Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Japanese sub floatplane units

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Japanese sub floatplane units Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/2/2008 10:13:41 PM   
DaveB


Posts: 151
Joined: 8/4/2003
From: Forres Scotland
Status: offline 		I give up,
before anyone posts the 'Must read thread' address I've spent 3 days trying to find this - which probably says more about my inability to pick the right words for the search option....

I'm playing the Japanese for the first time, and some of my I-class subs have search planes aboard, others don't. I'd like to disband an Alf group to load an FP on all my subs, I suspect thr RO's can;t carry them though. Can I add FP's to subs, if so how? I've got a few I class subs in Saigon, and an Alf unit sitting there, but the 'transfer to ship' option doesn't bring subs up and there's no option to split the FP unit up into the fragments I suspect I need. Are you limited to the existing ship/sub borne units provided at startup, or can FP's be added to subs that don't start the scenario already carrying them?

I'm playing Big B mod, but this mostly seems to run as per stock for things like this....
Post #: 1
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/2/2008 10:25:39 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Matrix didn't get this 100% correct. I don't play IJN much but the only sub-capable a/c should be the Glen. Alfs and Jakes apparently can be put on subs but I don't think they would have fit in the hangars IRL so they wouldn't have been any good in this role (and to put them there would be pure gamey).

Only subs with hull numbers in the I-10 to I-30 range would be capable of carrying a plane in any case IRL (don't think even all of those could). If you have a sub with an airgroup (1 plane but no plane assigned) I think you'll just have to wait til a Glen gets produced to equip the sub.

(in reply to DaveB)
Post #: 2
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/2/2008 10:26:28 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Not all Japanese subs can carry floatplanes.  When you click on a sub TF, if the sub capacity is 0, it can't carry a floatplane.  If it has a capacity of 1, it can carry a floatplane.  Also, some people think it's gamey to have a sub carry anything other than a Glen.

(in reply to DaveB)
Post #: 3
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/2/2008 10:47:00 PM   
Kull


Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveB

I give up,
before anyone posts the 'Must read thread' address I've spent 3 days trying to find this - which probably says more about my inability to pick the right words for the search option....

I'm playing the Japanese for the first time, and some of my I-class subs have search planes aboard, others don't. I'd like to disband an Alf group to load an FP on all my subs, I suspect thr RO's can;t carry them though. Can I add FP's to subs, if so how? I've got a few I class subs in Saigon, and an Alf unit sitting there, but the 'transfer to ship' option doesn't bring subs up and there's no option to split the FP unit up into the fragments I suspect I need. Are you limited to the existing ship/sub borne units provided at startup, or can FP's be added to subs that don't start the scenario already carrying them?

I'm playing Big B mod, but this mostly seems to run as per stock for things like this....


I can only speak to the "stock" game, but the Glen-carriers are I-7 to I-11 and I-15 to I-32 (excepting 16, 18, 20, 22, & 24). You can transfer in a 1-plane search daitai from one of the BBs, CAs, or CLs, but as noted by spence, that's gamey. You can also transfer one of the Glen's over to a capacity-size-one AV and upgrade it. That's a lot less gamey.

(in reply to DaveB)
Post #: 4
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/2/2008 11:12:45 PM   
Panther Bait


Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline 		According to the Combined Fleet webpage, only the Type J3, and the various Type A and Type B subs carried float planes.  These include:

I-7 through I-15, I-17, I-19, I-21, I-23, I-25 though I-45, I-54, I-56, and I-58

It also sounds like some of these were modified to remove the plane handling facilities in favor of other weapon mixes.

Also, I-400 through I-402 carried float bombers (Myrts, IIRC), but they were never used as they weren't ready in time.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 5
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/2/2008 11:28:32 PM   
DaveB


Posts: 151
Joined: 8/4/2003
From: Forres Scotland
Status: offline 		Okay,
thanks for the info - got spare Glens (that's no problem), I've trawled through and found A1, B1 and J3's FP capable... ie few enough to ensure that the only subs that have made port are from  non-FP capable classes, making me wonder which button I wasn't seeing....

Gamey - presumably as Glen folds up...no problem with that, I'm very familiar with US/Allied kit, less so with some of the Japanese equipment once we're out of the Zero/Betty/Val/Kate neck of the woods. I have no problem sticking to Glen for subs. Thanks all for the info, that's enough to sort me out.

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 6
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/3/2008 12:27:40 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Here is a beautifully restored Aichi (M6A1) Seiran at the Air and Space Museum in Washington DC.

http://collections.nasm.si.edu/media/full/A19630308000cp08.jpg

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to DaveB)
Post #: 7
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/3/2008 1:11:07 AM   
FeurerKrieg


Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline 		I have a great book on the subject if anyone has any specific RL questions on Japanese (or any nationality for that matter) sub based aircraft.

CHS did add the Serian to the large late war subs that were built to carry three of the Serians for offensive air attack missions.

_____________________________


Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 8
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/3/2008 8:01:12 PM   
DaveB


Posts: 151
Joined: 8/4/2003
From: Forres Scotland
Status: offline 		I suppose shoving a Betty onto the RO's would be considered 'a touch gamey' then?

(in reply to FeurerKrieg)
Post #: 9
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/3/2008 8:30:22 PM   
kfmiller41


Posts: 1063
Joined: 3/25/2003
From: Saint Marys, Ga
Status: offline 		gamey yes, damn good idea yes, torpedo put into allied carrier just outside San Fran harbor Priceless

_____________________________

You have the ability to arouse various emotions in me: please select carefully.

(in reply to DaveB)
Post #: 10
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/3/2008 9:25:28 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Who needs Betties for that?

(in reply to kfmiller41)
Post #: 11
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/3/2008 9:42:28 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveB

I suppose shoving a Betty onto the RO's would be considered 'a touch gamey' then?



Not to mention totally rediculous...., can you picture a sub crew out on deck in the heaving North Pacific with a set of plans and a rivet gun trying to put together a Betty from the pile of parts it would have to be broken down into to fit on a submarine? Make a great cartoon.

(in reply to DaveB)
Post #: 12
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/3/2008 9:53:37 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		Do folks really get hung up over putting anything but Glens on subs?

I mean, really, does it make -THAT- big a difference?  "Realistic" - no.  But I reserve "Gamey" for more something of malicious intent (that actually makes a differnce in the outcome of a game).  But if my opponent put Jakes on his subs, I could really care less.

But that might just be me.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 13
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/4/2008 3:58:04 AM   
DaveB


Posts: 151
Joined: 8/4/2003
From: Forres Scotland
Status: offline 		Well yeah Mike,
but look on the bright side - I bet the second one would go together in half the time the first one took....

Dave

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 14
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/4/2008 4:13:57 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline 		How about a sub seriving as a refueling base for some Emily's or Mavis's?

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to DaveB)
Post #: 15
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/4/2008 4:58:49 AM   
kfmiller41


Posts: 1063
Joined: 3/25/2003
From: Saint Marys, Ga
Status: offline 		wasnt that the Japanese plan for part of the midway operation. Seem to remember reading that somewhere

_____________________________

You have the ability to arouse various emotions in me: please select carefully.

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 16
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/4/2008 8:15:00 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: miller41

wasnt that the Japanese plan for part of the midway operation. Seem to remember reading that somewhere



The idea was to meet up and re-fuel the flying boats at French Frigate Shoals..., but the Americans got there first. Wasn't really a feasible operation without some type of sheltered anchorage.

(in reply to kfmiller41)
Post #: 17
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/4/2008 4:19:20 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: miller41

wasnt that the Japanese plan for part of the midway operation. Seem to remember reading that somewhere



The idea was to meet up and re-fuel the flying boats at French Frigate Shoals..., but the Americans got there first. Wasn't really a feasible operation without some type of sheltered anchorage.




I agree...perhaps allowing one or two AV support to be added to a base by a couple of the Japanese subs ina fashion similar to AV's. But then I suppose that would require the base to be friendly.

As far as historicity IIRC the Japanese had conducted this operation prior to Midway in March and had intended to repeat it except the US intercepted the orders and conveniently parked a DD in the anchorage. Shattered Swords discusses the earlier ops on page 50.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 18
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/4/2008 4:53:53 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: miller41

wasnt that the Japanese plan for part of the midway operation. Seem to remember reading that somewhere



The idea was to meet up and re-fuel the flying boats at French Frigate Shoals..., but the Americans got there first. Wasn't really a feasible operation without some type of sheltered anchorage.




I agree...perhaps allowing one or two AV support to be added to a base by a couple of the Japanese subs ina fashion similar to AV's. But then I suppose that would require the base to be friendly.

As far as historicity IIRC the Japanese had conducted this operation prior to Midway in March and had intended to repeat it except the US intercepted the orders and conveniently parked a DD in the anchorage. Shattered Swords discusses the earlier ops on page 50.


Yes, they had conducted a spectacularly ineffective bombing raid on PH from French Frigate Shoals (FFS) using the Mavis* (iirc)... the bombs fell miles from the target, and the USN was unaware that the raid had even taken place (for some time).

Eventually, they did figure it out, and mined FFS and parked some ships there as well.

Of course, game mechanics of WITP would not exactly allow this - you can't seize an enemy base like FFS without the owner knowing about it immediately. Similar mechanics prevent the building of "secret bases" which was conducted by both sides.

EDIT: *Nope - it was Emilys - operation K-1, conducted 1-5 March 1942. See:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/I-9.htm

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 1/4/2008 5:00:06 PM >

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 19
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/5/2008 2:20:26 AM   
FeurerKrieg


Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Do folks really get hung up over putting anything but Glens on subs?

I mean, really, does it make -THAT- big a difference? "Realistic" - no. But I reserve "Gamey" for more something of malicious intent (that actually makes a differnce in the outcome of a game). But if my opponent put Jakes on his subs, I could really care less.

But that might just be me.

-F-


Well, I'd be annoyed. The Glen's already are better at naval search than IRL. Putting a range 7 Alf (in stock) on the glens would be too much.
In CHS, the GLen range was cut down by 1 hex. Putting a Jake on in CHS means that you could hit a ship with a 100kg bomb, which does quite a bit more damage than a 30kg bomb that I think the Glen carries.

_____________________________


Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 20
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/5/2008 2:45:28 AM   
VSWG


Posts: 3432
Joined: 5/31/2006
From: Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Do folks really get hung up over putting anything but Glens on subs?

It certainly isn't important, but it says a lot about an opponent who KNOWS that subs could only handle Glens, and nevertheless decides to convert them to other float planes. For me, this would be an indicator that he and I have different opinions on how to play this game.

_____________________________


(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 21
RE: Japanese sub floatplane units - 1/5/2008 3:12:16 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline 		An airgroup with one ready plane won't conduct offensive missions in any case.

(in reply to VSWG)
Post #: 22
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Japanese sub floatplane units Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.094