Der Kessel Frame 2 Summary

[Nefarious]

The Frame 2 Allied Ace was Dantoo of 9 GIAP VVS RKKA

I-16 – Major Lev Shestakov was a veteran of the Spanish Civil War with at least 3 victories in that conflict. Later during the defense of Odessa in 1941 he shot down 3 aircraft and was awarded Hero of the Soviet Union in February 1942. The following July he was appointed CO of 9 GIAP, flying the LaGG-3 he was tasked with defending the skies over Stalingrad. Shestakov achieved 23 individual victories and 44 shared with 5 individual and 8 shared in the I-16 before he was killed January 1944.

Dantoo managed to claim 2 assists, but no Kills. He landed successfully.

The Frame 2 Axis Ace was Seighin of VF-17 "Jolly Rogers"

Bf 109E-4 – Nicloae Burileanu arrived at the Stalingrad front in early September 1942 and from there would go onto claim at least 10 victories against Soviet forces in the East. He flew the 109E-4 at Karpovka with the elite Romanian Grupul 7 Vanatoare and was surrounded after the Soviet offensive in November of 1942. Burileanu would survive the war and retire after 32 years of service flying over 50 different types of aircraft.

Seighin shot down a Yak-7B flown by TunesV of LCA and also claimed 3 assists. Seighin landed successfully.

The Stalingrad Airlift Objective

The Axis launched 40 He 111Hs. (8 UNDER MINIMUM - PENALTIES WILL BE ENFORCED IN FINAL SCORES)

20 were shot down or crashed before arriving or rearming at Pitomnik (A25).
20 rearmed or landed at Pitomnik (A25).
16 were shot down or crashed before returning to base at Rostov. (A71, A21, A22)
4 landed successfully at Rostov. (A71, A21, A22)

44 Tons of Food and Supplies were delivered.
48 Personnel were successfully evacuated.

125.4 Tons of Food and Supplies delivered so far.
240 Personnel were successfully evacuated so far

Pitomnik Defenders Objective

VF-17 and {The Gunfighters} were selected for the role of Pitomnik Defenders.

VF-17 "Jolly Rogers" launched 14 pilots. They shot down 6 Soviet Aircraft. 3 Aircraft were lost to enemy fire.

{The Gunfighters} launched 15 pilots. They shot down 14 Soviet. 7 Aircraft were lost to enemy fire.

The Defenders Objective after Frame 2 stands at Axis 50 - Allied 18.

ALLIED PILOTS: 148
AXIS PILOTS: 146

ALLIED KILLS: 68
AXIS KILLS: 108

ALLIED ASSISTS: 23
AXIS ASSISTS: 109

ALLIED DEATHS: 105
AXIS DEATHS: 60

The Allies destroyed 21 Objects.


-------------

Just a reminder... to be mindful of penalties from violating MINS and MAX numbers on specified aircraft in the plane set. These numbers are chosen to help provide balance and game play, violating them could cause you to greatly influence both of these in a negative way and will be penalized by me.

Good luck in Frame 3 and I will see you at Pitomnik.

[ELD66]

 

[Viper61]

And the shortage of HE-111's wasn't the only issue.  The AXIS also by my look at the Frame 2 logs:

    Upped short 8 109E's
    Upped short 8 110's

The effect was to have an additional 24 X 109G2's flying when they should have been other aircraft (HE-111's / 109E's and 110's).  This greatly favored the AXIS and accounts for the lopsided fighter victories they had.  And the amount of HE-111's that initially made it into A25.

Thanks for noting and taking action Nef will be interesting to see how you score this <S>

Viper61 ALLIED CIC

[perdue3]

Defended V97 against dozens of Yaks. KN was somewhat successful.

[gyrene81]

And the shortage of HE-111's wasn't the only issue.  The AXIS also by my look at the Frame 2 logs:

    Upped short 8 109E's
    Upped short 8 110's

The effect was to have an additional 24 X 109G2's flying when they should have been other aircraft (HE-111's / 109E's and 110's).  This greatly favored the AXIS and accounts for the lopsided fighter victories they had.  And the amount of HE-111's that initially made it into A25.

Thanks for noting and taking action Nef will be interesting to see how you score this <S>

Viper61 ALLIED CIC

what is it you're getting at Viper? i've looked at the logs and i don't see anything that could be construed as an intentional.

based on max possible squad commitment numbers, there were 24 109e-4s assigned which fits the minimum requirement. of the 4 squads that were assigned 109e-4s, none fielded their max numbers.
based on max possible squad commitment numbers, there were 25 110c-4bs assigned, which is over the minimum requirement. 2 squads were assigned and neither fielded the max numbers.
based on max possible squad commitment numbers, there were 51 he-111s assigned which is over the minimum requirement. of the 4 squads assigned he-111s, none fielded their max numbers.

there were 4 squads assigned the 109g-2 and they all fielded 10-15 pilots.
what is odd, is that kommando nowotny does not show up in the side assignments chart for either side, but they are registered and were assigned 109g-2s. they fielded 9 pilots.

unless someone wants to change a rule to force cic's to make their assignments of assets with minimum requirements based on minimum squad commitment numbers, there is always going to be some discrepancy.

[Stampf]

what is it you're getting at Viper? i've looked at the logs and i don't see anything that could be construed as an intentional.

based on max possible squad commitment numbers, there were 24 109e-4s assigned which fits the minimum requirement. of the 4 squads that were assigned 109e-4s, none fielded their max numbers.
based on max possible squad commitment numbers, there were 25 110c-4bs assigned, which is over the minimum requirement. 2 squads were assigned and neither fielded the max numbers.
based on max possible squad commitment numbers, there were 51 he-111s assigned which is over the minimum requirement. of the 4 squads assigned he-111s, none fielded their max numbers.

there were 4 squads assigned the 109g-2 and they all fielded 10-15 pilots.
what is odd, is that kommando nowotny does not show up in the side assignments chart for either side, but they are registered and were assigned 109g-2s. they fielded 9 pilots.

unless someone wants to change a rule to force cic's to make their assignments of assets with minimum requirements based on minimum squad commitment numbers, there is always going to be some discrepancy.

Agreed...where are you coming up with extra g-2's being used Vipe?

III/JG11 is a (16-21) squad at the moment...meaning we could launch as few as (14) He111's and still be within our accepted range.

In the event we launched (19) 111's...I can not complain about that turnout.

[ImADot]

My opinion is that when a minimum number of aircraft are needed, the CiC should use a squad's minumum to get enough planes in the air. Once the minumum for an aircraft type is reached in the arena, extra guys in those squads would then be able to up another aircraft type, as long as each squad is only flying two different aircraft.

[MachNix]

I agree with ImADot that using squads' minimums is good idea when trying to ensure a minimum for an aircraft type is reached, but did not think an "opinion" on meeting the minimums was needed.   

Failure to meet mission objective for any reason -- poor planning or squads not keeping to their commitment levels or in their assigned rides -- would result in a penalty, and the penalty would be proportional to the perceived advantage.

Unfortunately, penalties only apply to the points and not to the "fun."  It is one thing to have a guy not like his ride assignment and not show up to fly, then to show up and fly something other then his ride assignment.  Hopefully none of that was going on because it would take stronger measures IMO than a "penalty" to fix.

 

[perdue3]

This is why I assign numbers the way I do. In KN, when we have CiC duty, we assign squads specific numbers of aircraft that have MAX and MIN attached to them. I always make sure to hit the MAX or the MIN on the dot or close to it. I also make sure the squad given an exact nmber of aircraft can easily field that number. I.E. JG 11 is sometimes a 11-15 squad. So I would give them 8 aircraft that has a MAX and the remainder in a non-MAX. This ensures that there are no penalties unless a CO miscalculates or has a severe drought in pilots on that night.

[Changeup]

Hey I crashed twice.  That's BS

[Dantoo]

Most times you can get within a plane or two of the required figure and it's not a problem for anybody.  As long as it's clear that the CIC has made an adequate plan and there is no intention to deliberately warp the numbers then it's all good.

You can certainly get the situation where a squad completely fails to turn up. Nothing you can do about that as CIC.
You can get it so that a large 16-21 squad turns out with half their minimum.  That hurts, but nothing you can do about that as CIC.
Rarely, you get it such that a squad does the wrong thing and blasts in with way over their maximum.  Again nothing you can do as a CIC.

Squads have to remain aware of their responsibility to get their numbers right. If they have advance warning  that it's going to be way out of kilter, they need to let someone know.

[Viper61]

The set up requires a "Min" turn out for a plane type you are required to hit that mark or take the penelity.  The AXIS was way off the mark.  There are several ways the CIC can ensure 100% that the "Min" is meant.  Like commented twice the number needed.  Or splitting up plane types 50/50 to a squad and not requiring a squad comment past 50% of it lowest turnout number.  And Im sure there are other ways as well.  Lastly the CIC can go around the towers and get a head count on his "Min" AC numbers as a last check.  Squad CO's can report to the CIC there turn out especially if it going to be low so the CIC can do some last minute adjustments.  Etc Etc Etc.  Just making a plan and hoping for the best isn't a plan.  Or more plainly "Hope" isn't a plan.

If you check the ALLIED logs for Frame 2 you will see that all of our "Min"s were meant.  So it can be done and its easy to do.

If your the CIC and you plan a mission and the "Min"s arnt meant you deserve a penility.  And the AXIS side should take a hard hit for it.  Its the only way to enforce the rules.  And if this had been the ALLIES I would chime exactly the same way.

In Frame 2 the AXIS had what amounted to 2 extra squads flying the best AC Fighter of the game (24 AC).  That had a marked effect which changed the outcome of the frame.
The AXIS was short 8 bombers so the ALLIED sides was denied those kill point potential = 72 points
The AXIS was short 8 110's so the ALLIED side was denied those kill point potential = 32 points

And lastly how many "extra" kills did the AXIS side get because you had 16 extra 109G-2's and 8 X 109 drivers in G's and not E's.  Hard to say.... and then the negative effect that would have had if the kills took place before the ALLIED fighters achieved their primary missions like Striking targets or hunting down bombers.

Intention to plan a good mission doesn't count.  Either you did or didn't by the logs.  The AXIS didn't.  And because AXIS AC types and Min's were so far off I would hope a sizeable penelity is taken.  Otherwise there wont be an incentive for future CIC's and planners to follow the set up rules.  They will "Game the Game" and take the penility hit knowing that the outcome is better than the penility.  Penilites should be in points and rated at 4 times the point value that was achieved or effected by.  My opinion.

Not saying the AXIS CIC intentially planned a mission to Game the Game.  Not at all.  Im saying the plan violated the setup rules by a very wide margin.  So take the hit and lets move on. 

[Viper61]

And next time I'll try to hit the spell check button first before posting......  LOL

[Fulcrum]

Without a doubt the worst, least co-ordinated and fun FSO I've ever participated in.  And the last.

[KCDitto]

Don't ya all just love it when people write in here and complain about FSO and then write that they are NEVER going to play agian..... Like anyone really gives a CRAP.