A bunch of questions on aircraft

[vdr1981]

Sometimes stock files and good programming go in opposite directions... even worse for historical accuracy lol

I couldn't agree more BUT, we shouldn't forget that sometimes "good programing" without adequate testing can lead to game corruption and CTDs. I can not even remember anymore how many times I had to re-do examples of "good programing" from various "must have" mods which were seriously threatening to sink SH5 completely...I remember back then on my Subsim beginnings, I always had strange feeling that modders and mods will be ultimate savers and destroyers of SH5 since there were sooo many hidden problems caused by inadequate testing. My "feeling" proved to be correct...

Well, for 'seaplane freighters' (CAM ships, MAC ships and Fighter catapult ships) I don't see much problems in setting them as 'regular' escort carriers. The reason is that they actually played the same role as escort carriers before the latter became available, so as long as we set appearance/disappearance dates correctly for each ship and we specify British escort carriers in convoy layers, no ship would be used out of place: seaplane freighters will spawn within convoys early on, and starting from 1941 they will be gradually replaced by proper escort carriers. According to Wikipedia, from August 1942 CAM ships finally ceased sailing within North Atlantic convoys (even though 16 of them kept in service within Mediterranean and South Atlantic convoys until as late as September 1943). As for MAC ships, I think they kept serving as such until the end of the war.

The only minor issue would be CAM and MAC ships flying the naval ensign rather than the merchant one, but in my previous post I already suggested an easy workaround to "force" them using the red ensign.

I like this whole concept of actually functional catapult ships, this wasn't the case in any previous SH title to the best of my knowledge... I'll think about it for some future Wolves updates...

[gap]

Originally Posted by vdr1981

I couldn't agree more BUT, we shouldn't forget that sometimes "good programing" without adequate testing can lead to game corruption and CTDs. I can not even remember anymore how many times I had to re-do examples of "good programing" from various "must have" mods which were seriously threatening to sink SH5 completely...I remember back then on my Subsim beginnings, I always had strange feeling that modders and mods will be ultimate savers and destroyers of SH5 since there were sooo many hidden problems caused by inadequate testing. My "feeling" proved to be correct...

You are obviously right. My point was trying to limit the number of each base's air groups. Reason is that, with so many new RAF airbases that I want to add to the game, and so many "operational" air groups that I will be adding to each base (due to changes of squadrons and/or to change of aircraft used), I am afraid that loading times and memory usage might go beyond safety level.

Anyway, after your suggestion, I will be adding "filler" air groups to fill the possible intervals between an "active" air group and the next one. These air groups will do nothing but spawning one (or whatever is the minimum safe number) unarmed and short-ranged aircraft. Filler groups will also be used at the beginning and/or at the end of the whole air group sequence, in case a base is not active since day one and/or until the last day of the campaign that it will be used on. To keep on with my previous example, after the aforementione changes the cfg file looks like this:

[Unit]
ClassName=RAFNortholt		;-50087.640000	6186482.280000
3DModelFileName=data/Land/LAB_LargeAirBaseGB/LAB_LargeAirBaseGB
UnitType=406
MaxSpeed=0.000000
MinSpeed=0.000000
Length=1
Width=1

[AirGroup 1]
StartDate=19390801
EndDate=19400617
Squadron1Class=Trainer
Squadron1No=1

[AirGroup 2]
StartDate=19400618
EndDate=19400622
Squadron1Class=FHurricaneMkI	;No. 1 Sqn. RAF (fighter squadron, No. 11 Group - Battle of Britain)
Squadron1No=5

[AirGroup 3]
StartDate=19400623
EndDate=19400731
Squadron1Class=Trainer
Squadron1No=1

[AirGroup 4]
StartDate=19400801
EndDate=19400908
Squadron1Class=FHurricaneMkI	;No. 1 Sqn. RAF (fighter squadron, No. 11 Group - Battle of Britain)
Squadron1No=6

[AirGroup 5]
StartDate=19400909
EndDate=19450930
Squadron1Class=Trainer
Squadron1No=1


;****************** THE END ******************

What do you think?

Originally Posted by vdr1981

I like this whole concept of actually functional catapult ships, this wasn't the case in any previous SH title to the best of my knowledge... I'll think about it for some future Wolves updates...

I am actually surprised that no one before has thought about that. Unfortunately we don't have a similarly good solution for scout plane-equipped battleships and cruisers, since converting them into carriers would mess too much taskforce layers and probably their AI too.

[kapuhy]

Originally Posted by gap

scout plane-equipped battleships and cruisers

A bit on a side from this discussion, but I wonder, if the general rule for capital ships in U-Boat infested waters was to sail at high speed and not stop for anything in order not to become an easy target for a torpedo, how do you regularly recover your scout plane?

[gap]

Originally Posted by kapuhy

A bit on a side from this discussion, but I wonder, if the general rule for capital ships in U-Boat infested waters was to sail at high speed and not stop for anything in order not to become an easy target for a torpedo, how do you regularly recover your scout plane?

Is that a question about history or is it relative to SH5?

In the former case I am afraid I have not an answer, but being a protective measure I can imagine that spotters were launched more often in potentially hostile waters than in totally safe conditions, where no enemy was to be met.

Talking more specifically about the game, we should consider that - if no one finds a way to get TDW carrier patch to work - those scout planes would spawn outside rendering range; that is 20 km in stock game, probably more in TWoS. In other words, we would never see a battleship or a cruiser in 'alert state' launching her aircraft just in front of our eyes: we could imagine it to have been deployed long before enemy detection. On the contrary, in early war (before fleet carriers become available in numbers), those little planes would help task forces to be more "aware" of their environment and to better defend themselves.

[kapuhy]

Originally Posted by gap

Is that a question about history or is it relative to SH5?

In the former case I am afraid I have not an answer, but being a protective measure I can imagine that spotters were launched more often in potentially hostile waters than in totally safe conditions, where no enemy was to be met.

No, I was just curious how it worked in history - on one there's the notion that task forces containing precious capital ships were sailing at high speed and zigazgging to minimize chances of being torpedoed, and on the other what would be needed to regularly launch and recover scout planes - stopping entire task force including the expensive battleship so it can fish its scout plane out of the water. Possibly, several times a day.

Originally Posted by gap

Thank you for your support Vecko

If you don't mind, for now I have one last question: during your SH5 debugging activity, have you met any major problem - as ctd's or severe lags - connected with the large number of aircraft being drawn by the game at the same time? In other words: is there a limit that I should conform with when assigning planes to an air group, or I can be relatively free in equipping them with a (more or less) realistic number of aircraft?

One more thing to consider: is SH5 "squadron" simply a group of aircraft flying together? If so, the realistic numbers would not be whatever the actual squadron had, but the usual number of planes in a group (which for many recon/patrol planes would be one).

[propbeanie]

Don't forget also that a squadron of six planes only expected 4 to be available at any given time, due to maintenance, waiting on parts, lack of pilot, etc. In the SH games, six planes means that you have six planes, though they might be "launched" individually or by twos...

[gap]

Originally Posted by kapuhy

No, I was just curious how it worked in history - on one there's the notion that task forces containing precious capital ships were sailing at high speed and zigazgging to minimize chances of being torpedoed, and on the other what would be needed to regularly launch and recover scout planes - stopping entire task force including the expensive battleship so it can fish its scout plane out of the water. Possibly, several times a day.

If recovering those planes was so complicated that the whole process might have exposed a task force to more risks than it was worth, why did they carry them? A Walrus had a gross weight of more than 3 metric tons. Add to that catapult's weight. Wouldn't they spare that weight for extra stores/ammunition? I understand that, at some point, with the advance in radar technology and more fleet carriers available, scout planes enbarked on battleships and cruisers were made redundant, but I can't imagine them being carried around for no reason

Originally Posted by kapuhy

One more thing to consider: is SH5 "squadron" simply a group of aircraft flying together? If so, the realistic numbers would not be whatever the actual squadron had, but the usual number of planes in a group (which for many recon/patrol planes would be one).

Originally Posted by propbeanie

Don't forget also that a squadron of six planes only expected 4 to be available at any given time, due to maintenance, waiting on parts, lack of pilot, etc. In the SH games, six planes means that you have six planes, though they might be "launched" individually or by twos...

Good points. Let's put together some information.

In reality

According to Wikipedia

Originally Posted by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squadron_(aviation)

A squadron in air force, army aviation, or naval aviation is a unit comprising a number of military aircraft and their aircrews, usually of the same type, typically with 12 to 24 aircraft, sometimes divided into three or four flights, depending on aircraft type and air force. Land based squadrons equipped with heavier type aircraft such as long-range bombers, cargo aircraft, or air refueling tankers have around 12 aircraft as a typical authorization, while most land-based fighter equipped units have an authorized number of 18 to 24 aircraft.

In naval aviation, sea-based and land-based squadrons will typically have smaller numbers of aircraft, ranging from as low as four for early warning to as high as 12 for fighter/attack.

Originally Posted by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Bomber_Command_aircrew_of_World_War_II#Aircrew _leadership

Until mid-summer of 1943 most bomber squadrons comprised three flights, "A", "B" and "C", each of 7–10 aircraft. [...]. During the expansion of RAF Bomber Command from the summer of 1943 many squadrons consisted of two flights, each having 8– 12 aircraft

The website of No. 8 Squadron (which belonged to the Aden Command and performed ASW patrols during WWII) contains some interesting information too:

Originally Posted by https://www.viiisquadron.co.uk/history/1939-1945/maritime-patrols

In August 1941 the first Blenheim Mk IVs were received and by November the Squadron possessed over 20 of the improved aircraft. By the summer of 1942, the Vincents were finally withdrawn and replaced by the Blenheim Mk V. In September 1942, the Squadron strength was 31 Blenheim Mk Vs and 10 Blenheim Mk IVs.

Summing up, the typical figure for most Air Forces can be considered 12, 18 or 24 aircraft per squadron. My guess is that it is not an accident if the numbers above are all multiples of 2, 3, or 4, as this was the number of flights composing a squadron. That said, a minimum of 4 aircraft and a maximum in excess of 40 aircraft are also registered. Talking about the high extreme, I have a couple of remarks:

- No.8 Squadron had several detachments in Oman, Yemen and Somalia; this reduces the number of aircraft per station. I doubt its 41 Blenheims to have flown all at the same time just from one airbase.

- What should be considered besides number of aircraft, is number of aircrews per squadron. Especially by mid-late war, some RAF squadrons might have had more aircraft than they could actually operate, due to lack of crews. Unfortunately, informationion available on this point is pretty scarce.


In game

According to my experience (please tell me if I got something wrong), no matter how high is the number of aircraft assigned to nearby bases, their planes will always patrol singularly or in couples. If an aircraft or any another unit spots an enemy, it will call for reinforcements and more aircraft will visit the detection area. I have not direct experience of that, but according to propbeabie, in SHIV a maximum of 7 aircraft will look for our submarine if we were previously detected, which, imo, is pretty realistic. Even in this case (planes spawning purposely for attacking an enemy), having an higher number of aircraft assigned to a base, won't imply them spawning all at once.

Summing up: to the best of my (limited) understanding, a large number of planes in air groups won't have much effect on the size of "flights" (i.e. groups of aircraft flying together) spawned by that group, but it will increase the chance of aircraft spawning - singularly or in groups of two - for maritime patrol purposes. If the statement above proves true, relatively high numbers of aircraft per group should be reserved for long-ranged patrol bombers, because they need to cover a much bigger patrol area than shorter-range aircraft, especially in the suaezed SH5 world, where distances are bigger than in real world.

I wish to know your thoughts on these points guys

[vdr1981]

Originally Posted by gap

Anyway, after your suggestion, I will be adding "filler" air groups to fill the possible intervals between an "active" air group and the next one. These air groups will do nothing but spawning one (or whatever is the minimum safe number) unarmed and short-ranged aircraft. Filler groups will also be used at the beginning and/or at the end of the whole air group sequence, in case a base is not active since day one and/or until the last day of the campaign that it will be used on. To keep on with my previous example, after the aforementione changes the cfg file looks like this:

[Unit]
ClassName=RAFNortholt        ;-50087.640000    6186482.280000
3DModelFileName=data/Land/LAB_LargeAirBaseGB/LAB_LargeAirBaseGB
UnitType=406
MaxSpeed=0.000000
MinSpeed=0.000000
Length=1
Width=1

[AirGroup 1]
StartDate=19390801
EndDate=19400617
Squadron1Class=Trainer
Squadron1No=1

[AirGroup 2]
StartDate=19400618
EndDate=19400622
Squadron1Class=FHurricaneMkI    ;No. 1 Sqn. RAF (fighter squadron, No. 11 Group - Battle of Britain)
Squadron1No=5

[AirGroup 3]
StartDate=19400623
EndDate=19400731
Squadron1Class=Trainer
Squadron1No=1

[AirGroup 4]
StartDate=19400801
EndDate=19400908
Squadron1Class=FHurricaneMkI    ;No. 1 Sqn. RAF (fighter squadron, No. 11 Group - Battle of Britain)
Squadron1No=6

[AirGroup 5]
StartDate=19400909
EndDate=19450930
Squadron1Class=Trainer
Squadron1No=1


;****************** THE END ******************

What do you think?

That sounds OK to me but again, my knowledge of airplanes mechanics in the campaign is quite limited. I guess it should work generally. I'll make sure to post my findings as soon I learn something new about planes...

[gap]

Originally Posted by vdr1981

That sounds OK to me but again, my knowledge of airplanes mechanics in the campaign is quite limited. I guess it should work generally. I'll make sure to post my findings as soon I learn something new about planes...

Thank you for your support Vecko

If you don't mind, for now I have one last question: during your SH5 debugging activity, have you met any major problem - as ctd's or severe lags - connected with the large number of aircraft being drawn by the game at the same time? In other words: is there a limit that I should conform with when assigning planes to an air group, or I can be relatively free in equipping them with a (more or less) realistic number of aircraft?