PDA

View Full Version : Carrier Air Groups



BeoWolf_361st
08-22-2004, 01:02 AM
I have noticed alot of squads are starting up as just VF whatever.. instead of CAW/CAG airwings, which had the Fighting/Bombing/Torpedo/Scouting squadrons in them... That way the Group could fly any of the flyable aircraft in the game. I know some people enjoy the fighters, some like to move mud and maybe some will get to drop fish....
It's just a thought from an old retired Navy Sea Dog....... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/53.gif

BeoWolf_361st
08-22-2004, 01:02 AM
I have noticed alot of squads are starting up as just VF whatever.. instead of CAW/CAG airwings, which had the Fighting/Bombing/Torpedo/Scouting squadrons in them... That way the Group could fly any of the flyable aircraft in the game. I know some people enjoy the fighters, some like to move mud and maybe some will get to drop fish....
It's just a thought from an old retired Navy Sea Dog....... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/53.gif

IV_JG51_Razor
08-22-2004, 01:27 AM
We struggled with this concept for quite a while. We even considered going with a VC-51 designator which would have been just right, but given our fighter squadron roots - going all the way back to WarBirds ver 1.xx days, we decided to stick with the VF-51 moniker. It just rolls off the tongue easier http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Razor
IV/JG51 11/12 Staffelkapitan
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)
Forgotten Skies Online War
http://www.forgottenskies.com/ForgottenWars/default.aspx
"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

Latico
08-22-2004, 01:36 AM
I think it has to with what we might call "Fighter pilot Syndrome". For some reason fighter pilots seem to get all the "Glory" as if they single handedly win wars.

I aggree, for carrier ops Carrier AG's should be formed instead of just VF squadrons. Let's face it there are going to be some that turn out to be better at torpedo attacks and dive bombing than others are at dog fighting. And much of the carrier sorties required coordinated operations of the whole AG. And if the AA is as bad on the PF ships as it is on some of the FB ships, skillfully planned coordinated attacks are going to be an extreme must. Land based AA and AAA installations won't be easy either.

BSS_Vidar
08-22-2004, 05:22 PM
CVW's are a great idea. But they don't have to be formed by one unit. Allied squadrons can form CVW's and even rotate aircraft. VF-2 are our allies and are currently feeling their oats in FB as the make the transistion from CFS2. They all ready distinguish themselves in a multi-designation roll as a Fighter Squadron and a Bombing unit as well. I'll be talking to their CO as well as some other friends about this before PF hits the streets.

Any commands out their willing to help form a CVW? We'll be CVW-1. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
Just think of it. Ghost Skys competitions not with squadrons, but entire Airwings! Carrier vs. carrier

BSS_Vidar

VF-11 Vadger
08-22-2004, 05:27 PM
When it comes time to play PF League games and tournaments etc it is best to make friends with other squads who want to be assigned to the roll of bombing/torping because you may not have enough members in your own squad to fill up each position.

Visit us at http://www.VF-11.com
http://www.highalpharc.com/COD/cod2.jpg

Ankanor
08-22-2004, 06:05 PM
There is a reason for the Fighter syndrom. actually , a few. 1st, it's the glory thing.
2nd it's the freedom. Knowing that you depend on yourself to fight through. And also, there is the sequrity. It requires a lot of nerve to just sit in formation and and go straight and level as another guy in bad mood gives his best to blow you out of the sky. Then, you depend on your gunners, fellow squadron mates, lady Luck and the mersy of the AA gunners. to summerize, it's all guts, no glory. and few are the ones who like the condition.

Not that I won't get in an Avenger/Dauntless and go straight in the Flak storm. Just waiting for the PF http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/53.gif

O, how I want to hold you,
To feel your breath
And hear your laughter in my ears.
To look into your eyes
And see myself in there.
Caress you with my lips.
To hold your hands in mine
And find the hidden smile in your dimple
That makes you irresistible
And stops the breathing in my chest.
To be with you when you are weeping,
To wipe away the tears and take away the sorrow.
To watch you while you are sleeping
Like there is no tomorrow.

And with a tender kiss to wake you up.

Essen,23.02.2004 20:53

Greyhawk_100Gp
08-23-2004, 05:23 PM
I think that there were Composite squadrons/air Groups which operated off of Light Carriers and Escort Carriers... which had a mixture of fighters/attack/patrol aircraft. Certainly helps the idea of flying multiple aircraft types in this upcoming sim.

Latico
08-24-2004, 12:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Greyhawk_100Gp:
I think that there were Composite squadrons/air Groups which operated off of Light Carriers and Escort Carriers... which had a mixture of fighters/attack/patrol aircraft. Certainly helps the idea of flying multiple aircraft types in this upcoming sim.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

All carriers had compsite Airgroups. Ususally made up of squadrons as VS (Scout Squadron), VB (Bombing Squadron), VT (Torpedo Sqdn), and VF (Fighter Sqdn).

Early in the war all US carriers and their AG's shared the same designation number. Example: CV6 Enterprise carreid AG-6, that was comprised of VS-6, VB-6, VT-6, and VF-6. Later, the shuffling began of the AG's. CV6 was home to several deifferent AG's during the war. AG-6, AG-10, AG-20, AGN-90, the last was a radar equiped night squadron.

IV_JG51_Razor
08-24-2004, 08:34 AM
I think that what Greyhawk was referring to were the Composite squadrons (VC) that deployed aboard most, if not all, CVEs. They were made up of F4F/FM2s and TBF/TBMs and were used for ASW and close air support of amphibious landings. These squadrons were later used as nucular delivery units aboard CVs at the beginning of the cold war, and eventually evolved into what we call an Attack squadron today (VFA)

The Composite squadron would make the most sense for most of the squads in PF, simply because most of us don't fly fighters exclusively, but rather, a mix of fighters and bombers to accomplish an objective. The problem is, VC-51 just doesn't have the PIZAZZ that VF-51 has. So, that's why we decided to stick with a fighter squadron designation in PF. That, and the fact that we exist in FB as a fighter group - despite the fact that we operate a group of mud movers within it's ranks.

Razor
IV/JG51 11/12 Staffelkapitan
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)
Forgotten Skies Online War
http://www.forgottenskies.com/ForgottenWars/default.aspx
"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

Latico
08-24-2004, 09:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The problem is, VC-51 just doesn't have the PIZAZZ that VF-51 has. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, That's what I was talkin about earlier. An AG designation just ain't as glorious as a VF designation. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

HH_Hitcher
08-24-2004, 09:50 PM
I like VMF myself! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://img38.exs.cx/img38/4444/HitcherSig.jpg

BeoWolf_361st
08-25-2004, 08:00 PM
I believe the old adage goes: Bomber pilots win wars, Fighter pilots make movies. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

WIFC Warhawk
08-26-2004, 11:01 AM
We are going with allied/axis organizations that fly timeline aircraft with realistic command structures. Some of you might remember us as PACCOM from the old CFS2 days. I see Vidar here, and remember him well. Navy squadrons will be flying under a CAG unless based ashore (I am assuming that the PBY's will be able to drop ordnance). It appears that PF will allow us to implememnt aussie/brit squadrons to the pacific theater and I will be able to open 2 more branch commands accordingly. As it sits now, we are going in with 10 allied squadrons and 5 axis (chutai/kokutai). At our best in cfs2 numbers, we were more than 150 strong.

I hope to see some old familiar faces in PF and I for one cannot wait for it to come out. Salutes everyone.

{VF-1}_Rivrat
08-26-2004, 11:16 AM
JG1/VF-1 are currently planning on implementing the Carrier Air Group/CAW in our new Squadron. We will be Air Group 1 USS Yorktown CV-10, consisting of: VF-1,VB-1, and VT-1. This is the plan at the current time, however we are still waiting to see what kind of options/retrictions we will have in this game vs FB.

http://pic3.picturetrail.com/VOL25/914124/2142884/47893187.jpg

Sakai9745
08-26-2004, 06:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Latico:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The problem is, VC-51 just doesn't have the PIZAZZ that VF-51 has. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, That's what I was talkin about earlier. An AG designation just ain't as glorious as a VF designation. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Me personally, I like it when the air groups referred to themselves as 'Fighting X', such as Hornet's air group being 'Fighting Eight'. Had a much better ring to it.

Regards,

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/artexpo/august2002_fellows.jpg

Al - SF, Calif

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid."