RE: Blood in the skies

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Blood in the skies

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Blood in the skies

Page: << < prev 156 157 [158] 159 160 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 11:56:17 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

And, despite what everybody thinks, escort DOES make all the difference in the world!!!

Not everybody. I claim voice in the wilderness on this one

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4711

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 12:41:33 AM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

Hopefully the sub fix will provide advance warning. Problem here is that the Rader is attacking from the South and you can't really cut him off. Be nice to take Formosa or Okinawa. Iwo Jima would not hurt. I would not, however, expect Rader to repeat the same move with the KB. If him comes at you again, it will come from a different direction.

_____________________________

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4712

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 1:03:23 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

OK two lessons today .. one is "Retirement allowed" really means "allow reaction" .. the second lesson is far more complex. It seems that mult-day behavior is way different than one turn a day behavior. Escorting good on multiday .. at least ...I have a lot of clicking to do GreyJoy in my game ..

Not exactly. "Remain on Station" and "Retirement Allowed" are opposite and have to do with 'stay there' versus 'going home is OK'. This is the basic usage. Concerning 'React' range settings, think in terms of Halsey at the battle off Samar. Oh, wait - Halsey wasn't there because he Reacted and went somewhere else! So, when you tell a TF "Remain on Station" you are telling "and I mean stay right there - no Halseys!!!"

With Retirement Allowed the TF might go home or might React, at the TF commander's discretion.

< Message edited by witpqs -- 12/23/2011 1:05:37 AM >

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 4713

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 1:46:16 AM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

OK two lessons today .. one is "Retirement allowed" really means "allow reaction" .. the second lesson is far more complex. It seems that mult-day behavior is way different than one turn a day behavior. Escorting good on multiday .. at least ...I have a lot of clicking to do GreyJoy in my game ..

Not exactly. "Remain on Station" and "Retirement Allowed" are opposite and have to do with 'stay there' versus 'going home is OK'. This is the basic usage. Concerning 'React' range settings, think in terms of Halsey at the battle off Samar. Oh, wait - Halsey wasn't there because he Reacted and went somewhere else! So, when you tell a TF "Remain on Station" you are telling "and I mean stay right there - no Halseys!!!"

With Retirement Allowed the TF might go home or might React, at the TF commander's discretion.

There is a third option ...'Patrol Zones" Many of my submarines have patrol zones that move wihtin a 2 - 6 hex area ..the picture is shown below .. I wonder if reaction occurs within a patrol zone?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 4714

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 3:21:17 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

OK two lessons today .. one is "Retirement allowed" really means "allow reaction" .. the second lesson is far more complex. It seems that mult-day behavior is way different than one turn a day behavior. Escorting good on multiday .. at least ...I have a lot of clicking to do GreyJoy in my game ..

Not exactly. "Remain on Station" and "Retirement Allowed" are opposite and have to do with 'stay there' versus 'going home is OK'. This is the basic usage. Concerning 'React' range settings, think in terms of Halsey at the battle off Samar. Oh, wait - Halsey wasn't there because he Reacted and went somewhere else! So, when you tell a TF "Remain on Station" you are telling "and I mean stay right there - no Halseys!!!"

With Retirement Allowed the TF might go home or might React, at the TF commander's discretion.

There is a third option ...'Patrol Zones" Many of my submarines have patrol zones that move wihtin a 2 - 6 hex area ..the picture is shown below .. I wonder if reaction occurs within a patrol zone?

Yes - back in my first post on this I recommended using Patrol Zones noting that they do allow React.

That's also part of the reason that Retirement Allowed does not equal React allowed. React allowed is the default, and only Remain on Station orders no React.

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 4715

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 6:37:22 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

And, despite what everybody thinks, escort DOES make all the difference in the world!!!

Not everybody. I claim voice in the wilderness on this one

AHAHAHHAHAHAH LOL!!!

nice one!

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 4716

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 6:44:54 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

Hopefully the sub fix will provide advance warning.� Problem here is that the Rader is attacking from the South and you can't really cut him off.� Be nice to take Formosa or Okinawa.� Iwo Jima would not hurt.� I would not, however, expect Rader to repeat the same move with the KB.� If him comes at you again, it will come from a different direction.

The next direction he could attack is Japan sea (between Korea and Japan) me thinks.

But you know what? if Rader is right - and i strongly believe he is right on this matter - it doesn't really matter....with the numbers we're using the attacker will always pass through the CAP screen with his bombers, no matter how much CAP the defender will order....

I have the feeling - but no technical evidence - that something has changed in the code since we started.

i remember at Karachi we had several weeks of air battles with 1500 japanese planes attacking a base with 500 fighters on CAP...and the results were very bloody for both of us....now it really seems that the bigger the air battle is, the less bloody it is....which is really strange.

If you look at the combat reports i reported, every time i send a good wave of bombers with a strong escort against a mighty CAP, the resulted air battle is always very "light"....and it happened the same over Uruppu. If you look at the escorted raids you'll see that my CAP (which was more than appropriate if you ask me) didn't really engage deeply....it's like if when big waves of escorted bombers arrive the CAP fighters are always (no matter the side) out of position

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 4717

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 6:47:03 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

The slow-down period has started....no turn found in my mailbox when i woke up....

...that's something i gotta get used to....damned RL!!!

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4718

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 7:48:26 AM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I totally disagree here...

I didn't say that CVEs weren't important and very helpful. I said that under the circumstances, GJ can proceed with his invasion plans. He won't need to risk his fleet carriers. For goodness sakes, his invaison beaches are one to two hexes away from a friendly level nine airfield. That, and the fact that he has two-day turns and plenty of APA, AP, AKA, AK, LSD and LST will permit him to do what needs to be done. It won't be a bloodless coup, but it can be done.

yes, that's true. But to be honest, I can't see how an invasion at these beaches can work because these beaches already have hundreds of thousand Japanese and halve a million more can be railed in in just a couple of days. I can't see how these bases can be taken as they surely have level 6 forts at least.

The key to an invasion of any of the remaining home islands IMO is to land somewhere where the Japanese aren't 100% prepared yet, basically means at the other side of Japan and that can only be done with huge carrier support (after the Japanese airforce has lost 2/3 of it's strenght in the fights that are brought in from the big bases GJ already owns). If an invasion doesn't take the base within the first couple of days I would consider it failed already because even if 10.000 Allied av land at a clear hex I can't see them taking the base in a couple of days when the enemy has 5.000 av sitting there behind level 6 forts with the abilitiy to rail in a dozen divisions more. The only time I have seen a succesful invasion of Japan with the Allied not being bogged down on the ground was when they were landing at several spots within a "short" period while being able to take a couple of bases and exploit that. Landing a huge Army on one spot usually means facing a huge enemy Army and then it's Sitzkrieg for months.

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4719

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 8:07:36 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I totally disagree here...

I didn't say that CVEs weren't important and very helpful. I said that under the circumstances, GJ can proceed with his invasion plans. He won't need to risk his fleet carriers. For goodness sakes, his invaison beaches are one to two hexes away from a friendly level nine airfield. That, and the fact that he has two-day turns and plenty of APA, AP, AKA, AK, LSD and LST will permit him to do what needs to be done. It won't be a bloodless coup, but it can be done.

yes, that's true. But to be honest, I can't see how an invasion at these beaches can work because these beaches already have hundreds of thousand Japanese and halve a million more can be railed in in just a couple of days. I can't see how these bases can be taken as they surely have level 6 forts at least.

The key to an invasion of any of the remaining home islands IMO is to land somewhere where the Japanese aren't 100% prepared yet, basically means at the other side of Japan and that can only be done with huge carrier support (after the Japanese airforce has lost 2/3 of it's strenght in the fights that are brought in from the big bases GJ already owns). If an invasion doesn't take the base within the first couple of days I would consider it failed already because even if 10.000 Allied av land at a clear hex I can't see them taking the base in a couple of days when the enemy has 5.000 av sitting there behind level 6 forts with the abilitiy to rail in a dozen divisions more. The only time I have seen a succesful invasion of Japan with the Allied not being bogged down on the ground was when they were landing at several spots within a "short" period while being able to take a couple of bases and exploit that. Landing a huge Army on one spot usually means facing a huge enemy Army and then it's Sitzkrieg for months.

I see your point and i truly think you're right....BUT....don't we all wanna see a glorious end with this game?...something epic...somethung MIGHTY....even if we are pushed back into the seas...it will be an event that will remain in history of WITPAE records...and imagine the naval battles that will occur...Rader that will send his mighty BBs against my landing sites...my BBs that will respond in an epic struggle...subs, DDs, Kamikaze, CVs...everything...all our arsenals facing each other in the final mortal battle... wouldn't that be cool????

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4720

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 8:12:12 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

Don't have the turn yet buy just saw the replay....man it was a bloody turn...

Our attack against Tokyo went in very uncoordinated...we lost hundreds of bombers and probably more than 150 fighters in a series of uncoordinated attacks (what i said before about the air battles not being too bloody actually involves ONLY coordinated strikes)....BUT....we did deliver a decent blow to his BB fleet....unluckly none of my 250 TBMs delivered a single damned torp....but several BBs were set ablaze and we also caused heavy damages on some CAs and CLs present in Tokyo Harbour....if my TBMs did carry some torps probably we were now talking about a japanese PH....

Anyway...his BBs will need some R&R now...and Tokyo isn't a safe place anymore...

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4721

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 8:12:59 AM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

I don't want to discourage you and I sure want to see it happen too, I'm just not as enthusiastic as most of the other readers.

Reason being that I would rather bet on the Japanese than on the Allied bringing this operation to a succesful end.

_____________________________

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4722

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 8:23:09 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I don't want to discourage you and I sure want to see it happen too, I'm just not as enthusiastic as most of the other readers. Reason being that I would rather bet on the Japanese than on the Allied bringing this operation to a succesful end.

Know what you mean Castor...if i was in Rader's shoes i'd want me to land in northern Honshu...

On the other hand, from Hokkaido i cannot go and land wherever i want....the only "safe" place is there, right into the mouth of japanese arsenal...as you said without my CVEs i cannot anymore think about a landing somewhere without a close air cover given by LBA...so my options are now very limited.

And, above all, i do think that by now Rader has had time to organize his decenfeces well enough so that every single possible landing site is weel guarded and defended

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4723

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 9:18:59 AM

CT Grognard

Posts: 694
Joined: 5/16/2010
From: Cape Town, South Africa
Status: offline

I think in that respect rader's counterattack sinking all those CVEs was a tactical and strategic victory for him.

I imagine rader would now feel more comfortable that if you do invade Honshu, you'd have to do it where you have land-based air cover, i.e. northern Honshu and he would be able to concentrate his forces there.

It would be very hard for you to invade elsewhere in Honshu without being detected.

I think your only option if you really want to invade is choose the spot closest to your unsinkable aircraft carrier in Hokkaido and just plaster it. It does not mind if he knows then where you're going to land. If he overstacks with troops your 4Es and 2Es can cause lots and lots of casualties.

< Message edited by CT Grognard -- 12/23/2011 9:21:12 AM >

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4724

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 9:20:36 AM

cwDeici

Posts: 70
Joined: 12/6/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I don't want to discourage you and I sure want to see it happen too, I'm just not as enthusiastic as most of the other readers. Reason being that I would rather bet on the Japanese than on the Allied bringing this operation to a succesful end.

Know what you mean Castor...if i was in Rader's shoes i'd want me to land in northern Honshu...

On the other hand, from Hokkaido i cannot go and land wherever i want....the only "safe" place is there, right into the mouth of japanese arsenal...as you said without my CVEs i cannot anymore think about a landing somewhere without a close air cover given by LBA...so my options are now very limited.

And, above all, i do think that by now Rader has had time to organize his decenfeces well enough so that every single possible landing site is weel guarded and defended

How about Korea? It's much closer than the Phillipines at least.
It'd be just as dramatic to watch America and Soviet forces sweep over China in months.

< Message edited by cwDeici -- 12/23/2011 9:22:56 AM >

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4725

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 9:50:44 AM

Karsten

Posts: 31
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

Korea would have a hell of a supply line and i am not sure at all that the western allies have really the forces for major land campains in this theater. there are for sure lots of still restricted good japanise army formations bound there. Korea would be a huge distraction.

(in reply to cwDeici)

Post #: 4726

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 1:01:42 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Try a feint, GJ. Organize a massive fleet of empty transports and then approach a beach - perhaps Ominato, or perhaps something to the south like Okinawa. With two-day turns, rader will have a hard time figuring out what's going to happen. Then you can orchestrate thngs to creative a huge CAP trap, or a CAP and combat ship trap if you choose Ominato. If you've never tried a big feint before, rader probably won't see it coming. Use your imagine, set up something lethal, and perhaps employ several feints in coming weeks.

(in reply to Karsten)

Post #: 4727

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 1:27:25 PM

cwDeici

Posts: 70
Joined: 12/6/2011
Status: offline

Fantastic idea! That could negate most of Rader's advantage of knowing the battlefield, or even bring about victories on its own like the traps you mentioned!

< Message edited by cwDeici -- 12/23/2011 1:30:34 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4728

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 2:13:17 PM

princep01

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

Ser Greyjoy. I am sure you will use this small break in the action to brew up a very special New Year's treat for the foe and administer it forthwith upon his return to the fracas. However, in this interlude, try to remember your long suffering GF and reframe from brooding over dastardly plans and blood sport in her presence for the entire duration of this "truce". I'm sure she will enjoy having her knight all to herself and will reward your daring deeds in an appropriate manner.

Enjoy the holidays and ring in the New Year with style (No penquin suits, please). I wish my favorite knight a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. And that goes for the rest of you sods too:).

Onward,

princepBolton

(in reply to cwDeici)

Post #: 4729

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 2:29:47 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

GJ's girlfriend is long-suffering?

I thought we - the vicitms of the horrid penquin photo of recent vintage - were the sufferers. I know I am, anyway. I am still suffering. I will suffer for many days and weeks to come. Flashbacks, man, flashbacks!

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 12/23/2011 2:31:31 PM >

(in reply to princep01)

Post #: 4730

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 3:09:31 PM

Gridley380

Posts: 464
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

Crackaces

The number of large anti-aircraft guns used to defend German cites against Allied bombers is quoted as 18,000. One commentator states that the Germans probably lost the Battle of Stalingrad by defending German skies against Allied bombers

Even against the combination of German fighters (some days 600 were available) and numerous anti-aircraft guns , usually 95 percent of the bombers dropped their bombs on or near their assigned targets and returned in re-usable condition to England. (Very few Allied raids had bomber losses higher than 20 percent. "Terrible losses" as viewed by bomber air crews, and "not nearly enough losses" as viewed by the Germans.)

Comments from Jerry L Brewer who did U.S. 90 mm AAA in Japan during the Korean police action. One final thought on AA guns against modern aircraft. It was taking your faithful old shotgun out to shoot birds flying by at 100 MPH. German author Werner Muller in his book "The Heavy Flak Guns" said,"Based on average monthly ammunition consumption in 1944, it took 16,000 rounds of 88mm gunfire to bring down one four engine bomber."
Mr. Mullers book contains details on German AA guns and fire control systems. It is published by Schiffer Publishing Ltd. of Westchester Pa.ISBN: 0-8870-263-1

Available by e-mail through Barnes & Noble

So 10% overall flak effectiveness is about right doing cursory research ...

Ok back to GreyJoy and the war ..

This is certainly relevant to the 4E raids over Japan we've been watching, but I don't think it is relevant to the KB attack on the CVEs. There's a huge difference between firing a heavy AA gun at a 4E level bomber at tens of thousands of feet and firing one at an IJN dive or torpedo bomber headed right at your ship, or the ship next to you. I would have expected mid-1944 USN flak to cause quite a lot of casualties in the latter set of circumstances.

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 4731

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 3:25:34 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

Hopefully the sub fix will provide advance warning.� Problem here is that the Rader is attacking from the South and you can't really cut him off.� Be nice to take Formosa or Okinawa.� Iwo Jima would not hurt.� I would not, however, expect Rader to repeat the same move with the KB.� If him comes at you again, it will come from a different direction.

The next direction he could attack is Japan sea (between Korea and Japan) me thinks.

But you know what? if Rader is right - and i strongly believe he is right on this matter - it doesn't really matter....with the numbers we're using the attacker will always pass through the CAP screen with his bombers, no matter how much CAP the defender will order....

I have the feeling - but no technical evidence - that something has changed in the code since we started.

i remember at Karachi we had several weeks of air battles with 1500 japanese planes attacking a base with 500 fighters on CAP...and the results were very bloody for both of us....now it really seems that the bigger the air battle is, the less bloody it is....which is really strange.

If you look at the combat reports i reported, every time i send a good wave of bombers with a strong escort against a mighty CAP, the resulted air battle is always very "light"....and it happened the same over Uruppu. If you look at the escorted raids you'll see that my CAP (which was more than appropriate if you ask me) didn't really engage deeply....it's like if when big waves of escorted bombers arrive the CAP fighters are always (no matter the side) out of position

Viperpol and I are experiencing this in our game as well. I don't know if there was a change made of if we are just attacking in different ways that affects how the game acts

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4732

RE: DISASTER - 12/23/2011 3:34:25 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I totally disagree here...

I didn't say that CVEs weren't important and very helpful. I said that under the circumstances, GJ can proceed with his invasion plans. He won't need to risk his fleet carriers. For goodness sakes, his invaison beaches are one to two hexes away from a friendly level nine airfield. That, and the fact that he has two-day turns and plenty of APA, AP, AKA, AK, LSD and LST will permit him to do what needs to be done. It won't be a bloodless coup, but it can be done.

yes, that's true. But to be honest, I can't see how an invasion at these beaches can work because these beaches already have hundreds of thousand Japanese and halve a million more can be railed in in just a couple of days. I can't see how these bases can be taken as they surely have level 6 forts at least.

The key to an invasion of any of the remaining home islands IMO is to land somewhere where the Japanese aren't 100% prepared yet, basically means at the other side of Japan and that can only be done with huge carrier support (after the Japanese airforce has lost 2/3 of it's strenght in the fights that are brought in from the big bases GJ already owns). If an invasion doesn't take the base within the first couple of days I would consider it failed already because even if 10.000 Allied av land at a clear hex I can't see them taking the base in a couple of days when the enemy has 5.000 av sitting there behind level 6 forts with the abilitiy to rail in a dozen divisions more. The only time I have seen a succesful invasion of Japan with the Allied not being bogged down on the ground was when they were landing at several spots within a "short" period while being able to take a couple of bases and exploit that. Landing a huge Army on one spot usually means facing a huge enemy Army and then it's Sitzkrieg for months.

This is a good point CT. As I pointed out. GJ has a great position but he has not spent two years grinding down Rader's manpower by making a slower traditional approach to the home Islands, and inflicting the kind of casualties that would hamper Japan. Nor has he cut off the flow of oil, resources and troops that can be moved from other theaters to Japan. For this reason an invasion might be very difficult.

It has to be remembered that the Allies were planning an invasion of a nation that was for all purposes already defeated. Industry was in ruins, fuel was gone and the population was faced with mass starvation. Rader is not by any means close to this state. If the game is a good design then this invasion should be impossible-at least for a year or so.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4733

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 3:36:05 PM

kfsgo

Posts: 446
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline

Without commenting on the effectiveness of flak overall, do remember that CVEs aren't overendowed with AA guns - the Casablancas (which would be the most numerous at this point in time, I guess) have, uh...a single 5" gun at the back, and then 4 Bofors and 6 Oerlikon per side until 9/44 (at which point that increases to 8 Bofors and 15 O/side, which is an improvement, but also a bit late) - not by any means a huge number. By way of contrast an Essex-class CV at this point in the war can point 8-10 5" guns, 40-64 Bofors and 30-60 Oerlikon at an attacking aircraft - big difference. Bogue type upgrades to the heavier standard earlier and slings two 5", but there's not too many of those.

(in reply to Gridley380)

Post #: 4734

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 3:47:33 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380

quote:

Crackaces

The number of large anti-aircraft guns used to defend German cites against Allied bombers is quoted as 18,000. One commentator states that the Germans probably lost the Battle of Stalingrad by defending German skies against Allied bombers

Even against the combination of German fighters (some days 600 were available) and numerous anti-aircraft guns , usually 95 percent of the bombers dropped their bombs on or near their assigned targets and returned in re-usable condition to England. (Very few Allied raids had bomber losses higher than 20 percent. "Terrible losses" as viewed by bomber air crews, and "not nearly enough losses" as viewed by the Germans.)

Comments from Jerry L Brewer who did U.S. 90 mm AAA in Japan during the Korean police action. One final thought on AA guns against modern aircraft. It was taking your faithful old shotgun out to shoot birds flying by at 100 MPH. German author Werner Muller in his book "The Heavy Flak Guns" said,"Based on average monthly ammunition consumption in 1944, it took 16,000 rounds of 88mm gunfire to bring down one four engine bomber."
Mr. Mullers book contains details on German AA guns and fire control systems. It is published by Schiffer Publishing Ltd. of Westchester Pa.ISBN: 0-8870-263-1

Available by e-mail through Barnes & Noble

So 10% overall flak effectiveness is about right doing cursory research ...

Ok back to GreyJoy and the war ..

This is certainly relevant to the 4E raids over Japan we've been watching, but I don't think it is relevant to the KB attack on the CVEs. There's a huge difference between firing a heavy AA gun at a 4E level bomber at tens of thousands of feet and firing one at an IJN dive or torpedo bomber headed right at your ship, or the ship next to you. I would have expected mid-1944 USN flak to cause quite a lot of casualties in the latter set of circumstances.

Not to hijack this thread .. but I keep watching "WWII in Color" and a single Kami commin' in low on a CVE and lots of flak from 5 nearby friends .. next BOOOOM ...

However .. I have learned after a year of philosophy .. the truth can be relative especially in Witp AE

Back to the War!

(in reply to Gridley380)

Post #: 4735

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 4:19:45 PM

Gridley380

Posts: 464
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfsgo

Without commenting on the effectiveness of flak overall, do remember that CVEs aren't overendowed with AA guns - the Casablancas (which would be the most numerous at this point in time, I guess) have, uh...a single 5" gun at the back, and then 4 Bofors and 6 Oerlikon per side until 9/44 (at which point that increases to 8 Bofors and 15 O/side, which is an improvement, but also a bit late) - not by any means a huge number. By way of contrast an Essex-class CV at this point in the war can point 8-10 5" guns, 40-64 Bofors and 30-60 Oerlikon at an attacking aircraft - big difference. Bogue type upgrades to the heavier standard earlier and slings two 5", but there's not too many of those.

All true, though note that the ~30 CVEs were in 7 TFs, each with ~15 total ships 'mostly DD/DE' (going off GreyJoy's comments). That means ~10 DD/DE in EACH TF. Not sure how many of those were DEs and what type, but unless he had flush-deck or 'leader' DDs mixed in, each of THOSE should have at least 4x5"/38DP.

Now if they were mostly early-style DEs with 3"/50s instead of 5"/38s and few if any 40mm... yeah, his flak was probably too weak to matter even in real-world terms.

OTOH is they were heavily Fletchers fitted with heavy 40mm and 20mm batteries...

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 4736

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 4:48:10 PM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

With regards to your TBMs using bombs during the port attack.........as far as I am aware no Allied a/c will use torpedoes during a port strike in the game, ever. And other than 7th Dec 41 the same applies to the Japs. However, often Jap bombers will use the the special 800kg bomb during these attacks, whilst the Allies are stuck with the crappy 500lb bomb (maybe they use 1000lb bomb as well but I have never seen this happen yet).

(in reply to Gridley380)

Post #: 4737

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 5:00:03 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

With regards to your TBMs using bombs during the port attack.........as far as I am aware no Allied a/c will use torpedoes during a port strike in the game, ever. And other than 7th Dec 41 the same applies to the Japs. However, often Jap bombers will use the the special 800kg bomb during these attacks, whilst the Allies are stuck with the crappy 500lb bomb (maybe they use 1000lb bomb as well but I have never seen this happen yet).

At least the rules say it is possible ... "These attacks use bombs with only a small percentage of torpedo bombers using torpedoes (as it is assumed these ships may be in dry dock or protected by torpedo nets)." Now what the code does is always another story ...since different people and skills are involved in each process ...

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 4738

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 5:08:22 PM

FatR

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfsgo

Without commenting on the effectiveness of flak overall, do remember that CVEs aren't overendowed with AA guns - the Casablancas (which would be the most numerous at this point in time, I guess) have, uh...a single 5" gun at the back, and then 4 Bofors and 6 Oerlikon per side until 9/44 (at which point that increases to 8 Bofors and 15 O/side, which is an improvement, but also a bit late) - not by any means a huge number. By way of contrast an Essex-class CV at this point in the war can point 8-10 5" guns, 40-64 Bofors and 30-60 Oerlikon at an attacking aircraft - big difference. Bogue type upgrades to the heavier standard earlier and slings two 5", but there's not too many of those.

A major factor that impacts flak effectiveness in big battles is, IMO, raid size. Flak, even in oldest versions, performs excellently against small and moderately-sized raids. I've just observed 15-20% casualties from flak in a mix of combat/amphibious TFS - without Babes tweaks - to my Betty/Helen raids in 1943, and testing suggests that for less durable Jap planes losses of 30-40% to flak alone in 1945 are not uncommon. However, I believe that wheh dealing with raids of over hundred planes or so flak gradually grows less effective. I'm not sure if this can be attributed to ships being knocked out (you have to remember, that DP guns are the most important component of flak, they are the ones that fire to protect the entire TF, rather than the ship itself, so as you lose ships, overall effectiveness of flak decreases - and in case of CVEs densiy of DP guns is small to begin with) or exhaustion of ammo, or some other factors, hidden in the game.

< Message edited by FatR -- 12/23/2011 5:11:27 PM >

_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 4739

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/23/2011 6:44:37 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

Ok guys...sorry for the delay but it's been a very bad day at work.... and i have no time to reply or comment...

just to let you know that the raid at Tokyo costed us more than 400 planes and 300 pilots....

...the coordination was terrible and, despite we've wiped out 3 a/c factories (SAM, Frank and Tojo), the damages inflicted to enemy fleet is minimal....i'd say nothing to write home about....

impossible to do what the japanese are capable against our ports....

Will have a busy night...dinner, x-mas disco party and GF....no updates till tomorrow....sorry

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jul 14, 44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 36 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     A6M3a Zero x 71
     A6M5 Zero x 150
     A6M5c Zero x 40
     A7M2 Sam x 46
     J2M3 Jack x 20
     N1K1-J George x 236
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 18
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 163
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 51
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 29
     Ki-84a Frank x 181
     Ki-100-I Tony x 21
     Ki-102b Randy x 61

Allied aircraft
     F4U-1A Corsair x 43
     F6F-3 Hellcat x 51
     TBF-1 Avenger x 109
     TBM-1C Avenger x 59

Japanese aircraft losses
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
     F4U-1A Corsair: 7 destroyed
     F6F-3 Hellcat: 9 destroyed
     TBF-1 Avenger: 25 destroyed, 7 damaged
     TBM-1C Avenger: 10 destroyed, 14 damaged
     TBM-1C Avenger: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
     BB Musashi, Bomb hits 3
     BB Yamashiro, Bomb hits 1
     CL Tenryu, Bomb hits 1, on fire
     BB Hyuga, Bomb hits 1
     BB Ise, Bomb hits 2
     BB Fuso, Bomb hits 3, on fire

Repair Shipyard hits 2
Port hits 3

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 38 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     A6M3a Zero x 59
     A6M5 Zero x 119
     A6M5c Zero x 29
     A7M2 Sam x 37
     J2M3 Jack x 12
     N1K1-J George x 217
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 15
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 137
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 48
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 29
     Ki-84a Frank x 173
     Ki-100-I Tony x 16
     Ki-102b Randy x 54

Allied aircraft
     P-38J Lightning x 39
     P-51B Mustang x 13
     F4U-1A Corsair x 24
     F6F-3 Hellcat x 18
     PV-1 Ventura x 36
     TBF-1 Avenger x 31

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
     F4U-1A Corsair: 5 destroyed
     F6F-3 Hellcat: 7 destroyed
     PV-1 Ventura: 14 destroyed, 7 damaged
     PV-1 Ventura: 1 destroyed by flak
     TBF-1 Avenger: 13 destroyed, 8 damaged
     TBF-1 Avenger: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
     BB Nagato, Bomb hits 2
     CA Kinugasa, Bomb hits 1
     BB Hyuga, Bomb hits 4, on fire
     BB Musashi, Bomb hits 3, on fire
     BB Yamashiro, Bomb hits 3, on fire
     BB Ise, Bomb hits 3, on fire
     CA Kumano, Bomb hits 1
     BB Fuso, Bomb hits 1, on fire

Port hits 3

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     A6M3a Zero x 38
     A6M5 Zero x 78
     A6M5c Zero x 18
     A7M2 Sam x 29
     J2M3 Jack x 6
     N1K1-J George x 205
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 11
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 84
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 44
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 25
     Ki-84a Frank x 149
     Ki-100-I Tony x 8
     Ki-102b Randy x 42

Allied aircraft
     B-24J Liberator x 12
     B-25C Mitchell x 15
     B-25D1 Mitchell x 18
     B-25G Mitchell x 6
     B-25H Mitchell x 9
     B-25J1 Mitchell x 3
     B-29-1 Superfort x 4
     P-38J Lightning x 23
     P-51B Mustang x 3
     F4U-1 Corsair x 26
     F4U-1A Corsair x 11
     PBJ-1D Mitchell x 45

Japanese aircraft losses
     A6M3a Zero: 1 destroyed
     N1K1-J George: 1 destroyed
     Ki-102b Randy: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
     B-25C Mitchell: 4 damaged
     B-25D1 Mitchell: 2 damaged
     B-25G Mitchell: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
     B-25H Mitchell: 2 damaged
     B-25J1 Mitchell: 1 destroyed by flak
     B-29-1 Superfort: 1 damaged
     P-38J Lightning: 6 destroyed
     F4U-1 Corsair: 1 destroyed
     PBJ-1D Mitchell: 5 damaged
     PBJ-1D Mitchell: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
     BB Ise, Bomb hits 5, on fire
     BB Hyuga, Bomb hits 11, heavy fires
     CL Teshio, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
     BB Yamashiro, Bomb hits 6, on fire
     BB Nagato, Bomb hits 10, on fire
     CL Tokachi, Bomb hits 1, on fire
     BB Fuso, Bomb hits 7, heavy fires
     BB Musashi, Bomb hits 8, heavy fires
     DD Shikinami, Bomb hits 1, on fire
     CA Kumano, Bomb hits 1, on fire
     CA Kako, Bomb hits 1

Repair Shipyard hits 2
Ki-44-IIc Tojo factory hits 2
Ki-84a Frank factory hits 4
Port hits 11
Port fuel hits 1
Port supply hits 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 24,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 27 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     A6M3a Zero x 30
     A6M5 Zero x 61
     A6M5c Zero x 14
     A7M2 Sam x 26
     J2M3 Jack x 6
     N1K1-J George x 172
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 9
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 70
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 36
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 22
     Ki-84a Frank x 123
     Ki-100-I Tony x 7
     Ki-102b Randy x 34

Allied aircraft
     Liberator B.III x 13
     Liberator B.VI x 31
     B-24D1 Liberator x 29
     B-24J Liberator x 79
     B-25G Mitchell x 12
     B-25H Mitchell x 12
     B-29-1 Superfort x 60
     P-51B Mustang x 34
     F4U-1A Corsair x 40
     PB4Y-1 Liberator x 43

Japanese aircraft losses
     A6M3a Zero: 1 destroyed
     A7M2 Sam: 1 destroyed
     J2M3 Jack: 1 destroyed
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 2 destroyed
     Ki-102b Randy: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
     Liberator B.III: 3 damaged
     Liberator B.VI: 2 damaged
     B-24D1 Liberator: 2 damaged
     B-24J Liberator: 1 destroyed, 4 damaged
     B-29-1 Superfort: 4 damaged
     P-51B Mustang: 1 destroyed
     F4U-1A Corsair: 3 destroyed
     PB4Y-1 Liberator: 7 damaged

Japanese Ships
     BB Musashi, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
     BB Yamashiro, Bomb hits 2, on fire
     BB Ise, Bomb hits 2, on fire
     CL Oyodo, Bomb hits 1
     BB Hyuga, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
     CA Takao, Bomb hits 1

A7M2 Sam factory hits 4
Ki-44-IIc Tojo factory hits 7
Ki-84a Frank factory hits 18
Repair Shipyard hits 6
Port hits 4

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 76 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 29 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     A6M3a Zero x 23
     A6M5 Zero x 55
     A6M5c Zero x 14
     A7M2 Sam x 23
     J2M3 Jack x 4
     N1K1-J George x 149
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 6
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 59
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 33
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 21
     Ki-84a Frank x 114
     Ki-100-I Tony x 7
     Ki-102b Randy x 28

Allied aircraft
     Wellington B.X x 15
     B-24J Liberator x 4
     B-25G Mitchell x 11

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
     Wellington B.X: 8 destroyed, 1 damaged
     Wellington B.X: 1 destroyed by flak
     B-24J Liberator: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged
     B-25G Mitchell: 3 destroyed, 4 damaged
     B-25G Mitchell: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
     BB Nagato, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires

Port hits 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 76 NM, estimated altitude 24,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     A6M3a Zero x 18
     A6M5 Zero x 49
     A6M5c Zero x 12
     A7M2 Sam x 22
     J2M3 Jack x 4
     N1K1-J George x 125
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 5
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 55
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 31
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 19
     Ki-84a Frank x 103
     Ki-100-I Tony x 7
     Ki-102b Randy x 26

Allied aircraft
     B-24D1 Liberator x 6
     B-29-1 Superfort x 10
     P-51B Mustang x 6
     F4U-1A Corsair x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
     A6M3a Zero: 1 destroyed
     A6M5 Zero: 1 destroyed
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 1 destroyed
     Ki-102b Randy: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
     B-24D1 Liberator: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged
     B-24D1 Liberator: 1 destroyed by flak
     B-29-1 Superfort: 3 damaged
     P-51B Mustang: 2 destroyed

Ki-44-IIc Tojo factory hits 4
Ki-84a Frank factory hits 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 40,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     A6M3a Zero x 15
     A6M5 Zero x 47
     A6M5c Zero x 12
     A7M2 Sam x 20
     J2M3 Jack x 4
     N1K1-J George x 109
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 4
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 47
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 30
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 17
     Ki-84a Frank x 99
     Ki-100-I Tony x 7
     Ki-102b Randy x 21

Allied aircraft
     P-47D25 Thunderbolt x 195

Japanese aircraft losses
     A6M3a Zero: 1 destroyed
     A6M5 Zero: 3 destroyed
     A7M2 Sam: 1 destroyed
     J2M3 Jack: 1 destroyed
     N1K1-J George: 2 destroyed
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 1 destroyed
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 1 destroyed
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 1 destroyed
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed
     Ki-84a Frank: 6 destroyed
     Ki-100-I Tony: 2 destroyed
     Ki-102b Randy: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
     P-47D25 Thunderbolt: 1 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 66 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 18 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     A6M3a Zero x 13
     A6M5 Zero x 41
     A6M5c Zero x 12
     A7M2 Sam x 15
     J2M3 Jack x 2
     N1K1-J George x 100
     Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 3
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 44
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 27
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 15
     Ki-84a Frank x 84
     Ki-100-I Tony x 4
     Ki-102b Randy x 17

Allied aircraft
     B-25D1 Mitchell x 21
     B-25H Mitchell x 12

Japanese aircraft losses
     A6M5 Zero: 3 destroyed
     N1K1-J George: 2 destroyed
     Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 2 destroyed
     Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 1 destroyed
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed
     Ki-84a Frank: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
     B-25D1 Mitchell: 10 destroyed, 5 damaged
     B-25D1 Mitchell: 1 destroyed by flak
     B-25H Mitchell: 4 destroyed, 2 damaged
     B-25H Mitchell: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
     BB Nagato, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
     BB Ise, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
     BB Fuso, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
     CA Mikuma, Bomb hits 1, heavy damage

Port hits 1

...and lots of other useless raids composed of 10 to 20 unescorted 2Es and 4Es....

(in reply to FatR)

Post #: 4740