"Operation Husky"

[JOED70]

Landing accident the result of training deficency???
How about landing accident due to it not being a real airstrip just a light colored ridge in the terrain.

But what shoyuld that matter any ways you can pretend all you want about no hud cockpit only views no map etc etc . People are still going to use those features . I will no longer be wasting my time.

[Aquila chrysaetos]

Hello to everyone,

Let me first wish speedy recovery to Akula and express gratitude to McQ59 for being excellent host to last Saturday's game. It was fun!

Macademic's suggestions are excellent and I completely agree, but there is one exception when it comes to retracting/extending the landing gear. Namely, Stukas (Ju-87) are “stuck” with their landing gear in extended position.

JOED70 has a good point, some rules are simply not enforceable.

As for the new ideas, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in some “creative” Battle for Reichstag. I guess everyone can read about it online or otherwise so let's skip the details about the battle. It was a fierce battle because of defender's heavy entrenchments, so if VVS (Soviet Air Force) can soften up those pockets of resistance then the Soviet 3rd Shock Army that crossed the Moltke bridge would have an easier job to do. Here is how the game could be designed:

Game mode: Strike

Difficulty: Simulator (Duh!)

Map: Berlin

VVS: IL-4, IL-2M and/or Il-10, and fighter escort (La-7, Yaks or whatever).

Luftwaffe: Well, pretty much all fighters including the jet Me-262 since their job would be to intercept and prevent VVS to drop ordinance on and around Reichstag.

Mission: See above

Fuel: Unlimited

Ammo: Limited (not really sure about this)

Team composition and strength in numbers: open for debate

In strike mode on Berlin map both teams appear (spawn) pretty much equidistant to Berlin and there is no need for elaborate reform/regroup so VVS can just go straight ahead for the Reichstag while Luftwaffe tries to prevent them. Perhaps, another layer of complexity could and should be added. After successful strike VVS should attempt to land on Tempelhof and the winner is the one who manages to do that.

I'm relatively new to this game so critiques and suggestions are not only welcomed but badly needed.

Apologies for the long post,

Cheers!

PSN: PlaviKit

[McQ59]

Originally Posted by Aquila chrysaetos

Hello to everyone,

Let me first wish speedy recovery to Akula and express gratitude to McQ59 for being excellent host to last Saturday's game. It was fun!

Macademic's suggestions are excellent and I completely agree, but there is one exception when it comes to retracting/extending the landing gear. Namely, Stukas (Ju-87) are “stuck” with their landing gear in extended position.

JOED70 has a good point, some rules are simply not enforceable.

As for the new ideas, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in some “creative” Battle for Reichstag. I guess everyone can read about it online or otherwise so let's skip the details about the battle. It was a fierce battle because of defender's heavy entrenchments, so if VVS (Soviet Air Force) can soften up those pockets of resistance then the Soviet 3rd Shock Army that crossed the Moltke bridge would have an easier job to do. Here is how the game could be designed:

Game mode: Strike

Difficulty: Simulator (Duh!)

Map: Berlin

VVS: IL-4, IL-2M and/or Il-10, and fighter escort (La-7, Yaks or whatever).

Luftwaffe: Well, pretty much all fighters including the jet Me-262 since their job would be to intercept and prevent VVS to drop ordinance on and around Reichstag.

Mission: See above

Fuel: Unlimited

Ammo: Limited (not really sure about this)

Team composition and strength in numbers: open for debate

In strike mode on Berlin map both teams appear (spawn) pretty much equidistant to Berlin and there is no need for elaborate reform/regroup so VVS can just go straight ahead for the Reichstag while Luftwaffe tries to prevent them. Perhaps, another layer of complexity could and should be added. After successful strike VVS should attempt to land on Tempelhof and the winner is the one who manages to do that.

I'm relatively new to this game so critiques and suggestions are not only welcomed but badly needed.

Apologies for the long post,

Cheers!

PSN: PlaviKit

Thanks for taking part in the mission last sunday PlaviKit! Great to have you on mate.

I think you could make a thread on this, and develop it according to what we did with the Husky-operation.
I know that a lot of guys (me included) don't love the idea of ending up on the six of a IL-2M or IL-10, but if they have a clear mission and restricted orders they have to carry out in a role of a bomber and rocket-launcher, maybe we wouldn't be ending up dogfighting them?

What do you think PlaviKit?

[Aquila chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by McQ59

Thanks for taking part in the mission last sunday PlaviKit! Great to have you on mate.

I think you could make a thread on this, and develop it according to what we did with the Husky-operation.
I know that a lot of guys (me included) don't love the idea of ending up on the six of a IL-2M or IL-10, but if they have a clear mission and restricted orders they have to carry out in a role of a bomber and rocket-launcher, maybe we wouldn't be ending up dogfighting them?

What do you think PlaviKit?

Thank you for reserving the spot for me. It was my privilege to fly with you experienced guys!

As for the idea for new mission, perhaps the name for it could be “The April 30th Push”. I'll start the new thread as you suggested.

Point about IL-2M/Il-10 AC well taken as I feel that many people do not like to see them in the game. However, according to the historical sources about operational use of that AC it is obvious that they had huge losses as enemy fighters developed tactics to defeat them. Then again, this is the game and IL-2M/IL-10 are not the only ones that are seemingly superior to other AC. I was wondering why “everyone” flies Spitfire in a dogfight (especially true in realistic mode) until I tried one. Wow!!! Well then, we could limit IL-2M/IL-10 numbers and clearly define their role so everyone agrees and is willing to participate. Also it should be noted that the rear gunner on IL-2M runs out of ammo pretty fast so if we play in limited ammo mode that in itself evens out the play field. Again all suggestions are welcomed.

I like your idea as addition to Olife's mission about the use of B-17, awesome!

One more question, is it OK to use your template as a mission outline?

PSN: PlaviKit

[McQ59]

Originally Posted by Aquila chrysaetos

Thank you for reserving the spot for me. It was my privilege to fly with you experienced guys!

As for the idea for new mission, perhaps the name for it could be “The April 30th Push”. I'll start the new thread as you suggested.

Point about IL-2M/Il-10 AC well taken as I feel that many people do not like to see them in the game. However, according to the historical sources about operational use of that AC it is obvious that they had huge losses as enemy fighters developed tactics to defeat them. Then again, this is the game and IL-2M/IL-10 are not the only ones that are seemingly superior to other AC. I was wondering why “everyone” flies Spitfire in a dogfight (especially true in realistic mode) until I tried one. Wow!!! Well then, we could limit IL-2M/IL-10 numbers and clearly define their role so everyone agrees and is willing to participate. Also it should be noted that the rear gunner on IL-2M runs out of ammo pretty fast so if we play in limited ammo mode that in itself evens out the play field. Again all suggestions are welcomed.

I like your idea as addition to Olife's mission about the use of B-17, awesome!

One more question, is it OK to use your template as a mission outline?

PSN: PlaviKit

Sure you can use the template mate. Take it away!

I will for sure want to take part in the mission you sketch. To chase IL's can be a nice battle. Cpl of the guys around give them a good fight. This could be a multiple life mission. And do use the sosial club to develop and present.

[Aquila chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by McQ59

Sure you can use the template mate. Take it away!

I will for sure want to take part in the mission you sketch. To chase IL's can be a nice battle. Cpl of the guys around give them a good fight. This could be a multiple life mission. And do use the sosial club to develop and present.

Pardon my ignorance but how do I use social club to develop and present

[McQ59]

Originally Posted by Aquila chrysaetos

Pardon my ignorance but how do I use social club to develop and present

That's actually a very good question mate. I really can't tell you how to be a member. I think Gilly invited me, but I can't recall... I think the best idea is to ask Gilly. Sorry I couldn't help you more than that...

[MACADEMIC]

Originally Posted by JOED70

Landing accident the result of training deficency???
How about landing accident due to it not being a real airstrip just a light colored ridge in the terrain.

But what shoyuld that matter any ways you can pretend all you want about no hud cockpit only views no map etc etc . People are still going to use those features . I will no longer be wasting my time.

Hi Joe,

I wasn't on your team but I'm pretty sure your team didn't have to go and land in a field? If you mean the airfield inland (sorry forgot its name), it's true it's not very big and might pose a problem for larger teams to tuck everyone safely away from the runway. But I have landed there many times without problems with the P-51, without brakes (custom layout) and never had a problem. True, you have to touch down not far from the threshold, but this is where training comes in. This is something everyone can (and should) have practiced before going on this mission.

I noticed last week on the first historic mission in Britain that my team had huge problems landing in Hawkinge in Spitfires. Again this can be trained, if the spitfire's too hard then better take the Hurricane. And the approaches were usually too chaotic, low level turns and just unstable, touchdowns half way down the runway, coming in too fast. What can you expect?

I'm not saying it's anyone's fault that there are training deficiencies, it's just a fact and can be worked on. Perhaps I'll make a little tutorial on landing patterns and stabilized approaches and post on the forum to make it a bit easier.

And about your comment, well you're right it can't be verified. The only verification is if you trust the people you fly with because you go way back together. I don't have a problem with that.

MAC

[P-51]

Originally Posted by MACADEMIC

I'm not saying it's anyone's fault that there are training deficiencies, it's just a fact and can be worked on. Perhaps I'll make a little tutorial on landing patterns and stabilized approaches and post on the forum to make it a bit easier.

If you need a guy online that can hoast a room and teach how to land then I'll hapily do that. Send me a mail (on here, preferably) if you want some landing practice. I have a mic and can talk people down if you want?

If they would like I could fly along side in, say, a Po-2 to make sure they are doing it right.

I do think landing is my main skill, I can land anything from any angle!