Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

G4M Bettys on Wake

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> G4M Bettys on Wake Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/10/2010 9:18:44 PM   
Torplexed


Posts: 305
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: The Pacific
Status: offline 		Was curious. Historically did the Japanese ever enlarge the captured airfield on Wake to a size to operate 2 engined naval bombers like the Nell or Betty? I've noticed in the game it's already at an SPS of three but can't be enlarged much more.
Post #: 1
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/10/2010 9:47:25 PM   
stuman


Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline 		That's an interesting question. I have used it as a patrol/recon plane base only so far.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to Torplexed)
Post #: 2
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/10/2010 11:04:53 PM   
Torplexed


Posts: 305
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: The Pacific
Status: offline 		Yeah, I've noticed in the 1942, '43 and '44 scenarios of vanilla WITP there's never much posted there in the way of aircraft other than a few Emily or Mavis patrol planes. I was curious to know if the Japanese ever lengthened the airstrip to accommodate a squadron of bombers. I know they fortified the place well enough with bunkers and pillboxes using some leftover American prisoners as pressed labor.

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 3
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 12:59:40 AM   
stuman


Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Torplexed

Yeah, I've noticed in the 1942, '43 and '44 scenarios of vanilla WITP there's never much posted there in the way of aircraft other than a few Emily or Mavis patrol planes. I was curious to know if the Japanese ever lengthened the airstrip to accommodate a squadron of bombers. I know they fortified the place well enough with bunkers and pillboxes using some leftover American prisoners as pressed labor.


For what it is worth the current runway on Wake is 3000 meters long. So I bet in theory 2 engine land based planes could have been flown off of there. But man it is a small island, and I have to believe that it would have been really hard to have built that base up, and then keep it running for an active bomber base.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to Torplexed)
Post #: 4
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 1:15:35 AM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Torplexed

Yeah, I've noticed in the 1942, '43 and '44 scenarios of vanilla WITP there's never much posted there in the way of aircraft other than a few Emily or Mavis patrol planes. I was curious to know if the Japanese ever lengthened the airstrip to accommodate a squadron of bombers. I know they fortified the place well enough with bunkers and pillboxes using some leftover American prisoners as pressed labor.


For what it is worth the current runway on Wake is 3000 meters long. So I bet in theory 2 engine land based planes could have been flown off of there. But man it is a small island, and I have to believe that it would have been really hard to have built that base up, and then keep it running for an active bomber base.


By comparison, Wake is huge! Just for fun, where in the WITP world is this 9,000 foot runway?




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 5
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 1:18:12 AM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		Wake Island




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 6
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 1:20:31 AM   
stuman


Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline 		French Frigate Shoals ? I seem to remember a picture of it and thinking it was nothing more than a rectangle in the middle of the Pacific

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 7
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 1:34:53 AM   
Torplexed


Posts: 305
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: The Pacific
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman

For what it is worth the current runway on Wake is 3000 meters long. So I bet in theory 2 engine land based planes could have been flown off of there. But man it is a small island, and I have to believe that it would have been really hard to have built that base up, and then keep it running for an active bomber base.


Indeed, the current runway built in the post war era probably with the mechanized help of bulldozers, backhoes and graders is 3,000 meters long. But I wonder could a Japanese Naval Construction battalion made up mostly of conscripted Korean and Taiwanese labor which had little in the way of earth-moving equipment and special construction tools do the same in a reasonable period of time?

< Message edited by Torplexed -- 1/11/2010 1:35:09 AM >

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 8
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 1:50:59 AM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		Not French Frigate Shoals

Hint: I was there when I was in the Army. It was, until just a few years ago, an Army base, but now it is closed. The United States got rid of everything that was there, so closed the base. The things were in bunkers. They Army built a facility and burned it all in teh facility.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 9
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 1:56:19 AM   
Local Yokel


Posts: 1494
Joined: 2/4/2007
From: Somerset, U.K.
Status: offline 		Johnston Island.

_____________________________




(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 10
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 2:22:48 AM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Torplexed

Was curious. Historically did the Japanese ever enlarge the captured airfield on Wake to a size to operate 2 engined naval bombers like the Nell or Betty? I've noticed in the game it's already at an SPS of three but can't be enlarged much more.


Pre-war, B-17s refueled at Wake when ferrying from Pearl Harbor to the Philippines, so I'm guessing that the Japanese could have flown their Netties from there without much improvement.

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to Torplexed)
Post #: 11
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 2:38:17 AM   
Brady


Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline
A Betty with a war load had about the same T/O run that a P-38 did, so its not so much the length of the runway thats the isue, at least in dertiming the feasabality of them operating from a place like Wake.

from what I recall their is a formula aplied to all islands in game that determines the size of the base, of course this has from what I understand been tweaked on ocashion to adjust for circumstance.

_____________________________





Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 12
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 3:44:23 AM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		Johnston Island it is!

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to Local Yokel)
Post #: 13
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 7:49:08 AM   
stuman


Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline
quote:

Hint: I was there when I was in the Army. It was, until just a few years ago, an Army base, but now it is closed. The United States got rid of everything that was there, so closed the base. The things were in bunkers. They Army built a facility and burned it all in teh facility.


How long were you there ? Seems like it would have gotten a little " small feeling " after a while

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 14
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 11:35:27 AM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman

quote:

Hint: I was there when I was in the Army. It was, until just a few years ago, an Army base, but now it is closed. The United States got rid of everything that was there, so closed the base. The things were in bunkers. They Army built a facility and burned it all in teh facility.


How long were you there ? Seems like it would have gotten a little " small feeling " after a while


I was there three weeks for a temporary duty assignment. Normal assignments to JI were 1 year long with fairly frequent trips to Oahu. JI was a Chemical Weapons storage facility.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 15
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 11:40:39 AM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		I can see why the game limits the # of men on small islands like Johnston to 6000 now.  Even that many would have them standing on each other's toes, and that doesn't even include their supplies and sleeping quarters.  In my game I've got a defense battalion, base force and a couple of AA units there, plus a seaplane tender, PBY and B-26 squadrons running recon patrols over Baker Island, and 20k+ supply and fuel.  I have no idea where it is all stored...

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 16
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 12:13:22 PM   
noguaranteeofsanity


Posts: 257
Joined: 11/24/2009
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

I can see why the game limits the # of men on small islands like Johnston to 6000 now.  Even that many would have them standing on each other's toes, and that doesn't even include their supplies and sleeping quarters.  In my game I've got a defense battalion, base force and a couple of AA units there, plus a seaplane tender, PBY and B-26 squadrons running recon patrols over Baker Island, and 20k+ supply and fuel.  I have no idea where it is all stored...

Actually in 1942 it was much smaller than it is now and the island has been expanded over time since ww2. Here is the relative size in 1942, compared to present (apologies but the forum dont like svg files).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Growth_of_Johnston_Island.svg

While it probably also helps explain the rather square shape and/or straight coastline.

< Message edited by noguaranteeofsanity -- 1/11/2010 12:17:23 PM >

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 17
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/11/2010 2:02:07 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		Good grief; 1942 Johnston Island would have had one of the densest populations in the world if it had had 6000 people on it.  I also looked at Baker Island with Google maps; it's basically a big sand bar and if the Japanese had put as many men on it as the AI has in my CG (a garrison plus construction unit), they wouldn't be able to lie down...

(in reply to noguaranteeofsanity)
Post #: 18
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/12/2010 2:27:20 AM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Good grief; 1942 Johnston Island would have had one of the densest populations in the world if it had had 6000 people on it.  I also looked at Baker Island with Google maps; it's basically a big sand bar and if the Japanese had put as many men on it as the AI has in my CG (a garrison plus construction unit), they wouldn't be able to lie down...


IRL, the US garrisoned Johnston with a detachment of a Marine Defense Battalion because the atoll was too small to host an entire (900+) man battalion. So the 6,000-man limit is generous for some islands (I think French Frigate Shoals was even smaller). Still, its a huge improvement over stock, where you could cram unlimited numbers of troops onto any island, Johnston included.

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 19
RE: G4M Bettys on Wake - 1/12/2010 5:53:51 AM   
stuman


Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Good grief; 1942 Johnston Island would have had one of the densest populations in the world if it had had 6000 people on it.  I also looked at Baker Island with Google maps; it's basically a big sand bar and if the Japanese had put as many men on it as the AI has in my CG (a garrison plus construction unit), they wouldn't be able to lie down...


IRL, the US garrisoned Johnston with a detachment of a Marine Defense Battalion because the atoll was too small to host an entire (900+) man battalion. So the 6,000-man limit is generous for some islands (I think French Frigate Shoals was even smaller). Still, its a huge improvement over stock, where you could cram unlimited numbers of troops onto any island, Johnston included.


That is true. Makes me realizie how completely unrealistic my huge bases on some of those islands were in WiTP.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 20
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> G4M Bettys on Wake 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

1.203