Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Nefarious on October 19, 2013, 10:16:36 AM
-
Greetings!
Grab your Snow Gear because in November we head East, to that city infamous city on the Volga.
Their will be two new special objectives this FSO. A "simulated" Airlift Objective and a Pitomnik Defenders Objective. Please read the rules carefully and contact me with any questions.
Frame Dates are November 1st, 8th and 15th. Squad Modification ends and Squad CICs will be selected Thursday, Sept 24th.
Good luck all!
http://ahevents.org/fso-current-next-event.html
-
That's October 24th for CICs and mods. :lol
-
G3-MF is updated for November!
:rock
SlipKnoT
-
I thought others would have commented by now, but I guess not, so I'll take my shot at expressing my dissatisfaction with the next FSO. Frankly, the radical departure from the normal FSO concept of this setup has me more than a little concerned about the direction it appears to be trying to take the FSO community, and I'm surprised that there has not been more of a reaction here.
First, the complexity of this "scenario" (and I use that comparison to the typical Saturday scenario event intentionally), is such that it is going to be extremely hard if not impossible for a CiC to command and control his forces once they launch. We all know how hard it is to get our people to read and follow even simplistic orders...but this one has so many little nit-picky and unique rules that this one definately violates the KISS principle.
Next, a glance at the map indicates an extremely large ammount of available terrain, but the focus of the objectives seem to force everything into a tiny 4-grid square area, thereby effectively robbing the commander of the freedom to maneuver, or to seek a less obvious route to the target. While the scenario lists 2 objectives (re-supply of Stalingrad and defense of Pitomnik Airfield), the close proximity of these two fields results in it being in reality a single objective...the loss of Pitomnik equals the inabilty to re-supply Stalingrad. The 2 objectives are just too close together.
Instead of spreading the fight over a much larger piece of the terrain, and providing some measures for a commander to achieve a local superiority thru numbers or skillfull positioning of forces, you appear to be forcing all of the fight into a very small area. Basically you are setting up a giant MA furball, and I'm not buying into that kind of setup.
Also, I hope the inclusion of the P-40F in this setup was a typo, as I have to wonder why we are including a 1943 aircraft in a 1942 scenario...P-40Bs and P-40Es would make more sense.
Lastly, this setup continues the recent trend within the FSO of "single-sided" setups (i.e "The Green Desert" and "To Win The Winter Sky") where one side does nothing but defend, while the other does nothing but attack. I believe that this type of setup betrays the spirit of the FSO that I have come to love and look forward to for the past 12 years.
In fact it makes me not want to participate.
CptA
VMF-101 Nightmares
-
I thought others would have commented by now, but I guess not, so I'll take my shot at expressing my dissatisfaction with the next FSO. Frankly, the radical departure from the normal FSO concept of this setup has me more than a little concerned about the direction it appears to be trying to take the FSO community, and I'm surprised that there has not been more of a reaction here.
First, the complexity of this "scenario" (and I use that comparison to the typical Saturday scenario event intentionally), is such that it is going to be extremely hard if not impossible for a CiC to command and control his forces once they launch. We all know how hard it is to get our people to read and follow even simplistic orders...but this one has so many little nit-picky and unique rules that this one definately violates the KISS principle.
Next, a glance at the map indicates an extremely large ammount of available terrain, but the focus of the objectives seem to force everything into a tiny 4-grid square area, thereby effectively robbing the commander of the freedom to maneuver, or to seek a less obvious route to the target. While the scenario lists 2 objectives (re-supply of Stalingrad and defense of Pitomnik Airfield), the close proximity of these two fields results in it being in reality a single objective...the loss of Pitomnik equals the inabilty to re-supply Stalingrad. The 2 objectives are just too close together.
Instead of spreading the fight over a much larger piece of the terrain, and providing some measures for a commander to achieve a local superiority thru numbers or skillfull positioning of forces, you appear to be forcing all of the fight into a very small area. Basically you are setting up a giant MA furball, and I'm not buying into that kind of setup.
Also, I hope the inclusion of the P-40F in this setup was a typo, as I have to wonder why we are including a 1943 aircraft in a 1942 scenario...P-40Bs and P-40Es would make more sense.
Lastly, this setup continues the recent trend within the FSO of "single-sided" setups (i.e "The Green Desert" and "To Win The Winter Sky") where one side does nothing but defend, while the other does nothing but attack. I believe that this type of setup betrays the spirit of the FSO that I have come to love and look forward to for the past 12 years.
In fact it makes me not want to participate.
CptA
VMF-101 Nightmares
To answer some of your concerns.
The Pitomnik Resupply and Defenders Objective will take place at the same field. A25 is the base the He 111s will land/rearm at, and the Pitomnik defenders will launch from that field. These will not be the only two objectives in this FSO as you seem to be concerned about. The Allies will be attacking 2 to 3 fields and vehicle bases and city strats. So it's not really entirely one sided. So the fight will not be centralized around Pitomnik/Stalingrad. The map I included on the setup page will show how the fight will be spread out more than 4 grids.
The P-40F was chosen as more of an in-between for the P-40E and the P-40N. Obviously the engines are the big difference here, but it will still be competitive against the Axis and not an overwhelming force.
These are some of the things we could have discussed in the several PMs I included you and Filth on in the last two weeks. I still appreciate your input though <S>
-
please say the puffy ack at stalingrad will be disabled or seriously dumbed down...
-
Im not quite on CptA's side yet, but Im leaning his way. Allow me to explain:
The Green Desert was indeed one sided but not my design. The "defend only trend" that you mentioned is right on. I have no problem with defending only, but it should be occasional. I.E. 3 a year and spaced out. I understand that Late War Luftwaffe is defend only and essentially anything late war is defend only for Axis so that may be hard to do. So, maybe there is nothing we can do to stop the "only defend" setups. That doesn't bother me all that much. What does is the radical changes that Nefarious seems to be forcing upon FSO (this is not a slap in the face). I am a fan of the simple and easy-to-follow setups. Im not against complex scoring by no means, but why change when things are great? Another reason why I am not completely backing up CptA is because I love Eastern Front and it is always a slaughterhouse. However, kills will not matter as much as objective in this one so it seems that Nef has found a way to make the score not appear as lopsided as the fight will be. So I am just waiting it out to see what happens :)
<S>
-
On an average FSO night now many birds do you manage to get into the air?
boo
-
Recently around 300. That is pilots, if there are bomber formations even more.
-
The many 1943-45 8th/15th Air Force setups (ETO and MED), Japan 1945 and 1940 Battle of Britain setups (just to name a few) that we have done in the last decade where one side just defends were not radical departures from the past or deviations from the spirit of FSO. Many designs have just a defender. You will continue to see a mix of both types; attacker-defender and attacker-attacker (where both sides do both). Have fun. :salute
-
This FSO will use the "typical" standard scoring as indicated in the setup and not the scoring system I rolled out back in my last setup.
The only real big difference in this FSO is the addition of two objectives of which we have never seen before. The scoring for these two objectives isn't really all that "radical". Fly the "supplies" in, get points. Fly the "personnel" out, get points.
1) The Airlift Objective - In reality it's just another bomber mission, but instead of bombing the enemy field the objective is to land at A25, rearm, then take back off and land at the designated fields.
2) Pitomnik Defenders Objective - This is basically just the Ace Missions I do in my setups, expanded to two whole squads every frame. Their objective is to shoot down enemy aircraft (get points) and defend the airlift objective at Pitomnik.
EDIT: I would also like to add again that this FSO isn't really "single sided". The Allies will have multiple targets to attack outside of the Airlift Objective. My original idea was to have a standard style event with both sides having Offensive and Defensive Objectives, but I had to remove formations because the fact that the Drones are lost on the runway after Rearm. In doing this, the Axis lost a huge force multiplier and it's why I dropped the standard Offensive objectives for the Axis.
So the target breakdown will be more like 3 or 4 Allied Offensive Objectives to 1 Axis Offensive Objective.
-
"I-16 20mm option will be disabled."
Why? This can't be for balance sake.
-
"I-16 20mm option will be disabled."
Why? This can't be for balance sake.
It was brought to my attention and verified that the I-16 rarely used this gun package and was rare in front line service.
-
"I-16 20mm option will be disabled."
Why? This can't be for balance sake.
lay off the cookies and with the lack of 20mm's you will be lighter...then you can take 100% fuel.
-
And it's as if the ShVAKs never existed. :aok
I'm all for balance. :cheers:
-
Sorry I just today had a chance to peek at my emails. Been to busy lately to do anything but work.
I havent had a chance to look over the proposed design, but being that I fly with CptA and we as a squad share alot of chatter on what we like and dislike about certain setups, I have to say I prefer standard designs for FSOs with both sides sharing the attack/defend role. That said whatever comes down the pike, if the squad is flying and I have the time, Im there.
-
This FSO will use the "typical" standard scoring as indicated in the setup and not the scoring system I rolled out back in my last setup.
The only real big difference in this FSO is the addition of two objectives of which we have never seen before. The scoring for these two objectives isn't really all that "radical". Fly the "supplies" in, get points. Fly the "personnel" out, get points.
1) The Airlift Objective - In reality it's just another bomber mission, but instead of bombing the enemy field the objective is to land at A25, rearm, then take back off and land at the designated fields.
2) Pitomnik Defenders Objective - This is basically just the Ace Missions I do in my setups, expanded to two whole squads every frame. Their objective is to shoot down enemy aircraft (get points) and defend the airlift objective at Pitomnik.
EDIT: I would also like to add again that this FSO isn't really "single sided". The Allies will have multiple targets to attack outside of the Airlift Objective. My original idea was to have a standard style event with both sides having Offensive and Defensive Objectives, but I had to remove formations because the fact that the Drones are lost on the runway after Rearm. In doing this, the Axis lost a huge force multiplier and it's why I dropped the standard Offensive objectives for the Axis.
So the target breakdown will be more like 3 or 4 Allied Offensive Objectives to 1 Axis Offensive Objective.
I must disagree on your statement in item #1. This is hardly "another bomber mission". Bomber missions don't slow down, land, taxi, sit stationary, taxi again, then take off - all while under attack. This objective requires extreme coordination by the fighter escort, but the bombers may be so vulnerable that mounting an adequate defense for them proves impossible. You may want to also disable the rocket loadout from the I-16 as well.
That said, I cant wait to see this event in action. This brings a very unique objective into FSO, and I hope it proves to be successful in application.
-
It was brought to my attention and verified that the I-16 rarely used this gun package and was rare in front line service.
Have you got a ready source for that?
-
Have you got a ready source for that?
It was brought up for discussion here:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,353240.msg4673556.html#msg4673556
I tend to to agree with the OP, I did a little snooping via internets and books on the shelf and by the amount of photographic evidence and historical accounts it seems like these were used sporadically at best, where as I can find several accounts of using the rockets in combat, which appears they had a fair supply of. So, not really a verifiable source, but one that could be reversible if needed.
I must disagree on your statement in item #1. This is hardly "another bomber mission". Bomber missions don't slow down, land, taxi, sit stationary, taxi again, then take off - all while under attack. This objective requires extreme coordination by the fighter escort, but the bombers may be so vulnerable that mounting an adequate defense for them proves impossible. You may want to also disable the rocket loadout from the I-16 as well.
That said, I cant wait to see this event in action. This brings a very unique objective into FSO, and I hope it proves to be successful in application.
Yes you're absolutely right, poor wording on my part. I was referring more to the fact the axis still had an offensive style objective using bombers, which seems to be the concern of some by being "single-sided".
I hope it is successful too, thanks for your interest.
-
I give this setup a big +1 for innovation alone. Trying new things is hardly ever a bad thing. If it works out for the good, then maybe we can use it again in the future. If not, then lesson learned and carry on. Innovation is what keeps things fresh and keeps things from becoming stale.
-
I give this setup a big +1 for innovation alone. Trying new things is hardly ever a bad thing. If it works out for the good, then maybe we can use it again in the future. If not, then lesson learned and carry on. Innovation is what keeps things fresh and keeps things from becoming stale.
:aok absolutely. it's a real shame more people around here don't see things that way...
-
For the Airlift objective:
1. Can the 111s make more than one trip until at total of 48 round trips is reached?
2. Is there a time limit such as all 111s need to be rearmed/landed at A25 (completion of first leg) by T+60?
3. Even though everyone in FSO is a good sport, how will you police the No-Jett-Ord rule for the 111s?
-
For the Airlift objective:
1. Can the 111s make more than one trip until at total of 48 round trips is reached?
2. Is there a time limit such as all 111s need to be rearmed/landed at A25 (completion of first leg) by T+60?
3. Even though everyone in FSO is a good sport, how will you police the No-Jett-Ord rule for the 111s?
1. 48 He 111s minimum must launch every frame. Due to the flight time involved it would be impossible for a He111 to fly to A25 and back to A71, A21 or A22 then back to A25. (If I understand you correctly). A direct flight to A25 NOE took me 37 minutes, 45 seconds in a fully loaded He 111.
2. Yes and No. I expect the Airlift to BEGIN REARMING operations at or before T+60. I will not penalize aircraft that are en-route, on final or taxiing so long as He 111s have began rearming at A25. This addition is going to be added into rules and settings at ahevents.org right now.
3. The CM Logs can tell me if any of the He111s dropped bombs and they will be checked every frame.
-
1. 48 He 111s minimum must launch every frame. Due to the flight time involved it would be impossible for a He111 to fly to A25 and back to A71, A21 or A22 then back to A25. (If I understand you correctly). A direct flight to A25 NOE took me 37 minutes, 45 seconds in a fully loaded He 111.
2. Yes and No. I expect the Airlift to BEGIN REARMING operations at or before T+60. I will not penalize aircraft that are en-route, on final or taxiing so long as He 111s have began rearming at A25. This addition is going to be added into rules and settings at ahevents.org right now.
3. The CM Logs can tell me if any of the He111s dropped bombs and they will be checked every frame.
I was wondering how you would know. :devil
-
I was wondering how you would know. :devil
They also show if you actually took off carrying bombs. ;)
-
They also show if you actually took off carrying bombs. ;)
what if i just shoved a bunch of chubby hookers with a sash that had the word "bomb" on it in my plane? :D
-
The I-16 20mm option for the I-16 has been enabled.
Just not enough info or reason either way to disable it after more information was presented.
Good luck all.
-
The I-16 20mm option for the I-16 has been enabled.
Just not enough info or reason either way to disable it after more information was presented.
Good luck all.
It was brought up for discussion here:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,353240.msg4673556.html#msg4673556
I tend to to agree with the OP, I did a little snooping via internets and books on the shelf and by the amount of photographic evidence and historical accounts it seems like these were used sporadically at best, where as I can find several accounts of using the rockets in combat, which appears they had a fair supply of. So, not really a verifiable source, but one that could be reversible if needed.
So what exactly did you find that led to you reversing your initial decision?
-
So what exactly did you find that led to you reversing your initial decision?
I was contacted privately by a few members of the community with more evidence. Mainly being that there was not enough information either way to really make a rule removing them. Kind of like the 8 gun max load out for the P-47 which has been a strong FSO topic of discussion of the past.
Should have left it alone to begin with. <S>
-
Even if the member posted you privately, the evidence itself shouldn't be kept private. Please post here or in Krusty's thread. I'm sure that I'm not the only one who's interested.
-
Even if the member posted you privately, the evidence itself shouldn't be kept private. Please post here or in Krusty's thread. I'm sure that I'm not the only one who's interested.
That's it, there is nothing outside speculation and opinion on their usage. In his original thread, Krusty offered no more information or sources than anyone else has.
I read his information back in early September and tried to confirm it, but like him the only real evidence that exists is just the lack of photos of the I-16 with the 20mm loadout. I figured that was enough to warrant them being disabled, but truthfully I should have disregarded it. In the meanwhile, I have asked Krusty to post some sources.
-
sifting through a lot of garbage (almost got a virus), any available decent information shows the cannon option was equipped on gunship models, type 12, 17, 24, 27.
interesting purported interview with a former soviet i-16 pilot...
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/golodnikov/part1.htm (http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/golodnikov/part1.htm)
some information on the different types...
http://www.ww2warbirds.net/ww2htmls/polii16.html (http://www.ww2warbirds.net/ww2htmls/polii16.html)
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_polikarpov_I-16.html (http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_polikarpov_I-16.html)
more info with fewer types listed...
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/aircraft/fighter/polikarpov-i-16.asp (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/aircraft/fighter/polikarpov-i-16.asp)
-
That's it, there is nothing outside speculation and opinion on their usage. In his original thread, Krusty offered no more information or sources than anyone else has.
I read his information back in early September and tried to confirm it, but like him the only real evidence that exists is just the lack of photos of the I-16 with the 20mm loadout. I figured that was enough to warrant them being disabled, but truthfully I should have disregarded it. In the meanwhile, I have asked Krusty to post some sources.
(http://www.wio.ru/gal2a/f1/i16-17_4giap_kbf.jpg)
-
(http://www.wio.ru/gal2a/f1/i16-17_4giap_kbf.jpg)
Yep... just a handful of pics out there and thats one of them.
-
Yep... just a handful of pics out there and thats one of them.
WWII Russia wasn't the photo shoot we may want it to be, dude. :D
-
(http://airaces.narod.ru/all9/zhyikov1.jpg)
(http://www.wio.ru/gal2a/f1/i16-24_4giap_kbf.jpg)
(http://i1063.photobucket.com/albums/t518/66misos/I-16%20Type29/I-16Type29_sgtVPSegalayev_71IAPBalticFleet_4rocketsunderwind_camoNKAPtemplate.jpg)
-
WWII Russia wasn't the photo shoot we may want it to be, dude. :D
So are you saying dont bother shaving? :aok nice pics.
-
let them have the 20mm loadout...we will squash the inferior soviets anyway. :D
*well, i may not shoot one down but someone will...*
-
(http://airaces.narod.ru/all9/zhyikov1.jpg)
(http://www.wio.ru/gal2a/f1/i16-24_4giap_kbf.jpg)
(http://i1063.photobucket.com/albums/t518/66misos/I-16%20Type29/I-16Type29_sgtVPSegalayev_71IAPBalticFleet_4rocketsunderwind_camoNKAPtemplate.jpg)
Looking closer at those photos, (im on my phone, traveling this weekend) only the top photo is armed with 20s. The bottom two aircraft do not have them armed. Those are pitot tubes on the wings.
-
Looking closer at those photos, (im on my phone, traveling this weekend) only the top photo is armed with 20s. The bottom two aircraft do not have them armed. Those are pitot tubes on the wings.
take a look a the landing gear on the top photo too. different model of i-16 from the other 2.
-
take a look a the landing gear on the top photo too. different model of i-16 from the other 2.
Looks like the gear doors have been removed.
-
yep and there is a difference between the landing gear covers in that pic and the first one Arlo posted with the #28 plane...
from what i have been able to find (without getting a virus infection) is the gear covers were on later models...type 24 and 27. some very small differences in the windscreens too.
-
WWII Russia wasn't the photo shoot we may want it to be, dude. :D
In Soviet Russia, photo take you!
-
Dug up today what I could find. It would appear that both the Type 17 and Type 28 had the ShVAK 20mm and the I-16 was produced in very large #s some 17,000 in all.
Soviet Aces of WW2 (Morgan) page 92:
..."I-16 White 28 flown by Snr Lt M Vasiliev of 4 IAP, VVS, KBF, Stalingrad Front Spring 1942"
..."This aeroplane appears to have been a sub-series 17 equipped with long-barrelled 20mm ShVAK wing cannons"
-
I-16 tip 12 (I-16P - pushechnyy, cannon armed)
The I-16 tip 12 (or I-16P - pushhyechnyi or cannon armed) was the first version of the fighter to be armed with 20mm cannon. It was developed in 1936 by fitting two 20mm ShVAK cannon to a tip 5 airframe, with the cannon mounted in the wing centre section and synchronised to fire through the propeller arc. Only a small number of tip 12s were produced.
I-16 tip 17
The I-16 tip 17 was the first cannon armed version of the I-16 to be produced in significant numbers. This time the 20mm cannon were mounted further out, beyond the propeller arc. The type also retained the two machine guns in the upper fuselage. Despite the extra weight of the cannon the top speed of the I-16 only fell from 278mph on the tip 10 to 264mph on the tip 17. Twenty seven tip 17s were built in 1938, and 314 in 1939. Production them moved onto the tip 27.
I-16 tip 27
The I-16 tip 27 was the cannon-armed equivalent of the I-16 tip 20, and combined the airframe of the tip 18 with its two 20mm cannon in the wings with the ability to carry slipper-type auxiliary fuel tanks under the wings. Fifty nine were built in 1939, and a combined total of 277 tip 27s and 28s in 1940.
I-16 tip 28
The I-16 tip 28 combined the cannon armament of the tip 27 and the M-63 engine of the tip 24.
The cannon and 12.7mm armed versions of the I-16 were used as ground attack aircraft (notice this does not say 'exclusively') until enough Il-2s were available to replace them. The aircraft could also carry six unguided rockets, which gave it quite a powerful punch in this role, but the I-16 was at best lightly armoured, and so losses were high.
Although the Red Air Force lost huge numbers of I-16s, the Luftwaffe also suffered heavy casualties in the early part of the fighting, many of them inflicted by pilots flying the I-16.
The I-16 quickly faded from the front line. Production of the single seat fighter stopped in 1941, and so losses could only be replaced until stocks ran down. By the end of 1941 the number of I-16s with units on the front had dropped from just over 1,600 at the time of the German invasion to only 240, and by 1 July 1943 only 42 were still in operational use. The I-16 remained in use with units away from the front line for a little longer, but only 42 were still in use in the western part of the Soviet Union at the end of 1943 and in 1944 the aircraft was withdrawn in the west. They remained in use in the east almost to the end of the war, and the 888th IAP operated the type until August 1945, but none were used during the brief but effective Soviet invasion of Manchuria in the last few days of the war against Japan.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_polikarpov_I-16.html
-
:O
That last picture posted by Arlo shows an I-16 with the pilot in the cockpit and a maintenance guru standing in front of an engine with the cover opened... Is that a start pull chord I see?
:eek:
:rock
-
:O
That last picture posted by Arlo shows an I-16 with the pilot in the cockpit and a maintenance guru standing in front of an engine with the cover opened... Is that a start pull chord I see?
:eek:
:rock
:rofl :lol :rofl :lol they are working on the guns... :rofl
-
Axis Ace Mission for frame 1.
Kurt Ebener - was a tough, true fighting man. One of my all time favorite JG11 pilots. Great choice Nef!
Kurt Ebener
Oberleutnant
(http://www.luftwaffe.cz/images/ebener.jpg)
Kurt Ebener was born on 4 May 1920 at Könitz in the Saalfeld region of Thüringen. Ebener joined the Luftwaffe on 17 November 1939. On 1 December 1941, Ebener was posted to JG 3 based on the Eastern front. Unteroffizier Ebener was assigned to 4./JG 3. In spring 1942, he flew missions over Malta and North Africa before relocating back to the Eastern front. He recorded his first initial victories on 23 May, when he shot down two Russian I-61 fighters. Ebener recorded his 10th victory on 30 July and his 20th on 17 December. From mid-December until mid-January 1943, Ebener operated from within the Stalingrad pocket. In the most difficult of combat conditions, Ebener was to excel. In four weeks of fighting he claimed 35 victories, including five enemy aircraft shot down on 19 December, to record his 23rd through 27th victories, and four on 30 December (34-37). Ebener emerged as the leading German fighter pilot of the Stalingrad battle. On 1 March 1943, Ebener was transferred to Erganzungs-Jagdgruppe Ost to undertake a spell of instructing. He had 52 victories to his credit at this time. On 7 April, Ebener was awarded the Ritterkreuz and promoted to the rank of Leutnant. Ebener was transferred to 5./JG 11 on 31 March 1944. On 15 July, he was appointed Staffelkapitän of 5./JG 11 based on the Invasion front. In August, Ebener claimed five USAAF fighters shot down. On 23 August 1944, Ebener was shot down in aerial combat with USAAF fighters southeast of Paris in Bf 109 G-14 (W.Nr. 780 667) “Black 2”. Ebener baled out badly wounded to become a prisoner of war. In January 1945, due to the severity of his wounds, he was repatriated. Both of Ebener’s brothers, serving as officers in the German army, were killed on the Eastern front. Ebener died on 7 May 1975 at Fischbach in Taunus as a consequence of the wounds he received during the war.
Kurt Ebener was credited with 57 victories in 150 missions. He recorded five victories (W/JG11) over the Western front.
Ebener kicked arse.
<S>
-
Good luck! Can't wait to read about his exploits!
-
Warm blankets, salted pork, and malt bier for our boys in the 6th tonight.
<S>
Launching from within, 'Der Kessel' III./JG11 would score 27 victories for the loss of one man. 'Kurt Ebener' scored three victories and made it home safely.
<S>
-
lol hey I bailed in Glory wasn't sure which was more fun the Dogfights or watching the 111's sweating it out to rearm the base either way it was a Great Frame and a New twist also to FSO.
Nef
your Set's Are always Great Fun
<S>
Molsman
-
Enjoyed the fight at 91. Our fighter cover did not get to the V91 on time but it left the base open to a NOE attack by IL-2's. All but one hanger destroyed on first sortie. Last hanger taken out on 2nd Sortie. Over all a good night. Salute to the axis and their opposition to our attack.
-
Enjoyed the fight at 91. Our fighter cover did not get to the V91 on time but it left the base open to a NOE attack by IL-2's. All but one hanger destroyed on first sortie. Last hanger taken out on 2nd Sortie. Over all a good night. Salute to the axis and their opposition to our attack.
It may have been a good thing the fighters were late by time they got there we were all on the deck in that IL-2 swarm then the I-16's came in and I heard some Yaks even made an appearance. YOu guys hit 91 hard and we had to hustle back by time I got there it was already hurting.
-
<S> JG11! You guys came in like a tidal wave. What was left of the 56th didn't have much of a chance. Nothing short of a miracle that I was able to take one of ya with me. Guess the other 109 I ventilated made it home.
-
<S> JG11! You guys came in like a tidal wave. What was left of the 56th didn't have much of a chance. Nothing short of a miracle that I was able to take one of ya with me. Guess the other 109 I ventilated made it home.
<S>
-
<S> JG11! You guys came in like a tidal wave. What was left of the 56th didn't have much of a chance. Nothing short of a miracle that I was able to take one of ya with me. Guess the other 109 I ventilated made it home.
Ya Mak he made it at my cost,nice shooting I was PW first burst and then you took my wing off. I was busy trying to clear a squaddie and didn't see you until I was hit!
Was fun though!
:salute
-
Yea LilMak.... 2 seconds was all you had to work with :D :salute
(http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd476/AcesHighDitto/FSO%20Stalingrad%2011-13/26TakeTHATLilMak.jpg)
-
All I can say is the open cockpit setup of the I-16 with my Rift and 6DoF headtracking vs 109's and 110's was an absolute hoot!
:aok
-
...either way it was a Great Frame and a New twist also to FSO.
Nef
your Set's Are always Great Fun
<S>
Molsman
A rousing +1 based on the comments I heard in the AK mess during the post-frame 'band-aids and brews'. We're looking forward to Frame 2.
Thanks Viper61 for your extra effort this weekend. :rock
:salute
-
<S> JG11! You guys came in like a tidal wave. What was left of the 56th didn't have much of a chance. Nothing short of a miracle that I was able to take one of ya with me. Guess the other 109 I ventilated made it home.
Yep it turned into a meat grinder very quickly once JG11 showed up. Great stuff, things are setting up for a great rivalry in the coming years. :aok
-
Yep it turned into a meat grinder very quickly once JG11 showed up. Great stuff, things are setting up for a great rivalry in the coming years. :aok
:aok
Shifty...was the 56th coming into the area...hunting rtb transports...after playing part in another mission...or were you guys laying in wait to the west for just that reason?
-
We were assigned to hit V82 as our primary mission. Once we did that we continued to lurk around the area the transports were supposed to be in case we could find the HE-111s. It seemed like we hung out forever in enemy territory never seeing any transports. We found 109G2s instead. :lol
-
We were assigned to hit V82 as our primary mission. Once we did that we continued to lurk around the area the transports were supposed to be in case we could find the HE-111s. It seemed like we hung out forever in enemy territory never seeing any transports. We found 109G2s instead. :lol
:aok Gotcha...
All week, all pre flight, and all during our initial kombat at the field, and then during the subsequent defence of the Stalingrad re supply, the back of my mind was worried over unit(s) lurking in the rtb transport lanes. And in the event, the Red Airforce forces at the field did come at us thankfully, in a piecemeal fashion...this was only more confirmation in my mind that they were holding someone back in reserve for rtb attack. Then...to add even more to this growing concern that, what was up to that point a great success could turn horribly bad...by the time the last of the transports were away...my fighters had been engaged for over an hour, and simply could not follow right away, but were forced to make our own rearm in the cauldron for fuel and fireworks...and then exit on the tails of the transports...
...such was the intensity of the mission. The remnants of the 56th that we engaged were the most concentrated allied unit we encountered all night, and I am glad to hear you were not successful in finding the 111's.
See ya up.
<S>
-
Great to see you guys come in and pounce. Sorry I didn't maneuver out of the collision. These old eyes not quick enough to see he had reversed then I just threw some cannon in his face. As a gunner on a HE111 I honestly thought we were ok by the time we reached A72. Then could see 15k P40's that were called out. Understand the concern and that they could be there but they were in our exact exit route as if they knew. Strange. :huh
:salute
-
Anyone know how many tons of cargo made it? I wasn't able to attend.
-
Anyone know how many tons of cargo made it? I wasn't able to attend.
No not yet.
But I would estimate 95% plus, of the supplies made it in. Horrifically though...the red murderers destroyed a larger percentage of the transports that were filled with Wehrmacht nurses, invalids and wounded evacuees....as is their way.
We must prevent this crime from occurring in Frame 2.
-
No not yet.
But I would estimate 95% plus, of the supplies made it in. Horrifically though...the red murderers destroyed a larger percentage of the transports that were filled with Wehrmacht nurses, invalids and wounded evacuees....as is their way.
We must prevent this crime from occurring in Frame 2.
That's probably why I didn't get the P-40 by A72. By that time I thought we were in the clear and had one of those Wehrmacht nurses on my lap showing how to point my gun... the 13mm Maschinengewehr 131 also. :aok
-
That's probably why I didn't get the P-40 by A72. By that time I thought we were in the clear and had one of those Wehrmacht nurses on my lap showing how to point my gun... the 13mm Maschinengewehr 131 also. :aok
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
No not yet.
But I would estimate 95% plus, of the supplies made it in. Horrifically though...the red murderers destroyed a larger percentage of the transports that were filled with Wehrmacht nurses, invalids and wounded evacuees....as is their way.
We must prevent this crime from occurring in Frame 2.
Gott in Himmel, die krankenschwestern!!!!!! Wir müssen rächen den tod!!!