timtom
Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
|
The sources used for the CHS 1.60 USAAF OOB are:
Mauer, Mauer (ed.): Combat Squadrons of the Air Force World War II. Albert F. Simpson Historical Research Centre & Office of Air Force History Headquarters USAF 1982.
Mauer, Mauer (ed.): Air Force Combat Units of World War II. Office of Air Force History 1983.
Both are available (under M, of course) in PDF format here: https://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/Publications/authorindex.htm
The same sources have been used in this review, which works on the premise that it accepts the sqds allocated to the database rather than review the OOB in its entirety - so it isn't, strictly speaking, comprehensive.
Combat Squadrons of the Air Force World War II (CSAF) has played the starring role in this work, and Air Force Combat Units of World War II (AFCU) has only been used for sublementary information. CSAF, being a squadron by squadron account, obviously offers more detailed information, but I've organised this review on a group-by-group basis, as this seems to have been the basis unit of organisation, ie the squadrons with each group follow similar or identical trends.
CSAF holds information about hundreds of individual squadrons and the information given is thus necesarily brief. The main weakness for our purpose is the information about aircraft types and their usage by date, which is given somewhat generically. Type is given generally (P-38, P-39, P-40, etc) and on a year-by-year basis, so ofttimes a fair degree of guestimation is necesary.
The quicklink provided with each group leads to information lifted strait from AFCU.
A new source used in this review is the "Combat Chronology of the US Army Air Forces" (CC). The CC offers a month-by-month overview of USAAF combat operations. Occasionally individual squadrons are named in connection with specific aircraft. Fx, 67th Fighter Squadron is mentioned four times with P-400's between 3/42-10/42, seven times with P-39's between 10/42-3/44, and four times with P-38's between 4/44-3/45. By joining the dots it's possible to built up a picture of what aircrafts where used and when, as well as the relative importance of the respective aircraft. Fx, if a squadron is known to have used both P-39's and P-400 simultaniously, but there's five mentions of P-39's and one of P-400, it would lead one to suspect the P-39 to be the more important aircraft.
The Combat Chronology is available here: http://paul.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/wwii/usaf/html/
The CC isn't a source without limitations, but it does help answer some of questions left by CSAF. Further, my work on the P-47 only extends to 6/44, and none has been done on the P-51.
All three main sources originate with the USAF itself, and as such a high standard can reasonably be assumed.
Overall, I've been able to find little fault as such with the existing work other than a couple of honest mistakes which are quite possibly in the area of data entry rather than research. The questions I do raise are related to primarily to design and interpretation.
Even if we a 100% accurate picture of the OOB, the WitP system makes an exact representation impossible. The only question is what comprimises we want to make. The original CHS design put great emphasis on getting the Dec. 7 set-up right, even if that meant getting the late-war OOB wrong. Other expressions of this is the inclusion of marginal aircraft like the F2F-3, P-26, and P-35 - the latter is used by but one squadron, many of which are likely to be destroyed on the ground at Clark Field, and the rest will probably be shot down soon as they take to the air. This Dec 7 emphasis is one that I disagree with.
Another problem is that historically it was quite common for a squadron to use different aircraft simultaniously, and/or switch back and forth between types in a way not representable in WitP. I've tried to represent as many of the used aircraft types as possible. Where choices had to be made, I've tried to emphasise the aircraft actually used in combat.
In CHS 1.60 squadrons that served in the CBI will generally arrive in the US unless they transferred either from Europe or the East Coast. Personally I don't feel that the deployment of these units should reflect a command choice on the part of the player. Presumably the decision to send these units to the CBI was taking in Washington or even at an the intergovernmental level. Further, the layout of the map doesn't encourage movement between India and Oz after the fall of the DEI.
The issue about representing US West Coast strength is equally present with the fighter groups. CHS 1.60 gives the Allied player two groups - 327 & 328 - which saw no combat in the Pacific. They are good choices in as much as they didn't any combat anywhere else for that matter. Their potential impact on the game is obviously rather less than the heavy bomber equipped groups, and personally I don't really have any views on the matter.
This review was begun before CHS 2.00 was out, and thus refers to the CHS 1.60 database.
The following default upgrade paths will have to be changed under this scheme:
P-38F -> P-47C
P-39D -> P-38J
P-40B -> P-38J
P-40N -> P-51B/D Could be -> P-51B -> P-51D to allow P-51 upgrades prior to the 9/44 arrival of the D. With a P-51B replacement rate of 20, only a limited number of sqds could be upgraded. It might also create a bootleneck, which isn't necesarily a bad thing.
P-47C -> P-51D
P-400 -> P-38F or P-400 -> P-39D (no change)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 FG
35 FS: P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L or P-39D -> P-400 -> P-39D -> P-38J - P-38L
36 FS: P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L or P-39D -> P-400 -> P-39D -> P-38J - P-38L
80 FS P-400 -> P-38G - > P-38J -> P-38L
Note: The trouble here is the P-400’s, which were used alongside the P-39’s. 35 & 36 FS’ went P-38 until 44 apparently, while 80 FS got P-38’s early 43. 36 FS also used P-47’s, they can’t be incorporated without dropping the later P-38’s.
35 FS:
CSAF: P-39 41-43 * P-400 42-43 * P-38 44-45
CC: P-39: 3/42-5/43 * P-400 4/42-2/43 * P-38 7/44-8/45
36 FS:
CSAF: P-39 41-43 * P-400 42-43 * P-47 43-44 * P-38 44-45.
CC: P-39 3/42-5/43 * P-400 4/42-2/43 * P-47 12/43-2/44 * P-38 6/44-8/45
80 FS: P-39 42-43 * P-400 42-43 * P-38 43-45
CSAF: P-39 3/42- 2/43 * P-400 5/42-2/43 * P-38 3/43-8/45.
It seems all there sqds started with P-39’s, then mixed with P-400, shed them early 43, and went either pure P-39 or P-38. In the case of FS’ 35 & 36, P-39 -> P-400 -> P-39 -> P-38J is possible, in what case 80 FS has to be either P-39 or P-400 -> P-38G.
Alternatively, one sqd could be picked out to represent the group usage of the P-400, in what case I would suggest 80 FS.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=23
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 FG
45 FS: P-36A -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H
47 FS: P-40B -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H
78 FS: P-40B -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H
Note: Another group that used multiple aircraft. The main combat function of the group, at least as presented by the three sqd’s here, was to fly P-51 escort missions with 20 AF. 45 FS partook in the Gilbert operations, but other than that the sqd’s were tasked with defending PH until joining 20 AF in early 45.
This is why I’d like to end up with the P-51 eventually. This presents the problem of the P-47’s, which, according to CSAF, were used, among others, sometime between 43-45. The P-47 can be accommodated within this scheme (P-40 -> P-47C ->P-51) , but only by sacrificing the Dec.7 line-up or lumbering the sqd’s with that line-up until the arrival of the desired P-47 version.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=35
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 FG
24 FS: P-36A -> P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L, CZ throughout.
29 FS: P-40E -> P-38L or P-40B/E -> P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L. CZ, then to US for R&D 4/44
43 FS: P-40B/E -> P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L, or P-40E -> P-38L. CZ throughout.
Note: 24 & 43 FS’ stayed in the CZ throughout the war, while 29 FS went back to the US to do test-fly P-59’s & P-80’s, among others. 16 FG itself disbanded 11/43, its sqd’s transferred to XXVI Fighter Command. AFCU states it’s a P-40 group, but this doesn’t come through too strongly in the evidence.
However if the -> P-39 UP is chosen for FS’ 29 & 43, it will in effect turn 16 FG into a P-39 group.
Personally I favour the P-40E -> P-38L UP for these two sqds. The evidence just tells us that both aircraft were used, not in what numbers. Here we could take a cue from AFCU, letting 24 FS represent the P-39 influence in the group.
24 FS:
CSAF: P-36 41-42 * P-39 42-43 * 44-45 * P-40 43-44 * P-38 45.
CC: P-36 12/41-3/42 * P-39 1/43-8/44. No mention of P-40’s or P-38.
So probably P-36 -> P-39, which will lead to P-38.
29 FS:
CSAF: P-40 41-44 * P-39 42-44, after that, you name it, they’ve flown it, however P-38 44-45
CC: P-40 12/41-5/42 * P-39 3/42. Nowt else.
There’s no reference in CC to the type of P-40 used 12/41, so on this evidence (or lack thereof) the CHS 1.60 P-40B given to start could be an E instead.
43 FS:
CSAF: P-40 41-43, 44-45 * P-39 42-44 * P-38 45.
CC: P-40 12/41, nothing else.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=37
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 FG
12 FS: P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L
44 FS: P-40B/E -> P38J
70 FS: P-36 -> P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L
Note:
12 FS:
CSAF: P-39 42-43 * P-38 43-45
CC: P-39 2/42-2/43 * P-38 2/44-4/45
44 FS:
CSAF: P-40 41-44 * P-38 44-45
CC: P-40 12/41-12/42
44 FS flew P-40B’s on Dec.7. Under this scheme, it’ll either have to remain P-40B until upgrading to P-38, or start with the E. The main impact of giving this PH sqd B’s or E’s to start will be the heading under which it’ll appear in the aircraft losses table.
70 FS:
CSAF: P-36 41 * P-39 42-44 * P-40 43 * P-38 44-45
CC: P-36 12/41 * P-39 1/42-10/43 * P-38 12/42, 8/44-2/45
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=39
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 FG
46 FS: P-36A -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H
72 FS: P-39D -> P-51D - > P-51H, no aircraft to start.
Note: Cobbled together by taking 46 FS (15 FG), 72 FS (318 FG), and 531 FS, formerly 58 BS. Trained on P-39’s and P-38’s before receiving P-51’s and joining 20 AF early 45.
CC states that 72 FS had no aircrafts assigned. CSAF doesn’t even record the sqd having used P-26’s, according to which it flew P-38’s, P-39’s, P-40’s & P-51’s. The two aircraft actually used in combat are the P-39 (in the Gilberts) and the P-51 (with 20 AF), hence I would give preference to these two aircraft types. This in turn dictates P-39D -> P-51D.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=43
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23 FG
74 FS (1 AVG): P-40B -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H
75 FS (2 AVG): P-40B -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H
76 FS (3 AVG): P-40B -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H
Note: The AVG was absorbed into the USAAF in May of 42. Used P-40’s & P-51’s. According to CC, 74 & 76 FS’ used P-40 as late as 7 & 9/44 respectively. 75 FS’ is last reported with P-40’s 12/43. Thus the two former should strictly upgrade -> P-51D, but in order to start with P-40B’s, they have to be set to the default upgrade path.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=45
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 Pursuit Group
3 FS (Pursuit Squadron): N/U, disbanded 5/42
17 FS (Pursuit Squadron): N/U, disbanded 5/42
20 FS (Pursuit Squadron): N/U, disbanded 5/42
Note: Carried on paper after the PI debacle, but never manned until inactivated in ’46. Most of the aircraft were gone by 1/42 and it seems a good many pilots were evacuated. Some of these formed the 17th Pursuit Squadron (Provisional) on Java, later apparently absorbed into 40 FS.
CSAF credits the sqd’s with combat until 5/42, although probably mainly on the backs of the ground personal, who fought on as infantry.
CHS 1.60 has the sqd’s upgrade though the default -> P-47 line, which of course is as much fantasy as anything.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=46
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
32 FG
51 FS: P-36 or P-40B/E -> P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L or P-40E -> P-38L. CZ throughout.
52 FS: P-36A -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H. Disbanded 5/44
53 FS: P-36A -> P-40B -> P-47D -> P-47N or as 52 FS. CZ to 6/43, then US and ETO
Note: Another CZ FG, also disbanded 11/43, it’s sqd’s transferred to XXVI Fighter Command. 53 FS went to Europe with 36 FG.
51 FS:
CSAF: P-36 41-42 * P-40 42-44 * P-39 43-45 * P-38 44-45
CC: P-36 12/41 * P-40 12/41
The -> P-39 UP at least allows us to represent three out of four aircraft types used. The CC evidence could be used to justify that fourth aircraft being the P-36.
52 FS:
CSAF: P-36 41-42 * P-40 42-44 * P-39 43-44
CC: P-36 12/41
Under this scheme, the default P-36 -> P-40E upgrade will lead to the P-51, but as the sqd was disbanded in May 44, anything past this point is fantasy either way.
53 FS:
CSAF: P-36 41-42 * P-40 42-43 * P-47 43-45
CC: P-36 12/41 * P-40 1/43
Under my scheme, P-36 -> P-40 -> P-47 can’t be accommodated unless default P-40B -> P-47D, which would make this sqd P-36A -> P-40B -> P-47D. This would make impact on the 18 FS (343 FG) UP. However as the use of P-47’s only makes sense in relation to this sqd’s ETO deployment, it might be justified to take a cue from 52 FS’ UP.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=318
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
33 FG
58 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N
59 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N
60 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=55
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35 FG
39 FS: P-39D -> P-38F -> P-47C -> P-51D
40 FS: P-39D -> P-47C -> P-51D
41 FS: P-39D -> P-400 -> P-47C -> P-51D or P-400 -> P-47C -> P-51D
Note: A P-39/P-400 group before going P-47 in late ’43, then P-51 in early ’45. This can be reflected, if somewhat roughly, by P-47C UP default -> P-51. This means the group could receive both aircraft somewhat earlier than they did historically plus it’ll be P-47C all the way until the P-51’s arrive. According to Baugher (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p38_18.html ), 39 FS was the first SWPAC sqd to use the P-38. By setting the P-38F UP default to -> P-47C, 39 FS can use all three types of aircraft. Going P-38G means omitting both the P-47 & P-51.
There’s some uncertainty on my part about this group. One site states that went all P-400 during the spring of ’42, another that it was all P-38 by late summer of ’42. The CC isn’t very helpful here. So in the end I’ve gone with CSAF while trying to reflect the general trend of the group.
39 FS:
CSAF: P-39 41-42 * P-38 42-43 * P-47 43-45 * P-51 45
CC: P-39 12/41-7/42 * P-38 10/42-3/43 * P-47 12/43-1/44
40 FS:
CSAF: P-39 41-44 * P-47 44-45 * P-51 45
CC: P-39 12/41, 2/43 * P-400 2/43
41 FS:
CSAF: P-39 42-43 * P-400 42-44 * P-38 43 * P-47 44-45 * P-51 45
CC: P-39 12/41-1/42
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=57
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
37 FG
28 FS: P-40B/E -> P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L, or P-39D –> P-38L, or P-39D N/U. CZ throughout.
30 FS: P-40E -> P-38L, or P-40E N/U. CZ throughout
31 FS: P-40E -> P-38L, or P-40E N/U. CZ, then to US for R&D 4/44
Note: 28 & 30 FS’ stayed in the CZ throughout the war, while 31 FS went back to the US to do test-fly P-59’s & P-80’s. The 37 FG itself disbanded 11/43, its sqd’s transferred to XXVI Fighter Command.
28 FS:
CSAF: P-40’s 41-42 * P-39’s 42-45 * P-38’s in 45.
CC: P-26 12/41 * P-40’s 12/41 * P-39’s 5/42- 8/44.
There’s no mention of P-38’s. All three of the above UP’s are possible.
30 FS:
CSAF: P-40’s 41-45 * P-39’s 44-45 * P-38’s in 45.
CC : P-40’s 12/41-1/45 * P-39’s 1/45 only, no mention of P-38’s.
There’s no mention of the make of P-40 used, so unless further evidence can be found, the P-40B given in CHS 1.60 to start could just as well be the E model. This would allow the manual setting of the upgrade path to either P-38L or N/U.
31 FS:
CSAF: P-26 41-42 * P-40 41-44 * P-39 42-44.
CC: P-26 12/41-2/42 * P-40 12/41-9/42 P-39 5/42-9/42.
No mention of any aircraft after that. CSAF aircraft 44 onwards include A-24, A-25, P-38, P-51, P-59, P-63 & P-80. The type of P-40 isn’t given in either CSAF or CC, so I would suggest an UP similar to that of 30 FS.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=59
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
49 FG
7 FS: P-40E -> P-38J/L
8 FS: P-40E -> P-38J/L
9 FS: P-40E -> P-38G -> P-38J -> P-38L
Note: The trouble here’s that the group used P-40’s, P-47’s late 43, then P-38’s from mid-44. Dick Bong won his MoH flying the P-38 in the PI.
The P-47 could be accommodated by setting the default of the P-47C -> P-38J/L. However that means that 35 FG can’t go P-51. Further, 35 FG used the P-47 more extensively than 49 FG, plus there’s evidence that the latter used P-40’s concurrently with the P-47.
7 FS:
CSAF: P-40 42-44 * P-47 43-44 * P-38 44-45.
CC: P-40 2/42-5/44 * P-47 11/43 * P-38 6/44-2/45
8 FS:
CSAF: P-40 42-44 * P-47 43-44 * P-38 44-45.
CC: P-40 2/42-5/44 * P-47 8/43 * P-38 6/44-8/45
9 FS:
CSAF: P-40 42-43 * P-47 43-44 * P-38 43, 44-45
CC: P-40 2/42-3/42 * P-47 12/43-5/44 * P-38 3/43, 6/44-8/45
So CSAF and CC agree that P-40’s were in use with 7 & 8 FS’ during 44 – indeed they appear more frequently than the P-47 in the reports. This I submit as an argument for cutting out the P-47. If it is felt that a more modern fighter should be made available to compensate for the absence of the P-47, the UP could be set to P-40E -> P-38J.
9 FS is different in that it went P-38 early 43, hence the P-40E -> P-38G upgrade.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=71
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
51 FG
16 FS: P-40B/E -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H, Arrive Karachi 420312
25 FS: P-40B/E -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H, Arrive Karachi 420312
26 FS: P-40B/E -> P-40E -> P-40N -> P-51B/D -> P-51H, Arrive Karachi 420312
449 FS: No comments
Note: In California at the outbreak of war. Embarked for India the following month, and, via Oz and Ceylon, arrived in March 42. Spend the rest of the war in the CBI. If there ever was a CBI group worthy of being placed in the US, this is it. Still, I feel it’s more important to represent its 40 months in the CBI than the three months it spend elsewhere.
Used P-40’s (I’ve found no evidence which type) & P-51’s, except 26 FS which also flew P-38 some time in ’44. This can’t be incorporated, but 449 FS flies P-38’s, so they are represented in the group.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=73
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
54 FG
42 FS: P-39 N/U. Replacement training from 4/43, disbanded 4/44.
56 FS: P-39 N/U. Replacement training from 4/43, disbanded 4/44.
57 FS: P-39 N/U. Replacement training from 4/43, disbanded 4/44.
Note: Operated in Alaska during ’42, then withdrawn to train replacements on P-51’s until disbanded in April of 44. One option is to give the sqd’s no upgrade to limit the use of this group.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=76
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
58 FG
69 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N
310 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N
311 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=80
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
80 FG
88 FS: P-40E -> P-47D -> P-47N. Arrive 430628 Karachi.
89 FS P-40E -> P-47D -> P-47N. Arrive 430628 Karachi.
90 FS: P-40E -> P-47D -> P-47N. Arrive 430628 Karachi.
459 FS: No comments
Note: This group served in the CBI. In CHS 1.60 it is set to arrive in the US. I feel it should arrive in India, the earliest known date for which is June 28th 1943. However AFCU states that it was transported via the cape to Ceylon sometime in May.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=101
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
81 FG
91 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N, arrive 440225
92 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N, arrive 440322
93 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N, arrive 440301
Note: Transferred from the MTO, the AD’s given in CHS corresponds to the last known date present in Italy. Those above are the earliest known date present in India. Actual combat operations didn’t commence until June – at best.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=102
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
311 FG
528 FS: A-36A -> P-51B/D -> P-51H, Arrive 430920 Jamshedpur.
529 FS: A-36A -> P-51B/D -> P-51H, Arrive 430920 Jamshedpur.
530 FS: A-36A -> P-51B/D -> P-51H, Arrive 430920 Jamshedpur.
Note: Another group that served in the CBI but arrives in the US in CHS 1.60. Admittedly it seems that it moved via Oz, but things being what they are… AFCU places in at Nawadih in the Bengal by 430914, where as CSAF have the sqds arrive 17-20 September 43.
After using A-36’s initially, the group went P-51.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=132
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
318 FG
6 FS: P-40B/E -> P-47D -> P-47N
19 FS: P-40B/E -> P-47D -> P-47N
73 FS: P-40B/E -> P-47D -> P-47N
333 FS: P-39D -> P-47D -> P-47N or P-39D -> P-38L
Note: The group was stationed on HI until mid-44, when it moved to the Marianas. At this time it was a P-47 outfit. Later in the year it received some P-38’s, although I don’t know in what numbers. The description and photo’s given here http://www.web-birds.com/7th/318/318th.htm suggests to me that P-38 usage was more than incidental. Possibly one of 318 FG’s sqd’s should -> P-38L. However the P-47’s have already suffered badly in this review, and this can only be done at the cost of cutting out the sqd-in-question’s P-47’s.
6, 19 & 73 FS’ were equipped with P-40B’s on Dec.7. They will either have to keep the B’s until receiving P-47’s or start the game with E’s. They can’t go -> P-47C, as that leads to P-51’s.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=139
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
328 FG
326 FS: P-39D N/U. OTU, disbanded 3/44.
327 FS: P-39D N/U. OTU, disbanded 3/44.
329 FS: P-39D N/U. OTU, disbanded 3/44.
Note: Primarily a training organisation, but also tasked with WC air defence. Disbanded 31 March 1944.
A group given, presumably, to compensate for the absence of the many, many FS’ that spend some time in the western US during the war. I feel the sqd’s should be given either no upgrade or at least a late war one to avoid overstating its importance.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=149
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
329 FG
330 FS: P-38F/G N/U. Replacement training, disbanded 3/44.
331 FS: P-38F/G N/U. Replacement training, disbanded 3/44.
332 FS: P-38F/G N/U. Replacement training, disbanded 3/44.
Note: See 328 FG.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=150
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
343 FG
11 FS: P-40E N/A or P-40E -> P-38J/L
18 FS: P-36 -> P-40B -> P-38G/J
54 FS: P-40B/E -> P-38G -> P-38J -> P-38L
344 FS: P-40E N/A or P-40E -> P-38J/L
Note:
11 FS:
CSAF: P-36 41-42 * P-40 41-45 * P-38 43-45
CC: P-36 12/41 * P-40 12/41-7/45 * P-38 3/44-7-44
Given that CC lists it having both P-40’s (type unspecified) and P-36, I think one could be forgiven for ditching the P-36. This allows either no upgrade, as the P-40 seems to be the dominant aircraft, or -> P-38J/L if it is desired to reflect the P-38 used alongside the P-40 towards the end of the war.
18 FS:
CSAF: P-36 41 * P-40 41-45 * P-39 43 * P-38 43-45
CC: P-36 12/41 * P-40 4/42-2/43 * P-38 3/44
CC is fairly adamant about the P-36’s, even giving the number of aircraft (20). This, however, creates something of a headache - under this scheme - if the -> P-40 -> P-38 UP is desired. One compromise would be P-36 -> P-40B -> P-38G/J, which requires the P-40B default UP to be set to the desired P-38 version.
54 FS:
CSAF: P-36 41-42 * P-40 41-42 * P-38 42-45
CC: P-36 12/41 * P-40 12/41-5/42 * P-38 3/43
According to Baugher (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p38_18.html ), 54 FS was the first unit to use P-38’s overseas in the Pacific. If 54 FS -> P-38F, then either the scheme for 35 FG falls apart or 54 FS will upgrade -> P-47 -> P-51, neither of which it used historically.
Options include having it arrive with P-38F’s, possibly using its arrival date to Alaska (420522) or thereabouts as its AD, or simply having it go P-40B/E -> P-38G, that is to retain its CHS 1.60 UP. 54 FS wouldn’t be unique in having a fudged UP…
344 FS:
CSAF: P-40 42-45 * P-38 44-45
CC: P-40 10/42-12/43
See 11 FS
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=164
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
347 FG
67 FS: P-400 -> P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L
68 FS: P-40B/E -> P-39D -> P-38J -> P-38L
339 FS: P-38G -> P-38J -> P-38L
Note: 347 FG was activated on New Caledonia 10/42 and composed of 67 & 68 FS’ from 58 FG. 339 FS was a newly activated sqd. Although predominantly a P-39 -> P-38 group, it like most of the early war FG’s used multiple aircraft types concurrently – fx, when activated, 339 FS was equipped with P-38’s, P-39’s & P-400’s.
67 FS:
CSAF: P-400 42 * P-39 42-44 * P-38 44-45
CC: P-400 3/42-10/42 * P-39 10/42-3/44 * P-38 4/44-3/45
68 FS:
CSAF: P-400 42 * P-39 42-44 * P-40 41-43 * P-38 42-45
CC: P-39 3/42-12/43 * P-40 5/42-4/43 * P-38 2/44-3/45
The sqd used P-39’s & P-40’s simultaneously. If the UP is to lead to P-38’s, the only way to fit the P-40 is by having the sqd starts with P-40’s.
339 FS:
CSAF: P-400 42 * P-39 42-43 * P-38 42-45
CC: P-400 10/42 * P-39 10/42 * P-38 10/42-3/45
Although a mixed sqd to start, I would recommend the P-38, as it figures quite prominently with 339 FS in the CC during the last months of ’42.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=168
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
348 FG
340 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N
341 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N,
342 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N,
460 FS: P-47C -> P-47D -> P-47N, arrive 7/44-8/44, Oz or US
Note: According to CSAF, 460 FS was constituted from the 1st Airdrome Squadron (a service unit, I believe) 440711, which had been in Oz since mid-43.
Pilots, aircraft, and at least some of the ground crew arrived later, according to the following quote: “Stanaway, in his book, Kearby’s Thunderbolts, gives the following explanation of the formation of the 460th Fighter Squadron: In July (1944) the 348th became the only Group in the Southwest Pacific with four operational squadrons when the 460th Fighter Squadron arrived from the States with an untested cadre of pilots and ground crews. But before the 460th could enter the fighting, they needed to get ready. “We went to Nadzab, in the Markham Valley, and started receiving pilots for the 460th,” said Carter. “After lots of training with the new pilots, we moved to Noemfoor and did more training.” As of the 28th of August, 1944, 24 new pilots from the pool at Port Moresby, New Guinea, had been chosen and assigned to the new 460th Fighter Squadron. According to Stanaway, “By September 1, 1944 the 460th was in training in the back water of the war and was becoming combat ready.” Before long the pilots of the new 460th Fighter Squadron joined the other squadrons of the 348th Fighter Group in flying escort, patrol, reconnaissance, strafing, and ground support missions.” http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/p-47/42-8066/william-carter.html
CSAF credits the sqd with combat operations from the end of August 44, and it seem to me that it should be given an AD to match.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=169
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
407 FG
515 FS: Delete or A-24 -> A-36 -> P-51
Note: Started life as 407th Bombardment Group (Dive), comprising 632, 633, 634 & 635 BS’. The A-24 equipped air echelons went to the Aleutians July-August ’43. Actual combat operations seem to be restricted to one week during the Kiska invasion. The largest number of A-24’s operating on any one day per CC is 16. Withdrawn back to Florida before the end of August. Renamed 407th Fighter-Bomber Group (515, 516, 517 FS’, 635 BS disbanded). Replacement training until disbanded 4/44.
In CHS 1.60 the group is represented by 515 FS only. Even this could be said to be overstating it.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=228
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
413 FG
1 FS: No comments
21 FS (21 Pursuit): P-40E -> P-47D -> P-47N, original 21 FS disbanded 5/42
34 FS (34 Pursuit): P-35 -> P-47D -> P-47N, original 34 FS disbanded 5/42
Note: 21st & 34th Pursuit Squadrons, after having been destroyed as fighting formations in the PI, were carried on as paper formations before being inactivated in 46. 21st & 34th Fighter Squadrons were activated 10/44, and had nothing to do with 21 & 34 PS’. In CHS the latter are carried throughout, representing the former also.
Suggesting P-35 -> P-47D of course saddles the player with the P-35 until late 43, but this is still more force than was available historically. Then again, 34 FS is the only sqd to use the P-35, and perhaps it’s a bit extravagant to use a slot for just one sqd…
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=234
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
414 FG
413 FS: Arrive 450605
437 FS: No comments
456 FS: No comments
Note: CSAF gives the last known state side date as 450605 - the CHS 1.60 AD of all but 413 FS, which is given as 450615. Probably a typo.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=235
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
475 FG
431 FS: Arrive 430514
432 FS: Arrive 430514
433 FS: Arrive 430514
Note: AFCU states that the group was activated 430414 and constituted (named) 430515. The former date is used in CHS 1.60. CSAF states that the group was activated 430514 and named 430515, which makes me suspect that the activation date given in AFCU is a typo – and I can’t think why the AAF would wait a month to number the group. Further, both AFCU and CSAF have to physical placement for the group prior to 430514. Also note that the group didn’t actually commence operations until August.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=285
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
506 FG
457 FS: No comments
458 FS: No comments
462 FS: No comments
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=313
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
507 FG
463 FS: No comments
464 FS: No comments
465 FS: No comments
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=314
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
508 FG
466 FS: No comments
467 FS: No comments
468 FS: No comments
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=315
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Air Commando Group
5 FS (Commando): P-51B -> P-47C -> P-51D -> P-51H, arrive 12/43-2/44
6 FS (Commando): P-51B -> P-47C -> P-51D -> P-51H, arrive 12/43-2/44
Note: 1 ACG went under a number of names - most notably 5318th Provisional Unit (Air) - before getting its official name. It was originally formed to operate in support of the Chindits, and did so during the 2nd Chindit operation commencing March 5 1944.
CHS 1.60 has the FS’ arrive 9/44, which is the month they were officially constituted. Obviously they were in existence as fighting formations well before this date. From what I can find, they were in India before the end of December 1943. The same applies for 319th TCS. At the very least they should be available before 3/44.
The FS’ operated P-51’s initially, then to P-47 mid-44, then back to P-51’s mid-44. This can be accommodated in the upgrade path (sort of).
http://www.chindits.info/Thursday/AirCommando.htm
http://www.comcar.org/Air%20Commando%20Group/air_commando_groups_home.htm
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Air Commando Group
1 FS (Commando): Arrive 441214 Jamshedpur
2 FS (Commando): Arrive 441215 Jamshedpur
Note: 2 ACG historically operated in the CBI, but in CHS 1.60 its squadrons (incl. 317 TCS) arrive in the US, and are hence unlikely to ever get to the CBI. Hence I propose to have them arrive in the CBI. AFCU places the group in the Bengal by 11/44, however the fighter squadrons didn’t arrive until the middle of the following month.
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=6
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Air Commando Group
3 FS (Commando): No comments
4 FS (Commando): No comments
http://www.armyairforces.com/dbgroups.asp?Group=10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also
32 FS: Delete
Note: A CZ-only sqd arriving early ’44. Several of the CZ sqds in CHS 1.60 were disbanded or withdrawn at this time, so I feel 32 FS could reasonably be excluded for this reason.
418 NFS: No comments
419 NFS: No comments
421 NFS: No comments
426 NFS: Arrive 440809 India
427 NFS: Arrive 441031 India
Note: Both sqds served in the CBI – I feel the time and place of arrival should reflect this.
547 NFS: Arrive 440805
548 NFS: Arrive 440902
549 NFS: Arrive 441004
550 NFS: Arrive 441102
Note: The dates given above reflect the last known date of stateside deployment before going overseas. The CHS 1.60 AD’s makes these units available up to six months before they actually saw combat. Given that the Allied player won’t be sort of airpower by mid-44, maybe slightly less generous AD’s could be argued for.
< Message edited by timtom -- 6/15/2006 10:22:21 PM >
_____________________________
Where's the Any key?  |
Printable Version
CHS 2.0x OoB Errata - 
Dutch
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