Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

G-2 and G-3 had the same performance of about 1G, just that G-3 was about 2.5x lighter and more comfortable

 

If you read past pg. 106, you will see they made it lighter because several pilots chose not to wear it because they considered it cumbersome.

2 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Says here it's mandatory from August @JG7_X-Man

Where? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

There is at best a 3 month lag in WWII (being conservative).

 

But K4s are using DC engines and Tempests are dropping bombs?

 

Tempests didn't drop bombs until May. And when they flew they could use +11lbs boost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

image.png.dfa8f71f7fb277e42a22ef4d580b50ef.png

 

11th August 1944

 

Good find!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

If you read past pg. 106, you will see they made it lighter because several pilots chose not to wear it because they considered it cumbersome.

That's irrelevant. G-suits were available for use and pilots did wear it. 

Edited by =362nd_FS=RoflSeal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Says here it's mandatory from August @JG7_X-Man

 

Ahhh - Yeah that's not in the same font ;) like someone editing Wikipedia to prove a point. 

Anyway - happy flying and see you all in the virtual skies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

That's irrelevant. G-suits were available for use and pilots did wear it. 

 I am not say they did not, just saying there was push back but don't get me started on the statistical inaccuracy of the "performance data"

 

 

 

image.png

Edited by JG7_X-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

Ahhh - Yeah that's not in the same font ;) like someone editing Wikipedia to prove a point. 

Anyway - happy flying and see you all in the virtual skies

 

Just found it myself.

Screenshot_20200802-182809.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Just found it myself.

Screenshot_20200802-182809.png

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes 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

Your reasoning physically hurts. But I am out now since this thread is about TAW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes 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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ACG_DerSheriff said:

Your reasoning physically hurts. But I am out now since this thread is about TAW.

Fair enough! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NoBigDreams said:

Bugs:

Sea level altitude is ~1000m.

Many targets (hit only reds so far) seem to be immune to damage. Can't really go and test each one individually but it do be like so. At least buildings and trucks are suspect. 
 

Other than that, :)

unfortunately, i experienced the same problem, concerning the damage on buildings. attacked the northern complex of red depot at charleroi about 3hours ago, two direct hits with 1000kg, no result. Quiet disappointing after a 1:45h mission. I figured I just had to wait a little longer but now that I read this... please have a look at it!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

image.thumb.png.a156dd3932326c35e5cc02b9090cbe03.png

 

Help please! :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JG7_X-Man said:

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

 

image.thumb.png.a156dd3932326c35e5cc02b9090cbe03.png

 

Help please! :salute:

I mean spelling was never my strengh too

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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:

 

image.png.d5b6e5fd49a92257f17c389b0f35113b.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

image.png.299c71f04af450f3884cd1e573fac4c5.png

January 20, 1945

 

image.thumb.png.5ef1b29565168ee7a94acb37724c1817.png

 

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.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ITAF_Airone1989 said:

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

now open

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

 364-pascoe-19sept44.jpg

 

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.

 

479-creighton-25dec44.jpg
364-allen-27dec44.jpg

 

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:

55-mcginn-11sept44.jpg
 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
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 :biggrin:

 

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

 

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 by NoBigDreams
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, DerSheriff said:

I mean spelling was never my strengh too

:dash: 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.

 

 364-pascoe-19sept44.jpg

 

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.

 

479-creighton-25dec44.jpg
364-allen-27dec44.jpg

 

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:

55-mcginn-11sept44.jpg
 

 

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.  :salute:

Edited by JG7_X-Man
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@=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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

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.
 

BadCar.gif

 

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

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

Edited by NoBigDreams
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
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 by JG4_Widukind
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...