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: Air Transport Operational Losses

 
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 >> RE: Air Transport Operational Losses Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/13/2016 8:14:27 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline 		The base has 0 troops and no LI/HI industry, which can generate the supplies. Also, the base is not adjacent to a land hex.

At start, Ulleungdo had 170 supplies. The stocks jumped to 205 supplies after the air transport mission had delivered the goodies.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 61
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/13/2016 8:48:08 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		I have a theory but it is just that - a theory. Michael fixed the problem of TR landing @ an airfield with more than 50% rwy damage so that they do not suffer op losses (because they 'drop the supplies now' but did not - or was not able to - change the messaging, and maybe also not the impact on mission max range.

But as I pointed out, this is only a theory supported by the little empirical data I see. Only Michael can confirm if this is correct or not.

< Message edited by LoBaron -- 8/13/2016 8:49:41 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 62
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/15/2016 8:00:09 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline 		Since those missions do not show up during AIR TRANSPORT PHASE, can they still be intercepted by enemy fighters over the receiving base?

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 63
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/15/2016 5:58:53 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Since those missions do not show up during AIR TRANSPORT PHASE, can they still be intercepted by enemy fighters over the receiving base?

Combined with Barb's posts in the tech forum about things suddenly not showing up on the air combat screens and reports, it appears that this is a recent bug that suppresses the usual display but everything else take's place as if you could see it - so I am guessing yes, fighter intercepts should still occur.

_____________________________

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 Yaab)
Post #: 64
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/20/2016 5:14:59 AM   
atkaparking

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 3/12/2012
Status: offline 		A while back, a poster related an actual air transfer incident, wherein 36 US fighter planes flew from Noumea or points thereabouts, to Lunga(?) The post articulated the fate of each individual plane; only a handful of pilots and even fewer planes survived. If someone has the link or post, I promise to print it out this time and never complain about loss rates again.

I, for one, would welcome historical loss rates. It rewards planning and makes players really want to evaluate the risk versus the severity of emergency before assigning long-range missions and transfers. Ship transfer of air units takes on new importance, as well as the attendant ASW/sub ops to target these ships.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 65
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/20/2016 5:47:55 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
Do you mean this unlucky event?

(from Jim Sullivan, Corsair in Action (Squadron/Signal, 1977), page 14; a more detailed account is in Barrett Tillman’s Corsair)

“On January 25, 1944, after successfully launching all 24 of its Corsairs from the USS Kalinin Bay the day before, VMF-422 landed at Hawkins Field on Tarawa Atoll. On the morning of January 25, 23 of the 24 planes departed for the 700-mile trip to Funafuti, with a stop-over planned for Nanomea, a distance of 463 miles from Tarawa.

“The squadron lifted off at 0930 in fair weather. The flight was uneventful for a little over two hours until just 15 minutes out of Nanomea, [when] rain squalls covered them up. Dropping down to 200 feet, Maj. MacLaughlin, the C.O., passed the word for the flight to stay on him. Several sharp turns in the soup resulted in everyone being lost. Nevertheless, all but 3 pilots were able to stay together for a while longer.

"Of these three pilots who got separated form the others, one flew on all the way to Funafuti non-stop and landed safely there with 80 gallons of fuel left. One was never heard form again and the third managed to land on Niutao Island, where he was found by friendly natives.

“The remaining 20 pilots and planes continued on coming into the clear over Nui Island, about halfway between Nanomea and Funafuti. Two more dropped out in the water with one surviving. Now there were 18. After hitting another squall, two more were lost, including MacLaughlin. Now there were 16. Shortly, it became 15, as more more went in.

“Running short of fuel, it was decided that they would all ditch together while they could. Before they got into the water, two more strayed off from the others, leaving 13 that ditched together. After two days in the water, a PBY spotted them but was damaged in the water landing, and the whole lot had to be picked up by the USS Hobby.

“The cost in human life was enormous: 6 pilots lost their lives and of the 23 F4Us that left Hawkins field, 22 of them were destroyed.”

(in reply to atkaparking)
Post #: 66
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/20/2016 6:19:13 PM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1673
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: atkaparking
I, for one, would welcome historical loss rates.

I tend to agree w/ you, the game does not model historic training/ops loss rates. But my attitude falls into the "be careful what you wish for" category.

If historical loss rates were introduced to the game, it'd become unplayable. Airframe & pilot losses in groups assigned to Training would be unsustainable - add in historic ops-loss rates to front-line airgroups & the WitP:AE air-war grinds to a halt.

(in reply to atkaparking)
Post #: 67
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/21/2016 5:44:10 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline 		Well, it could be made as an option on the options screen - Realistic Training Losses.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 8/21/2016 6:00:29 AM >

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 68
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/21/2016 5:53:59 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jmalter

quote:

ORIGINAL: atkaparking
I, for one, would welcome historical loss rates.

I tend to agree w/ you, the game does not model historic training/ops loss rates. But my attitude falls into the "be careful what you wish for" category.

If historical loss rates were introduced to the game, it'd become unplayable. Airframe & pilot losses in groups assigned to Training would be unsustainable - add in historic ops-loss rates to front-line airgroups & the WitP:AE air-war grinds to a halt.

Well, on the IJ side it is modeled by the HI cost every month for pilots in training ... it basically costs ~2 aircraft per pilot to get them trained.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 69
RE: Air Transport Operational Losses - 8/22/2016 4:34:40 PM   
Panther Bait


Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline 		Realistic ops losses would force players to put a hold on overly high sortie rates for a lot of their equipment, especially 2- and 4-engine bombers. No more daily bombing raids in China by the entire IJAAF bomber force, and the same thing for the US/UK bombers.

Training ops losses could be somewhat mitigated by adding actual training aircraft, like the AT-6, to the OOB, or by drastically reducing ops losses at huge bases (e.g., level 9 air fields) as a fix to excessive losses in training squadrons.

Mike

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 70
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Air Transport Operational Losses Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
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

3.219