RE: Aircraft Loads

RE: Aircraft Loads (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding

Message

Shark7 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 4:03:54 AM)
This also begs the question, can a Depth Charge device now be used with code 64 on the ASW mission. One that certianly comes to mind is the Ka-1 which did carry DCs.

btbw -> OT: question (10/3/2012 4:53:33 AM)
OT: Can Nell got MAD also? It was very successfull sub hunter in real life.

n01487477 -> RE: OT: question (10/3/2012 5:49:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: btbw OT: Can Nell got MAD also? It was very successfull sub hunter in real life. G3M3 Nell has H-6 Radar and the editor is always available to add MAD too.

michaelm75au -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 8:49:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 This also begs the question, can a Depth Charge device now be used with code 64 on the ASW mission. One that certainly comes to mind is the Ka-1 which did carry DCs. I guess that would be why I was asked to add ASW as a filter. Just noticed that it does not show any ASW device types on aircraft screens. Uses the weapon for combat but not showing is had to tell if it has one. I'll add that to the next beta.

LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 10:04:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: US87891 quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget Anyone willing to share data or a modded WITPairxxx.csv with poor souls like me who have little time to spare for their own research and little knowledge about things that can fly to start with...? [sm=innocent0001.gif] Data for what kind of planes and for what year(s)? Alternative loads (both kinds) have been in the editor since the beginning and there’s gobs and gobs of alternative loads in private mods floating around but they are have different ideas about what is good. I know Treespider is looking at level bombers. Jeremy’s people have been playing with adaptive ground support for a year or two. (Heh, you should see what the Marines think is a decent loadout for their CSFBs on their Commencement Bay carriers !!!!) Lots of alternatives change almost year by year for many planes. And other groups have other ideas about what to do and when to do it and who to do it to so there’s a dozen or so viable alternatives out there. If you could give an idea about what you want to accomplish I’m sure there’s somebody with just the ticket. The alternative (pun, pun) is you’ll get swamped by all the alternative alternatives [:D] 1. I mean data for typical payloads for the different missions of each aircraft, i.e. Betty: AP=4x500lb GP, N=4x500lb AP, n=torp, G=8x100lb GP (random figures just for ex.) etc. Maybe I misunderstood, but I have checked mods in this subforum, including latest DBB, RA 4.6, Nikademus GC May42, (Almost)HistoricalMod, Treespider - none of them uses filters and mission-specific payloads. Can you point me to those private mods which use them? 2. Clarification question: Can I define different bombloads for the same mission, e.g. G=4x250lb GP and G=10x100lb GP - will this work and if so, how will the engine decide which payload to use? 3. Clarification question: the toggle "use torps" will force use of torps - if available - regardless of whether torps are set as 02 or 04? Stupid question, just to be sure... 3. When bombs are set to naval attack 02, search missions no longer have bombs > no "search-strikes" anymore with the chance of attacking targets of opportunity during search missions [:(] quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 This also begs the question, can a Depth Charge device now be used with code 64 on the ASW mission. LOL - first thing I experimented with after learning about those filters [:)]

michaelm75au -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 12:34:58 PM)
quote: 2. Clarification question: Can I define different bombloads for the same mission, e.g. G=4x250lb GP and G=10x100lb GP - will this work and if so, how will the engine decide which payload to use? No. If you did define multiple slots with same filter, they all would be included if matched the mission. Not sure about naval where there is an alternate load??? quote: 3. Clarification question: the toggle "use torps" will force use of torps - if available - regardless of whether torps are set as 02 or 04? Stupid question, just to be sure... Yes. Torpedo should be type 02 and bomb equivalent as 04. But it should handle the other way. Was designed as a torpedo replacement, though. quote: 3. When bombs are set to naval attack 02, search missions no longer have bombs > no "search-strikes" anymore with the chance of attacking targets of opportunity during search missions [:(] They should carry the extended bomb load as if a naval attack mission. Search and ASW only use the weapon list from the Extended side of the a/c table. I am tweaking some of the filters in the code at the moment, as slots with multiple values seem to lose this value sometimes.

treespider -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 1:03:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget quote: ORIGINAL: US87891 quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget Anyone willing to share data or a modded WITPairxxx.csv with poor souls like me who have little time to spare for their own research and little knowledge about things that can fly to start with...? [sm=innocent0001.gif] Data for what kind of planes and for what year(s)? Alternative loads (both kinds) have been in the editor since the beginning and there’s gobs and gobs of alternative loads in private mods floating around but they are have different ideas about what is good. I know Treespider is looking at level bombers. Jeremy’s people have been playing with adaptive ground support for a year or two. (Heh, you should see what the Marines think is a decent loadout for their CSFBs on their Commencement Bay carriers !!!!) Lots of alternatives change almost year by year for many planes. And other groups have other ideas about what to do and when to do it and who to do it to so there’s a dozen or so viable alternatives out there. If you could give an idea about what you want to accomplish I’m sure there’s somebody with just the ticket. The alternative (pun, pun) is you’ll get swamped by all the alternative alternatives [:D] 1. I mean data for typical payloads for the different missions of each aircraft, i.e. Betty: AP=4x500lb GP, N=4x500lb AP, n=torp, G=8x100lb GP (random figures just for ex.) etc. I do not believe there is a central "database" that has that information. In doing research the scenario designer has to make a best guesstimate as to what the standard load for a typical mission would be based on the available bomb types. The Command at Sea System Data Annexes provides a list of "typical" bombloads but makes no reference to mission. quote: Maybe I misunderstood, but I have checked mods in this subforum, including latest DBB, RA 4.6, Nikademus GC May42, (Almost)HistoricalMod, Treespider - none of them uses filters and mission-specific payloads. Can you point me to those private mods which use them? I do not believe there are any mods CURRENTLY available to the public that incorporate the filters or altDevice/altUse mechanisms. I have been doing some testing of the filters and use of "bomb sticks" that I plan on incorporating in my mod.

treespider -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 1:21:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 I will throw this out there. Device 1875 20lb GP bomb would make a good candidate for faux para frag. A B-25C modified straffer could carry 60 "para-frags" and 4 100lb bombs. My guess is code the 20lb bombs as 32 for AF attack along with a line for the 100lb bombs. My question is would it be dropped as a block of 60 or does that cause issues for the game engine? Is there a better way to do it? Sorry I keep bringing them up but I really want them in my mod but I don't want to break things. In doing some testing I have found like much of the rest of the system the issue comes with how many devices are involved. As to runway hits (assuming two devices with the same accuracy) - "Effect" appears not to play a factor and the damage inflicted seems to be directly related to the number of devices and not the effect. So 60 para frags with an effect of 1 are just as effective as 60 x 500 lb bombs with and effect of 500...when it comes to Runway attacks....if their accuracy values were equal. That's why I am toying around with "Bomb Sticks" - a single device that may represent multiple bombs. So your B-25C may only carry 4 devices each representing 15 para frag bombs. The other issue you have with para bombs is that they were released at very low altitude... you may want to run some tests to determine the effect of accuracy & altitude.

n01487477 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 1:24:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: treespider quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 I will throw this out there. Device 1875 20lb GP bomb would make a good candidate for faux para frag. A B-25C modified straffer could carry 60 "para-frags" and 4 100lb bombs. My guess is code the 20lb bombs as 32 for AF attack along with a line for the 100lb bombs. My question is would it be dropped as a block of 60 or does that cause issues for the game engine? Is there a better way to do it? Sorry I keep bringing them up but I really want them in my mod but I don't want to break things. In doing some testing I have found like much of the rest of the system the issue comes with how many devices are involved. As to runway hits (assuming two devices with the same accuracy) - "Effect" appears not to play a factor and the damage inflicted seems to be directly related to the number of devices and not the effect. So 60 para frags with an effect of 1 are just as effective as 60 x 500 lb bombs with and effect of 500...when it comes to Runway attacks....if their accuracy values were equal. That's why I am toying around with "Bomb Sticks" - a single device that may represent multiple bombs. So your B-25C may only carry 4 devices each representing 15 para frag bombs. The other issue you have with para bombs is that they were released at very low altitude... you may want to run some tests to determine the effect of accuracy & altitude. Exactly the way that Nemo121 had in his armageddon mod ... I have a game file if you want to have a look. But not the scenario files as he didn't release it and alas has left the forum

michaelm75au -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 1:45:35 PM)
I have updated the beta installer (1118c) to address some issues with displaying the filtered a/c weapon list, and handling multiple filters together (was wiping out the filter on first incorrect weapon choice).

US87891 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 7:28:52 PM)
quote: quote: Maybe I misunderstood, but I have checked mods in this subforum, including latest DBB, RA 4.6, Nikademus GC May42, (Almost)HistoricalMod, Treespider - none of them uses filters and mission-specific payloads. Can you point me to those private mods which use them? I do not believe there are any mods CURRENTLY available to the public that incorporate the filters or altDevice/altUse mechanisms. I have been doing some testing of the filters and use of "bomb sticks" that I plan on incorporating in my mod. That’s right, there aren’t any, not for regular distribution anyway. JWE didn’t want to mess with planes because he said the air team was much more competent about those things and because there were so many different ways of doing it right that picking one would just offend everyone else. So it’s a mad scramble, with every group doing its own thing. And yes, there’s lots of different ways to do it right. The California guys for example got the Navy Bureau of Aeronautics performance papers and really dirtied up the FB versions of planes. Instead of clean/max, they use combat/ACA. So they are lower and slower but they have 5” HVARs for ground attack and 11.75” Tiny Tims for ships hanging off a -4 Corsair. But that means adding devices and modding aircraft specs. It also means setting squadrons up as Fighters or FBs with the corresponding aircraft. And it wreaks havoc on all the sweep and CAP games that people use. No wonder he didn’t want to touch it. The Pendleton folks have a lot of data on modded Fs and FBs in different war periods, but don’t think it would apply in a general case. I can get Jeremy to send you his ’43-’45 standards if you want.

LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/3/2012 10:10:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: treespider I do not believe there is a central "database" that has that information. In doing research the scenario designer has to make a best guesstimate as to what the standard load for a typical mission would be based on the available bomb types. The Command at Sea System Data Annexes provides a list of "typical" bombloads but makes no reference to mission. I don't believe either - that's why I have asked if someone has already done some research and would be willing to share the results. [:)] quote: I do not believe there are any mods CURRENTLY available to the public that incorporate the filters or altDevice/altUse mechanisms. I have been doing some testing of the filters and use of "bomb sticks" that I plan on incorporating in my mod. Ok, so I misunderstood. Will toy around a bit myself but guess for the real thing I better wait for someone more knowledgable than I am in air things to come forward with a mod [;)].

oldman45 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 12:34:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: treespider quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 I will throw this out there. Device 1875 20lb GP bomb would make a good candidate for faux para frag. A B-25C modified straffer could carry 60 "para-frags" and 4 100lb bombs. My guess is code the 20lb bombs as 32 for AF attack along with a line for the 100lb bombs. My question is would it be dropped as a block of 60 or does that cause issues for the game engine? Is there a better way to do it? Sorry I keep bringing them up but I really want them in my mod but I don't want to break things. In doing some testing I have found like much of the rest of the system the issue comes with how many devices are involved. As to runway hits (assuming two devices with the same accuracy) - "Effect" appears not to play a factor and the damage inflicted seems to be directly related to the number of devices and not the effect. So 60 para frags with an effect of 1 are just as effective as 60 x 500 lb bombs with and effect of 500...when it comes to Runway attacks....if their accuracy values were equal. That's why I am toying around with "Bomb Sticks" - a single device that may represent multiple bombs. So your B-25C may only carry 4 devices each representing 15 para frag bombs. The other issue you have with para bombs is that they were released at very low altitude... you may want to run some tests to determine the effect of accuracy & altitude. Thanks Tree, I will try some different combo's and see what happens. So the bombs are really attacking the runway, and an after effect is to destroy aircraft? I was hoping the light bombs would not hurt the runway but the planes and "buildings".

JeffroK -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 3:03:35 AM)
For those who want to try A-G Rockets, after Nemos trial I set them up as salvos (of 3 or 4) with an accuracy of 1. It allows the FB to operate as they could without allowing hundreds of hits, seemed to work OK.

trojan58 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 3:27:18 AM)
Now that we can do an aircraft ASW load-out, does that mean we can add depth-charges to planes or do we still need to use bombs and rockets ta

michaelm75au -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 11:18:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: trojan Now that we can do an aircraft ASW load-out, does that mean we can add depth-charges to planes or do we still need to use bombs and rockets ta Yes you can with but you need the latest beta (1118c) to see and use them with aircraft. Tried it last night and they did get used on target subs.[:D]

sandman455 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 12:04:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 quote: ORIGINAL: treespider quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 I will throw this out there. Device 1875 20lb GP bomb would make a good candidate for faux para frag. A B-25C modified straffer could carry 60 "para-frags" and 4 100lb bombs. My guess is code the 20lb bombs as 32 for AF attack along with a line for the 100lb bombs. My question is would it be dropped as a block of 60 or does that cause issues for the game engine? Is there a better way to do it? Sorry I keep bringing them up but I really want them in my mod but I don't want to break things. In doing some testing I have found like much of the rest of the system the issue comes with how many devices are involved. As to runway hits (assuming two devices with the same accuracy) - "Effect" appears not to play a factor and the damage inflicted seems to be directly related to the number of devices and not the effect. So 60 para frags with an effect of 1 are just as effective as 60 x 500 lb bombs with and effect of 500...when it comes to Runway attacks....if their accuracy values were equal. That's why I am toying around with "Bomb Sticks" - a single device that may represent multiple bombs. So your B-25C may only carry 4 devices each representing 15 para frag bombs. The other issue you have with para bombs is that they were released at very low altitude... you may want to run some tests to determine the effect of accuracy & altitude. Thanks Tree, I will try some different combo's and see what happens. So the bombs are really attacking the runway, and an after effect is to destroy aircraft? I was hoping the light bombs would not hurt the runway but the planes and "buildings". I was kind of working on something like parafrags but got stuck. Here's some ideas/frustrations I was working on. Parafrags are only useful down low. At 1000' they would probably be worse than normal ordnance of similar weight. By 2000' they would be only marginally better than dropping leaflets due to ambient winds at the target. Historically speaking, the ordnance was a special mission. You would have bombed and reconned the target quite a bit before executing a parafrag mission so that you'd have a very good map of both potential targets and flak sites. From here you set up a low level run that would minimize flak exposure, while maximizing potential overflight of target(s). This kind of planning isn't part of the game. All you get is the ability to marry the ordnance to the mission. That means the 200' mission altitude would need a HR. But then what happens when you mistakenly attack an airfield with some flak units? From my limited play - I think you'll see some pretty nasty results. The only option I could think of was to limit the load to only a few attack bomber groups. Aircraft with the attack bomber option checked get a flak suppression modifier during attacks. This might let you have a reasonable # of aircraft survive the 200' encounter with flak units at the field. As for the results with the heavy count of small bombs, I've played quite a bit with some IJ bombers fitted with historical loads of lighter bombs and they are playable IMO. But parafrags would be a big jump up on bomb count so I don't know. At least now you can easily limit it to airfield missions only. And it seems reasonable that a decent size strike of parafrags would completely shutdown an airfield (100%) with complete disruption/destruction of assets on the ground so maybe it doesn't matter what you get for results so long as it achieves this outcome.

traskott -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 6:49:26 PM)
If I put just only some filters ( ie: a 139WH-3 with 3x300 kg GP bomb filter 08, and 3x300 kg SAP filter 02 ), what load will use if mission is not 08 nor 02 ( naval and ground attacks ) ? Thank you !!!

inqistor -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 10:02:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: treespider I do not believe there is a central "database" that has that information. In doing research the scenario designer has to make a best guesstimate as to what the standard load for a typical mission would be based on the available bomb types. The Command at Sea System Data Annexes provides a list of "typical" bombloads but makes no reference to mission. I was hoping, that el Cid have such datasheet, but it seems he is only using number of hardpoints, and general bombload for plane period. quote: I do not believe there are any mods CURRENTLY available to the public that incorporate the filters or altDevice/altUse mechanisms. I have been doing some testing of the filters and use of "bomb sticks" that I plan on incorporating in my mod. Actually I have modified several planes in Scenarios 31, and 36. But it is done solely in devices tab, you can check, that those planes uses bomb from different fields, than standard: 628 B5N2 KATE uses 2 fake bombs, which are exchanged for 2x60kg bombs for ground attacks 644 D3A1 VAL uses 250 kg bomb for Naval Attack, but it is exchanged for 4x60 kg bombs for ground attacks Later BETTY models carry additional fake torpedo, which is exchanged for hardcoded bombload, when torpedo is not used (that doubles its bombload - I know this is too much, but current model carries too few, and I did not found other solutions) PEGGY is interesting. According to requirements, it should carry "(d) a maximum bombload of eight 220-lb. bombs, three 551-lb. bombs, or a single 1,102-lb. bomb". It carries 500 kg bomb for naval, and port attacks, which is exchanged for 8x100 kg bombs for ground attacks. There was no way to change it into 3x250 kg bombs, because number of bombs is exchanged only as 1:1, or in pairs. So either 2, or 4. LILY uses 4x100 kg bombs only for naval/port attacks, for ground it is exchanged for 8x50 kg

inqistor -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 10:09:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sandman455 I was kind of working on something like parafrags but got stuck. Here's some ideas/frustrations I was working on. Parafrags are only useful down low. At 1000' they would probably be worse than normal ordnance of similar weight. By 2000' they would be only marginally better than dropping leaflets due to ambient winds at the target. Historically speaking, the ordnance was a special mission. You would have bombed and reconned the target quite a bit before executing a parafrag mission so that you'd have a very good map of both potential targets and flak sites. From here you set up a low level run that would minimize flak exposure, while maximizing potential overflight of target(s). This kind of planning isn't part of the game. All you get is the ability to marry the ordnance to the mission. That means the 200' mission altitude would need a HR. But then what happens when you mistakenly attack an airfield with some flak units? From my limited play - I think you'll see some pretty nasty results. The only option I could think of was to limit the load to only a few attack bomber groups. Aircraft with the attack bomber option checked get a flak suppression modifier during attacks. This might let you have a reasonable # of aircraft survive the 200' encounter with flak units at the field. I am not sure plane can drop to 200' during ground attacks, but I think there could be workaround, when you use strafing for this. No need for any HR: If you define parafrags, as aircraft gun, but with 0 effect, and penetration (so it will not work during air battles), it should be used during strafing, and I hope this type uses Soft, and Hard attack for hitting LCU devices (still probably uses effect for attacking ships) quote: ORIGINAL: traskott If I put just only some filters ( ie: a 139WH-3 with 3x300 kg GP bomb filter 08, and 3x300 kg SAP filter 02 ), what load will use if mission is not 08 nor 02 ( naval and ground attacks ) ? The one, which have appropriate number (or 0). So in this case NO bombs.

inqistor -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/4/2012 10:17:07 PM)
The overall problem with bomloads, is that with increasing number of bombs, also increases number of hits. So by using historical bombloads, we will get strange result, when it is filtered by game engine. Here is my theory, how it should be implemented, to work in current engine: Fighters should become main aircraft for attacking airfields. Example: ZERO carries 2x60kg bombs. Since number of hits is most important for closing airfields, this type of plane should carry most bombs. Change should be something like 8x15kg bombs (same bombload) Light attack bombers (mostly 1E) - they should be main ground support. Example: ANN/MARY carries 1x250 kg bomb. Since number of hits is most important for eliminating LCU devices, not size of bomb, they should carry more devices, than 2E bombers (so more, than 4). Change should be something like 5x50kg 2E bombers - heaviest tactical support. 4 devices seems to work OK, anything more is streching game engine, but because we need unity in same class models, bombs can be represented as "sticks" (TM by NEMO) of 2 bombs each. Japanese bombers do not carry more than 4 250 kg bombs (at least in current Scenarios), but quite a lots of Allied 2E bombers carry more. As a side note - it seems, that size of bomb is more important during checking if plane hit on ground will be destroyed. Lots of smaller bombs generate more hits, but planes tend to be only damaged. 4E bombers - ONLY STRATEGIC ATTACKS. They should barely hit anything in support role. The whole bombload should be represent as ONE (maximum TWO) device. Something like one large bomb, with effect of sum of all carried bombs. That way they are only good for attacking industry, or destroying stockpiles at bases, as they generally score less hits, than smaller planes (although their hits are sure kill). That can create problem with naval attacks, but bombload, in this case, can represent 1-2 bombs effect, but have greater accuracy (to simulate releasing of whole bomb-bay in one go). To sum up: 4E - 1, or 2 devices 2E - 2-4 devices (NO MORE!) 1E - more, than 4 devices for ground attacks (they can still carry ONE large bomb against ships) Fighters - more, than 4 devices for ground attacks

traskott -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 12:25:07 PM)
Ok, so every plan we load must have one bombload with filter 0 just in case. Point taken. [:D] Good point inquistor about 1E, 2E and 4Es.

michaelm75au -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 1:28:29 PM)
If you are going to use filters, then you should cater for all attack missions, else the weapon load will none. Putting a filter 0 on a weapon will mean that it will ALWAYS be included on any mission - as it is now.

traskott -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 1:45:58 PM)
Understood. So every plan must have the following filters values: 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32.

michaelm75au -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 1:59:31 PM)
Filter 2 and 4 only need to be present for torpedo replacement/alternate. Normally I would not worry about 4 except for when plane has a torpedo. Filters can be added together so like weapon loads can take just a single slot. Example, you might have same load for AF/Land so that load needs a filter of 32 plus 8 (40)

Shark7 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 3:00:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: michaelm If you are going to use filters, then you should cater for all attack missions, else the weapon load will none. Putting a filter 0 on a weapon will mean that it will ALWAYS be included on any mission - as it is now. So, lets take the Ki-30 Ann: Standard load was 3 x 100kg GP bomb internal with an option to carry an additional 150kg of bombs externally on short range missions. So I could set it up like this: 100kg GP bomb 3 internal 00 30kg GP bomb 4 external 08 So that for AF attack, Naval etc it still carries just the 3 internal 100kg GPs, but for ground attack it will carry the extra 4 x 30kg bombs. Or that is how I understand it.

US87891 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 3:01:05 PM)
@ Treespider @ LargeSlowTarget Hi. Just got these in the email and thought you might be interested. These are from the MIL-C-5011 SAC&Ps of B-17G, B-24J and B-25J (without and with a BB fuel tank). Lists the numbers of bombs of different types that can physically fit in the respective bomb bays. Yeah, noticed the B17 can fit more 1600lb AP and 1000lb AP than 1000lb GP. Probably because diameter of 1000lb GP is 40-50% fatter than 1600lb and 1000lb AP (19” vs 14” and 12”). Hope this formats out right. Bomb/Type - - - - B17-B24-B25-B25* 2000/AN-M66 GP - 02 - 04 - 01 -n/a 1600/AN-Mk1 AP - 08 - 08 - 02 - 02 1000/AN-M65 GP - 06 - 08 - 03 - 02 1000/AN-M33 AP - 10 - 12 - 04 - 04 500/AN-M64 GP - 12 - 12 - 06 - 04 250/AN-M57 GP - 16 - 16 - 08 - 04 100/AN-M30 GP - 24 - 24 - 24 - 12 * is B25 with 215 gal BB tank installed

traskott -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 3:55:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: michaelm Filter 2 and 4 only need to be present for torpedo replacement/alternate. Normally I would not worry about 4 except for when plane has a torpedo. Filters can be added together so like weapon loads can take just a single slot. Example, you might have same load for AF/Land so that load needs a filter of 32 plus 8 (40) SO, if I put: 2x500 filter 48 2x300 filter 14 the plane will carry 2x500 at port and AF attack, and 2x300 at naval, alternate naval and ground attack... . and... 2x800 filter 62 -> 2x800 at every mission, but better just use filter 0 here, isn't ? Interesting. Thanks [&o]

Shark7 -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 4:41:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: traskott quote: ORIGINAL: michaelm Filter 2 and 4 only need to be present for torpedo replacement/alternate. Normally I would not worry about 4 except for when plane has a torpedo. Filters can be added together so like weapon loads can take just a single slot. Example, you might have same load for AF/Land so that load needs a filter of 32 plus 8 (40) SO, if I put: 2x500 filter 48 2x300 filter 14 the plane will carry 2x500 at port and AF attack, and 2x300 at naval, alternate naval and ground attack... . and... 2x800 filter 62 -> 2x800 at every mission, but better just use filter 0 here, isn't ? Interesting. Thanks [&o] Actually, if you use filter 0, you will have 2 x 800 on every mission, in addition to what you specify for the specific mission since filter 0 is default load (at least I think this is right). So even if you specify a torpedo load 2, with 2 x 800 set at filter 0, you'd end up with a naval load of 1 torpedo AND 2 x 800.

LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Aircraft Loads (10/5/2012 4:51:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: US87891 @ Treespider @ LargeSlowTarget Hi. Just got these in the email and thought you might be interested. These are from the MIL-C-5011 SAC&Ps of B-17G, B-24J and B-25J (without and with a BB fuel tank). Lists the numbers of bombs of different types that can physically fit in the respective bomb bays. Yeah, noticed the B17 can fit more 1600lb AP and 1000lb AP than 1000lb GP. Probably because diameter of 1000lb GP is 40-50% fatter than 1600lb and 1000lb AP (19” vs 14” and 12”). Hope this formats out right. Bomb/Type - - - - B17-B24-B25-B25* 2000/AN-M66 GP - 02 - 04 - 01 -n/a 1600/AN-Mk1 AP - 08 - 08 - 02 - 02 1000/AN-M65 GP - 06 - 08 - 03 - 02 1000/AN-M33 AP - 10 - 12 - 04 - 04 500/AN-M64 GP - 12 - 12 - 06 - 04 250/AN-M57 GP - 16 - 16 - 08 - 04 100/AN-M30 GP - 24 - 24 - 24 - 12 * is B25 with 215 gal BB tank installed Thanks! Real-life keeps me away from the editor at the moment, but I'll keep that in mind.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.09375