Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Lancaster and Lincoln

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Lancaster and Lincoln Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/2/2006 11:47:33 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

The squadrons that were meant to be part of Tiger Force were combined into groups ("Wings") to make some space in the air group database. So that is why you don't see the individual squadrons. They are all there (including No.9 and No.617) as part of these larger formations.


They are all "there" only in the sense of being listed. Since these units only appear in October 1945, they are virtually never going to enter play.
And they cannot be used from India when they could have been used and, apparently, were actually used. I do not see why a player who gets them earlier cannot transfer them to join Tiger Force if the war lasts long enough? And I also do not understand why the wing that commanded them in India could not also transfer. This never happened - but IF the Tiger Force had stood up clearly these units would have transferred. Don't you think the wing did too? Why are they NOT in India earlier?

And why is the Lincoln which essentially was never built (those that were are not bombers) present at all? Does not this represent a slot we can free up? Do you think the Mark I (F.E.) which eventually was built and which did go to the Far East post war - should be used?

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 61
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/2/2006 1:18:42 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again
They are all "there" only in the sense of being listed. Since these units only appear in October 1945, they are virtually never going to enter play.
And they cannot be used from India when they could have been used and, apparently, were actually used. I do not see why a player who gets them earlier cannot transfer them to join Tiger Force if the war lasts long enough? And I also do not understand why the wing that commanded them in India could not also transfer. This never happened - but IF the Tiger Force had stood up clearly these units would have transferred. Don't you think the wing did too?


I am not sure what you mean. Each Wing replaces three squadrons. As mentioned this was done to make some space in the air group file. The same thing has been done with the B-29 squadrons, which have also been combined into Groups. There is now not enough room to separately represent all of the Tiger Force squadrons (or the B-29 squadrons).

quote:

Why are they NOT in India earlier?


I didn't set the dates for the arrival of Tiger Force, so I cannot answer that question, but it may be that they do arrive a bit later than they should. The current dates are spread between October and December 1945, whereas I have seen one comment stating that they were meant to arrive between August and November. So it may be that they should be arriving a little earlier.

quote:

And why is the Lincoln which essentially was never built (those that were are not bombers) present at all?


It was intended to include Lincoln bombers in Tiger Force, which is why they have been included.

quote:

Does not this represent a slot we can free up? Do you think the Mark I (F.E.) which eventually was built and which did go to the Far East post war - should be used?


We could use the MkI (FE) or the MkVII (FE). I decided on the MkVII, but I am not sure which would have been the most numerous type, or whether there is enough of a difference between the two models to worry about it.

Andrew


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 62
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/3/2006 1:06:33 AM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1900
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline
Andrew/Sid

An idea for freeing up slots for CHs if not already being done - remove the Soviet I15 & I16 as the Soviet units start with the Type24 I16 anyway, don't remember about the Matrix stock versions though.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 63
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/3/2006 1:38:09 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

An idea for freeing up slots for CHs if not already being done - remove the Soviet I15 & I16 as the Soviet units start with the Type24 I16 anyway, don't remember about the Matrix stock versions though


You forgot that CHINA uses these planes. Or some of them. I am not sure we need FIVE slots for I-15 and I -16!! Probably two will serve. Will check this out.


(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 64
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/3/2006 1:44:39 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

I am not sure what you mean. Each Wing replaces three squadrons. As mentioned this was done to make some space in the air group file.


This is getting very confusing for me also. I have no idea what you mean - except theoretically. I see all these bomber units in the 177 files you sent to me. I also see plenty of free slots for Allied air units as well. Are you saying all this has changed since I sent them back? Obviously, I cannot see or know what is not in files I have a version of. I am basing my comments on either 155 or 177 - which as far as I can tell are virtually identical for Allied Air units. I am reviewing aircraft - but in the context of squadrons in the game.

IF you are saying these units were removed in favor of wings,
AND IF you are saying you don't think the two squadrons of Lancasters in India can be added during the historical war period,
I wonder if you need the Lancaster at all? I am inclined to put it in - but only if it is available when it was and where it was. Tiger Force is all fiction - planned deployments which never occurred - planned for after the atom bombs become factors - very late units that probably are not needed at all. If we followed USSBS reasoning the game would end on 1 November 1945 in any case - and if Japan is not defeated by then I regard it as having won the war.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 65
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/3/2006 1:48:12 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

I didn't set the dates for the arrival of Tiger Force, so I cannot answer that question, but it may be that they do arrive a bit later than they should. The current dates are spread between October and December 1945, whereas I have seen one comment stating that they were meant to arrive between August and November. So it may be that they should be arriving a little earlier.


My RAF Aircraft reference article on Lancaster lists these two squadrons as Pacific Theater - and it does not list Tiger Force at all. WITP lists them with Tiger Force and I ASSUME they would have joined it - but they were already in theater and participated in fighting in Burma from NE India. I think they should be in the game. I am willing to get rid of Tiger Force altogether - although I have not done so. But the main reason to have Lancaster at all is that it is a type used DURING the war - and I see no sense in having two slots for such a late plane - so I am getting rid of Lincoln - of which only 9 were ever made - and none were bombers.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 66
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/3/2006 1:54:47 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

We could use the MkI (FE) or the MkVII (FE). I decided on the MkVII, but I am not sure which would have been the most numerous type, or whether there is enough of a difference between the two models to worry about it.


The main production models were Mark I and Mark III. The Mark I (FE) was eventually made and even sent to the Pacific - in 1946. It is essentially re-engined Mark I and Mark IIs. Other marks were not really made in numbers, or were not bombers at all. But the biggest problem with trying to put in more than one mark is that we don't have good data for all the sub variants. The types that were not built never got to run trials, so data would be pretty iffy even if we could find it. While I do see an "electronic warfare" plane type in the database, I don't think it works for WITP (it may be for NATO - not yet done). The two units that really went to the Pacific had Mark III - and all the units that deployed before 1946 would have had to use it as well - since Mark I (FE) did not go into production (conversion actually) until about February 1946. That is so late I think it is best to stay with Mark III for everything. All I know about the Mark I (FE) is that it had different engines, and was modified to give it more range (which I assume means adding fuel tanks of some kind, and possibly reducing bomb load).

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 67
DO-24K - 2/3/2006 1:58:30 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
There is an English source stating DO-24K has 12 hard points for 50 kg bombs.

I have added 50kg bombs as a device - permitting JAAF to use them which until now it could not - and configured DO-24K to use its historic armament. If it had hard points, it also had a bomb sight, so the accuracy will be normal. This is 600 kg of bombs - and no torpedos. Dutch sources give it less range than other sources indicate, but I am following them anyway - since they seem to be accurate in details otherwise missing in most references.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 68
75 mm Gun Mark 6 - 2/3/2006 2:01:32 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
I have added the allied 75 mm gun - but not yet applied it to any aircraft. It was mounted on some B-25 and some B-26 - but I need to figure out what is the best candidate - and what else changes when it is added.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 69
Rockets - 2/3/2006 2:03:12 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
A test of Swordfish with 6 ASW rockets finds they are surprisingly effective. Surprising because their accuracy is 1 - due to not firing more than 1 per tube. 38% hit in strafing attacks.

I hope to learn if they work in air air combat on fighters from other tests.

I added a smaller Type 1 rocket to the A6M8 as well.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 70
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/3/2006 7:11:26 PM   
Skyros


Posts: 1570
Joined: 9/29/2000
From: Columbia SC
Status: offline
The Chinese use the I-16c.
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

An idea for freeing up slots for CHs if not already being done - remove the Soviet I15 & I16 as the Soviet units start with the Type24 I16 anyway, don't remember about the Matrix stock versions though


You forgot that CHINA uses these planes. Or some of them. I am not sure we need FIVE slots for I-15 and I -16!! Probably two will serve. Will check this out.





_____________________________


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 71
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/3/2006 10:07:52 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
Between them the Russians and the Chinese use all but one of five types of I-15 and I-16.

I 16 Type 24 is not used.

IL-2 and IL-2M are not used.

IL-4 is not used.

LaGG-3 is not used.

MiG-3 is not used.

YAK-1/3 & 5 are not used.

Any reason to keep them? Is the air OB wrong for any of these?


(in reply to Skyros)
Post #: 72
B25 and B-26 data - 2/3/2006 10:11:41 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
The B-26A is used with torpedoes historically - at Midway and with effect in the SW Pacific area.

The B-25H is used late in the war with the 75mm gun. An earlier version also had it - but it was a heavier gun and not successful. The B-25 also carried 8 rockets late in the war.

I hope to create slots for B-26A and B-25H - and possibly a US 5 inch rocket - this latter will be hard unless there are more air ordnance slots.


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 73
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/4/2006 12:43:59 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again
My RAF Aircraft reference article on Lancaster lists these two squadrons as Pacific Theater - and it does not list Tiger Force at all. WITP lists them with Tiger Force and I ASSUME they would have joined it - but they were already in theater and participated in fighting in Burma from NE India.


What do your sources say were the arrival dates for No.9 and No.617 squadrons in India?


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 74
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/4/2006 12:53:03 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again
I wonder if you need the Lancaster at all? I am inclined to put it in - but only if it is available when it was and where it was. Tiger Force is all fiction - planned deployments which never occurred - planned for after the atom bombs become factors - very late units that probably are not needed at all.


Since the CHS scenario can run up to March 1946, the scenario includes all forces that would realistically have participated in the war if it had actually lasted that long. That is why Tiger Force is included in CHS, and will remain so.

This is not taken to the extreme though - only forces that would have been present by the end of 1945 are actually included. Anything that would have arrived later than that is not included, even if it may have been in action by March 1946.

Andrew

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 75
RE: Sea Hurricanes - 2/4/2006 3:38:31 AM   
Hipper

 

Posts: 254
Joined: 6/15/2004
Status: offline
I had not realised one was still flying


00007 Sea Hurricane
Oldest airworthy Hawker Hurricane in the world. Sea Hurricane Z7015 is owned and operated by the Shuttleworth Trust. Orginally built as a Mk1, after service with the RAF it was converted for Naval use with the addition of an arrestor hook. The aircraft flew with No 880 Squadron Fleet Air Arm during 1941 but when the squadron embarked on HMS Indomitable Z7015 was absent. Her individual squadro letter is unknown, so when the "7" code number was applied to the restored aircraft the code letter 'L' was added in honour of David Lee (deputy Director, as was, IWM Duxford)contribution.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 76
RE: B25 and B-26 data - 2/4/2006 3:49:52 AM   
sspahr

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The B-26A is used with torpedoes historically - at Midway and with effect in the SW Pacific area.


When did B-26's use torpedoes in the SW pacific?

I found this on the net http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avb26.html :

Four Marauders were used in the torpedo-bomber role at the Battle of Midway in June 1942, scoring no hits and losing two of their number. Torpedo-carrying Marauders attacked the Japanese carrier RYUJO off the Aleutians the same day, but no hits were scored. These were the first and last times the Marauder saw combat with the USAAF as a torpedo bomber.



(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 77
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/4/2006 6:16:40 AM   
TheElf


Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Between them the Russians and the Chinese use all but one of five types of I-15 and I-16.

I 16 Type 24 is not used.

IL-2 and IL-2M are not used.

IL-4 is not used.

LaGG-3 is not used.

MiG-3 is not used.

YAK-1/3 & 5 are not used.

Any reason to keep them? Is the air OB wrong for any of these?




Umm what are you saying here? It doesn't make sense...

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES



(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 78
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/4/2006 6:10:40 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

What do your sources say were the arrival dates for No.9 and No.617 squadrons in India?


Nothing except they participated in operations in 1944 over Burma.
I assume that implies a 1944 arrival date. Probably we can find a unit history - but except for Japan and USA I do not have detail unit histories on a comprehensive basis.


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 79
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/4/2006 6:15:07 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Since the CHS scenario can run up to March 1946, the scenario includes all forces that would realistically have participated in the war if it had actually lasted that long. That is why Tiger Force is included in CHS, and will remain so.

This is not taken to the extreme though - only forces that would have been present by the end of 1945 are actually included. Anything that would have arrived later than that is not included, even if it may have been in action by March 1946.


I had a number of discussions about this with Joe - who opposes virtually all late war units. I took the position that CHS should be what you say here it is. Unfortunately it isn't. For example, most Japanese ships that would have completed are not present, but Allied ships are even into 1946. And the same can be said for air units. I want to add the Japanese ships - and you even said I could - but there are no slots at all for them to go in. [But there are hundreds of slots devoted to auxiliary minesweepers and subchasers armed with on .30 cal, and falsely rated as equal to real MS and SC - and similar things.] This is something I hope to address - but having been diverted from dealing with ships - I have not yet done so except to define the missing submarines (which I think matter) and surface ships (which may not matter).

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 80
RE: B25 and B-26 data - 2/4/2006 6:19:30 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

I found this on the net http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avb26.html :

Four Marauders were used in the torpedo-bomber role at the Battle of Midway in June 1942, scoring no hits and losing two of their number. Torpedo-carrying Marauders attacked the Japanese carrier RYUJO off the Aleutians the same day, but no hits were scored. These were the first and last times the Marauder saw combat with the USAAF as a torpedo bomber.


This information is correct but incomplete - so its conclusions are wrong.
Apparently some were also used in the SW Pacific area in 1942, and with more than one air force. I do not know details of successes, except there were some. Also, there is a USMC version of the B-25 called PBJ which was torpedo armed. By 1943 there were eight squadrons - and by 1945 four more were in training.


(in reply to sspahr)
Post #: 81
Test results - 2/4/2006 6:21:44 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
The three early Zero models had a drop tank! It is also in the device list!
Has been since stock - but was never implemented. I have implemented it for use by testers.

I have a report the 57mm gun on the Ki-102 works.

I have submitted torpedo and 75mm armed US medium bombers for testing


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 82
RE: Test results - 2/4/2006 9:08:01 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The three early Zero models had a drop tank! It is also in the device list!
Has been since stock - but was never implemented. I have implemented it for use by testers.



How do drop tanks work in WITP? I always thought they were just figured in as part of the range in WITP.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 83
RE: B25 and B-26 data - 2/4/2006 11:53:29 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

I found this on the net http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avb26.html :

Four Marauders were used in the torpedo-bomber role at the Battle of Midway in June 1942, scoring no hits and losing two of their number. Torpedo-carrying Marauders attacked the Japanese carrier RYUJO off the Aleutians the same day, but no hits were scored. These were the first and last times the Marauder saw combat with the USAAF as a torpedo bomber.


This information is correct but incomplete - so its conclusions are wrong.
Apparently some were also used in the SW Pacific area in 1942, and with more than one air force. I do not know details of successes, except there were some. Also, there is a USMC version of the B-25 called PBJ which was torpedo armed. By 1943 there were eight squadrons - and by 1945 four more were in training.





From - http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b26_19.html

"The Marauder could carry an 18-inch 2000-pound torpedo slung on an external rack underneath the fuselage. On the ground, the torpedo only cleared the ground by about four inches when taxiing. In June, the B-26A made its debut as a torpedo bomber, being used against Japanese warships during the Battle of Midway. Four Marauders were equipped with external torpedo racks underneath the keel and took off on June 4, 1942 in an attempt to attack Japanese carriers. The torpedo runs began at 800 feet altitude, the B-26s then dropping down to only ten feet above the water under heavy attack from Japanese fighters. Two of the Marauders were lost in this action, and the other two were heavily damaged. No hits were made on the Japanese carriers. The B-26 was much too large an aircraft for this type of attack."


and From - http://www.vectorsite.net/avb26.html

"While the USAAF was grappling with the difficulties of getting the new bomber into operation, in October 1941 Martin began delivering the next variant, the "B-26A", with 139 built. This variant dealt with the range issue by accommodating a removeable fuel tank in the bombbay. The B-26A had torpedo shackles on the bombbay doors to allow it to carry a single 900 kilogram (2,000 pound) torpedo; replaced the nose and tail 7.62 millimeter guns with 12.7 millimeter guns; and changed the electrical system from 12 to 24 volts DC.....

Four Marauders were used in the torpedo-bomber role at the Battle of Midway in June 1942, scoring no hits and losing two of their number. Torpedo-carrying Marauders attacked the Japanese carrier RYUJO off the Aleutians the same day, but no hits were scored. These were the first and last times the Marauder saw combat with the USAAF as a torpedo bomber. ...

...The British apparently used them initially as torpedo-bombers in the Mediterranean with considerably greater success than had been enjoyed by the USAAF in that role. Marauders were also used for minelaying, maritime reconnaissance, and like the Maryland before it, as a fighter to intercept German transports flying to Africa. They later saw RAF and SAAF service in Italy and in support of Tito's partisans in Yugoslavia...

...This meant that the next production version was actually the "B-26F", which was put into production at the Baltimore plant in 1943, with 300 built. The B-26F was similar to early-block B-26Bs with -41 engines, but had the wing incidence shifted up by 3.5 degrees to shorten the takeoff run, though at a cost of a lower top speed. Experienced Marauder crews tended to regard such an "improvement" as a step backward. Provision for torpedo carriage was also removed. 200 of these aircraft were supplied to the RAF as "Marauder IIIs".

And for an interesting synopsis of the B-26 in the Pacific....http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/b026-18a.html

And the B-26 in general...http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/b026i.html













_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 84
RE: Test results - 2/5/2006 12:01:33 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

How do drop tanks work in WITP? I always thought they were just figured in as part of the range in WITP.


This is my view. Another view is they do nothing whatever. Yet another is that they make normal range only 8/10 of actual range. It may be that "normal range" is reduced by 1/10 compared to an identical plane without drop tanks (it SHOULD be - but is it?). And it may be that a mission to extended range has no bombs - or fewer bombs - compared to an identical plane without drop tanks (but is it?) This should be in the manual - or in a special editors technical manual (which I would pay for - hint hint)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 85
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/5/2006 1:36:31 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

What do your sources say were the arrival dates for No.9 and No.617 squadrons in India?


Nothing except they participated in operations in 1944 over Burma.
I assume that implies a 1944 arrival date. Probably we can find a unit history - but except for Japan and USA I do not have detail unit histories on a comprehensive basis.


Can you provide something more substantive? My understanding is that both No.617 and No.9 Squadrons were operating in Europe throughout 1944 (at least until November) trying to nail the Tirpitz. After that they remained operating in Europe until the German surrender. My information is sketchy however.

The only other information I have found is that No.617 Squadron deplyed to India in early 1946.


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 86
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/5/2006 2:05:35 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
no mention or listing of these two squadrons in Shores' third volume on Burma/India theater, 1944 or 45

FYI.



_____________________________


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 87
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/5/2006 2:07:57 AM   
sspahr

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
Andrew,

Have you seen this web site?

http://www.rafweb.org/Menu.htm

For 617 Squadron:

It was ... allocated to 'Tiger Force' but the need for this force vanished when the Japanese surrendered following the dropping of the Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However 617 did move to India in January 1946 by returned to Binbrook in the UK in May.

For 9 Squadron:

As the end of the war in Europe loomed, No 9 was earmarked for operations in the Far East as part of 'Tiger Force', ... . However, the Japanese surrender after the dropping of two A-bombs brought these plans to a close, although the squadron did move to India to undertake aerial survey work until April 1946.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 88
RE: Lancaster and Lincoln - 2/5/2006 2:12:55 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sspahr

Andrew,

Have you seen this web site?

http://www.rafweb.org/Menu.htm



Yes I have seen that site. It seems to be a good site for this sort of info, although it is a pity it is not more comprehensive.

Thanks,
Andrew

(in reply to sspahr)
Post #: 89
More tiger Force info - 2/5/2006 5:03:29 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
If it matters....


From: http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/14wing/about_us/history7_e.asp

Tiger Force - NO. 6614 Wing Greenwood
Three "Very Long Range" (VLR) bomber groups, each consisting of 22 Squadrons, (one RAF, one RCAF, and the third a composite British Commonwealth formation), were created and code-named "Tiger Force".

By Spring 1945, "Tiger Force" was scaled down to two groups, considerably smaller than originally proposed.

By 8 May 1945, almost immediately, the RCAF units earmarked for "Tiger Force" were converted to Canadian built Lancaster Bombers (MK X's) and returned to Canada for training and reorganization. No. 6614 Wing Greenwood was created. The plan called for the Wings to commence training for the Pacific in August, with the first Wing to arrive in the Pacific Theater by December.

The arrival of the new bomber Wing overlapped the phasing out of No. 8 (RCAF) OTU. The disbandment order for the OTU was to be effective 31 July 1945. By 1 August 1945, No. 664 (Heavy Bomber) Wing and its two squadrons (No. 405 and 408 Squadrons) were officially formed. Training was to commence 24 August 1945.

405 Squadron was Canada's first bomber squadron to form overseas, in April 1941. In April 1943, it became the RCAF's first and only Pathfinder Unit.


With the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the subsequent capitulation of Japan on 14 August 1945, No. 6614 Wing (and Tiger Force) became superfluous. On 5 September 1945, No. 6614 Wing officially disbanded as part of Tiger Force.


And from...
http://www.cadets.ca/_docs/cic/PIP-MOC-JOLC-Air_e.pdf
" When the war ended in Europe, The RCAF proceeded with plans to send a contingent of eight heavy bomber squadrons to the Pacific theater for operations with tiger force, a Commonwealth formation which was also to include ten RAF and two Royal Australian Air force (RAAF) bomber squadrons. The eight squadrons of No6 Group flew their Lancasters home to Canada in June, but the war in the far East ended before they had been re-formed and re-equipped."





< Message edited by treespider -- 2/5/2006 5:12:57 AM >


_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Lancaster and Lincoln Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.515