Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Airial Convoys

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.
unmerged(21069)

unmerged(21069)

First Lieutenant
Oct 23, 2003
269
0
Visit site
More than once in HOI 1, I have wished I had the ability to resupply by air and it occurs to me that perhaps a feature that should be included in HOI2 should be arial convoys. Historically, Hitler supplied and/or tried to supply trapped troops on the Russian front by air. The convoys should work the way that ship convoys work (although some provision will have to be included that takes into acount the range of the aircraft). What do you all think?
 
Well, from reading the interview it says that you can assign air wings to do specific missions now loke bombing runs. We should be able to assign transport planes to fly supply routs then right?
 
Burma Road, in China and Myanmar, extending from the Myanmarese railhead of Lashio to Kunming, Yunnan prov., China. About 700 mi (1,130 km) long and constructed through rough mountain country, it was a remarkable engineering achievement. Undertaken by the Chinese after the start of the Sino-Japanese War in 1937 and completed in 1938, it was used to transport war supplies landed at Rangoon and shipped by railroad to Lashio. This traffic increased in importance to China after the Japanese took effective control of the Chinese coast and of Indochina. The Ledo Road (later called the Stilwell Road) from Ledo, India, into Myanmar was begun in Dec., 1942. In 1944 the Ledo Road reached Myitkyina and was joined to the Burma Road. Both roads have lost their former importance and are in a state of disrepair.
Click to expand...

:confused:

I am at a loss as to what this has to do with aerial convoys...
 
oops. my bad.

"The Hump", which was referred to earlier, was an aerial convoy route that carreid goods, resources, and armaments over a gap in the Burma Road. The numbers are extremely impressive.
 
I certainly like the idea but I question the effectiveness of arial supply convoys. It often provided less than desirable results during Operation Market Garden and the Eastern Front. In many respects, dropping anything from a plane - bombs, men or supplies - was a risky venture throughout the war. If arial convoys were implemented, the ability to deliver the payload ought to diminish with distance. Furthermore, I suggest the possibility of delivering a full payload ought to be minimal.

My two bits, yada yada ...
 
actually, the luftwaffe managed to keep both the Demyansk and the Kholm pockets supplied with 300 tons of supplies a day from feb. 20 - May 18 1942 of course they had airfields in the pockets

the failure of the efforts to resupply Stalingrad and other pockets were in part a result of the fact that the training of transport pilots was held up in order to get more planes to resupply Demyansk and Kholm, partly because there were often smaller airfields and also because the red airforce got better

but i would still say that airial convoys should be an option in HOI 2
 
-- An air wing supplied Africa throughout the campaign, started with one Gruppe of 53 Ju 52 in 1941, grew to 250 planes during "Tunisgrad" phase. At that range 100 Ju 52 could deliver 3,000-4,500 tonnes per month.

-- The "Hump" in Burma, a large air wing delivered 3,000 tonnes per month to NatChi.

-- Stalingrad 1942-43, several air wings but with terrible weather and bad serviceability delivered maybe 90 tonnes per day, 2,700 per month.

-- As Stefano2294 noted, Demyansk/Kholm 1941-42, kept 100,000 men supplied with parachute drops through the winter. (This was one reason why Goering thought Stalingrad could be done.)

-- ALL mobile campaigns in 1940, 1941, 1942 used air supply to panzer spearheads. In the Caucasus 1942 the Luftwaffe delivered 200 tonnes of fuel per day even though half the 500-plane transport pool was supporting Rommel in North Africa (good flying weather, multiple sorties per day). Allied 1944 campaign used air supply the same way, and they had HUGE air transport pools to do it.

One really interesting aspect of this is that if the Germans don't fly the catastrophic Holland 1940, Crete 1941, and Stalingrad 1942 missions, they will save upward of 1,000 transports and be able to support their panzer spearheads much better.

-- Soviet supply of partisans. They basically flew in all the arms and ammo, and about half of the food (surprisingly) consumed by up to 250,000 partisans. Mostly in light aircraft, at night, but it comes to at least 100 tonnes per day. Britain's Bomber Command flew thousands of tonnes to resistance forces in Western Europe too.

-- Air evacuations and transport missions. Not sure how this would work, but the numbers are huge. In Norway 1940 they flew in 29,000 men and 2,400 tonnes of supply. They moved 30,000 men out of Stalingrad before it fell, and then another 50,000 belonging to 17th Army in the Kuban the following month. They couldn't get above 100 tonnes per day to Stalingrad, but they brought 17th Army about 500 tonnes per day, then filled the return trip with wounded and evacuees.

-- Sea Lion, had it occurred, would have involved a huge airlift of supply as well as paras.

Air supply IMHO is even more important than paratroopers. Air supply missions flew every day in every theater. So it should definitely be looked at.
 
Math Guy said:
-- An air wing supplied Africa throughout the campaign, started with one Gruppe of 53 Ju 52 in 1941, grew to 250 planes during "Tunisgrad" phase. At that range 100 Ju 52 could deliver 3,000-4,500 tonnes per month.

-- The "Hump" in Burma, a large air wing delivered 3,000 tonnes per month to NatChi.

-- Stalingrad 1942-43, several air wings but with terrible weather and bad serviceability delivered maybe 90 tonnes per day, 2,700 per month.

-- As Stefano2294 noted, Demyansk/Kholm 1941-42, kept 100,000 men supplied with parachute drops through the winter. (This was one reason why Goering thought Stalingrad could be done.)

-- ALL mobile campaigns in 1940, 1941, 1942 used air supply to panzer spearheads. In the Caucasus 1942 the Luftwaffe delivered 200 tonnes of fuel per day even though half the 500-plane transport pool was supporting Rommel in North Africa (good flying weather, multiple sorties per day). Allied 1944 campaign used air supply the same way, and they had HUGE air transport pools to do it.

One really interesting aspect of this is that if the Germans don't fly the catastrophic Holland 1940, Crete 1941, and Stalingrad 1942 missions, they will save upward of 1,000 transports and be able to support their panzer spearheads much better.

-- Soviet supply of partisans. They basically flew in all the arms and ammo, and about half of the food (surprisingly) consumed by up to 250,000 partisans. Mostly in light aircraft, at night, but it comes to at least 100 tonnes per day. Britain's Bomber Command flew thousands of tonnes to resistance forces in Western Europe too.

-- Air evacuations and transport missions. Not sure how this would work, but the numbers are huge. In Norway 1940 they flew in 29,000 men and 2,400 tonnes of supply. They moved 30,000 men out of Stalingrad before it fell, and then another 50,000 belonging to 17th Army in the Kuban the following month. They couldn't get above 100 tonnes per day to Stalingrad, but they brought 17th Army about 500 tonnes per day, then filled the return trip with wounded and evacuees.

-- Sea Lion, had it occurred, would have involved a huge airlift of supply as well as paras.

Air supply IMHO is even more important than paratroopers. Air supply missions flew every day in every theater. So it should definitely be looked at.
Click to expand...

Interesting numbers. Regarding the x of tonnes dropped per day or month, are we to assume all of it made it into the proper hands? Is there any data available on the success rates of drops (though, I suppose any supplies arriving to stranded troops is a success)? Regardless, it appears there is solid argument for its consideration in HoI 2. Incidentally, I loved the option of airdrops in Close Combat 2: A Bridge Too Far .
 
To support a division in normal operations, 150-300 tonnes per day of which 40 % ammo, 40 % fuel, 10 % food. Allied divisions had much more lavish numbers of vehicles and consumed more; Axis divisions got by with less.

To keep 250,000 troops on active defense in Stalingrad would have required 300 tonnes per day (so as little as 20-25 tonnes per division per day).

Trevor Dupuy estimated that effectiveness dropped very little until supply fell to about 65 % of normal, then dropped much faster (figures originally quoted by Steel from Dupuy's Numbers, Prediction & War):

Supply efficiency

  • 120 - +20% combat efficiency
    110 - +10% combat efficiency
    100 - no change
    90 - no change
    80 - no change
    70 - no change
    60 - -5% combat efficiency
    50- -15% combat efficiency
    40- -25% combat efficiency
    30- -35% combat efficiency
    20- -45% combat efficiency
    10 - -55% combat efficiency
    0 - - -65% combat efficiency

So that minimum of 300 tonnes would have kept the Stalingrad defense close to 50 % efficiency.

Efficiency of paradrops really varied. The Stalingrad paradrops were unsuccessful, because if the container came down a mile from the troops, they didn't have gas for vehicles or physical strength to haul contents back. Because of the added weight of parachutes and containers, and the need for a drop crew of 2-3 men per plane, transports could only carry about half as much supply per trip, and then the percentage lost might be 50 %, so paradropping was MUCH less efficient than point-to-point transport.
 
Finding some of the last posts in this thread very interesting, I think aloud two things:
1) game-wise then, how could/would all this translate to HOI 2 game design? (I just visited a HOI 1 thread on air transports and had my doubts on using repeated missions for those on-the-map units)
2) tonnage in proportion to tonnage provided by other means (train , ships, trucks, horse-wagons, donkeys whatever). Granted that in several examples there were no significant alternatives available.
 
MostlyHarmless said:
Finding some of the last posts in this thread very interesting, I think aloud two things:
1) game-wise then, how could/would all this translate to HOI 2 game design? (I just visited a HOI 1 thread on air transports and had my doubts on using repeated missions for those on-the-map units)
2) tonnage in proportion to tonnage provided by other means (train , ships, trucks, horse-wagons, donkeys whatever). Granted that in several examples there were no significant alternatives available.
Click to expand...

For a nice introduction into logistics in WW2 try this article on the Western Desert and Rommel's dilemma

http://www.almc.army.mil/ALOG/issues/JanFeb01/MS610.htm

Note that the seaborne convoys were putting almost 2,500 tonnes per DAY into Africa during 42. Even against the RN. Air supply is maybe a fraction of that at 100-150 tonnes per day. It can keep an isolated division or two happy but air supply is not the panacea for lazy generals ;)

Note that air supply can be useful in transhipment of supplies too. Especially if trucks are too slow / not available.
 
Under manage convoys?

Air supply could be integrated into the manage convoys screen. Build an air transport, then assign it to the convoy pool like with transports currently. Set up a convoy as before, and instead of just ships and escorts, have airplanes as well. Intercepts could occur based on enemy aircraft entering the provinces that the air-convoy has to pass though. The main issue would be to require lots of air transport to supply even a small amount as to make this an expensive strategy.
 
Derek Pullem said:
Note that the seaborne convoys were putting almost 2,500 tonnes per DAY into Africa during 42. Even against the RN. Air supply is maybe a fraction of that at 100-150 tonnes per day. It can keep an isolated division or two happy but air supply is not the panacea for lazy generals ;)
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I guess this 2,500 tonnes per day includes reinforcements (tanks and aircrafts) shipped to Africa Korps. I remember reading somewhere that RN sink few ships and over 700 aircrafts in route to Africa Korps. So my conclusion is 100-150 is needed to keep unit effective in battle condition, any additional tanks&reinforcements will make this supply level higher.

I don't know any wargame that simulate supply realistically. HoI1 it was easy task to reinforcement divisions behind sea. It was easy to add ships to convoy and in few days they transported enough supplies to support dozen divisions for few months. So this is good thread, hopefully we get better supply system for HoI2.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back