Hello All,
I was doing a bit of research on the Belgian "Balloon-Buster" Willy Coppens last night, when I came across some interesting info, and was pondering what the WoW implications would be.
Apparently, Coppens was dissatisfied with the original, single .303 caliber Vickers mounted on his Hanriot HD.1 aircraft, but refused to upgrade to another A/C or to try and fit a secong gun to his beloved Hanriot. Despite the single MG on his favorite aircraft, he quickly became Belgium's leading ace and the greatest and most famous "Balloon-Buster" of all time. The secrets to his success were the following:
1. Due to the fact that tracer ammo was available, it was in such short supply and apparently of such low quality (many bullets simply flew to pieces shortly after leaving the gun) that Coppens was forced to develop his own TTP (Tactics, Techniques and Proceedures):
a. He would fly as close to his intended target as possible- this made missing nearly impossible and, counter-intuitively, proved to be "safer" as he flew so close to the balloon that enemy gunners were prevented from firing at him due to fear of hitting their own balloon. The problem is getting this close without being shot to pieces!
b. He typically limited his burst to only four (4) rounds(!) to limit jams and maximize his precious supply of tracer ammunition.
2. His trusty HD.1 was armed, not with the standard .303 caliber machinegun, but with an 11mm Vickers MG! This was news to me, I had never even heard of such a weapon in this caliber. Apparently, the weapon was developed specifically for the purpose of destroying balloons, and was refered to in some sources as an "anti-balloon machine gun". The 11mm round was originally of French design, while the weapon itself was built by Colt in the USA to design specs provided by Vickers of Great Brittain (which is of course copied from the Russian Maxim). The records are rather muddled as to how many were manufactured and who they were issued to. In fact, it is hard to find many details about the weapon at all, and it would most likely have been forgotten completely were it not for the fact that many of the Vickers MGs fitted to surviving (or repro) WWI aircraft on display in museums to day (primarilly in the US) are, in fact, of 11mm caliber because of the availability of cheap parts.
This helps to explain (to me, anyways...) why Coppens (flying in late 1917-18) would chose to continue using such a, seemingly, out of date aircraft such as the Hanriot HD.1 armed with a single MG, when more "modern" aircraft (such as the Sopwith Camel) armed with twin guns were available this late in the war. Though I have only found this weapon mentioned in context with Coppen's personal aircraft, surely others must have mounted it, at least experimentally, for a period.
So, ... What does this mean to me (or you) and how would we best represent this in our favorite game: Wings of War? Here are my thoughts on the subject...
A. We could treat his single MG as normal, and use the "B" damage deck. This works on the principle of " a single MG is a single MG is a single MG, regardles of whether it is .303 caliber or 7.7mm or 7.92mm. This does however not really, adequately represent the 11mm Heavy machinegun he used so effectively.
B. We could treat it as using the "A" damage deck due to its heavier fire power. The "A" deck is normally used to represent twin MGs (of the typical calibers). This, to me does not really represent the "unique-ness" of Coppen's 11mm-armed Hanriot; too much firepower.
C. We could continue to use the "B" deck (as written) but give him an extra damage card at close-range (1 "B" at long-range annd 3 "B" at short-range), to simulate the increased damage potential of the heavier round at close-range, while limiting its effects at long-range where his short bursts would result in very few hits, and thus... less damage.
D. We could give ALL his shots a +1 damage shift (as with subsequent shots). Thus, a "1" damage card would inflict 2-points of damage, a "3" would do 4-points, etc... A "0" would remain a ZERO. This would simulate the greater damage inflicted by the heavier round and uses a (modified) rule already in the Rule Book.
Of the above, I think I like "C" and "D" best, as they seem to best simulate the weapon coupled with Coppen's tactics, while creating/modifying the basic rules (as written) the least, i.e. the KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid).
What are your thoughts?
Chris
Bookmarks