Aircraft comparison for operational-level wargames and alt history forums

I know what I'm after is essentially impossible to do, certainly with anything approaching precision, but does anyone know of a system to compare aircraft for a CRT or something similar for an operational-level wargame or to back up alt. history scenarios?

Many years ago I built up a CRT based on giving different aircraft types points in the usual way, but it was hard to gauge whether it was accurate even when I added correction factors to allow for height advantage, etc. It became even harder when trying to assess how aircraft of different generations would fair, such as a Gladiator against a Zero. And on top of that there is the huge factor of training.

While we can have opinions and gut based calls on the way such a CRT should work and the ratings and factors involved, it would be much better to find information based more on statisical analysis. I don't have any relevant games and can't find any that may have what I'm interested in.

Does anyone know where anything of this nature can be found? In the alternative, are there any guides to kill ratios that aren't fairly simplistic and which don't come from eras when combat was pretty one sided? I think the USAAF data, for example, shows that the B24 had an outstanding kill ratio which indicates that they can be very misleading.

There is a Russian site where you can find turn times for a 360° circle, and you can find aircaft performance graphs at WWIIaircraftperformance.com or org. But, people who do these comparisons pout in a LOT of time and generally don't post their years of work for just anyone to use. Also, when you compare, you have to know the load out for both aircraft, the altitude at which they are fighting, and the initial airspeed when they see each other to have any hope of being even generally accurate.

In general, thesere weren't any "bad" fighters or they would never have made producation. So generally, there is some altitude or some situation where any particular fighter would have an advantage ... not always. But, the top fighters are usually quite close to one another most of the time. Again, not always. The Bf 109 started out about even with the Spitfire. By mid-1944, the Spitfire was generally the better airplane, but the mid-1944 Bf 109, when flown by a good pilot, was no pushover, ever. The Mustang was also generally better than a Bf 109 but, when fighting one-on-one, a well-flown Bf 109 was again no pushover.

However, late-war, 700 P-51 Mustangs were usually much more than a match for 40 - 60 Bf 109s and another 60 - 80 Fw 190s. Quantity has a quality all it's own.

The Hurricane, while generally an earlier design than the Spitfire, actually shot down more German airplanes than the Spitfire in the Battle of Britain. It had more to do with the number Hurricanes in service at the time versus the number of Spitfires in service at the time than it did with the airplane characteristics themselves.

Good luck!

There is a Naval miniatures game "General Quarters" that has an aircraft component. The aircraft part of the game is more operational level than single planes. It might be a start. You can find copies of the rules on eBay, I don't know if its still in publication. It is a good naval simulation for 1/2400 scale ships. I've played it since high school. The air component is a loose simulation. More data for you. I attached the aircraft chart.

I'd put my money on the Gladiator.

pinehilljoe said:

There is a Naval miniatures game "General Quarters" that has an aircraft component. The aircraft part of the game is more operational level than single planes. It might be a start. You can find copies of the rules on eBay, I don't know if its still in publication. It a good naval simulation for 1/2400 scale ships. I've played it since high school. The air component is a loose simulation. More data for you. I attached the aircraft chart.

General Quarters

These two rulebooks contain the original General Quarters rules for naval miniatures. Although first published in the 1970s, their realistic and elegant game mechanics are still usable today. Somewhat counterintuitively, GQI covers World War 2, and GQII covers World War I (plus some optional...

boardgamegeek.com

Click to expand...

Is this like Avalon-Hill's Jutland? I have Jutland. I just lack the town square to play it on.

Thanks all, and particularly Pinehill Joe. That's great information - I must have modelled my own rules, long ago lost, on the papyrus copy of GQ I got back when Midshipman Ernest J King was a noob. That gives me a great start. I like the fact that the CRT table now includes "chased off" - I can remember including a section like that in my old ruleset because I was struck by the fact that rules always seem to imply that no-one runs away to live to fight another day.

SaparotRob said:

Is this like Avalon-Hill's Jutland? I have Jutland. I just lack the town square to play it on.

Click to expand...

GQ is similar to Jutland. GQ is played at 1/2400 scale, so floor space is reasonable. An Iowa is about 4.5 inches long. The game can be played on a living room floor or even pool table for small engagements. In high school I lined Iron Bottom Sound and Savo Island on our basement floor (understanding parents). 1/1200 scale games need a big playing area like a school gym, and a sizeable investment in ship models. You could play an engagement like Cape Esperance in a few hours. Maybe not the most technically realistic, but playable and fun.


Also there is a forum that has an Air Ops section, maybe members have more data they can share.

Good luck with your research.

SaparotRob said:

I'd put my money on the Gladiator.

Click to expand...

Gladiators, A1Ns and Sparrowhawks take to the sky.

"We're off to the big show tonight
So fly 'em wing to wing"