I'm looking at the Airco DH.4 and wondering which one I should buy? I have the Straaken R.VI if that matters since she'll be a beast to take down.
Thank you for your thoughts.
Airco DH.4 - Which one?
I'm looking at the Airco DH.4 and wondering which one I should buy? I have the Straaken R.VI if that matters since she'll be a beast to take down.
Thank you for your thoughts.
I think both US versions are A/A gunned, and one of the British DH.4s is AB/B... so either might do the trick. You might also want to look at the Bristol Fighter. One of them is seriously up-gunned... AB/A. That would be my choice... or, if you're into Shapeways, a 4-gun Sopwith Dolphin.
I'm at work, atm. I'll give you the specifics of each after I get home.
Ken, it really does not matter, just because it has a B gun does not mean you always have to use it has a B gun. In some games you might want to use it has an "A" gun or visa versa.
What I saw was:
United States - Airco DH.4 A/A - 50th Squadron AEF
Great Britain (Royal Navy) - Airco DH.4 AB/B - Cotton/Betts
Great Britain - Airco DH.4 B/A - Bartlett/Naylor
Two from Great Britain and only one from the U.S. The Great Britain Royal Navy being the best gunned. Do you think the Royal Navy would defend over London?
I don't see any upgunned Bristol's though the Arkel does seem weaker.
Great Britain - Bristol F.2B Fighter A/B - Harvey/Waight
Great Britain - Bristol F.2B Fighter B/B - Arkell/Stagg
Australia - Bristol F.2B Fighter B/A - Headlam/Beaton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German...ng_World_War_I
Check out the section 1916 which does imply the RFC and RNAS shared the defence of London against Zeppelins from the German Army and Navy as the year began.
Now transfer this across to your scenario a little more as gamers as opposed to historians maybe. You may very well have a yes-answer on your hands there. Best of luck - please could somebody write an AAR / photos if your mission does go live.
We have played against the Staaken a few times in our gaming group, and what brings it down is numbers rather than guns--that is, a bunch of scouts is better than one upgunned one. That is because the Staaken has almost no blind spot (particularly if you play without altitude), and can absorb a lot more damage than any one or two scouts.Originally Posted by Ken at Sunrise
What really works well against a Staaken is a bunch of Snipes or SE 5as.
I ordered a few extra to complete what I think will be my game kit. I'm still missing a few that I would really like such as the Hawker DH.2 and Kirschstein DR.I
Otherwise I have a couple of Nieuports, Camels and Bristols. Only one Snipe but he's Barker and so is the Camel so I should (???) only play him in one plane.
That would be good numbers shouldn't it? I don't see any SE 5as at Ares Games. Did I miss something?
Not for this scenario but I'd really, really like to get my hands on the Hawker DH.2 and Kirschstein DR.I.
Two others but not pressing would be Immelmann and Little in a Tripe. I already have a Tripe (Collishaw) but Little would be a nice addition.
I imagine that Barker's Camel was passed on to another pilot when his squadron upgraded to Snipes. So you could use both.
S.E.5a models were issued in Series 4 but they have long been out of production. They are very hard to find. There are 1/144 scale models of them available from other sources but then you need to find a manoeuvre deck.
Lets face it. You need them all
You are slowly becomming an addict like the rest of us
Say it ain't so... Honestly I've played my share of collectible games, too many really. I've found that they put me off; so if I find one I like then, except for one, I buy everything I want up front then tend to stop buying. Four more planes then we'll see; the DH.2 and DR. I are the two most needed. Then Little in a Triplane and Immelmann would be it for me.
Of course the exception may be: S.E. 5a, Zeppelin and Balloons. But after than I'll have a good collection and I'll be on to other things. I was thinking of looking up the bios of the pilots I'll have.
So, 4 more planes. Argh and the DH2 is so hard to find too. There should be one some where!
I've just posted a mini-challenge about bringing down the Staaken if anybody is interested. No Boom Cards / Explosion Chits allowed but I reckon (subject to THOROUGH rulebook read being a WGS man) I may have a David v. Goliath type solution.
The nearest RNAS aircraft postings to London were apparently in Gravesend - somewhere on here one of the Members once posted quite a clear photo of RFC / RNAS Stations in Southern England. I'm going to start looking for it now as I think it may be in the Officers' Club.
Is it with a N17 using a revolver?
Land the N17 on the upper wing; hop out; shoot the pilots; jump back in the N17; fly away. :)
No - and I have been beaten to it as detailed by the WingCo in an excellent AAR which features a Zeppelin Staaken gliding in flames out of the action as killed by 52 Squadron RFC. See Circuits and Bumps for the link to the action.
What was my idea? The reason I was required to look at the rulebook in such detail was that it involved shooting UPWARDS into what historically was an aircraft's worst blind-spot until the advent of the ball-turret in WW2. Even that was a clumsy remedy at times. The PC game Simply Planes came into the equation because as I checked in with Chopper Squad today I was shown the Ninja Star creation which has to be the most lethal drone on the planet! Fire it upwards at even a jet fighter and this gizmo will just cut the other aircraft out of the sky ... Exploits blind-spots again AND does not require time to arm after it has been launched.
Shoot the pilot ... Yes - if you had a good enough aim because imagine the difficulty of other crew members accessing the pilot station in the Staaken and that's only when they have realised that the pilot is actually no longer with them. Then having to turf him out over the side (ugh!) before reaching for ... As seen on Those Magnificent Men In Their Flying Machines ... THE BOOK OF INSTRUCTIONS!
Ken, grab what you can when you can - Herr Oberst has Little's Tripe (that sounds wrong doesn't it!) in Aerodrome Accessories
And in answer to your original question go for the Cotton/Betts variant if you are after a Staaken - although not all the guns are modelled on it it is an up-gunned variant intended to go after Zeppelins - just the gas bag versions. The Bartlett/Naylor version is probably the more flexible version to pick up for all round game use though and it still packs a punch.
And then you find out it has two pilots ...
Sapiens qui vigilat... "He is wise who watches"
I was thinking a more "Flyboys"-senario but I like your thinkingLand the N17 on the upper wing; hop out; shoot the pilots; jump back in the N17; fly away.
DaveAnd then you find out it has two pilots ...for the heads up there - but nobody spotted my other Golden DUH! About the ball turret / underside defence made in the same posting.
Fell asleep last night and instantly remembered ... Junkers Ju-86 with the moveable underside gunner installation that lowered beneath the aircraft but could only be used in flight ... Then the Heinkel 111!
So it wasn't the advent of the ball turret which improved underside defence in WW2 in fact. It was the Germans thinking innovatively probably based on their experiences and lessons learned from WW1.
I remember a HP-typish bomber that had some sort of ballturret. It was a model I was given (but never built) in my youth.
It was brittish doubleengine (As I remember it. It might have been four) bomber. Can't remember the name
It might even had two "ballturrets"
Do any of you have a clue what this was and is it post WWI?
Do I need a Tripe based on all the other stuff I have?
Haha Oddly enough I ended up ordering the Cotton/Betts just before I saw the post. I'm very glad to hear it was intended to go after Zeppelins so it will fit the games well. However I'm not sure if I need second. I see why the Bartlett/Naylor is more flexible but it might be nice to have a more robust upgunned plane and just try to out fly or 2v1 games?And in answer to your original question go for the Cotton/Betts variant if you are after a Staaken - although not all the guns are modelled on it it is an up-gunned variant intended to go after Zeppelins - just the gas bag versions. The Bartlett/Naylor version is probably the more flexible version to pick up for all round game use though and it still packs a punch.
And then you find out it has two pilots ...
For someone that has only played a single game I have a larger collection (or will have as soon as it arrives) that one might think. I still need my DH.2and another Dr. I though instead of Kirschstein I think Lothar might be better.
Kirschstein has pilot cards in the game which I thought was nice but Lothar actually flew with his brother and since I was going to field two Dr.Is together then.... oh well whichever is available first I suppose.
Not forgetting the trap doors and gun tunnels on the undersides of various German kites ...or the ventral gun position on the HP 0/400...Dave
Sapiens qui vigilat... "He is wise who watches"
Can someone direct me to what German kites are? I know the U.S. generic version of a kite definition but I suspect that you are talking about something different and that some planes were considered kites.Not forgetting the trap doors and gun tunnels on the undersides of various German kites ...or the ventral gun position on the HP 0/400...
Thank you,
Last edited by Ken at Sunrise; 02-05-2016 at 07:29. Reason: grammar
Sounds like someone needs to go back to basic training with Squadron Commander Lord Flasheart!
P.S. - In WWI, it was common for English speakers to refer to aircraft and particularly scouts as "kites". That usage is echoed here by many forum participants.
Gonna haveta get my Slackbladder Goes Forth out and give it a spin ...
Funny you should say that. The mouse over on the green dot by my name says that I haven't got to Flight Training. I have no idea what that is or where to go to find it.Sounds like someone needs to go back to basic training with Squadron Commander Lord Flasheart!
Hi Ken.
The green "dots" or "bars" under your name and flag represents the amount of Reputation you have accumulated. Reputation is the site's mechanism for marking the recognition you've received from your peers. Post something particularly witty, or informative (AARs, photos, useful links, book reviews, etc.)... and another member may award your efforts/contributions with REP points. The more you receive, the higher your Reputation... and the more "well known" you are. The more you have, and the more you're able to award at any one time. It's a ranking system in a sense, but only one of several. The medals you see beneath a member's name, location, etc. also mark accomplishments and/or contributions to the site and community. Finally, the number of "Sorties Flown" (the number of times you've posted) results in an increase in Rank.
It's not a perfect system, as the REP points are awarded by members (and I know I forget to do so even when it's clearly warranted) and some consistent contributors have received far less REP than should be their due... but it works reasonably well.
The FAQ is a great place to get some of these questions answered quickly and easily (and in far fewer words than my attempt). Check out the REP FAQ here: http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/faq...vb3_reputation
The FAQ Menu can be found here: http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/faq...b3_board_usage
Hope that helps!
I quite liked it when my Rep Situation said that I had yet to report for flight training and I was flying my First Solo ... Reminded me of being a trainee pilot back in 1997 all over again and how these feel for real. I had a favourite Cessna 152H at my FTS in Conway SC which carried the registration number N24238 and I nicknamed it Esther after my girlfriend at the time! No nose-art of course at a flight training school but N24238 did witness my First Solo three times around the Traffic Pattern as well as my PPL Checkride with FAA Examiner Bob Burrows on a day when even the Chief Flight Instructor told me not to go up or I'll bust! But Bob just like a good friend in fact told me to Strap In And We Will Do This Together. That phrase has now become part of my encouragement-parlance if a trainee is struggling with any aspects of their flying.
Top 100 Rep points and you become an Ace.
The "ventral dustbin" used on the Ju-86 (and the bomber models of the Ju-52!) wasn't quite as good as a "proper" Sperry Ball turret; for one, the dustbin couldn't really target anything greater than 45-deg. or lower -- the gunner couldn't *see* to aim without risking a falling-out in the literal sense. :)
The early He-111s also had the "dustbin"; but that was swapped for a ventral gondola, which wasn't much of an improvement. The aft-facing gunner had a considerable arc of fire, but in some positions, it was pure "spray and pray"; and the worst offender was attempting to fire close-to-straight-down. (There's a video out there of someone demonstrating this, but I can't find it.)
Conversely, the Sperry turret's mounting -- hold a marble between thumb and forefinger, and you'll have an idea of how it worked -- allowed the gunner to aim directly at any point underneath the acft. Here's a pic of a B-24 with the ball pointed straight down:
.
Chris that ball turret photo you have posted is amazing. Always thought that these devices could point directly downwards to counteract the threat of Schrage Musik or directly upward firing machine guns which British heavy bombers were always left vulnerable to with their overall lack of underside vantage or defence points.
We have Schrage Musik mentioned in the WGS Rulebook (Page 37) and the Messerschmitt Bf.110 in the game along with poorly defended Avro Lancaster heavy bombers with exposed undersides. Not in the game is the fighter-mounted Schrage Musik guns which could be directed upwards from a level orientation. Cannot remember which of the German fighters were fitted with these but I have definitely seen at least one diagram of how these worked. Italy was also trying to design the feature into the Reggiane Re.2005 fighter but I think they only ever built 5 and never got around to perfecting this feature.
Never had the chance to read the WGF Rulebook about firing upwards - but I remain interested in this subject.
Understanding the limitations of the source, Wikipedia states the following as aircraft associated with Schräge Musik:
Typical installations:
- Dornier Do 217N: 4 × 20 mm MG 151/20
- Focke-Wulf Fw 189: 1 × 20 mm MG151/20 (used mainly on Eastern Front)
- Heinkel He 219: 2 × 30 mm MK 108
- Junkers Ju 88C/G: 2 × 20 mm MG 151/20
- Junkers Ju 388J: 2 × 30 mm MK 108
- Messerschmitt Bf 110G-4: 2 × 20 mm MG FF/M
- Messerschmitt Me 262B-2: 2 × 30 mm MK 108 (proposal only, B-2 version never produced)
- Focke-Wulf Ta 154: 2 × 30 mm MK 108
Here's the link to the site: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%A4ge_Musik
My favorite part (completely WGF biased as I am): respect given to Nieuports (N.11s & N.17s... firing into the undefended bellies of German a/c one of Albert Ball's favorite tactics), S.E.5s and Sop Dolphins (respect to Defiants, btw).
We seem to be straying somewhat far afield from the OP, but the Sperry Ball Turret was a pretty amazing piece of engineering. Check it out at the following sites, especially the last. Randall Jarrell's sobering poem is worth reading:
https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN.../TURRETS5.html
http://browningmgs.com/AirGunnery/05_ball.htm
http://untoldvalor.blogspot.com/2007...eed-apart.html
Sven demo'd using Schrage Musik in WGS here in this thread
Sapiens qui vigilat... "He is wise who watches"
Actually, the problem is one of timing.
I've always wondered why British bombers (and for that matter: Everybody *except* the US) never had Sperry-types attached to them -- the British had a ventral barbette, but it was so difficult to aim, and keep serviced, it was removed from those units which had it; thus, the British never had any kind of usable ventral firepower, and got the s*** kicked out of them by "Jazz". I did some research, and found the info I needed at the US Patent and Trademark Office's website, where they have all the Patents and Trademarks available online.
The Sperry Ball turret was patented in September 1941 -- bu the patent wasn't officially published until *1947* (at which point Turrets were going out-of-fashion -- note that the first-gen of post-war bombers lacked any defensive guns save perhaps a tail turret; B-47, B-52, etc.). I suspect the Sperry Ball was classed a War Secret, and would not be handed out casually to anyone who asked; thus, Britain never got access to them, save for a handful of L-L B-17s and B-24s. Had the Sprerry Ball been developed earlier, it's possible Britain might have been able to view the patent, and license-build them for attachment to their heavy bombers. How might *that* have altered the RAF's role in the strategic bombing campaign....
My how we have wandered off the "Which DH-4" thread!
Barry I think I may be partly to blame as I introduced a tactical matter regarding aircraft with underside vulnerabilities and this genericised the thread. So my apologies ...
BUT I hadn't really been interested in what an Airco DH.4 was at all until I got so heavily involved with this thread. So to bring us nicely back round to this quite capable and remarkable aircraft type I'd like everyone to know how all this has broadened my WW1 knowledge. Thanks for enabling me to learn about something I thought I didn't really care about: Would have been my loss had I carried on not caring
Barry I think I may be partly to blame as I introduced a tactical matter regarding aircraft with underside vulnerabilities and this genericised the thread. So my apologies ...
BUT I hadn't really been interested in what an Airco DH.4 was at all until I got so heavily involved with this thread. So to bring us nicely back round to this quite capable and remarkable aircraft type I'd like everyone to know how all this has broadened my WW1 knowledge. Thanks for enabling me to learn about something I thought I didn't really care about: Would have been my loss had I carried on not caring
Since we've returned to the topic of the OP, I'm of the opinion that you can't go wrong with any of the DH.4s. One of the best day bombers of the war: fast, rugged, well-armed, and able to carry a respectable bomb load. Love the DH.4! I have several... of each version.
Though a Bristol Fighter would be a respectable substitution.
With this in mind, it comes down to which camo scheme you like best.
The Kiel Canal raid Cotton/Betts was created for this one raid - I suspect it was overpainted for home defence use.
The RNAS Bartlett/Naylor lends itself to all sorts of missions. So too the US 50th squadron plane.
Pick whichever scheme you like most!
If I may I'd like to briefly elaborate on Tim's posting above with two illustrations: I think I may be missing one - correct me if wrong.
Bartlett / Naylor.
Cotton / Betts.
There are pics of the Cotton Betts tricked out as it was for Zep hunting with the extra guns over the wing (as the model should have) and it is in the same scheme at that time. For the Kiel mission it had a standard load out.
Found it !
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...t=cotton+betts
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...-A-DH4-Repaint
Last edited by flash; 02-08-2016 at 01:34.
Sapiens qui vigilat... "He is wise who watches"
You are missing the picture of the American D.H.4 from 50th Squadron A.E.F., Tonx.
I ended up ordering the Cotton Betts. Mostly because someone said it was a Zeppelin hunger and would play well against the Zeppelin Staaken R.VI. Too bad is doesn't have the guns over the wings like the photograph.
We played a few games with the Staaken over the weekend and while powerful, it's certainly not unstoppable. It only has 7 more hitpoints than the Gotha and with only two engines recognized in-game, is just a susceptible to engine damage bringing it down as any other two engine plane. The 5 guns are quite powerful, but they are single guns (B deck) and there is a big blind spot created by the tail so you've only got 2 covering each flank in the rear, and the single gun in front. Still quite daunting - as it should be - but far from invincible.
I think your DH.4 will make a great Staaken slayer. Have fun with it!
It us nothing a little modelwork can't fix
I like this one:
Enough to make a couple conversions . . .
Is this right Steve ? They've ruled a four engine beast as a two ? Have they changed it from FotG where you have a 50/50 chance to get two damage per engine hit ? Lame if they have...
Sapiens qui vigilat... "He is wise who watches"
Perhaps for some. But I like this game, to some degree at least, because the miniatures are already prepainted and ready to play. I'm not a modeler or miniature painter. For some perhaps but not me, I lack both the skill and patience.It us nothing a little modelwork can't fix
No worries. I have the Cotton/Betts DH4. You will not be disapointed.
From memory (don't have my Staaken rules supplement in front of me), you play engine damage as follows:
1) When you draw an engine damage card, you take the crew injury markers for crew positions III and VI (could be wrong on the numbers, but it's not relevant) equating to the two mechanic/gunner positions.
2) You place the two markers facedown, shuffle them and draw one. This is the engine to which the damage will be assigned.
3) You now take one each of the "1" and "2" engine damage markers and place them facedown, shuffle them, and draw one. This is the amount of engine damage done.
4) You perform the same steps for each additional engine damage card drawn.
5) Per the rules for multi-engine aircraft in the main rulebook, once the sum of the values listed on the engine damage markers surpasses the number of engines on the aircraft, the plane is considered shot down and is removed from play. From everything I could get from the wording in the Staaken rules supplement, the plane is considered to have two engines.
The above came up because we happened to draw two engine damages in one attack by a Bristol (one from the front gun and one from the rear - the really big base of the Staaken is an easy target to hit!). After performing the above procedure, the Staaken had received a "1" and "2" engine damage marker, thereby eliminating it from the game. Perhaps an edge case - getting two engine damage markers in one shot - but it happened nonetheless.
On the plus side, the mechanic/engineers allow you to attempt to repair engine damage. They have to spend an entire turn working on the engine, and they can only work on the engine on the side they are located. At the end of the turn (or the beginning of the next - can't remember now), you draw a card from one of the damage decks (I believe the B deck but can't remember). If it's a Kaboom or a 0, they fail and the engine is unfixable. If they succeed, you can pick one of the engine damage markers to discard, I believe up to the value listed on the damage card. They of course have to stop firing their wing guns to do the repairing, but it does significantly boost the survivability of the plane - at least in theory
I don't know what the rules leaflet in the Staaken box says (mine haven't arrived yet), but the photos posted here in the forum clearly show a "4" above the engine symbol on the Staaken flight base...
Regards,
Oerjan
I should've made it clear that I have relatively little experience with multi-engine aircraft, read the rules quickly only after the issue came up in-game, and almost certainly got some of it wrong. Would be very happy to be proven incorrect in my understanding so far!
Edit: yup, you were right: should be 4 engines, not two. Found a photo of my base and there are indeed 4 listed. Totally missed that.
Last edited by surfimp; 02-08-2016 at 15:20. Reason: Photo added
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks