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: 7-8 May 41 - CV Battle off Port Hedland

 
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: 7-8 May 41 - CV Battle off Port Hedland Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 7-8 May 41 - CV Battle off Port Hedland - 3/30/2015 10:06:09 AM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		You mentioned 125(J) and 77(A) air losses; how many related to the carrier battle?

are you planning to keep pushing with Halsey?

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 211
RE: 7-8 May 41 - CV Battle off Port Hedland - 3/30/2015 3:34:02 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

You mentioned 125(J) and 77(A) air losses; how many related to the carrier battle?

are you planning to keep pushing with Halsey?



Rough air losses (think this is close, Zero losses may be off due to other engagements) are:
IJN CV: 28Z, 18K, 17V
Brit CV: Martlet 14, Hurri 10, Sword 4, Alba 9, SBD 1

Fighter strength and pretty much zero AA ammo left in the TF is forcing me to pull the Brit CV TF back to Perth. I'm leaving Halsey at sea for the time being. Haven't decided whether to send the Brit CV TF back out after replenishing - I'm sure L_S_T won't expect it, but not sure if its worth the risk.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 212
RE: 7-8 May 41 - CV Battle off Port Hedland - 3/30/2015 11:47:27 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		Considering how close you are to the withdrawal dates; it might make sense to pull back, as damage can make it difficult to move the carriers out of theatre if somehow they get engine damage

But of course, you can make the decision later on, once you have them all replenished

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 213
9-10 May 42 - 3/31/2015 6:05:10 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline 		9-10 May 42

Highlights - Relatively quiet after the hectic last two days. Both IJN CV TFs did not loiter, but headed back toward friendlier waters.

Jpn ships sunk:
BB: 1 (Fuso is again listed as sunk - only contact was a single aerial torp hit on 10 Feb in the DEI; reportedly lost in East China Sea - foundered enroute to Japan perhaps? Still skeptical..)
DD: 1 (Hayate)

Allied ships sunk: None

Air loss:
Jpn: 27
Allied: 32

Subwar:
Jpn: 1 Attack, 0 ships hit
Allies: 0 Attacks, 0 ships hit
Sub laid mines off Palembang sink a DD and damage a PB and two xAKs. 4 mines cleared…

Amph Inv:
Sangi (PI)

Bases lost:
Port Blair (Burma)
Sangi (PI)

SIGINT/Intel: NSTR

West Coast/Admin. Slow convoy forms up LA bound for Auckland.

In NOPAC. US BB TF (3BB, 2CL, 6DD, DMS) bombard Attu with moderate effect - nothing like the IJN nuclear bombardments of course, but enough to delay any fortification attempts for a while. LB-30s discover Rufes over Attu for the first time. Will have to bring my “experimental” P-38E squadron up from LA to do some sweeps.

CENPAC. NSTR

In SOPAC, the KB moves back to the north, and is sighted near Efate - where it’s Zeros mange a very nice little air ambush over Tanna, bushwacking the usual Banshee raid. 12 Banshees are splashed - I should know better. KB launches a small Val strike against PTs off Noumea - and encounter the P-400 for the first time. The P-400 doesn’t do well against the Zero escort, and lose 9 to nothing. Not a good day in the air over SOPAC!

In SWPAC, the British CV and BC TFs avoid the sub menace and close on Perth. Halsey remains at sea, 700 miles off the coast of Carnarvon, awaiting replenishment. BC Repulse and CA Australia will need repair yards for moderate damage, remaining ships (less some DD escorts for the above) will be combat ready. The dire fuel situation in Australia as somewhat moderated with the arrival of half a dozen big tankers in Melbourne. Two major tanker convoys are enroute from Capetown which should sustain the area for a while - which is one reason I want to maintain Halsey in the area.

In the Philippines, NSTR.

In China, Oscars sweep Sian, but the AVG stays on the ground. Wenchow is bombarded heavily both air and naval - including a visit from BB Yamato. Have one sub patrolling the area, perhaps it can get lucky? The results of all this bombardment has destroyed most of Wenchow’s industry, and burning supply.

In India/Burma, NSTR.



(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 214
RE: 9-10 May 42 - 3/31/2015 6:18:17 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		Regarding Fuso: did you get the sinking it in the Operation Report ?

I think once you see it there, it is a guaranteed sinking

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 215
RE: 9-10 May 42 - 3/31/2015 6:48:18 PM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline 		Can the Repulse be repaired in Australia? Sydney's yard only holds 30. Or is the plan just to repair the minor damage at Perth and go from there? I am curious because I face similar issues in my own game. Though it is much earlier in my game, I have the same problem: seriously damaged ships in the waters between Java and Western Australia, and where to send them? Any yard big enough for the job seems to be a LONG way away.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 216
RE: 9-10 May 42 - 3/31/2015 9:12:32 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

Can the Repulse be repaired in Australia? Sydney's yard only holds 30. Or is the plan just to repair the minor damage at Perth and go from there? I am curious because I face similar issues in my own game. Though it is much earlier in my game, I have the same problem: seriously damaged ships in the waters between Java and Western Australia, and where to send them? Any yard big enough for the job seems to be a LONG way away.


What you normally do in these scenarios is to repair system damage in a port with lots of naval support like Sydney.

Once system damage is zero, you move it to the closest port with appropriate shipyard. The chances of flooding events are significantly lower with no system damage.

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 217
RE: 9-10 May 42 - 3/31/2015 10:08:35 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

Can the Repulse be repaired in Australia? Sydney's yard only holds 30. Or is the plan just to repair the minor damage at Perth and go from there? I am curious because I face similar issues in my own game. Though it is much earlier in my game, I have the same problem: seriously damaged ships in the waters between Java and Western Australia, and where to send them? Any yard big enough for the job seems to be a LONG way away.


What you normally do in these scenarios is to repair system damage in a port with lots of naval support like Sydney.

Once system damage is zero, you move it to the closest port with appropriate shipyard. The chances of flooding events are significantly lower with no system damage.


Right! Just compare the tonnage of the ship to the SY size and you will know if it can fit in the drydock. Repulse is about 6000 tons too big for Sydney's dock. If system damage is under 30 and float damage is not above 50, I would send her directly to Capetown, using cruise speed.


Note that sometimes small amounts of flotation damage can be repaired in major ports without using the SY. I think it has to be less than 5 float. I guess this simulates welding a patch over a small hole or two.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 218
RE: 9-10 May 42 - 4/1/2015 12:21:03 AM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

Can the Repulse be repaired in Australia? Sydney's yard only holds 30. Or is the plan just to repair the minor damage at Perth and go from there? I am curious because I face similar issues in my own game. Though it is much earlier in my game, I have the same problem: seriously damaged ships in the waters between Java and Western Australia, and where to send them? Any yard big enough for the job seems to be a LONG way away.


What you normally do in these scenarios is to repair system damage in a port with lots of naval support like Sydney.

Once system damage is zero, you move it to the closest port with appropriate shipyard. The chances of flooding events are significantly lower with no system damage.


Right! Just compare the tonnage of the ship to the SY size and you will know if it can fit in the drydock. Repulse is about 6000 tons too big for Sydney's dock. If system damage is under 30 and float damage is not above 50, I would send her directly to Capetown, using cruise speed.


Note that sometimes small amounts of flotation damage can be repaired in major ports without using the SY. I think it has to be less than 5 float. I guess this simulates welding a patch over a small hole or two.



Exactly - Repulse(34sys/3flt/14eng) is heading to Capetown while Australia (17sys plus two 8" guns knocked out) is heading to Sydney.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 219
RE: 9-10 May 42 - 4/1/2015 12:23:51 AM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Regarding Fuso: did you get the sinking it in the Operation Report ?

I think once you see it there, it is a guaranteed sinking



No, her loss wasn't admitted. 2nd time she's appeared as sunk; she's already been resurrected once 10 days after being listed as sunk back in Feb. Didn't expect to see her listed as sunk again 3 months after that. So who knows...

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 220
11-12 May 42 - 4/2/2015 8:41:28 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline 		11-12 May 42

Highlights - Staying fairly quiet as the KB and Mini-KB have departed contested waters. Buffaloes do well over Lashio.

Jpn ships sunk:
TB: 1
xAK: 1

Allied ships sunk: None

Air loss:
Jpn: 47
Allied: 18

Subwar:
Jpn: 1 Attack, 0 ships hit
Allies: 2 Attacks, 1 ships hit (xAK sunk off Attu)
SS Trusty heavily damaged by DCs off Sumatra; should make it back to Colombo.
Sub laid mines off Palembang sink a TB and damage a DD.

Amph Inv:
Christmas Is (DEI)

Bases lost:
Christmas Is (DEI)

SIGINT/Intel: NSTR

West Coast/Admin. Slow convoy departs LA bound for Auckland.

In NOPAC. S-27 torps sinks an xAK off Attu and the first echelon of the 58th IN (SEP) Reg embarks at SH for Amchitka.

CENPAC. NSTR

In SOPAC, quiet as the KB disappears to the north. Yorktown’s VT-5 flies off the CV to Auckland and becomes the first TBD squadron to transition to TBFs. Once the US CVs arrive at Auckland to replenish, will begin a supported resupply effort to Noumea. These CVs bring a heavy contingent of USMC squadrons for SOPAC (4F, 4D), most of which will deploy at LaFoe/Noumea - once we get sufficient planes and pilots. My intent here is to finalize the organizations of MAGs in SOPAC with 2F and 2D in hopes of better synchronizing strikes.

In SWPAC, Halsey refuels at sea while the British CVs arrive back at Perth and replace lost airframes. Will depart shortly to support a troop convoy to Carnarvon with engineers to build up the base. With Derby AF now at level 3, I’m a bit more reluctant to send ships to Port Hedland in Betty/Zero range. The first Betty/Zero raid on Port Hedland is met by a robust CAP of Aussie P-40s and US P-39s. 11 Zeros are lost in exchange for 5 P-39s and 3 Kittyhawks. But the 48 Zeros did protect the 10 Bettys! I think Exmouth has been abandoned by Jpn ground troops. The challenge is going to be keeping Port Hedland supplied. I’m also curious if the IJN restarts its bombardment runs to Port Hedland - the IJN surface fleet has been significantly quiet in NW Australia the last few turns. On the bright side, a 2nd transport snuck into Darwin with supplies.

In the Philippines, NSTR.

In China, of course as soon as I move a US sub off Wenchow, the IJN doesn’t come to bombard.

In India/Burma, a Buffalo squadron on LRCAP over Lashio manages to intercept unescorted raids - they tally 13 Nells and 7 Sonias for 3 Buffs. IJA slowly grinding a slow advance in Burma.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 221
13-14 May 42 - 4/3/2015 6:31:45 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline 		13-14 May 42

Highlights - Not much going on…which isn’t a bad thing. Zeros sweep Port Hedland, but Allied CAP holds its own.

Jpn ships sunk: None

Allied ships sunk: None

Air loss:
Jpn: 29
Allied: 33

Subwar:
Jpn: 0 Attacks, 0 ships hit
Allies: 1 Attacks, 1 ships hit (xAP dam off Wyndham)

Amph Inv:
Salajar (DEI)

Bases lost:
Salajar (DEI)

SIGINT/Intel: NSTR

West Coast/Admin. Large fast convoy starts forming up at LA headed for Auckland.

In NOPAC. 58th IN (SEP) Reg begins offloading at Amchitka covered by a surface group while BB TF (3BB, 6DD) prepare to bombard Attu. P-38Es arrive in Adak.

CENPAC. NSTR

In SOPAC, Adm Fletcher with Yorktown and Lex arrive at Auckland; Hornet still a day out. Slow, resupply convoy departs Auck for Noumea; Fast troop convoy will follow next turn with CVs and surface group in support. USMC squadrons begin shuttling to LaFoe/Noumea.

In SWPAC, Port Hedland is swept by Zeros and are met by a robust CAP. 19 Zeros lost in exchange for 14 P-39s and 6 Kittyhawks. I’ll take that exchange over home turf. But it looks like another IJN bombardment is afoot - TF sighted 4hexes out. Port Hedland AF now at level 2 - but I’ve held off deploying any DBs until after the bombardment. Convoy with US engineers will depart Perth for Carnarvon next turn - followed by the the Brit CVs and a surface TF.

In the Philippines, the first two subs arrive with supply since the fall of Batavia! Additional subs should be arriving fairly regularly for a while. The first of two xAKs enroute, which has remained undetected since departing Midway, actually blunders into an IJN convoy off the north coast of Luzon!! Now found, I highly doubt she’ll make it the rest of the way!

In China, the Chinese successfully defended SE of Sian, holding back a division sized attack. IJA is still slowly trying to envelop Sian, but we’re pulling out of the pocket faster than the IJA can close it due to the rough terrain south of the city. His drive on the open terrain to the north has been slowed, likely due to lack of supply more than anything else.

In India/Burma, NSTR.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 222
RE: 13-14 May 42 - 4/3/2015 7:02:39 PM   
Monter_Trismegistos

 

Posts: 1359
Joined: 2/1/2005
From: Gdansk
Status: offline 		Hi, great AAR. Finally something equivalent to Mike Solli's one, but for Allied Fan Boys.

I'm curious - what is your convoy orgasnisation.
How many ships you need to gather to send them from west coast?
Fast convoy is 14kn?
How many escorts is your minimum for a convoy?

_____________________________

Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 223
RE: 13-14 May 42 - 4/3/2015 11:13:00 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Hi, great AAR. Finally something equivalent to Mike Solli's one, but for Allied Fan Boys.

I'm curious - what is your convoy orgasnisation.
How many ships you need to gather to send them from west coast?
Fast convoy is 14kn?
How many escorts is your minimum for a convoy?


Thanks Monter, welcome. I'll try and answer as best as possible.

Convoy organization, see post #2 for routes. That route plan has held up.

How many ships? Whatever is available truthfully. Here's a snapshot of my current convoys plowing the seas between LA and Auckland:

Auckland/LA: Outbound from LA
PG, AVD, 8TK, 6xAP, 11xAK (F)
2PC, TK, 2xAP, 25xAK (S)
DE, PC, AM, 10TK, 6xAP, 4xAK (F)
2AM, 32xAK (S)
KV, AMC, AVP, 4xAP, 22xAK (VF)

LA/Auckland: Inbound to LA
DE, AMC, 5xAP (F)
PC, AVP, 2AKV, 8TK, 2xAP, 4xAK (F)
PC, AVD, 4TK, 5xAP, 4xAK (F)
AM, AKV, TK, 2xAP, 4xAP (F)
KV, PC, 2AG, AO, 32xAK (S)

(S)= Slow convoy, 12-13kts, moves 3/3
(F)= Fast convoy, 14+ kts, moves 4/3 or 4/4
(VF)= Very Fast convoy, 18+kts, moves 5/4 (troops convoy)

So, as you can see, the convoys come in all shapes and sizes. Tankers are the most critical assets - never enough on the routes from LA to Auck/LA or Capetown to Perth.

Miminal escort is 1 ASW ship - more if I have them, more for troop/tanker convoys if at all possible. I also use ASW TFs near ports - when a convoy comes close, or departs, I'll use an ASW TF to provide some additional ASW near ports.

The other key, besides number of available ships, is port size. Beginning the war, ports need to be expanded. It may take a number of turns to offload or load cargo depending on port size.

Despite my larger size convoys, I really haven't had many ship collisions - perhaps 2-3 total. Nothing very serious.

Lastly, make use of offmap locations. I have tanker convoys moving between East Coast/UK to Capetown keeping Capetown stocked - and allowing Capetown to push fuel to Perth. Offmap convoys don't consume fuel - so you can use "full speed" without risk.

Still, I'm short fuel in OZ and low in New Zealand - I still need more tankers!!! Keeping CV operations in SWPAC hasn't helped that fuel situation at all!

Hope this helped!

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)
Post #: 224
RE: 13-14 May 42 - 4/4/2015 3:41:45 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		I would add:

- Consider what is the ships' cruise speed when forming convoys; some ships are deceptively "fast" when looking at the full speed, but its cruise speed slow; and cruise speed is what they will be doing 95% of the time

- Avoid "full refuel" if possible; which means use long range ships for long range hauls and keep them at "do not refuel"

- Shape your escorts based on the threat; how is your opponent using his submarines? does he likes to lurk close to port? try to find patterns. At least 1 escort, but sometimes they are not available and I would take the risk if it is low value cargo/ low value xAKLs

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 225
RE: 13-14 May 42 - 4/4/2015 4:05:24 PM   
witpqs


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

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I would add:

- Consider what is the ships' cruise speed when forming convoys; some ships are deceptively "fast" when looking at the full speed, but its cruise speed slow; and cruise speed is what they will be doing 95% of the time
+1 Cruise speed is how you speed match for the sheep in convoys. Full speed matching is only for warships to fight.

- Avoid "full refuel" if possible; which means use long range ships for long range hauls and keep them at "do not refuel"
Going even further, when helpful use 'Do Not Refuel' and then set one or more waypoints with 'Full Refuel'. For example, you are sending a convoy to Australia and it does not have enough range for a safety margin. Set a waypoint at Pearl Harbor with 'full refuel' and it will refuel there plus still obey 'do not refuel' at the actual destination. You can also set 'Yes' to use the waypoint(s) on the return trip as well, refueling on the way home. Doing this with multiple waypoints to refuel in both directions will even get many short-legged ships in the game without constantly managing them.

- Shape your escorts based on the threat; how is your opponent using his submarines? does he likes to lurk close to port? try to find patterns. At least 1 escort, but sometimes they are not available and I would take the risk if it is low value cargo/ low value xAKLs



_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 226
15-16 May 42 - 4/6/2015 6:52:41 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline 		15-16 May 42

Highlights - Port Hedland is nuked again by naval bombardment while B-17s find death in the sky over Derby. Positive highlight is that a xAK actually made it to Bataan!

Jpn ships sunk:
xAK:1

Allied ships sunk: None

Air loss:
Jpn: 20
Allied: 32

Subwar:
Jpn: 0 Attacks, 0 ships hit
Allies: 2 Attacks, 0 ships hit

Amph Inv:
Wenchow (China)

Bases lost: None

SIGINT/Intel: NSTR

West Coast/Admin. NSTR

In NOPAC. US BB TF (3BB, 5DD, DMS) bombards Attu and heads back to DH. No IJN activity.

CENPAC. NSTR

In SOPAC, Continued reorganization of USMC air assets; US naval strength remains at Auckland.

In SWPAC, Port Hedland is crushed by a Naval bombardment (2BB, 3CA, 2CL, 9DD). While a/c losses are minimal, the AF is shut down and all the 1200+ supply destroyed. Another IJN TF looks to be ready to make a bombardment run. Can’t do anything right now against these runs - not willing to commit surface forces at Port Hedland - don’t think its worth the risk. Fort level 3 just doesn’t cut it against the IJN. Brit CVs lay off Carnarvon to support the upcoming US engineer landings there - I want to build up Carnarvon. I make another poor choice and send B17s to hit Derby -figuring the Zeros there have been worn down over Port Hedland - wrong! I lose 18 Forts in exchange for 15 Zeros. Not good.

In the Philippines, amazingly the xAK Makiki docked at Bataan after a long journey from PH and has begun offloading its 2100 supplies. Attacked during all four air phases by Sonias which failed to score a single hit. Two more subs also arrive with supply. Wish I could direct which units were receiving the supply - like the AA units instead of HQs!

In China, Wenchow is bombarded by sea again (BB, CA, 4DD) and additional troops are also put ashore. The two Chinese Corps remain defiant and will hold as long as possible.

In India/Burma, NSTR.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 227
RE: 15-16 May 42 - 4/6/2015 7:02:58 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		that is a lot of B-17s !

Did you escorted them? any chance you can share the combat report?

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 228
RE: 15-16 May 42 - 4/6/2015 8:05:47 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

that is a lot of B-17s !

Did you escorted them? any chance you can share the combat report?


No escort - B17Es at extended range....I should know better...

Here's the combat reports from the attacks. Once you do something dumb in 2 day turns, you pay for the mistake twice...

Morning Air attack on Derby , at 64,127

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 37 NM, estimated altitude 27,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 23

Allied aircraft
B-17D Fortress x 4
B-17E Fortress x 19

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed
G4M1 Betty: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 2 destroyed, 8 damaged

Runway hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-17D Fortress bombing from 23000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Genzan Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 20 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 35 minutes
3rd Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead
Hosho-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead


Afternoon Air attack on Derby , at 64,127

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 24,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 29

Allied aircraft
B-17D Fortress x 4
B-17E Fortress x 9

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
B-17D Fortress: 1 destroyed, 3 damaged
B-17E Fortress: 1 destroyed, 8 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb
4 x B-17D Fortress bombing from 23000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Genzan Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 2 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 33 minutes
3rd Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 23 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes
Hosho-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead

Afternoon Air attack on Derby , at 64,127

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 25,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 19

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 3 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Hosho-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 23000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 17 minutes
Genzan Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 2 scrambling)
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 23000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
3rd Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (6 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
10 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 23000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 41 minutes

Afternoon Air attack on Derby , at 64,127

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 29,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 10

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 2

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 1 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 23000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Genzan Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 23000.
Raid is overhead
3rd Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 0 on standby, 3 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
3 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 23000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 78 minutes

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 229
17-18 May 42 - 4/8/2015 6:22:57 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline 		17-18 May 42

Highlights - Port Hedland is nuked yet again by naval bombardment while Banshees over Darwin sink a CL.

Jpn ships sunk:
CL:1 (Yubari)
DD: 1

Jpn ships unsunk:
CL: 1 (Tama - listed again as in service after being twice listed as sunk)

Allied ships sunk:
xAK: 1

Air loss:
Jpn: 14
Allied: 07

Subwar:
Jpn: 2 Attacks, 1 ship hit (xAK sunk off Carnarvon)
Allies: 2 Attacks, 0 ships hit

Amph Inv:
Galeia (DEI)

Bases lost: None

SIGINT/Intel: Absolutely nothing of value. Not a single SIGINT hit on a major IJN vessel yet…frustrating.

West Coast/Admin. 34 ship fast convoy departs LA for Auckland.

In NOPAC. NSTR

CENPAC. NSTR

In SOPAC, slow convoy arrives at Noumea with some support troops and supplies. Troop convoy carrying 132nd Reg/Americal Div will depart Auckland with surface and carrier escort. With the better parts of two USMC air groups (4 sqd ea) on New Caledonia, if the KB comes calling, the airpower assembled, both naval and ground based, should be able to protect the convoy.

In SWPAC, Port Hedland is crushed again by a Naval bombardment (BB, 2CA, 4CL, 5DD). While a/c losses are again minimal, the AF remains shut down. Right now, I’m in no rush to change that situation. Derby AF is now a level 4, and I expect IJN aircraft to use it offensively over Port Hedland. Brit CVs continue to lay off Carnarvon to support the offloading US engineer landings there. Halsey remains about 240 miles further west, also loitering. The question is whether or not the Mini-KB will risk a sortie against the convoy at Carnarvon - that would be the trigger to commit the Allied CVs. I’m not risking another CV support to Port Hedland for the time being - the risks outweigh the potential gains. Over Darwin, I bring in a Banshee squadron to hit a probing IJN TF - Banshees hit CL Yubari with two 1000lb bombs and it is listed as sunk. On land the IJA forces - with tank regiments in the lead, continue to attempt to bottle up the withdrawing Australian forces around Daly Waters. Strangely, there hasn’t been a major push to take Darwin from overland yet…

In the Philippines, the xAK docked at Bataan is hit three times by Lilys, but continues to offload supplies. Major boost since the unit supply situation had just about gone dry. Two subs also arrive. This should give Bataan a few weeks more life, although there seems to be no increase in IJA forces to prepare an attack.

In China, IJA ground forces take a hex NW of Sian and the Chinese continue to slowly withdraw out of Sian and positions to the SE. Going is slow for both sides in the harsh terrain. I put one AVG squadron in Sian for probably the last time to see what if it can catch some IJA ground support.

In India/Burma, the IJA get across the river just north of Akyab with a Bde sized force, but fail to dislodge the defenders. At the end of the turn, the Allies have an Indian Bde, an infantry battalion, and a tank regiment attempting to hold the ground against what looks like 1-2 Bdes of the 18th Div. I don’t think I can stop this attack from gaining Akyab, but I think I can make it expensive.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 230
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/10/2015 3:56:21 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline 		19-20 May 42

Highlights - Port Hedland is nuked yet again by naval bombardment; KB is sighted in the Gulf of Carpentaria north of Australia??!!

Jpn ships sunk: None

Jpn ships unsunk:
SS: 2 (I-164 and RO-65)

Allied ships sunk:
DD: 1 (Arrow)
xAK: 2
xAKL: 1

Air loss:
Jpn: 21
Allied: 14

Subwar:
Jpn: 2 Attacks, 2 ship hit (xAK sunk off Normanton and xAKL sunk off Cooktown)
Allies: 1 Attack, 0 ships hit

Amph Inv: None

Bases lost:
Galeia (DEI)

SIGINT/Intel: KB confirmed in northern Australian waters (and not in SOPAC) and Mini-KB still in NW Aus waters is solid info that will accelerate invasion of Efate planning.

West Coast/Admin. NSTR

In NOPAC. BBs Idaho and Mississippi depart DH for Bremerton with damaged CL Raleigh (12/56/1) for refit and repair respectively. They will be replaced by BBs Nevada (at Bremerton) and Pennsylvania (enroute to Bremerton). Will continue to develop Adak and Amchitka as well as prepare for invasion of Attu (slated for mid/late Jun).

CENPAC. NSTR

In SOPAC, the troop convoy carrying 132nd Reg/Americal Div departed Auckland with surface (2CA, CL, 6DD) and carrier escort TFs (Hornet TF: CV, CA, CL, CLAA, 6DD; Lex/York TF: 2CV, 2CA, CL, 10DD) and transports should dock at Noumea in two days. With the KB confirmed NOT in SOPAC, Amphibious TF begins loading at Auckland to invade Efate with 7th Mar Reg and support units. Had planned on invading Efate in mid Jun, but this is an opportunity if the KB stays out of the area to quickly seize Efate and perhaps Luganville and get AFs operational. Estimate that both Efate and Luganville has Naval Guard battalions defending. Escorts for the Americal Reg will loiter and provide support for invasion. CVs will stay within Noumea LBA fighter range should the IJN decide to intervene once troops are ashore.

In SWPAC, Port Hedland is crushed by a Naval bombardment (2BB, 3CA, 2CL, 9DD) yet again. a/c losses are again minimal, the AF remains shut down. Different day, same outcome. Engineers complete landing at Carnarvon and another convoy to depart Perth with AA and CD units - these were slated to go to Port Hedland, but will now got to Carnarvon. Mini-KB confirmed off Broome - likely still with Kaga and Akagi. Derby AF now at level 4. B-17s hit the base at night, destroying 6 Bettys. Why the KB is NW of Normanton is anybody’s guess. I’m assuming its to prevent resupply of Darwin, or support larger landing at Normanton. In any case, if it stays west of Torrez Strait, this could work out well. SS Argonaut was out of Brisbane enroute to lay mines off Port Hedland, and will now mine the Torrez Strait. Best case is that L_S_T rushes the KB back to SOPAC once landings start at Efate - through the mines. It’s a longshot, but I can dream, can’t I? On the ground front, between Tennant Creek and Daly Waters, a reinforced Aus Bde successfully attacks an IJA tank regiment - supplies are finally starting to move into Tennant Creek. While I need some more infantry in and around Tenant Creek, I’m hesitant to bring much in due to limited supplies.

In the Philippines, three subs dock with supplies despite a notable increase in IJA air devoted to ASW.

In China, IJA ground forces are held SE of Sian while the withdrawal out of Sian area continues. AVG finds no targets near Sian and will remain on CAP there another turn. Wenchow is bombarded by BB Yamato again on one of her “training” runs. Now if the SS Gato can just get a shot at her…

In India/Burma, not much movement at the moment. I think the IJA is short supply around Lashio as that’s the only reason I can think of for the single Chinese Division to still hold the base. On the Akyab front, the IJA has 2 IN Bdes across the river, but no attacks were made on the British defenders.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 231
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/10/2015 7:28:03 PM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline 		How many days would it take for KB to move close enough to interfere with operations at Efate? 4? I'm wondering if that is enough time cushion so your transports don't get caught.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 232
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/10/2015 10:31:04 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

How many days would it take for KB to move close enough to interfere with operations at Efate? 4? I'm wondering if that is enough time cushion so your transports don't get caught.



Yeah, I figure about 3-4 days for the KB to be in striking range of an Efate invasion from their present location.

It all depends on when he decides to return east. If the invasion is in progress, 3-4 days is fine. If he returns before my Amph TF is up towards Noumea, I'll abort.

The real question is what he's doing with the KB in the Gulf of Carpentaria in the first place?? Whatever it is, it needs to keep the KB occupied for at least another 6 days for me to pull this off.

< Message edited by IdahoNYer -- 4/10/2015 11:32:00 PM >

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 233
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/11/2015 1:33:14 AM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline 		Can you post a pic of Northern Australia? Between this and some other AARs I can't remember who has what. It seems weird to commit the whole KB to what looks like a dead end backwater.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 234
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/11/2015 1:40:25 AM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

Can you post a pic of Northern Australia? Between this and some other AARs I can't remember who has what. It seems weird to commit the whole KB to what looks like a dead end backwater.



Here ya go jwolf...

if you can come up with a good reason why the KB is sitting here, I'd love to hear it....




Attachment (1)

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 235
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/11/2015 1:42:29 AM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline 		Maybe he's going to bomb the ground troops around Daly Waters with KB?

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 236
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/12/2015 3:36:41 AM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		or maybe the airfields at Daly Waters

do you have any "interesting" ship disbanded at Normanton?

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 237
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/12/2015 4:43:56 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

Maybe he's going to bomb the ground troops around Daly Waters with KB?



quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

or maybe the airfields at Daly Waters

do you have any "interesting" ship disbanded at Normanton?



just did the replay - its Normanton. Bde sized landing.

Normanton AF is level 0, and is fairly isolated...so what's the objective?
- another foothold in Australia? Very possibly, but I can bring troops in fairly easily and he can't.
- draw Allied troops from NE OZ defenses in order to land at Cairns/Cooktown? Very possibly...
- deny Normanton as a resupply base for Darwin? Definitely this will happen - had been running a couple of small xAKs out of Normanton.

I only have a small Aus BF and two Aus armored "regiments" training at Normanton - enough to hold against an SNLF raid, but not against a determined Bde attack with the KB providing air support. So it will fall. I'm bringing troops up from the Sydney area which will take a while, but they are avail and it won't compromise my defenses. US 41st Div is at Sydney, and I planned to have it eventually head west toward Tennant Creek - will stay in Sydney a bit longer as a strategic reserve. US 32nd Div just departed Auckland for Sydney and it will head to Cairns to counter any threat to the NE.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 238
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/12/2015 5:16:44 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		I think he just wants to cut off your troops north of Tennant Creek, and doesn't realize how much reserves you have and how quickly you can get them up to threaten Normanton. This may be a mistake in his conquest plans.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 239
RE: 19-20May 42 - 4/12/2015 6:05:22 PM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline 		I would think your lines of supply around Normanton would be better than his. Here's to hoping for a sort of Japanese Stalingrad on a smaller scale.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: 7-8 May 41 - CV Battle off Port Hedland Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
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

0.844