Operation Barbarossa/Moscow Information Thread (Un-Official)
Moderators: Board of Directors, Command
Re: Operation Barbarossa/Moscow Information Thread (Un-Official)
Excellent read. Thank you Vranac.
32 Squadron / USAAF 84 Squadron
-
- Posts: 687
- Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 1:05 am
- Location: The land of Cheese, Beer, and Harley Davidsons
Re: Operation Barbarossa/Moscow Information Thread (Un-Official)
One problem we're going to run into with a BoM campaign is simply that there needs to be a early war plane pack expansion. No Ju-87B, no LaGG-3 series 8 (less powerful engine and also packed 2 30 cal ShKAS MG's), no Su-2, no SB bomber (most common one in VVS), no I-153, no E-4. Maybe we'll get these someday but for now we'll just have to make do and use more planes that weren't really that common.
Re: Operation Barbarossa/Moscow Information Thread (Un-Official)
@Kai Lae - Ideally yes, but this has never stopped ACG. We could really have used some Fairey Battles, MS406's, D520's and a whole slew of aircraft used during The Battle of France but we made due and had a great time. Also to top it off we were shamefully forced to keep the Bf-109E4's and Spitfires available much too early for the sake of some certain whiny pilots. This could repeat itself (hopefully they will have matured by this point) leading to an influx of modern machinery such as Yaks and F-4's.
I do like to shoot down planes yes I do
Re: Operation Barbarossa/Moscow Information Thread (Un-Official)
One thing that might help introducing aircraft that were not that common (P40 / IL2) is having smaller units - from 20 Aug 41 a Soviet regiment consisted of 2 squadrons of 9 aircraft each plus 2 staff, so effectively only 10 aircraft per squadron at full strength (which would seem to be a rare occurrence given the losses). A lot of the accounts mention formations of just 3-6 aircraft - whether that was a tactical decision or forced on them by circumstance is not clear. So a small or half squadron of P40s or IL2s could be put in amongst the others without overly unbalancing the force mix - so in effect have more, smaller units? As the primary mission was ground attack on the front line, or escorting small formations of bombers to do the same, it would make sense to have more, smaller formations that are easier to keep together in poor weather, would increase the coverage and be seen more widely by the supported troops (an important element for the Soviets) - but that is purely assumption on my part.
The Germans will have their own problems of a limited force mix as, according to Bergstrom, the 110s in Luftflotte 2 were withdrawn prior to Typhoon.
The attrition suffered by the P40s due to the weather conditions (as in Vranac's post) was an experience shared by the Luftwaffe at the same time. Whether the dwindling number of serviceable aircraft (a critical factor for the Luftwaffe that led to them losing their grip on air superiority) could or even should be reflected in a campaign is something that can be looked at. After the first few days in early October the weather was predominantly poor (persistent rain and mud limiting operations) before temperatures dropped in late November for a brief clear period and then heavy snow.
Having the German pilots longing for a return to France or a posting to the Med would be entirely realistic
The Germans will have their own problems of a limited force mix as, according to Bergstrom, the 110s in Luftflotte 2 were withdrawn prior to Typhoon.
The attrition suffered by the P40s due to the weather conditions (as in Vranac's post) was an experience shared by the Luftwaffe at the same time. Whether the dwindling number of serviceable aircraft (a critical factor for the Luftwaffe that led to them losing their grip on air superiority) could or even should be reflected in a campaign is something that can be looked at. After the first few days in early October the weather was predominantly poor (persistent rain and mud limiting operations) before temperatures dropped in late November for a brief clear period and then heavy snow.
Having the German pilots longing for a return to France or a posting to the Med would be entirely realistic
Re: Operation Barbarossa/Moscow Information Thread (Un-Official)
In this book Ivan gaidaenko recounts how the shturmoviks pilots were particularly bad at navigation. Probably because they were green and flew low. This is also an observation of a shturmovik pilots autobiography I also read. Gaedaenko, a fighter pilot flying Migs and Yaks and la5 describes how his fighter squadron leader lead the viks to the target and had dived to indicate where to attack so that the viks would know where the target was. On one mission the viks having been guided back to their own airfield after a mission with particularly heavy flak were confused and attacked their own base with bombs before realising their mistake! (Human bombers heh!)Rich wrote:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B00KC3 ... ref=plSrch
Operation Barbarossa and the retreat to Moscow. Is a really good book with several pilots recollections of flying for the vvs in i16s LaGGs Migs and Yaks. Because they were interviewed many many years afterwards they have been a lot more free to say what they want without worrying so much about what the party line is. I have read two biographies from the Russian side and they both are completely soulless and are devoid of any criticism of anything russian .
Re: Operation Barbarossa/Moscow Information Thread (Un-Official)
Interesting option for ACG to follow for the LW units. JG54 were later linked with JG26 later in the war and effectively you could keep existing JG26 Staffel's on secondment i.e. JG54 II Gruppen 4th Staffel and 5th Staffel, etc.
https://www.asisbiz.com/Luftwaffe/jg54.html
Thought this might be useful
BD
https://www.asisbiz.com/Luftwaffe/jg54.html
Thought this might be useful
BD
We are the Pilgrims, master; we shall go always a little further; it may be beyond that last blue mountain barred with snow across that angry or that glimmering sea