PDA

View Full Version : examples of Rearm, Refuel, Repair in real life ww2 events



grifter2u
12-06-2006, 01:06 AM
for those interested in a constructive discussion of this topic, and how it might be implemented in BoB in a realistic way, it is usefull we keep some discussion going on this issue. imo it is an extremely important part of the allied strategy during BoB and without it BoB might not have been won (previous evidence of this was supplied already).

we cant just let disruptive negative behaviour by a small minority on these forums result in censorship of whole topics, and risk not having these important improvements made. if some people dont like this idea, remember it is an option and can be turned on/off depending on your personal choice of how to use these sims.

lets stick to the real life examples in this thread, and some of the experienced users might make suggestions of how this could possibly be implemented in BoB later on.

for example ...........


S/L John Ellis of No. 610 Squadron wrote in his Combat Report for 12 August 1940:

I was leading 610 Sqdn which was detailed to intercept raid approaching Dungeness... In the dogfight I chased one solitary Me. 109 flying very fast and diving slightly. He rolled on to his back as I opened fire and I continued firing as he started his vertical dive, I could see my bullets entering the side of his fuselage as I followed him down. I broke off the attack as I was convinced he was diving out of control, he was also drawing away from me rapidly. F/O Lamb, who was behind me, later reported he saw this e/a continue its dive into the sea and break up.
I climbed up again to 15,000 over Dungeness and spotted another Me 109 climbing into the sun. I caught him at about 20,000. He started to spin down to the left soon after I opened fire. I fired the remaining ammunition at very close range as he was spinning, but he presented an extremely difficult target. When I broke off the attack his engine was ticking over slowly and he was still spinning violently and he appeared to be out of control. Noticing a scrap going on just above I left the Me 109 and returned to re-arm.

from S/L John Ellis, Combat Report - 12 August 1940
in: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

FritzGryphon
12-06-2006, 01:14 AM
I'm not sure if it's really necessary to prove the existance of rearming and refueling in real life. I think anyone will agree that this happens. The contentious issue is the minimum realistic time to re-arm.

The very quickest I have read about refueling and re-arming (not repair or any other maintainance) of an aircraft was in 7 minutes by Israel in the Six Day War.


This air attack, codenamed 'Moked' was designed to shatter the Egyptian air force while their aircraft were still grounded. Within three hours most of the Egyptian planes and air bases were destroyed. The Israeli fighters operated continuously with a turn-around time to re-fuel and re-arm of only seven minutes.

http://www.sixdaywar.orcon.net.nz/html/war.htm

And these results were only possible by incredible effort and planning on the part of the Israelis. Their enemies, using similar aircraft, took hours to reload planes.

It's also likely that loading bombs onto a Mirage is much faster than feeding machine gun rounds into a Spitfire, making such fast turnarounds impossible for WWII propellor planes.

grifter2u
12-06-2006, 01:19 AM
hi gryphon,

i have seen a historical video where the whole refueling and re-arming is done in real time during ww2 in BoB, i'll try and track it down and time them to get some more information.

here is another example

Next big day came on July 27. Beurling was part of a interception of the major attack on Malta, involving Ju-88s escorted by Messerschmitts and Macchis. He shot down 25 year old Faliero Gelli, who survived by pancaking his Macchi into a rocky field, and being found by merciful Maltese who did not battered him to bloody pulp, like they often did. Supposedly, Gelli is (he lives in New Jersey) the only man who survived Beurling's attack. After trouncing Gelli, Beurling destroyed another Macchi and one Bf-109. He also got probable second Messerschmitt. Since Takali airstrip was full of bomb craters, Beurling's squadron landed in nearby Luqa. After quick re-arming and refueling, they took off again, this time to meet a party of 20 Bf-109s. George went after separated rotte, and finished both of them. Two days later he victimized yet another German fighter. Thus after nearly two month on the island, his score was 16 destroyed, one probably destroyed, and four damaged.
from George "Buzz" Beurling - The Top Scoring Canadian.
Written by Wilhelm Ratuszynski.

FritzGryphon
12-06-2006, 01:51 AM
Personally, I'd not be willing to wait even 1 minute to re-arm and refuel. I'd much rather just hit refly.

What is the appeal to waiting, I wonder?

grifter2u
12-06-2006, 02:15 AM
RRR can be used to get you home to your original airbase, after you have been on a longer mission and just made it back to friendly territory when you are low on fuel.

coop servers dont provide refly, yet there might be time you need more fuel or ammo to complete your mission or make it back home (like it was in real life)

hitting refly is linked to the false perception (and behaviour) that presumes there is an endless supply of new planes at an airfield. the plane availability at any airfield should be linked to a "new airplane resupply rate" for that squadron and the model aircraft stationed at that airfield, and the availability of fuel and ammo (for ex are all the fuel supply storages destroyed at that airfield, etc..). once you fator some of those issues in, the whole immersion factor significantly increases.

just a few examples http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

interesting that a 6 year old sim already incorporated some of those concepts in its campaign engine, sadly the sim itself has a very arcade flight model

The campaign is actually fully playable from both sides and leads to very different play styles and game experiences in the supreme-commander mode. Playing as the Germans, you'll be responsible for plotting the day's targets, assigning squadrons to them, and keeping the Royal Air Force off balance. Much will depend on the routes and times you plan for your attacks. If you allow too much time between raids, you give the enemy fighters time to land, refuel, and get back in the air. The game even models things like the rate of replacement aircraft turned out by British factories.
from "Rowan's Battle of Britain Preview" on yahoo games website

grifter2u
12-06-2006, 02:41 AM
there is no specific reference given for this information but it is from "Lesser-Known Facts of World War II "
http://members.iinet.net.au/~gduncan/1941.html (http://members.iinet.net.au/%7Egduncan/1941.html)


SPITFIRE vs HURRICANE

Contrary to popular belief, it was the Hurricane, not the Spitfire that saved Britain during the dark days of 1940. The turn-around time (re-arm, refuel etc.) for the Spitfire was 26 minutes. That of the Hurricane, only 9 minutes from down to up again. During the Battle of Britain the time spent on the ground was crucial and as one fitter/mechanic of No. 145 Squadron quipped: "If we had nothing but Spits we would have lost the fight in 1940." The Spitfire was an all metal fighter, slightly faster, had a faster rate of climb and had a higher ceiling, while the Hurricane had a fabric covered fuselage, was quicker to repair and withstood more punishment. With the for's and against's of both fighters they came out about even. The majority of German planes shot down during the four month period were destroyed by Hurricanes. For much of the Battle of Britain, the Spitfires went after the German BF 109s at the higher altitudes, while the Hurricanes attacked the bomber formations flying at lower altitudes. This cost the enemy a total of 551 pilots killed or taken prisoner. During the war a total of 14,231 Hurricanes and 20,334 Spitfires were produced. The famous Rolls-Royce 'Merlin' engine evolved through 88 separate marks and was fitted in around 70,000 Allied aircraft, including the famous Lancaster bomber, during the six years of war.

In the hectic battles in the sky over southern England many pilots returned to base utterly exhausted and routinely fell asleep as they taxied their plane to a stop. Ground crews often had to help the sleeping pilot from the cockpit after he returned from combat.

at least it gives a bit of an infication of possible time frames, but i have no idea of how reliable that webpage is.

but there are other indications the hurricane was easier to refuel and rearm

"The Hurricane was reknowned for its viceless flying qualities, capacity to withstand extensive battle damage, steadiness as a gun platform, ease and speed of refuelling and re-arming, and its agility in combat. Its sturdy wide-track undercarriage recommended it for operations from relatively poor airfield surfaces and this, combined with its ease of maintenance and repair, resulted in the Hurricane serving both in the Middle and Far East about two years before the first Spitfires arrived. The Hurricane it was therefore that fought at times and in theaters under greatest threat, and suffered heavy casualities accordingly. Yet, on account of the weight of this responsibility, Hurricane pilots destroyed more enemy aircraft - German, Italian, and Japanese, than any other Allied fighter during the Second World War, and by a substantial margin."

from - Francis K. Mason, The British Fighter Since 1912.

Hoarmurath
12-06-2006, 05:21 AM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
Personally, I'd not be willing to wait even 1 minute to re-arm and refuel. I'd much rather just hit refly.

What is the appeal to waiting, I wonder?

He want a refly option in cooperative and offline games. And he is trying to present it as an historical "must have".

GerritJ9
12-06-2006, 05:32 AM
I have to question the 9 minute refuelling/rearming time quoted for the Hurricane. Both Hurri and Spitfire had eight 303s during the BoB, and it seems unlikely that rearming the Hurricane's eight guns would take significantly less time than rearming eight similar guns on a Spitfire. Repairs WILL take longer on a Spitfire (depending on the damage of course), but similarly I don't see how refuelling could take significantly longer for a Spitfire either. Does anybody own both a Hurricane I and a Spitfire with eight 303s? Would be interesting to run a test to either confirm or demolish these figures.
As for the Huricane's so-called "agility in combat"....... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif If the sim's model is anywhere near accurate, then nearly every other fighter is more agile- even the F4F-3, which is hardly a manoeuverability icon, can outturn the Hurricane.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The KNIL is dead. Long live the KNIL!

grifter2u
12-06-2006, 06:11 AM
GerritJ9:

lets try and stick to facts and quote some historical information to support it.

we do know that when fighters landed at their home base they had their own designated pit crews that would take care of them, multiple individuals were involved at any one time to refuel and rearm them. similarly when fighters landed at designated forward airbases specifically built for RRR, multiple service personnel would be involved. think of it like a F1 pit crew servicing a fighter, but going at 1940's speed :]

and whatever your personal perception is about the hurricane, i'll just restate the previous historical observation i posted

Hurricane pilots destroyed more enemy aircraft - German, Italian, and Japanese, than any other Allied fighter during the Second World War, and by a substantial margin.
from - Francis K. Mason, The British Fighter Since 1912.

for its time the hurricane was a magnificent fighter, but outclassed in maneuverability and speed by the 109 at the outbreak of the war. without the hurricane, we'd probably all be speaking german and marching in goose steps.

LEBillfish
12-06-2006, 08:21 AM
If you are hoping to fly back out with a damaged plane....Remember this....

If a plane is damaged enough that it hinders its performance, first off the "pilot" is probably done for the day simply trying to gather his wits....I've seen numerous accounts where real aces are speaking, and they quite clearly state even after having just killed their opponents "they had, had enough"....

Secondly, if a pilot is that stressed now making him a liability, and the plane is stressed having taken damage.....To send it back out is quite simply just risking pilot and plane unjustifiably......So I'd doubt many would allow it (C.O.'s)........Granted, in all theatres and from all sides both cases were ignorred and sent back out....Yet I'd bet it was not the norm.

Damage that has no effect does not affect your experience when using "refly" in DF servers....In most coops, re-arm time I'd "guess" would be so long that the coop would be over (lets say 20-30 minutes)....."Insta-Rearm/refuel"....really would destroy the experience....More so, at what percentage do you say "repair" must be made?

Personally, I just don't see it being the record times set......and I know of very very few that will wait 30 minutes in their chair rather then hit refly or just call it quits.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

GerritJ9
12-06-2006, 08:52 AM
Grifter2u, assuming both fighters carried approximately similar amounts of fuel, refuelling them should take approximately the same amount of time. BoB Hurricane and Spitfire used the same engine (Merlin III), so specific fuel consumption is the same. The Hurricane I had a range of 425 miles, Spitfire IA 575 miles; allowing for an aerodynamically more efficient airframe, the Spitfire IA would have carried more fuel, but not excessively so- certainly the difference in Imp. gallons would have been less than suggested purely by range figures; those would indicate the Spitfire carried 35% more fuel. Assuming the Hurricane required 9 minutes for refuelling, the Spitfire would require slightly over 12 minutes for refuelling, assuming the tanks of both were as dry as a bone and a 35% difference in capacity. Or perhaps Hurricane squadrons had been issued with petrol bowsers with a greater pumping rate than Spitfire squadrons?
Both carried eight 303s, the Hurricane I with 334 r.p.g., the Spitfire IA 300 r.p.g.- not a really significant difference.
So, why, given roughly similar ammunition and fuel loads, should a Spitfire's ground crew (as noted, with designated pit crews), have required 26 minutes to rearm and fuel, and a Hurricane's designated ground crew require only 9 minutes? While I will accept some difference because of the location differences of guns and ammo boxes, I don't buy a difference of 17 minutes. It smacks of something written by Hurricane propagandists.

As you yourself stated, "outclassed in manoeuverability and speed by the Bf-109"- and the 109 is hardly a manoeuverability king.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The KNIL is dead. Long live the KNIL!

Chuck_Older
12-06-2006, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by GerritJ9:
I have to question the 9 minute refuelling/rearming time quoted for the Hurricane. Both Hurri and Spitfire had eight 303s during the BoB, and it seems unlikely that rearming the Hurricane's eight guns would take significantly less time than rearming eight similar guns on a Spitfire. Repairs WILL take longer on a Spitfire (depending on the damage of course), but similarly I don't see how refuelling could take significantly longer for a Spitfire either. Does anybody own both a Hurricane I and a Spitfire with eight 303s? Would be interesting to run a test to either confirm or demolish these figures.
As for the Huricane's so-called "agility in combat"....... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif If the sim's model is anywhere near accurate, then nearly every other fighter is more agile- even the F4F-3, which is hardly a manoeuverability icon, can outturn the Hurricane.

Hurri and Spit do not share the same wing, however http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The physical reloading of the weapons would take the same amopunt of time every time, but consider that the weapons are not removed from their platform (the plane) to be reloaded

A completly forgotten concern is re-plenishing oxygen

I and others have mentioned a system in which a plyer lands aircaft Yellow 9, a Bf 109E, and that plane is immediately in queue for RRR. The player however, can now choose any available plane from a pool of 'ready' aircraft, if any exist

It is not a 100% realistic option, but a compromise will need to be made somewhere

A lot of people argue vehemently about that idea; I don't know why but they seem to over-complicate the idea

GerritJ9
12-06-2006, 03:31 PM
Chuck, I accept that because of differences in the wings, rearming MAY take a bit longer for a Spitfire- but NOT a 17 minute difference! "Rearming" would consist of changing the ammo boxes and recharging the guns, NOT swapping the eight 303s for a set of new ones! If you swap the guns for a set of new ones, you would probably also have to harmonize them, and there is NO WAY you could do the changing and harmonizing in 9 minutes!
Replenishing the oxygen is simply a matter of taking the old ones out and fitting new bottles. I built the Airfix 1:24 Spitfire ages ago, and from memory the oxygen bottles were located right behind the pilot's seat; never built the 1:24 Hurricane, but I would think that the oxygen bottles are in a similar location on the Hurricane, so figure the same amount of time for changing them on both planes.
Bottom line is, that discrepancy of those times for rearming Hurricane (9 minutes)and Spitfire (27 minutes) simply does not stand up to close scrutiny. As I said, it's probably some sort of propaganda being spouted by the Hurricane wallahs.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The KNIL is dead. Long live the KNIL!

LEXX_Luthor
12-06-2006, 04:37 PM
Good Question!

FritzGryphon::
What is the appeal to waiting, I wonder?
Having to wait vulnerable on the airfield or carrier and looking up to see you are under bombing - or torpedo - attack is part of the immersion.

Your squadron of Zeros just finished off a torpedo plane attack, and you are low on fuel and/or ammo. Do you land now, or wait? Do you see flak guns popping off on the distant destroyer escorts? No, so you decide to land and refit. So you land and wait and see other AI Zeros takeoff to patrol the fleet. Then you see flak puffs go off on the destroyers, then your own carrier guns start firing and you look above to see the classic tiny FB/PF Dots. Then the dots stop moving but get bigger as they drop between the puffy clouds and flak puffs. By this time, you need to take off again, if possible.

If you cannot see the attraction of this idea for many countless players and WW2 military aviation enthusiasts and history lovers, its probably because my writing skills are that bad, and I am not sharing my enjoyment of this as well as I could perhaps. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


However, ReArm and ReFuel is NOT an option for every scenario. A "realistic" mission offering the play of an 8th Air Force P-51 should not allow any ReArm/ReFuel, but a mission designer can design that same gameplay mission around the option of a Bf109 player landing to RR and takeoff again to join with later scheduled friendly AI Luftwaffe fighters to catch the bombers on their return flight.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
12-06-2006, 04:43 PM
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/Smileys/thumbs.gif http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/Smileys/thumbs.gif

Bearcat99 (last poaster in the previous RR thread)::
grifter.. great posts man....
The nice thing about this sim is that with all of it's options people can acxtually choose to fly as they see fit. While I dont mind flying in fully immersive settings... to me it is more fun to have some kind of visual aid.. like tight icons.. because it is hard for me to see sometimes.... but it is great that I can set up a server coop or DF with all the options I prefer.. and someone will join it.... I dont have to beat my chest and insist that anyone fly the way I think is best.... those who want to will choose to do so.. those who dont wont.

IMO more options are always better than less.

It is amazing, the amount of negativity in this thread. So much bluster. I mean... if you disagree with an idea then fine say so and be done with it... but this long back and forth protracted negative banter.. basically saying the same thing over and over is just ..... incredible. To all those who actually contributed ideas to this thread..... thanks.... to those who injected nothing but negativity... just for the sake of hearing themselves speak... because thats all it was. No rhyme or reason to thier points other than... I dont like it so it bites. Arguing just for the same of arguing..... says a lot about people and thier personalities.

~ http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/2271069344/p/12
Yough Thanks Bear!


PS:: Bear, recall in a very old Wonder Woman View thread, I was brutally opposed to any kind of Cockpit OFF option, for it may prevent or delay people from eventually enjoying the more immersive cockpit on experience (my theory anyways). It took a few years for you to turn your cockpit on. Yeah but well guess what? I need to use the cockpit OFF option in StrikeFighters because its the only way to conduct any kind of level bombing which is not supported by developer. So here I am, full use of Wonder Woman view.

If I had it my way, in my old "I know realism better" mentality, there would be NO cockpit OFF option in SF today and I would not be able to conduct level bombing. So you were right all along about *everything* needing to be an option that we can choose to use or not, including for doing things that we read about in history but are not supported by the developer.

I was (choke) wrong. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

grifter2u
12-07-2006, 04:14 AM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
If you are hoping to fly back out with a damaged plane....Remember this....

If a plane is damaged enough that it hinders its performance, first off the "pilot" is probably done for the day simply trying to gather his wits....I've seen numerous accounts where real aces are speaking, and they quite clearly state even after having just killed their opponents "they had, had enough"....

Secondly, if a pilot is that stressed now making him a liability, and the plane is stressed having taken damage.....To send it back out is quite simply just risking pilot and plane unjustifiably......So I'd doubt many would allow it (C.O.'s)........Granted, in all theatres and from all sides both cases were ignorred and sent back out....Yet I'd bet it was not the norm.

Damage that has no effect does not affect your experience when using "refly" in DF servers....In most coops, re-arm time I'd "guess" would be so long that the coop would be over (lets say 20-30 minutes)....."Insta-Rearm/refuel"....really would destroy the experience....More so, at what percentage do you say "repair" must be made?

Personally, I just don't see it being the record times set......and I know of very very few that will wait 30 minutes in their chair rather then hit refly or just call it quits.

you are thinking about the right kind of concerns, but most of those can be overcome or have already been addressed with what is happening in BoB (going by some of oleg's stements)

first to rearm, refuel or repair a plane, like many other issues in il2 already, there will be a compromise in perfectly copying the time it took in real life. currently hitting refly magically transports you instantly into a brand new plane when you respawn, yet 30 sec before that same base might have been raided by an enemy attack that distroyed all planes on the ground, or as a pilot you might have crash landed your plane or parachuted out 50 km away. i find that instant respawn more strange compared to having to wait for ex 2 min after landing at a frontline airbase to get some refueling done so i can return my plane back to its starting airbase.

if a plane is significantly damaged it would make no sense in taking off with it again after refueling at that same because it would not be competitive in battle,...but...

1) all you might need is a splash-and-dash of fuel from a forward RRR base to get your damaged bird back home for repairs (for your personal satisfaction of getting it back home, but also maybe so you can get the full points of the mission). if the plane is too damaged to even risk taking off again you would of course leave your plane there and hit refly (which might give you a little 30 sec video clip of you sitting in a truck or jeep and hitching a ride back to your home base, like it was in real life). you would then get a new plane from your home base again, if one was still available there.

2) if you would leave the damaged plane at a forward airbase that is within reach of the enemy then the repair time for that plane would make it vulnerable to complete destruction by the enemy while it is sitting there inactive on the ground, and this would result in your home squadron having one less plane available until a new supply arrives from the factory (many sims like mig alley already incorporate those type of game engine timing of resupply for fuel,planes etc.. and it is a major part of realism and immersion)

oleg has already stated (in the video interview) that one front line airbase can be captured by the enemy if a large part of its infrastructure is destroyed, and as a result the front line would shift. all you need to add to that is that each airfield only gets a resupply of new aircraft of a particular model at a specific rate. so if you bring your damaged aircraft back home you might in some situations not have any brand spanking new aircraft available (like it was in real life). you can still keep your instant refly option for those that want it, but it would then only offer you a brand new aircraft at other airfields.

i dont have the answers of exactly how to implement it, and i dont claim to, but we need something a bit more realistic that the magic instant refly tele-transporter we have now, and airfields shouldnt constantly have a magic unlimited number of new fighters appearing out of worm-holes after that same airfield has just been vaporised by enemy carpet bombing with 1000 pounders.

grifter2u
12-07-2006, 04:41 AM
and for those that still believe only perfectly rested pilots flew in perfectly maintained and refueld aircraft ......

from "Pearl Harbor hero pilot Taylor dies at 86" article in the Washington Post newspaper


After a night of poker and dancing at the officers' club at Wheeler 21-year-old Lt. Taylor and fellow pilot George Welch awoke to the sound of planes flying low, machine-gun fire and explosions. They learned that two-thirds of the U.S. aircraft at the main bases of Hickam and Wheeler fields were demolished or unable to fly. They quickly dressed and, while Welch ran to get Lt. Taylor's new Buick, Lt. Taylor, without orders, called Haleiwa and commanded the ground crews to get two P-40 fighters armed and ready for takeoff.

Strafed by Japanese aircraft, the pair sped 10 miles from Honolulu to Haleiwa. At the airstrip, they climbed into their fighters, which were fueled but not fully armed, took off and soon attracted fire from the Japanese, who had not expected to be challenged in the air.

Soon out of ammunition, Welch and Lt. Taylor landed at Wheeler to rearm. Senior officers ordered them to stay on the ground.

"He had been wounded by that point and was bleeding," said Lt. Taylor's son, retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Kenneth Taylor Jr. "But while ground crews were rearming the planes, and he was being lectured on his behavior, the Japanese attacked Wheeler again. That scattered the crowd, and (Lt. Taylor and Welch) took off. My dad actually hit some ammo carts as he was taking off and fired his guns before he was off the ground."

His father told the Army Times in 2001: "I took off right toward them, which gave me the ability to shoot at them before I even left the ground. I got behind one of them and started shooting again. The only thing I didn't know at that time was that I got in the middle of the line rather than the end. There was somebody on my tail.

"They put a bullet right behind my head through the canopy and into the trim tab inside. So I got a little bit of shrapnel in my leg and through the arm. It was of no consequence; it just scared the hell out of me for a minute."

Official records credit Lt. Taylor with two kills. His son noted that his father thought he had two more, although in the heat of the battle he didn't see the planes hit the ground, and potential witnesses were too busy to keep track.

Welch was credited with four downed Japanese planes. American aircraft losses were estimated at 188 destroyed and 159 damaged, and the Japanese lost 29 planes.

speaks for itself really, a perfect example of the fog of war in real life. we need some options and features that get us closer to that experience.

Chuck_Older
12-07-2006, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by GerritJ9:
Chuck, I accept that because of differences in the wings, rearming MAY take a bit longer for a Spitfire- but NOT a 17 minute difference! "Rearming" would consist of changing the ammo boxes and recharging the guns, NOT swapping the eight 303s for a set of new ones! If you swap the guns for a set of new ones, you would probably also have to harmonize them, and there is NO WAY you could do the changing and harmonizing in 9 minutes!
Replenishing the oxygen is simply a matter of taking the old ones out and fitting new bottles. I built the Airfix 1:24 Spitfire ages ago, and from memory the oxygen bottles were located right behind the pilot's seat; never built the 1:24 Hurricane, but I would think that the oxygen bottles are in a similar location on the Hurricane, so figure the same amount of time for changing them on both planes.
Bottom line is, that discrepancy of those times for rearming Hurricane (9 minutes)and Spitfire (27 minutes) simply does not stand up to close scrutiny. As I said, it's probably some sort of propaganda being spouted by the Hurricane wallahs.

According to contemporary RAF reports, during the Battle of Britian the Spit took nearly twice as long to re-arm, re-fuel, and re-plenish oxygen, about 20 minutes for a Spit, about 11 minutes for a Hurri. When I get home tonight, I will find a quote for you if you like http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Chivas
12-07-2006, 12:47 PM
I could care less at how long it actually took to rearm, and refuel. I just want to increase the immersion level by having more activity around the base depicting actions that actually happened. Why would anyone care how long I set the time interval for RR in the privacy of my own home.
If we were lucky enough to have a server option they fly on the server that suits your sensiblilities. Just like we do now for open and closed pit.

~Salute~
Chivas<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

Lodovik
12-07-2006, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
A completly forgotten concern is re-plenishing oxygen
True, that, though I think this would not take too long of a time as it's a matter of unscrewing the depleted oxy container and screwing in the new prefilled one. Have to do some checking on the subject.


I and others have mentioned a system in which a plyer lands aircaft Yellow 9, a Bf 109E, and that plane is immediately in queue for RRR. The player however, can now choose any available plane from a pool of 'ready' aircraft, if any exist
A commendable idea. It could be extended a bit with having a pool of 'ready pilots' as well. The player could choose to change into fresh pilot avatar as well as a plane or keep using the same pilot.
The benefit of the pilot switch would be that the new pilot would be rested and able to apply full stick force, whereas the weary pilot would have a penalty in stick force and G force resistance. So it would be a players tactical choice between depleting the pilot pool and flying with reduced effectiveness.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<<The 20 mm cannons built by the tender hands of Komsomol girls' volunteer workers corps played their deadly masurkah.
Octobriana pulled her LA-7 up and away as another of the Rodinas' enemies fell screaming to his doom.>>

Chuck_Older
12-07-2006, 03:12 PM
Originally posted by Chivas:
I could care less at how long it actually took to rearm, and refuel. I just want to increase the immersion level by having more activity around the base depicting actions that actually happened. Why would anyone care how long I set the time interval for RR in the privacy of my own home.
If we were lucky enough to have a server option they fly on the server that suits your sensiblilities. Just like we do now for open and closed pit.

~Salute~
Chivas

You might care, because if you're managing a squadron fighting on a particular day that the Luftwaffe sends out a feint raid, and you take the bait, then when your planes are at the limit of their endurance, a real raid overflies London, you might want to be able to know how long it will take to get the squadron in ops again http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Likewise, if you're playign as a German, the tactic of luring the RAF up to sap their endurance and hit a bombing target while they are on the ground would be a viable tatic- if there is no RRR time, and all planes just have to land, and become instantly "fresh", no downtime, that give the Luftwaffe a horrible disadvantage that they never really had to face, and the RAF a great benefit that is unrealistic

In FB, we can basically play air-quake with resources in a campaign. In BoB, we may very well find that we have to think tactically and strategically in the comfort of our own homes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chuck_Older
12-07-2006, 03:12 PM
Interesting read:

"Little Friends, the fighter pilot experience in WWII England"
ISBN 0-394-58434-1

page 47, quote:

In the interminable over the relative merits of the Spitfire versus Hurricane, only the viewpoints of the pilots who flew them are normally considered. Eric Marsden, 145 (Hurricane) Squadron fitter, has an interesting perspective. "If we'd had nothing but Spits we'd have lost the fight in 1940. The turnaround time on the ground was so poor that Jerry couldn't have failed to get us. The Spit I and II took twenty-six minutes to turn around, comapred to a Hurri's nine minutes [this is even faster than I had recollected~Chuck] ...that is, complete service- rearm, refuel, and replensih oxgen- from down to up again"

LEXX_Luthor
12-07-2006, 05:25 PM
Chivas::
I could care less at how long it actually took to rearm, and refuel. I just want to increase the immersion level by having more activity around the base depicting actions that actually happened. Why would anyone care how long I set the time interval for RR in the privacy of my own home.
You do care, which is why you as Oleg's paying customer, are asking for ReFuel and ReArm and the ability to do it as you wish.

I mainly want a *simple* ReArm and ReFuel for the player to -- optionally -- enforce during gameplay a waiting time for refit in handcrafted and extended "fun" single missions (not campaigns) that immerse the player in the dangers that can materialize in a much larger air battle beyond the player's cockpit. No ground crew grafix needed (we disagree here) -- just the vulnerable wait for refit on the airfield or carrier deck and the Panic and fear that you feel when you see you might get caught on the ground or on deck before you can refit and take off. This happened to alot of pilots in WW2, getting caught on the ground or deck, so at least that part is "historical" and the most important part.

However, for use in the so-called "historical" campaigns, the ReFuel and ReArm idea might need alot more programming so the AI may partake of the feature and not just the player. The campaign's outcome should depend on all the AI flying in the campaign, and so some of the AI too should refit -- some -- like AI Bf-109s defending Germany but not AI P-51s flying from off-map England. This is infinitely more work for the sim developer to do than enabling simple "player only" refit for single missions, with no ground crew grafix, that I enjoyed when playing the old Suhkoi Flaker sim. So that's all I ask for now.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

grifter2u
12-07-2006, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Interesting read:

"Little Friends, the fighter pilot experience in WWII England"
ISBN 0-394-58434-1

page 47, quote:

In the interminable over the relative merits of the Spitfire versus Hurricane, only the viewpoints of the pilots who flew them are normally considered. Eric Marsden, 145 (Hurricane) Squadron fitter, has an interesting perspective. "If we'd had nothing but Spits we'd have lost the fight in 1940. The turnaround time on the ground was so poor that Jerry couldn't have failed to get us. The Spit I and II took twenty-six minutes to turn around, comapred to a Hurri's nine minutes [this is even faster than I had recollected~Chuck] ...that is, complete service- rearm, refuel, and replensih oxgen- from down to up again"

an excellent reference there, thx for looking it up !

note that the timing he gives is for "down to up again", i wonder if that is from touchdown to takeoff, or from stand-still at the pitcrew area to taxi for takeoff ?



somebody previously mentioned the usefull thought that on landing with your aircraft at an airfield you might have an option on how to proceed , rather than the simple instant worm-hole respawn of a factory fresh new aircraft at any airfield on the map. maybe we could have various options like...

1) go to debriefing hut to view the map on the wall showing friendly/enemy formations (this could include a margin for error as it had in real life), get updated radar and weather information, see success failure state of your last mission and dead/mia/returned-to-base info on your squad mates etc... (this could be kept simple, or could be increased in complexety as BoB-SoW evolves over the years). while you do this your aircraft clock is ticking and it is getting refueled and rearmed etc..

2) choose to spawn to other aircraft at same airbase: and you would see a short list of what is available at that airfield at that time, like..
a) brand new hurricane/spitfire (if those were stationed at that airfield, and not all are on sorties by other pilots etc..)
b) partially refueled/rearmed/repaired aircraft standing at that field that other people landed and abandoned ( a fully refueled but only partially repaired a20 might be sitting there for ex). this could then be used for a mission, or some people might choose to simply refly it to its normal home base to it is available there for.
c) there might be aircraft available, but all fuel storage depots at that field might recently have been destroyed so there is no fuel. you might need to wait a number of minutes before fuel is again available at that base, based on a resupply cycle (like it was in real life)
d) choose the "transit back to home base" option, and you get a shor animation of sitting in a truck/jeep for 30 sec while returning to your home base and choose an aircraft there.
e) while your aicraft is being refueled/repaired etc, you could man the flak guns at that airfield for a few min (as oleg already stated will be possible)
f) you could choose to let your pilot rest and recover for a number of minutes (people go fix a drink or sandwich meanwhile, like they do in RL when people fly for many hrs online, i am sure many of you have done this). 3 or 4 min later you return and your il2 pilot might be completely refreshed and rejuvenated (note oleg has hinted at already including pilot fatigue in BoB, and if he does this type of extra feature would be easy to implement). also if your pilot is in that "rest and recover" phase, when your airbase gets raided you might be forced to take off by your CO (like it was in real life) and be subject to added fatigue and reduced fighting ability, or be vulnerable to getting killed in your hut while asleep etc. note that in RL many pilots did partially recover from their fatigue while flying home to their bases if that part of the flight was uneventful, and if pilots saw little action during their previous flight the fatigue issue might not be relevant and should not be over modeled either.

those are just some thoughts, but a simple variation of the above significantly increases realism and immersion.with a little lateral thinking and knowledge of how events happened in RL, we can significantly improve BoB and improve simulating what happened in real life.

this thread is focussed on how to implement RRR in il2, and see how it was used in real life so we can implement it to increase realism and immersion, but .... for those that lack imagination it might be worth to look at the broader picture of how we can simulate a pilots experience in BoB.

personally i would also like to see pilot rescue missions, where for ex a pilot ejected over enemy territory, and you have a few minutes spare for other pilots in the area to land close to him, stand stationary for 30 sec, then take off again with the resqued pilot.

similarly, with the above "refly options" , some people might choose to shuttle aircrafts back to their home bases to make them available again to their squad mates, or choose to fly unarmed/lightly-armed planes to shuttle pilots back to their home bases. dont disregard this lightly, adding minor things like that can make a big difference in a well designed sim.

those types of features would take very little programming time and resources to add in while the game in being developed, as long as they take account of it during the development phase. it might not be fully implemented in the initial BoB release, but if included in the code from early on, it suddenly becomes possible later on with little effort.

the "game engine" basically needs:
1) a time based resupply of new materials, like new planes, fuel, munitions to airfields. in some 6 year old sims (like mig alley) you can even target those supply lines (modeled as moving collums of trucks, trains etc that move in real time from point A to point B), and your degree of success in targeting those supply lines directly affects the combat readiness of airbases and the strenght of defense lines on the frontline map.
2) a time based cycle for refueling, rearming planes etc, and a fatigue and recovery rate of pilots.
3) destruction and resupply of new materials need to be maintained in the game, so if you crash land and totally destroy a plane on the runway the wreck needs to stay for a period of time. similarly when an aircraft is landed at a particular base, that is where that aircraft stays for a period of time before it is transplanted back to its home base by "shuttle pilots", like it was in real life. similarly if all the fuel storage at one airfield is destroyed, than that airfield has no fuel availble for a fixed period of time, untill it gets a fresh supply etc...

variations on the above can be implemented for single missions offline/coop/campaign/online servers etc... it wount be a one size fits all solution.

JamesBlonde888
12-07-2006, 10:44 PM
Nice thread grifter.

I would just have the a/c taxi to a point on the airfield (Most likely the fuel tanks) and then have a dice rolling type thing to determine how long it takes to refuel and re-arm. The parameters being +or- 5 minutes on some historical average.

Of course if the enemy has hit the tanks there would be no refuel and rearm.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y237/JamesBlonde/newsig.bmp
3) Shouts 'Bleiben Sie auf Kürs du kükuk!' when a family member detaches itself from the shopping formation.
http://www.freewebs.com/jamesblonde888/

(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination


Die lezte

Chivas
12-08-2006, 01:41 AM
Oleg mentioned in another forum,,

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Chivas:
Hello Oleg

With the skeleton technology almost ready, could that mean some ground crew animations in BOB or future Storm of War additions?

~Salute~
Chivas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, you right. It is General plan that will depends only of our involment in other works
and general loads of team.
-----------------------------------------------


This is good news for possible ground crew
animations that could depict starting, rearming and refueling at some point in the SOW series.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

slipBall
12-09-2006, 04:47 AM
Originally posted by Chivas:
Oleg mentioned in another forum,,

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Chivas:
Hello Oleg

With the skeleton technology almost ready, could that mean some ground crew animations in BOB or future Storm of War additions?

~Salute~
Chivas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, you right. It is General plan that will depends only of our involment in other works
and general loads of team.
-----------------------------------------------


This is good news for possible ground crew
animations that could depict starting, rearming and refueling at some point in the SOW series.


Yes, I was very excited about this....I took the liberty of posting your question..and Oleg's answer, that I read over at simHQ....it looks like we will have a ground crew...sooner, rather than later http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f394/SlipBall/orders.jpg

WTE_Ibis
12-11-2006, 02:00 AM
A small point that I would like included is the ability for external view prior to takeoff
on full real.
The pilots in real life knew the airfield and its included runways buildings etc.
On spawning we are magically transported to a cockpit of an aircraft situated on an airstrip or apron that we have never seen before, not by any stretch of imagination is this situation any where near "real"
Small I know but maybe a walk to the aircraft or at least a plan of the layout before spawn.
Cheers.
ps. It would be cool to see the pilot next to you give the thumbs up as well.


.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

LStarosta: -That was the most entertaining thing I've read all day, granted I just woke up.

http://wte-anga.com
http://www.uploadit.org/gallery/12741
http://server6.uploadit.org/files/Ibissix-schmile.JPG
http://premium1.uploadit.org/Ibissix//sig.jpg
Join us or oppose us, either way MAKE MY DAY

http://wte-anga.com

Chivas
12-11-2006, 02:25 AM
Its an interesting idea, but I think with the fewer number of airfields, by the time we start flying full real we should know most of them quite well. It wouldn't hurt to have an overview screenshot of the base with appropriate dispersal and recovery zone marked, that we could check out before running/walking to our aircraft.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

grifter2u
12-12-2006, 12:26 AM
good point !

one option would be to provide a map view of the airfield you are on, and be able to print it out when you look at the mission/airfield briefing.

that combined with a real time view at the airfield (maybe from the control tower if BoB can only program a single fixed point of view for this), would be a good improvement.

DustyBarrels77
12-12-2006, 01:01 AM
disapearing with esc refly in .502 of a second when being straffed or bombed by a bomber and magically appearing is much more realistic then a quickened refuel/rearm feature.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:M98REgPM-RPbEM:http://www.me-air-company.de/crash_gross/005.jpg

F16_Petter
12-14-2006, 12:24 AM
I dont understand what the fuzz is all about?
Why dont add it as a feature in the FMB.

Then the host could decide, and scale it to his/her own way.

At the base in the FMB, there would be an option to select "ROR" rate of rearm/refuel.

1.0 would be historical setting for plane type
2.0 would be double as fast for plane type
3.0 three times as fast.. etc.

Kind of like the ship AA today.. that you can scale..

It would however need some research to get the constant value for each aircraft type, regarding fuel tank size.. (time to refuel) weapon racks, ammodrums etc.

I would be happy if only the fuel was modeled though..

Its a nice thougt though... I hope the will add something similar!

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://flygflottilj16.se/img/banner/banner_small.jpg (http://flygflottilj16.se/)

Chuck_Older
12-14-2006, 07:10 AM
Well firstly, "the host" isn't used by offliners, so you just excluded half the players

and secondly, having it "in the fmb" doesn't take into account how it can be used in a dynamic campaign

Plelv44_Mangrov
12-22-2006, 03:31 AM
This is the same post as in General discussion. Turkin sota (Turkki's war, after it's planner, Major Reino Turkki) at 4th - 10th August 1950 was the FAF's first large war exercise after the WW2.

Two teams, HävLLv 31 and 33 (24 and 34 during the war) were the "good guys" and HävLLv 41 (42) was the enemy.

During the exercise test were performed to measure the effectiveness of the peace-time training.

"Test 1.

Four planes to be filled with ammunitions. Four privates are available, each one fills one plane. The ammunitions are 50 meters in front of the planes.
Result: Average time for each plane was circa 30 minutes and 30 seconds.

Test 2.

Two planes to be filled with ammunitions. Four privates are available, two privates per plane. The ammunitions are 5 meters behind the planes.
Result: Average time per one plane was now 11 minutes.

Test 3.

To remove a Mg-151 and left Mg-131 from the plane. Two privates are available.
Result: It took 18 minutes to remove Mg-151 from the plane and four minutes to remove Mg-131. Total of 22 minutes.

Test 4.

To reattach the weapons. Two privates are available (not the previous ones).
Result: It took 35 minutes to reattach the Mg-151. In reality it could have took much longer, but a helping hand was given. It took 11 minutes to reattach the Mg-131.

MT's during Turkki's war (http://www.kolumbus.fi/kari.stenman/2003_theme_12.html)

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/2418/untitledvy8.jpg

http://www.kolumbus.fi/kari.stenman/theme/2003_theme_12_04.jpg <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"No enemy plane will fly over the reich territory"
Herman Göing

LEXX_Luthor
12-23-2006, 04:53 PM
Thanks Petter. Having ReArm/ReFuel in the fmb implies the feature is available for dynamic campaign mission generators, as both FMB and dynamic campaign engines both use text mission files -- the mission creator creates the mission files, either by hand with FMB or through a programmed mission generator, such as the DCG that 3rd Party modder Lowengrin makes, if my assumption of how that mod works with mission generation is correct.

F16_Petter ::
Why dont add it as a feature in the FMB.

In other words, ReArm and ReFuel is not really an "fmb" feature but would be an added game feature such as bombing waypoints, takeoff/landing waypoints, or other game features that can be made easily visible and worked with in the FMB tool, but do *not* require the FMB to be used by the game. The Offline campaign players would find this extremely immersive -- to a point -- until sim developers also program the AI to refit and fly newly generated flights within a game run, and not just the player plane. This would be a huge programming task but also a significant advance in combat flight simulation.

For now, I would be happy with just player plane refitting for some uses such as the mission sculptor designing extended fun and immersive missions around this more simplified, and far more easy to add, feature.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

grifter2u
12-23-2006, 05:49 PM
Plelv44_Mangrov

thanks for posting that info here.


gents,

Mangrov's post gives the timing of rearming finish airforce 109's, and provides a nice comparison for the current info we already have for spitfires and hurricanes.

note that in "test 2" it says.. <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> Test 2.

Plelv44_Mangrov
12-24-2006, 01:55 AM
Originally posted by grifter2u:
afaik the RAF had at least 4 men assigned per plane for refueling and rearming, so in theory that 11 min for a 109 could be cut in half. in practise this might not work out that ideally, but it illustrates the point that the number of ground crew assigned per plane makes a major difference.

I am afraid I don't agree with you. The two men only rearmed the plane, they didn't refuel it or anything.

I'm not sure if FiAF used four men per plane for fuelling and arming, but the fastest time to rearm a Bf-109 is about 11 minutes with two men.

Or did you mean that RAF had four men to rearm the plane and other four men to refuel it? If that is the case I don't believe that the could be any faster since eight men per plane is too much, at least for a singe-engine aeroplane.

One must also remember that those were post-war crews with no "real" experience about their job.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"No enemy plane will fly over the reich territory"
Herman Göing

grifter2u
12-24-2006, 06:01 AM
Originally posted by Plelv44_Mangrov:
I am afraid I don't agree with you. The two men only rearmed the plane, they didn't refuel it or anything.

I'm not sure if FiAF used four men per plane for fuelling and arming, but the fastest time to rearm a Bf-109 is about 11 minutes with two men.

Or did you mean that RAF had four men to rearm the plane and other four men to refuel it? If that is the case I don't believe that the could be any faster since eight men per plane is too much, at least for a singe-engine aeroplane.

One must also remember that those were post-war crews with no "real" experience about their job.

Mangrov,
i think there might have misunderstood a little of what i said in english.

the 2 man 109 rearming you mentioned didnt say anything about refueling afaik, but a 109 has both a cannon and machine guns (you didnt specify what ammunition was being rearmed, so i presume they did both). you could in fact put 4 men on that same 109, and 2 do the machine gun rearming, and 2 do the canon rearming, this would make it faster than the current 11 min with 2 men which you provided info on. all that is rough speculation because i know little about the 109 rearming myself. all i know is that 2 men doing it in 11 min, it then could be faster with 4 men because there are different guns.

what i do know is that for a hurricane with Eight 0.303-in Browning machine guns in the wings, a crew of at least 4 was used for fast rearming during BoB, 2 men on each wing, and the ammo boxes were designed for easy access and fast replacing.

Four Browning 7.7 millimeter machine guns were mounted in single bay in each wing, firing outside the propeller arc. Elimination of the synchronizing gear needed for firing through a propeller arc both reduced weight and increased reliability. The guns were easily accessed for service and loading. The innermost gun in each wing had an ammunition box containing 338 rounds, while the next gun had 324 rounds, and the two outer guns 338 rounds each. Cyclic rate of fire of each gun was initially 1,100 rounds per minute, though this was later improved to 1,200 rounds per minute.
from FIGHTERS OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR by Charles W. Cain and Mike Jerram, Exeter Books, 1979.

the refueling was done by another 2 man crew afaik. i just ordered a dvd that has real historical footage of the rearming and refueling done during BoB, so i will get more information from that.

Bartolomeo_ita
12-25-2006, 02:37 PM
how do they simulate this stuff? I don't wanna land and read - wait 10 mins to rearm - ... - done - ...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________________
6S.Bart - www.diavolirossi.net (http://www.diavolirossi.net)

Cossack13
12-25-2006, 02:51 PM
If they do institute this option, all I ask is that they program it for the realistic amount of time based upon aircraft, crew, and supply status.

BfHeFwMe
12-25-2006, 04:45 PM
Is it actually continuity most of us are dreaming about. A continuous and on going connected battle, or at least mission.

Staying active in a coop or campaign with the ability to join one in progress is a worthy goal, got my vote. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Valencia, returning in his shot-up but airworthy Hellcat after his harrowing February 1944 mission over Truk, summed up the thoughts of many pilots about Hellcats: ?If they could cook, I?d marry one.?

grifter2u
12-25-2006, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by BfHeFwMe:
Is it actually continuity most of us are dreaming about. A continuous and on going connected battle, or at least mission.

Staying active in a coop or campaign with the ability to join one in progress is a worthy goal, got my vote. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

you have a good point there, that would be the ideal situation.

not to digress, but that is how i thought dynamic campaign engines worked in falcon-4. you have a central server running 24/7 and people can join on their own, or with a few friends. you then select the airfield you want to fly from, and see the progressive series of flights being tasked from that location. you then select one you want to participate in (the others being manned by AI if no humans choose them), and then fly your mission with other humans and/or AI's. all during that time other humans can join or leave the server. implementing this for BoB would be a major task, and i am not sure il2 has the resources to devote many man hours to a full dynamic campaign engine that covers the months of BoB.

currently for BoB we need at least improved game play functions like for ex:
- external inspection of your aircraft while on the ground, both after landing (to observe damage for ex) and as a preflight inspection.
- while aircraft is being refueled and rearmed, maybe visit the briefing room of that airfield and get radar information of enemy/friendly formations, and the location of the rest of your squadron.
- airfields where squadrons are based should get regular AI flights of new aircraft arriving, to resupply the lost ones. maybe a few transport planes occasionally landing with supplies or new pilots etc.. (whatever way that was done in real life)
- airfields should have the option on/off to have a degree of "life" in them. there should be the odd jeep or refueling truck driving around the airfield, an ambulance or fire truck driving to the end of the landing strip when a damaged aircraft comes in maybe (initiating the "clear runway for damaged plane coming in to land" type command could activate that little subroutine.
- small groups of trucks entering/leaving airfields with supplies. easy to do already, those little convoys could leave from local towns/cities at various timed intervals (for ex exiting the factory buildings we already have in il2), and make a pre-planed journey allong existing roads to a local airfield. destroying those convoys could also affect the combat status of the airfield they are supplying (that last part is a little more complex, but you get the idea).
- some civilian cars/buses on country roads. this could already be done without much programming. in the same way you already can create mission maps with military trucks/trains/convoys, you should be able to add civilian moving ground objects. if you shoot them up by mistake you would get a msg of "-30 points for killing civilians in car" etc.. the MAIN reason this type of feature is useful is because suddenly as a pilot you have to make sure you positively identify a target before engaging it, just like you had to in real life ! that makes things harder, but also more realistic.

the above examples i gave are just some general thoughts, dont get to exited if somebody doesnt "like" them, but each of those take minimal programing to implement in the way that i described, and would make a MAJOR difference in suddenly having a living world you fly in, immersions would be much greater. remember Oleg is already talking about adding in flights of birds etc... so he is thinking in that direction already.

grifter2u
12-25-2006, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by Cossack13:
If they do institute this option, all I ask is that they program it for the realistic amount of time based upon aircraft, crew, and supply status.

yes, realism and correct times would be the aim, but ...

be aware that already now there are some compromises, yet people seem to happily accept those, such as..
- you can currently land your badly damaged plane at a completely destroyed airfield and instantly respawn in a brand new aircraft with full fuel and weapons.yet in real life there might not have been any intact aircraft available, or fuel and ammunitions might have been destroyed.
- when you change your default weapon status from the plane you have chosen, for ex to arm it with rockets or bombs, this seems to happen instantly yet in real life it might have taken 10 or 20 minutes, maybe even more.
- when you crash land your airplane in a field or other base, you hit refly and are instantly tele-transported back to your original airbase.
- when you decide to change home base (bec it is being vulched or for other reasons), you again instantly can switch bases without time penalty.

etc... there are many other examples.

one way to deal with this is that the option could be set by the server host, as either "realistic" (for ex 11 min to rearm a 109 as discussed before), or "accelerated" which for the same plane now suddenly is only 3 min for ex.

the purpose is to add realism, and to simulate more closely what really happened in ww2 and the BoB period, and it would be as an OPTION. so people who believe real aircraft during BoB where never refueled and rearmed can choose to fly the Borg version instead and pretend perfectly new aircraft instantly are teletransported out of worm holes wherever and whenever needed.

Cossack13
12-25-2006, 07:15 PM
Originally posted by grifter2u:
yes, realism and correct times would be the aim, but ...

be aware that already now there are some compromises, yet people seem to happily accept those, such as..
- you can currently land your badly damaged plane at a completely destroyed airfield and instantly respawn in a brand new aircraft with full fuel and weapons.
In a DF Server, yes, but not in a Coop!

If this option is dragged into the Coop realm, allowing unrealistic rearm times would turn them into Air Quake. A very bad move.

grifter2u
12-25-2006, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by Cossack13:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by grifter2u:
yes, realism and correct times would be the aim, but ...

be aware that already now there are some compromises, yet people seem to happily accept those, such as..
- you can currently land your badly damaged plane at a completely destroyed airfield and instantly respawn in a brand new aircraft with full fuel and weapons.
In a DF Server, yes, but not in a Coop!

If this option is dragged into the Coop realm, allowing unrealistic rearm times would turn them into Air Quake. A very bad move. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that is not a concern but has to be looked at how best to implement. similar to being already able to set other options for the coop server, you should also be able to set ...
- allow rearm/refuel at friendly airbases: on/off
- set rearm/refuel timing: realistic/accelerated

folks we dont want to remove anything, we want to ADD options and improve realism.

Stackhouse25th
12-31-2006, 10:56 PM
always interesting when the mods decide to lock a topic rather than ban the users who start the disruption. maybe the mods will delete their obnoxious discussion and revive the thread and merge the two.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

VFA-25 C/O

Skoshi Tiger
12-31-2006, 11:19 PM
To be able to rearm you would need the proper facilities (ground crew, fuel and ammo trucks etc), to do so. To be fair these facilities would have to be targetable.

Can you imagine the whining and complaining and how often people would be called 'cheat' just for doing the tactically sensible thing of taking out these facilities before the opposition gets to use them!

Just for this single reason I think it NEEDS to be included in BoB! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-02-2007, 05:23 AM
Skoshi Tiger::
To be able to rearm you would need the proper facilities (ground crew, fuel and ammo trucks etc), to do so. To be fair these facilities would have to be targetable.
To start your engine in Forgotten Battles, you need fully modelled animated 3D ground crew and starter trucks.

But you don't have them, so you must uninstall your Forgotten Battles.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

grifter2u
01-03-2007, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by Skoshi Tiger:these facilities would have to be targetable
To be able to rearm you would need the proper facilities (ground crew, fuel and ammo trucks etc), to do so. To be fair these facilities would have to be targetable.

Can you imagine the whining and complaining and how often people would be called 'cheat' just for doing the tactically sensible thing of taking out these facilities before the opposition gets to use them!

Just for this single reason I think it NEEDS to be included in BoB! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

yes i agree, these facilities would have to be targetable ! and distrying them would make them unusable.

the ground crew, fuel and ammo trucks dont need to be animated however, it could just be static objecs you taxi up to. many english airfields were squadrons were based had individual parking spots for most of their fighter aircraft, surrounded by blast walls. given that a 500 pound bomb often only had a 40 meter blast radius in ww2, the enemy would have to be fairly accurate in targeting specific ground based aircraft (compared to the very weak bunkers that were just added to '46). fuel and ammo storage would often be more centrally located, and targeting those should make that airfield unable to re-arm and re-fuel for a period of time (till the airfield gets repaired or resupplied). repeated accurate bombing could keep an airfield shut down, just like it did in real life.



Lexx Luthor,

i think you misunderstood what he was saying

grifter2u
01-28-2007, 02:26 AM
bumpsy bumpsy

shame we lost some good posts on this topic, because of the ubi forum crash.

DmdSeeker
01-28-2007, 04:56 AM
Aces High had re-arm last time I flew it; and it worked well.

in the main arenas (AH's version of a DF server) it's popular amongst the stat freaks as they can argue about killing streaks; and in the scenario servers (AH's co-op) it's been used to great effect in BoB scenario's I've flown in as well as Battle of the Reich missions.