Author Topic: Next scenario: Battle of Britain 2006 (Read 10018 times)

Brooke · « **Reply #60 on:** August 23, 2006, 02:38:47 PM »

Also, for this scenario to happen, we need CO's. If you would like to volunteer or know of someone who would be good in the role, please read the "CO's needed" topic.

croduh · « **Reply #61 on:** August 23, 2006, 03:27:30 PM »

so i do have to fly a plane after all.Hehe i thought i can just fool around in my boat and watch the planes fighting;)

Tilt · « **Reply #62 on:** August 24, 2006, 10:15:42 AM »

Radar ranges and sector counter ranges can now both be tower based and set to differing ranges and minimum thresholds...............

This way you could simulate chain high and chain low radar.

chain high could be less accurate sector counters at a longer range and higher floor threshold

chain low could be shorter more accurate dot radar for final vectoring.....

Re altitudes.................

The game play and objectives was such that any LW bomber force spending time climbing to ALWAYS achieve altitude superiority will not have sufficient mission time for two missions per frame.............. and to achieve victory conditions with one bombing mission per frame was very difficult.

Constantly patroling RAF squadrons had fuel problems.............. and so were often climbing to meet the opposition even later in the frame.

Rompa · « **Reply #63 on:** August 24, 2006, 12:55:25 PM »

Do not EG groups for LW have a 2nd life?

Quote

From BoB Rules site
1) JG & ZG gruppen may not carry bombs but have 2nd lives as Ju87 Pilots.
2) EG &KG gruppen may carry full bomb loads . KG gruppen will have 2nd lives as Ju88 Pilots

Brooke · « **Reply #64 on:** August 26, 2006, 09:14:44 PM »

I am pleased to announce our Commanding Officers for Battle of Britain 2006.

RAF CO: Major Biggles (formerly Pooface)
Luftwaffe CO: Krusty

General description is here (including the link to the rules):

http://ahevents.org/site/content/view/122/153/

Registration is now open here:

http://ahevents.org/site/component/option,com_staticxt/Itemid,165/

Gentlemen, we have a battle!

We will open the Battle of Britain 2006 forums soon.

Schutt · « **Reply #65 on:** August 27, 2006, 08:00:17 AM »

Please rethink the rescue verrification, last time 2 cms werent sufficiant to witness the rescuing without a verry frustrating long waiting time on the ground.
Can you have 1 or 2 more "rescue verrification officers" ?

Nifty · « **Reply #66 on:** August 27, 2006, 08:50:52 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Schutt
Please rethink the rescue verrification, last time 2 cms werent sufficiant to witness the rescuing without a verry frustrating long waiting time on the ground.
Can you have 1 or 2 more "rescue verrification officers" ?

Completely agree with this. All of my pilots who used the rescue rules, as well as others I heard on range channel, were made to wait quite a long time before the rescue CM could come and verify.

The only smooth rescue I recall is when I called the CM before I landed a C47 to pick someone up. The CM got there just as I was pulling up to the guy.

I don't blame the CMs at all, they had a lot of requests to go verify. They just needed a few other CMs to help them.

Fencer51 · « **Reply #67 on:** August 27, 2006, 09:03:25 AM »

The way to speed it up would be to allow bailed pilots over friendly land territory to just land and be safe. After all, the militaries of each side were not wasting their limited SAR on pilots landing on golf courses.

68falcon · « **Reply #68 on:** August 27, 2006, 09:05:59 AM »

IIRC part of the reason for using only 2 CMs was to imitate the amount of time an actual rescue and return to flight status would take. The designers didn't want MA a style reups. The draw back was the PT boat rescues. It took to long to get to the downed pilot and return him to a friendly base. This was fixed in frame 2 by eliminating the return to a friendly base

leitwolf · « **Reply #69 on:** August 27, 2006, 11:50:34 AM »

I'm really looking forward to this

Hard decision which side to fly for though..
but i think i want revenge for the two 109s ganging on me

I hope i can get my spitty again.. last time was a blast.

Tilt · « **Reply #70 on:** August 27, 2006, 04:41:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 68falcon
IIRC part of the reason for using only 2 CMs was to imitate the amount of time an actual rescue and return to flight status would take. The designers didn't want MA a style reups. The draw back was the PT boat rescues. It took to long to get to the downed pilot and return him to a friendly base. This was fixed in frame 2 by eliminating the return to a friendly base

You do remember correctly............ a natural delay which was longer should there be more demand also provided a disinsentive to folk bailing at the first opportunity.............

Bruv119 · « **Reply #71 on:** August 27, 2006, 05:27:10 PM »

Poo This will be my first event in AH and it looks like Brooke has landed you with a BIG responsibility.

My squad would want to be in the thick of it so pencil us in for the front line Spits hopefully but nothing against the Hurricane.

If you need any assistance PM me......

Bruv
The Few CO

~S~

Major Biggles · « **Reply #72 on:** August 27, 2006, 05:52:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bruv119
Poo This will be my first event in AH and it looks like Brooke has landed you with a BIG responsibility.

My squad would want to be in the thick of it so pencil us in for the front line Spits hopefully but nothing against the Hurricane.

If you need any assistance PM me......

Bruv
The Few CO

~S~

~~bruv for your immediate support. infact, a PM is already on it's way to you~~

Reynolds · « **Reply #73 on:** August 27, 2006, 06:24:09 PM »

303BG will take the 109s. Expect some spits to burn...

Dichotomy · « **Reply #74 on:** August 27, 2006, 06:31:07 PM »

Krusty, oh goodstrong one, you are mine and I plan on hanging your scalp on my wall

ummm so how much do the patches cost per person?