Schweinfurt 17_8_43_Comp Comb Wing 2nd ATF IN ALONE

[mongoose]

So I've been working with ChatGPT5o plus for quite a long time now on how to make missions with multiple aircraft, especially the B-17, and trying to put fit B17s into a sort of formation that used to be in use, certainly in 1943, which in this case basically involves two shotai formations together for the eight player aircraft. The question is also the spacing how to group everything together more or less, and there are a lot of problems associated with this, and we've been working very hard, just especially on this one particular mission, which is this one bomb group going in to the target but being attacked by multiple Luftwaffe fighters, both one109s and 190s. So this is just an example of what we're trying to do, we being myself and ChatGBT5o, so I offer this to you as an example of the work that we are doing. We will be obviously trying to do others, but the main thing is this is a short mission showing what this combination of myself and AI is capable of. Now you may need certain aircraft which are in the zip file on my mediafire which is uploaded here. The ZIP also includes aircraft which you may have in which case it's not an issue but if you don't have them they're all here. Credit goes to the fact that the B-17 was a Firepower aircraft which I was given permission to use a couple of years back for these kinds of missions. Then there are the 3 other fighter aircraft which I have to give credit for. The P-47 C-5 was built by Gregory SARGE Pierson & Jerry SPARKS Beckwith with texture by Dan Swart. The ETO_AI_109g_6 Is obviously a ETO aircraft but I do not see anyone to credit within the model so I'm not quite sure who did this but in any case credit to goes to whoever did it, if they know please inform me. The SJE_AI190a4L_1_51_43 I'm pretty sure is Daniel Gecko Holtz's work; again no attributions are to be found within the actual aircraft folder but I'm pretty positive that it's his, If I've left anybody out on this it's my apologies but I just don't have the information at hand.

Schweinfurt 17_8_43_Comp Comb Wing 2nd ATF IN ALONE

MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.

www.mediafire.com

I put the wrong version in this is the correct xml

 

[mongoose]

I put the wrong version in thei sis the correct xml

 

[Frosty]

That looks impressive!!
Roughly how many A/C are there in the air and how are the FPS from within the cockpit?

 

[Pat Pattle]

It looks like the bomber ai are behaving themselves, what spacing are you using?

 

[mongoose]

I will consult my partner and get back! We also made the same mission with spawn fighters, but I kept this as I can then make the player a LW fighter, either 109 or 190.

 

[rbp71854]

It just isn't right to use a digital robot to do the work of a human.

Well done, its an amazing advance to mission building.

 

[MajorMagee]

I put the wrong version in thei sis the correct xml

The corrected one kicks out an error
Missing B_17F_CR

p.s. After correcting the aircraft reference I still get mission failed to load in my ETO install. The same happens with the earlier version of the mission.xml.

 

[Flamingskull5000]

What kind of frame rate hits does this serve up?

 

[mongoose]

1. here 2 missions just tested one with spawned LW aircraft. B_17F_CR included.
2. I use LAA as per my post https://sim-outhouse.org/sohforums/...ram-and-large-formations-causing-ctds.165762/ but in any case turn off labels if you can!

 

[mongoose]

It looks like the bomber ai are behaving themselves, what spacing are you using?

ChatGPT's reply "
I’ve set the bombers up using SHOTAI formations (CFS3’s 3-ship element), which stack into 12-ship squadrons. Each 36-ship Group is then built from three of those squadrons in the classic Lead / High / Low layout.


For spacing I’m using:

• Vertical separation: ~+850 ft / −850 ft between the High and Low squadrons and the Lead.
• Lateral separation: managed via OffsetScaleFactor (typically ±2 to ±3), which pushes the High squadron aft-right and the Low squadron aft-left.
• Element structure: inside each squadron, CFS3 auto-generates four 3-ship “Vs” when you drop 12 aircraft into a SHOTAI block. This reflects the historical 3-ship element doctrine from 1944.

The trick for avoiding the classic “spawn explosion” is to give each squadron a slightly offset initial Lat/Lon and enough route length for the geometry to tighten up gradually, rather than forcing them to spawn on top of each other.


So in short: 3-ship elements → 12-ship squadrons → 36-ship Group, with about 850 ft vertical and 2–3 units lateral offset between squadrons, converging on course to form the box. That’s been behaving nicely in tests."

 

[MajorMagee]

Still just get mission failed to load...

Is this not compatible with ETO?

 

[mongoose]

I use ETO install for it. Do you know what the issue is?

 

[MajorMagee]

Once the aircraft issues were resolved I thought it would run since all the prefilght screens are populated and working normally. As soon as you hit the button to fly the mission the screen starts flashing white and a not very helpful dialog says mission failed to load. I've looked through the xml and can't spot what's jamming things up. Weapons are available, referenced weather is installed, etc.

 

[mongoose]

Hmmm! It would be interesting if someone else tried it based on my latest fixes above. I assume you have no problem with it in Mb?

 

[MajorMagee]

I can't get MB to run either.

Other missions work fine.

 

[mongoose]

OK I will download from here the missions and see if I have any issues. I'll report back later/tomorrow,

 

[mongoose]

OK I don't know what to say. I downloaded the last zip of mine and both worked in mb and in play. Some one else needs at least to try it in mb and play just to see if it starts in ETO era 3.

 

[gecko]

ChatGPT's reply "
I’ve set the bombers up using SHOTAI formations (CFS3’s 3-ship element), which stack into 12-ship squadrons. Each 36-ship Group is then built from three of those squadrons in the classic Lead / High / Low layout.


For spacing I’m using:

• Vertical separation: ~+850 ft / −850 ft between the High and Low squadrons and the Lead.
• Lateral separation: managed via OffsetScaleFactor (typically ±2 to ±3), which pushes the High squadron aft-right and the Low squadron aft-left.
• Element structure: inside each squadron, CFS3 auto-generates four 3-ship “Vs” when you drop 12 aircraft into a SHOTAI block. This reflects the historical 3-ship element doctrine from 1944.

The trick for avoiding the classic “spawn explosion” is to give each squadron a slightly offset initial Lat/Lon and enough route length for the geometry to tighten up gradually, rather than forcing them to spawn on top of each other.


So in short: 3-ship elements → 12-ship squadrons → 36-ship Group, with about 850 ft vertical and 2–3 units lateral offset between squadrons, converging on course to form the box. That’s been behaving nicely in tests."

Is ChatGPT helping with lat lon offset calculations? As I understand what you're saying, you've got 12 individual formations of 3 built up into the group formation. In the past I did an experiment trying to build up a similar formation with 36 B-17s in a stacked V. I used flights of 6 in shotai, and was able to replicate the look and spacing of the formation pretty well, but only in a straight line. Getting the formation to turn invariably resulted in chaos and scattering. But this was by eyeballing waypoint locations in MB. If the lat and lon offsets of the different flights that make up the formation could be mathematically calculated, there might be some interesting possibilities.

 

[mongoose]

Is ChatGPT helping with lat lon offset calculations? As I understand what you're saying, you've got 12 individual formations of 3 built up into the group formation. In the past I did an experiment trying to build up a similar formation with 36 B-17s in a stacked V. I used flights of 6 in shotai, and was able to replicate the look and spacing of the formation pretty well, but only in a straight line. Getting the formation to turn invariably resulted in chaos and scattering. But this was by eyeballing waypoint locations in MB. If the lat and lon offsets of the different flights that make up the formation could be mathematically calculated, there might be some interesting possibilities.

Well the current mission was pretty straight forward, but with chatGPT i will be looking into turns and also IP separation and post bombing rejoining. I should say it takes many trials to get it correct, too tight > explosions or too loose. Also will be looking into the change in formation tactics from later in 1944 Off to the UK tomorrow for 5 weeks so nothing til Oct 10th or so.
Taking a break from TOWII as I have temporarily lost enthusiasm without Ted around, but I will get back to it as I owe him.

 

[Snuffy]

According to my finding. Copilot said this about the attached picture below.

"
That’s a fantastic diagram you’ve shared, Ted. It captures the intricate choreography of bomber formations during World War II with impressive clarity. The “Combat Box” and “Combat Wing” formations weren’t just about flying in neat rows—they were strategic masterpieces designed to maximize mutual defense and bombing accuracy.


Here’s a quick breakdown of why this formation mattered so much:

Strategic Purpose of the Combat Box​

• Mutual Protection: Aircraft flew in tight, staggered formations so their gunners could cover each other from enemy fighters.
• Bombing Precision: The lead bomber guided the entire group, ensuring synchronized bomb drops over targets.
• Altitude Layering: With squadrons flying at slightly different altitudes (as shown—750 feet apart), they reduced the risk of mid-air collisions while maintaining formation integrity.

Why the Staggered Layout?​

• Plan View: Staggering in horizontal space allowed for overlapping fields of fire.
• Side View: Vertical separation helped maintain visibility and spacing.
• Tail View: The tiered arrangement (Lead, High, Low squadrons) optimized both defense and command structure.

Tactical Genius​

This kind of formation was especially used by the U.S. Army Air Forces in Europe, notably with B-17 Flying Fortresses and B-24 Liberators. It was a response to the brutal reality of air combat—where survival often depended on how well you could fly as a team.


If you’re into military history or aviation strategy, this diagram is a goldmine. Want to dive deeper into how these formations evolved or how they compared to other air forces’ tactics?

https://warhistory.org/media/2024/01/1706505214_357_Attacking-a-B-17-formation-from-the-German-side.jpg

​