PDA

View Full Version : New IJ Aircraft Screenshots at RRG!



Fox_3
08-07-2006, 06:20 AM
Looking good!

http://rrgstudios.com/

Fox_3
08-07-2006, 06:20 AM
Looking good!

http://rrgstudios.com/

ForkTailedDevil
08-07-2006, 06:28 AM
Too bad we can't fly the A5M4.

MEGILE
08-07-2006, 07:02 AM
I hope the Jill is flyable http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

JG53Frankyboy
08-07-2006, 07:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
I hope the Jill is flyable http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% not...............

MEGILE
08-07-2006, 07:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
I hope the Jill is flyable http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% not............... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Jeeze Franky.. you really know how to let a dude down gently

269GA-Veltro
08-07-2006, 08:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ForkTailedDevil:
Too bad we can't fly the A5M4. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree.....really too bad. I'd prefer the Claude to the Ki-27, and sincerly i really don't understand this decision...as for a lot of others.

The A5M4 model looks also great....much better than the Ki-27.

http://rrgstudios.com/img/manchu/20_full.jpg

EJGrOst_Caspar
08-07-2006, 08:22 AM
I disagree. Both models look very fine.

If you mean the design itself... boh, I couldn't choose. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

JG53Frankyboy
08-07-2006, 08:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 269GA-Veltro:
Agree.....really too bad. I'd prefer the Claude to the Ki-27, and sincerly i really don't understand this decision...as for a lot of others.

The A5M4 model looks also great....much better than the Ki-27.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

at least for the Ki-27 we have some maps to fly them historical.
the only one i can imagine for the A5M is the Coral Sea, AFAIK the Shoho had some A5M on board.
and yes, i know that often wasnt important in the past.........

VW-IceFire
08-07-2006, 08:36 AM
There may not be sufficient cockpit references for the A5M to make it flyable. That seems to be the overriding issue with making things flyable.

I can't wait to setup some online scenarios with the Ki-27 against I-153 and so forth.

JG53Frankyboy
08-07-2006, 08:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
There may not be sufficient cockpit references for the A5M to make it flyable. That seems to be the overriding issue with making things flyable.

............ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that was it propably in the past - but now its normaly the lacking manpower/time............

269GA-Veltro
08-07-2006, 08:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
There may not be sufficient cockpit references for the A5M to make it flyable. That seems to be the overriding issue with making things flyable.

............ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that was it propably in the past - but now its normaly the lacking manpower/time............ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...and wrong or/and strange decision.

The cockpit references is a old story, but for some aicrafts (like the Kate for ex.), we should be able to find however a solution to make it fliable...but i'm afraid that 3 cockpits for 3 different aircrafts, are better than 3 cockpits for one only aircraft. Tenzan and Kate would have been a great addition for the IL2 serie and a decisive addition for PF, also with the same cockpits...also if not 100% historicall.

Yes lacking manpower/time for sure, but also wrong decisions...at least for my point of view.

LEBillfish
08-07-2006, 08:55 AM
The A5m did not get near the use that I have found (though in fairness I study Japanese Army history not Navy) as compared to the Ki-27. When you speak of early pacific, china and S.E. Asia activity, most often it was Ki-27's that were encountered as by the time things really began hopping the A6M2 was in use.

Until the advent of the Ki-43, the Ki-27 was the primary fighter of the Japanese Army, it's combat life extending far into 1942, wherein the A5M was essentially out of the picture by 1940 I believe though was used in Kamikaze actions late in the war.

As to comparative production numbers and combat hours I can't say............Yet do find it a pity being it is slated as AI even though it has been around with us for some time on the developers boards.......Info on it to make any model or cockpit is as rich as the Ki-27 to be sure.

(Now where's that flyable G3m, Ki-21, Ki-48?.......Sigh, so much kewl stuff we'll never see sadly)

JG53Frankyboy
08-07-2006, 08:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 269GA-Veltro:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
There may not be sufficient cockpit references for the A5M to make it flyable. That seems to be the overriding issue with making things flyable.

............ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that was it propably in the past - but now its normaly the lacking manpower/time............ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...and wrong or/and strange decision.

The cockpit references is a old story, but for some aicrafts (like the Kate for ex.), we should be able to find however a solution to make it fliable...but i'm afraid that 3 cockpits for 3 different aircrafts, are better than 3 cockpits for one only aircraft. Tenzan and Kate would have been a great addition for the IL2 serie, also with the same cockpits...also if not 100% historicall.

Yes lacking manpower/time for sure, but also wrong decision...at least for me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

a flyable japanese carrierbased bomber without an US one ?
go figure http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

DIRTY-MAC
08-07-2006, 08:55 AM
and Chinese Gladiators

Tater-SW-
08-07-2006, 09:10 AM
1379 Ki-27(a and b) built vs 1094 A5Ms (all types).

The Ki-27 is a far far better choice than the A5M if only 1 had to be chosen. One, there were more built. Two, far more Ki-27s saw combat than A5Ms during the war. Three, the combat they saw was from land bases, and PF doesn't do CV ops very well at all, so land planes are always more useful, IMO.

tater

269GA-Veltro
08-07-2006, 09:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 269GA-Veltro:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
There may not be sufficient cockpit references for the A5M to make it flyable. That seems to be the overriding issue with making things flyable.

............ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that was it propably in the past - but now its normaly the lacking manpower/time............ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...and wrong or/and strange decision.

The cockpit references is a old story, but for some aicrafts (like the Kate for ex.), we should be able to find however a solution to make it fliable...but i'm afraid that 3 cockpits for 3 different aircrafts, are better than 3 cockpits for one only aircraft. Tenzan and Kate would have been a great addition for the IL2 serie, also with the same cockpits...also if not 100% historicall.

Yes lacking manpower/time for sure, but also wrong decision...at least for me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

a flyable japanese carrierbased bomber without an US one ?
go figure http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ho my God, don't tell me about it....i remember very well that incredible statement..."If we couldn't have the american torpedos, we'll never have the japanese torpedos...forget them!". A decisive wrong decision...at least for my opinion.

About the Claude and the Ki-27, i'm sorry but i don't have any interest in the Manchuria addon, but i like the Claude design. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Chuck_Older
08-07-2006, 10:29 AM
I can almost see that type 97 in my gunsights now

LEBillfish
08-07-2006, 11:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
I can almost see that type 97 in my gunsights now </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Hehe...you're doomed no matter if you meant fighter or bomber....
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

xTHRUDx
08-07-2006, 12:35 PM
i need that a-20c. it was used in the ETO and espescialy MTO. the maps that may come with the addon might be able to be used as stand-ins for other areas.

Ernst_Rohr
08-07-2006, 12:36 PM
The fun part is that the IJA pilots complained about the Ki-43's POOR maneuverability compared to the Ki-27. THAT is going to be interesting to fly! The whole Ki-27 vs I-16 thing is going to be pretty interesting as well.

I am really looking forward to this one!

BTW:
A5M was used in coastal and southern China, but he campaigns there were pretty brief, as the IJN outnumbered and definately outclassed what was left of the Chinese navy. A5M had a few months of combat operations, where it completely outperformed its opponents. As the Japanese pressed in from the coast, the show was all IJA, and the IJN operational used of the A5M ceased.

A5Ms continued in service as naval trainers however, and served for quite some time before they were replaced by A6M's. As the war ground on, the A5M's were brought back into service as trainers again, and as kamikaze aircraft.

Ki-27's on the other hand were in continous service and operations for a considerable period of time. From 38 on, the 27 was a workhorse, and even after the Ki-43 supposedly replaced it, the 27 soldiered on as a 2nd line fighter, light ground attack bomber, and as a fighter trainer. It remained the IJA's most deployed AC all through 41 and it wasnt replaced as in all units until much later in the war. Some 2nd line and reserve units had operational Ki-27's until 1944, mostly as spotter and relay aircraft.

Plus, the Ki-27 operated in every theatre of the war vs. the A5M's limited operational deployment along the Chinese coast.

I think it would be more appropriate to get the pits and flyble versions of the bombers in over the A5M, even though I like the plane. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chuck_Older
08-07-2006, 01:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
I can almost see that type 97 in my gunsights now </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Hehe...you're doomed no matter if you meant fighter or bomber....
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Doomed? Low six on the bomber, don't dogfight the fighter. You only need one pass per plane if your aim is good enough http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

JG53Frankyboy
08-07-2006, 01:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ernst_Rohr:
The fun part is that the IJA pilots complained about the Ki-43's POOR maneuverability compared to the Ki-27. THAT is going to be interesting to fly! The whole Ki-27 vs I-16 thing is going to be pretty interesting as well.

............. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the soviet SchKas and the roughness of the Polikarpov fighters will give the Ki-27 a lot of proplems.............

Ernst_Rohr
08-07-2006, 01:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">quote:
Originally posted by Ernst_Rohr:
The fun part is that the IJA pilots complained about the Ki-43's POOR maneuverability compared to the Ki-27. THAT is going to be interesting to fly! The whole Ki-27 vs I-16 thing is going to be pretty interesting as well.

.............



the soviet SchKas and the roughness of the Polikarpov fighters will give the Ki-27 a lot of proplems............. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


True, but at the same time, the fighters of the period were using rifle caliber MG's, the I-16s24 being the only notable exception, and even then it wasnt the predominant type during the Russo-Japanese scrum in 39. Plus, the Ki-27 was supposed to be a very pleasant plane to fly and the I-16 is anything but.

I think a good pilot in and I-16 will do well, but the average pilot is going to have his/her hands pretty full against an even more nimble Ki-27.

Chuck_Older
08-07-2006, 01:53 PM
Tex Hill thought flying a Ki-27 was unpleasant. Of course, he's very tall, and the throttle works backwards on the plane

JG53Frankyboy
08-07-2006, 01:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ernst_Rohr:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">quote:
Originally posted by Ernst_Rohr:
The fun part is that the IJA pilots complained about the Ki-43's POOR maneuverability compared to the Ki-27. THAT is going to be interesting to fly! The whole Ki-27 vs I-16 thing is going to be pretty interesting as well.

.............



the soviet SchKas and the roughness of the Polikarpov fighters will give the Ki-27 a lot of proplems............. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


True, but at the same time, the fighters of the period were using rifle caliber MG's, the I-16s24 being the only notable exception, and even then it wasnt the predominant type during the Russo-Japanese scrum in 39. Plus, the Ki-27 was supposed to be a very pleasant plane to fly and the I-16 is anything but.

I think a good pilot in and I-16 will do well, but the average pilot is going to have his/her hands pretty full against an even more nimble Ki-27. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i just build some Nomonhan like missions some weeks ago, as it was sure that the Ki27 would become flayable but not 100% sure that a Nomonhan map would come.

so i build a small COOP campaign, where i used Ki-43-Ia as a placeholder - fast to replace with the Ki27 when it would be released.

in the AI tests, the Oscars get slaughtered from the Polikarpovs - of 153 or 16 (sure only Schkas weapons)......
fortunatly the SB2 are also easy targets , well burning, for the Typ89 machine guns

Haigotron
08-07-2006, 02:13 PM
All right, gorgeous models, absolutely great http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I love Japanese warbirds!

DIRTY-MAC
08-07-2006, 02:17 PM
you can do very interesting cenarios with the Japanese Ki27s and Ki43s against a whole bunch of Chinese aircraft with many of the planes we have as substitute for some of the Chinese planes, they had alot of different odd types,



Before the Tigers: China€s Air Forces in the Struggle Against Japan

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

Most popular accounts make it sound as if WW2 erupted suddenly in the fall of 1939. But, one can easily argue that the war began several years earlier, in 1931, in China. This article focuses on Chinese aerial resistance to Japan. But before we can understand the hodgepodge of equipment that makes the Chinese air force so interesting to the modeler and historian, we need a little background on China€s turbulent history during the first half of this century.

China became a nominal republic in 1912, when Sun Yat-sen€s Kuomintang (Nationalist Party) deposed the last Manchu emperor. But the country€s most prosperous, mercantile cities remained de facto foreign colonies. Shanghai€s International Quarter was actually a European city within a city, guarded by French and German legation guards and British, Japanese, and American Marines. The hinterland was ruled in feudal fashion by independent warlords, renegade Imperial or republican generals, wealthy landowners, or simple adventurers who exercised absolute powers of life and death over their subjects. Much of their time was spent in wars and conspiracies against rival warlords, so European-equipped and led private armies were everywhere. Sun Yat-sen, dependent entirely on the former Imperial army for defence, found himself all but powerless. He was forced into alliances with various warlords and lost control of the government he had been elected to lead.

Sun Yat-sen had one powerful ally, however: Lenin. At a time when all the Western powers were backing Japan and expanding their colonies, Soviet Russia renounced Tsarist-era territorial concessions and returned Chinese land. The Soviets supplied arms and advisers to Sun Yat-sen€s movement and set up a military academy under €œGalen,€ General Vasili Bluecher, and political commissar Mikhail Borodin. Promising Chinese army officers like Chiang Kai-shek were sent to Moscow for advanced training. Soon, the Kuomintang was able to secure a base of operations in Canton and, under the leadership of Sun Yat-sen€s Moscow-sponsored successor, Chiang, launched the Northern Expedition that would, by 1927, subjugate all warlords south of the Yangtze river.

In the 1920s, meanwhile, ultra-right, militarist factions came to dominate the Imperial Japanese Army. They saw their mission as conquest: Japan would establish a vast €œEast Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere€ that would drive out the Europeans and set Asians to their destined work, supplying labor and raw materials for Greater Japan. Resource-rich Manchuria and Mongolia were to be the initial targets of this great expansion.

Thirty-five years of effort had produced substantial gains by 1930. The Japanese had gained a foothold in China in the one-sided Sino-Japanese War of 1895, when China ceded Formosa (now Taiwan) and Koreato the Emperor's government. The Russo-Japanese War built on this success by winning control over the Russian naval base at Port Arthur and the Russian railroads in southern Manchuria. The Versailles Peace Conference rewarded Japan's wartime military and naval service with additional territory in China. The German colonies were awarded to Japan, in spite of the fact that China had itself sided with the Allies. Japan greatly expanded these holdings using anti-Bolshevism as cover. Japan's forces in Russian East Asia were by far the largest to join the Allied intervention.

In 1931, the generals decided that it was time to complete this slow takeover of north China. When some track was conveniently blown up along a Japanese-owned rail line near the Japanese garrison at Mukden, Japan's Korea-based Kwantung Army seized the whole province of Manchuria, citing the need to €œmaintain order,€ to protect Japanese nationals, and, once again, to contain €œcommunism.€ The generals unilaterally declared the independence of Manchuria from China and proclaimed it the new Japanese protectorate of Manchukuo. In a clear threat to the rest of China, they selected the latter's deposed Manchu emperor as the puppet head of state for their creation. The vain, gullible princeling soon found himself a virtual prisoner in his own supposed country.

Chinese resistance was seriously weakened at this time by a rift in the ranks of the Kuomintang. Up until 1927, Chinese Communists had held automatic dual membership in the Nationalist Party. But their insistence on agrarian reform alienated Chiang Kai-shek, himself the son of a wealthy landlord. The Generalissimo had in any case been thoroughly assimilated to the Chinese rightists, militarists, and warlords that controlled much of his army. He was all but completely dependent on the advice of the army's chief of staff, the German mercenary Gen. von Falkenhausen (von Falkenhausen successfully commanded China's forces until 1939, when Japanese pressure at last forced Hitler to insist on his resignation). His army had the organization and outlook of a German Freikorps, and its soldiers, with their Mauser K98 rifles and automatic pistols, their coal-scuttle helmets, nd their potato-masher grenades, looked and fought like the thuggish Sturmtruppen of 1918-19.

In 1927, Chiang acted on the reactionary sentiments of his circle and suddenly banned the Communist Party. The decree automatically condemned everyone connected with the party to death. The gruesome anti-communist reign of terror that Chiang set in motion would eventually cost at least 1,000,000 defenseless men, women, and children their lives. Grotesque, inhuman tortures, mass decapitations, and systematic massacres of entire families and villages embittered the civil population and deprived Chiang's army and police of the popular support they would need in the impending struggle with Japan. In spite of the obvious dangers, Chiang remained ambivalent in the face of the latter's growing incursions into Chinese territory. With the liquidation of the Communists now the sole, overriding objective of the Nationalist movement, the defense of the national territory against foreign invasion seems to have been at best a secondary concern. Forces and munitions were husbanded for use against the regime's battered former ally, even as the foreign aggressor seized the regime's territory and killed its northern allies. At times, Chiang seems to have looked on the fiercely anticommunist militarists of the Kwantung Army more as potential supporters than as serious threats.

Despite their horrendous cost to his movement and people, Chiang's efforts were all for nought. In 1933, the encircled, seemingly defeated Reds broke through Nationalist army lines and began their epic Long March, a year-long, 6000-mile fighting retreat to the secure Communist base areas of north- west China. The civil war that would end in 1948 with the Kuomintang€s ignominious retreat from the mainland to Taiwan had now commenced.

Civil War, the Young Marshall, and the Bai Ying
The warlord's armed airliner and the general purpose biplane typified Chinese aviation during this time of civil strife. The Red Army had no air force. It€s strength lay in its disciplined, peasant infantry and its paramilitary, guerilla organization.
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/O2.gif Chiang Kai-shek and Gen. von Falkenhausen were thus chiefly interested in light reconnaissance-bombers of the type that had proved so useful against the Reds in Germany and the Baltic countries. Between 1932 and 1936, the Nationalists bought 72 Douglas O-2MC-2 and -10 attack bombers and twenty Vought V-92C Corsairs, as well as twenty-four Heinkel He 66Ch biplane dive bombers. These airplanes were good counter-insurgency airplanes, well suited to close support of infantry, railroad route security, and punitive raids on undefended villages. But the qualities that made them excellent for these purposes left the two-seaters unable to defend themselves in the face of serious fighter opposition. The warlord's bought similar airplanes, but also demonstrated a taste for armed airliners and executive transports. Such aircraft could perform most of the duties of their military counterparts given the prevailing lack of opposition. But they could also resupply isolated units of the leader's private army, boost his prestige, and transport him in style and safety between different parts of his domain.


One such warlord's transport, a Boeing 247-D, called Bai-Ying or €œWhite Eagle,€ performed what was perhaps the most important aerial service of the Sino-Japanese conflict: it brought about a suspension of the civil war and allowed the Red and Nationalist armies to join forces against Japan. The airplane belonged to one of the most successful Nationalist generals, the fiercely anti-Communist, twenty-four year-old warlord Chang Hsueh-liang, called the €œYoung Marshall.€ In 1935, Chang bought the stock Boeing as his personal staff transport. It flew him in and out of the combat areas and dropped supplies to his troops during the anti-Red purges and anti-warlord campaigns.

Chang and the Bai-Ying might never have distinguished themselves from dozens of others, had Chang's Tungpei Army not itself fallen victim to the Imperial Japanese Army's insatiable appetite for expansion and Chiang Kai-shek's obsessive campaign against communists and rivals, real or imagined. Chang€s power base lay in Manchuria. When Japan seized this territory, Chang's men were suddenly homeless. They might at any moment turn on the Young Marshal whose policies had failed them. At this critical juncture, Chiang decided to let the Japanese dispose of the charismatic Chang, a potential rival and critic of Chiang's quiescence in the face of foreign aggression. The Generalissimo Chang had faithfully served flatly refused to help him and tried to turn the other generals and warlords against him. The Young Marshal saw that he had to act immediately or lose the confidence of his troops. Chang led the Tungpei Army into a series of disastrous battles with the Japanese in Manchuria. His men fought well by all accounts, but they lacked the resources of their enemeies. Late in 1935, the Tungpei Army was driven out of Manchuria altogether. Seriously weakened by its losses, it was then badly defeated in an encounter with the Reds.

To Chang's surprise, the Communists did not massacre their many prisoners in the usual Nationalist fashion (the heads of Red POWs, hung from signposts and telegraph lines, feature prominently in civil war-era photos). Instead, the Manchurian troops were given a short but intense, anti-Japanese indoctrination and sent back to their units. Their accounts of the efficiency, organization, high morale, and nationalism of the Red army and populace made a deep impression on Chang. He immediately flew in his Boeing 247 to the Red capital in Yenan and signed an immediate secret truce. Then, when Chiang Kai-shek came to Sian to harangue the defeated troops, the Young Marshal called an immediate meeting of the divisional commanders of both Nationalist armies in the area. He convinced them that Chiang had to be arrested and forced to fight the invaders. That done, Chang€s bodyguard invested Chiang Kai-shek€s quarters and arrested the Generalissimo. Within hours, army units across China declared for the mutineers.

The Nationalist dictator expected to be killed. But instead, Chang sent his Boeing to fetch a Communist delegation from Yenan and various military leaders from other parts of China. The Reds asked for nothing from Chiang Kai-shek but a cessation of civil hostilities and an immediate war on Japan under his leadership. They joined the Young Marshal in pressing for the Generalissimo€s immediate release, though many nervous army officers preferred that he be immediately tried and executed. Chiang Kai-shek was released, and he kept his promise. But he never forgave Chang Hsueh-liang. When the honorable Young Marshal flew to Nanking in his Boeing and surrendered to Chiang by way of apology for his conduct at Sian, the Generalissimo had him imprisoned. The KMT even took him with them when they fled to Taiwan, where he remained in prison well into the 1990s. http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/B247Y.gif



Before his arrest, the young Marshal had ordered a second Boeing, the subject of the illustration. Long-range fuel tanks of the kind used in the MacRobertson trophy-race 247 replaced the uncomfortably cramped forward passenger cabin. The growing threat of Japanese fighters led to the installation of three .50-cal. machine guns, one replacing the lavatory and two fixed in the nose baggage compartment. Chang was already in prison when the plane was delivered, and it never saw any useful service. A KMT pilot flew it into a mountain shortly after delivery.

The Mercenaries: The 14th Squadron
In its early phases, the air war against Japan was fought largely by the foreign mercenary pilots of the 14th Squadron. This unit€s airmen included pilots from the United States and France with a few Australians thrown in. Several had recently served on the Republican side in Spain. Its commander was an American WW1 veteran, Vincent Schmidt, and its air gunners and ground staff were Chinese. The squadron€s equipment was equally cosmopolitan: Vultee V-11 and Northrop 2E light bombers, a couple of Martin 139 medium bombers, an armed Bellanca 28-90 racing plane, and a pair of Dewoitine D-510 fighters.
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/d510.gif
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/v11.gif
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/Gamma.gif






In July 1937, the Japanese invaded China proper, seizing Peking on the 28th. The 14th Squadron€s Northrops carried out some of China€s first offensive action against Japan when they bombed Japanese lines on 14 August, 1937. On the night of May 19, 1938, Chinese crews flew two of the unit€s surviving Martin bombers on a leaflet raid over Nagasaki. Western pilots also served on Hawk IIIs at Hanchow (4th Wing) and on D-510s at Kunming.
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/hawk3.gif
The Kuomintang and the Soviets
Soviet airmen and equipment poured into China after the Japanese attacks began. I-15bis fighter biplanes and I-16 monoplanes were probably the most numerous warplanes in China prior to Pearl Harbor and open American intervention. China€s long range bomber force was composed almost entirely of Russian-flown Tupolev SB-2s, a number of which raided Japanese-occupied Formosa (now Taiwan). Unfortunately, little seems to be now be known about this largely clandestine operation.

http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/sbchina.gif
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/sbchina.gif


Aircraft Types Reliably Reported to Have Served in China
Camouflage and Markings
Chinese Nationalist airplanes were often delivered in silver dope or natural metal. But most received a camouflage finish consisting of dark, olive green on all surfaces. Sometimes only the upper surfaces were painted, the undersides of the flying surfaces and, often, the fuselage being left in unpainted metal or aluminum dope. The camouflage paint seems to have worn rapidly, so many aircraft have a mottled appearance. Soviet aircraft normally carried standard VVS camouflage: olive green upper surfaces and pale blue-grey undersurfaces. But the top sides of SB-2s and I-153s were sometimes given a green mottle over bare metal or, possibly, light blue-grey. Some Vultees may have also carried this type of camouflage. The Boeing 281 Pea-shooters based at Nanking were at first painted pale grey overall. Later, this gave way to the standard dark green on all surfaces, though fighters serving in the same units can be seen in both finishes. Curtiss Hawks were always green on all surfaces.

http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/breda_ba27.gif

Chinese markings varied considerably in this period. The standard markings were horizontal blue-and-white rudder stripes and a white Nationalist star carried on the wings. China never had air superiority. So, since friendly-fire was unlikely from above, only the undersurfaces were marked. But these were not hard-and-fast rules.
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/boeing1.gif V-92 Corsairs were delivered with vertical rudder stripes, though this may have been the result of confusion at Vought. On bare metal and some green-camouflaged aircraft, the star was superimposed on a blue disk. When the undersurfaces were dark green, however, the disk was normally omitted. Blue or black tactical numbers were carried on the rear fuselage sides. They could be almost any shape, style or size, with lots of variation, even within units. National insignia were not normally painted on the fuselage. However, some of the repainted Nanking Boeing 281s had the star and disk on the fuselage sides and some Hawk IIIs had ragged, hand-painted stars on the sides of the nose. Presentation messages in white Chinese characters were sometimes painted in the same position on Hawks. Since Japan's navy made extensive use of license-built Heinkel 66s (Aichi D1A1/2 navy bombers), Chinese He66Ch aircraft carried large, yellow identification panels on their wings and fuselages.

http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/boeing2.gif
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/shrike.gif
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n2/shrike2.gif

DIRTY-MAC
08-07-2006, 02:49 PM
He111
http://www.airwar.ru/transfer/grishan///camms/ar/315/pics/10_2.jpg

Chuck_Older
08-07-2006, 03:05 PM
Great article, D-M!

We have the B5N already, which looks very very much like a Shrike II.

Here's a Chinese SB 2M:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/CSB.jpg

Here's a Chinese Hawk 75:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/CH.jpg

I'd be interested in some 14th Squadron scenrios...I-15s could double as HawkIIIs, maybe? Interesting, I'll have to look at some flyable stand-ins!

DIRTY-MAC
08-07-2006, 03:39 PM
I can help you with it if you want,

here are some of the types used by the Chinese:

Armstrong Whitworth A.W.35 Scimitar (13?)
Breda Ba.27* (30, 11 known to have been delivered)
^Bregeut Bre.19 (74)
Curtiss Hawk 75 H, M (113)
Curtiss Hawk 75Q (2)
Curtiss Hawk II (50)
Curtiss 68C Hawk III (102)
Curtiss 81-A3 (P-40C Tomahawk) (100 AVG)
Curtiss 87-V (P-40N Warhawk)
Curtiss Wright CW.21 (30 - many not completed)
^Fiat CR.30 (2)
^Fiat CR.32 (16)
Gloster Gladiator Mk I (36)
North American P-51D Mustang (50)
Polikarpov I 15bis (185, plus 4 Soviet Squadrons)
Polikarpov I 153 (93)
Polikarpov I 16 type 10, I 16UTI* (250+, plus 2 Soviet squadrons)
Republic P-43 Lancer
Vultee P-66 Vanguard
Curtiss A12 Shrike (20)
Curtiss Wright CW-19R (20)
Ilyushin DB-3
Lockheed B-14L Hudson
Martin B-10B (9)
North American B-25 Mitchell
Northrop Gamma 2B (24 imported and 25 assembled in China)
Tuplev ANT 40 SB* (200)
Vultee V-11G* (30)
Vultee V-12C (13)
Vultee V-12D (52 - not all completed)
Curtiss Wright C-46 Commando
Douglas C-47 Dakota
Focke-Wulf FW 58
Mitsubishi Ki 57 (captured)
Avro 626 Prefect* (9)
Avro 621 Tutor* (5)
Breda Ba.28* (18)
Fleet 10C, D and licensed assembly* (56)
North American AT-6 Havard* (85)

the G50 can go for a P-26 pea shooter

Pzl1 does fit in very good to as it lloks very much like a french fighter they used wich I cant remenmber the name of, they had almost the same gull wing

Cr 42 can go for a Cr 32 or any of the other biplane fighter types

Iar 80 makes a pretty good P-66 Vanguard for 1942 cenarios

and etcr

GerritJ9
08-07-2006, 03:48 PM
A5M4s did see brief action over the Philippines during the initial stages of the japanese invasion if I'm not mistaken, but that was pretty much the extent of their combat use. The Ki.27 saw extensive combat over Malaya/Singapore, Sumatra/Java and Burma so it makes much more sense to have the Ki.27 flyable rather than the A5M4.

Tater-SW-
08-07-2006, 03:58 PM
Wasn't there supposed to be another Italian plane we have not yet seen? As I recall, it was the one based upon the P-43, and it bears more than a superficial resemblence to that and the P-35. That'd be cool for early philipines scenarios as well if it ever appears.

Sad, also, is the fact that way back when they posted screen shots of some other fixed gear japanese planes, ki-30 or 32 I think, and a recon plane (c5m?).

tater

Tater-SW-
08-07-2006, 04:03 PM
Was the RE 2000 I was thinking of.

tater

DIRTY-MAC
08-07-2006, 04:35 PM
both the Re2000 and P-43 was based upon the P-35

Chuck_Older
08-07-2006, 07:21 PM
Nice list! Quick check though- P-40Cs have external fuel capacity while P-40Bs do not. Otherwise they are essentially the same plane- AVG machines had no external fuel provisions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Although Tex Hill and the ground crew did manage to jury-rig bomb shackles into some

There's some discrepancy or other about the planes being -2s or -3s...near as I can tell, they were -2s with -3 wings. Some sources swear they had no self sealing fuel tanks in the wings, but others list external self-sealing layers, very clearly on the spec sheets for the planes. There was even some sort of computer (!) on the list of equipment. My guess is this was the name for the gunsights...which weren't on any of the planes. Erik Shilling stated that this equipment was not installed on the AVG planes. The sight we have in the game is the gunsight that one of the technical staff cooked up while in Rangoon! One plane fell into the harbor at Rangoon, crate and all, while being offloaded- parts were used on other planes, I think they actually built a whole one out the damaged airframe. Here's an interesting list for AVG P-40s-


Tail # Mfg # RAF # fuselage # flown by remarks
P-8101 15337 AK466 92 Hedman last plane assembled in Rangoon
P-8102 15338 AK467 13 Cross
P-8103 15339 AK468 3 Rossi, Bartling abandoned Rangoon
P-8104 15423 AK471 5/9/24? Bond, Burgard? Bond recalls this as his aircraft
P-8105 15424 AK472 67 Hodges Wrecked 23 Oct 1941
P-8106 15425 AK473 11? Sandell? first aircraft assembled in Rangoon
P-8107 15430 AK478 Schiel crashed Toungoo
P-8108 15431 AK479 37 Ricketts
P-8109 15432 AK480 68 Older damaged in forced landing near Lashio, March
P-8110 15433 AK481 42 Fish
P-8111 15438 AK486 first a/c with thrust bearing sump
P-8112 15439 AK487 Armstrong crashed Toungoo
P-8113 15444 AK492 2
P-8114 15445 AK493 11? Sandell? crashed Rangoon?
P-8115 15452 AK500 69 Bishop, Martin, McGarry crashed Thailand 24 Mar 42; see below
P-8116 15453 AK501 89? crashed Rangoon 23 Jan 42
P-8117 15459 AK507 Bright crashed Toungoo
P-8118 15460 AK508 70 Olson
P-8119 15466 AK514 71 Overend, C Smith, Shilling
P-8120 15467 AK515 43 Keeton
P-8121 15473 AK521 88 Jernstedt
P-8122 15474 AK522
P-8123 15480 AK528 36 Rector
P-8124 15481 AK529 leaky thrust bearing
P-8125 15487 AK535 1 Atkinson crashed Toungoo
P-8126 15488 AK536 Hammer crashed Toungoo
P-8127 15494 AK542 47 Petach, RT Smith,
Layher? crashed in China; see below
P-8128 15495 AK543 54 Christman crashed Rangoon?
P-8129 15501 AK549
P-8130 15502 AK550
P-8131 15508 AK556 35/27 Blackburn, Prescott?
P-8132 15509 AK557 15 Martin
P-8133 15514 AK562 49 Swartz, Haywood
P-8134 15515 AK563 48 Hill
P-8135 15521 AK569 79 Hedman, Reed
P-8136 15522 AK570 40 Cole

Note: Engine from #47 (P-8127?) said to be on display at Torrence airport in California. Wreckage of P-8115 is on display at Chiang Mai Air Force Base, Thailand.
February allotment
Taken from a block with RAF serials AM370/519 (other aircraft in this series went to No. 73 and 112 squadrons in North Africa). Arrived Rangoon June 1941.

Tail # Mfg # RAF # fuselage # flown by remarks
P-8137 15828 AM375
P-8138 15834 AM381 57 Howard
P-8139 15841 AM388 99 Olson
P-8140 15848 AM395 96
P-8141 15855 AM402
P-8142 15862 AM409 41 Paxton, Merritt, Bacon, Boyington
P-8143 15869 AM416 10 Farrell crashed Rangoon 23 Jan
P-8144 15876 AM423 25 Mickelson
P-8145 15882 AM429
P-8146 15884 AM431 7? Neale?
P-8147 15886 AM433 52 Shilling, Martin, Hill photo plane?
P-8148 15888 AM435 86/98? McMillan
P-8149 15890 AM437 58 Shapard, Houle
P-8150 15892 AM439 91 McMillan
P-8151 15894 AM441 33 Little
P-8152 15896 AM443 56 Bright
P-8153 15898 AM445 71?/78? Shilling photo plane?
P-8154 15900 AM447 97 Foshee, Moss
P-8155 15902 AM449 8? crashed Rangoon 23 Jan
P-8156 15904 AM451 46 Lawlor
P-8157 15906 AM453 100 assembled Loiwing, March; see below
P-8158 15908 AM455 5? Bond?
P-8159 15910 AM457
P-8160 15911? AM458? see note
P-8161 15913? AM460? 59 Bacon see note
P-8162 15915 AM462 94 Haywood, Neale, Groh
P-8163 15916 AM463
P-8164 15918 AM465 11? Sandell? crashed Rangoon?
P-8165 15920 AM467 45 Bartelt, Moss forced landing near Lashio, March
P-8166 15921 AM468
P-8167 15923 AM470
P-8168 15925 AM472 85 Brouk, Hurst, Greene Shot down 23 Dec 1941
P-8169 15926 AM473 43 Keeton

Notes: P-8157 was the "hundredth" Tomahawk. Its wing assembly went to complete P-8194, whose own wings had been ruined by immersion in salt water while being off-loaded in Rangoon. The fuselage of 8157 was eventually trucked north to Loiwing and made whole by canibalizing wings from another plane.

One of the AVG Tomahawks may have been wrongly identified. One RAF source shows AM598 as serving in North Africa; another says that AM460 did. The plane that went to China in its stead may have been AM498 (Curtiss serial 15951).
March allotment
Taken from the same block as February allotment. Arrived Rangoon July 1941.
Tail # Mfg # RAF # fuselage # flown by remarks
P-8170 15928 AM475 53/13 Layher, Little, Hill
P-8171 15930 AM477 50? Ricketts, Hill?
P-8172 15931 AM478 50/7? Ricketts, Neale
P-8173 15933 AM480 77 RT Smith, Rossi belly landing Magwe
P-8174 15935 AM482
P-8175 15937 AM484
P-8176 15939 AM486
P-8177 15940 AM487 38 Geselbracht
P-8178 15942 AM489 76? 5? McMillan? Bond?
P-8179 15944 AM491
P-8180 15945 AM492
P-8181 15947 AM494 51 Cole
P-8182 15949 AM496 21 Boyington, Schiel
P-8183 15950 AM497 83 Hodges
P-8184 15952 AM499 44 Laughlin, PWright
P-8185 15954 AM501 13? Cross?
P-8186 15955 AM502 75 Reed RAF roundels?
P-8187 15957 AM504 6 Dean belly landing
P-8188 15959 AM506 23/45? McGarry, Jones, Bartelt?
P-8189 15961 AM508
P-8190 15962 AM509 16/6? Dean
P-8191 15963 AM510 90 Dupouy
P-8192 15964 AM511
P-8193 15965 AM512 74 Conant belly landing 31 Oct 1941
P-8194 15966 AM513 7? Sawyer, Neale? wings from P-8157; see note above
P-8195 15967 AM514 84 Greene crashed Rangoon?
P-8196 15968 AM515 34 Newkirk crashed Thailand
P-8197 15969 AM516 18 Kuykendall
P-8198 15970 AM517 5? Bond? destroyed Loiwing?
P-8199 15971 AM518 Neale
P-8200 15972 AM519 39 Moss

Notes: A photograph of Bob Neale with fuselage No. 7 seems to show a tail number of P-8194, though the 9 seems more roughly painted than the other numbers. Possibly a replacement for an earlier No. 7?

Tomahawks numbered 1-33 were assigned to lst Squadron, 34-66 to 2nd Squadron, 67-99 to 3rd Squadron. Some sources say that P-8119 carried fuselage number 71. In addition to aircraft identified above, the following fuselage numbers are known: #17 Croft, #19 Hoffman, #30 Moss, and #67 Prescott, but these numbers cannot be tied to a specific aircraft. Note, however, that pilots often flew any plane available.

Erik Shilling said that his photo plane was #53, probably meaning the tail number P-815

**edit**

the story of the 100th plane is included in the above http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Divine-Wind
08-07-2006, 07:31 PM
No flyable Claudes makes teh baby Kamikaze cry. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif

Feathered_IV
08-07-2006, 07:56 PM
A5M4 is the prettiest aircraft ever built. Be sure!

Although, the A5M1 is a real looker too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

slo_1_2_3
08-07-2006, 08:26 PM
So will the b6n2 be flyable? or is this kown yet?

Feathered_IV
08-07-2006, 09:17 PM
*Chants* No time, no time, no time.....

Tater-SW-
08-07-2006, 09:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DIRTY-MAC:
both the Re2000 and P-43 was based upon the P-35 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. What I meant was that I thought the Re 2000 was done already for Il-2, or it was on one of the plane list I saw. Course so was the Cw-21, Fokker, etc. Who knows.

tater

DIRTY-MAC
08-08-2006, 04:41 AM
I think the external was done on the Re2000 but Im not shure it will be implemented
while the external and cockpit are done for the CW-21B and Fokker and those should come some day in the future