I think that reasonableness is more important than "realism" as the latter generally means something different to each player. That said, well thought out scenario descriptions and Player briefings go a very long way towards selling your particular vision of the situation and the world that you are attempting to create.
Beware of scenario creep! Your end goal is justifiably vague but if you attempt to model a hot war across the entire Inter-German Border, you could easily produce an unplayable monster although to be sure that would have a certain charm to a subset of CMO Players.
I try to focus on creating a scenario that fits a particular command position or level and remember that in the 1950's things were not nearly as "joint" as they are declared to be in 2020. For example, giving naval units to a player Air Group commander might prove a distraction but including naval units in a non-Player controlled side can provide the signature of a global battlefield. You can always set up a Special Action that gives the Player additional forces using the Lua Change_Side function if that floats your boat (figuratively). If there are any naval scenarios from this time period, you might see if any of them might have some infrastructure or organisational that could assist you. Should you use other's work, be nice and provide an honourable mention to the originator somewhere in your scenario documentation. Check the CWDB Import folder for import files that may already be available for you but as a caveat, remember that many Import files use Single Unit Airfields, which are NOT targetable. To keep the AU down, you can create an airfields-only side with all units blind but friendly to the Player and with the Player friendly to it. This is basically invisible to the Player but can reduce the load on the CPU when things start hitting the fan.
As for how many aircraft of what type where, that's really unimportant because the counterfactual nature of your scenario means that you can skew the situation as desired. For my nuclear Armageddon scenarios, specific information was often elusive or contradictory and so this is where the concept of reasonableness comes in. For example I tended to use 27-plane Regiments for the PVO with nine-aircraft per squadron. Likewise no commander ever has enough so assets like air-tankers should be available in limited quantities. This number may be too low but if so it accounts for the fact that availability will usually be <70% even in a First World air force. But that quantity facilitates organizing interceptions using trios of aircraft, which I believe was PVO doctrine at the time. It helps me to attempt to design for effect rather than trying to be historically determinative or slavishly accurate. For example most tankers were SAC resources so giving quantities of KC-97s to the Tactical Air Force in Europe should not be considered reasonable unless you (briefly) explain why.
Your mileage may vary, good luck.
< Message edited by Randomizer -- 6/25/2020 9:51:35 PM >