Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

TAW - bugs, errors and problems

Recommended Posts

3 - The level of skills of the AI Anti Aircraft gunners is set to high.

I know that these kind of targets should be attacked with several aircraft to distract the AAA defences but despite the numerous attempts made there seems to be not any effort by the LW units to plan and coordinate their attacks together so for lone players and small units this becomes a pain.

Every unit seems to play by itself hidden in its " Teamspeak hole " so for players that have no other way than flying alone ( or in very small units ) there in no way to have fun flying a ground attack sortie because you get sistematically killed by the " sniper gunners " that do not seem to miss a single shot, also from distance.

A possible solution could be vary a bit the skill level of the various enemy ground units so the have a bit more of  differentiation and so to not meet always enemy troops with the skill level of a Jedi ( At the end not all the troops at the front line were fully experienced units ) so to provide to lone players ( or to units with just 2-3 players in their ranks ) the chance to try to fly these kind of sorties with some sort of chance ( that instead actually are a sure and complete suicide for them ).

Add to this that now we have the " 3 lives system " and you can easily immagine how much these things could restrict the player choices and freedom of action. ( Thing that should be avoided in a dynamic campaign, in my humble opinion ).

 

As an additional note, in the case that you don't want to change the system, should be at least specified in the TAW manual that flying lone sorties or with just 2-3 pilots against ground targets , corresponds to a mere suicide. ( I'm new to the TAW campaign so I was totally unaware of this and it will be the same for a new pilot\small unit joining the TAW campaign in the future )

As said in my opinion this should be tweaked in a better way because actually the currect system detracts heavily from the fun of lone players\small units...and it's a real pity because this campaign is simply marvellous in its concept and realisation.

 

As always my comments are to be intended exclusively as suggestions\gentle requests and NEVER as mandatory\peremptory ones.

These are simply my feedbacks from a passionate player point of view, trying, if possible, to improve the " TAW Experience ". 

 

With respect, my sincere best regards to all!

 

Keep up the great work!

 

Salute!!!

 

 

Edited by SKG210_Werner_Molders
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

=LG= please see this post about a possible issue with the turnkey tank attack/capture process in the current map (#7):  

 

 

thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kathon!

 

Today I was disconnected from the server on two different times but on similar situations. Both times, it happened when there was suddenly a very large number of planes in the area. The first a groups of 15+ bombers showed up in front of me, as soon i was about to engage a bomber, i got disconnected. The second time, a couple of hours later and on a different map iteration, I played for about an hour until we saw a large number of enemy fighters and bombers, suddenly i was disconnected. On both cases, my stats show the sorties as "in flight" and the last entry says "pilot exit".

 

I have never seen this behavior on other servers or on previous TAWs.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2019 at 6:02 PM, -=RedS=-Str1ke said:

You should have waited until he ends his sortie. He was still flying while you posted this info, that's why his first sortie was still not available on the web page. Now you can his first sortie where he rammed you.

 

 

On 11/17/2019 at 8:35 PM, SCG_Vieira said:

Hi Kathon!

 

Today I was disconnected from the server on two different times but on similar situations. Both times, it happened when there was suddenly a very large number of planes in the area. The first a groups of 15+ bombers showed up in front of me, as soon i was about to engage a bomber, i got disconnected. The second time, a couple of hours later and on a different map iteration, I played for about an hour until we saw a large number of enemy fighters and bombers, suddenly i was disconnected. On both cases, my stats show the sorties as "in flight" and the last entry says "pilot exit".

 

I have never seen this behavior on other servers or on previous TAWs.

 

Cheers

I don't know if your disconnections was correlated with those big groups of bombers or it was just a coincident. But in case of disconnection when you are not damaged by other player then result is In flight and last entry is pilot exit. This is normal.  

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Kathon. In any case, after those first couple of days the issue never happened again for me. Thanks for your time and all the best. You guys have the best sim server on the planet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi mates, have a question about statistic,

i'v damage seriosly He111 on this flight http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=79666&name=-=RedS=-Str1ke

than landed and take off on another plane http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=79742&name=-=RedS=-Str1ke

got kill in flight log + Ju88 kill, but on this screnn there is onli 1 AK http://taw.stg2.de/pilot.php?name=-=RedS=-Str1ke

 

Is it ok? If it not, check it plz to next war :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2019 at 11:17 PM, -=RedS=-Str1ke said:

Hi mates, have a question about statistic,

i'v damage seriosly He111 on this flight http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=79666&name=-=RedS=-Str1ke

than landed and take off on another plane http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=79742&name=-=RedS=-Str1ke

got kill in flight log + Ju88 kill, but on this screnn there is onli 1 AK http://taw.stg2.de/pilot.php?name=-=RedS=-Str1ke

 

Is it ok? If it not, check it plz to next war :)

 

It's "delayed air kill" problem when pilot starts a new sortie before enemy is shot down from the previous sortie. I will try to improve it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest deleted@103832

On Mission # 532/3 the Soviet artillery position just south of Kalach AF was positioned in a way that AAA guns were inside the forest on the western edge of the position. This allowed them to fire through the trees at incoming aircraft while being impossible to see. We dropped bombs in the area of the tracers but were not able to confirm whether they were destroyed or the crews temporarily abandoned their position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

If its okay to add Bf-109 G6, G4 and Fw-190 A5 on the map also add the P-40 and P-39?

 

 

Edited by Cookie_Monster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IL2 Mission Planner for the campaign is not currently functioning properly.

 

On the TAW website, the map and objectives show up properly.

 

However, when you click the map to open the Mission Planner, all icons are squeezed into one corner. Please fix.

1.JPG

Capture.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

UPDATED - windows 10 full update solved my problem

======================================================================

Hello . The game client simply disappeared during the flight. How is this boring?

https://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=2596&name=EGr8_kadett16

https://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=2584&name=EGr8_kadett16

 

I found error logs. Unfortunately in Russian.

 

Имя журнала:   Application
Источник:      Windows Error Reporting
Дата:          09.03.2020 12:56:18
Код события:   1001
Категория задачи:Отсутствует
Уровень:       Сведения
Ключевые слова:Классический
Пользователь:  Н/Д
Компьютер:     DESKTOP-HGRCTGJ
Описание:
Контейнер ошибки , тип 0
Имя события: APPCRASH
Отклик: Нет данных
Идентификатор CAB: 0

Сигнатура проблемы:
P1: Il-2.exe
P2: 1.0.0.1
P3: 5e26f238
P4: landscape.dll
P5: 0.0.0.0
P6: 5e26efbc
P7: c0000005
P8: 000000000003bc07
P9: 
P10: 

Вложенные файлы:

Эти файлы можно найти здесь:
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\ReportQueue\AppCrash_Il-2.exe_5450c3ce6646956e8eabee46525320c0243683_085d0f89_d9d14bf2-714e-4096-921c-be2192a34b51

Символ анализа: 
Повторный поиск решения: 0
Идентификатор отчета: becaedd4-034e-4113-9ae8-40a4e3ddea13
Состояние отчета: 100
Хэшированный контейнер: 
Идентификатор GUID CAB: 0
Xml события:
<Event xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/events/event">
  <System>
    <Provider Name="Windows Error Reporting" />
    <EventID Qualifiers="0">1001</EventID>
    <Level>4</Level>
    <Task>0</Task>
    <Keywords>0x80000000000000</Keywords>
    <TimeCreated SystemTime="2020-03-09T09:56:18.502100700Z" />
    <EventRecordID>488</EventRecordID>
    <Channel>Application</Channel>
    <Computer>DESKTOP-HGRCTGJ</Computer>
    <Security />
  </System>
  <EventData>
    <Data>
    </Data>
    <Data>0</Data>
    <Data>APPCRASH</Data>
    <Data>Нет данных</Data>
    <Data>0</Data>
    <Data>Il-2.exe</Data>
    <Data>1.0.0.1</Data>
    <Data>5e26f238</Data>
    <Data>landscape.dll</Data>
    <Data>0.0.0.0</Data>
    <Data>5e26efbc</Data>
    <Data>c0000005</Data>
    <Data>000000000003bc07</Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
    <Data>\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\ReportQueue\AppCrash_Il-2.exe_5450c3ce6646956e8eabee46525320c0243683_085d0f89_d9d14bf2-714e-4096-921c-be2192a34b51</Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
    <Data>0</Data>
    <Data>becaedd4-034e-4113-9ae8-40a4e3ddea13</Data>
    <Data>100</Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
    <Data>0</Data>
  </EventData>
</Event>

 

Имя журнала:   Application
Источник:      Application Error
Дата:          09.03.2020 12:56:17
Код события:   1000
Категория задачи:(100)
Уровень:       Ошибка
Ключевые слова:Классический
Пользователь:  Н/Д
Компьютер:     DESKTOP-HGRCTGJ
Описание:
Имя сбойного приложения: Il-2.exe, версия: 1.0.0.1, метка времени: 0x5e26f238
Имя сбойного модуля: landscape.dll, версия: 0.0.0.0, метка времени: 0x5e26efbc
Код исключения: 0xc0000005
Смещение ошибки: 0x000000000003bc07
Идентификатор сбойного процесса: 0x3b40
Время запуска сбойного приложения: 0x01d5f5f5cabf0481
Путь сбойного приложения: D:\Games\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\bin\game\Il-2.exe
Путь сбойного модуля: D:\Games\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\bin\game\landscape.dll
Идентификатор отчета: becaedd4-034e-4113-9ae8-40a4e3ddea13
Полное имя сбойного пакета: 
Код приложения, связанного со сбойным пакетом: 
Xml события:
<Event xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/events/event">
  <System>
    <Provider Name="Application Error" />
    <EventID Qualifiers="0">1000</EventID>
    <Level>2</Level>
    <Task>100</Task>
    <Keywords>0x80000000000000</Keywords>
    <TimeCreated SystemTime="2020-03-09T09:56:17.570004300Z" />
    <EventRecordID>487</EventRecordID>
    <Channel>Application</Channel>
    <Computer>DESKTOP-HGRCTGJ</Computer>
    <Security />
  </System>
  <EventData>
    <Data>Il-2.exe</Data>
    <Data>1.0.0.1</Data>
    <Data>5e26f238</Data>
    <Data>landscape.dll</Data>
    <Data>0.0.0.0</Data>
    <Data>5e26efbc</Data>
    <Data>c0000005</Data>
    <Data>000000000003bc07</Data>
    <Data>3b40</Data>
    <Data>01d5f5f5cabf0481</Data>
    <Data>D:\Games\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\bin\game\Il-2.exe</Data>
    <Data>D:\Games\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\bin\game\landscape.dll</Data>
    <Data>becaedd4-034e-4113-9ae8-40a4e3ddea13</Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
  </EventData>
</Event>

 

Имя журнала:   Application
Источник:      Application Error
Дата:          09.03.2020 12:27:17
Код события:   1000
Категория задачи:(100)
Уровень:       Ошибка
Ключевые слова:Классический
Пользователь:  Н/Д
Компьютер:     DESKTOP-HGRCTGJ
Описание:
Имя сбойного приложения: Il-2.exe, версия: 1.0.0.1, метка времени: 0x5e26f238
Имя сбойного модуля: Il-2.exe, версия: 1.0.0.1, метка времени: 0x5e26f238
Код исключения: 0xc0000005
Смещение ошибки: 0x000000000079fcf6
Идентификатор сбойного процесса: 0x21b4
Время запуска сбойного приложения: 0x01d5f5ecc58b9560
Путь сбойного приложения: D:\Games\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\bin\game\Il-2.exe
Путь сбойного модуля: D:\Games\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\bin\game\Il-2.exe
Идентификатор отчета: a1fa7087-b111-4099-be50-97c34113585f
Полное имя сбойного пакета: 
Код приложения, связанного со сбойным пакетом: 
Xml события:
<Event xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/events/event">
  <System>
    <Provider Name="Application Error" />
    <EventID Qualifiers="0">1000</EventID>
    <Level>2</Level>
    <Task>100</Task>
    <Keywords>0x80000000000000</Keywords>
    <TimeCreated SystemTime="2020-03-09T09:27:17.520345400Z" />
    <EventRecordID>472</EventRecordID>
    <Channel>Application</Channel>
    <Computer>DESKTOP-HGRCTGJ</Computer>
    <Security />
  </System>
  <EventData>
    <Data>Il-2.exe</Data>
    <Data>1.0.0.1</Data>
    <Data>5e26f238</Data>
    <Data>Il-2.exe</Data>
    <Data>1.0.0.1</Data>
    <Data>5e26f238</Data>
    <Data>c0000005</Data>
    <Data>000000000079fcf6</Data>
    <Data>21b4</Data>
    <Data>01d5f5ecc58b9560</Data>
    <Data>D:\Games\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\bin\game\Il-2.exe</Data>
    <Data>D:\Games\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\bin\game\Il-2.exe</Data>
    <Data>a1fa7087-b111-4099-be50-97c34113585f</Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
    <Data>
    </Data>
  </EventData>
</Event>

 

Edited by EGr8_kadett16
add some logs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mistakenly made two accounts under the impression that was the minimum number required to build a squad. Unfortunately, this had the unintentional effect of making my second account the UNLOCKED account. I’d like to switch back and play TAW in my main account if possible. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/8/2020 at 2:56 AM, Riksen said:

@=LG=Kathon

 

Planeset for the Bobp version of TAW is awful and absurd, please consider a review before launch.

 

Sure, any suggestions are welcome 😄

 

On 3/8/2020 at 4:11 PM, =KG76=flyus747 said:

IL2 Mission Planner for the campaign is not currently functioning properly.

 

On the TAW website, the map and objectives show up properly.

 

However, when you click the map to open the Mission Planner, all icons are squeezed into one corner. Please fix.

1.JPG

 

 

Fixed.

 

 

On 3/9/2020 at 11:38 AM, =KG76=flyus747 said:

I mistakenly made two accounts under the impression that was the minimum number required to build a squad. Unfortunately, this had the unintentional effect of making my second account the UNLOCKED account. I’d like to switch back and play TAW in my main account if possible. Thanks.

 

Fixed.

Edited by =LG=Kathon
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

On map 69, the Allied defenses successfully destroyed an attacking tank tank column.  However, on Map 70, the defenses completely disappeared  even though another tank column was was attacking the city.  (Is it possible to have the tank resolution combat to completelyly destroy the city's defenses yet still have successfully defended?)  In addition, an allied supply column was reported as being spawned it but it was not visible on map #70.

 

Edit: Since learned that heavily damaged defenses do disappear from map...never seen all 3 missing.

 

Edited by SCG_Limbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SCG_Limbo said:

On map 69, the Allied defenses successfully destroyed an attacking tank tank column.  However, on Map 70, the defenses completely disappeared  even though another tank column was was attacking the city.  (Is it possible to have the tank resolution combat to completelyly destroy the city's defenses yet still have successfully defended?)  In addition, an allied supply column was reported as being spawned it but it was not visible on map #70.

 

 

Yes. If defense level after the battle (after destroying enemy tank convoy) is very low than there is no defense at all in the next map in that city.

 

I opened mission #70 in the MissionEditor and supply convoy to Enschede was located in 1122 about 50km from the city.  I have noticed that map is very big and that white stripped circle is hardly seen if the map is zoom out. 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Dear gents,

on mission 17.03.2020 17:07:48: the sortie page shows me being in a 109 k4

allthough I was flying a 190 a8.

 

Thanks

Edited by zischl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2020 at 1:26 PM, =LG=Kathon said:

 

Sure, any suggestions are welcome 😄

 

Well I did a quick little MS Paint edit on the current plane set for WF TAW, this is close to what I think is a balanced, historical and engaging plane set.

If you have any questions or criticism I'd like to hear it. The Normandy planes can be gradually introduced as they are being released as well.  

Taw table suggested edits.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@ACG_HardeKoning

 

I think it is better than the one currently implemented for sure. One thing I would change would be the P51 for map 2. Considering the 150oct Mustang was not present in the continent, we could swap the +1 in map 2 for the Spit 25lbs which was present in the continent after Jan 3rd 1945. We could still keep the 150oct Mustang since many people would want to fly it but not make it a +1 plane.

 

Good job anyways!

Edited by Riksen

Share this post


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

Well I did a quick little MS Paint edit on the current plane set for WF TAW, this is close to what I think is a balanced, historical and engaging plane set.

If you have any questions or criticism I'd like to hear it. The Normandy planes can be gradually introduced as they are being released as well.  

Taw table suggested edits.png

 

I liked that, but for improvements in the Allies side I would say give spit 150oct and P-38 1/1, let P-51 150oct and tempest as 0/1 in this exact order, if it's to be more historically accurate, I'd rather remove the P-51 150oct from the plane set and put that P-38 as 1/1 plane with no restrictions.

 

For the G-6 on map#1, the current version we have in-game isn't suitable, maybe when Normandy comes out we can have it, as for now we have the earliest from Autumn/Summer 1943 version. We don't even have Erla-Haube, which was introduced at the end of 1943, no GM-1, neither AS engine nor MW-50 boost.

I'm not sure if the A-5 would fit either, since A-8 began being produced in February 44', again what we could use is the A-6 when it's released, maybe a person with a greater knowledge and better sources could ascertain that.

 

I'm not sure the time frame from map#1, as we flew on Summer but plane set would be more suitable for Autumn 1944, then Axis could have D-9s and K-4s (DB) available. Imho I don't think D-9 should be a 1/1 plane, but rather 0/1 in map#1. The Dora as 0/1 in map #2 seems a bit off, I would rather make it 1/1 and reduce the K-4 from 1/2 to 1/1.

Edited by SCG_Gustav_Hagel
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@=LG=Kathon I'm studying an alternative for airfields since Allies have 4 out of their 7 airfields with paved runways while Germans just 2. There are options such as Düsseldorf instead of Wesel and Münster instead of Ladbergen. Another point would be to put 262s in concrete runways, there are few in the neighbor cities that were historically used for 262s squadrons, some of them are Hopsten, Achmer, Hesepe and Rheine, I think Hesepe would be more appropriate than Fürstenau, which is a terrible airfield to take off from, not only for 262s but bombers as well.

Edited by SCG_Gustav_Hagel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2020 at 6:15 AM, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

 

I liked that, but for improvements in the Allies side I would say give spit 150oct and P-38 1/1, let P-51 150oct and tempest as 0/1 in this exact order, if it's to be more historically accurate, I'd rather remove the P-51 150oct from the plane set and put that P-38 as 1/1 plane with no restrictions.

 

For the G-6 on map#1, the current version we have in-game isn't suitable, maybe when Normandy comes out we can have it, as for now we have the earliest from Autumn/Summer 1943 version. We don't even have Erla-Haube, which was introduced at the end of 1943, no GM-1, neither AS engine nor MW-50 boost.

I'm not sure if the A-5 would fit either, since A-8 began being produced in February 44', again what we could use is the A-6 when it's released, maybe a person with a greater knowledge and better sources could ascertain that.

 

I'm not sure the time frame from map#1, as we flew on Summer but plane set would be more suitable for Autumn 1944, then Axis could have D-9s and K-4s (DB) available. Imho I don't think D-9 should be a 1/1 plane, but rather 0/1 in map#1. The Dora as 0/1 in map #2 seems a bit off, I would rather make it 1/1 and reduce the K-4 from 1/2 to 1/1.

 

These are good suggestions as well but if we also want to be historically accurate, we would need to remove the Bf-109 K4 with DC engine as well as the P-51D with 150 oct. Despite of not having operated from bases in the continent, the P-51 D with 150 oct fuel saw way more action over the continent than did the K4 with DC engine.

 

And, as you said, the G6 we currently have is not a good candidate for the first map at all since it is not representative of the version that was available then.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Riksen said:

 

These are good suggestions as well but if we also want to be historically accurate, we would need to remove the Bf-109 K4 with DC engine as well as the P-51D with 150 oct [...], the P-51 D with 150 oct fuel saw way more action over the continent than did the K4 with DC engine.

Based on what? In quantity? Proportionally? Apparently it wasn't much hard to convert the DB to DC engine, in fact, it was more a matter of fuel grade and a screw adjustment on the engine (see Mermet, J. "Messerschmitt Bf 109 G1 through K-4), for as I've been researching, the C-3 fuel was mostly used on Western front. According to http://kurfurst.org/Engine/Fuel/German_fuel_specifications_and_production.html

The relative volumes of production of the two grades cannot be accurately given, but in the last war years the major volume, perhaps two-thirds (2/3) of this total has the C-3 grade. Every effort was being made toward the end of the war to increase isoparaffin production so that C-3 volume could be increased for fighter plane use.

 

Also, there's this source: http://kurfurst.org/Engine/Boostclearances/605D_clearance198.html, which states by photographs, there were more than just 2 Geschwader using the C-3.

 

As we don't have even a bigger map which includes South England, would be interesting to push maybe the P-51s to the rear airfields to be more historically representative of this stage of the war. It's a suggestion, not that it should be done to balance since we know the P-51D without 150oct isn't as competitive on TAW at low/medium altitudes, regarding speed, as the K-4 DC.

 

Btw, do you have numbers on how many fighter squadrons were equipped with Tempests and fought in the Mainland after the Invasion of Normandy and how many were fitted with the Sabre IIA engine?

Share this post


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

Based on what? In quantity? Proportionally? Apparently it wasn't much hard to convert the DB to DC engine, in fact, it was more a matter of fuel grade and a screw adjustment on the engine (see Mermet, J. "Messerschmitt Bf 109 G1 through K-4), for as I've been researching, the C-3 fuel was mostly used on Western front. According to http://kurfurst.org/Engine/Fuel/German_fuel_specifications_and_production.html

The relative volumes of production of the two grades cannot be accurately given, but in the last war years the major volume, perhaps two-thirds (2/3) of this total has the C-3 grade. Every effort was being made toward the end of the war to increase isoparaffin production so that C-3 volume could be increased for fighter plane use.

 

Also, there's this source: http://kurfurst.org/Engine/Boostclearances/605D_clearance198.html, which states by photographs, there were more than just 2 Geschwader using the C-3.

 

As we don't have even a bigger map which includes South England, would be interesting to push maybe the P-51s to the rear airfields to be more historically representative of this stage of the war. It's a suggestion, not that it should be done to balance since we know the P-51D without 150oct isn't as competitive on TAW at low/medium altitudes, regarding speed, as the K-4 DC.

 

Btw, do you have numbers on how many fighter squadrons were equipped with Tempests and fought in the Mainland after the Invasion of Normandy and how many were fitted with the Sabre IIA engine?

 

Let me gather the documents and I'll send you them to prove that the real situation was different. Regarding the tempest, unfortunately, I have no info on as Im yet to do any research on them. I'll be back here soon.

Edited by Riksen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

Based on what? In quantity? Proportionally?

 

As per @KW_1979 research:

 

On 3/21/2020 at 3:36 PM, KW_1979 said:

 

This point needs to be expanded on a bit.  People love to post the "Mustangs never used 150 Octane based on the continent" statement - and it is a true statement.  But it gives a very false impression that Mustangs with 150 octane weren't involved in these battles because they were based in England.

 

To illustrate this, I spent a little time digging through references looking at allied victory claims for the Market-Garden battle (Sept 17-25th) and the Battle of the Bulge (Dec 16th - Jan 14).  I've included just claims made over our map area - the exception to this is the US 9th AF.  I just don't have detailed enough info for them, just raw numbers with dates and units but no locations.   I've included all claims for the 9th, but this likely overstates their involvement, as many 9th AF fighters were deployed well south of our map area - still I don't think this impacts my totals by too much.

 

For the Market-Garden battle (Sept 17-25th 1944), RAF Spitfire Mk. IXs claimed 23, and RAF Mustangs 9.  9th AF P-47s claimed 8 and P-38's 3.  8th AF P-51s and P-47s (all operating out of England and using 150 octane fuel) claimed 79 and 34 respectively!  As you can see, the 8th AF (flying out of England using 150 octane fuel) was the main Allied force involved over this battle!

 

For the Battle of the Bulge (Dec 16th 1944 through Jan 14th 1945, which was the date that most of the Jagdwaffe was ordered to the east front and air combat dropped off significantly) the totals are:

 

RAF Spit IX: 131

RAF Spit XIV: 3

RAF Typhoon: 14

RAF Tempest: 53

RAF Mustang: 9

 

9th AF P-47: 258

9th AF P-38: 56

9th AF P-51: 17 (these were scored by Tac Recon squadrons of the 9th AF)

 

8th AF P-51 based on the continent (100 octane fuel): 80

8th AF P-47 based in England (150 octane fuel): 81

8th AF P-51 based in England (150 octane fuel): 319 !!!

 

As you can see from the numbers, P-51's using 150 octane fuel were used HEAVILY in combat in western Europe.

 

If people want them removed for balance, that's a fair argument to have.  But from a historical perspective they were the most important Allied air superiority fighter.

 

 

 

You can see that for the period of just 29 days, there were, at least, 319 P-51 D Mustangs operating with 150 grade octane fuel in missions over the continent. They were not stationed in the continent but still participated in missions there. We know the Allies, at this time, had air superiority and prevailed in numbers over Europe to ratios as high as 10:1 against the Germans and the use of 150 oct fuel was widely employed for units operating from Britain, especially for V-1 bomb hunting. As you will see below, proportionally speaking, this number of Mustangs is higher than that of Bf-109 K4s with DC engine and C3.

 

There is evidence of Bf-109 K4s using as early as Dec 1944, but unfortunately we do not know how many aircraft and which units used that rating. Apparently, however, its use caused issues as an order was issue by the LW to withdraw its use on January 24th 1945. Could this mean all units used it? Maybe. Could that mean only a handful used? Maybe. What we do know, though, is that during this period, the II./JG11 received 12 K4s for testing with the rating of 1.9 ata. So we simply do not currently have enough info to determine how widely used it was. What we also know is the number of units and serviceable aircraft for the units for the timeframe:

 

II./JG2 = 7

III./JG3 = 5

I./JG4 = 2

III./JG4 = 10

IV./JG4 = 2

II./JG11 = 4

III./JG26 = 13

I./JG27 = 14

III./JG27 = 14

Stab./JG53 = 1

I./JG77 = 1

III./JG77 = 18

 

That is less than 80 aircraft. Similarly to what we have done with the Mustangs, we also have to consider where they were stationed (https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/39794-oob/):

 

II./JG11

Zellhausen 17-12-44 (Out of the map)

Strasburg 23-1-45 (Out of the map)

 

I./JG27

Stormede 19-3-45

Helmstedt 30-3-45 (Out of the map)

 

III./JG27

Gutersloh 18-3-45

Goslar 29-3-45 (Out of the map)

Halberstadt 8-4-45 (Out of the map)

 

III./JG53

Nellingen 23-3-45 (Out of the map)

Neuhausen ob Eck 26-3-45 (Out of the map)

 

IV./JG53

Reichenbach 2-4-45 (Out of the map)

 

Even if we consider that all of them used 1.98 ata, this further reduces the number of available aircraft. In addition, we also have to consider fuel availability. 

 

7 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

The relative volumes of production of the two grades cannot be accurately given, but in the last war years the major volume, perhaps two-thirds (2/3) of this total has the C-3 grade. Every effort was being made toward the end of the war to increase isoparaffin production so that C-3 volume could be increased for fighter plane use.

...

 

Evidence shows otherwise. Please see here:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/39355-the-state-of-german-avgas-stock-april-1945/

 

and here:

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Methanol.pdf

 

The use of 1.98 ata was resumed again in March 1945 but, except for the II./JG11 during testing, there is no other evidence suggesting any other unit using the rating. Could that mean the I./JG27, III./JG27, III./JG53, and the IV./JG53 also used it? We do not know. Either way, the number would be inferior to that of Mustangs for sure, even if we assume all of these units converted to the new rating. Therefore, regardless of the merit of the use of the 1.98 ata rating, if we are to exclude the P-51D with 150 grade oct fuel from the plane set, by the same logic, we should also remove the Bf-109 K4 DC engine.

 

Hope it all makes sense lol.

 

Cheers

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Riksen said:

 

As per @KW_1979 research:

 

 

You can see that for the period of just 29 days, there were, at least, 319 P-51 D Mustangs operating with 150 grade octane fuel in missions over the continent. They were not stationed in the continent but still participated in missions there. We know the Allies, at this time, had air superiority and prevailed in numbers over Europe to ratios as high as 10:1 against the Germans and the use of 150 oct fuel was widely employed for units operating from Britain, especially for V-1 bomb hunting. As you will see below, proportionally speaking, this number of Mustangs is higher than that of Bf-109 K4s with DC engine and C3.

 

 

For the time frame in question - Dec 16th through Jan 14th I can give a pretty precise number for how many P-51Ds (and P-47Ds) the 8th AF had and were sending out on missions thanks to the works of Roger Freeman and Kent Miller.

 

The full 8th AF fighter command at this time constituted 13 groups of P-51s (plus scouting forces) and 2 groups of P-47s, all using 150 octane fuel.  This force amounted to roughly 800 P-51s and 120 P-47s.  On December 23rd, they launched 636 fighter sorties.  On December 24th, 853 sorties.  And on December 25th 460 sorties.  Just to give an example of 3 days during the battle.  All of these days were sorties supporting bomber operations against rail and communications targets and airfields just behind German lines around the Rhine to support Allied ground forces.   Now the 352nd and 361st groups (P-51s) moved to the continent on December 23rd at which point they no longer had access to 150 octane fuel.  The 78th FG switched from P-47s to P-51s starting Jan 1 1945.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

Btw, do you have numbers on how many fighter squadrons were equipped with Tempests and fought in the Mainland after the Invasion of Normandy and how many were fitted with the Sabre IIA engine?

 

5 squadrons (3, 56, 80, 274, 486) of Tempests moved to the continent in late September and early October.  33 and 222 Squadrons joined the mix in January of 1945.

 

It appears that Sabre IIB engines (+11lbs boost model) started being installed from the factory with the 3rd and 4th production batch models (NV and SN serials), based on the production info towards the bottom of Mike Williams page: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/tempest/tempest-V.html

 

The first evidence I see of these later serials in RAF loss records is on Feb 1st and 2nd with NV681 and NV657 being lost.  3 earlier block (JN and EJ serials) were lost those same days.  I recall seeing a post on this a while ago discussing the conversion of Sabre IIAs to IIBs.  I don't have any data on that, but I seem to recall them talking about that happening in December/January.  So it would seem like January is probably a good cut over point for the availability of the +11 boost option on the Tempest.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

As per @KW_1979 research:

 

 

You can see that for the period of just 29 days, there were, at least, 319 P-51 D Mustangs operating with 150 grade octane fuel in missions over the continent. They were not stationed in the continent but still participated in missions there. We know the Allies, at this time, had air superiority and prevailed in numbers over Europe to ratios as high as 10:1 against the Germans and the use of 150 oct fuel was widely employed for units operating from Britain, especially for V-1 bomb hunting. As you will see below, proportionally speaking, this number of Mustangs is higher than that of Bf-109 K4s with DC engine and C3.

 

There is evidence of Bf-109 K4s using as early as Dec 1944, but unfortunately we do not know how many aircraft and which units used that rating. Apparently, however, its use caused issues as an order was issue by the LW to withdraw its use on January 24th 1945. Could this mean all units used it? Maybe. Could that mean only a handful used? Maybe. What we do know, though, is that during this period, the II./JG11 received 12 K4s for testing with the rating of 1.9 ata. So we simply do not currently have enough info to determine how widely used it was. What we also know is the number of units and serviceable aircraft for the units for the timeframe:

 

II./JG2 = 7

III./JG3 = 5

I./JG4 = 2

III./JG4 = 10

IV./JG4 = 2

II./JG11 = 4

III./JG26 = 13

I./JG27 = 14

III./JG27 = 14

Stab./JG53 = 1

I./JG77 = 1

III./JG77 = 18

 

That is less than 80 aircraft. Similarly to what we have done with the Mustangs, we also have to consider where they were stationed (https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/39794-oob/)

 

Where did you get those numbers and from what timeframe?

There are missing some Gruppen that had K-4s, but let's stick with the ones you cited. From your own resource I could find the orders from December (first and last day), as well as other months. And they have far more numbers from those that you stated. For instance, in December(beginning/end):

 

II./JG2 = 2/9

III./JG3 = 9/8

I./JG4 = 0/2

III./JG4 = 36/26

IV./JG4 = 0/7

II./JG11 = 0/11

III./JG26 = 35/26

I./JG27 = 15/14

III./JG27 = 38/26

Stab./JG53 = 0/2

I./JG77 = 0/1

III./JG77 = 68/27

(http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/bjagd.htm)

 

Those are numbers available for those you've mentioned, but what do these numbers tell? They are only the first and final number of aircraft in this period, not the total though. It's worth checking that some of these Gruppen also received more brand new K-4s, for instace III./JG4 received 38 aircraft, in which 34 were straight out of the production line and the other 4 were repaired aircrafts. I was suspecting that if your numbers were indeed right, then the delivery number would be far from what he stated even by November (534 K-4s). All being said, there were way more than 80 K-4s just in December.

Besides that,  you've mentioned some, not every Gruppe or Stab that used the K-4 and also, data was lost for the year 1945. Another thing to point out is that we have evidence of K-4 being delivered around October 15th (Janda, A., Poruba, T., Mersserschmitt Bf 109K), for instace III./JG77 received a batch of 75 aircraft which they lost 8 (ohne Feindeinwirkung). I'm not sure if they entered in action in that month though, but in my resources the III./JG27 flew K-4s in November 21st (after a massive loss on November 2nd, which resulted them withdrawn from operations, see Murawski, JG27 part IV).

 

Airfields:

 

II./JG2:  25.9.44 - 3.45 Nidda (on the map)

I./JG4: 21.11.44 - 22.1.45 Darmstadt-Griesheim (not on the map by a tiny bit)

III./JG4: 17.9.44 - 4.10.44 Bad Lippspringe (on the map), 26.12.44 - 23.1.45 Darmstadt-Griesheim

IV./JG4: 20.11.44 - 23.1.45 Frankfurt/Rhein-Main (Jafü Mittelrhein, not sure if they used K-4s, information is missing and not compatible. On the map)

II./JG11: 17.12.44 - 23.1.45 Zellhausen (on the map. This Jafü Mittelrhein used K-4s)

III./JG26: 11.44 - 14.3.45 Plantlünne (on the map)

I./JG27, III./JG27, including Stab, II. and IV: http://www.ww2.dk/air/jagd/jg27.htm, on the map around Rheine-Hesepe area.

I./JG77: 10.12.44 - 18.1.45 Dortmund (on the map)

III./JG77:  16.12.44 - 17.1.45 Düsseldorf (Based at Dortmund for Operation Bodenplatte, on the map)

 

I've selected the ones from your partial list and removed the one in the east. You need to take care while analyzing your information since the Western Allies crossed the Rhine river on 22 March and LW units moved back eastwards, everything after that makes no sense for the map we currently have. So take care when selecting half-truths and partial information.

 

9 hours ago, Riksen said:

Even if we consider that all of them used 1.98 ata, this further reduces the number of available aircraft. In addition, we also have to consider fuel availability. 

 

 

Evidence shows otherwise. Please see here:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/39355-the-state-of-german-avgas-stock-april-1945/

 

and here:

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Methanol.pdf

 

The use of 1.98 ata was resumed again in March 1945 but, except for the II./JG11 during testing, there is no other evidence suggesting any other unit using the rating. Could that mean the I./JG27, III./JG27, III./JG53, and the IV./JG53 also used it? We do not know. Either way, the number would be inferior to that of Mustangs for sure, even if we assume all of these units converted to the new rating. Therefore, regardless of the merit of the use of the 1.98 ata rating, if we are to exclude the P-51D with 150 grade oct fuel from the plane set, by the same logic, we should also remove the Bf-109 K4 DC engine.

 

 

 

If you read again https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/39355-the-state-of-german-avgas-stock-april-1945/, you will see that the availability of C-3 is more than a half of the total, just looking at the Bestand section, also more fuel was also being produced and delivered as C-3 than B-4 (Zuführen column). Remember that in the West, the responsible Commando for that front was Luftgau-Kommando III (https://www.ww2.dk/ground/hq/lgiii.htm), if you see the chart, C-3 fuel numbers are in favor even more than the Eastern front.

In that document, on 2.4.1945:

LgK III:     (B-4) 944    |    (C-3) 1390

LgK VIII:  (B-4) 569   |    (C-3) 283    --------------------- in cbm

 

On 3.4.1945:

LgK III:     (B-4) 834    |    (C-3) 1581

LgK VIII:  (B-4) 354    |    (C-3) 107

 

On 22.4.1945, we don't have the numbers for LgK III, instead we have for LgK VII (München) and again for LgK VIII (Niederschlesien).

 

I don't see the point of the Methanol source, as the source with C-3 and B-4 numbers per se explain the most fuel available, what we need to see is the priority for the K-4, as other planes such as FW 190 A-8 and FW 190 D-9 required solely the C-3 (need to check references). I can only see a strong relationship with MW-50, which it's not strongly related to our subject. What it can raise as a question is how extensively it was used and lacked for the units (information that I think there's a high chance to be nonexistent). Mermet, Ritger and Poruba state how engine output was reflected by both MW-50 and B-4/C-3 fuel usage in both 605DB and 605DC engines.

 

Note that rarely references state the different fuel availability in the sections (Süd, West, Ost, etc...).

 

So my conclusion is that the currently sim we have, my idea is, since a (complete) simulation is impossible, a representation of the war in it's last year, including the airplanes and types which relevantly participated in combat, including P-51D 150oct and also Me 262 (in reduced numbers) in the period from August to end of the war, and what to choose on map is totally Kathon's decision.

 

 

Edited by SCG_Gustav_Hagel

Share this post


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

...

Those are numbers available for those you've mentioned, but what do these numbers tell?

...

 

It tells the number of serviceable (operating) aircraft. This is for the date of Operation Bodenplatte that took place in 1st January 1945 and only includes those units operating Bf-109 K4s as per the Order of Battle of the operation. You are correct regarding the numbers, however. I hastily typed them from my cell phone, as I'm doing now, and as I was going back and forth between tabs, I ended up mixing up the numbers. The corrected numbers are:

II./JG2 = 9

III./JG3 = 8

I./JG4 = 2

III./JG4 = 26

IV./JG4 = 7

II./JG11 = 11

III./JG26 = 26

I./JG27 = 14

III./JG27 = 26

Stab./JG53 = 2

I./JG77 = 1

III./JG77 = 27

Giving us a total of 159 for that date (1st January 1945). Even If you take the number that each one of these units started with in December 1944, which is about 300, this is still inferior to the numbers of P-51Ds (800) operating within the similar period as mentioned by @KW_1979:

 

9 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

 

For the time frame in question - Dec 16th through Jan 14th I can give a pretty precise number for how many P-51Ds (and P-47Ds) the 8th AF had and were sending out on missions thanks to the works of Roger Freeman and Kent Miller.

 

The full 8th AF fighter command at this time constituted 13 groups of P-51s (plus scouting forces) and 2 groups of P-47s, all using 150 octane fuel.  This force amounted to roughly 800 P-51s and 120 P-47s.  On December 23rd, they launched 636 fighter sorties.  On December 24th, 853 sorties.  And on December 25th 460 sorties.  Just to give an example of 3 days during the battle.  All of these days were sorties supporting bomber operations against rail and communications targets and airfields just behind German lines around the Rhine to support Allied ground forces.   Now the 352nd and 361st groups (P-51s) moved to the continent on December 23rd at which point they no longer had access to 150 octane fuel.  The 78th FG switched from P-47s to P-51s starting Jan 1 1945.

 

All of these Mustangs, except those associated with the 352nd and 361st FG, operated from Great Britain and used 150 oct grade fuel. This alone proves the relevance of the P-51 D operating with the aforementioned fuel as compared to that of the Bf-109 K4 and it is a strong argument to not have it removed as you suggested here:

 

On 3/20/2020 at 6:15 AM, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

I'd rather remove the P-51 150oct from the plane set and put that P-38 as 1/1 plane with no restrictions.

...

 

Regarding this:

 

5 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

They are only the first and final number of aircraft in this period, not the total though. It's worth checking that some of these Gruppen also received more brand new K-4s, for instace III./JG4 received 38 aircraft, in which 34 were straight out of the production line and the other 4 were repaired aircrafts. I was suspecting that if your numbers were indeed right, then the delivery number would be far from what he stated even by November (534 K-4s). All being said, there were way more than 80 K-4s just in December.

...

 

They represent the total of available airframes for Operation Bodenplatte as I stated above which was used as a date to provide comparison in numbers between the P-51D Mustang operating with 150 oct fuel to the total Bf-109 K4s available according to the Order of Battle for the operation. Although those were all K4s, how many of those were using the 1.98 ata rating? And which units? We just do not know. As I mentioned earlier:

 

14 hours ago, Riksen said:

...

There is evidence of Bf-109 K4s using as early as Dec 1944, but unfortunately we do not know how many aircraft and which units used that rating. Apparently, however, its use caused issues as an order was issue by the LW to withdraw its use on January 24th 1945. Could this mean all units used it? Maybe.

...

 

Again, could be that all of them used 1.98 ata rating? Maybe. Could it be that only a few of them did? Maybe. We just do not have hard evidence saying which units did, we only have that for the II./JG11 and that was for March 1945 as testing. If you do come across such data, please, share it here. I absolutely love the Bf-109 and that is one of my favorite aircraft. I'm always curious to learn additional things about this plane.

 

5 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

Besides that,  you've mentioned some, not every Gruppe or Stab that used the K-4 and also, data was lost for the year 1945.

...

 

And I don't have too because, as I stated, we do not have documents showing which ones used it. Even if there was 1 million K4s on the 1st of January 1945, we do not know which units used the rating (if all, none, or some). For convenience, I picked only those units that participated in the Operation, as stated above in the order of battle of the operation that is most relevant to us here. You are also correct, a lot of documentation was lost during WW2 and that could mean several things:

- 1: One of the documents lost showed in detail orders to convert units to the new 1.98 ata rating;

- 2: Document number 1 never existed and there was never such order;

- 3: Everything in between.

 

You see, without evidence, we can only assume and not prove anything and this opens our discussion to different interpretation. This is where the problem lies ... Some will argue in favor and some will argue against it, but the reality is, neither side have can prove or disprove the point. As mature adults, I hope we can agree that there is evidence suggesting the use of the 1.98 ata but we do not know how widely it was uses without additional information which, unfortunately, I have not yet found.

 

5 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

Another thing to point out is that we have evidence of K-4 being delivered around October 15th (Janda, A., Poruba, T., Mersserschmitt Bf 109K), for instace III./JG77 received a batch of 75 aircraft which they lost 8 (ohne Feindeinwirkung).

...

 

 The earliest evidence of 1.98 ata use we have is from December 1944 so even if the K4s were delivered in October and, again assuming all of them used the new rating, they only had 27 aircraft available at the time of the Operation. But again, we have to assume this was the case and we do not have proof that this unit even operated with this rating. Could that be the case? Yes. Could it not? Yes.

 

5 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

Airfields:

 

II./JG2:  25.9.44 - 3.45 Nidda (on the map) - ON THE MAP BUT NO DOCUMENT SHOWS THE UNIT USED THE NEW RATING

I./JG4: 21.11.44 - 22.1.45 Darmstadt-Griesheim (not on the map by a tiny bit) - NOT ON THE MAP (SIMILAR CASE WITH THE MUSTANGS USING 150 GRADE OCT FUEL)

III./JG4: 17.9.44 - 4.10.44 Bad Lippspringe (on the map), 26.12.44 - 23.1.45 Darmstadt-Griesheim - ON THE MAP BUT NO DOCUMENT SHOWS THE UNIT USED THE NEW RATING

IV./JG4: 20.11.44 - 23.1.45 Frankfurt/Rhein-Main (Jafü Mittelrhein, not sure if they used K-4s, information is missing and not compatible. On the map) - ON THE MAP BUT NO DOCUMENT SHOWS THE UNIT USED THE NEW RATING

II./JG11: 17.12.44 - 23.1.45 Zellhausen (on the map. This Jafü Mittelrhein used K-4s) - WE HAVE EVIDENCE CONFIRMING THE USE OF THIS RATING FOR THIS UNIT AS TESTING IN MARCH 1945

III./JG26: 11.44 - 14.3.45 Plantlünne (on the map) - ON THE MAP BUT NO DOCUMENT SHOWS THE UNIT USED THE NEW RATING

I./JG27, III./JG27, including Stab, II. and IV: http://www.ww2.dk/air/jagd/jg27.htm, on the map around Rheine-Hesepe area. - ON THE MAP BUT NO DOCUMENT SHOWS THE UNIT USED THE NEW RATING

I./JG77: 10.12.44 - 18.1.45 Dortmund (on the map) - ON THE MAP BUT NO DOCUMENT SHOWS THE UNIT USED THE NEW RATING

III./JG77:  16.12.44 - 17.1.45 Düsseldorf (Based at Dortmund for Operation Bodenplatte, on the map) - ON THE MAP BUT NO DOCUMENT SHOWS THE UNIT USED THE NEW RATING

...

 

5 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

So take care when selecting half-truths and partial information.

...

 

C'mon man, I thought we were having a civil discussion here where both of us were trying to learn something form each other instead of playing an ego game. If that is your intention then, please, knock yourself out and carry on with this topic without me. I'm here open minded and willing to learn new things about my favorite plane and how to make my favorite campaign better, not to see who can yell the loudest. I would appreciate if you had the same intentions so I will just ignore this part and pretend you did not mean anything by it.

 

5 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

If you read again https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/39355-the-state-of-german-avgas-stock-april-1945/, you will see that the availability of C-3 is more than a half of the total, just looking at the Bestand section, also more fuel was also being produced and delivered as C-3 than B-4 (Zuführen column). Remember that in the West, the responsible Commando for that front was Luftgau-Kommando III (https://www.ww2.dk/ground/hq/lgiii.htm), if you see the chart, C-3 fuel numbers are in favor even more than the Eastern front.

In that document, on 2.4.1945:

LgK III:     (B-4) 944    |    (C-3) 1390

LgK VIII:  (B-4) 569   |    (C-3) 283    --------------------- in cbm

 

On 3.4.1945:

LgK III:     (B-4) 834    |    (C-3) 1581

LgK VIII:  (B-4) 354    |    (C-3) 107

 

On 22.4.1945, we don't have the numbers for LgK III, instead we have for LgK VII (München) and again for LgK VIII (Niederschlesien).

...

 

You are correct again. Proportionally wise, the concentration of C3 fuel increased in comparison to B4 and that shows that the Luftwaffe placed more emphasis in C3 but we also have to remember that other planes used this fuel and not only K4s. Despite of the change in production ratios between C3 and B4, however, the overall stores of fuel available decreased substantially for both. If you normally produce 100 oranges and 50 apples a day but later decrease production to 10 oranges and 30 apples a day, your overall fruit production is still lower than normal despite the change in ratio. Just in 1944 alone, AVGAs production fell from 180,000 tons to about 20,000 (Luftwaffe Over Germany: Defense of the Reich). By 1945, the shortage got to the point of even restricting air operations.

So even if we consider that all Bf-109 K4s operated with the new rating, how did this also impact the units and the possibility of actually operating with 1.98 ata?

 

5 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

I don't see the point of the Methanol source, as the source with C-3 and B-4 numbers per se explain the most fuel available, what we need to see is the priority for the K-4, as other planes such as FW 190 A-8 and FW 190 D-9 required solely the C-3 (need to check references). I can only see a strong relationship with MW-50, which it's not strongly related to our subject. What it can raise as a question is how extensively it was used and lacked for the units (information that I think there's a high chance to be nonexistent). Mermet, Ritger and Poruba state how engine output was reflected by both MW-50 and B-4/C-3 fuel usage in both 605DB and 605DC engines.

 

Note that rarely references state the different fuel availability in the sections (Süd, West, Ost, etc...).

...

 

The point is to show two things: The impact of the Allied bombings on Germany's Industrial capabilities and, secondmy, the lack of methanol, which, as you know, is needed for the 1.98 ata rating. Again, assuming all Bf-109 Ks were using 1.98 ata, how did this also impact their operation? Based on these conditions, it seems like there was a negative impact on the Luftwaffe and this is further supported by the lack of resistance from the Luftwaffe at this stage of the war. How negative was it for the K4s with 1.98 ata? We do not know because we do not know which units used the rating and depended on methanol and C3. Also, as you correctly stated, how much of these two essential materials did they receive?

 

5 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

So my conclusion is that the currently sim we have, my idea is, since a (complete) simulation is impossible, a representation of the war in it's last year, including the airplanes and types which relevantly participated in combat, including P-51D 150oct and also Me 262 (in reduced numbers) in the period from August to end of the war, and what to choose on map is totally Kathon's decision.

...

 

And I never said otherwise. It is, in the end Kathon and the other TAW admins decision, but that does not mean we cannot have a civil discussion and provide good arguments to improve the campaign and assist them in their decision, regardless of what that might be. IMHO, if we are to remove the 150 oct fuel from Mustangs, which is also a valid point, we should also consider removing the Bf-109 K4 with 1.98 ata. This is from a gameplay perspective as well as a historical one (evidence situation above) but if either one stays, I think we should have both present for the same reasons. Both are valid arguments in my opinion.

 

Cheers

Edited by Riksen
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

And I never said otherwise. It is, in the end Kathon and the other TAW admins decision, but that does not mean we cannot have a civil discussion and provide good arguments to improve the campaign and assist them in their decision, regardless of what that might be. IMHO, if we are to remove the 150 oct fuel from Mustangs, which is also a valid point, we should also consider removing the Bf-109 K4 with 1.98 ata. This is from a gameplay perspective as well as a historical one (evidence situation above) but if either one stays, I think we should have both present for the same reasons. Both are valid arguments in my opinion.

 

Ultimately it depends on what the server goal is.  If the admins want something that reflects what actually happened historically, then this stuff definitely matters and we should hammer it out.  On the other hand, if they just want to make a "balanced" scenario then I guess it's whatever keeps the matches close.

 

With regard to trying to include 8th AF Mustangs, there is obviously the potential for huge balance issues if you have a scenario with mostly (or entirely prior to November 44) G14s and A8s against mass numbers of 150 octane P-51s.  But that's what was really going on in fall and winter of 1944.  One possibility that servers could look at is using an air spawn for the 8th AF forces - on the edge of the map a long way from the fights.  Lock this with 150 octane, but no bombs etc and near full fuel (75-80% - standard practice was to burn 50 or so gallons off the fuselage tank during climb out to avoid CG issues in combat and then switch to the drop tanks).  That way if guys want to play as the 8th AF, you're getting the whole package - long flight times included.  Potentially in some scenarios you could actually spawn them behind the axis lines as fighters returning from an escort mission and looking for something to bounce or strafe on the way home - a common activity for 8th AF fighters when they didn't find any opposition during their escort.  In that case you've got to fight your way to friendly lines on top of it all.  If you were going to use this type of setup, 100 octane P-51s close to the battle should be pretty limited, as the 9th never had many during this time period, and the RAF Mustangs were all based in England as well after summer of 1944.  Just an idea, but I think it would capture the flavor - sometimes you wouldn't see many of them and some days they're everywhere just depending on what the players are choosing to do that day.

Edited by KW_1979

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Riksen Sorry if I might have offended you, I thought you were first referring to only K-4s without any distinction on engine type. The fact is we will never know how extensively 1.98 ata was used, but photos suggest it was more widespread than the own Kufürst document, (since many had the C-3 fuel mark). This would be a good paper or even book to discuss about, specially when some sources state that the conversion of both engine was a matter of adjusting a screw (Mermet picture), but as Poruba say it's also a matter of different materials (note that Poruba states probably). If it's the former, it's expected to have both engine types being produced at the same type under a common designation DB 605 D and the use of 1.98 ata ealier than the documents (the fuel grade marking needs to show C-3, 94 octanes, rather than 87). If it's the second, then there have to be a second version of the engine being produced separetedly, but both engines were produced at same time. But I guess we will never know unless there are good quality photos from the period. About the number P-51Ds and Bf 109 K-4 is a false symmetry, since we all know the higher quantity of American machines.

The follor extract is from Mermet:

 

 

Screenshot_20200326-033642_1.jpg

1 hour ago, KW_1979 said:

With regard to trying to include 8th AF Mustangs, there is obviously the potential for huge balance issues if you have a scenario with mostly (or entirely prior to November 44) G14s and A8s against mass numbers of 150 octane P-51s.  But that's what was really going on in fall and winter of 1944.

In fact during the winter G-10s and few K-4s were already operational, so it's not totally true only G14s and A8s (can't tell about Doras, but I supposed they were also operational) facing P-51Ds with 150oct off. In fact, the final versions of G-14 had either AS or ASM engine, improved for higher altitudes.

Edited by SCG_Gustav_Hagel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

In fact during the winter G-10s and few K-4s were already operational, so it's not totally true only G14s and A8s (can't tell about Doras, but I supposed they were also operational) facing P-51Ds with 150oct off. In fact, the final versions of G-14 had either AS or ASM engine, improved for higher altitudes.

 

Yes I understand that G-10s and K-4s started seeing combat in November and December, but they are still in the minority at that point vis a vis the G14.  And like I said, anything prior (Aug,Sep, Oct) is generally going to be the 51 vs G14/A8 matchup.  Unfortunately we don't have a G-14AS (or G-6AS, G-10, A-9 etc ... hopefully some day), but my understanding is that the relationship is much like that of Spit LF IXs and HF IXs.  You trade a bit of low alt performance for a higher critical altitude - the loss of performance coming due to the cost of spinning a bigger supercharger all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, KW_1979 said:

 

Yes I understand that G-10s and K-4s started seeing combat in November and December, but they are still in the minority at that point vis a vis the G14.  And like I said, anything prior (Aug,Sep, Oct) is generally going to be the 51 vs G14/A8 matchup.  Unfortunately we don't have a G-14AS (or G-6AS, G-10, A-9 etc ... hopefully some day), but my understanding is that the relationship is much like that of Spit LF IXs and HF IXs.  You trade a bit of low alt performance for a higher critical altitude - the loss of performance coming due to the cost of spinning a bigger supercharger all the time.

That's for sure, G-14 remained as the standard and most produced Bf 109 version on mid-late 44.

 

 

@Riksen http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=2470

 

Would be interesting to have the DC engine only starting from March and foward and then pushing back the 262 during Winter 44, also adding P-51D 150 oct starting from September (unlocking after the regular one), I'm not sure if G-14 should also be place on March until the end of war, if it was still being extensively used then I don't see why not. This would bring more diversity and also put LW pilots under similar conditions VVS ones face on the Eastern Campaign. I think Kathon will need to work hard to figure out 262s number, but I think something as 1 for every 15/20 red pilots during the winter and 1 every 10 red pilots in the last map would reflect better the proportion, also making fuel jet depots and/or the 262 airfield destroyable would be a huge upgrade for the campaign. 

Edited by SCG_Gustav_Hagel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

Ultimately it depends on what the server goal is.  If the admins want something that reflects what actually happened historically, then this stuff definitely matters and we should hammer it out.  On the other hand, if they just want to make a "balanced" scenario then I guess it's whatever keeps the matches close.

...

 

I agree and it all comes down to what the TAW admins want but from what I have seen so far, it is a good mix between history and gameplay balance.

 

9 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

...

With regard to trying to include 8th AF Mustangs, there is obviously the potential for huge balance issues if you have a scenario with mostly (or entirely prior to November 44) G14s and A8s against mass numbers of 150 octane P-51s.  But that's what was really going on in fall and winter of 1944.  One possibility that servers could look at is using an air spawn for the 8th AF forces - on the edge of the map a long way from the fights.  Lock this with 150 octane, but no bombs etc and near full fuel (75-80% - standard practice was to burn 50 or so gallons off the fuselage tank during climb out to avoid CG issues in combat and then switch to the drop tanks).  That way if guys want to play as the 8th AF, you're getting the whole package - long flight times included.

 

I actually think this is a great idea! We could consider that this initial balance issue would be later offset by the introduction of the Me-262 in the later maps so basically we would have a scenario where P-51 D with 150 grade oct would dominate early maps and then Me-262s dominating late maps and apply restriction to the use of both. It is just an idea that could be potentially used as well.

 

8 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

@Riksen Sorry if I might have offended you, I thought you were first referring to only K-4s without any distinction on engine type.

...

 

No problem. I appreciate the apology and I'm happy to know we can continue our discussion in a civil and friendly way, respecting each other's opinions, even with they diverge at times.

 

8 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

The follor extract is from Mermet:

 

Screenshot_20200326-033642_1.jpg

 

These are good references and indeed may indicate a more spread use, especially if we assume it could be done by simply adjusting a screw however, as you correctly noted, that would also depend on the availability of both C3 and MW50. Both of which, we know, were in overall short supply. Also, the simple fact that you have the marking for C3 fuel on the plane does not directly indicate the airframe operated with the 1.98 ata rating as the source above indicates. You could very well have a Bf-109 K4 with C3 fuel marking and have it fly with no MW50 and, therefore, no 1.98 ata rating. So, in the end, even if all units were able to adjust the screw and switch the ratings on the go, which may very well have been the case, how was the availability of C3 as well as MW50 for those units? The simple fact that this could have been done therefore does not necessarily imply it was widely used since both C3 fuel and Methanol was in short supply. It does, however, indicate it was possible.

 

8 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

About the number P-51Ds and Bf 109 K-4 is a false symmetry, since we all know the higher quantity of American machines.

...

 

How is this a false symmetry? This is what proves the point. There were more P-51Ds operating with 150 oct fuel over the continent, although not based there, than Bf-109 K4s in general. Because the Allies produced more planes and therefore predominated in the air, they will, therefore, have more airframes of that type vs the ones for the Axis so this here:

 

On 3/20/2020 at 6:15 AM, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

I'd rather remove the P-51 150oct from the plane set and put that P-38 as 1/1 plane with no restrictions.

...

 

Should not happen since they were more relevant than the K4s and any other LW planes in general. The symmetry would only potentially be false if we were to compare the proportion of P-51D using 150 oct fuel and, therefore their proportion, to other US produced airframes and then determine how common they were within the USAAAF. Based on @KW_1979 post, however, they were more common than the 100 oct versions, despite of not being based in the continent.

 

7 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

...

Would be interesting to have the DC engine only starting from March and foward and then pushing back the 262 during Winter 44, also adding P-51D 150 oct starting from September (unlocking after the regular one), I'm not sure if G-14 should also be place on March until the end of war, if it was still being extensively used then I don't see why not. This would bring more diversity and also put LW pilots under similar conditions VVS ones face on the Eastern Campaign. I think Kathon will need to work hard to figure out 262s number, but I think something as 1 for every 15/20 red pilots during the winter and 1 every 10 red pilots in the last map would reflect better the proportion, also making fuel jet depots and/or the 262 airfield destroyable would be a huge upgrade for the campaign. 

 

I totally agree with you here if we were to take a more historical approach and I think this is also an excellent suggestion. Like you said earlier though, it is up to the devs of TAW and I'm not sure the whole LW community would approve a more historical approach when it does not favor then. Not every one is like you and enjoys the immersion of being on the shoes of a LW pilot and having to face similar adversities as they did. The vast majority (and this is not something exclusive to LW-only players), scream BALANCE when they see themselves in the short end of the stick and scream HISTORICAL when they have the advantage. For just proposing something like this, you have my respect and I salute you!

Although I prefer a more historical approach, I'm okay with either one of them (balance or historical) and even a mix of both as long as there are plausible arguments to support them. Either way, thank you for the documentation and the great discussion and @KW_1979 for the additional info. I believe this is the way all the community should approach issues. Just like the 1.98 ata. Do I believe you have a point that they were used even earlier than March 1945? Most definitely! But we just dont know how many were there. We could even introduce the DC engine earlier and just have smaller numbers and then apply a higher availability after March 45. Anyways, these are all good points and again I appreciate both of you for this discussion!

 

Cheers 

Also, @KW_1979 and @SCG_Gustav_Hagel

 

This is another important point:

"While spark plug fouling was eliminated, PEP was found to have an undesirable effect on valve seats. As a result of excessive maintenance required on the V-1650 engines, General Doolittle of the Eighth Air Force decided in late March 1945 to revert to the normal 100/150 (1 T) grade fuel." (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/atsce-28march45.pdf)

That we should consider and it would make things very interesting in the late stages of the campaign.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same problem with a convoy column few hours ago (russian one, near Sychevka AF). The icon was right on a bridge (Subbotino, exacly). In game, only saw a truck before the bridge and one under it, in the water. Both destroyed but the icon was still on the map. 

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...