PDA

View Full Version : Convoy PQ20



Kat
24-02-2007, 09:38
It's Late 1942 and Convoy PQ20 ( ficticious number - believe they finished at 18) is nearing Murmansk with 15 merchantment. So far the escorts have done their job but as they near their destination allied codebreakers have detected a large force of U-boats and perhaps some shipping causing a thread to the convoy.

Axis - using Fw200, Ju88 and He111 long range bombers sink at least 75% of the convoy. Escorts will be provided by Me110 long range escort's.
Allies - Using FM-2 Martlets defend the convoy and Using TBF Avengers attack the enemy U-boats and sink at last 85% of them so they no-long cause a threat. Also some Hurricane I are available (representing launches from MAC's) but will need to ditch near the convoy or bail out once their mission is complete. Also a limited number (4 of) of Sunderlands are operating in the area at the limit of their range ( obviously the Jap 4 engined Flying boat )

The Allies will launch from 1 of two fleet carriers used to allow a takeoff but well apart from the convoy ( and not a target to complete ) and can recover either to the same carriers or to the two Escort Carriers.

As the flight time is a touch long I've given the axis two choices. An airstart (which will head east so no need to turn ) and existing ground base. Both will give the same aircraft and just a choice. The airstart should be a normal flight time to target.

http://bananaz.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/PQ20.jpg

http://bananaz.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/PQ20-1.jpg

http://bananaz.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/PQ20-2.jpg

Firelok
24-02-2007, 10:37
I agree with JtD here flight-times are very long you need to focus all the action in a much smaller area.

LeVola
24-02-2007, 11:09
Sounds nice, I read a book of one convoy PQ something, that was attacked by Germans. Only few ships made it to USSR. I think Germany lost 1 or 2 planes and one sub(friendly bombs).

Kat
24-02-2007, 11:54
Sounds nice, I read a book of one convoy PQ something, that was attacked by Germans. Only few ships made it to USSR. I think Germany lost 1 or 2 planes and one sub(friendly bombs).that would be pq 17 which had a comminication mistake which cause them to scatter. about 1/3 of the shipd made it thru.

MajorDamage
24-02-2007, 13:14
I'd suggest spreading out the U-boats a lot. The term 'wolf-pack' is a bit misleading as they would have been spread out over tens or even hundreds of miles of sea in an attempt to attack a convoy from the front and flanks at the same time, the idea being to overwhelm the escorts. They remained co-ordinated by radio contact.

PQ18 was indeed the last PQ designated convoy - the next one after that was JW51.

Kat
24-02-2007, 18:48
Spread the axis targets around and in numbers less than the allies one ( counter for having less A-G capability and having to find the targets ) I had a think whilst at work and everything is now airstarted, means I can keep it further from the land and can get rid of the fleet carriers. In order to allow axis a landing strip there is a 'test runway' airfield available to the south.

Updated the picture - looking promising?

For the Record :-

Hurricane I (launched from CAM Merchants)
F4F-4 (1942 - FM-2 is 1943)
TBF (earliest model)

against

110 G2
Ju88
He111 H6 (torps acceptable)
Fw200

Algorex
24-02-2007, 19:05
Hurricane IIb as a Sea Hurricane? The CAM ships weren't used after the escort carriers appeared IIRC.

Kat
24-02-2007, 19:22
Hurricane IIb as a Sea Hurricane? The CAM ships weren't used after the escort carriers appeared IIRC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAM_ship

1940-41, they where an emergancy measure implemented due to the lack of aircover. Escort carriers and Merchant Carriers came shortly after.

" This was a short lived role, as she was selected for conversion into Britain’s first escort carrier; work commenced in Bootle on January 22nd 1941, the conversion was completed by Blyth Shipbuilding. Work was completed in early June 1941. The ship re-commissioned on June 17th as HMS EMPIRE AUDACITY, Commander D.M. MacKendrick in command."

"Work on the first two (Empire MacAlpine and Empire MacAndrew) was started in June 1942. By October of that year a decision had been made in favour of ten more (four tankers, six grainers) and a total of 32 was eventually planned although only the nineteen below actually were completed. Many of the ships were given names with the prefix "Mac-", in a reference to their designation as MACs; the "Empire" name was commonly used for wartime British ships."

"Sea Hurricane Mk IA

The Sea Hurricane Mk IA was a Hurricane Mk I modified by General Aircraft Limited. They were modified to be carried by CAM ships (catapult armed merchantman). These were cargo ships equipped with a catapult for launching an aircraft, but without facilities to recover them. Thus, if the aircraft were not in range of a land base, pilots were forced to bail out and be picked up by the ship. They were informally known as "Hurricats". The majority of the aircraft modified had suffered wear-and-tear from serving with front line squadrons, so much so that at least one example used during trials broke-up under the stress of a catapult launching. 50 were converted from Hurricane Mk Is."


I think your confusing MAC ( Merchant Aircraft Carrier ) Most of which used Swordfish (although the IB Sea Hurricane was used too - the 1B being a IIA so 8 MG's ) with CAM ( Catapult Armed Merchant ) which used Hurricanes.

Either way whether I'm simulating MAC's or CAM's the MK1 does the job.

Kat
25-02-2007, 12:40
OK added pictures of the targets.

There are 3 U-Boat groups ( 3 boats per group ) and a Surface fleet for the allies to locate and destroyed.

The axis just have the convoy to hit.

The complete plane list will be :-

Axis
He-111H-6
Ju-88A-4
Bf-110G-2
Fw200

Allies
F4F-4
HurricaneMkI
TBF Avenger ( 1942 model)
H8K1 (limited to 4)

F4F is in both spawn points, as will the Avenger, the Hurricane and H8K will be in the south and north points respectivly.

If that looks good to you guys I'll give Firlok some more work :P

Firelok
26-02-2007, 12:28
I think you are missing a big part of the fun out not having carrier starts, this doesnt mean you can't have the CAM Hurri 1s (although I read somewhere they only ever got actually used in anger once) Using the nice new Murmansk summer map I'm suggesting the following....

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e150/firelokc/PQmap.jpg

To the north generic US carriers (or HMS illustrious) plus escorts.
CAM hurri airstart over fleet (limited numbers) Wolfpacks and coastal torpedo boats surround the convoy and the Luftwaffe get to take off from a proper airbase. (which if you are going to use the FW200 a ground spawn point somewhere is really important to actually use this AI plane.)
BTW having a blue shore estabilshment also allows some short-range single engined planes (for those fighter jocks.)

I think this is an OK idea for a map but you've painted yourself into a corner, on one side maintaining strict 'historical' precedents and on the other this has forced you into using an ugly static runway where it's not strictly neccessary.

Not 'historical' true but a much sounder basis for what we are after.

Kat
26-02-2007, 12:32
CAM's wheren't used much indeed, 8 firings, 6 bombers shot down, 1 pilot lost. Pretty good success rate IMO :).

I'm using the winter map because that's when the hardest time was, convoys forced south etc.

That said I'll take a look and see how I can tweak it :)

Boemher
26-02-2007, 12:43
Am I the only one who thinks that air start Hurricanes with Martlets coming from the Carriers are going to cause absolute havoc amongst the Blue side? The 110 G2 doesnt exactly do well against single seaters and the Martlet's .50s will slaughter it imo. As for the bomber chaps, its going to be pilot kill city :( For me it would be more balanced with only Hurricanes offering fighter cover.

Kat
26-02-2007, 12:48
Am I the only one who thinks that air start Hurricanes with Martlets coming from the Carriers are going to cause absolute havoc amongst the Blue side? The 110 G2 doesnt exactly do well against single seaters and the Martlet's .50s will slaughter it imo. As for the bomber chaps, its going to be pilot kill city :( For me it would be more balanced with only Hurricanes offering fighter cover.

Hurricane I's are not exactly leading edge fighters, 110's ought to do fine against them. Martlets are better but they are the 4 gun ( I think ) F4F's not the 6 and no cannon so shouldn't be too bad at all.

Boemher
26-02-2007, 13:03
From long experience of flying both sides of Zorins Vadso map ( I think its this map ) which already feature Hurricanes and Martlets against Bf 110s and Bf 109 F4s in a Murmansk convoy set up I would beg to differ. The only occasion I have been shot down on that map flying a Martlet was by 109s. The Bf 110 only has speed and firepower on its side, bringing its guns to bear on single engined fighters is very difficult and its lack of manuverability renders it helpless as soon as a higher placed bandit enters the fray - ie air start Hurricanes. The main use for the Bf 110 in this scenario would be anti shipping with 500kg bombs slung underneath but I suspect this capability will be limited otherwise few will chose to fly bombers.

The Martlet may only have 4 guns but they are 0.5' heavy machineguns, these weapons can chew through targets because of their armour piercing capabilities. It also has a higher dive speed that the Bf 110 which is important when you are blue and you are unable to run away because above 700 km/h your plane falls to pieces.

As for Hurricanes not being leading edge fighters, neither are the I-16 or I-153 or even the P40 for that matter yet they still seem to score a raft of kills. Having a single engined fighter with a 2000m airstart will make all the difference believe me. On a side note the CAM launched Hurricanes would be launched once an aircraft had been sighted so would presumably be at a height disadvantage when the action commenced.

Kat
26-02-2007, 13:23
FWIW on my version of the scenario BOTH sides have airstarts so no advantage there. Whilst it's true CAM Hurris would have a height disadvantage it wouldn't be much and they would only face Fw200's and the like so the height disadvantage doesn't really come into play there.

You may be right about the 110 but I'd like to give it a try, Vadso is a very different planeset. The Hurri's are IIb's, there are allied A20's etc. plus the fighters will be going for the bombers not the fighters so 110's will be able to come in behind fighters as the fighters lineup bombers. The fighters can't afford to ignore the bombers, if they do I suspect they may well lose the map as I think the allied forces will take longer to take out their targets than the Axis will.

Don't get me wrong, I understand your concerns just don't think they are as clearcut as it appears.

Boemher
26-02-2007, 13:35
Vadso is a different planeset but it featured (map may have changed) the planes in contention ie the 110 and the Hurricane and Martlet, it also featured Fleet Air Arm against German opposition which aside from the Tirpitz map was the pioneer in doing so.

The Bf 110s role in this scenario is escort fighter not fighter bomber yes ? Therefore it is reasonable to look at how the Bf 110 compares as a fighter to the British aircraft and also to look at Vadso which has been on the server for over 12months with the same set up. The Bf 110 will have considerable trouble doing anything other than running away on the level or shooting up Red bombers. It is not an escort fighter - this was found out the hard way in the BoB. When faced with Red fighters split between Bomber intercepting and Bf 110 hunting the 110 will be at a severe disadvantage because it will be forced to fly as a fighter in this map sooner or later or the Blue bombers will get hammered. There are only 1 or 2 pilots on UKD who can make a go at the 110 as a fighter and even then a lesser pilot in a Martlet will nullify them - and rightly so.

As for airstarts can we not have twin engined aircraft (bombers and 110) getting one and single engined fighters (Hurri and Martlet )not getting one. It makes more sense that the Carrier and CAM force are restricted in this sense because they are the defenders and they possess a superior rate of climb to offset this disadvantage.

Kat
26-02-2007, 13:50
Yes the 110 is an escort, whilst it's true in the BoB the 110 got hammered it was up against Spitfires as well as Hurricanes (better hurris than the Mk I), the Martlet of course is inferioer to both but we'll see..


I've adjusted things, whilst I'm not 100% happy about using the test runways I'd rather keep things positiionally correct.

Changes :-

1) Added a Task Force leaving Murmansk providing long range air cover. (i.e. a Carrier to take off from ) using the generic carrier. This Carrier has Martlet's and SBD's (figured being a fleet carrier probably would be ok).

2) Added a home base and 110 spawn to the test runway. IF we do decide we need a 109 too I'll add it there.

3) the Airstart is the Hurricanes ( which remember are the 1's with the terrible neg G cutout ) and the Sunderlands.

Also spread the convoy a touch.

Boemher
26-02-2007, 14:22
Id like to avoid 109s too, Im not angling for their inclusion by anymeans.

The Martlet in IL2 is superior to the Hurricane II in every category and imo the Bf 109 E4 also (except speed), if the Spitfire I was present in this sim I would assume the Marlets superiority over it too.

Hurricane Is do have neg G cut out, performance wise they are not that different from the IIb however. I still feel that air starting single engined fighters to intercept bombers is an inelegant solution. On most maps, with the exception of recent maps, airstarts when available are confined to bomber types. This in my opinion is quite fair. When looking to intercept bombers being equipped with a airstart in a Hurricane would enable me to make several very low risk accurate passes at the Blue teams bombers. Head on then one or two high side attacks exposing myself to little return fire. This is because the height gained by an airstart allows me to build up sufficient energy to make effective attacks.

In reality climbing to face incoming bombers exposes you to escorts and also bomber defensive fire because of the slow closing speeds. IMO this would be representative of the kind of tactical situation the FleetAirArm and CAM pilots would be facing most of the time.

With air starts it is more like BoB or the Germans attacking B17s and B24s over Europe - a well forewarned fighter interception attacking with optimum positional advantage. I think in a convoy scenario it would be unlikely to engineer these circumstances as the defending force.

With out the airstart for the fighters we would be looking at a 2 or 3 minute sustained climb to achieve 2000m, that isnt an awful lot but if you consider that if you airstart at 2000m after 2/3 min continous climbing the fighters will always come in above the bombers at 3500/ 4000m given the same time scales.

Kat
26-02-2007, 20:58
The Martlet in IL2 is superior to the Hurricane II in every category
I'd rather face 4 .50 cal than 4 20mm or 12 303 ;)

Boemher
26-02-2007, 21:13
I'd rather face 4 .50 cal than 12 303 ;)

then you have your priorities wrong :cool:

Kat
27-02-2007, 01:21
then you have your priorities wrong :cool:

hehe - nah I have more luck with a IIb than any US fighter by dint of greater spread of fire and probably higher weight of fire. Whilst an individual 0.5 cal is clearly superior to a 303, put 12 in the air at once and they are very effective. In fact the RN asked for the 6 gun 0.5 cal Martlets.



Six Browning .50 machine guns. The two inboard guns had 400 rounds each, enough for 32 seconds. The four outboard guns had 270 rounds, enough for 22 seconds. Output per second was 75 rounds, or a weight of 3.64kg per second. Muzzle power was 1374 kW.

So a Martlet (4 50cal) is about 2.42 KG/s



Eight Browning .303 guns installed in the wings. 300 rounds per gun, enough for 16 seconds of fire. 152 rounds per second, or 1.72 kg/sec output. Total muzzle power 480 kW.

So a IIb Hurri is 2.58. KG/s

For the record the IIC is over 6 KG/s

Algorex
27-02-2007, 07:09
Difference being that the .50cals actually pierce armour plating.

Kat
27-02-2007, 09:50
Difference being that the .50cals actually pierce armour plating.
Actually it shouldn't, not sure how you'd test it to prove it but the .50 cals should have no-more success against armour than the 303's. Heck some planes armour was sufficient against 20mm shells.

Algorex
27-02-2007, 13:51
Actually it shouldn't, not sure how you'd test it to prove it but the .50 cals should have no-more success against armour than the 303's.

erhm... really?

Kat
27-02-2007, 14:04
erhm... really?
Yep, I've read several accounts of even 20mm hits not penitrating seat armour. Several reasons for this not least of which is plane armour is of higher quality generally than tank armour so thinner can be used. Also the aircraft structure adds to the protection, as does things like radios.

Now this is real world I'm talking about, in game I don't know but if modelled correctly 303's and 50 cals shouldn't have any noticeable difference in terms of penetrating armour as armour was generally (at least in RAF service) intended to protect against 20mm ( and window armour against 50 cal).

Naturally the hitting power of a 50cal is higher so You have more chances of damaging the engine or causing structual failure but truly the real chance of knocking a plane out of the sky with MG's is either setting it on fire ( and either cal can do that), killing the unarmoured crew ( I'd go for 303's on that - more in the air ) or killing the engines ( I'd give 50cal the marginal lead on this one ).

Algorex
27-02-2007, 14:45
Yup, all the air forces moved from rifle calibre MGs to heavy MGs just for fun...

The typical fighter armour was at the edge of .50cal penetration values while a .303 had not chance of penetration.

20mm can be stopped by your typical late war 13mm face hardened armour plate especially with tumbling effects prior to the armour but i would trust my life on it. I know there are reports, accounts and calculations about armour efficency against cannon calibre AP shells.

Boemher
27-02-2007, 16:44
Not to diverge too much away from the topic but a .50 cal round from the Browning M2 has a tremendous amount of KE for what is basically a large machine gun. From people who have fired it apparently it can penetrate most light armoured vehicles, brick walls, tear up train carriages ect

It definitely has much superior armour penetration characteristics than your average rifle calibre machine gun round. What you also need to factor in to the equation is that 4 x .50 cal offer a fairly tight spread of bullets compared to 12 x .303s which are arranged all along the Hurricanes wing. You have to be a very good shot to hit with all 12 guns normally 4 or more are hitting nothing but air when you seemingly have the target fixed in your gunsight.

On a side note even the p*** poor Italian Breda 12.7mm Heavy Machine guns could penetrate the back armour of a Spitfire from close range. I cant remember the pilot at the moment but I know of an account where the RAF pilot bounced an Italian fighter, which spotted him and evaded and as he zoomed away skyward the Italian pilot managed to score a bulls eye penetrating his armoured back and ciercing his left lung. The RAF pilot managed to get back to base and make a safe landing but he very nearly could have been killed.

Algorex
27-02-2007, 17:05
Finnish FA pilots didn't have anything nice to say about the 12.7 bredas either, apparently they didn't penetrate a simple 8mm steel plate (i-16 armor iirc)

Firelok
27-02-2007, 17:23
Before we get distracted too much by kinetic energy of .50cals. The Bf110 isn't up to the task you've assigned it. Destroying bombers, it's fine, protecting bombers is a different story. I think adding the 109e7/b would go a great way to making this a lot more fun for both sides. Also the H8K(Sunderland) has nowhere to land after a sortie, better to leave it out unless there is a seaplane base nearby.

irish
27-02-2007, 18:00
I've seen movies of the M2 Browning literally pulverizing concrete blocks. Turned 'em into dust. No Joke.

It should also be noted that the thing has served in all branches of the US military for close to a century. AFAIK they have no plans to remove it anytime soon

Back to topic: Any chance us getting to fly this map soon?:)

Kat
28-02-2007, 00:30
Before we get distracted too much by kinetic energy of .50cals. The Bf110 isn't up to the task you've assigned it. Destroying bombers, it's fine, protecting bombers is a different story. I think adding the 109e7/b would go a great way to making this a lot more fun for both sides. Also the H8K(Sunderland) has nowhere to land after a sortie, better to leave it out unless there is a seaplane base nearby.

Can I make a wild(ish) suggestion...

Would an IAR 81c work? I know Romania was involved and I know the IAR was in theatre, just adds something we don't see very often to the map and isn't out of place completly as the Romanians where using them on the Eastern front.

Algorex
28-02-2007, 07:08
Can I make a wild(ish) suggestion...

Would an IAR 81c work? I know Romania was involved and I know the IAR was in theatre, just adds something we don't see very often to the map and isn't out of place completly as the Romanians where using them on the Eastern front.

As a plane it might work, as the ugly cousin of bf-109E. But the closes IARs operated about 2000km south and i can't see a reason why they should be included, other than the "not used enough" argument. Use bf-109E7 instead.

Kat
28-02-2007, 11:29
As a plane it might work, as the ugly cousin of bf-109E. But the closes IARs operated about 2000km south and i can't see a reason why they should be included, other than the "not used enough" argument. Use bf-109E7 instead.

Fair enough, thought they would be closer than that, I'll have to think up a scenario to use it :)

Boemher
28-02-2007, 11:48
I still like the origional map idea with no single engined fighters for the Blue side, the 109 never had the range to venture far out to sea. The only issues I have are already stated.

-Air start Hurricanes - even Mk Is will be too tough for escorts to counter

-Martlets will probably render the 110 impotent due to their dive speed and firepower

A soloution would be to keep everything the same and try one of the following. Just have Martlets as Reds only fighter taking off from carriers and drop CAM Hurris, or supplant Martlets with Sea Hurricane (use IIb) taking of from Carriers and drop CAM Hurris or lastly and most drastically - bring forward the year of the map and just use CAM Hurri Mk Is with airstart and no FAA presence.

Kat
28-02-2007, 11:54
I still like the origional map idea with no single engined fighters for the Blue side, the 109 never had the range to venture far out to sea. The only issues I have are already stated.

-Air start Hurricanes - even Mk Is will be too tough for escorts to counter

-Martlets will probably render the 110 impotent due to their dive speed and firepower

A soloution would be to keep everything the same and try one of the following. Just have Martlets as Reds only fighter taking off from carriers and drop CAM Hurris, or supplant Martlets with Sea Hurricane (use IIb) taking of from Carriers and drop CAM Hurris or lastly and most drastically - bring forward the year of the map and just use CAM Hurri Mk Is with airstart and no FAA presence.

What I was thinking was keep the 110's as airstart escorting the bombers (where they do have a chance because even just forcing a fighter to dive away does the job - the incoming fighters can't mess with the 110's too long or the bombers will be long gone) but putting 109's on the southern base as cover for the departing U-boats and surface fleet. The 109's CAN of course reach the bombers but hard for them to escort.

How does that sound?

Incedently just having CAM Hurries would bring the year back not forward :P

Boemher
28-02-2007, 12:03
It would bring the year forward to 41 / Jan 42, as in move the time more towards the beginning of the war, capice?

Bf 109s had trouble crossing the Channel, having this extremely short ranged single engined fighter flying out to attack an artic convoy just isnt very convincing. I would rather fight as Blue with no single engined fighters and the map be unbalanced than to have the 109 present.

Kat
01-03-2007, 03:15
I'm going to stick with the airstarted MkI's and the 110's (but no 109's ) also airstarted.

The MkI I doubt will be used much but gives an option. There will be two carriers with ground level planes. Currently SBD's and F4F-3. Need to manually add the avenger.

There is a land based bomber spawn primarally to allow the use of the Condor. Same base is obviously the recovery base.

I do understand the concerns about the 110 but want to see how it plays. Due to the selection of planes up against it I'm not convinced it's 100% certain to be an issue. Plus the fact that the reds need to engage the bombers.

Kat
05-03-2007, 12:20
I've submitted this. I kept the 110 as only fighter FOR NOW. See how it go's in an environment where the allies MUST go for the bombers or they are likely to end up losing.

The targets are basically as per the picture above however I have added a couple of bits. There are two single merchant targets ( i.e. damaged, smoking with small escort ), some holes in the convoy as a result and have shifted the U-boats around a bit. For instance one in around AN25 as if it's approaching the stragglers.

Planes :-
Allies :-
Earliest Martlet
Hurricane I (Airstarted)
SBD
TBF (earliest)

Axis :-
110 G2
Ju88
He111 H-6
Fw200

Boemher
05-03-2007, 13:12
Kat have you ever played Belgrade? yesterday formations of 5/6 He111s were coming in to target (With 109s as fighter escort) and were completely destroyed by head on attacks followed by concentrated stern attacks each time. It got to the stage where Blue team stopped flying bombers and went soley for the Bf 109 E4/B or E7.

The Hurricane I was causing the majority of the damage inflicting pilot kills and setting the He 111's wing fuel tanks alight. In total 19 bombers were shot down, before Blue team gave up on bombers all together.

The Blue bomber team, led by T}{OR, came in at 2000m, in a tight formation and the Red fighters still were able to climb up to 2000m + altitude with ease. The reason people stopped choosing bombers was it is simply no fun repeatedly being destroyed by fighters before you reach targets. All the Hurricane airstart on this map will achieve is an even tougher time for the Blue bomber pilots - and therefore less pilots willing to fly in bombers and ultimately less people willing to fly Blue.

Algorex
05-03-2007, 13:25
I expect to see many bf-110s glide bombing the ships, that's what i'd do ;)

Kat
05-03-2007, 13:33
Kat have you ever played Belgrade? yesterday formations of 5/6 He111s were coming in to target and were completely destroyed by head on attacks followed by concentrated stern attacks each time. It got to the stage where Blue team stopped flying bombers and went soley for the Bf 109 E4/B or E7.

Every time I've played Belgrade nothing like that's ever happened and the Hurricane I is the least used plane. You can't compare Belgrade to my map though. The only similarity is that both use He111's and Hurricane I's.

On belgrade every single red is a fighter, on my map you do that and you'll never win so the blue's shouldn't be swamped by 18 Martlets or Hurricane I's.

Belgrade is also an ground start both sides so both my map and belgrade the Hurricanes start with the same essential position. If anything the bombers have a slight advantage as from a standing start the Hurricane get's to 2000m first.

That said I've just looked at that belgrade mission.

19 bombers where shotdown. There seemed to be 3 main hurricane pilots.

FlyingFinn - got 1 He111 plus others.
Whirlin - Got shot down 3 times without a single kill.
Yourself - no He111's.

There where a couple of other He111/Hurricane kills but to say the hurricane I did the damage is clearly false. Most bomber kills seemed to be in the E4 which is what you'd expect. There also seemed to be only one big raid mounted in the entire mission.

Hardly conclusive. Trust me Hurricanes unless you manage a headon pass ( of which I believe there might have been ONE when FF got Thor ) against a He111 your in for a hard time shooting them down. I've done a lot of offline maps around 1940 and as such spent a lot of time trying to shoot down Heinkels with Hurricane I's and IIbs. It's not easy.

I'm actually worried the allies will struggle on this map.


Correction I missed one - RGAF Jester actually did get a few He111's in Hurricanes usually the same pilot ( 5 He111, xman 4 times, and MD once ) all in the Hurricane I. Given he kept getting the same pilot he clearly didn't destroy formations and makes me wonder what was going on to get the same pilot all the time.

The main point though is the the force attacking the bomber SHOULD be a lot smaller than belgrade AND ( all be it probably for a short time ) there are 3 allied targets to hit.

I wonder if xman ( who died abotut 7 times in HE111's ) was going in at low level all the time.

Kat
05-03-2007, 13:47
I expect to see many bf-110s glide bombing the ships, that's what i'd do ;)

Ooops better put bomb limit on the 110's :P (forgot that)

Not bothered about the gunpods - if a 110 wants to weigh it's self down so be it.

Boemher
05-03-2007, 13:51
How many He 111s were crippled by Hurricanes ? I suppose its tough for stats to show that and maybe it would require someone who was actually there to state what they experienced - or someone who has flown the Bf 109 E enough to know that 60 rpg for the cannons is not an awful lot when it comes to shooting down bombers.

Multiple planes shooting multiple targets, very much like on most maps where bombers are shot at by 2/3 or even 4 individual fighters. I alone shot up 2 bombers to the point of running out of ammunition only for the bomber to be finished off by someone else. *edit* I just checked stats there are over 12 recorded instances of damage or shotdowns logged by the Hurricane I against the German bomber types. Thats not bad if according to you it is the least flown Red fighter.

I laughed when I read that You are worried that Reds might be in trouble ! Frankly it would take a stretch of the imagination to believe that one side featuring 2 single engined fighters one of which is airstarted could ever get in to trouble against a side that features 0 single engine fighters.

What it boils down to is how easy do you want to make it to fly Red and kill bombers on this map? That you think a He 111 airstarted at 2000m with a bomb load could ever be at a height advantage against air started Hurricanes is quite improbable.

Boemher
05-03-2007, 13:53
The main point though is the the force attacking the bomber SHOULD be a lot smaller than belgrade AND ( all be it probably for a short time ) there are 3 allied targets to hit.

I wonder if xman ( who died abotut 7 times in HE111's ) was going in at low level all the time.

On Belgrade there were single engined fighters actively escorting the He 111s. It is very difficult to focus on a bomber when you offer your 6 up to a Bf 109. Against a Bf 110 which cannot follow the Hurricane or Martlet through any evasive manuvers it will be a completely different scenario. One where you can afford to worry much less about being caught with your pants down because it is so easy to reverse position against the 110.

Kat
05-03-2007, 14:01
What it boils down to is how easy do you want to make it to fly Red and kill bombers on this map? That you think a He 111 airstarted at 2000m with a bomb load could ever be at a height advantage against air started Hurricanes is quite improbable.

No what I'm saying is the He111's against the Hurricanes will be at LESS of a disadvantage than on Belgrade.

On Belgrade everything is stacked against the bombers.

1) They start on the ground and as it takes longer to take off a Bomber than a fighter this is an instant technical disadvantage. Airstart both and in fact the bomber reduces the disadvantage.

2) All reds are fighters. That means the bombers are coming into a heavily outnumbered environment with ALL reds over the target and probably higher.

On PQ20 the blues can choose 1 of 3 targets (although two will die quickly) and red will have units heading to attack the U-boats so the blue bombers will arrive in an environment which is a LOT less hostile than Belgrade. Plus if Blue wants to be tactical they can send some low level He111's in from the southern base. Longer flight time but coming in at sea level with torps gives them a chance and means the fighters have to split up.

I'm prepared to be proved wrong.. but I want to test it first ;)

Boemher
05-03-2007, 14:13
No what I'm saying is the He111's against the Hurricanes will be at LESS of a disadvantage than on Belgrade.

On Belgrade everything is stacked against the bombers.

1) They start on the ground and as it takes longer to take off a Bomber than a fighter this is an instant technical disadvantage. Airstart both and in fact the bomber reduces the disadvantage.

2) All reds are fighters. That means the bombers are coming into a heavily outnumbered environment with ALL reds over the target and probably higher.

On PQ20 the blues can choose 1 of 3 targets (although two will die quickly) and red will have units heading to attack the U-boats so the blue bombers will arrive in an environment which is a LOT less hostile than Belgrade. Plus if Blue wants to be tactical they can send some low level He111's in from the southern base. Longer flight time but coming in at sea level with torps gives them a chance and means the fighters have to split up.


You reckon that by mirroring the mix of He 111s to fighter ratio that was found on Belgrade but supplanting the single engined escorts with 2 engined bomber destroyers ( again I must reiterate that the Bf 110 is not an escort fighter in the P38 mould ) while having the bombers face a mix of Hurricanes and Martlets would put the Blue team at LESS of a disadvantage?

What makes shooting down bomber easy is attacking them from head on with an altitude advantage. Hurricane Mk I s provide this ability. Therefore Blue bombers will always be at a disadvantage because even if they kill a Hurricane it can just respawn at 2000m and immediately re enter the fight. Can you picture that ?

I know you said that you doubt the Hurricane will be flown much and that you regard it as inferior to the Bf 110 as a fighter, well if thats the case why have it on the map? Why not have no airstart fighter and have only Martlets?

Kat
05-03-2007, 14:23
You reckon that by mirroring the mix of He 111s to fighter ratio that was found on Belgrade but supplanting the single engined escorts with 2 engined bomber destroyers ( again I must reiterate that the Bf 110 is not an escort fighter in the P38 mould ) while having the bombers face a mix of Hurricanes and Martlets would put the Blue team at LESS of a disadvantage?

The mix ISN'T mirror'd?

I'll repeat myself shall I...

Belgrade

8 Bombers (for example) and 9 Fighters

against SEVENTEEN CONCENTRATED FIGHTERS IN A SMALL AMOUNT OF AIRSPACE.

PQ20
Let's say

5 Hurricane I's on CAP.
5 Martlet's on CAP.
7 Mix of Martlet's, TBF and SBD hitting U-boats.

Not just that but the German Bombers might be a mix of 50m Torpedo bombers, concevably coming in from two angles and high level or glide bombers.

Now I accept the Bf110 isn't in the P38 class BUT due to the fact the fighters will have to stop the bombers they can't mix it too much with the 110's so even if all the 110's do is force the fighters to break off then they've done their job. May well not work and I understand on paper it may not look like it. But until it's tested we don't know.

Just remember, if the maps played properly the ratio of bombers vs defensive fighters is about 1:1 NOT 1:3 as on belgrade. That is a BIG difference.

Boemher
05-03-2007, 14:25
I'm prepared to be proved wrong.. but I want to test it first ;)

Ok Kat but basically it is now page 3 of the discussion and all myself and others have been doing is trying to suggest to you that this map will be inherantly imbalanced. It is only from my own 4 years plus of experience playing IL2 that I can contribute to this discussion on map balance.

There is a distinction to be made from what works well hypothetically using WW2 as a reference and what works well in IL2. I feel you are overestimating the capabilities of the 110 in the role of fighter , a type which you may not have flown that much, and underestimating the capabilities of the Hurri I with a 2000m airstart - this instantly transforms the Hurricane in to a dangerous proposition.

Kat
05-03-2007, 14:30
OThere is a distinction to be made from what works well hypothetically using WW2 as a reference and what works well in IL2. I feel you are overestimating the capabilities of the 110 in the role of fighter , a type which you may not have flown that much, and underestimating the capabilities of the Hurri I with a 2000m airstart - this instantly transforms the Hurricane in to a dangerous proposition.

Hypothetically it shouldn't work however I want to try it. Due to the way the map is structured I'm not prepared to dismiss it out of hand.

Boemher
05-03-2007, 14:30
The mix ISN'T mirror'd?

I'll repeat myself shall I...

Belgrade

8 Bombers (for example) and 9 Fighters

against SEVENTEEN CONCENTRATED FIGHTERS IN A SMALL AMOUNT OF AIRSPACE.

PQ20
Let's say

5 Hurricane I's on CAP.
5 Martlet's on CAP.
7 Mix of Martlet's, TBF and SBD hitting U-boats.

Not just that but the German Bombers might be a mix of 50m Torpedo bombers, concevably coming in from two angles and high level or glide bombers.

Now I accept the Bf110 isn't in the P38 class BUT due to the fact the fighters will have to stop the bombers they can't mix it too much with the 110's so even if all the 110's do is force the fighters to break off then they've done their job. May well not work and I understand on paper it may not look like it. But until it's tested we don't know.

Just remember, if the maps played properly the ratio of bombers vs defensive fighters is about 1:1 NOT 1:3 as on belgrade. That is a BIG difference.


Are you deliberately trying to misconstrue what I post? Or just trying to dodge the issue ...

The mix that I referred to was on the BLUE side not the RED side. I am asking you whether you think that having 7 HE 111s escorted by 10 Bf 110s is better than having 7 HE 111s escorted by 10 Bf 109s. Which was the ratio present on Belgrade last nite. In this scenario the bombers were slaughtered, by inlarge by Hurricanes as the stats do show, to the point where Blue stopped flying bombers all together.

In your scenario how can supplanting the Bf 109, an excellent fighter, by the unmanuverable Bf 110 place the Blue team at LESS of a disadvantage? The answer is it wont, it will make the process of flying He 111s even less pleasurable compared with Blegrade.

Kat
05-03-2007, 14:39
Regarding the head on attacks (which as a bomber pilot I often don't see - perhaps 1 in 4 attacks if that ) surely the 110 can counter it if they are equally good. The 110 spots the approaching fighter and dives in front of the bomber formation and go's nose on nose with the fighter. The fighter has two choices. Gamble the nose on nose pass with the 110 (which most like the single seater will lose ) or break off. Either is good for the bombers. In a tail on attack of course the fighter isn't manoveuring so again the 110 has a chance.

Where the 110 will DEFINATLY struggle is slashing attacks but these are hardest to pull off and with Machine guns only not nearly as deadly as cannon.

Kat
05-03-2007, 14:42
Are you deliberately trying to misconstrue what I post? Or just trying to dodge the issue ...

The mix that I referred to was on the BLUE side not the RED side. I am asking you whether you think that having 7 HE 111s escorted by 10 Bf 110s is better than having 7 HE 111s escorted by 10 Bf 109s. Which was the ratio present on Belgrade last nite. In this scenario the bombers were slaughtered, by inlarge by Hurricanes as the stats do show, to the point where Blue stopped flying bombers all together.

In your scenario how can supplanting the Bf 109, an excellent fighter, by the unmanuverable Bf 110 place the Blue team at LESS of a disadvantage? The answer is it wont, it will make the process of flying He 111s even less pleasurable compared with Blegrade.

The point I am making is the fighter ratio was 17 versus 9 on Belgrade.

In PQ20 it's 9v9 (approx) - MUCH better odds even taking into account the 110's disadvantages.

May not work BUT belgrade is definatly not a good comparison.

Belgrade is probably the worst map for bomber pilots as the reds spawn right on the target and don't have targets to hit of their own. Fun dogfights mind but not comparable to a map with red and blue ground targets.

Firelok
05-03-2007, 15:00
Belgrade is probably the worst map for bomber pilots :mad:
Now it's true I'm biased because it's my map but organised bomber sorties here for blues have produced some great fun over the last few months, it's a target rich environment and well rewards bomber attacks.
__________________________________________________________________

Now back to the matter at hand, I've uploaded PQ20.mis with one major change on my part.


Not bothered about the gunpods - if a 110 wants to weigh it's self down so be it.
All the gunpod and rocket options have been disabled by me for the simple fact that none of this stuff should be on an early 42 map. Some other thoughts about this gunpod/Mk108 stuff are in this thread posted some months ago.
http://www.battle-fields.com/commscentre/showthread.php?t=11139&highlight=MK108+policy
Really I'm heading the complaints off at the pass with this one, as soon as someone gets exploded by Mk108s/BK gunpods their going to complain TBO.
Whatever version of long-range escort Bf110s were available up here in Norway in 42 (Probably earlier than a G2) I'm pretty damned sure they had no gunpods or rocket mortars.

Kat
05-03-2007, 15:02
:mad:
Now it's true I'm biased because it's my map but organised bomber sorties here for blues have produced some great fun over the last few months, it's a target rich environment and well rewards bomber attacks.
__________________________________________________________________

Now back to the matter at hand, I've uploaded PQ20.mis with one major change on my part.


All the gunpod and rocket options have been disabled by me for the simple fact that none of this stuff should be on an early 42 map. Some other thoughts about this gunpod/Mk108 stuff are in this thread posted some months ago.
http://www.battle-fields.com/commscentre/showthread.php?t=11139&highlight=MK108+policy
Really I'm heading the complaints off at the pass with this one, as soon as someone gets exploded by Mk108s/BK gunpods their going to complain TBO.
Whatever version of long-range escort Bf110s were available up here in Norway in 42 (Probably earlier than a G2) I'm pretty damned sure they had no gunpods or rocket mortars.

Thanks firelok :D

Regarding Belgrade I do like the map, I just think it's VERY unfair to compare the two as they are quite different maps. Belgrade is comparable to maps like Normandy or (when I finish it ) Dunkirk II.

Algorex
05-03-2007, 15:04
Bf-110s were F2 models.

Btw what are the odds of anyone taking the TBF off a carrier, fly three squares and try to destroy some 20 u-boats shooting back at him/her?

Kat
05-03-2007, 15:06
Bf-110s were F2 models.

Btw what are the odds of anyone taking the TBF off a carrier, fly three squares and try to destroy some 20 u-boats shooting back at him/her?

We'll see, I put the SBD in as an option and the Martlet can carry bombs.

They won't have 20 U-boats shooting at them tho, each pack is 3 :P.

From memory there are 12 U-boats in 4 packs and a 5 ship surface fleet.

Boemher
05-03-2007, 15:17
" was one of the Arctic Convoys sent from Britain to aid the Soviet Union in its war with Nazi Germany. The Convoy departed Loch Ewe, Scotland on 2 September 1942 and arrived in Archangelsk on 21 September 1942.

This convoy followed the disaster of PQ-17 and the British were determined to provide the convoy with air cover. The new escort carrier HMS Avenger had arrived from the USA and formed the core of the protecting force. The convoy was postponed because a large part of the Royal Navy was engaged in Operation Pedestal a vital Malta convoy in August.

A small RAF force was dispatched to Northern Russia as part of the preparations. This consisted of Spitfires and Handley Page Hampden bombers. One of the Hampdens crashed in Norway and plans for the Operation were captured by the Germans

[edit] Ships

The Convoy consited of forty four merchant ships (15 British, 20 American, 7 Russian and 2 Panamanian). The escort was commanded by Rear Admiral Robert Burnett and consisted of the carrier HMS Avenger carrying 10 Hawker Hurricanes and 3 Fairey Swordfish , the cruiser HMS Scylla, and the destroyers HMS Onslow, Onslought, Opportune, Offa, Ashanti, Eskimo, Somali and Tartar. Force B consisted of the destroyers HMS Milne, Marne, Martin, Meteor, Faulknor, Fury, Impulsive and Intrepid. Close escort was provided by destroyers HMS Malcolm and HMS Achates, two anti-aircraft "gunships", 4 Flower class corvettes, 4 A/S trawlers and 3 minesweepers.

Distant cover was provided by the battleships HMS Anson and HMS Duke of York, and cruisers HMS London, Suffolk, Cumberland, Sheffield and Norfolk under the command of Admiral Bruce Fraser.

[edit] Battle

The Luftwaffe provided a formidable opponent with 42 Heinkel He-111 torpedo bombers of KG26 and 35 Junkers Ju-88 dive bombers. Tactics consisted of simultaneous attack by torpedo bombers and dive bombers swamping the defenders. U-Boats began shadowing the convoy and one of them, the U-88 was sunk by HMS Faulknor. The convoy was sighted by a German Blohm + Voss BV 138 flying boat on 12 September and later that day the German torpoedo bombers sunk 8 ships. The next day the Germans returned losing 5 Heinkels to Hurricane fighters, 3 Hurricanes were also shot down by friendly fire but their pilots were rescued. Later attacks were beaten off at the cost to the Germans of 20 more planes shot down. The Convoy was attacked by U-boats on its approach to Kola Inlet and three more ships were sunk by U-408. British escorts sunk U-boats U-457 and U-589. Two more merchant men were sunk by air attack in Murmansk harbour.

[edit] References

* Richard Woodman, Arctic Convoys 1941-1945 , 1994, ISBN 978-0-7195-5752-1"

From Wiki on PQ convoy 18

Its interesting that at this late date it is the Sea Hurricane that was the Carrier fighter and not the Martlet, and that there were no CAM Hurricanes present.

Out of interest were CAM ships and escort carriers ever used in conjunction?

Algorex
05-03-2007, 15:26
Its interesting that at this late date it is the Sea Hurricane that was the Carrier fighter and not the Martlet, and that there were no CAM Hurricanes present.

Out of interest were CAM ships and escort carriers ever used in conjunction?

Check my post #8 ;)

Kat
05-03-2007, 15:29
Reason for the Martlet is that is has a tailhook.

Technically yes it probably shoudl be purely Hurricanes.

the use of CAM's is artistic license as your probably right the two didn't serve togehter ( although Escorts and MAC's would have ) as I thought the IIb would be too much.

MajorDamage
05-03-2007, 15:44
They won't have 20 U-boats shooting at them tho, each pack is 3 :P.

From memory there are 12 U-boats in 4 packs and a 5 ship surface fleet.

Sorry to be a pedantic old git but could you do me a favour and spread out the u-boats into singles? They would never, ever operate in threes like this. I know they're like that on the Biscay map but that's for a very specific reason - namely that they were ordered to travel in small groups across the Bay of Biscay for mutual AA cover, often with a specially converted flak boat. Once they got out into the open sea and away from the RAF patrols they split up and went on operations. It was a tactic that only happened for a very short time and was dropped soon afterwards because it didn't work.

Boemher
05-03-2007, 15:46
In order of Red fighter prowess:

Martlet
Hurricane IIb
Hurricane Mk I

I agree having a tail hook is a great feature especially if you need to land on a Carrier, but I still think you should go with either just the Martlet or just the Hurricane IIb but if you must have a CAM launched Hurr Mk I, just dont give it the airstart, have it take off from the carrier and ditch in the sea.

That is my only reservation on this map lol

Kat
05-03-2007, 15:51
Sorry to be a pedantic old git but could you do me a favour and spread out the u-boats into singles? They would never, ever operate in threes like this. I know they're like that on the Biscay map but that's for a very specific reason - namely that they were ordered to travel in small groups across the Bay of Biscay for mutual AA cover, often with a specially converted flak boat. Once they got out into the open sea and away from the RAF patrols they split up and went on operations. It was a tactic that only happened for a very short time and was dropped soon afterwards because it didn't work.

Let's see how it plays, 15 spread out targets may annoy the hell out of people plus not sure I've ever seen a map with 15 targets on SC. But sure if either the allies win easilly or it turns out to be a balanced map I'll consider it for sure :). The groups are spread out over about 30km of sea maybe more btw.

T}{OR
05-03-2007, 16:13
Since you all have been talking about Belgrade, I'll join the discussion. I agree with Bohemer almost completely. That time was a masacre for us bombers. If we didn't get killed on first pass, after second one we would be kissing ground. I can tell you for sure we got 2 or 3 good headons. - I even turned my rudder hard right to evade - not much you can do against Hurri's 12 blazing guns with that glass nose... :mp5: Our fighters were helpless or buisy diging fighters themselves... They did get some fighters though - but they had to shoot untill dewinging or blowing up...

If you want I have tracks of those flights to back it up. (at least I think I didn't delete them...)

MajorDamage
05-03-2007, 16:17
You won't have to have 15 sperate target groups - just spread them out and make a few target groups with very large radii.

I'd really appreciate it if you'd do this for me Kat - otherwise I feel it dilutes a rather key feature of the Biscay map which I have spent a very long time researching and making. (I started working on the idea over a year ago).

Even if the only research you ever do on the U-boat war is to watch Das Boot you will know that U-boats did not operate in close groups like this.

Kat
05-03-2007, 16:20
Our fighters were helpless or buisy diging fighters themselves... They did get some fighters though - but they had to shoot untill dewinging or blowing up...

Which is what I was trying to highlight.

If you have 17v9 fighters then the attackers have 8 fighters to harass the bombers.

9v9 (which is what you'd expect in PQ20) the fighters ratio is comparable.

Algorex
05-03-2007, 16:27
Which is what I was trying to highlight.

If you have 17v9 fighters then the attackers have 8 fighters to harass the bombers.

9v9 (which is what you'd expect in PQ20) the fighters ratio is comparable.

And what will the 8 other red pilots be doing, flying TBFs? Hunting u-boat with 2 x100lbs of the martlet? Instead of juicy bombers wobbling towards you.

To me the only thing that can "make" this map is obscure weather (it's autumn in the northern atlantic after all). Cloud cover helps blues and you can put fewer u-boats closer to the convoy so the FAA needs to seach for them.

Kat
05-03-2007, 16:31
And what will the 8 other red pilots be doing, flying TBFs? Hunting u-boat with 2 x100lbs of the martlet? Instead of juicy bombers wobbling towards you.

Most people are pretty poor against bombers ;) - people like Flying Finn, Boehmer, yourself etc. know how to hit them but most don't.

Seriously though you can say that about all maps. So yes the other 8 would be running GA missions or escorting said missions.

Kat
08-03-2007, 01:36
Tested today.

The airstarted Hurricanes where not a problem whatsoever.

There where a few issues however so I've revised the map and sent it back.

The blues just hit the convoy and adjusted so the target count should look right.

110 loadout still needs checking, that many options I think we'd still missed some.

Adjusted red targets both number and spread. Red's now have 3 targets (two tripple U-boats groups and a 6 U-boat group with a nearby surface fleet.

The last is quite spread out but kept as one group as two many groups scroll off the target group list.

Re-added the fw200 and Avenger ( airstarted the avenger due to it's trickiness in taking off ) which had got removed by mistake when I edited the map.

Firelok
08-03-2007, 11:13
1.
Regardless of the merits of HurriI's etc I've got a big problem with the location of their airstart on this map from observations after testing it last night.

Any Blue attackers that does manage to kill fighters loitering for them over target (and there was a lot.) are rewarded by the fighter respawning with a 2000m height advantage over them.
The Hurricane I is always going to be the mass attacker here because lots of people would prefer an airstart to mucking about with carrier take-offs.

THis airstart (which has Hurri's and TBF's) should be back a grid by the other carriers and have the SBD3 on it as well if moved to this position (very powerful airstarted bombers are available on the other side after all.) which would guarantee more offensive bomber sorties from reds. (There were almost none last night.)

Functionally the map will work better this way.

2. As the Blue shore airfield is such a long way off I still think some bf109e4/Bs from this location would spice things up a lot here.

Kat
08-03-2007, 11:19
Fair point on the airstart, I didn't hear that feedback hence not moving it that far ( it's further from the convoy though ) however it does make sense.

Thinking e4's providing top cover for the departing axis ships?

Incedently just for the record a round trip from the ground base by He111 (which cruised at 220mph) is about 15 mins. From the airstart it's probably around 12-13. Touch on the long side but given the airstart get's you in action fairly quickly I don't think it's a problem. Much less time and the bombers will be able to mount sorties too quickly IMO.

Also the positioning of the airbase is such that, unless your Major Damage with a single engined 110, it's a straight in approach from the sea so the landings are quite quick ( rather than spending a minute or two on most maps lining up etc. ).

Firelok
19-03-2007, 13:06
Where are we at with this map? it's been languishing in testing for at least a week, whats going on with it?

Kat
19-03-2007, 13:09
Where are we at with this map? it's been languishing in testing for at least a week, whats going on with it?

I think I sent you an updated file ( should have less targets, revised U-boats etc. ) waiting testing again.

Should be dated the 8th.

Firelok
20-03-2007, 17:45
Has any one tested this? No HurriIIbs but is the TBF still supposed to be on?
I know how the AI planes get lost in the wash only too well.

Kat
21-03-2007, 23:16
TBF is supposed to be on yes, guess like Dunkirk today forgot to add it after editing.