Slitherine

quote:

5) Why have transport skills anyway ? surely flying from AF A to AF B , any idiot from training can do this surely ? sure xp for bad weather tests etc , but even these should be a lot safer than active missions , even if unopposed. What is the transport skill used for in game ?

quote:

weather , its always horrible in Burma , so not flying in thunder/storm forecasts is not really an option or they would never fly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK

quote:

My team mate (LoBaron) any myself have been having a discussion about the allied transport a/c ops losses and what's causing them. From out chats we have come up with a wee list of things to check/ask.

1) Do planes get scrapped when fatigue gets too high ? , is there a % chance that a high fatigued airframe goes in the spares pile before the maintenance cycle ?

Write offs are a form of Op Loss - see s.7.2.1.14 on page 168 of the manual.

quote:

2) Are the high C47 losses just a result of us using a lot of them, and a/c in smaller numbers just don't get flagged as often so less noticeable ? One side note here :- I have been using the allied bomber groups in India to fly in supply to Burma (mythilinka etc.) for 2 solid months and not noticed an excessive loss of a/c. The Chinese SBIII's would be highly noticeable as there are nil replacements for them in the pools.

Yes

quote:

3) Range does (or should) be a factor , but even flying ledo-myth (3 hexes from L9 to a L6 airfield) seem to have similar losses as flying from Ledo to Chengtu (L5) Range 12. this seems odd ? On the game related note , Ledo to Myth has been 90% of the runs for the allied transport groups for the past 6 months.

Range is a factor in that it increases pilot fatigue, which is different from airframe metal fatigue. Both fatigues are factors in the game.

quote:

4) Pilot skills , Exp and transport skills are (I assume) the important ones , would setting up rear area training bases specifically for transport pilots eliminate most of these losses ? .. again the allied bombers have good exp but naff all transport skills.

Of the two, pilot experience is the relevant one for operational losses. Transport skill has one definite, and one inferred benefit. The definite benefit is concentration on training up transport skill will improve experience quicker than the scatter gun approach of "general" training. The inferred benefit is that IIRC, michaelm said that the quantum of supplies delivered via a supply drop to a non airfield is dependent on a die roll whereas air transported between airfields, the exact supply is delivered. If that interpretation is correct, and I may well be incorrect in my recollection, I would infer the transport skill plays a role.

quote:

5) Why have transport skills anyway ? surely flying from AF A to AF B , any idiot from training can do this surely ? sure xp for bad weather tests etc , but even these should be a lot safer than active missions , even if unopposed. What is the transport skill used for in game ?

Actually there is considerable adjustment required between flying a single and a multi engined aircraft. See above for my inferred comment regarding transport skill.

quote:

Additional note.

weather , its always horrible in Burma , so not flying in thunder/storm forecasts is not really an option or they would never fly.


Has anyone got anything to contribute to help try and shed some light on this. The point is to try and reduce the ops losses (2-3 every 2 days) to a rate where the pools for C47's actually accumulates.

Actually with that loss rate, you should still be increasing your C-47 pool.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tocaff

Alfred the color of your text is awful for these poor eyes.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz

Hi Rob,

.
.
.
If your goal is to reduce op losses then I can only recommend reducing the number of consecutive turns that you fly missions.

quote:

2) Are the high C47 losses just a result of us using a lot of them, and a/c in smaller numbers just don't get flagged as often so less noticeable ? One side note here :- I have been using the allied bomber groups in India to fly in supply to Burma (mythilinka etc.) for 2 solid months and not noticed an excessive loss of a/c. The Chinese SBIII's would be highly noticeable as there are nil replacements for them in the pools.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

I fly transport with 20-30 percent rest, and still have high losses, but not as high as before i started this. All pilots start at around 50 exp and 70 transport. Using 5-7 groups for supply and occasionally troop movement, and not accumulating C-47s in the pools.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
I wondered if in this area altitude makes any difference? Obviously the standard 6000 setting wouldn't get you over the Himalayas, and yet when I have the groups set to this level, they get to their destination. It can't be assumed this is 6000 over any surface, because performance would still be different. But does altitude have any bearing on Ops losses?