Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: Kweassa on March 13, 2002, 09:22:18 PM
-
1.09 is out.
Do we count the days now? :D
-
This is my opinion only, and not necessarily representative of the CT Team as a whole (nice disclaimer, eh?:)). Our main problem with a BoB set up is the lack of the Ju87 and He111. I'm concerned that running with what we have, even with the new planes released yesterday, allows such a limited planeset for both sides for a CT set up. It would certainly be a one-way affair, with the LW having the only true offensive capability in the form of the Ju88 and Me110. Kind of interesting how the technological advantage swung from the Germans early on to the Allies later in the war. Imagine a CT set up where it's the Luftwaffe that has the JABO and bomber advantage:).
I think we could do a BoB scenario or snapshot (or even a TOD), because you can limit ordnance loadouts via the rules and tailor the objectives. I'm not sure we could run a good BoB in the CT, however. Certainly we'd have to disable base capture by not allowing any troop carriers, otherwise the LW would walk all over the RAF in a free-flowing arena. Some would argue that no objectives are necessary for the CT; that simply enabling A/C and let people enjoy a pure A2A environment would be enough, and for a segment of the CT crowd. However, I'm of the strong opinion that the CT has to have more to it than that. It has to have a reason to fight, beyond the thrill of the fight itself. Otherwise we're excluding a signficant slice of the customer base.
In any event, I'm not nixing the idea of a BoB CT tour. We just need to give it some thought on how best to go about it, given the still limited planeset.
Sabre
CT Team
-
Originally posted by Sabre
This is my opinion only, and not necessarily representative of the CT Team as a whole (nice disclaimer, eh?:)). Our main problem with a BoB set up is the lack of the Ju87 and He111. I'm concerned that running with what we have, even with the new planes released yesterday, allows such a limited planeset for both sides for a CT set up. It would certainly be a one-way affair, with the LW having the only true offensive capability in the form of the Ju88 and Me110.
* * *
I'm of the strong opinion that the CT has to have more to it than that. It has to have a reason to fight, beyond the thrill of the fight itself. Otherwise we're excluding a signficant slice of the customer base.
Then let me be the first to respectfully (very respectfully) disagree. We now have almost exactly what really occurred in BoB, in terms of plane set. So the English can't bomb France? Anyone who insists on flying bombers will simply have to join the Nazi side and fly 88s. I suggest that CT generally caters to a crowd that IS more interested in the thrill of the fight itself than in the landgrab.
Perhaps more to the point: It's only for A WEEK! We already have the map! Why not invest a week to see? ESPECIALLY now that the planes are new.
- oldman
-
How about balancing the arena with other methods.
Example, (note, in this example all non historical equipment is already disabled)
Germany
No C47s for Germany (i e no Ju 52s). No German fleets, but lots of shore guns along the french-belgian coastline to keep the allied fleets from roaming free. Only allow M3s and M8s (M8s subbing for early German tanks, M3's subbing for SPW's) to spawn from captured fields. Only allow LVT's at one or two bases in france (around the Calais area)
This forces Germany to do an "invasion" with LVTs to get a foothold in England. It also prevents Germany from roaming free once a base is captured. Enable refueling/rearming at captured fields, but not spawning. That forces any German fighter cover to start in France, fly to any captured field and refuel, before it can be really effective. A brave German player can try to tackle the allied fleets with PT's and Ju88s.
Britain
Give the allies 2 CV task groups, and 4-6 BB groups. Disable pretty much everything except the historical fighters as well as M3's and M8's. Enable Seafires and TBM's (subbing for Fulmars and Swordfish) from the CV's. And PT's.
With this fleet the Brits can slaughter pretty much anything foolish enough to try to cross the channel. It would be extremely foolish of the brits to loiter in the channel area with the fleets though, considering the German coastal guns. A well timed run with the fleet can wreak havoc on any invasion attempt though.
Note that the Brits dont get C47's or LVTs..there will be no invasions in the wrong direction. HOWEVER the M3's allow the Brits to recapture any lost ground in England.
Oh, and once a fleet is lost, it's lost. No new fleets should the brits loose 'em.
What do you guys think?
-
I think that even with just with fighters enabled - 109E, 110C, Spit I, Hurri I you would see more people in the CT than you ever have before. People have been crying for a BoB for a long time - me included. It's limited, but who cares - it'd be fun.
-
Your point about it only being one week is well taken, Oldman, and I appreciate it. As I said, I know there are those who just want to fly. I've made a statement about the MA that I think applies here as well, though. It is the basis of my strong feeling that, in general, the CT set ups should have some strategic goals to remain viable. Specifically, I'm of the opinion most air to air fights occur because someone tries to take a base or otherwise accomplish some military objective. The strat guys may not be the majority (not proven, but let's assume), but they are the catalysts the generate the fights and furballs. Someone loads up bombs with an eye to taking a base, someone else see the incoming raid and responds. Others note a fight, and it's rock and roll time:). Beyond that, one of the most oft-voiced reasons people claimed they didn't fly in the CT before the CT Team was formed was the lack of a goal beyond flying, fighting, and dying.
Having said all that both you and Hortlund make good points. Perhaps rather than the BoB, we could set up a "Battle for France" set up. This isn't all that difference tactically than the "Battle for Sicily" we just ran, but with the roles reversed. Take away C-47's from both sides, with M-8's, M-3's, and M-16's to represent the somewhat less formidable AV's of the period. The German objective would simply be to drive the British and French forces off the Continent. The British Isles would be the unassailable redoubt for the British to fall back to, with the Royal Navy providing the means to return to the continent in force.
LVT(2)'s could be enabled for Germany from French ports (perhaps with spawn points a mile off the British coast), and for the British from their naval battle groups. The only reset condition would be the complete capture of all Allied bases (or all but one, as the case may be). Otherwise we let it run the full week and simply declare a winner Friday night at 12 PM EST, based on whether the Germans hold all of the bases on the Continent at that time. An early reset could occur if it is clear that one side or the other has no fight left in it, of course;).
How does this sound? The only problem would be the lack of any 1939-40 carrier planes for the RN. My thought here would be to use the TBM as a Swordfish replacement (no more out of place in this time period than the Ju88 model we have) and use Hurricane-I's for the carrier-based fighters. While the Hurr-I doesn't have a tail hook, pilots can either attempt a landing without it, or simply ditch along side the TG. After all, in AH there's no rule that says number of takeoffs have to equal number of landings:D.
Sabre
CT Team
P.S. I like the idea of shore batteries but for one problem: the Atlantic Wall didn't exist in 1939-40, and neither did the massive gun implacements protecting the French Coasts on D-day.
-
You can always use the Sturmovik as a sub for the Ju87
-
in stead of having land grabbing as a goal why not aircraft attrition wasent that the germans obj was to weaken britians air force. in order to invade at a later date.
this being said why not enable speicific numbers of planes reletive to what was acrually feilded to each side (dont know if that can be done) when they are lost they are not replaced or maybe replace them in very small numbers (3-5 planes a day for each plane in the set up)
this would certianly require pilot s to fly in groups and choose there fights carefully
as for the bombers they would attempt to bomb all targets in to submission ( very long rebuild times) but would have to be most certianly be escorted
this sounds more like a TOD but would be interesting to try it for a week
-
Please don't refer to them as Nazis... please.
-
Not an option, Key. Code doesn't give us that capability or authority. The other suggestion, simply keepiing a tally of bomb-tonnage dropped as a measure of victory, is even more susceptable to "milk-running" than base capture in a 24/7 arena like the CT. That kind of objective can be used in a TOD or event, but is not practical in the CT. Nice suggestions though.
Sabre
-
Sabre, I'm aware that you can't limit planes at a field. But, can't you lengthen the down times, and/or set the fields to uncapturable, ( i believe....I could be wrong, isn't there a setting what team can capture what field?)
NUTTZ
Originally posted by Sabre
Not an option, Key. Code doesn't give us that capability or authority. The other suggestion, simply keepiing a tally of bomb-tonnage dropped as a measure of victory, is even more susceptable to "milk-running" than base capture in a 24/7 arena like the CT. That kind of objective can be used in a TOD or event, but is not practical in the CT. Nice suggestions though.
Sabre
-
Sturmovik for a Ju-87.
That's funny.
Shooting a Sturmovik down with a Spit I or Hurri I would be a completely different experience than shooting a Ju-87 down.
.303s just ain't got what it takes.
-
S!
Hurricane I was used as the Sea Hurricane I. It was identical except for the tailhook.
Wasn't used in 1940, but was used in early '41. And land based Hurricane I's actually landed, and took off from British CV's during the Norway campaign.
-
S!
My suggestion for a BoB CT is as follows:
The Brits have no bombers. Just Hurris and Spits.
Very long repair time on fields and targets.
Germans basically try to kill all the targets on the board with bombing. The further they fly from their French bases, the harder it is to escort the bombers, as per history.
If they can kill the Brit fields, then the Britn Fighters have no where to base.
-
I think steves (hortlund's) suggestion would work best .........
I hate base capture in the ct but I am a minority................
If I were king I would max out down time and up the amount of ord to kill hangers etc....... Then make the lw level each base if they close um all down lw.......I dont think it would cater to a lot of folks and fer gameplay it would turn mostly fighter v fighter with few buff formations pushin through........
But in all practicality Steves suggestion would have the largest appeal
please consider it..........
-
What about using a TBM for an Allied bomber in such a BOB setup?
The TBM is slow, doesn't have much in the way of defensive capability, sucks at high altitude, and doesn't have that huge a bombload--perfect as a "generic early Allied bomber" sub.
Granted it's tougher than Bostons and Blenheims and such, but the German fighters have cannons so they could definately kill it, in addition to the fact that the Ju-88 is also superior to the more proper He-111.
Lack of a Stuka won't be a problem since nobody would fly it anyway except for the joy of hearing that dive siren.
You'd end up with 109E's, 110C's and Ju-88's versus Spit 1's, Hurri 1's and TBM's. Not a bad setup although it slightly favors the German side. Arena settings/victory goals could compensate
J_A_B
-
BoB was basically brit fighters vs lw bombers & escorts.
I'd say use the euro map (duh),
Enable spit1 free,C202 (replacement for pre-V spits, and its got no hispano) at 2 pnt perk cost , hurri1 free,hurriIID (hell, give the limeys at least 1 cannon ride ;) ) at 2 pnt perks costfor Brits
Enable Ju88 free, Ki67 (as replacement for HE111) at 2 pnt perk cost, IL2 (replacement for STUKA) free,109E free,109F4 at 2 pnt perk cost, and 110C4 free for LW.
Brits have M16 enabled.
NO other vehicles allowed. No m3's no flaks, no tanks.
Objective of LW would be to flatten RAF fields, Fuel, ammo and troop factories.
Rebuild times would be 4X longer than normal (no resupply allowed from goons/m3's since they are disabled).
Victory conditions:
LW: 80% of RAF fields closed OR bring fuel/ammo/troop factories down to 20% each.
RAF: Dont let the LW attain their victory conditions.
-
The 109F4 would be unbalancing (even as a perk) and historically innacurate. It has less right to be in than the Spit V (less unbalancing, earlier therefore less innacurate), and the Spit V shouldn't be there either.
I can't see an IL2 working as a sub for the Ju87, as Karnak said almost impossible to shoot down with 303s, whilst the real Ju87 was an easy target.
Spit I, Hurri I, TBM vs 109E, 110C and Ju88 sounds ideal to me.
-
JU88 and Ki67 are much faster than the actual buffs used in BoB....
May make interception kinda tough
And errm I could be wrong but did ANY LW buff in BoB have cannon?
And the fuel multiplier will be?? 109's had 20 mins over britain max didn't they?
SKurj
-
Originally posted by SKurj
JU88 and Ki67 are much faster than the actual buffs used in BoB....
Um...duh....but the JU88 WAS one of the actual buffs used in BoB.
- Oldman
-
JU88 may have been in BOB, BUT it was not the more common bomber used, and was it the variant modelled in AH or an earlier SLOWER model?
SKurj
-
Ju88A-4 was too late to participate in the BoB.
Ju88A-1 and Ju88A-5 did participate, the A-5 being similar to the A-4 except having different engines.
I have no problems with the Ju88A-4 being used for a BoB Ju88.
The Ki-67 in no way resembles a BoB German bomber.
It is WAY faster, faster than Hurri Is. It has vastly better defensive firepower, 12.7mm and 20mm instead of single 7.92mm. It has a much smaller bomb load, 800kg vs 2000kg.
Attacking bombers in AH is already harder because the bombers run at full power instead of cruising power, E.G. 280mph bombers instead of 180-200mph bombers. I certainly don't want to be forced to attact a 340mph bomber that is defended by twin 50s in the tail and 20mm in the dorsal with a 355mph fighter armed only with .303s.
-
well were not running a historical scenario however i wouldn't allow the 109f......or spit v
put an alt cap on the ju88 (dunno how you would enforce it except through the honor system) at 15k.
Folks like field capture for some reason.....mostly milkrunnin..........
but if you force the axis to invade via lvts and give the brits the tbm and a couple of fleets to patrol the channel it would be tolerable......driving from calais to england in a lvt would take a week itself so we need a spawn point .........
the only problem would be we would need an axis fleet with flight from the carrier disabled. It could simulate escorts for the landing craft. You would need to increase the rebuild time on fleets though.
This would give the brits the advantage in the channel and an advantage of fighting defensively.
The fuel modifier would need to be set so the 109e have limited flight time over england.
Again with the limited planeset on and gameplay I dont know how much mass appeal this set up would have.
Once fields are captured in England enable m3 and pnzrs (m8) and allow 109es only at a few bases..........
It would be the most limiting planeset yet.
I wouldn't like to see a bunch of planes that were not available for bob be used.
we need some substitutes obviously...the tbm, ju-88a4, lvts, m8 would be all..............
Anyway its only I week I would prefer this to any of the onesided pac set ups or fantasy land........
-
come on guys... BOB! If you don't get all anal about it it is your chance to beat up on mean ol talentless lazs.
lazs
-
Well, that clinches it! If it gets Lazs, the arch nemesis of the CT, in there then we got to do it:D. Actually, I'm still leaning towards a period that would cover the last stages of the Battle for France, which would (if the Germans did their job well) transition into the Battle of Britain.
Planeset would be Hurr-I, Spit-I, and possibly the C202 (to represent the Curtis Hawk or another French fighter, if the armament and speed are a reasonable match), versus the 109E, 110C, Ju88. M-8's would take the place of tanks, with M-3's and M-16's to provide troop mobility and mobile AAA. I'm toying with the idea of also subing the LVT(4) as a sub for the French main battle tank, but need to look at that a little more. The French tank was superior to the German tanks except in speed, as I recall. Again, got to do a little more research. No C-47 would be allowed, I think.
Sabre
CT Team
-
Uhmm, the big Char was only superior in armor and puch (one 75mm low velocity gun + a 37mm anti tank gun).
If you're talking about the smaller french tanks those weren't superior to the german ones, other way around almost. Specially in 1940 BoB time (where france was allready beaten of course).
Like the setup though.
-
Originally posted by Sabre
How does this sound? The only problem would be the lack of any 1939-40 carrier planes for the RN. My thought here would be to use the TBM as a Swordfish replacement (no more out of place in this time period than the Ju88 model we have) and use Hurricane-I's for the carrier-based fighters.
Sabre
CT Team
Absolute nonsense to say the ju88a4 is out of place in the BOB setup! Ju88a-1 was in operation in 1939 september 26th according to my books. Ju88a5's were used in the battle of Britain, they had the the older engines engines(1000hp Jumos) but the ju88a4 with jumo 211j(1300hp) engines was in service(it just had problems with the engines). so im sure ju88a4s were around.and if you are refering to the later modified A4 then its a mute point as these were fitted with 13mm in nose fired from bombaimers position(not modeled in AH). The only engine upgrade after the ju88a4 was the JU88B with the BMW 801MA(1600hp) as far as i can see.Admittedly the torpedo should not be allowed(ju88A17, though still a modified ju88a4).The ju88a1 achieved 321.25mph with a 4409lb payload.our ju88a4 has a top speed of 292mph.so the engines didnt make an awful difference to speed, just the payload I think.
However, the choice of TBM is wrong in my view,TBM has 2x50cals in the wings which gives it offensive capability the swordfish or Fulmars didnt have.the twin 50 cals in the rear turret are also deadly compared to a vickers mg in the swordfish and the quad 303s of the Fulmar.There was very little bombing carried out during the BOB compared to the amounts of anti-bomber and fighter sorties. This is what its known for after all.
Buzzbait has it correct I think.First see how it goes and then if it looks like its not getting the interest then change it.I cannot beleive we have waited for 2 dang years for these early planes and the CM team arent going to do a setup with it!
These are all the aircraft we need and the map to fight over which we have in almost working condition :) Some of the best fights i had were in the CT rolling set days when we were limited to similar performing aircraft:
RAF:
Hurricane I
Spitfire I
LW:
me109E4
bf110C4
ju88A4
Like it or not during the BOB the LW had the only cannons, all other machine guns of the time in the planes were 303in/7.9mm and we should get a taste of the difference before we introduce a 50cal armed plane.
-
"There was very little bombing carried out during the BOB"
This is false, as you well know.
Bomber command was extremly active in this time period attacking the transportation build up in the French ports, with very heavy losses.
But what the hell. You guys will never be happy with a BoB set up. It's got Spits in it, hasn't it? If only you could remove those, you'd all be able to enjoy some history, no?
Have fun.
-
I'd love to see the BoB reenacted in the CT.
Spit and Hurri I's, vs 109E4, 110C4, and Ju88.
Not sure how far developed the German radar system was during the BoB, but if that is one area the RAF led in, give the LW reduced dar range, or even a lack thereof if they did not have a system in place in France during the BoB.
Set the fuel multiplier to give the 109's a max of what? 15-20 minutes over Britain before they have to rtb? I'll volunteer to help find the fuel multiplier we need.
-
Originally posted by Seeker
"There was very little bombing carried out during the BOB"
This is false, as you well know.
Bomber command was extremly active in this time period attacking the transportation build up in the French ports, with very heavy losses.
But what the hell. You guys will never be happy with a BoB set up. It's got Spits in it, hasn't it? If only you could remove those, you'd all be able to enjoy some history, no?
Have fun.
as usual a moron takes half the sentance out of context.
READ WHAT I SAID SEEKER.
"There was very little bombing carried out during the BOB compared to the amounts of anti-bomber and fighter sorties."
Im british mate, Im fully aware we did use bombers.Im fully versed in just what we DID during the BOB.I grew up listening to my grandparents describing what it was really like.My grandfather made sure I understood just how close the RAF came to defeat and gave me many books on it and ive continued to read books on it for the last 20 some odd years.I suggest you get a hold of yourself before you start claiming some sort of conspiricy on LW flyers part to have a unfair advantage over the RAF side.grow up.All i DONT want to see is the CT getting flooded by planes that didnt play as major a role as the spit I or hurricane, like the tbm or some other replacement type.While the interest is on NEW planes in 1.09 lets bloody well use just those!! The ju88a4 is so near to the ju88a5(more commonly used in BOB) as to be a very acceptable aircraft.OR put another way a pretty FAIR alternative.
We dont NEED to model RAF bombers for a BOB set up.British bombers never as far as i know destroyed all of any LW bases fuel supplies or stopped any LW fighters having 100% fuel loads in fact i think they avoided fighter areas if at all possible.However many RAF fields were put out of action for days in single devastating raids where huge amounts of poundage were dropped on them.(read some books on these raids).
-
Why do you want to mix in the battle of France into this?
I just dont understand why a BoB setup wouldnt be enough.
If you do a "clean" BoB setup it can be 100% accurate on the aircraft, and depending on where you want to go with the possibility of a German invasion, reasonably accurate with the GV's (the M16 has no place in there though..really, what would that one be subbing exactly? That Vickers AA-tank with 4xMG's?)
But France? And adding 202s subbing for Curtis hawks? Please no. Please keep it clean. Germans on the continent, Brits on that Island. Germans get to bomb the brits if they can, the Brits get to shoot down German planes if they can. Everyone is happy. Why complicate things?
[edit] If we would add the battle of France it would only end with some moron milkrunning the entire map some night when only the japanese are online. Then Germany would have to reconquer France again, using only GV's...Gee how fun...
-
yep... hortlund is correct... don't get all goofy about it... Spits 109's hurri's and 110... The only place you can fly these planes with some kinda parity.... The only way you guys can screw it up is to make the bases too far apart or make spits rare...
lazs
-
lazs, which plane will you be flying? :)
Hazed, just where did you get the idea that the CM team isn't going to offer a setup with the BoB planeset? Just because we don't have one now doesn't mean we haven't discussed it and aren't planning on doing a snapshot or a TOD. :p Give us time, bro. Who knows, there might even be a new, smaller scale/closer bases English Channel terrain in the works right now. :D
-
Lazs I would bet good money you are going to flying the 109e, or winging with shane in a 110.
I believe the cross of hortlund and the purists would be the best.
spit1 hurri1
109e 110 ju88
Ground vhs as mentioned originally by hortlund, and there calais location and objectives.
LW should be trying to bomb the bejesus out of britain, and the raf should be trying to stop them.
Very important to get the fuel right. Hawk would be great addition as it didnt suffer from engine cut out, but 202 is not a good sub. I cant wait to take those bb guns to the luftwaf.
I would like this up next week please ;)
-
Will do some fuel test tomorrow, can see how the fuel multiplier should be set at to give the desired result. Did the 109s have 10 minutes of flight over london when they took of from the coast of France? I think not since the Crossing of the channel took no more then 5 minutes it self.
Need some more info on that please.
-
I am very interested in trying 8 .303's out on 109e's and 110's at close range.
lazs
-
Is there any advantage the hurri 1 has over the spit 1? Hi speed handling ? roll? alt?
-
Is there any advantage the hurri 1 has over the spit 1? Hi speed handling ? roll? alt?
Hurri turns (considerably) better, and should be tougher. Spit has it beat every other way.
-
yup, hurri I turns better. Spit I can outrun it, but catch the Spit while you got the E advantage and you can eat him up. At least I got eaten up when the Hurri came down on me after I finished off a 190 and a P-51D in my Spit Mk I (hehe, PERKIES!!!)
Lazs, yeah, the Spit Mk I against the 109E and 110C would be nice. Tho in the MA, depending on the circumstances you can run down the uber planes. ;) still die a lot tho. well, I die a lot regardless. :)
-
Originally posted by ergRTC
Is there any advantage the hurri 1 has over the spit 1? Hi speed handling ? roll? alt?
In addition to what the others said, I think there's a noticeable difference in lethality.
- oldman
-
"In addition to what the others said, I think there's a noticeable difference in lethality. "
The Hurri has very slightly more ammo, but the guns are the same 303's arn't they? How would there be a difference in lethality?
-
The Hurricane's guns are bunched together in groups of 4, but the Spit's guns are all spread out from each other. I'd expect this to result in the Hurricane having more concentrated firepower.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
The Hurricane's guns are bunched together in groups of 4, but the Spit's guns are all spread out from each other. I'd expect this to result in the Hurricane having more concentrated firepower.
J_A_B
That's why.
- oldman
-
"That's why."
I can see how that make a difference to *some*; but the *rest* of us, who know the meaning of the phrase:
"Fire at convergence"
See no difference.
Hoser.
-
"there is nothing more leathal than a Spit"
Agreed, the Spitfire is the least survivable plane in the sky. Perhaps they should model the frying pans or whatever that some Spit pilots used to sit on.
Oh wait, you were trying to claim that the Spit is lethal to someone besides its own occupant? Well I'm sure that the deathtoll on the ground from wrecked burning Spitfires falling onto helpless spectators is quite high.....
hehe :p
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by Seeker
[B [/B]
"Leathal"? "Leathal"? Is that "weasel," spoken by an Englishman with a bad lisp through porcupine teeth? I don't understand how there can be nothing more weasel than a Spit, but then, I haven't been here that long.
I do, however, admire those who can manage to squeeze the trigger at the precise moment of convergence. I believe they should be restricted to flying Gloster Gladiators.
- Oldman
-
Think you're sitting pretty in your Runstang, my man?
Just see how many perkies Karnak talks HiTech into slapping onto the Spit XIV to keep the "best plane of the war" in the game.....
-
Originally posted by Wilbus
Will do some fuel test tomorrow, can see how the fuel multiplier should be set at to give the desired result. Did the 109s have 10 minutes of flight over london when they took of from the coast of France? I think not since the Crossing of the channel took no more then 5 minutes it self.
Need some more info on that please.
Hi Wilbuz, Reference the time 109's had over London, this would seem to be an often reprted fact that is only partially true.
Early on in the Battle some 109 units were based on or near the Cherbourg peninsula, some 100 miles from England in a straight line, these 109's had a more limited time "over London" than the 109's based near Calais (just 20 miles from England).
Later on in the battle the Cherbourg area 109's were repositioned around Calais, this shortened the time they were over the Sea BUT.. Goerings orders to the fighters to stay near both bombers and 110's meant they escorted at inefficient throttle settings so had a shorter than ideal flight time.
109's were fitted with a red light when thier fuel was low, this was the indication to leave for home (France), at altitude a plane, of either side, could, and infrequently did, glide some of the way home.
Hope this helps, basically the 109's range (Time over London) depends where it takes off from.
Witch
56 Firebird Sqn 2nd TAF
:)
-
I do think it is a very good idea to make sure the burn rate will match historical scenarios.
The cherbourg penn. is by Guernsey right? This appears to be about twice the distance from london, so I would suspect that gave the 109s a little less than 3x as much time over the target. We are looking at 50 minutes of vulch time? Does this seem to be historically accurate? How lond did they launch from cherbourg compared to calais? Did they keep using both?
-
Did a little testing on fuel burn last night, flying from Calais to London in a 109E with full fuel load and burn rate set to 1.0. I climbed out to 22K over the Channel. I had used a little over 1/3 of my fuel upon arriving over London, leading me to think that 1.0 might be about right. Anyone else done any testing on the Europe map?
Sabre
CT Team
-
Originally posted by ergRTC
I do think it is a very good idea to make sure the burn rate will match historical scenarios.
At the start of the Battle LuftFlotte 3 was based in the west of France with 3 JG, roughly these were based at..
JG2 based @ Le Havre = 120 miles from English coast
JG27 based around Cherbourg= 70 miles from English coast
JG53 based around Brest & Rennes = 170 miles from English coast
In the middle of August A. Galland transfered all 3 of these JG to the Calais area to reduce thier flight times to England.
The range of the 109E-4 was 410 miles, the Spitfire was 395 miles, similar and around an hours flying time.
So the modifier for fuel that makes their flight times around that time would be the one to use.
I can't be more specific because pilot reports of the time mention "around an hour flights" This doesn't mention how much time is spent on cruise or full Mil power.. :confused:
Hope this helps
Witch
56Sqn RAF
:p :) :)
-
S! Sabre
If you have used only 1/3 of your fuel to get to London, then the fuel burn is too low.
Considering you had to climb to 22,000, using full throttle, it would only take you 1/6 of a tank to get home even if you used full throttle.
That leaves you with fully 1/2 a tank to fool around with over London, or about 30 minutes of flying at full throttle
Considering the 109`s had around 10 minutes air time over London historically, this figure is obviously generous.