Air Campaigns
Want to start or join a group build? This is where to start.
OFFICIAL: CAS (Close Air Support)
Keeperofsouls2099
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Florida, United States
Joined: January 14, 2009
KitMaker: 2,798 posts
AeroScale: 2,443 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 15, 2010 - 02:54 PM UTC
small update.....Paint is on decals were finished up tonight and now working on my payload.I will post pic's of the finished build soon....
JimMrr
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,505 posts
AeroScale: 595 posts
Posted: Monday, August 16, 2010 - 05:33 AM UTC
@Damian:..sounds good..I cant wait to see pics of progress...
@Michael: I believe the BF110 was conceptualized as a fighter escort over England, when that role didnt work out, they found other uses for it...
@Justin...youre a good modeller ...and a fast one too!
MikeMx
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 22, 2008
KitMaker: 649 posts
AeroScale: 434 posts
Posted: Monday, August 16, 2010 - 05:46 AM UTC
Thats the problem with a lot of WW2 planes, most of the ones used for close support were designed for something else. The Typhoon was supposed to be an interceptor, the FW190 a fighter (the F and G were dedicated ground attack and were in ground attack squadrons), the JU87 a dive bomber etc etc.
Off the top off my head the only 2 close support planes, designed and built as such in WW2 were the HS129 and IL-2. That somewhat limits what you can do in this campaign, if you take the rules 'to the letter'. I get that we can't just build any old fighter and put a bomb under it but perhaps a list of WW2 planes that are acceptable would be handy. That way I for one, can work out what to build for this.

thanks
Mike
JimMrr
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,505 posts
AeroScale: 595 posts
Posted: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 12:56 AM UTC
I think the reasoning behind this campaign was to see a departure from the usual candidate aircraft, and to provide a challenge to us as modellers to get into the books and learn some more history......Ill get something together tonight for a list of WW2 aircraft ..coming to mind immediately is the Stuka, the Sturmovik..the FW 187...
MikeMx
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 22, 2008
KitMaker: 649 posts
AeroScale: 434 posts
Posted: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 01:19 AM UTC
That would be good!
The Stuka strictly speaking was not designed as a close support aircraft - if thats included other dive-bombers should be. Also the G model Stuka was an adaption of a plane designed for a different role - much like the Typhoon and FW190F/G.
About the only thing I have in my stash thats a purpose built (from the start) close aupport plane is an IL-2. I do have a choice of JU87B/R, JU87G1, FW190F8, P47D, Beaufighter Mk21, F4U5, Harrier GR3 and Harrier GR7 if specialist close-support models of other planes are allowed.

thanks
Mike
JimMrr
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,505 posts
AeroScale: 595 posts
Posted: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 01:21 PM UTC
I think what is important for this campaign is as follows:
1- the aircraft was purpose build for close air support..I know there are a TON of grey areas here, which leads me to the second point
2- everyone should have a ton of fun and hopefully learn and share some history about their subject
Keeperofsouls2099
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Florida, United States
Joined: January 14, 2009
KitMaker: 2,798 posts
AeroScale: 2,443 posts
Posted: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 04:20 PM UTC
Sukhoi Su-25
A-10 Thunderbolt II
Junkers J.I
Ilyushin Il-2
Ilyushin Il-10
Sukhoi Su-7,
Sukhoi Su-17
Nanchang Q-5.
AH-64 Apache
Henschel Hs 123

WWII is a hard era for CAS Mainly because they didnt see a need for it.Most planes were just updated for the role.But here is what I could find

Great campaign idea by the way Jim really makes you use your Noodle
MikeMx
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 22, 2008
KitMaker: 649 posts
AeroScale: 434 posts
Posted: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 08:28 PM UTC
The HS129 was a dedicated close support plane too - was never intended for anything else!

thanks
Mike
SGTJKJ
#041
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Kobenhavn, Denmark
Joined: July 20, 2006
KitMaker: 10,069 posts
AeroScale: 3,788 posts
Posted: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 - 11:07 PM UTC
The same goes for the Stuka. That is also a dedicated ground attack aircraft.
To some extent the same can be said for the Ju-88 although that is turning into the greyish area.
JimMrr
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,505 posts
AeroScale: 595 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 01:24 AM UTC

Quoted Text

..coming to mind immediately is the Stuka, the Sturmovik..the FW 187...


I mad a mistake with the FW 187 I think...what I meant was the Henschel...couldnt remember the name...it was used alot for CAS on the eastern front..
MikeMx
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 22, 2008
KitMaker: 649 posts
AeroScale: 434 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 09:03 AM UTC
Disagree about the Stuka - it was a dive bomber. It may have been used in close support in the same way the Typhoon was an interceptor that was converted into a close support aircraft but it was never built from the start as a close support aircraft. If you have the Stuka you should be able to have the SBD, SB2C, D3A and D4Y as well.
If you refer to the JU87G, that was a JU87D (dive bomber) fitted with a pair of 37mm Flak for anti-tank work. On that basis you could also have FW190F's and FW190G's as they were dedicated close support versions of the FW190 - which is why I was asking for clear guidance on this matter.
The JU88 was not a close support plane either. There were close support versions of it but very few were made and they were based on the normal bomber models with extra machine guns/cannons or anti-tank guns,
As far as I know the only purpose built close support aircraft (not converted from planes originally built for other roles) were the HS129 and IL-2. Even the HS123 started as a dive bomber and was converted to the close support rule.

thanks
Mike
doubtingthomas
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: March 17, 2009
KitMaker: 156 posts
AeroScale: 153 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 09:37 AM UTC
I am interested in this campaign, but there is certainly a lot of debate about what is in or out.

So...I went to the internet...specifically that vast storehouse of error-free knowledge known as Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close_air_support
"Close air support (CAS) is defined as air action by fixed or rotary winged aircraft against hostile targets that are close to friendly forces, and which requires detailed integration of each air mission with fire and movement of these forces.....The determining factor for CAS is detailed integration, not proximity."

There seems to be a distinction between the method of delivery (dive bombing, level bombing, etc) and being intended for CAS...i.e., if the aircraft was originally intended for army co-operation, it doesn't matter how it delivered the ordnance.

The webpage lists a number of aircraft from WW1 to the present specifically designed for CAS, but the numbers are few. It specifically lists the Sopwith Salamander, Junkers J.I, Ju87, A-36, Il-2, and I didn't get to the jets.

Also interesting was the related section on COIN aircraft, as a subset of CAS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-insurgency_aircraft

That said, I think I'm in with an A-36, if that meets the definitions (and per Wiki, it does )
MikeMx
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 22, 2008
KitMaker: 649 posts
AeroScale: 434 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 10:59 AM UTC
The question has nothing to do with how the ordnance is delivered - its: was the plane designed and built from the start as a close support aircraft?
To me, a dive bomber is a plane that could more accurately bomb its target by diving towards its target at a steep angle. That doesn't mean it is or isn't a close support aircraft, it was certainly effective in that role and the Stuka was used in close support - that I do not dispute but was it designed and built purely as a close support aircraft?
If everyone's sources generate a consensus that it was, then fair enough! I have 2 Stukas in my stash and the paints to paint them! It would be easier for me then building my IL-2!
Regards the A-36, do you mean the dive-bomber/ground attack version of the Mustang? If so that surely goes against the first rule of the campaign as the P51 was built as a fighter and the A-36 was adapted from the P51 much in the same way as the FW190F and FW190G were derived from the FW190A.

thanks
Mike
MikeMx
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 22, 2008
KitMaker: 649 posts
AeroScale: 434 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 11:05 AM UTC
Another point to consider - the definition of Close air support that has been mentioned doesn't specify that the enemy forces have to be on land or sea.
Now if its not important whether the enemy be land or sea based then that opens the campaign up to all those lovely carrier attack planes! Now I have a whole load of carrier torpedo and dive bombers in my stash
grayghost666
#021
Joined: August 02, 2007
KitMaker: 2,458 posts
AeroScale: 197 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 03:05 PM UTC
Hello All,
The Stuka was designed as a close support dive bomber to replace the German army artillery units. This is from the official US Army Air Forces handbook on enemy aircraft copy right 1944.
Of course it did not replace the artillery units, But was used for pinpoint bomb drop on any enemy target stopping the German Army advance IE: artillery units, troop trains, terror missions against civilian etc. So the Stuka is in.

The way this campaign was set up is to:
Try some kits that you would not normally use
Have some fun with said kits
Show how you build your kits and help everyone learn new ways of doing things
and earn a cool ribbon.

You could say that a P-40 was a CAS plane because it strafed troops and dropped a few bombs. But the P-40 was made to be a Fighter Plane.
To me and to Jim a CAS Plane is one that when you get back to base, you have to pull the tree branches out of the flaps and landing gear bays and get a new paint job on the bottom of the plane because it is now green not blue.

On the subject about ship aircraft, I my opinion they are not allowed for 1 reason This is a per say land campaign. If you want to do a shipborne dive bomber/torpedo plane/ fighter plane campaign, Please do and let me know. I have a few dozen ship aircraft kits I could build.
Please use common sense in what you want to build, Read the rules and if you have any doubt Please contact me either here in the threads or PM me I check the threads 2 -3 times a day usually.

Jim will be gone for a few days and as the XO I will be in charge of the campaign.

Thanks for all of your input, I have read every post many times before I posted this.
AND Remember Have FUN
Cheers,
Bruce
Keeperofsouls2099
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Florida, United States
Joined: January 14, 2009
KitMaker: 2,798 posts
AeroScale: 2,443 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 03:14 PM UTC
All I have left to do is install the rear gear bay doors on my A-10 and I am done.
Sunday is my day off i will post pic's then so I can get outside and take them
This is my 9th campaign finished this year and almost my last the only one I have left is the EOD campaign


Build On,
Justin
doubtingthomas
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: March 17, 2009
KitMaker: 156 posts
AeroScale: 153 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 05:19 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Regards the A-36, do you mean the dive-bomber/ground attack version of the Mustang? If so that surely goes against the first rule of the campaign as the P51 was built as a fighter and the A-36 was adapted from the P51 much in the same way as the FW190F and FW190G were derived from the FW190A.



Not following...first rule of the campaign seems to be:
"- Purpose built,or modified CAS aircraft including rotary wing aircraft."

Sure, the A-36 is a modification of the original P-51 design...but designed and ordered to allow dive bombing for close air support (with dive brakes, structural changes, and a new wing). That's the only role the aircraft ever performed, and few other aircraft of the western allies performed the role with such exclusivity.

I'll leave it up to our campaign leaders...
wrenchy
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Saskatchewan, Canada
Joined: April 23, 2006
KitMaker: 140 posts
AeroScale: 89 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 05:22 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Hello All,
The Stuka was designed as a close support dive bomber to replace the German army artillery units. This is from the official US Army Air Forces handbook on enemy aircraft copy right 1944.
Of course it did not replace the artillery units, But was used for pinpoint bomb drop on any enemy target stopping the German Army advance IE: artillery units, troop trains, terror missions against civilian etc. So the Stuka is in.

The way this campaign was set up is to:
Try some kits that you would not normally use
Have some fun with said kits
Show how you build your kits and help everyone learn new ways of doing things
and earn a cool ribbon.

You could say that a P-40 was a CAS plane because it strafed troops and dropped a few bombs. But the P-40 was made to be a Fighter Plane.
To me and to Jim a CAS Plane is one that when you get back to base, you have to pull the tree branches out of the flaps and landing gear bays and get a new paint job on the bottom of the plane because it is now green not blue.

On the subject about ship aircraft, I my opinion they are not allowed for 1 reason This is a per say land campaign. If you want to do a shipborne dive bomber/torpedo plane/ fighter plane campaign, Please do and let me know. I have a few dozen ship aircraft kits I could build.
Please use common sense in what you want to build, Read the rules and if you have any doubt Please contact me either here in the threads or PM me I check the threads 2 -3 times a day usually.

Jim will be gone for a few days and as the XO I will be in charge of the campaign.

Thanks for all of your input, I have read every post many times before I posted this.
AND Remember Have FUN
Cheers,
Bruce



So, by "ship aircraft", do you mean carrier based attack planes like the A-4 and A-7?
MikeMx
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 22, 2008
KitMaker: 649 posts
AeroScale: 434 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 - 09:41 PM UTC
Ok so now I'm totally confused by this campaign now! The way it came across to me is the planes had to be designed and built close air support - not close air support derivitives of other planes.
I see someone is building a Sea Harrier for this (primary role - fleet air defence - hence the air interception radar in the nose) and the A-36 is derived from the P51.
Yet the ME110 has already been refused despite there being a dedicated ground attack/cas version the 110E. If the A-36 is allowed a 110E should be too. If the A-36 is deemed acceptable then that should open up the campaign a bit for others in the same vain.
If someone asked me what planes were used a lot in CAS roles during WW2 my list would be HS123, HS129, JU87, ME110E, FW190F, FW190G (in fact the FW190F/G replaced the JU87 squadrons!), Typhoon, Hurricane Mk IID, Hurricane MkIV, IL-2, A-36. These are dedicated planes either built from the start as such or converted from other roles into dedicated CAS planes. Other ones that come to mind are the P47 and Beaufighter, although i'm having trouble finding dedicated CAS versions of them .
Of these I have in my stash a JU87B/R, JU87G1, FW190F8, Hurricane Mk IID, and IL-2. Now of those the one I want to build most is the FW190F8 but I'm thinking of the Hurricane with those lovely big 40mm cannons - maybe both?
So my question to the campaign organisers is can we eliminate some grey areas and make what is allowed a bit more defined?

thanks
Mike
skyhawk
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Florida, United States
Joined: June 03, 2003
KitMaker: 1,095 posts
AeroScale: 52 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 - 03:16 AM UTC
Work started on the Roden AU-23A...

great kit, and overall good fit too. So far its been a breaze to build.

Photobucket

Photobucket
Photobucket

only fit issue so far is the nose parts. I was wise and attached them to the halves early on to avoid any bad "step" on the fuselage sides. However it looks like the nose is just a tad wider than the fuselage, so a small gap results on the top (bottom is fine). A little sanding and file work will remove some of the nose for a perfect fit...so no big deal here.
Photobucket

overall so far... those are 1/32 figures on the side. This plane is pretty big!
Photobucket

Andy
cinzano
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Indiana, United States
Joined: January 13, 2009
KitMaker: 419 posts
AeroScale: 378 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 - 12:53 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Disagree about the Stuka - it was a dive bomber. It may have been used in close support in the same way the Typhoon was an interceptor that was converted into a close support aircraft but it was never built from the start as a close support aircraft. If you have the Stuka you should be able to have the SBD, SB2C, D3A and D4Y as well.
If you refer to the JU87G, that was a JU87D (dive bomber) fitted with a pair of 37mm Flak for anti-tank work. On that basis you could also have FW190F's and FW190G's as they were dedicated close support versions of the FW190 - which is why I was asking for clear guidance on this matter.
The JU88 was not a close support plane either. There were close support versions of it but very few were made and they were based on the normal bomber models with extra machine guns/cannons or anti-tank guns,
As far as I know the only purpose built close support aircraft (not converted from planes originally built for other roles) were the HS129 and IL-2. Even the HS123 started as a dive bomber and was converted to the close support rule.

thanks
Mike




Man,

You guys are busting blood vessels needlessly.

Ju87. Close air support?! absolutely. Typhoon? Yes. Corsair? Yes. If SBD's were used in direct support of infantry then definitely yes. (also Russian p-39, and American A-36).

Build planes! Have fun.

Cheers,
Fred
Keeperofsouls2099
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Florida, United States
Joined: January 14, 2009
KitMaker: 2,798 posts
AeroScale: 2,443 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 - 04:06 PM UTC
While the rest of you are trying to figure out what CAS is.Here it is my finished entry Great campaign Jim I have learned alot and discovered a few planes I did not know existed.
The kit is a Hobby boss 1/48 A-10A,Aires cockpit and scratch built LAU-68's(Rocket Pods).......






More can be found on the build log...
A-10 Build Log
eoinryan
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Cork, Ireland
Joined: April 30, 2010
KitMaker: 232 posts
AeroScale: 66 posts
Posted: Friday, August 20, 2010 - 07:37 AM UTC

Fantastic A-10!

I've just been reading the debate about what is/is not Close Air Support. Some interesting views, but for my two cents the main reason for having campaigns is to enjoy the build! If you are a grunt on the ground under fire and something from the sky swoops in blows up whatever was trying to kill you, you'd probably regard it as close air support. Stuka's should be in! B-2s? probably not. Common sense should dictate!

Anywho, it will be next month before I start but I'm still debating whether to build a 1/48 Mi-24 Hind or an IL-2 Sturmovik. Choppers are allowed, aren't they?

Eoin
grayghost666
#021
Joined: August 02, 2007
KitMaker: 2,458 posts
AeroScale: 197 posts
Posted: Friday, August 20, 2010 - 10:23 AM UTC
Hello Eoin,
Yes some helicopters are allowed such as the Hind, Apache, Cobra etc.
The huey class is out as it was a transport helicopter as are other of such types.
Cheers,
Bruce
MikeMx
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 22, 2008
KitMaker: 649 posts
AeroScale: 434 posts
Posted: Friday, August 20, 2010 - 10:57 AM UTC
How about a Skyraider?

thanks
Mike