PDA

View Full Version : October 1944



Zorin
19-01-2008, 23:08
RAF/USAAF

Ground Attack

P-38L
P-47D

High Alt.

P-51C
P-51D-5NT

Low Alt.

Tempest
Spitfire L.F. IXe CW

Luftwaffe

Fighter Bombers


Fw190F8
Bf109G6AS


Strategic Bombers

Arado Ar234

Fighters

Fw190A9
Bf109G14
Fw190D9

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb107/ZorinW/map_w44.jpg

NS-IceFire
20-01-2008, 00:37
Cool...I like it so far. Pretty long flying distances for the second base...is that a Me-262 base? And is this the Bessarabia map?

Also question about the Spitfires...almost no Mark VIIIs were used on the Western Front...they were sent to Italy and the Far East. The VIII clipped and IXe Clipped are almost identical for performance except the IXe has more firepower with the pair of .50cals. I'm not strictly opposed because there were some very small numbers of VII and VIIIs that made their way to the Western Front anyways...if its for skin reasons then I'm sold.

Zorin
20-01-2008, 00:41
Cool...I like it so far. Pretty long flying distances for the second base...is that a Me-262 base? And is this the Bessarabia map?

Also question about the Spitfires...almost no Mark VIIIs were used on the Western Front...they were sent to Italy and the Far East. The VIII clipped and IXe Clipped are almost identical for performance except the IXe has more firepower with the pair of .50cals. I'm not strictly opposed because there were some very small numbers of VII and VIIIs that made their way to the Western Front anyways...if its for skin reasons then I'm sold.

1. Correct, Me262 base. Will be limited to around 4 spawn points.

2. Yep, Bessarabia. Most western area with the nice mountains and river valleys.

3. I read about SpitVIII based in France in September/October 1944 and it is an uncommon sight, so I thought why not.

4. Targets will be:
RED = Train, Tanks and a Dam
BLUE = Tanks and Artillery

Luxchamp
20-01-2008, 01:56
this looks promising :)

*drools at the thought of 4 me-262s*

NS-IceFire
20-01-2008, 03:58
1. Correct, Me262 base. Will be limited to around 4 spawn points.

2. Yep, Bessarabia. Most western area with the nice mountains and river valleys.

3. I read about SpitVIII based in France in September/October 1944 and it is an uncommon sight, so I thought why not.

4. Targets will be:
RED = Train, Tanks and a Dam
BLUE = Tanks and Artillery
1) Sounds good :)

2) Excellent choice...this map is almost as unbelievable as the Slovakia map and slightly more frame rate friendly.

3) Thats all I needed to know. A rare sight but hey sounds good to have it!

4) Thumbs up man...looking good! :D

T}{OR
20-01-2008, 08:30
Thumbs up Zorin! Show us more details.

Algorex
20-01-2008, 11:30
The Spitfire VIII squadrons that were based in france were in the south supporting dragoon and following operations and all the Tempest wings were in north-west europe supporting the push towards rhine and beyond. And as ice pointed out the performance is identical to the IXc/e so IXe is all the spitfire we need.

Also a malcolm hood mustang would be a nice addition as half of the operational mustangs were B/Cs when the war ended in europe. Maybe a mossie for the fun of it.

Zorin
20-01-2008, 12:35
The Spitfire VIII squadrons that were based in france were in the south supporting dragoon and following operations and all the Tempest wings were in north-west europe supporting the push towards rhine and beyond. And as ice pointed out the performance is identical to the IXc/e so IXe is all the spitfire we need.

Also a malcolm hood mustang would be a nice addition as half of the operational mustangs were B/Cs when the war ended in europe. Maybe a mossie for the fun of it.

You are a true encyclopedia Algore ;) I admit I read combat reports that just gave France as squadron home, so I jumped to conclusions...

RAF/USAAF

Tempest
Mosquito FB VI
P47D

P-51C
P-51D-5NT
Spitfire L.F. IXe CW

LW

Ju88
Bf110G2

Bf109G6AS
Fw190F8
Fw190D9

Me262A2

T}{OR
20-01-2008, 12:38
Question? Why not 51 D-NA20?

Zorin
20-01-2008, 13:28
Question? Why not 51 D-NA20?

There is no difference in performance, afaik, therefor I don't see why we should not use the 5NT for once. Most people don't even use the special gunsight on the NA20.

LBR=Barkhorn
20-01-2008, 14:03
There is no difference in performance, afaik, therefor I don't see why we should not use the 5NT for once. Most people don't even use the special gunsight on the NA20.

It's a rare sight, but, when i fly P51D20 i use the Ace-maker gunsight... Also, there's any chance of an A series 190?

Luxchamp
20-01-2008, 14:14
There is no difference in performance, afaik, therefor I don't see why we should not use the 5NT for once. Most people don't even use the special gunsight on the NA20.

i didn't know there was one!:eek:

Zorin
20-01-2008, 14:19
I would prefer a tight planeset with no more than 12 planes:

RAF/USAAF

Ground Attack

Mosquito FB VI
P47D

High Alt.

P-51C
P-51D-5NT

Low Alt.

Tempest
Spitfire L.F. IXe CW

Luftwaffe

Fighter Bombers


Fw190F8
Bf109G6AS
Me262A-2a

Fighters

Fw190A9
Bf109G14
Fw190D9

T}{OR
20-01-2008, 14:50
If there is a late '44 plane like Dora and Me262, than I think it's reasonable to put in NA-20. Just for the same reason you're not putting it in.

Blue will have 2 of the best and fastest planes ingame, and we even don't have a MustangIII. Mustangs we have in game are early '44 versions, and shouldn't even go up against Doras or 262s...

Zorin
20-01-2008, 15:16
If there is a late '44 plane like Dora and Me262, than I think it's reasonable to put in NA-20. Just for the same reason you're not putting it in.

Blue will have 2 of the best and fastest planes ingame, and we even don't have a MustangIII. Mustangs we have in game are early '44 versions, and shouldn't even go up against Doras or 262s...

1. ..."and we don't have".... Sounds like a red only pilot to me here ;) :D
2. From what I could find out, the Mustang D arrived in mid 1944 (translates to June-July for me) so there can't be a early D Mustang in the first place. And as I pointed out, there is no difference in performances between the two.
2. The Me262, operational in October, has to fly 5 grids to get even close to the action here, so no need to be afraid of her. Especially as there will be a max. of four in the air.
3. If I leave out the Dora, Blues will get into trouble, which can't be our goal as we should guarantee some sort of balance.

But lets see what the rest has to say.

T}{OR
20-01-2008, 15:38
I don't even try to hide it mate. I do fly red whenever possible. :D I find it more challenging. But don't get me wrong, I enjoy blue planes very much. And I do even better with them.

I'm just under the impression when last time blue team got organised and took 262s together with Doras and dominated till the end of the map. This was on UKD3 and map was Rhur.

Any mustang you give me, I'd gladly fly. You're the map maker. I just expressed my whishes. Besides, NA-20 cockpit is better looking (throttle handles, and other gadgets to those unaware :p)...

Zorin
20-01-2008, 15:47
...I'm just under the impression when last time blue team got organised and took 262s together with Doras and dominated till the end of the map. This was on UKD3 and map was Rhur...

Organised and on TS, you could win a 1945 map with Gladiators within these conditions. :D

NS-IceFire
20-01-2008, 16:04
i didn't know there was one!:eek:

Dude! Have a look in the AEP readme under K-14 gunsight. Its available on the P-51D-20 and YP-80...it makes aim very easy if you know what to do with it. :D

Boemher
20-01-2008, 16:10
3. If I leave out the Dora, Blues will get into trouble, which can't be our goal as we should guarantee some sort of balance.


When did the D9 enter service? And what Red types does the D9 need to counter on this map that the limited Me 262s cant handle, given that there are no Mustang IIIs or Spit 25s on the map?

Zorin
20-01-2008, 16:25
When did the D9 enter service? And what Red types does the D9 need to counter on this map that the limited Me 262s cant handle, given that there are no Mustang IIIs or Spit 25s on the map?

JG26 and JG54 were equipped with D9s from September 1944. And I think with (completely unlimited) less snappy P51s, very dangerous Tempests combined with agile Spits and robust P47s, Blues have the right to get D9s.

What does the rest think?

Algorex
20-01-2008, 16:26
When did the D9 enter service? And what Red types does the D9 need to counter on this map that the limited Me 262s cant handle, given that there are no Mustang IIIs or Spit 25s on the map?


III/JG54 got their Doras in september.
First Flugzeugbestand reports after the JG54 ones that list the fw 190D are from december '44 with the II/JG26 and II/JG301.

After looking in to this thing, the plane set at least for the blues is pretty accurate, both the III/JG54 with their FW 190D-9s and Kommando Nowotny with Me-262s were based in the Lower Saxony near the Dutch border not far from the Rhur area.

Boemher
20-01-2008, 16:49
The first recorded combat between a D9 and a Tempest was in December 1944, thats why i asked. Perhaps a plane or a spawn limit on the D9 would be appropriate or even replacing the D9 44 with the D9 45 which has poorer performance.

Zorin
20-01-2008, 16:53
III/JG54 got their Doras in september.
First Flugzeugbestand reports after the JG54 ones that list the fw 190D are from december '44 with the II/JG26 and II/JG301.

After looking in to this thing, the plane set at least for the blues is pretty accurate, both the III/JG54 with their FW 190D-9s and Kommando Nowotny with Me-262s were based in the Lower Saxony near the Dutch border not far from the Rhur area.

Is there a way to get the Red set accurate or at least a little bit closer to reality without throwing the balance out of the window?

Luxchamp
20-01-2008, 17:23
i'd like D9s :)

Algorex
20-01-2008, 17:26
The first recorded combat between a D9 and a Tempest was in December 1944, thats why i asked. Perhaps a plane or a spawn limit on the D9 would be appropriate or even replacing the D9 44 with the D9 45 which has poorer performance.

You're not wrong here, one gruppe of planes means that on average there was about 20 or so planes in operational condition. Even the Tempest units alone had two or three times that amount in the air.

Looking at the USAAF the majority of tactical work in the 9th AF was done by p-47 units with P-38s taking part (most p-38 units switched to mustangs during the spring '45), P-51s were usually based in england and flying escort missions with the 8th AF.

RAF had typhoons as their primary ground pounder with tempest flying low to medium altitude fighter sweeps and spitfires flying high and medium mission.

Boemher
20-01-2008, 21:18
Algore, when do you think the D9 44 we have in IL2 actually saw service in WW2? Compare says it reaches 453 mph at 17,500 ft. Thats pretty bloody fast , if not quite a bit overmodeled.

Sonko
20-01-2008, 21:25
I think the planeset is quite okay, the performance differences between the single seaters aren't that high, it will be up to the pilots who have to fly their planes correct.

Zorin
20-01-2008, 22:22
It should be 435mph at 20.000ft.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190d9test.html

So yes, our D9 44 has a performance plus of 18mph (28km/h) at 20.000ft.

Boemher
20-01-2008, 22:35
Thats quite a big increase, especially when you consider it occurs from 5250 m up to 6000 m, So its top speed of 453 mph can be reached between 17,325 almost all the way to 20,000ft.

It means that it is faster at altitudes which historically it was slower than the Tempest at. The Dora 9 shouldnt be faster in level flight until over 20,000ft imo. between 17,000ft and 18,000ft is around the full throttle supercharged height of the Sabre II A which meant that it achieved its maximum HP and performance at a lower altitude than most other types. the Fw 190 D9 in IL2 seems to hit its peak performance too low and by too large a margin.

Zorin
20-01-2008, 22:43
As far as I can tell our Tempest is 5km/h slower than the one on this chart, right?

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/tempest/tempest-speed-ft.jpg

Boemher
20-01-2008, 22:46
I think our one - again according to IL2 compare does 430 mph dead at top speed 5750 m alt and 374.7mph at S/L

i got this engine data from a new book I bought for my birthday

Napier Halford Sabre IIA:
FuelSpec - 100/130oct
TakeOff,SL,BHP,RPM - 1995HP,3750rpm.+7lb
NormalContinousClimb - 2065HP,3700,+7lb,4750ft
FullySupercharged - 1735HP,3700,+7lb,17000ft
MaxPower(5min) - 2235HP,3700,+9lb,2500ft
FullySuperchargedMaxPower - 1880HP,3700,+9lb,15250ft

Napier Halford Sabre IIB:
FuelSpec - 100/130oct
TakeOff,SL,BHP,RPM - 2010HP,3850rpm,+11lb
NormalContinousClimb - 2065HP,3700,+7lb,4750ft
FullySupercharged - 1735HP,3700,+7lb,17000ft
MaxPower(5min) - 2400HP,3850,+11lb,S/L
FullySuperchargedMaxPower - 2045HP,3850,+11lb,13750ft

Napier Halford Sabre IIC:
FuelSpec - 100/130oct
TakeOff,SL,BHP,RPM - 2065HP,3850rpm,+17.25lb
NormalContinousClimb - 2235HP,3700,8500ft
FullySupercharged - 1960HP,3700,18250ft
MaxPower(5min) - 3055HP,3850,+17.25lb,2250ft
FullySuperchargedMaxPower - 2760HP,3850,17.25lb,12450ft

I think our 262 pilots should be glad we Tempest pilots never got any Sabre IIC Tempests to play with from Oleg :) 3055 HP would have made it faster than the Mustang III!

NS-IceFire
20-01-2008, 22:59
I don't think it'll be a huge problem with the D-9. The D-9 and Tempest face off well against each other. The winner of the map will be determined by which team can properly eliminate the targets more effectively.

FlyingFinn
20-01-2008, 23:01
I think our 262 pilots should be glad we Tempest pilots never got any Sabre IIC Tempests to play with from Oleg :) 3055 HP would have made it faster than the Mustang III!
!!! :eek:

Boemher
20-01-2008, 23:05
Clostermann talked of only ever needing to use emergency war power once in his Tempest and when he did he just walked away from pursuing Doras.

I used to think he talked a lot of hot air but if he genuinely did fly a Sabre IIC model towards the end of the war then all of his chat suddenly seems to make more sense.

Zorin
20-01-2008, 23:07
I think our 262 pilots should be glad we Tempest pilots never got any Sabre IIC Tempests to play with from Oleg :) 3055 HP would have made it faster than the Mustang III!

Well, at altitudes only of interest when the 262 would be landing, again, even a Gladiator could shoot it down in such a situation.

All the accounts you can read on that page when a Tempest faced a Me262 it always shot it down when it was landing. Same for the Ar234. I know that German pilots would have done the same, but being proud of such a kill would be being proud of beating someone already on his knees....

Boemher
20-01-2008, 23:09
And jumping someone and shooting them down in flames is chivalrous?!

Why didnt the Luftwaffe play by the rules and simply not use jets until everyone else got theirs ready?

Zorin
20-01-2008, 23:11
And jumping someone and shooting them down in flames is chivalrous?!

Why didnt the Luftwaffe play by the rules and simply not use jets until everyone else got theirs ready?

No, that would be the pilots fault, not paying attention. You can't honestly compare that with a landing plane being attacked with gear and flaps down...

Boemher
20-01-2008, 23:16
I really see no difference between the two Zorin, in both instances blame lies soley on the shoulders of the pilot who gets shot down.

In the 1st case being jumped is due to not checking ones 6 enough and not zig zagging to clear blindspots and in the 2nd case you shouldnt land a plane when there may be enemy pilots around waiting to shoot you down - the fact that all of Germany was within range of Allied fighters doesnt make this unfair or less valid.

War is hell

Anyway who says Jets were only shot down while landing? 2nd TAF book i have says a Tempest pilot shot down a He 162 by sneaking up on it while it executed a wide turn enabling the RAF pilot to cut the corner and close the gap ,

Zorin
20-01-2008, 23:23
....you shouldnt land a plane when there may be enemy pilots around waiting to shoot you down - the fact that all of Germany was within range of Allied fighters doesnt make this unfair or less valid...

That comment pretty much sealed any further discussion as we have no common ground to talk on further.

That is like saying, oh we have hospitals and schools in our bomber range, bad luck for them. Attacking defenseless target with no chance to protect themselves or beat back is just cowardly.

Boemher
20-01-2008, 23:31
Yet you make a distinction between being shotdown blindly while flying in level flight and being shot down blindly while landing? Whats the difference is it gear down and landing lights ?

Sorry but there was no chivalry in WW2 - you are romanticising something which in actuality was ruthless and cold blooded murder. What hospitals and schools have do do with this is beyond me.

Bombing London, Coventry and Glasgow was cowardly, declaring war on poor little Poland was cowardly, where do we stop this senseless line of thought? Flying for Bomber Command during WW2 was actually pretty terrifying given that the survival rate for an airman in the service was lower than any other armed service on the British or US side.

Zorin
20-01-2008, 23:44
Yet you make a distinction between being shotdown blindly while flying in level flight and being shot down blindly while landing? Whats the difference is it gear down and landing lights ?

Sorry but there was no chivalry in WW2 - you are romanticising something which in actuality was ruthless and cold blooded murder. What hospitals and schools have do do with this is beyond me.

Bombing London, Coventry and Glasgow was cowardly, declaring war on poor little Poland was cowardly, where do we stop this senseless line of thought? Flying for Bomber Command during WW2 was actually pretty terrifying given that the survival rate for an airman in the service was lower than any other armed service on the British or US side.

In flight at least leaves you some sort of chances to actually get the upper hand, but while on a landing approach there is nothing you can do except to die.

I'm not romanticizing anything, but war has rules. And terror bombing and shooting defenseless targets is stretching those rules by an unacceptable margin, IMO.

And hospitals and landing plane, all the same. The soldier in the hospital could shoot you next week, same for the pilot on his next flight. Yet bombing hospitals has been, at least up to a certain point, been out of the question.

Anyway, this leads nowhere...

Zorin
20-01-2008, 23:57
A simple poll: Shall we use the D9 44 or D9 45?

Boemher
21-01-2008, 00:09
D9 44 or D9 45 is a larger issue which concerns all IL2 maps

For this map id be satisfied with a spawn limit for D9 poll given that probably around only 20 were flying at this point of the war.

Luxchamp
21-01-2008, 00:09
Bombing London, Coventry and Glasgow was cowardly

as was the bombing of french and german towns, but we run off-topic.

war is hell, but this is a game.

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


@ Zorin:

clostermann tells us that he once followed a 262 in his tempest and shot an engine aflame, but ran out of ammo while doing so (or his canons jammed all simultaneously which seems unlikely). it was only because the 262 was able to limp on with his intact damage that he survived... though luck :o

i'd prefer the 1944 dora over the 45 :)

Zorin
21-01-2008, 00:17
D9 44 or D9 45 is a larger issue which concerns all IL2 maps

For this map id be satisfied with a spawn limit for D9 poll given that probably around only 20 were flying at this point of the war.

How many? 6?

Boemher
21-01-2008, 00:30
6 sounds good, what is the 262 limit - 4 ?

Zorin
21-01-2008, 00:35
6 sounds good, what is the 262 limit - 4 ?

Yes.

Zorin
21-01-2008, 01:17
On a side note: III.KG76 was equipped with 38 Ar234 from October to November 1944 (51 by December). How many would have been operated?

http://batfredland.free.fr/Foe_Ar234.jpg

Sonko
21-01-2008, 08:45
One third of the total count, I guess.

Zorin
21-01-2008, 15:28
Would anyone mind if we use the Arado 234 instead of the Me262? That would add to the bombing performance but drastically reduce the fighting power of the LW.

LBR=Barkhorn
21-01-2008, 19:17
Would anyone mind if we use the Arado 234 instead of the Me262? That would add to the bombing performance but drastically reduce the fighting power of the LW.

Nice idea. LW still can hold a fight with Dora 44 and 109G6AS or G10, and the Ar234 should force faster allied planes to act as interceptors.

NS-IceFire
21-01-2008, 22:17
Anything for more Ar-234 action is good with me. I love that plane :)

Zorin
21-01-2008, 23:18
Glad the idea is well received. :)

Zorin
22-01-2008, 00:50
Started dam building:

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb107/ZorinW/dam_1.jpg

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb107/ZorinW/dam_2.jpg

Luxchamp
22-01-2008, 01:38
Would anyone mind if we use the Arado 234 instead of the Me262? That would add to the bombing performance but drastically reduce the fighting power of the LW.

i don't mind :), i like the 234 very much, and, considering how blues owned reds on UKD1 (berlin 45) with only 2 262s, it sounds necessary :)

but:


i still like to show off the skin you made for my 262!!! :D

FlyingFinn
22-01-2008, 10:00
That dam just screams to be bombed to bits. Can't wait for this.

csThor
22-01-2008, 12:05
The very first bombing mission of an Ar-234 was flown on December 25 1944 when 8 aircraft from Einsatzstaffel/KG 76 bombed the marshalling yards of Liege and Namur. Before the operational use of the Ar-234 was limited to strategic recon missions.

Zorin
22-01-2008, 13:42
The very first bombing mission of an Ar-234 was flown on December 25 1944 when 8 aircraft from Einsatzstaffel/KG 76 bombed the marshalling yards of Liege and Namur. Before the operational use of the Ar-234 was limited to strategic recon missions.

Well, there would be no difference in planeset if we'd call it December, only problem is the lack of snow... :(

csThor
22-01-2008, 17:33
To be frank December 44 is pretty much the kickoff line for any ground attack mission by jets. While Erprobungskommando Schenck was active as early as late June 1944 it had little to no impact on the war and was barely noticed by the Allies and KG 51 took a long time to get its act together. Basically reequipment and training took the best part of October and November and it was not before "Wacht am Rhein" when jet bombers appeared in any numbers worth typing.

Zorin
22-01-2008, 18:51
To be frank December 44 is pretty much the kickoff line for any ground attack mission by jets. While Erprobungskommando Schenck was active as early as late June 1944 it had little to no impact on the war and was barely noticed by the Allies and KG 51 took a long time to get its act together. Basically reequipment and training took the best part of October and November and it was not before "Wacht am Rhein" when jet bombers appeared in any numbers worth typing.

I'm very willing to make this as close to actual events as possible. Could you suggest a scenario that would feature the planeset we have right now(page 1 post 1)?

NS-IceFire
22-01-2008, 22:07
Honestly we have to remember that the purpose of the map is to have fun...if the Ar-234 fits nicely into the scenario then put it in. So what if its off by a few months? I understand the reasonings but I don't think they are valid for something like this. Its close...doesn't have to be absolutely exact.

Luxchamp
22-01-2008, 22:11
Honestly we have to remember that the purpose of the map is to have fun...if the Ar-234 fits nicely into the scenario then put it in. So what if its off by a few months? I understand the reasonings but I don't think they are valid for something like this. Its close...doesn't have to be absolutely exact.

i agree :)

Zorin
22-01-2008, 22:23
Honestly we have to remember that the purpose of the map is to have fun...if the Ar-234 fits nicely into the scenario then put it in. So what if its off by a few months? I understand the reasonings but I don't think they are valid for something like this. Its close...doesn't have to be absolutely exact.

Sure. Especially as it doesn't make that much of a difference as the planeset wouldn't change from Oct 44 to Feb 45 and the map is a stand-in. I'm just curious how close we could get to actual events. Can't hurt to know :cool:

Zorin
23-01-2008, 00:19
Just collected all the necessary data for the LW based on the numbers for 12.44:

Fighter

II./JG26 (Nordhorn; 1st on the map)

Fw190A8 (15)

Fw190D9 (55)

III.JG26 (Plantlünne; 2nd on the map)

Bf109G14 (36)

Bf109K4 (35)

Bomber

III.KG76 (Achmer & Hespe; 3rd on the map)

Ar Arado 234 (51)

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb107/ZorinW/airfields.jpg

csThor
23-01-2008, 07:27
If I were you I'd leave the planeset as it is - for the Luftwaffe the primary planes would be Fw 190 A-8 and a few A-9 plus Bf 109 G-14 and Bf 109 G-6/AS (alias Bf 109 G-14/AS). The D-9 was in the process of being introduced but it should be limited in numbers. You can leave a seriously limited Me 262 A-2a in the game as I./KG 51 did fly a few missions in autumn 1944 but these were few and far in between.

EDIT: The stuff above is for the "October 1944" theme ;)

NS-IceFire
23-01-2008, 22:56
Sure. Especially as it doesn't make that much of a difference as the planeset wouldn't change from Oct 44 to Feb 45 and the map is a stand-in. I'm just curious how close we could get to actual events. Can't hurt to know :cool:
Certainly...I agree too...can't hurt to know and have the research in hand and if it results in a unique scenario and it works then by all means. Just saying :cool:

Zorin
23-01-2008, 23:02
What does the majority prefer, the Oct 1944 scenario with the limited D9'44/Me262 or the Feb/March scenario with limited K4/D9`45 and Ar 234?

The theme would be for both an allied advance with Red target to destroy infrastructure and remaining armored forces.

Luxchamp
23-01-2008, 23:04
d9/44 and 234s :D

as long as there are no 262s *sigh*

Sonko
24-01-2008, 17:56
Make it the October scenario maybe with three spawn limited 262's?

Zorin
24-01-2008, 17:57
Make it the October scenario maybe with three spawn limited 262's?

Now, in what context?

Luxchamp
24-01-2008, 18:02
Now, in what context?

*cough* in the context of the map? ;)

personally (as stated numerous times before) i'd prefer to see the 234s :) adds lots of speed to the blue planeset, without giving them an (almost) unbeatable offensive fighter.

Sonko
24-01-2008, 18:11
"without giving them an (almost) unbeatable offensive fighter."

okay, I'm convinced now. leave the 262.

Zorin
25-01-2008, 23:49
Any more opinions? I want to get on with this, so please, post your opinion. Especially the representatives of the Allied side.

Algorex
26-01-2008, 09:04
It looks like a good one, now it's really up to the play test to get futher feedback.

Zorin
26-01-2008, 14:18
March 1945

RAF/USAAF

Ground Attack

P38L late
P47D

High Alt.

P-51C
P-51D-5NT

Low Alt.

Tempest
Spitfire L.F. IXe CW

Luftwaffe

Fighter Bombers


Fw190F8


Strategic Bombers

Arado Ar234

Fighters

Fw190A9
Bf109G6AS
Bf109K4 (shares limited spawn area (5) with Fw190D9`45)
Fw190D9`45

Algorex
26-01-2008, 14:30
If you're going with march '45 then the bubble top mustang should be D-20. Bf 109s can be K-4s, G-10s or G14s without limitations.

That is if there was anything left of the luftwaffe flying at the time.

Zorin
26-01-2008, 14:39
If you're going with march '45 then the bubble top mustang should be D-20. Bf 109s can be K-4s, G-10s or G14s without limitations.

That is if there was anything left of the Luftwaffe flying at the time.

We could have the Bf109s without limitations but that wouldn't aid the peace talks with the Tempest is no 11/13lbs boost version, where is my 25lbs Spitfire partys.

And I only called it March because of the fact that this is a summer map. If I relocate it to a winter map we could keep the Blue planeset, see post with data for 12.44, and would be good to go.

Zorin
28-01-2008, 11:22
On a winter map it would be basically a second Bulge. Only that Bulge has 28 planes to chose from instead of my proposed 12.

Now, what should we do about this? Try to replace Bulge (relocating this to a winter map) or keep it on the summer map and set it to March 1945?

Sonko
28-01-2008, 15:47
I'd say keep this scenario on the green october map and create a more or less completely new one on a winter map to replace Bulge.
I could care about a winter44 map when there are no objections.

Zorin
29-01-2008, 00:02
Go ahead, I'd really like to see what you can come up with for a Bulge replacement :)

As Caspar stated that the new maps might change in certain regions I will put this on hold. That way I can spare me to relocate whole target areas if things change.

irish
01-02-2008, 15:32
Holy Cow Zorin!


Those shots of your "dams" look fantastic for something that is totally cobbled together out of FMB.

It almost looks Sci Fi

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a66/jds1978/503416551_4d9849f421_o.gif

Zorin
01-02-2008, 15:41
Holy Cow Zorin!


Those shots of your "dams" look fantastic for something that is totally cobbled together out of FMB.

It almost looks Sci Fi



Thanks irish :)

NS-IceFire
01-02-2008, 16:03
It was built to hide the All-Spark :)

irish
01-02-2008, 17:24
Z: Just wondering....have you tried skip bombing those dams yet?

Ice: All Spark? you gotta clue me in:confused: :cool:

kammo
01-02-2008, 17:29
Transformers right;)?

NS-IceFire
01-02-2008, 18:02
Yep Transformers Movie reference :)

Zorin
01-02-2008, 18:44
Z: Just wondering....have you tried skip bombing those dams yet?

Ice: All Spark? you gotta clue me in:confused: :cool:

You sure can skip bomb the dam, the Mossie fits right through the unfinished part in the middle, but don't set your delay to anything below two or you might lose vital parts of your plane. ;)

And I'm well aware that a damn usually doesn't "explode", but otherwise the target would be boring and as it is a one hit target you want to get a good show for your money, don't you? :D

irish
01-02-2008, 20:00
I'm all in favor of the fire works.

Zorin
02-02-2008, 00:59
Just collected all the necessary data for the LW based on the numbers for 10.44:

Fighter

Stab/JG26 + I./JG26 (Krefeld; 2nd from the top)

Fw190A8 (2+15)

Fw190A9 (1+21)

II./JG26 (Gladbeck; 3rd from the top)

Fw190A8 (16)

Fw190A9 (13)

III./JG26 (Mönchengladbach; 4th from the top)

BF109G-14 (51)

Fighter Bomber

Stab./Schlachtgeschwader 4 + II./Schlachtgeschwader 4 (Gütersloh; most eastern)

Fw190F8 (4+40)

Bomber

I./KG51 (Rheine; 1st from top)

Me262A2-a (51)

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb107/ZorinW/Map-2.jpg

Zorin
03-02-2008, 00:20
I guess noone will mind if we sneak in a G6 AS to provide a 109 without MK108, right?

NS-IceFire
03-02-2008, 00:35
I think allot of people would be thanking you :)

Zorin
04-02-2008, 22:33
Final planeset for mid November 1944, this gives us the Fw190D9 as an option as JG26 started conversion to the D9 in November.

I left out the Fw190A8 as it only clutters up the set without any gain and put the MK108 G14 on the spawn limit area together with the D9.

RAF/USAAF

Ground Attack

P38L late
P47D-27

High Alt.

P51C-NT
P51D-5NT

Low Alt.

Tempest MK.V
Spitfire L.F. IXe CW

Luftwaffe

Strategic Bomber

Me262A2-a (limited spawn area)

Fighter Bomber


Fw190F8

Fighters
Fw190A9
Bf109G6AS
Bf109G14
Fw190D9 (limited spawn area shared with G14)

Zorin
07-02-2008, 11:20
As we all seem to agree on the planeset(<=12 planes :D ), I'd like to know what sort of targets would be interesting and historically correct for the LW to attack.

csThor
07-02-2008, 13:52
Well ...

a) In October 44 pretty much all of the german fighter forces in the West were trying to spoil the reign of the Allied Tactical Air Forces and were busy in defensive missions. There were, to my knowledge, no fighter-bomber missions flown because the fighter units had no stocks of bombs nor were the pilots trained for that kind of mission (Julius Meimberg remembers his and his men's perplexity when they were tasked to dive-bomb a bridge in early 1945).
b) At that time Galland was fighting a desperate battle against his superiors. He tried to preserve the fighter strength his staff had helped to rebuild after Normandy and the autumn battles in the Netherlands (keyword here is: tried) for his planned mass attack against 8th USAAF Heavies. Sending his units into missions they were not trained for in an environment full of light and medium AAA would have been farthest from his mind.
c) As far as I could make out all Schlachtgeschwader were still in the East at that time and tried to keep the Red Army away from East Prussia and Central Poland. SG 4 was posted to the West only in late November for "Wacht am Rhein".

With the mentioned facts in mind I'd go for the following solution:

1.) Set up some high-profile targets for the Me 262s deep in allied territory. Examples could be large depots (fuel, supply etc) or repair shops, strategically important bridges and/or train stations/marshalling yards. Protect these with an unholy amount of AAA (especially 40mm).
2.) Delete droppable ordnance from all german fighter aircraft leaving the Fw 190 F-8 as only bomb-carrier. Give them tactical targets such as artillery posts, tank columns, truck columns or (for a change) some smaller frontline depots, allied command centers and the likes. By disallowing bombs on Bf 109s and Fw 190 fighter versions you force people to coordinate their efforts.

You asked ;)

Zorin
07-02-2008, 14:59
Well ...

a) In October 44 pretty much all of the german fighter forces in the West were trying to spoil the reign of the Allied Tactical Air Forces and were busy in defensive missions. There were, to my knowledge, no fighter-bomber missions flown because the fighter units had no stocks of bombs nor were the pilots trained for that kind of mission (Julius Meimberg remembers his and his men's perplexity when they were tasked to dive-bomb a bridge in early 1945).
b) At that time Galland was fighting a desperate battle against his superiors. He tried to preserve the fighter strength his staff had helped to rebuild after Normandy and the autumn battles in the Netherlands (keyword here is: tried) for his planned mass attack against 8th USAAF Heavies. Sending his units into missions they were not trained for in an environment full of light and medium AAA would have been farthest from his mind.
c) As far as I could make out all Schlachtgeschwader were still in the East at that time and tried to keep the Red Army away from East Prussia and Central Poland. SG 4 was posted to the West only in late November for "Wacht am Rhein".

With the mentioned facts in mind I'd go for the following solution:

1.) Set up some high-profile targets for the Me 262s deep in allied territory. Examples could be large depots (fuel, supply etc) or repair shops, strategically important bridges and/or train stations/marshalling yards. Protect these with an unholy amount of AAA (especially 40mm).
2.) Delete droppable ordnance from all german fighter aircraft leaving the Fw 190 F-8 as only bomb-carrier. Give them tactical targets such as artillery posts, tank columns, truck columns or (for a change) some smaller frontline depots, allied command centers and the likes. By disallowing bombs on Bf 109s and Fw 190 fighter versions you force people to coordinate their efforts.

You asked ;)

That's about what I expected. :)

csThor
07-02-2008, 15:16
Dang! I've become predictable! :eek:

:D

Algorex
07-02-2008, 15:46
Try to stay away from unnecessary loadout limitations.

Also some of our pilots might like a P-38L for ground pounding, especially if the targets include tanks.

Zorin
07-02-2008, 17:23
Try to stay away from unnecessary loadout limitations.

Also some of our pilots might like a P-38L for ground pounding, especially if the targets include tanks.

I actually swapped the P38L for the Mosquito as I thought that the P47 would be a sturdier ride for the ground pounders. Especially with its radial that sure will absorb more hits from a Wirbelwind than a Allison. But lets hear the audience.

Want a P38L, desperately? :D

Sonko
07-02-2008, 19:34
Not me, I can live with the P-47.

Luxchamp
07-02-2008, 22:09
i'd prefer the P-38. easier to hit :D

Zorin
08-02-2008, 13:03
If no one comes forward for the P38 with some good reasons (Luxchamp ;) ), the planeset will stay as it is.

As for the layout. As it is now, the Me262 will have to fly for 10min at 500km/h to reach the targets. Is that acceptable?

Algorex
08-02-2008, 13:20
Well one fourth of the fighter arm the of 9th air force was equipt with p-38s.
The HVAR rockets are better against tanks.
P-38 doesn't ruin the balance of the planeset.
P-38 is under used in post mustang maps.

Luxchamp
08-02-2008, 13:26
If no one comes forward for the P38 with some good reasons (Luxchamp ;) ), the planeset will stay as it is.

hehe, seriously though, i'd prefer the P-38 -> *hides behind Algorex' post


As for the layout. As it is now, the Me262 will have to fly for 10min at 500km/h to reach the targets. Is that acceptable?

that's fine by me :)

Zorin
08-02-2008, 14:21
Well one fourth of the fighter arm the of 9th air force was equipt with p-38s.
The HVAR rockets are better against tanks.
P-38 doesn't ruin the balance of the planeset.
P-38 is under used in post mustang maps.

That is a good reason. :)

Should it be the P38L or L late? Between the two lies quite a gain in terms of overall performance.

Zorin
08-02-2008, 15:09
http://www.web-birds.com/9th/474/474th.htm

This should do for P38s. Js and Ls were flown in November 1944.

csThor
08-02-2008, 15:13
That's a question for the real P-38 experts. On the one hand the P-38 L late was stated to have performance figures achieved with 150 octane fuel only - however the 9th USAAF never received such fuel. So the aircraft itself would be a what-if crate just as all the 1946 jets.
On the other hand I have also heard that the P-38 L late performance is closer to the real-life P-38 L without the 150oc boost. But since that came from players with ... um ... rather one-sided viewpoints I am not sure how much of that is to be believed. However, I cannot support or deny that claim as I'm neither an expert on allied metal nor do I particularly care about flight performance charts and the likes.

NS-IceFire
08-02-2008, 23:34
The trick is this.

The P-38J is higher performance than the P-38L, however, the P-38L is more representative in features (particularly the dive breaks) of a 1944 P-38J-25, while the P-38L Late out performs both of them but is just a little better than the J.

Given the opposition and the timing the P-38L Late should be the top candidate to make it competitive. After all its facing down Bf109s and FW190s potentially armed with MK108s which the P-38 doesn't do all that well with. Also with the Kyushu map we made the change a while back because I thought the P-38L by itself would be overpowering but it turned into one of the most picked on Allied fighters in the set so we added the P-38L Late which brought it up to snuff against the Japanese fighters it was against. This will probably work for the German ones as well.

And really...if it doesn't work out for some reason (I'd be surprised if it was a problem) then its easy to swap.

Zorin
08-02-2008, 23:34
Final planeset:

http://battle-fields.com/commscentre/showpost.php?p=189946&postcount=92

I think it is a good mix. Especially on the allied side, with the USAAF in the ground attack and Jet interception role and the RAF being the backbone of the fighter force.

Zorin
08-02-2008, 23:39
The trick is this.

The P-38J is higher performance than the P-38L, however, the P-38L is more representative in features (particularly the dive breaks) of a 1944 P-38J-25, while the P-38L Late out performs both of them but is just a little better than the J.

Given the opposition and the timing the P-38L Late should be the top candidate to make it competitive. After all its facing down Bf109s and FW190s potentially armed with MK108s which the P-38 doesn't do all that well with. Also with the Kyushu map we made the change a while back because I thought the P-38L by itself would be overpowering but it turned into one of the most picked on Allied fighters in the set so we added the P-38L Late which brought it up to snuff against the Japanese fighters it was against. This will probably work for the German ones as well.

And really...if it doesn't work out for some reason (I'd be surprised if it was a problem) then its easy to swap.

We can easily lock the MK108 on the Fw190 and Bf109G6AS. The point is, we are very close in terms of a historically correct planeset, sadly we don't have the late war RAF stuff, so why put a plane in that, as pointed out by csThor, never saw service the way it is modeled?

Plus, it will be fully laden with rockets and bombs so the max performance will be not a crucial point.

NS-IceFire
09-02-2008, 04:15
Again the argument is about P-38 performance and if the P-38L actually meets the performance levels its supposed to. By some accounts, probably the same ones that csThor is talking about, the P-38L Late is more closely performing to the level that the P-38L should. I'm also not convinced about the Late model seeing no service...not sure about that either. There was quite a bit of arguing about that...forget the results but it wasn't crystal clear.

And I always go back to the point that people need to have fun...if the Late model makes the 38 more viable and thus fun then its in the best interests to make it happen. If it adds little and the P-38L is the model chosen...no biggie. I'd still fly it either way.

Its definitely a shame that the Spit XIV, Typhoon, or Mosquito late war aren't available as well. This would be their map.

I don't see any need to lock the MK108s either. Let them be unless you feel it necessary. Up to you...just my thoughts.

csThor
09-02-2008, 06:31
IceFire - According to Maddox Games the P-38 L Late runs on 150oc avgas. At the time 150octane fuel was introduced it was given only to 8th USAAF and ADGB units and later (in February/March 1945) to the 2nd TAF on the continent. But when 8th USAAF got the fuel it had no Lightnings anymore, only 9th USAAF still used it and this air force never received 150oc avgas.

Algorex
09-02-2008, 06:44
I'd say put the p-38L late in at first and replace it if the need comes, which i very much doubt.

Zorin
09-02-2008, 14:09
Ok, you have a point there. It should be fun for both sides. But if the unlimited red planes should cause trouble we will go back to the regular P38L.

NS-IceFire
09-02-2008, 17:17
IceFire - According to Maddox Games the P-38 L Late runs on 150oc avgas. At the time 150octane fuel was introduced it was given only to 8th USAAF and ADGB units and later (in February/March 1945) to the 2nd TAF on the continent. But when 8th USAAF got the fuel it had no Lightnings anymore, only 9th USAAF still used it and this air force never received 150oc avgas.

See this is where I'm confused about the L Late. I thought that the L Late used improved Allison engines which gave a corresponding HP boost and thats where the extra performance comes from. When we got the plane originally everyone was talking about engines and not fuel...otherwise that would have gotten swept up in the huge banter about the 150 octane fuel for the 2nd TAF.

Zorin
09-02-2008, 18:29
What I could find after a short search:

1.
All P-38Js retained the V-1719-89/91 engines of the P-38Hs, but their more efficient cooling installations enabled military rating at 27,000 feet to be increased from 1240 to 1425 hp, while at that altitude war emergency rating was 1600 hp.

The revised beard radiators produced some additional drag, but it was more than adequately compensated for by the improved cooling which made the Allison finally capable of delivering its full rated power at altitude. Consequently, the P-38J was the fastest variant of the entire Lightning series--420 mph at 26,500 feet. Maximum speed at 5000 feet was 369 mph, 390 mph at 15,000 feet. Range was 475 miles at 339 mph at 25,000 feet, 800 miles at 285 mph at 10,000 feet, and 1175 miles at 195 mph at 10,000 feet. Maximum range was 2260 miles at 186 mph at 10,000 feet with two 250 Imp gall drop tanks. An altitude of 5000 feet could be attained in 2 minutes, 15,000 feet in 5 minutes, 10,000 feet in 7 minutes. Service ceiling was 44,000 feet. Weights were 12,780 lbs empty, 17,500 lbs normal loaded, 21,600 lbs maximum.

2.
The P-38L was powered by 1475 hp Allison V-1710-111/113 engines with a war emergency rating of 1600 hp at 28,700 feet and a military rating of 1475 hp at 30,000 feet. Except for the more powerful engines, the P-38L was generally quite similar to the previous P-38J.

14,100 lbs empty, 17,500 lbs combat loaded. Maximum speed was 360 mph at 5000 feet, 390 mph at 15,000 feet, 414 mph at 25,000 feet. An altitude of 20,000 feet could be reached in 7 minutes. Service ceiling was 40,000 feet. Maximum range at sea level was 900 miles. At 30,000 feet, maximum range was 2260 miles (with drop tanks).

If we now look at them in IL2 compare and than check the late version, it is plausible for me that the late represents higher rated fuel, giving a performance boost over the whole performance band with a loss at higher altitudes. It is the same with the Bf109K4 and the C3 fuel version.

Zorin
09-02-2008, 18:49
This graph illustrates the effect rather nicely. It shows a trial with a P38J without (left) and with (right) 150 octane fuel.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-38/p-38j-28392-level.jpg

NS-IceFire
09-02-2008, 18:50
Did some looking myself...you might be right. There's mention of the uprated Allison V-1710-111/113 engines but with a maximum horsepower of 1600hp. Presumable the jump to 1720hp is from the extra octane.

Now we have an idea of the history.

Zorin
09-02-2008, 19:01
And here the 150 octane story.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html

Important for us:


It was decided that the Second Tactical Air force would change over from 100/130 grade fuel to 100/150 grade fuel from the 15th December 1944.

Zorin
09-02-2008, 19:41
Does this conclusion lead us to using the P38L now or where do we stand now?

Zorin
09-04-2008, 14:17
I'll have to see how the reworked Slovakia and Bessarabia maps look like so I can decide which one to use.

The winter version sounds very tempting as well.

Zorin
09-02-2009, 17:30
Handed Over To Winds Of War

SMURFY1967
09-02-2009, 18:02
Well in that case there`s nothing more to add to this thread, so i`ve locked it.

Zorin
31-12-2009, 00:08
The drastic measure that was taken by the creator of the Bessarabia map to lay a dry spell on the whole north western region has caused a major problem. The dam I build is now surrounded by the flat greens of the Romanian plains. Thanks a lot man...:wall:

Therefor relocating the whole installment might take me a bit.