Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

The Butterfly Effect: A British AAR

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Reader mode
RAFspeak penetrating the cockpit of a Bristol machine... then falling asleep before he takes off?!? There's drugs for that sort of thing Old Chap!!! ;)

Loved the update Pip. Also, I like your new 'short' update policy... when's it going to come into effect? :D

I hope development of the Bristol doesn't last too long, if it does I can see it maybe crowding out a certain all wood, twin engine fighter/bomber! :eek: Say it ain't so Pip... :(
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Nice way to start a Monday morning, by reading a cracking update!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Well, the philosophy behind the Defiant is better than OTL, and as a bomber detroyer (assuming the bomber escorts do not exist or have been engaged by Spits/Hurris) and (later) night fighter could have some real utility.

The Whirlwind could've really been something, but the Peregrine engines and lack of range let it down... a mk.ii with Merlin XXs and more petrol (as was proposed) could give the RAF an excellent multi-role fighter.

Excellent update--good stuff.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Lovely update, Pippy! Can't wait to see what's on the table for the rest of the RAF. As an aside, that Bristol's just a beautiful aircraft.

Vann
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Wonderful stuff!!! The server at work blocks the site for the desktops so I had to read the update on my iphone. I think I developed RSI of the thumb scrolling down so much.

I congratulate you on avoiding the ominiscience of hindsight by mixing the good, the bad and the Defiant. The poor Defiant. Your update brought back memories of putting together an Airfix model in my youth. I remember thinking how wonderful the 4 gun turret looked but how the hell were they meant to shoot straight ahead.

I can't wait for the next mini-update.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
So much technical detail, so little time to absorb it all! Good job, they are worth the wait your updates.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Dazzling, in one word. But as much as I know we all want to know every intimate detail of the RAF, I think it would take too long, and we're just as eager to see how Lord Winston is handling his fall from prime ministery, how Goebbels is spinning the Rhineland crisis and a moral victory for Germany, how the Indian cabinet is handling the agitation between Chinese and Japan, and how many tissues it cost to console Benito after a less than stellar performance against Ethiopians and Britain giving Italy a boot to the head.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
RAFspeak - You should lay off the cider before flying aircraft, it'll only end in tears and accidents. :D

Glad you liked it though.

trekaddict - I tried to balance the elation of the Spitfire against the depression of the Defiant. :)

Westland put in the P.9 (OTL Whirlwind), which might have a happier future this time round depending on what happens to the Peregrine. Certainly given it's OTL role as a high speed low level straffer I think Strike Command will take a great interest in the Westland, if it gets that far. ;)

Duritz - I'm going to try and make the next update huge, hopefully the reverse psychology will kick in and it'll come out short but perfectly formed!

I wouldn't worry about the Mossie, she was twice the size of any of the twin engined fighters with about 4x the bomb load. I can see that design doing fine, if anything with Churchill at the helm it wont face such resistance from overly cautious Ministry types.

Sir Humphrey - I agree, best way to start the week.

DonnieBaseball - The rationale behind the Defiant is (as far as I can tell) straight historical. The RAF genuinely believed the Germans would send over unescorted bombers (to be fair if France hadn't fallen then they would have been forced to do that, so not a completely unreasonable assumption).

Ironically I think the Defiant would have been an excellent Luftwaffe design. With all those unescorted Bomber Command and 8th Air Force bomber streams to attack it would have been in it's element, till the Mustang came along of course. ;)

Vann the Red - Glad you liked it and I agree on the Grumman / Bristol. With a few notable exceptions I find the unused prototypes are normally more striking than the chosen designs, so I'm going to try and show a few such beauties when I can. :)

Davout - That sir is dedication, I am honoured you would risk personal injury just to read an update. :eek: :D

I think one part of the firing mechanism sums up the Defiant quite well; a great deal of work went into a complex linkage system so the pilot could fire the guns if he wanted. Yet he couldn't move the guns and they couldn't fire forward so despite all the work and effort it was in practice utterly useless. The plane in microcosm, fine engineering achievement ruined by a lack of critical thinking about practical reality.

daemonofdecay - Thanks for that, as the bomber update is half started (and I'm off down a tunnel tonight so get Wednesday off) I hope to be able to feed your addiction sometime this weekend. Sooner if I can master a short update. :D

Lord Strange - So reassuring to hear that! I'm not sure what I've done deserves such patient loyalty, but I am very grateful for it. :)

C&D - To briefly answer your questions; Not to badly, badly, very badly, lots.

Though I concede such issues do need to be addressed. Though first I was thinking of covering; the US election results, the Amsterdam Conference, the new Govt. of India Act, the post-war Committee of Imperial Defence meeting with the Dominions and of course, Spain.

So after all that lot I'd expect to get around to the issues you raise no later than mid 2010. :D
 
great stuff pippy, much 'shorter':D than i was expecting.;)


hope the whirlwind does well ITTL, she's a good kite and doesn't get anywhere near the recognition deserved.

looking forward to the Bomber update.

later, caff
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
El Pip said:
C&D - To briefly answer your questions; Not to badly, badly, very badly, lots.

Though I concede such issues do need to be addressed. Though first I was thinking of covering; the US election results, the Amsterdam Conference, the new Govt. of India Act, the post-war Committee of Imperial Defence meeting with the Dominions and of course, Spain.

So after all that lot I'd expect to get around to the issues you raise no later than mid 2010. :D
Click to expand...

Well, it's good to hear all the important matters will get covered.

[Closes his eyes, breathes deep and moans.]

Hmmm, I can almost taste the bitter tears of Mussolini's sorrow.
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
C&D said:
Well, it's good to hear all the important matters will get covered.

[Closes his eyes, breathes deep and moans.]

Hmmm, I can almost taste the bitter tears of Mussolini's sorrow.
Click to expand...
I heard that good old Winnie prescribes a modest dash of Gordon's to go with that as a breakfast aperatif. There seems to be a never ending supply for him at the moment :D

Great work on the tech updates over recent weeks / months, I think the fact that you go into so much trouble with your research and unearth so many little facets on which to draw TTL that makes your AAR so unputdownable :p

Can't wait for the next scrap!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Well, its all mighty fine and interesting with this technology pr0n, but i for on am waiting eagerly for the story to get moving again. More precisely, i want to see what happens to mr. Garner ;)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
El Pip said:
DonnieBaseball - The rationale behind the Defiant is (as far as I can tell) straight historical. The RAF genuinely believed the Germans would send over unescorted bombers (to be fair if France hadn't fallen then they would have been forced to do that, so not a completely unreasonable assumption).

Ironically I think the Defiant would have been an excellent Luftwaffe design. With all those unescorted Bomber Command and 8th Air Force bomber streams to attack it would have been in it's element, till the Mustang came along of course. ;)
Click to expand...

I was just thinking of something I read in one of my BoB books--it had a bit about the Defiant, how the Air Ministry (and Churchill!) thought the 2-seater was better for air superiority missions (i.e. over enemy territory) as it could "use its armament both offensively and defensively"(?) and cover its own retreat(!) home.

The comparison was made to the WWI Bristol fighter, but this actually had a fixed forward gun plus a rear gunner--it was flown like a regular fighter, but with a sting in the tail if it got in a bad spot--not at all the same as the Defiant!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Good to hear about the Mossie there Pip. Looking forward to your long/perfectly formed/short update... who really cares, as long as they keep coming! :D

Dury.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
(Temporarily sworn off the cider. At least the cloudy, still sort.

You know, the Marvellous Mossie has all the features which dear old Winston was traditionally excited about: radical concept, world-beating performance, promised to 'get the job done' by new and amazing methods, not easily countered... I'd be surprised if De Havilland didn't find his 'baby' snatched out of his hands and given state funding ASAP, instead of requiring his own money for a scandalous number of years as in the OTL. :eek:

As for the sad little Defiant, I agree that using it for intercepting bombers - particularly at night - would be a reasonable usage. I feel the same way about it as I do the 'Stringbag' - some people have fond memories of it, but I see it as more of a killer of brave and irreplacable aircrew than a useful 'kite'.

Same goes for the Fairey Battle, of course... :wacko:

...Now then, we are all eager to see how the bomber types are going to be outfitted. Nothing wrong with bombers - somebody has to drop nasty things onto the heads of bad people, after all! :rofl:

What I'd like to know is this though - where is my jolly good friend Guy Gibson? I believe he is only a Pilot Officer right now, but he's going to be the youngest Wing Commander in the RAF in a few short years, and yet my searchings of the Leader database shows nothing, I tell you! ...Do the Good People of Sweden not like him for some reason? How can the RAF learn how to dive-bomb with their Hampdens, without Guy to show the way? :eek:
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Does this mean the Roc is a goer as well?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
A good update, El Pip. I especially enjoyed the pictures.

El Pip said:
Though I concede such issues do need to be addressed. Though first I was thinking of covering; the US election results, the Amsterdam Conference, the new Govt. of India Act, the post-war Committee of Imperial Defence meeting with the Dominions and of course, Spain.

So after all that lot I'd expect to get around to the issues you raise no later than mid 2010. :D
Click to expand...

Personally, I would like to get the US election results by the end of 2009...if that is possible. If not, there is always next year.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
RAFspeak said:
As for the sad little Defiant, I agree that using it for intercepting bombers - particularly at night - would be a reasonable usage. I feel the same way about it as I do the 'Stringbag' - some people have fond memories of it, but I see it as more of a killer of brave and irreplacable aircrew than a useful 'kite'.

Same goes for the Fairey Battle, of course... :wacko:
Click to expand...
The Swordfish racked up some notable successes - at least against targets not protected by modern fighters. And the Battle was a reasonable aircraft (for its time) that was let down by faulty doctrine and organisation and drastically misused by the High Command. The Defiant, on the other hand....

The late-30s RAF seriously over-estimated the effectiveness of their power-operated turrets, largely, I think, because they didn't truly realise just how far fighter speed and armament had moved on in the same period. Compared to a Gauntlet or Fury, the Defiant offers a powerful punch in a (theoretically) more flexible package than a conventional single-seater; compared to a Hurricane or Bf109, it's under-gunned as well as under-performing. Four .303 MGs just doesn't scare 1940s bombers (or fighters - the "self-defending bomber" paradigm came out of the same idea).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
caffran - The Whirlwind would have been a fine design if only it had a chance to finish it's development before being judged. A better set of engines wouldn't have gone amiss either.

C&D - I have resigned myself to getting over-involved in my updates and being unable to produce the short, snappy chapters my broad scope requires.

If I were to just focus on the politics (or the military) then the update size would probably be OK, as it is I think I'm always going to leave some people twiddling their thumbs at updates that don't interest them while waiting for the ones that do.

I confess I'm not really sure of the answer as previous attempts at producing short updates haven't gone all that well. ;)

scubadoobie2 - Too kind sir, though I very much appreciate the comment. :)

Pwn*Star - I have a plan I will outline later, hopefully you'll like it.

DonnieBaseball - Interesting little snippet, perhaps based on the performance over Dunkirk? That's the only op I can think of which might meet that requirement - fly out high, get into a defensive dropping circle so the tail gunners can work together, then fly home when the fuel runs out.

Duritz - Bomber update pretty much done I just need to pick which CAS model gets the nod. :D

RAFspeak - The Mossie's biggest problem will not be falling between the gaps, she's a bit light on bombs (and lacks turrets) for Bomber Command while a bit on the heavy side for Strike Command. I'm reluctant to push her too far forward because somethings have to go wrong for the RAF, though I do promise she will make an appearance.

On the Defiant and co, there are few truly bad aircraft however there are many aircraft that have very specialist roles or are overtaken by technology. The aircraft you mention would have been fine if used as intended or if the war had broken out a few years earlier.

I would point you at the Stuka as the classic example, whole squadrons were annihilated in the BoB but the type was invaluable in Barbarossa. Same aircraft, different circumstances.

As to Mr Gibson, to be fair he only ever made Wing Commander, a bit too lowly to make the leader list I'm afraid. Had he survived however, who knows?

Sir Humphrey - You will have to wait for the FAA update for that one, though I suspect the Navy may have slightly different views on the matter than the RAF.

Nathan Madien - The cheek of it, though you raise a good point.

EDIT;

merrick - Had I waited I could have just quoted chunks of that post. As you so briefly put it tactics and how a plane is used can be as important as technology. And I think you hit the nail on the head with the Defiant. Such accuracy combined with brevity, I'm truly envious.


Here is my latest idea on the subject; I propose to push out the bomber update this week and then move onto the US election results. That does mean the Army (and a few bits of the RAF) suffering from a delayed tech update, but I can think of good game reasons why they would get delayed and it'll make a nice change if a few things aren't rushed into service to fit HoI2 timescales.

So unless anyone desperately wants tank porn I'll be firing up the editor and knocking up an electoral college map ready for Chapter LXIX.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back