
:salute
-
I never seen so many jugs that high in my life. :O :O
Bombers got raped :devil :devil.
Fantastic first frame. :salute
-
<S> Allies, was extreme fun!
-
good times
:salute
-
Great fight over A66. The 109 G14 where not hard to fight as i anticpated while in the P-47 D25
-
It was a good time. I hope the 2nd frame is just as fruitful. :aok
-
Great fight over A66. The 109 G14 where not hard to fight as i anticpated while in the P-47 D25
Just for the record Oak. The 109 G14 is a pig above 22k. Anything lower and you guys would have had your hands filled with the 109s.
-
Just for the record Oak. The 109 G14 is a pig above 22k. Anything lower and you guys would have had your hands filled with the 109s.
guess i need to study my 109s. I thought they fly well that high up.
-
I would rather have a G-2 above 20k ft than a G-14. We need a 109G-6/AS for these 8th AF FSOs.
-
Mongrels had an excellent night.
We had 23 pilots (actually 24, but the extra was a gunner) and 0 deaths.
Lost a few drones, but not a bomber single pilot. Made it to our target, had a successful drop and flew home. One P-38 pilot had to ditch in the Channel. He was captured and another P-51 pilot had to bail over France.
Credit goes to our escorts:
412th Braunco Mustangs
Lynchmob
MAG-7
-
Salute to the Allied Cic on the use of "Decoys" .
Rt was tasked with patrolling 13.10 sector. Why any bomber group would choose this route to A71 would be suicide because of the heavy concentration of radar is beyond me, however, those where the orders and we followed them.
RT found in 2 cases a lone Jug flying around 2 airfields, A46 and A47 or A49,(I cant remember) in that order,right before A71 was to be attacked thus on radar, it would appear a force flying that route. In both cases the single jug was just circling not making any bomb run. So future axis Cic's take note of this tactic. :D
-
RT found in 2 cases a lone Jug flying around 2 airfields, A46 and A47 or A49,(I cant remember) in that order,right before A71 was to be attacked thus on radar, it would appear a force flying that route. In both cases the single jug was just circling not making any bomb run. So future axis Cic's take note of this tactic. :D
Didn't the CM's issue a statement against tactics like this?
-
Didn't the CM's issue a statement against tactics like this?
That's what I was thinking Saxman. We have the proof. I wanted to put the information out there and let them decide if it is within the rules.
-
RT found in 2 cases a lone Jug flying around 2 airfields, A46 and A47 or A49,(I cant remember) in that order,right before A71 was to be attacked thus on radar, it would appear a force flying that route. In both cases the single jug was just circling not making any bomb run. So future axis Cic's take note of this tactic. :D
That dose seem like a cheating on AH considering in real life that doesn't work.
-
Didn't the CM's issue a statement against tactics like this?
I don't remember any rules on using decoys, none the less, they weren't in my orders.
-
I'm pretty sure this came up a couple months ago. It's not in the RULES, but individual pilots buzzing around flashing bases to distract the defenses is an unwritten "Don't do that." I think it was one of the gamey tactics that came up in one of the threads from August Storm when we had Allied pilots suspected of bailing over a task group to draw AAA fire away from the rest of the strike.
-
Hmm.. I don't recall that.
IMO I think it's silly to not allow separate flights to flash bases to draw away enemy defenders.
Now bailing and remaining in a chute to draw fire or flash a base is pretty gamey and should be punishable.
-
We had a blast hitting A66. Unfortunately, As Bravo Strike Bomber Lead, I misjudged the flight path and at T+ 35 had to throw the flight plan out the window. I had hoped to be able to concentrate our bomber formation, but we were just plain running out of time.
Stoney, Dred, Thank you for the escort. You got us to the target, and that's what counts. Tried to keep the radio comms as professional as possible as well. Hope there was no confusion.
-
That discussion had to do with pilots in chute's floating in the ack to distract it from the attacking planes.
It had nothing to do with aircraft flying in the radar ring to "flash" a base as a decoy.
-
IMO I think it's silly to not allow separate flights to flash bases to draw away enemy defenders.
It's very gamey in my opinion. During the war, what radar there was would have been able to tell the difference between a single P47 and a huge box of bombers. Also, there would have been spotters on the ground relaying aircraft types and numbers to HQ.
Single aircraft sent solely for the purpose of flashing bases, is very gamey. If there isn't a rule against it, there should be.
I thought the point was to encourage aerial combat. Is FSO about the fighting? Or is it about the score at the end?
-
It's very gamey in my opinion. During the war, what radar there was would have been able to tell the difference between a single P47 and a huge box of bombers. Also, there would have been spotters on the ground relaying aircraft types and numbers to HQ.
Single aircraft sent solely for the purpose of flashing bases, is very gamey. If there isn't a rule against it, there should be.
I thought the point was to encourage aerial combat. Is FSO about the fighting? Or is it about the score at the end?
Your right about German radar. As i said earlyer, something like that will not distract axis. There should a be a rule on that if we can not see them on radar or have the CiC have the ability to see them on radar.
-
During the War the RAF oft times would send out a Mosquito ahead of the major Lancaster formations as a path finder.
So....whether it is gaming the game <shrugz>.
-
That discussion had to do with pilots in chute's floating in the ack to distract it from the attacking planes.
It had nothing to do with aircraft flying in the radar ring to "flash" a base as a decoy.
Which unfortunately happened lastnite as a player stayed "inchute" at 71 to draw the ack!
-
Mongrels had an excellent night.
We had 23 pilots (actually 24, but the extra was a gunner) and 0 deaths.
Lost a few drones, but not a bomber single pilot. Made it to our target, had a successful drop and flew home. One P-38 pilot had to ditch in the Channel. He was captured and another P-51 pilot had to bail over France.
Credit goes to our escorts:
412th Braunco Mustangs
Lynchmob
MAG-7
Air Raiders (109s) and Killuminati (190s) were tasked with defense of HQ. The 109s were our early detection force while us 190s would be used to hit the bomber force before they hit HQ. VF6 were also tasked with 109s for HQ defense, but only 1 showed up. :(
Around T+40, the Air Raiders squadron reported a large fighter sweep composed of +20 P51s heading to HQ, so our 190s immediately vectored out of the target zone. Then the Air Raiders reported that the bomber force was seen 10 miles behind that fighter sweep, so once again, our 190s were vectored North and were now going to fly around the fighter sweep. Then the Air Raiders once again sent word, "the enemy escorts were stripped!" Horrido! Now our 190s are salivating at the chance to annihilate a group of B24s. We then turned into the projected flight path of the B24s and immediately found the B24s! But wait, is there another axis group attacking the B24s? P51s, +10 were still giving close escort to the B24s! This hive had bees!
Our group now knew we had one chance at those bombers, so without hesitation, we blew through those escorts and fired at any bomber we could focus on. First shots on the left side of the B24 formation occurred from our 190s. Then, it seemed like the whole world lit up, as tracers filled the sky in all directions. Our closure rates was fast, and I found myself switching targets every few seconds, maneuvering hard to avoid collisions a few times. In a few more seconds, I found myself looking back to see this awesome B24 formation a mere 800 yards behind me. Before I could pull to the left for another run, a nose gunner on the lead b24 ate his Wheaties that morning and nailed me. I then bailed out and opened the silk. With my engine no longer making a sound, I could now hear the roar of those B24s and 50 cals, as I floated to the ground. The rest of the 190s, now were being chased away, immensely outnumbered by the P51s. Our 190s went from the hunters to the hunted in a blink of an eye. We were overwhelmed, hunted down and killed like dogs!
The event started out with optimism regardless of our lower defensive size, but the plan was good. As the events unfolded, it quickly turned into horror and some were left with a sour taste. I personally can not wait for Frame 2, as we will seek our revenge and hunt down the 332nd like the dogs they are!
Well done to those who attacked the HQ strat.
:salute
-
If both sides use the Radar Warning Range to detect enemy attacks, then both sides should be able to spoof or trip the radar too draw away enemy defenders.
-
Kermit, great AAR. :) :rock
-
It's very gamey in my opinion. During the war, what radar there was would have been able to tell the difference between a single P47 and a huge box of bombers. Also, there would have been spotters on the ground relaying aircraft types and numbers to HQ.
Single aircraft sent solely for the purpose of flashing bases, is very gamey. If there isn't a rule against it, there should be.
I thought the point was to encourage aerial combat. Is FSO about the fighting? Or is it about the score at the end?
This type of rule, if initiated will definifitely bite both ways. As in the past, many routes are surrounded radar on the paths in and out. It is indeed one thing that planners look at on how to get around them so as not to alert the nmy of their intention or route to target. With the 60 min on target rule, on some setups it is impossible to not set off radar of non target bases to meet that requirement.
For something like what you are suggesting, then the pro must be taken away as well as the con for those that are defending. All feilds other than the target bases should be turned off or non existant. Target bases are just that, targets....... size, alt, hdg is always a guess for those defending. Thats part of the defense guess work in trying to hit your nmy before they hit you. IMHO, ploys by using the radar to draw off enemy from the intended target is not much different then many mission in europe that sent strike forces to other areas as well as the use of pathfinders. The luftwaffe had to many times guess on the intended target as well as split their forces for that guess. In this case, the targets are always known to the defenders.
-
Frame I was great, flying 25K+ Jugs at A66.........then barely having fuel to come back home lol
Wish to get a spitfire in frame II :pray :pray :pray
-
This type of rule, if initiated will definifitely bite both ways. As in the past, many routes are surrounded radar on the paths in and out. It is indeed one thing that planners look at on how to get around them so as not to alert the nmy of their intention or route to target. With the 60 min on target rule, on some setups it is impossible to not set off radar of non target bases to meet that requirement.
For something like what you are suggesting, then the pro must be taken away as well as the con for those that are defending. All feilds other than the target bases should be turned off or non existant. Target bases are just that, targets....... size, alt, hdg is always a guess for those defending. Thats part of the defense guess work in trying to hit your nmy before they hit you. IMHO, ploys by using the radar to draw off enemy from the intended target is not much different then many mission in europe that sent strike forces to other areas as well as the use of pathfinders. The luftwaffe had to many times guess on the intended target as well as split their forces for that guess. In this case, the targets are always known to the defenders.
Maybe a second look at the T+60 rule is in order then. Afterall, isn't the T+60 rule intended to move things along and encourage aerial combat? But if it forces CiCs to take advantage of a gamey aspect of play (which discourages aerial combat), then maybe it needs to be adjusted. Maybe the rule should be more tailored to the scenario. I mean, why +60 every scenario? If the targets are deeper into enemy territory, maybe it should be +75, +90, who knows? If the time limit is going to force straight line paths, then it is a problem that needs a peek. Bomber groups should have a little time flexibility to plan their routes.
It shouldn't be a major problem to build custom time on target flexibility into each scenario.
On another topic. It seems to me that the Allied ration of bombers to fighters is a bit skewed in favor of the fighters on this set up. But I could be wrong about that, interested to hear other opinions.
-
Salute to the Allied Cic on the use of "Decoys" .
Rt was tasked with patrolling 13.10 sector. Why any bomber group would choose this route to A71 would be suicide because of the heavy concentration of radar is beyond me, however, those where the orders and we followed them.
RT found in 2 cases a lone Jug flying around 2 airfields, A46 and A47 or A49,(I cant remember) in that order,right before A71 was to be attacked thus on radar, it would appear a force flying that route. In both cases the single jug was just circling not making any bomb run. So future axis Cic's take note of this tactic. :D
Didn't the CM's issue a statement against tactics like this?
I don't remember any rules on using decoys, none the less, they weren't in my orders.
They were not in the CiC's orders. The AK's and the 334th were tasked with providing escort/fighter sweep for the strike force with 34 fighters. I had estimated that 50+ fighters would be protecting A71 (the logs show at least 53). In hopes of making it more of a "fair" fight, and to allow the bombers to at least make it to target; an element of the AK's were ordered to flash A48, A49 and A50 in hopes of drawing some of the protecting CAP away from our intended route. As Dustoff noted above, it was not a logical route to attack from. It was a tactic that seemed to have a modicum of success.
I'm pretty sure this came up a couple months ago. It's not in the RULES, but individual pilots buzzing around flashing bases to distract the defenses is an unwritten "Don't do that." I think it was one of the gamey tactics that came up in one of the threads from August Storm when we had Allied pilots suspected of bailing over a task group to draw AAA fire away from the rest of the strike.
I have been participating in FSO's for seven years, performing CiC duties more than a dozen times . As a former AK FSO CO and current S2 officer, I know the rules. I follow the FSO forum closely, I make sure I'm up to date with the rules and have access to the Objectives of each frame. I doubt that more than 25% of FSO participants can make the same claim. Never, I repeat never has flashing bases been deemed a violation of the rules or has been considered gamey. It has been a strategy that has been used before in FSOs by CiC's as well as in Scenarios.
It's very gamey in my opinion. During the war, what radar there was would have been able to tell the difference between a single P47 and a huge box of bombers. Also, there would have been spotters on the ground relaying aircraft types and numbers to HQ.
Single aircraft sent solely for the purpose of flashing bases, is very gamey. If there isn't a rule against it, there should be.
I thought the point was to encourage aerial combat. Is FSO about the fighting? Or is it about the score at the end?
IMO what is gamey, is allowing the horde to mass by knowing the enemy's target, by what time they have to strike and being able to deduce the general direction they will come from, but I understand the conscessions needed for gameplay.
The point of FSO IMHO is to offer an alternative to the Main Arenas. And yes in the end it is about score. That's why points are assigned and tallied. All games need a winner and a loser. This is achieved through air combat, strategy and tactics. If all you look forward to is furballing, then I would suggest that you remain in the MA.
-
Good post Wxman.
-
IMO what is gamey, is allowing the horde to mass by knowing the enemy's target, by what time they have to strike and being able to deduce the general direction they will come from, but I understand the conscessions needed for gameplay.
The point of FSO IMHO is to offer an alternative to the Main Arenas. And yes in the end it is about score. That's why points are assigned and tallied. All games need a winner and a loser. This is achieved through air combat, strategy and tactics. If all you look forward to is furballing, then I would suggest that you remain in the MA.
A little hostile sounding, I really don't disagree with you that much... I agree that there should be some unknowns as far as targets. The commanders of the attacking side should be able to choose from a list of possible targets. Then if they want to send small bomber groups to several targets as decoys, no problems. But single fighters that supposedly can imitate entire formations of bombers is rather silly.
I just think that there is room for improvement in how FSO works. I'm not claiming to be the supreme master of all thinngs that will decree the answer from on high. I'm just tossing out thoughts. Sorry if I stepped on your toes by suggesting that your tactics are gamey.
-
Great post WxMan. It is apparent some complaints actually translate into "I got no Killz."
The everyone wants an edge attitude seems to prevail in a few and they are the most vociferous.
Their attitude can ruin a Scenario when a CiC trys gaming the game. No CiC has done that so far in FSO.
History and fun is why I participate. DGS featured long flights of boredom then 10 to 15 mins of sheer terror.
Same with this FSO! For about 45 mins was just forming up and looking and the radio chatter picks up
as enemies are spotted and fight begins. That my friends is reality! That is what most of us I dare say
strive for. With the reality comes a great deal of fun if you have good planning and a good attitude.
If one doesn't like that and wants only furballs within 10 mins and no structure please keep
your game in the MA.
And I do agree with Krusty on the 32 plane limit. One would think by this time that would have been addressed.
JG/11 and JG/2 was great fun!
Hajo
-
:salute Hajo
That was fun indeed. I could only imagine what those B26 pilots were screaming on vox when JG11 had an entire head on pass on the stream. Many bombers went down within the first 30 seconds of combat.
:salute
-
Didn't the CM's issue a statement against tactics like this?
The rule is that all objectives must be attacked by a credible force (squadron strength or more) by T+60. We instituted that rule to disabuse the community of the idea of flashing a base with a single fighter at T+59, and then having the main attack come in at T+75 or some other time after T+60. There is no prohibition against flashing bases for deception purposes.
-
It is apparent some complaints actually translate into "I got no Killz."
I hope that wasn't directed at me. I got a killz in the frame. :D
-
<S>Kermit,
Your 190's came into that B24 force without hesitation to do as much damage as possible. Tenacious is the word that comes to mind. Us close escorts often had to hold fire becouse of your proximity to the bombers. So :salute to your 190 force, they were very determined despite the odds. Oh yea that should have been 10+p-51 and a p-38, I wanted a cannon :D
:salute
BigRat
332nd
-
A little hostile sounding, I really don't disagree with you that much... I agree that there should be some unknowns as far as targets. The commanders of the attacking side should be able to choose from a list of possible targets. Then if they want to send small bomber groups to several targets as decoys, no problems. But single fighters that supposedly can imitate entire formations of bombers is rather silly.
I just think that there is room for improvement in how FSO works. I'm not claiming to be the supreme master of all thinngs that will decree the answer from on high. I'm just tossing out thoughts. Sorry if I stepped on your toes by suggesting that your tactics are gamey.
I apologize if you took my post as a personal attack, it was not my intent. It just appeared to me that we have a differing views of what we find appealing in this event.
As I have stated, I have a long history with FSO's. I have seen it evolve from what my perception of a violent chess match it once was, to more of a carnivorous tug of war it seems to be now. This is only natural as many of the participants spend a year or more in the MA before trying this wonderful venue, cementing their view on how any aspect of Aces High should be played. It has in my opinion changed the event significantly over the years. Many initially come here just for the fight and are unhappy if the battle is not on their terms, while others like me not only enjoy the fight, but get the added pleasure of denying the enemy their terms of engagement through the use of legal tactics and strategy. In this instance it was deception. A strategy that has been used in military campaigns over thousands of years. If you perceive what I did as gamey, you are entitled to your opinion, but I beg to differ.
Regardless, the defenders at A71 did a fine job. I estimate that we lost over two-thirds of our fighters and about the same percentage of our bomber force. However we took many scalps and the bombers did drop on the target. I'd like to think my bit of trickery allowed that to happen.
-
Just to add my opinion (for what it's worth)...
Having 1 plane (or 10 for that matter) flash a non-target base in an attempt at deception to draw defenders away from their patrol zones, should never work. As has been stated many, many times before, the targets and time restrictions are published for all to see. If a non-target base is flashing, then defenders are fools to leave their station to go chasing after it. But then again, lots of people are hungry for a kill and will do stupid things in an attempt to find one. At the very most, perhaps they would adjust their patrol a little, but should never leave their assigned defense zone until positive ID is made on the attacking force.
So, as long as people starve for kills and can be coaxed into leaving their patrol area by flashing a non-target base, I say why not do it?
On a personal note, I was in a P38 tasked to escort bombers to a Grunt facility. We came across the enemy defenders and engaged them. Our orders were to force them low and/or away and to not chase them down to where we could no longer defend our bombers. I didn't get any kills that sortie - smoked one baddie who rtb'd - he was out of the fight and I count that as a success. I tried to stay with the bombers and on the way back home I was one of 2-3 fighters keeping an eye on 4 bomber formations to make sure they got out of France safely.
-
The rule is that all objectives must be attacked by a credible force (squadron strength or more) by T+60. We instituted that rule to disabuse the community of the idea of flashing a base with a single fighter at T+59, and then having the main attack come in at T+75 or some other time after T+60. There is no prohibition against flashing bases for deception purposes.
From what I understood in the argument during that time frame, the rule was instituted to settle what was considered an attack to meet the T+60 rule. At that time a few fighters were doing a pass over killing radar or feild gun in order to say an attack was made to meet the time requirement. I don't beleive it had anything to do with the radar being set off. I dont remember any argument along flashing of radar.
Of course, my memory is fading as I get older ;)
-
If both sides use the Radar Warning Range to detect enemy attacks, then both sides should be able to spoof or trip the radar too draw away enemy defenders.
Actually, this was a common tactic throughout the war in nearly all theaters of operation.
-
Air Raiders (109s) and Killuminati (190s) were tasked with defense of HQ. The 109s were our early detection force while us 190s would be used to hit the bomber force before they hit HQ. VF6 were also tasked with 109s for HQ defense, but only 1 showed up. :(
Ah, I was curious as to where the Axis was on the attack of the HQ.
Heres the story from one of the escort squadrons, MAG-7:
MAG-7 was only able to get 4 pilots over France that night. Our No.5 man discoed and No. 6 arrived a little too late. We took off from A 8 and climbed to about 28,000 ft. We were flying close escort. Everyone was nervous due to anticipated defence of the high value target. There were 30 B-24s total and about 20-28 P-51Bs escorting. As we were about 15 min from target, we got word of several 109s out in front. The largest of the three escort squadrons headed out in front to deal with the 109 (Probably why you got the call of the escorts being stripped ;).) The rest stayed with the bombers. About 2-3 min later, 190s appeared to our left, and those who did not attack the 109s went after the 190s. We were able to dispatch them quick enough so the bombers could drop on the HQ. We turned North and high-tailed it home.
Overall, MAG-7 didn't loose a single pilot from enemy action. Also, the buffs were able to drop on the HQ without a single complete loss of all three drones.
Well done 332nd :salute.
That was some good bombing out there.
-
Ah, I was curious as to where the Axis was on the attack of the HQ.
Heres the story from one of the escort squadrons, MAG-7:
MAG-7 was only able to get 4 pilots over France that night. Our No.5 man discoed and No. 6 arrived a little too late. We took off from A 8 and climbed to about 28,000 ft. We were flying close escort. Everyone was nervous due to anticipated defence of the high value target. There were 30 B-24s total and about 20-28 P-51Bs escorting. As we were about 15 min from target, we got word of several 109s out in front. The largest of the three escort squadrons headed out in front to deal with the 109 (Probably why you got the call of the escorts being stripped ;).) The rest stayed with the bombers. About 2-3 min later, 190s appeared to our left, and those who did not attack the 109s went after the 190s. We were able to dispatch them quick enough so the bombers could drop on the HQ. We turned North and high-tailed it home.
Overall, MAG-7 didn't loose a single pilot from enemy action. Also, the buffs were able to drop on the HQ without a single complete loss of all three drones.
Well done 332nd :salute.
That was some good bombing out there.
Very well played Ponyace.
Good luck for frame 2!
:salute
-
Just to be clear using the tactic of flashing base radar is legal. There will be no rule or guideline changed to prohibit this strategy.
-
The rule is that all objectives must be attacked by a credible force (squadron strength or more) by T+60. We instituted that rule to disabuse the community of the idea of flashing a base with a single fighter at T+59, and then having the main attack come in at T+75 or some other time after T+60. There is no prohibition against flashing bases for deception purposes.
Hi Stoney
If a squad follows it's orders but doesn't hit the target until say T+70 is it still in violation?
At T+35-40 we realized our orders would put us 10-15 mins behind so we changed up to compensate. Had we followed through blindly we would have been late. We often point out potential problems but sometimes this happens. It would be a shame if a squad simply followed orders and was penalized. The CiC's don't always have the time to do a dry run on the worse case route.
-
Hi Stoney
If a squad follows it's orders but doesn't hit the target until say T+70 is it still in violation?
At T+35-40 we realized our orders would put us 10-15 mins behind so we changed up to compensate. Had we followed through blindly we would have been late. We often point out potential problems but sometimes this happens. It would be a shame if a squad simply followed orders and was penalized. The CiC's don't always have the time to do a dry run on the worse case route.
<S> I'm glad you guys took the initiative and changed course to make the T+60 mark. Good Job <S>
-
Hi Stoney
If a squad follows it's orders but doesn't hit the target until say T+70 is it still in violation?
At T+35-40 we realized our orders would put us 10-15 mins behind so we changed up to compensate. Had we followed through blindly we would have been late. We often point out potential problems but sometimes this happens. It would be a shame if a squad simply followed orders and was penalized. The CiC's don't always have the time to do a dry run on the worse case route.
Yes, even though it wouldn't be the squad's fault per se. You did the right thing. I noticed the deviation while we were enroute and figured that was the reason for it.
-
Thought I called that over the radio, you guys must have been just out of range. Sorry if the message got dropped
-
PFactordave the post I made did not refer to you.
Being a veteran of many Scenarios and FSO nights, it seems a minority of players and usually the
most vociferous have complaints or are trying to win the event in any way they can. They want an edge.
It is the winning at all costs attitude that can ruin an event for the majority. How they win does not matter
they just want bragging rights. It almost occurred in our last Scenario. And it would have but for some level
heads involved in the Scenario. FSO so far I've not seen that. The CiCs have done a great job.
History...that is a fun factor to me. Yes...frequently at most LW planes got two passes on a bomber stream.
History...the Allies lost some escorts and bombers and still pressed on to their targets knowing full well
some aircraft were damaged and their fuel was running low. Escorts also knew since they were over enemy airspace
that if they had to bail or ditch there was no returning to battle. the LW fighters however could refuel, rearm, even replane
and again tear into the Allied formations with fewer escorts, some damaged and low fuel, and fewer number of defensive fire
from the enemy Bombers. That was one advantage the LW did have historically. They fought over home ground. That also
unfortunately showed they were losing the War. The alt at which the Allied bombers flew and the speed in FSO is accurate.
The way the LW fighters perform in this FSO is accurate also. the P47, P51, were designed as high alt fighters to escort
effectively. And yes...the bombers had to fly straight and defend themselves.
I had a blast escorting. I knew the Jug was going to be tight on fuel. Returning home might not occur. The fights were great from
28K to the ground.
I had fun....with the History and the white knuckled combat that ensued.
It's called a Twofer!
-
The Unforgiven was the second set of B 24's with P38 escort that fell into Kermit's zone of operation. ImaDot was also in a squad on escort. We hit the target and swung for home. I actually swung back for a second run on the target. Our escorts did a great job for the bombers. They were well disciplined and forced the enemy below our altitude. On "tail end charlie" on the way back I had 2 Unforgiven P-38's and Imadot help me back to base. The 8th AF bombing missions are always a challenge. :salute to the CM staff that dreams up the fights. An even bigger SALUTE to the brave men that actually flew these missions on both sides in WWII. Attacking a fully armed B24 formation is not a light undertaking.