Air Unit Cost

[Guinness]

With 1914 or 1916 Aircraft tech, I agree that not much BP is going into aircraft. This will change as technology progresses, of course.

But I think we should consider that down the road, BP will continue to figure more and more prominently in aircraft production (after all, for instance, even the US had to deal with an aluminum shortage during WW2).

Maybe there is some middle ground? A nominal BP and $ cost per unit of aircraft which escalates as the technology progresses, but you also have to build factories if you want to build your own? Essentially, aircraft factories being equivalent to slipways and drydocks?

If we are to apply this logic to aircraft, I suspect it makes sense to also apply it to mechanized and armored land equipment and possibly field artillery as well (though the requirement to burn BP to make ammunition does a good job of representing the industrial costs of keeping an army in the fight, in my opinion).

[ctwaterman]

Hmmmmm I have to think about this carefully, as long as we keep things a little under control I am not disastisfied with the way I am building my Airforce.

I dont want to have to build an entirely new and different type of Factory IC of $, BP for heavy industy stuff, and AF for Air Craft production.

Ive tried to keep my aircraft production levels steady but increasing, I had to accelerate my production schedule when a potential enemy and one I was at war with started to produce 1500 aircraft in one HY.

My feeling is that Ive tried to be responsible with the Aircraft, slowly building up my capacity by opening a training airfield with 100 single engined aircraft over 3 years ago.   And I wll soon have over 900 front line aircraft and 400 training aircraft with all the original 100 training aircraft gone.

I think the limiting factor on these wooden and fabric aircraft should be how long they last once combat starts.  If you have to replace your airplane every 6 months once combat starts or after say 4 years if it doesnt then you have a limiting factor.

As an example of Size of Airforce I stated I will have 900 combat aircraft but spread over 7 1st line Airfileds and 2 Continents it comes down to less than 60 Aircraft per Corp.

Charles

[Desertfox]

Looking at one of my books...

Russia started WWI with 244 planes, Germany 232, France 138, Italy 150. France ended with 4511, UK 3300, Germany 2390. Over the course of WWI France produced 68k, UK 58k, Germany 49k. Some numbers for you guys to consider.

All metal planes don't come around until early 30s, concrete airfields until WWII. That said I don't think we should have to pay for planes and airfields...yet.

[P3D]

BP should not figure in aircraft construction - it is heavy industry thus completely different from what is needed for Aluminium - nevermind a magnitute 2-3 difference in total output in the era.

I'd use IC to limit the number of aircrafts, which is more relevant here - it represent stuff like automobiles, carpentry, etc. We should define a ramp-up time (mainly determnied by training issues), and a maximum amount the industry can sustain (to keep it simple). Also, the higher the IC, the more 'mechanized' the society, thus more likely that people would be devoted to aviation (base for pilots and ground crews).

Take an example, a nation with 40 millions of people and decent economy (roughly OTL Metropolitan France equivalent), that is, about 100 IC.  Of that 4500 about 3200 was front-line aircraft (says Wikipedia) a relevant production rate of 20K per year.

Based on the details my suggestion is the following :
a/ a nation should be capable of maintaining (training, manning, replacement) a given amount of military aircrafts (single-engine equivalent) for each IC. Should be a hard limit, dependent on tech level, decreasing by time (perhaps link it to aircraft cost). Say 50 planes/IC in 1920, using the current fighter aircraft costs in the rules section that is the equivalent of $0.15 of aircrafts per IC. Add in the more expensive multi-engined bombers and round it up to $0.2.
b/ the industry should be able to produce like four times this amount in a year as attrition replacement - 100 per IC per 6 months based on the French example. 100 single-engine aircrafts (1917 tech) cost $0.30, that is $30 spent on aircraft replacements alone, so I think economy/cost would pretty much limit it without any further rule.
c/ Alternative is to represent attrition in war with front-service upkeep. If the mods do not want to make up aircraft casualty numbers or reflect it in higher wartime upkeep, it should be the same as purchase cost, i.e. assuming 100% replacement in 6 months. That is twice as much as a mobilized army unit (without any ammo expenditure).
d/ Ramping up training. Starting with a 100-strong airforce, the simplest rule I can imagine is doubling it every 6 months. Building up to 3200-strong would take 3 years, a believable figure considering WWI numbers.

Repeating my suggestion for clarity. I think it is fairly simple.

A nation could maintain $0.2 worth of airforce for each IC it has.
Frontline upkeep for 6 months to represent losses and attrition is the same as the purchase cost.
Air force expansion is 100-engine at establishment, doubling it every 6 months.


Note to mods: aircraft engine techs should be updated to correspond with the somewhat slower development of the aircraft tech.

[maddox]

For once, P3D I tend to agree with your proposal.

But I would  use the amount of engines deployable as criteria, not the  number of aircraft.

Also, to avoid countries with a maxed out air force allotment- as the rules are so straightforward, there must be some other limiting factor.

[P3D]

For once, P3D I tend to agree with your proposal.

But I would  use the amount of engines deployable as criteria, not the  number of aircraft.

Also, to avoid countries with a maxed out air force allotment- as the rules are so straightforward, there must be some other limiting factor.

My limit is actually cost not number of engines. As aircraft cost increases countries can afford less aircraft.  BTW by the rules a 4-engined plane cost more than 4 single-engined one.

A country with 100 IC and $150 economy would pay $20 for the maxed out airforce wartime, $5 IC peacetime. Neither cost is negligible. Add the ability to double an airforce in 6 months - that would mean a country could keep it to half the max size and double it if necessary.

[ctwaterman]

The proposal makes since, limiting aircraft to the IC that build thems carpentry, and small engine shops.  Im screwed but it logical from a game mechanics and roleplaying perspective.

I herebye have the best small airforce...  :'(

[P3D]

OTOH New Zion would be already over the limit.

[ctwaterman]

New Zions pitiful collection of aircraft never really concerned me I mean 1914 Aircraft with 75 HP engines from China  :o, I mean how quick can my pilots make Ace. 8)

now other nearbye neighbors ;) ;D

Charles