Can there be any doubt?

Build planes folks. The campaign guidelines are pretty simple and straight forward.

Let's have some fun.

Cheers,
Fred

Hey Everybody, Love the thread. Mike, I think you're overthinking. As you're doing this, it's narrowing the field of possibilities for everyone because Bruce has to be more specific. I'm with Fred. Build it, It probably strafed something somewhere sometime. It would be easier to rule out the aircraft that probably never saw any Ground Support one time or another(He-219, Texan, U-2, SR-71 and maybe 3 or 4 more). My Great Uncle (navigator) made a strafing run in a B-24 (3 or 4 missions before he went down over Ploesti. The irony is he might have been shooting at one of my Great Grandfathers).Pilots in the first string-bags started fighting by throwing bombs out the sides and shooting at troops and each other with pistols so technically it would be hard to disprove that it was used for ground support at one time or another.

Bruce, Don't be too quick to rule out the Huey (Gunships just for ground support) of course you're the XO so...

Eoin, I was on the wrong end of a Hind D in '86 and I can say without shame that's the only time I've... wetted myself. Quite impressive from the angle I was at though and would be a fun build.

As for me, I'm looking forward to building this little beauty. The only plane designed around a weapon as far as I know, and that side door is the epitome of kewl.

What a kit! It's so nice PE is, in my humble opinion, unnecessary. It comes with all the parts to build any variant and an extra fuselage sprue (evidently the bagged one is defective). Plus I picked it up on clearance for a whopping $7 with tax. I'm going to build it as a P-39Q with the Coral and Blue camo scheme of the 46th FS/ 15th FG. Just hope I can do it justice.

Hello All,
Here is a simple guild to use for any build you might want to do for this campaign:
Using an Encyclopedia for the Worlds Combat Aircraft ( copyright 1990) and using an old pamphlet from the U.S. Army Air Corp ( Forces ) copyright 1946
if you use a model that starts with the following, They are NOT allowed:
P/F = Pursuit/Fighter used to combat other planes in the air for control of the air space. The P-39Q is compared with the BF109, Spitfire, Yak 1 and the Yak 9 as an example.
B = Bomber used to destroy enemy targets with a large bomb load.
C = Cargo used to transport personnel and supplies around the country or world.
T = see above.
UH = Utility Helicopter used to transport combat troops and supplies behind enemy lines. The Huey Gunship grew out of this type of Helicopter to suppress the enemy troops so they did not have a hot LZ. This was not a "Modified CAS" helicopter as it was not completely rebuilt for such action.
I talked to a Engineer about the Gunship and he stated it all started with the troops on the ground modifying the Huey to protect the slicks coming in for a landing.

There are a couple of exceptions to the above:
A= Attack Aircraft after WW2
The AC-47, AC-130 are a few that would be allowed. The reason being after talking to the same Engineer both planes only original parts were the superstructure, wings and some of the flaps. The rest were of the planes were new as in the Electronics, heavier floor support for the guns, newer guns, etc.

Please remember I do not like telling anyone that the build they want to do is not allowed, It bothers me and it Jim alot . But you must follow the rules which Jim and myself sorted out to make this a very simple and very small rules campaign.

In the future ( if Jim is willing) we will come up with a Modified CAS Campaign allowing just about all Aircraft that were turned from fighters to Fighter/Bombers for a 1943 to 1945 setting. How does that sound to everyone?

I am hoping that there are no hard feeling's about what I have said, But the spirit of the campaign is just as important as the rules are.

Some of you are right, If I was a grunt on the ground taking fire and a plane swooped downed and killed the enemy I would not care if it was a Fighter ,Bomber, or a guy on a kit doing it. But for this campaign it MUST be a CAS Aircraft to get a Ribbon.
I hope this puts to bed any questions about was is or is not allowed.
Cheers,
Bruce

ALLLLrighty then, Mike, Tom, Fred, everybody, I apologize.

It seems we've stumbled into a Gray area minefield.


Really? Fred, It ain't that simple now.

Bruce, your last post muddied the waters for me but did make me go back and re-read everything.

I'm not a rules lawyer, I don't want to debate, and I certainly don't want to be an ass. Please don't take anything negatively because I'm usually extremely blunt, and certainly not eloquent.

With the disclaimers out, the confusion is in (obviously) the first rule.


Maybe the rules could be slightly bigger.
Bruce, It's your and Jim's campaign and you can run it any way that you want to. If you want Purple Sturmoviks from 1943 with skis operating out of Northern bases only?! Great. Just tell us so before we "enlist" with thoughts of building THAT kit we've had in the stash for just the right time to build or got excited about and went out and bought (I would have bought mine anyway, who would pass up a deal like that). Whomever wrote that rule should have been more specific or refined/defined it better. Y'all are walking through a gray area, calling it Black and White, and we're not seeing it. Also, the new guide you put out only covers US stuff. Otherwise, I say with "ambiguity comes flexibility".

Modify: To change or alter, esp. slightly or partially.

The rule states that it had to be a purpose built OR modified CAS weapon. The OR makes all the difference in what is and what is not a CAS weapon and the confusion. As I read it now (and read it before), we had the option of building almost anything that took to the air and had either rockets, cannons, or bombs. I think you meant Purpose Built or Purpose Modified by the factory as I read your last post (now who's blowin' a blood vessel, Fred) but even then your not quite fitting the peg in the hole.
Your definition in an earlier post was that you and Jim expected something to have tree limbs in it after it was done with business. My first mental image was of a photo of a P-47 Thunderbolt, the second was a photo of 2 B-26s at literally treetop level. Your ruling on the P-39 makes sense either way the rule is interpreted. Without the supercharger it was worthless at high altitudes but it had a Big F---ing Cannon so it was relegated to the ground attack /CAS role. No modification necessary. But it probably had tree branches or palm fronds coming home. I have been the welcome recipient of "help" from AC 130s and Warthogs and I assure you, those guys didn't have any tree branches or leaves when they landed.

Purpose built: A10, SU-25, HS-123, HS-129, Cobra, Apache, Hind, J-1, Salamander, GA-1, (if you want a stringbag), A-7, A 4, Shturmovik, and 2 or 3 more Soviet designs.

Modified: A-36, P-51D/K & P-47 (hardpoints and mounts for rockets or bazookas, rockets are only good for ground), Huey guns, AC 130, Stuka, Fw 190, Me 110, Skyraider, Sea Fury, Tornado, Harrier, Bronco, Dragonfly, Strikemaster, Hurricane, Thunderbolt, Corsair, AC 47, Typhoon, Bu-131, Blackhawk, etc. etc. All factory modified to blow up stuff on the ground.

Used in CAS role: Almost everything else at one time or another.

As to the Huey, I agree with your Engineer friend on all but one point. The Gunship version was modified with a new chin-mounted GL, hard points and weapons pods in direct response to field requests and modifications. Bell put the package together, built the choppers, sent them out, and they weren't used to carry troops, just support them. Hence, a dedicated, modified CAS Aircraft.

Of course, now that my rant is over, I once again defer back to y'all. I can shift gears pretty easy. I have an A10 and a Shturmovik with this campaign written all over them, and , if you change your mind, I have a Huey Gunship and the P-39. No problems any way you go.

I'll reiterate, I'm just trying to point out the ambiguity that all the confusion is stemming from.
Thanks for you and Jim running the campaign,
Charlie

I personally think it would be easier to understand if the definition of modified was clearly specified for this campaign. For example (correct me if I'm wrong) the Typhoon and P47 did not need modified other then to fit bombs and or rockets, so they are simply fighters with ground attack weapons and to me at least should not be allowed.
However things like the FW190 F/G and Hurricane IId and IV had extra modifications to make them into CAS aircraft - like extra armour, reinforced landing gear etc as well as being able to carry a variety of ground attack weapons. So the question there is how modified does it have to be to qualify?
I too am not trying to be awkward or anything but I and I'm sure others don't want to build something for this campaign only for it to be ruled out. Hope you understand where I'm coming from here.

thanks
Mike

PM coming your way Mike

So what did you want done with all of this ???


You want me to hang it under what ???


Well perhaps you might like to put some wings on it first !!



Ok, Ok, I'll get to the wings later.

(Sorry folks, just wanted to show y'all that I was actually doing something here)

Lookin good Damian, as always!....I hope one day Ill have time to do up a tweet ...very cool aircraft indeed!

Love the A-10, Justin. It looks great! The wrap around camouflage is great and the amount of pain hung under that beast is very....inspiring

Nice progress, Damian. Those big cannister - are they fuel tanks or napalm cannisters?

Justin I apologize for not commenting on your build...I must have a head full of concrete dust here!...looks awesome!...Ive always liked the look of the A-10...

Thanks guys loved the build Hobby boss makes a good kit.

@Jim dont worry about I understand what with all the confusion thats been going on.

@Auss looking good my man and it looks like you have plenty of ordnance to mount(not the fun part trust me look up)

I read a few of the highly technical comments on this thread.

hence a question; is a sea harrier acceptable for this campaign or not?

According to Wikipedias Development Summary, The Harrier is a "Close support, Reconnaissance attack aircraft"...so methinks its a yes..unless someone can point out a glaring mistake in the definition..

Good start D! If I wasn't so far behind and now out of town for a long weekend, I'd pull out that old Hase A-37 myself...

The Harrier GR3/4/7/9 and AV8B are certainly close support but the Sea Harrier's prime role is air combat with attack as a secondry role. The FRS 1 had a Blue Fox radar (air combat) and carried air to air missiles, or sea eagle anti ship missiles and could carry some bombs/rockets in a secondry attack role. The FA2 had a Blue Vixen radar (air to air) and usually carried AMRAAMs and Sidewinders but could also carry Sea Eagles or bombs/rockets in secondry roles.

thanks
Mike

*pouring a large glass of good scotch.....

Thanks guys, this old Monogram kit is going together well, with a little bit of sanding and trimming here and there.

Jesper, the 6 finned weapons are bombs, the ones tapered at each end are indeed napalm cannisters. She's a nasty little piece of work !

Cheers, D

she is indeed...I like it !

You can say that again. I do not want to be a VC or NVA if that little tweety bird lets the load go through the jungle canopy.

Looking forward to see more

After being unemployed for a year and a half(!!!)..I am finally working again, and the job I have is assisting in the demolishing and rebuilding of my church. Im pretty burnt out at the end of the day, and Im not getting alot of modelling done..but I plan on getting back in shape and once I get my cockpit done on the Hind Im doing, the exterior paintjob will be a cakewalk..have patience with me guys..

Congrats on the job Jim, you'll be into a routine in no time !

A little more progress here on the Tweet, bottom half wings on, tail wings on, cockpit and front wheel bay in place, test fitting top wing halves shows a little bit of work to get a neat finish, but not bad at all.



Cheers, D

You da man, Damian

@ Jim, Congrats on the job!

@ Damian, Looks pretty good

Congrats Jim

Looking good D