Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

16-17 Oct 42

 
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 >> 16-17 Oct 42 Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
16-17 Oct 42 - 1/8/2016 3:10:20 AM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
16-17 Oct 42

Highlights – Effective sweeps over New Guinea; shipping converges at Portland Roads without incident.

Jpn ships sunk:
SS: 1 (I-123)
xAP: 1 (old)

Allied ships sunk: None

Air loss:
Jpn: 44
Allied: 27

Subwar:
Jpn: 0 Attacks, 0 ships hit
SS I-123 sunk by DDs off Portland Roads
Allies: 3 Attack, 0 ships hit

Jpn Amph Inv: None

Allied Amph Inv: None

Bases lost: None

Bases Liberated: None

SIGINT/Intel: NSTR

West Coast/Admin. NSTR

In NOPAC, its time to start pulling out the Carrier Air (Wasp and Hornet) from Adak, and start transiting them back to the carriers at Seattle – two squadrons shuttle to Kodiak, two to Anchorage.

In SOPAC, NSTR

In SWPAC, F4Fs again sweep Moresby and are met by A6M2 Zeros – In the two days, Wildcats lose 5 in exchange for 12 Zeros. Over Wau,18xP-38Fs and the debut of the P-38G (7 planes), meet a robust CAP of 34 A6M3 Zeros. In two days, 8 P-38Fs are lost in exchange for 16 Zeros. I’ll take those exchanges! Unfortunately, my B-17s didn’t fly to hit Wau, but that’s probably OK considering the number of fighters on CAP. Overall, the New Guinea strikes over the last week have done well at reducing enemy fighter capability – Allied fighter strength remains solid (250+ deployed from Cairns to Portland Roads) and ready to support the Horn Island Operation. The TFs will head from vicinity of Portland Roads and begin landings next turn (fingers crossed). Air power will transition to providing LRCAP over Horn and hitting ground targets, except for the P-38Gs and one B-17 Bomber Group which will keep Moresby occupied. The Horn Island operation is a complex landing – a Bde of the 40th ID plus support AR and ENG support in two Amph TFs (CL, 3DD, DM, DMS, 3AM, 3APD, AP, 3xAP, 2AK/CLAA, 2DD, KV, 2SC, 3AM, 3xAP, 2AK), Bmb/Surf TF (2CL, 4DD) plus ASW, Minesweeping and PT TFs. I figure the biggest threat is LBA from New Guinea bases (hence the focus on the sweeps), although the KB could lend some air from north of New Guinea. Most worrisome threat is a BB TF from Darwin or Koepang where my LBA would have limited range to interdict. Will be an interesting few turns coming up!

In WAUS, BC TF (BB, BC, 4 DDs) returns from Port Hedland to Carnarvon without incident and rearms with AKE support. Convoy with USMC Def Bn begins offloading at Exmouth, CA TF providing cover. B-17s hit Port Hedland AF, without loss and keep it shut down. Much quieter than I anticipated…

In China, two major land battles. That same Chinese Corps forced another IJA Bde back from positions north of Chungking with heavy loss – but the ring around Kienko continues to tighten.

In India/Burma, B-24s hit Myitkyina with good effect, shutting down the AF over two days and no planes lost. No CAP encountered. Will shift to a tougher nut to crack next turn – Mandalay, preceded by sweeps. On the ground, IJA forces attack the 87th Mtn Reg again near Kohima – and are held again, but casualties mount.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 481
RE: 16-17 Oct 42 - 1/8/2016 1:53:38 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
"Over Wau,18xP-38Fs and the debut of the P-38G (7 planes), meet a robust CAP of 34 A6M3 Zeros. In two days, 8 P-38Fs are lost in exchange for 16 Zeros. I’ll take those exchanges"

I don't know if I would take those exchanges... By now he should be building 120 Zeros per month if not more, while your P-38s are scarce

Are you trying to close Wau/ Moresby for Horns invasion?

< Message edited by Jorge_Stanbury -- 1/8/2016 2:54:40 PM >

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 482
RE: 16-17 Oct 42 - 1/10/2016 12:45:10 AM   
IdahoNYer


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

"Over Wau,18xP-38Fs and the debut of the P-38G (7 planes), meet a robust CAP of 34 A6M3 Zeros. In two days, 8 P-38Fs are lost in exchange for 16 Zeros. I’ll take those exchanges"

I don't know if I would take those exchanges... By now he should be building 120 Zeros per month if not more, while your P-38s are scarce

Are you trying to close Wau/ Moresby for Horns invasion?


I was also referring to the Wildcat sweep - add that in you have 13 friendly to 39 enemy - I'll take a 3-1 loss ratio in '42, wouldn't you? I know I'm short planes - I can't do anything about that, nor the production capability of the Japanese right now.

Best I can do is cause losses at a reasonable ratio.

And yes, I'm trying to inflict enemy fighter losses over New Guinea prior to Horn Island landings - weaken his escort ability for the forthcoming Ms. Betty strikes.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 483
18-19 Oct 42 - 1/11/2016 11:36:29 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
18-19 Oct 42

Highlights – Horn Island liberated; Heavy air losses for both sides over Horn and Mandalay.

Jpn ships sunk:
SS: 1 (I-24)
AMc: 1 (old)

Jpn ships unsunk:
SS: 1 (RO-64)

Allied ships sunk:
KV: 1
AMc: 1

Air loss:
Jpn: 95
Allied: 77

Subwar:
Jpn: 4 Attacks, 1 ship hit (AMc sunk)
SS I-24 sunk by DEs north of Portland Roads
Allies: 2 Attack, 0 ships hit

Jpn Amph Inv:
Terempa (DEI)

Allied Amph Inv:
Horn Is (SWPAC)

Bases lost:
Terempa (DEI)
Trinkat (Burma)

Bases Liberated:
Horn Island

SIGINT/Intel: Gds Mixed Bde is reported in the New Guinea jungle, midway between Lae and Terapo – likely moving to defend Terapo on the southern coast – which is fine, since I’m not landing there.

West Coast/Admin. I’m starting to preposition ships for the 11/42 upgrades – primarily some 15 US DDs, including the newly arrived Fletcher class, but also the North Carolina Class BBs. Won’t be a major impact to operations, but want to make sure those that need upgrades are in place to do so. Its going to take much of November just to re-gather the currently refitting CVs together (2 in Capetown, one in Seattle, Bremerton, Sydney and Auckland.

In NOPAC, it remains pretty quiet. US LBA begins hitting ground targets on Attu, and I’ll demonstrate with a transport TF in the Bering Sea to see if it draws any attention.

In SOPAC, USMC paras complete redeployment to Funafuti via PBY, and a CD Bn is enroute via transport TF, escorted by a CL TF (CLAA, 3DDs). Once established, will start bringing in the engineers and build up the base.

In SWPAC, the big news is Horn Island is secured in the first attack! The invasion goes about as well as could be hoped. Starts off with SS RO-68 sinking an AMc of the minesweeping force just off Portland Roads, but DEs on one ASW TFs damage the sub enough where it doesn’t execute any further attacks. Another sub, SS I-24 misses DE Hatfield, and the DEs Lawrence and Peary bring her to the surface and sink her. CL TF (2CL, 4DDs) bombard without much success, but the two Amph TFs land the troops without serious problems. With the AM turn, Allied bombers pound the defenders, the Maizuru SNLF, with good effect, but, as expected, L_S_T throws in large numbers of Bettys at the invasion. Fortune is with the Allies for a change, and the 70+ Bettys come in without escort – the LRCAP out of Portland Roads does well (despite me messing up the altitude settings), shooting down 41 of the attackers over the two days, and the Bettys only sink a KV, and heavily damage the CLAA San Diego and an xAP. Zeros sweep on the second day, and do well as the F4Fs and P-40Ks were pretty tired. All told, 45 Bettys, and a single Zero are lost in exchange for 7 F4Fs and 5 P-40K. I expected better from AA, but I’ll take it. Troops take the island in the first assault, with the SNLF destroyed. All troops except a couple of motorized support and most (over 4000) supplies were successfully landed by the end of the two days, and the ships will depart for Portland Roads and Cairns. CLAA San Diego (87float) and the xAP (46float) are disbanded at Horn, and fingers are crossed. Surprisingly, the AF (level 1) is fully repaired, and an Aussie Kittyhawk squadron is quickly based there, as I’ll start flying in aviation support troops, as well as more engineers via sea transport. Goal now will be to build up the AF as quickly as possible to support the next operation – Merauke, while keeping the pressure on NG AFs with sweeps and B-17s. Screenshot below shows dispositions at bases at the time of Horn Island’s liberation.



In WAUS, PBYs report the IJN is approaching Exmouth! Better here than against Horn Island! An unknown CV TF lurking behind the usual 1-2 punch; a BB TF leading a CA TF, heading towards Exmouth. With CVs in the area, I elect to weigh anchor, and the CA TF providing support to the USMC Def Bn landing, along with the TR TF, will depart back to Carnarvon. The USMC Def Bn is “mostly” offloaded, and once the threat has gone, will bring the ships back to finish the process. Was tempted to send the BC TF (BC, BB, 4DDs) to Exmouth from Carnavon and intercept the potential incoming BBs, but decided to play it safer – if L_S_T decides to hit Carnavon instead, the BC TF will be waiting – along with over 100 fighters avail for CAP, should the CVs come in range. The Illustrious and Warspite TFs, still out to sea, will clear the area further in case the IJN makes a wide sweep to the SW. With the Horn Island landings, my bet he aborts and heads back to base (which I’m assuming is Koepang).

In China, fighting begins at Kienko with the IJA forces attacking across the river with a Shock attack – and suffer 1600 casualties in exchange for 360. Although successful, Kienko is outflanked and doomed – no supply anyway. Trying to extract the troops to the west/northwest.

In India/Burma, the B-24 strike at Mandalay is costly to both sides. Fighters sweep, but meet over 80 fighters (Tojos/Oscar IIa/bs), and there are still enough fighters to give the bombers a hard time. After two days, losses are heavy for both sides. 7 B-24s are either written off or shot down and many damaged. Fighter losses are about even: 16 Oscar IIa, 13 Tojo, and 7 OscarIIb vs. 16 Hurri IIb, 6 P-40K, 8 P-39, and 9 Martlets. On the positive side, few pilots are lost, as many planes are written off on landing, and the AF suffered moderate damage (37). On the negative side, the B-24s will need some rest, and while losing 7 bombers isn’t catastrophic, it’s almost half a month’s replacements – and as expected, Mandalay wasn’t a base for those fighters – L_S_T looks like he’s concentrating at Magwe – which right now, is hard to reach effectively with fighters. Will focus on shorter range targets as we build up the B-24s and await reinforcements. On the ground, the IJA succeed in pushing back the US 87th Mtn Reg across the river towards Kohima will heavy loss – expected, but still painful.



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by IdahoNYer -- 1/12/2016 12:38:28 AM >

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 484
RE: 18-19 Oct 42 - 1/12/2016 1:38:51 PM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline
Great news at Horn Island -- congrats! I'm surprised to read that the Japanese would lock up a Gds unit for so long on a difficult slog through the jungle. My conclusion is that it's much too dangerous for them to try to reinforce by sea, and if so, that's good news and a testament to your careful and thorough development of NE Australia. Speaking of which, the disparity in development of your bases and his on that map is very wide. Frankly the Japanese aren't nearly as built up in NG as I would expect. But maybe all the action in NW Australia has occupied a lot of Japanese resources and attention.

Edit: I see we're almost up to the big shootout at Carnarvon!

< Message edited by jwolf -- 1/12/2016 2:39:53 PM >

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 485
RE: 18-19 Oct 42 - 1/12/2016 3:50:06 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
What are your plans for Horn Island?
would you develop it's airfield?

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 486
RE: 18-19 Oct 42 - 1/12/2016 5:48:14 PM   
FeurerKrieg


Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline
I have to agree that NG is pretty barren. I realize that Japan doesn't want to develop too much on the outskirts since it will be taken or bypassed at some point anyway, but I would expect to see at least three or four size 4 airfields in southeast NG for sure.

_____________________________


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

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 487
RE: 18-19 Oct 42 - 1/13/2016 12:46:32 AM   
IdahoNYer


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

I have to agree that NG is pretty barren. I realize that Japan doesn't want to develop too much on the outskirts since it will be taken or bypassed at some point anyway, but I would expect to see at least three or four size 4 airfields in southeast NG for sure.



I figured L_S_T was just limiting AF construction so well built up bases wouldn't fall into Allied hands. Interesting....


(in reply to FeurerKrieg)
Post #: 488
RE: 18-19 Oct 42 - 1/13/2016 12:49:32 AM   
IdahoNYer


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

What are your plans for Horn Island?
would you develop it's airfield?



Horn opens up the Torrez Straits - which I need freedom of movement through to put pressure on NW OZ. And yes, I will fully develop Horn's AF.

Horn and Portland Roads will be the two primary AFs for raids on NG ports, AFs and shipping - as well as providing LRCAP to landings at Merauke.


(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 489
RE: 18-19 Oct 42 - 1/13/2016 12:50:37 AM   
IdahoNYer


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf


Edit: I see we're almost up to the big shootout at Carnarvon!



Yup - next posting after I finish out the current turn L_S_T just sent!

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 490
20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/13/2016 11:20:10 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
20-21 Oct 42

Highlights: Wow! What a turn!!!! Naval engagements at Carnavon (finally, right )! This will take a few posts...

Jpn ships sunk (losses based on Tracker):
CA: 2 (Suzuya, Maya)
CL: 1 (Yubari)
DD: 2 (Makinami, Teruzuki)
SS: 2 (I-22, RO-60)

Allied ships sunk:
BB: 1 (North Carolina)
CA: 2 (Canberra, Hawkins)
DD: 3 (Cushing, Nepal, Electra)
PT: 2
AM: 3
xAK: 1
xAKL: 5

Air loss:
Jpn: 20
Allied: 61

Subwar:
Jpn: 1 Attack, 0 ships hit
SS RO-60 reported sunk by DDs north of Portland Roads, I-22 sunk by SS S-40 off Horn Is
Allies: 9 Attacks, 3 ships hit (I-22 sunk, CL Yubari sunk, CA Maya Dam)

Jpn Amph Inv:
Djemadja (Malaysia)

Allied Amph Inv: None

Bases lost:
Djemadja (Malaysia)

Bases Liberated: None

SIGINT/Intel: Well, I know where about 75% of the entire Combined Fleet it's off Carnavon or Exmouth!

West Coast/Admin. Slow convoy departs LA for Auck.

In NOPAC, NSTR.

In SOPAC, CD Bn beings offloading at Funafuti, so far without any reaction, but snoopers have sighted the TF.

In SWPAC, it's the calm after to storm, little activity. Allied TFs begin returning to ports and surprisingly aren¡¦t attacked by Ms. Betty. Two subs are reportedly sunk near Horn Island area, and another damaged. Much ship congestion at Portland Roads as I sort out TFs to sustain Horn Island, and bring in additional troops. LBA rests ¡V B-17s are ready, but P-38s are still recovering. Other Allied fighters continue to proved LRCAP over coastal convoys and Horn Island, but no air threats this turn.

In WAUS, it's the naval engagement(s) of the Pacific War so far! While I was expecting Exmouth to get pounded by a BB and CA TF, L_S_T brought what appears to be most of the Combine Fleet with him and raids Carnavon! As best as I can tell from various reports, the IJN fleet was committed in four TFs (one carrier and three surface) to this operation and consisted of the following:
CV: 4 (Akagi, Hiryu, Soryu, Zuikaku)
BB: 7 (Nagato, Ise, Hyuga, Kongo, Hiei, Haruna, Kirishima)
CA: 9 (Takao, Atago, Maya, Myoko, Haguro, Mogami, Mikuma, Suzuya, Kumuno)
CL: 2 (Yubari, Isuzu)
DD: 20+?

Against this force, the Allied Navies have two surface TFs and a plucky ASW TF with:
BB: 1 (North Carolina)
BC: 1 (Repulse)
CA: 3 (Hawkins, Canberra, Australia)
CL: 2 (Achilles, Birmingham)
DD: 12
plus 4 PTs and an assorted collection of local shipping.
And LBA:
Exmouth: 17F, 16DB
Carnavon: 119F, 37DB, 15TBF

The below overview screenshot shows the dispositions going into the action ¡V enemy TFs are the sighted locations, and what the PBYs reported. All Allied TR TFs, with ASW support and the CA TF began at Exmouth but departed to Carnavon prior to action, while the BC TF began at Carnavon. Well off to the west, and not involved in the action were the Brit BB and CV TFs. Numbered stars refer to the order of significant actions, described below


Action opens up at Exmouth, recently evacuated of all Allied shipping (mostly heading to Carnavon of course!) with BB TF (Ise, Hyuga, 6DDs) brushing aside the 4 PTs at Exmouth, although nothing is sunk. Exmouth is bombarded by the BBs, but cause no damage (amazingly!)(1). Simultaneously, BB TF (4Kongos, 5DDs) enter Carnavon, presumably to bombard, but encounter the Allied fleet and various merchies. First engagement is against an AM and xAK which are quickly sunk(2).



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by IdahoNYer -- 1/14/2016 1:56:33 AM >

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 491
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/13/2016 11:22:37 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
Next in line is the CA TF (3CA, 2CL, 6DD) which is pretty inconclusive other than CL Achilles is out of the fight with heavy damage(3). Then what I expected to be a tough fight for both sides, the IJN BB TF runs into the BC TF (BB, BC, 4DDs), but the Allied gunnery is atrocious, with only one 16” shell being observed to hit while the BB North Carolina is pummeled into a floating wreck – with ranges down to 3000yds, the 14” IJN BB shells penetrated quite effectively(4). At least no torpedoes hit! Haruna took the 16” shell, and at least looked a bit damaged. The next round, the IJN BBs find the North Carolina and escorting DD, and sink both without much fanfare. After this fight, only the Kirishima and Kongo bombard –curious why the Haruna and Hiei didn’t bombard…damage? ammo? In any event, the bombardment does nothing, so both Exmouth and Carnavon AFs remain fully operational(5).




Attachment (1)

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 492
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/13/2016 11:24:30 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
Following the bombardment, but before the sun comes up, the BB TF runs into two coastal convoys coming down from Exmouth into Carnavon – and sinks all the ships in both (2AM, 5xAKLs)(7). Fortunately, the larger convoy carrying the remainder of the USMC Def Bn was missed. Lastly that night, Allied subs around Exmouth area find targets – SS KXII hits CL Yubari with two torps in two separate attacks, while the KXVIII misses CV Akagi with 4 torps(6,8).


As the sun comes up, the IJN BB (Kongos) TF is just NW of Carnavon, well in range of LBA, and the IJN CA TF (9CA, CL, 7DD) moves close to Exmouth enroute to Carnavon (I’m assuming this is a waypoint near Exmouth, where PTs are engaged in daylight, the results being two PTs sunk, and two CAs (Mogami,Takao) being light dinged by a collision(9). And just off Carnavon, the Kongo TF finds an ASW TF, and the two DDs acquit themselves rather well – not quite a Leyte Gulf action off Samar, but nice enough!)(10).



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by IdahoNYer -- 1/14/2016 12:26:14 AM >

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 493
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/13/2016 11:30:35 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
At this point, the IJN CA TF enters Carnavon and runs into the Repulse TF (BC, 3DDs) in a daylight action(11). Since Repulse didn’t hardly fire at all during the action which cost me the North Carolina, she’s doesn’t do too badly this time around, landing 15” rounds on Suzuya and one I think on CA Maya as well. Still, numbers weigh against Allies, and the Repulse is a shattered wreck, barely afloat.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 494
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/13/2016 11:33:31 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
Now the Allied LBA begins to get into the fight, Carnavon flyers attacking the CA TF still at Carnavon with three morning raids – SBDs hitting CA Maya with two bombs(12). TBFs find the Kongos off Carnavon, and put fish into both the Hiei and Haruna(13). Exmouth flyers attempt to strike the KB without fighter escort, and lose 8 of 14 Banshees and fail to penetrate the CAP(14). That afternoon, Carnavon SBDs hits CA Kumuno and put 6 bombs into the CA Maya(15,17). TBFs attack the Kongos, but fail to score(16). Other than over the CVs, little if any IJN CAP is present.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 495
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/13/2016 11:36:12 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
Following the afternoon strikes, the naval forces aren’t quite done yet – the two CA TFs engage in a wild melee at Carnavon – The IJN TF is missing the CAs Suzuya and Maya, and the Allied TF is without the CL Achilles(18). After the dust is settled, Haguro is likely crippled, and both Mogami and Takao heavily damaged. The Allies lose CAs Canberra and Hawkins. CL Birmingham is the “lucky ship” – pounding CA Haguro throughout the fight, escapes without any damage. But we’re not quite done, the “Little Ships that Could”, the US ASW TF of DDs, bumps into Suzuya and Maya, and pour 5” rounds into the two CAs off Carnavon(19). Amazing!!




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by IdahoNYer -- 1/14/2016 12:37:21 AM >

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 496
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/13/2016 11:39:03 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
The final act of the day is SS O19 putting a fish into CA Maya off Carnavon(20). At this point, I’ve lost a BB, 2CA and a few DDs sunk with BC Repulse a barely floating wreck. Against this I figured that both CAs Maya and Suzuya were sunk, as well as CL Yubari and 2 Kongos and 2 CAs damaged pretty well. But we’re not quite done – on to the second day! The 21st begins with the IJN CA TF being sighted, but not engaging a crippled xAKL off Carnvon – the xAKL reports the CA TF consists of 3CA, CL, 3DD. So, at this point, I figure that the other 6CA and 4DDs are either sunk or crippled, and trying to head to safer waters. The next sighting is off Exmouth, where S-38 engages a CA TF (2CA, 2DD) and misses CA Atago with 4 torps(21). No night engagements this time, and no AM airstrikes – weather perhaps? Afternoon strikes initially go after withdrawing IJN TFs off Exmouth, which are now covered by CAP, with overall poor results. F4F escorted SBDs go after the CVs, and fail to penetrate the CAP(22). Other raids score a few hits – SBDs hit CA Takao and a DD(24), while TBFs manage only one bomb hit on CA Myoko(23). Jpn CAP does well against the strikes, losses are heavy. The last few strikes focus on the Kongos, still lumbering from Carnavon headed north. SBDs hit BB Haruna with two bombs and TBFs put a torp into BB Kirishima(25).



Thus ends the busiest two day action of the war so far. End of day two still has the Kongos and the CV TF well in range of LBA – perhaps some damaged CAs as well, not really sure what’s been sunk, or what is damaged and how bad.
Here’s my damage assessment:
IJN:
CV: 4 (Akagi, Hiryu, Soryu, Zuikaku): All untouched.
BB: 7 (Nagato, Ise, Hyuga, Kongo, Hiei-heavy dam, Haruna-heavy dam, Kirishima-moderate dam)
CA: 9 (Takao-dam, Atago-dam, Maya-sunk, Myoko-light dam, Haguro-cripple, Mogami-light dam, Mikuma-not dam, Suzuya-sunk, Kumuno-dam)
CL: 2 (Yubari-sunk, Isuzu-not dam)
DD: 20 (2 sunk, 4 cripple/hv dam)
Allies:
BB: 1 (North Carolina-sunk)
BC: 1 (Repulse-cripple, likely will sink)
CA: 3 (Hawkins-sunk, Canberra-sunk, Australia-dam)
CL: 2 (Achilles-hv dam, Birmingham-untouched)
DD: 12 (3 sunk, 2 cripple, 2 hv dam, 2 dam)

So who won? Tonnage wise, the IJN put more Allied tonnage under the waves, so a marginal tactical victory goes the the IJN. That’s as of right now – Repulse or one of the Kongos sink, it can go to a draw or a solid IJN tactical victory. But operationally, or even strategically, I think this is a solid Allied win. L_S_T committed a huge force that achieved little substantial damage to the Allied effort (only the BB North Carolina will be really missed), no damage to the bases, and the IJN is currently limping away to far off home ports. Even if the remaining warships survive, the IJN will be short a significant number of fast BBs and CAs in the coming weeks while they repair damage! And it’s really not over yet – Carnavon and Exmouth are both fully operational, and reinforced Allied LBA will go all out to hit the withdrawing IJN forces – not to mention the 10 or so subs between Carnavon and IJN safe haven. The real question is whether the IJN CVs will loiter and attempt to provide cover for the damaged ships, or clear the area to avoid damage to the flat tops. With some good weather, next turn could be very interesting.

In China, the ring closes around Kienko from the west, south and east. In the further northern reaches, IJA forces push behind Lanchow, the last defendable position in this area – but it should prove to be a tough nut to crack as there are still supplies to be had.

In India/Burma, NSTR.


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by IdahoNYer -- 1/14/2016 1:59:00 AM >

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 497
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 1:31:47 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Thanks for bringing us this blow-by-blow account. Must have been tense watching the carnage!

A lot of players seem to expect that the modern US BBs can have their way in any battle with IJN BBs. My experience has been that the higher level of crew experience on the IJN BBs outweighs the technological advantage of the US BBs until the latter get some action under their belts.

I try to use my fast BBs initially to escort carriers (where they may get experience defending against air attacks) and on bombardments of relatively isolated locations that cannot hit back very hard if the BB does not leave the scene right away.

_____________________________

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 #: 498
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 2:11:28 AM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline
That was a super job of displaying and reporting a fantastic series of engagements and combats! You really went all out, both in game and here -- kudos all around!

On the strategic analysis of the battle, I'm inclined to agree with you. The amount of force brought by the Japanese was tremendous, yet they achieved no real strategic objective and suffered losses more or less comparable to yours.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 499
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 2:36:42 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
Kudos for a great victory! and yes I consider this an Allied victory regardless of any additional IJN loss

The biggest lesson is that the IJN needs to be fought within LBA range; otherwise it will prevail with minimal losses. If you take out the air component, then this would had been a Japanese victory

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 500
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 3:16:58 PM   
IdahoNYer


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

That was a super job of displaying and reporting a fantastic series of engagements and combats! You really went all out, both in game and here -- kudos all around!



thanks jwolf....I know you've been waiting a bit for it

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 501
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 3:23:59 PM   
IdahoNYer


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Thanks for bringing us this blow-by-blow account. Must have been tense watching the carnage!

A lot of players seem to expect that the modern US BBs can have their way in any battle with IJN BBs. My experience has been that the higher level of crew experience on the IJN BBs outweighs the technological advantage of the US BBs until the latter get some action under their belts.

I try to use my fast BBs initially to escort carriers (where they may get experience defending against air attacks) and on bombardments of relatively isolated locations that cannot hit back very hard if the BB does not leave the scene right away.



Agree with you BB....but....what is the alternative if your opponent is bringing in BBs for bombardment? NC and Repulse were expected to counter TWO BBs in a TF - which had been L_S_T's normal bombardment TF - like the Ise and Hyuga pairing. Against 4 Kongos - especially when the ranges were under 10,000yds, I knew this wasn't going to turn out well.

Now that my LBA is growing, that might help deter the BB bombardment runs - and from now on my fast BBs will stick with the CVs.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 502
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 3:31:14 PM   
IdahoNYer


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Kudos for a great victory! and yes I consider this an Allied victory regardless of any additional IJN loss

The biggest lesson is that the IJN needs to be fought within LBA range; otherwise it will prevail with minimal losses. If you take out the air component, then this would had been a Japanese victory


Thanks Jorge. Fully agree with LBA cover. Having the CV air groups also help a lot - US Army LBA isn't great against warships, and USMC air experience is still lacking a bit. Was hoping I could get the IJN into my LBA air umbrella while my CVs were in refit, but expected that during the Horn Island operation, not Carnavon! Never thought that much of the IJN would go that deep without their own air cover.


(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 503
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 3:48:02 PM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

quote:

Never thought that much of the IJN would go that deep without their own air cover.


In fairness, they probably weren't supposed to -- at least, not during the daytime. I am assuming that the Japanese intent was to engage and/or bombard during the night and withdraw toward his CV group before any LBA would launch during the day. But the surface action was so fierce and prolonged that his ships were caught much farther forward.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 504
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 3:50:16 PM   
BBfanboy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Thanks for bringing us this blow-by-blow account. Must have been tense watching the carnage!

A lot of players seem to expect that the modern US BBs can have their way in any battle with IJN BBs. My experience has been that the higher level of crew experience on the IJN BBs outweighs the technological advantage of the US BBs until the latter get some action under their belts.

I try to use my fast BBs initially to escort carriers (where they may get experience defending against air attacks) and on bombardments of relatively isolated locations that cannot hit back very hard if the BB does not leave the scene right away.



Agree with you BB....but....what is the alternative if your opponent is bringing in BBs for bombardment? NC and Repulse were expected to counter TWO BBs in a TF - which had been L_S_T's normal bombardment TF - like the Ise and Hyuga pairing. Against 4 Kongos - especially when the ranges were under 10,000yds, I knew this wasn't going to turn out well.

Now that my LBA is growing, that might help deter the BB bombardment runs - and from now on my fast BBs will stick with the CVs.

Not criticising your assumption of a 2 BB bombardment nor your decision to commit NC and Repulse. I have seen several comments recently in various AARs about how the modern US BBs were going to clean up on the older Japanese ones, and I was just trying to dispel the overconfidence a bit.

It appears that L-S-T brought along his carriers but was counting on a nuclear bombardment by all those SCTFs to close your airfields so he did not have to split his fighters between CAP and Sweep and Escort. You fooled him with your resistance and it cost him a lot. I hope your aircraft and subs can continue to cash in next few turns.

_____________________________

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 #: 505
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 8:39:38 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
What I have learnt after reading some AARs is that BBs are very vulnerable. Other than carrier escort (fast) and naval bombing assets (slow), I don't think I am going to use them a lot. I have seen a packs of cruisers doing more damage.

I certainly believe LST's use of his entire Kongo class ship as a tactical asset was way too much risk, as these are the only battleships fast enough to join the KB.
for at least 3 to 4 months, most likely more, his KB will be either poorly protected or moving slowly

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 506
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 8:47:24 PM   
BBfanboy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

What I have learnt after reading some AARs is that BBs are very vulnerable. Other than carrier escort (fast) and naval bombing assets (slow), I don't think I am going to use them a lot. I have seen a packs of cruisers doing more damage.

I certainly believe LST's use of his entire Kongo class ship as a tactical asset was way too much risk, as these are the only battleships fast enough to join the KB.
for at least 3 to 4 months, most likely more, his KB will be either poorly protected or moving slowly

I was about to say he can use his potent CAs as CV escorts too, but he had quite a few of them messed up too!

_____________________________

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 #: 507
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/14/2016 9:11:18 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
Yes, plus the fact that less bombers will go after cruisers than after battleship. A key function of escort battleships is to absorb hits that otherwise would hit carriers.

Moving into Allied escorts; other than battleships and CLAAs, I have noticed that USS Wichita (CA-45) can be an awesome escort, carrying eight Mark 12 5"/38 caliber guns (although I don't know if there is adifference between ERB enclosed turrets and OP(S) open pedestals) and 16 bofors



< Message edited by Jorge_Stanbury -- 1/14/2016 11:51:32 PM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 508
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/17/2016 1:58:42 AM   
IdahoNYer


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

What I have learnt after reading some AARs is that BBs are very vulnerable. Other than carrier escort (fast) and naval bombing assets (slow), I don't think I am going to use them a lot. I have seen a packs of cruisers doing more damage.



That was my belief going into this game as well. L_S_T has given me doubts - his use of BBs in the bombardment role has been a greater threat than the KB at times! I've found little to stop the BBs - a CA TF gets mauled, and the best a/c weapon the US has early on is the SBD - which doesn't do much against BBs.

What I've also learned (the hard way) is that BBs can be effectively used by the IJN in this manner, but not so much by the US. US experience just isn't up to task. Had to do it all over again, I'd leave the old US BBs safe in port, or perhaps troop convoy escort (I lost too many in the Aleutians). My fast BBs will provide AA for CV TFs for the foreseeable future.

The best counter I have right now to the IJN BBs (other than increasing aerial torpedo platforms) is hopefully L_S_T will be a bit more conservative now after Carnavon.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 509
RE: 20-21 Oct 42 - Carnavon Carnage! - 1/17/2016 4:29:50 AM   
poodlebrain

 

Posts: 392
Joined: 10/4/2012
From: Comfy Chair in Baton Rouge
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer


US experience just isn't up to task. Had to do it all over again, I'd leave the old US BBs safe in port, or perhaps troop convoy escort (I lost too many in the Aleutians).

Experience can be gained. You can send your BBs on shakedown cruises to build experience, then assign them some bombardment missions under LBA before committing them to real battles. You have more than a year to do so, and fuel consumption shouldn't be too much of a concern if you base them on the West Coast and North Pacific until you are ready to conduct offensive operations in the Central and/or South Pacific. This will also give you opportunity to upgrade the AA capabilities of the BBs so that they can better defend themselves from air strikes.

_____________________________

Never trust a man who's ass is wider than his shoulders.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 510
Page:   <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> 16-17 Oct 42 Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   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

1.109