Tactical Air War

[JG7_X-Man]

27 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

I disagree based on the fact Blue are flying DC engines in winter.

So your point is even if we started in Nov '44, there should be no DC - but the DC did come out in '44

 

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/DB605_datasheets_DC.html

 

Nov '44 is good start date to use all planes we have.

[-Pepegga-Armor]

I dont see what's the argument here. X-Man is correct. The g-3 was issues relatively late in the war when compared to the g2. Thankfully the g2 was in service even earlier so the usage of the gsuit in the p-51 is correct. Sadly our poor pilot might not be so comfortable but a little discomfort is worth it when your life is on the line.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

5 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

So your point is even if we started in Nov '44, there should be no DC - but the DC did come out in '44

 

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/DB605_datasheets_DC.html

 

Nov '44 is good start date to use all planes we have.

What about the 3 month lead time ?

[Talon_]

2 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

What about the 3 month lead time ?

Exactly.

14 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

So your point is even if we started in Nov '44, there should be no DC - but the DC did come out in '44

 

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/DB605_datasheets_DC.html

 

Nov '44 is good start date to use all planes we have.

 

Says at the bottom "Marz 1945"

 

Now I don't speak German but I don't think that says 1944.

[JG7_X-Man]

@=LG=Kathon I keep getting register message when I join TAW but I am already registered:

 

 

Help please! 

[FTC_DerSheriff]

Just now, JG7_X-Man said:

@=LG=Kathon I keep getting register message when I join TAW but I am already registered:

 

 

Help please! 

I mean spelling was never my strengh too

[Barnacles]

16 minutes ago, -SIMP-Armor said:

I dont see what's the argument here. X-Man is correct. The g-3 was issues relatively late in the war when compared to the g2. Thankfully the g2 was in service even earlier so the usage of the gsuit in the p-51 is correct. Sadly our poor pilot might not be so comfortable but a little discomfort is worth it when your life is on the line.

And if they start nerfing planes because of pilot discomfort, that's a whole can of worms.

[JG7_X-Man]

13 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

Exactly.

 

Says at the bottom "Marz 1945"

 

Now I don't speak German but I don't think that says 1944.

 

I just went by this:

 

[PainGod85]

3 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

So your point is even if we started in Nov '44, there should be no DC - but the DC did come out in '44

 

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/DB605_datasheets_DC.html

 

Nov '44 is good start date to use all planes we have.

 

'Entwurf einer vorläufigen Motorenkarte

9 - 605 DB u. DC

Ausgabe C

Stand: 1. Dezember 1944'

"Draft of a preliminary engine placard

9 - 605 DB and DC
Edition C
Status: December 1, 1944'

Also:

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/Boostclearances/DB_Niederschrift6730_DB605DBDC_20-1-45.pdf

January 20, 1945

 

 

Quote

Boost pressure 1.98 ata, C3 fuel
By the Messrs chief engineers of the bureau this report by Mr. Haupting-Medinger is presented. According to this report, the acceptance trials for 1.9 and 1.98 ata boost pressure have initially been concluded with a negative result.

 

Further down, they lambast DB for even issuing releases of those boost pressures to Galland, citing a lack of a satisfactory results during testing with four of these engines.

Additionally, they eventually compromise - towards the end of January 1945! - with continuing trials at 1.98 ata that had already begun with one group, and the continuation of trials with 1.90 ata until those engines failed, on the condition that engine replacements would be set to 1.80 ata.

[Barnacles]

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/Boostclearances/605D_clearance198.html  If I understand correctly,  this page says in March 1945, only a fraction of K4s were starting to be set to 1.98 Ata, officially?

Edited August 2, 2020 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[-Pepegga-Armor]

what have I done

7 minutes ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

And if they start nerfing planes because of pilot discomfort, that's a whole can of worms.

 

[SV7_Vase]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbavYn0UeaQ

 

https://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=448&name=SV7_Vase


guys whats going on? bug? normal?

 

1000kg bomb dont destroy trucks on random flak.

even 20mm are useless

Edited August 2, 2020 by SV7_Vase

[Cpt_Siddy]

[ITAF_Airone1989]

40 minutes ago, SV7_Vase said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbavYn0UeaQ


guys whats going on? bug? normal?

 

1000kg bomb dont destroy trucks on random flak.

even 20mm are useless

Check your video, it said I cannot watch that cause it's private

Edited August 2, 2020 by ITAF_Airone1989

[SV7_Vase]

5 minutes ago, ITAF_Airone1989 said:

Check your video, it said I cannot watch that cause it's private

now open

[357th_KW]

9 hours ago, =/Hospiz/=Metalhead said:

During TAW timeframe no 9th AF units used P-51. 9th received P-51s earlier, true. However, during 1944 USAAF performed a kind of "standarization", swapping P-47 and P-51 units between 8th and 9th AF. As a result, 8th ended up almost uniformly equipped with P-51s (with notable exeption of 56th FG), while 9th was primairly equipped with P-47s, after they send all theris Mustang squadrons to 8th.

The 354th Fighter Group, of the 9th Air Force, based in France, was flying Mustangs up until November 26th 1944.  During September, October and November they engaged in air combat and ground attack over places like Aachen, Wesel,  Frankfurt, Koblenz and Arnhem.  Between November 26th and December 23rd, the 9th AF still had tac recon units operating P-51s over the battle area.  On December 23rd the 352nd and 361st fighter groups of the 8th Air Force deployed to Belgium, attached to the 9th Air Force primarily performing fighter sweeps to counter Luftwaffe activity.  So unless map #1 is specifically dated 11/26/44-12/22/44 and we ignore any 9th AF tac recon squadrons, there were 9th AF Mustangs present.
 

Quote

TAW focuses on tactical ops, that's why planeset is based on equipment used in 9th AF and 2nd TAF, in the vicinity of the frontline, not operating from remote bases.  There were numerous Tempest squadrons in 2nd TAF during timeframe of map#1, but there were no P-51 units in the 9th AF. During that time 8th AF was based mostly in England with only few units (former 9th units) operating from the continent. Number of kills doesn't matter much in that context. Luftwaffe was focused on Reich defense at that time, so it is natural consequence, that units flying escort tasks scored high number of kills because they were often involved in combat. On the other side, tactical units faced lighter opposition, so contacts with enemy were less common. In that context, those 53 kills scored by 5 Tempest squadrons isn't that low number, compared to 80 scored by 2-3 P-51s fighter groups of 8th AF, which despite being contintent based, still flown escort missions..

Clearly you didn’t read all of what I wrote.  Those kill numbers I posted were just accounting for 8th AF missions that were focused on tactical objectives, on our map.  So they are VERY meaningful because they indicate that those 8th AF Mustangs were involved in those tactical battles to a significant degree.

 

Quote

Sure, there's no barrier that prevents a fighter on a strategic operation to dive down and look for tactical skirmishes, but there's no point to do so either. War is not a game, it's not about chasing the first enemy you see to rack up your stats. It's about executing orders and performing tasks. If a fighter unit has order to cover a bombing raid, it covers a bombing raid, sweeping high altitudes from enemy. Whatever is going down there is happening DOWN there. It is no threat to bombers so there is no need for fighters to leave their assignment. Sure, 8th involved in tactical operations from time to time, but MAJORITY of their time they flown up high, and most of combat they had, was up high.

Just because you think it’s pointless, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.  8th Air Force P-51s were used as a fighter screen for the allied transports during Market-Garden in September 1944.  8th AF P-47s were employed to suppress flak for those same transports.

 

 

 

8th AF bombers targeted rail and communications facilities just behind German lines during the battle of the bulge.  Fighters were employed both in escort and in fighter sweeps around the battle area.

 

 

These weren’t just individuals freelancing.  This was the entire Air Force being deployed against German targets in the forward battle area.

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

OK we are in agreement that evaluation was done in Aug '44.

However, the we still have the supply chain lag - that doesn't put the suit on a pilot at the front until 3 mons later, which bring us to Nov '44

Or we could just rely on the actual historical record instead of making guesses.

 

September 11th 1944, G suit in use:

 

[Real_NBD]

The deck is still a lie, mission #7 this time has sea level at ~1000m. Also red trucks indeed are nigh indestructible.
And it's not going to be a very long campaign if one side can capture quarter of the map in a single mission, see for example mission 6->7.

Cheers!

[Coldman]

6 minutes ago, NoBigDreams said:

The deck is still a lie, mission #7 this time has sea level at ~1000m. Also red trucks indeed are nigh indestructible.
And it's not going to be a very long campaign if one side can capture quarter of the map in a single mission, see for example mission 6->7.

Cheers!

L alt+A you will have proper alt. 

[Real_NBD]

45 minutes ago, =LG=Coldman said:

L alt+A you will have proper alt. 

It's not about the numbers on the altimeter, this messes up aircraft performance. Now P47-D28 is actually faster on the deck than FW190-A8 for example. Basically all non-turbo aircraft lose relative performance. 
If the map was Italian Alps, sure 1000m ground alt why not. But it's the Netherlands

 

Anyhow I've made my point, now back to enjoying the TAW experience 

 

The trucks might be ok after all? It's super random. Sometimes SC250 5 meters from them does nothing and other times few 20mm rounds do the job. Weird, or I just suck at bombing.

Edited August 2, 2020 by NoBigDreams

[JG7_X-Man]

6 hours ago, DerSheriff said:

I mean spelling was never my strengh too

Thanks! 

5 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

The 354th Fighter Group, of the 9th Air Force, based in France, was flying Mustangs up until November 26th 1944.  During September, October and November they engaged in air combat and ground attack over places like Aachen, Wesel,  Frankfurt, Koblenz and Arnhem.  Between November 26th and December 23rd, the 9th AF still had tac recon units operating P-51s over the battle area.  On December 23rd the 352nd and 361st fighter groups of the 8th Air Force deployed to Belgium, attached to the 9th Air Force primarily performing fighter sweeps to counter Luftwaffe activity.  So unless map #1 is specifically dated 11/26/44-12/22/44 and we ignore any 9th AF tac recon squadrons, there were 9th AF Mustangs present.
 

Clearly you didn’t read all of what I wrote.  Those kill numbers I posted were just accounting for 8th AF missions that were focused on tactical objectives, on our map.  So they are VERY meaningful because they indicate that those 8th AF Mustangs were involved in those tactical battles to a significant degree.

 

Just because you think it’s pointless, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.  8th Air Force P-51s were used as a fighter screen for the allied transports during Market-Garden in September 1944.  8th AF P-47s were employed to suppress flak for those same transports.

 

 

 

8th AF bombers targeted rail and communications facilities just behind German lines during the battle of the bulge.  Fighters were employed both in escort and in fighter sweeps around the battle area.

 

 

These weren’t just individuals freelancing.  This was the entire Air Force being deployed against German targets in the forward battle area.

 

 

 

 

Or we could just rely on the actual historical record instead of making guesses.

 

September 11th 1944, G suit in use:

 

 

Nice! However, as TAW is simulating USAAF/RAF units with bases in France/Belgium i.e. USAAF 9th Airforce and the RAF 2nd TAF, so this isn't helping your argument. However, if you can't wait until the next map to fly your precious "Fighter that won the war", I would be more than happy to support you in an air start of P-51s over the North Sea at 7K.  

Edited August 3, 2020 by JG7_X-Man

[=BES=Senor_Jefe]

@=LG=Kathon, can you please look at my first sortie?  Got an AK but my stats show I have 2 assists lol.  

 

I know stats were a bit messed earlier. But not sure of it's because I ended my sortie and he crashed after I came back in a Spit.

[357th_KW]

9 hours ago, PainGod85 said:

 

Additionally, they eventually compromise - towards the end of January 1945! - with continuing trials at 1.98 ata that had already begun with one group, and the continuation of trials with 1.90 ata until those engines failed, on the condition that engine replacements would be set to 1.80 ata.

It’s worth noting as well that the gruppe assigned to test this, II/JG11, had been devastated over Y-29 on January 1st, and doesn’t appear to have flown any more operations on the western front before transferring to Strausberg (36 km E of Berlin) on January 23rd.

9 hours ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/Boostclearances/605D_clearance198.html  If I understand correctly,  this page says in March 1945, only a fraction of K4s were starting to be set to 1.98 Ata, officially?

And I and III/JG 27 both moved from the Paderborn area to some fields near Brunswick (well east of the map) on March 30th.  Amusingly, the one fight I know these units fought during that 10 or so days before their move, was on March 24th 1945 when the 357th and 359th Fighter Groups of the 8th Air Force were assigned to patrol over their airfields.  Both gruppen were caught at low altitude by the Mustangs and had a very bad day, losing 15 aircraft.  Based on some of the earlier posts in this thread, one is left to ponder whether those pilots were screaming for the admins to stop these “strategic” fighters that weren’t even based on the continent from interfering with their “tactical” operations.
 

III/JG53 moved from the Mannheim area just south of our map to Stuttgart on March 23rd.  IV/JG53 was based in southern Germany well off the map throughout 1945.

[FeuerFliegen]

Just completed a sortie and landed at Paderborn.  Damaged my plane a little bit during the landing but all was safe overall.  For some reason it counts as ditched for my sortie?

[Real_NBD]

A-HA! I knew I wasn't crazy! It's this little POS that doesn't take seemingly any damage, and doesn't even register as an enemy ground unit in the replay file! Other trucks seem to be OK and that's what has caused the confusion.
 

 

This is the sortie in question, the old truck took no damage 

http://taw-server.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=1906&name=NoBigDreams

Edited August 3, 2020 by NoBigDreams

[Ala13_UnopaUno_VR]

It would be nice if you also published this in the Technical Issues and Bug Reports section, so that the developers can assess it

[2/JG26_rudidlo]

7 minutes ago, Ala13_UnopaUno_VR said:

It would be nice if you also published this in the Technical Issues and Bug Reports section, so that the developers can assess it

Don't think it's bug. In my opinion truck has just too much hitpoints assigned.

[JG4_Widukind]

I tried to address the topic here a few pages beforehand, unfortunately there was almost no response, and that's how it looks in the IL2 forum, hardly any reactions.
If no one is interested in the topic of bombs or Damagde Model, there is the wrong forum for that, also for the G-pants discussion.

current bugs: wrong elevation values also on the map:
Dortmund 450m
Enschede 430m
Cologne 1000m
and others
This severely limits the performance of the Focke Wulf A8, as the first charger with C3 injection goes up to approx. 1100m.
This means that if you don't have the performance you need to take off, The front airfields are too small there.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by JG4_Widukind

[2/JG26_rudidlo]

12 minutes ago, JG4_Widukind said:

current bugs: wrong elevation values also on the map:
Dortmund 450m
Enschede 430m
Cologne 1000m
and others
This severely limits the performance of the Focke Wulf A8, as the first charger with C3 injection goes up to approx. 1100m.
This means that if you don't have the performance you need to take off, the A8 jabo is too small.

I was shocked yesterday that I wasn't able to take off with  He-111, but also with  Ju-52, which I'm flying with frequently.

[JG4_Widukind]

yes, its the same Problem

[JG7_X-Man]

4 hours ago, NoBigDreams said:

A-HA! I knew I wasn't crazy! It's this little POS that doesn't take seemingly any damage, and doesn't even register as an enemy ground unit in the replay file! Other trucks seem to be OK and that's what has caused the confusion.
 

 

This is the sortie in question, the old truck took no damage 

http://taw-server.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=1906&name=NoBigDreams

 

I am guessing it's not a linked entity? 

[Cpt_Siddy]

2 hours ago, JG4_Widukind said:

I tried to address the topic here a few pages beforehand, unfortunately there was almost no response, and that's how it looks in the IL2 forum, hardly any reactions.
If no one is interested in the topic of bombs or Damagde Model, there is the wrong forum for that, also for the G-pants discussion.

current bugs: wrong elevation values also on the map:
Dortmund 450m
Enschede 430m
Cologne 1000m
and others
This severely limits the performance of the Focke Wulf A8, as the first charger with C3 injection goes up to approx. 1100m.
This means that if you don't have the performance you need to take off, The front airfields are too small there.

 

 

 

 

Laughs in turbo supercharger 

[Viktor33_33]

Why is there no choice to fight for UK? It is unlikely that the USAF used Spitfires and Tempests in 1944-45. This is not realistic for such a server.

[Talon_]

4 minutes ago, Viktor33_33 said:

Why is there no choice to fight for UK? It is unlikely that the USAF used Spitfires and Tempests in 1944-45. This is not realistic for such a server.

 

A more realistic representation is RAF in the North, USAAF in the South.

 

Movements were broadly equivalent to those shown here between October 44 and April 45,

 

[Mm1ut1]

I would really like the technochat enabled. As a casual player I don’t have each aircraft’s specifications memorized. I’m easy enough to shoot down without my eyes glued to my notes ! The experts can turn it off if they like, right ? 
 

[Talon_]

17 minutes ago, =L/R=Rafcio said:

 

Do you remember the conversations in May with Todeskvlt in private messages? Did you not understand what he meant?

 

I'm not here to poop on the server, I like TAW a lot and plan to fly this campaign. I'm just posting the historical movements which might be useful for the next version of Rhineland TAW.

[Cpt_Siddy]

Elapsed time 02h 56m

Edited August 3, 2020 by Cpt_Siddy

[CSW_Hot_Dog]

2 hours ago, Mm1ut1 said:

I would really like the technochat enabled. As a casual player I don’t have each aircraft’s specifications memorized. I’m easy enough to shoot down without my eyes glued to my notes ! The experts can turn it off if they like, right ? 
 

Not quite so. This server is not for casual players, this is Champion League. I like it off and dont want to be disadvantaged by others, who has it on...

[JG4_Raven]

On 8/1/2020 at 10:01 AM, =LG=Kathon said:

SRS will be installed later (next week probably)

 

is done  

 

 

if you have any further requests for the SRS, just let us know

[JG7_X-Man]

3 hours ago, Talon_ said:

 

I'm not here to poop on the server, I like TAW a lot and plan to fly this campaign. I'm just posting the historical movements which might be useful for the next version of Rhineland TAW.

 

Yeah - seeing RAF Eindhoven , RAF Volkel, RAF St Denis Westrem and RAF Melsbroek with the American star looks very "uninclusiveness" 

[FTC_DerSheriff]

A fixed air pressure would be really great to get those A-8s off the ground on short fields....