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: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J)

 
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: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) Page: <<   < prev  47 48 [49] 50 51   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/19/2017 10:49:47 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptHaggard

Gentlemen,

The first flotilla of 8 submarines set off from Midway this morning, their thin line on the far horizon soon casting a somber vision, despite whoops of jubilation when lines were singled-up... in the next five days, similar flotillas of vessels will depart Midway and Wake, Rabaul and Shortlands, 14 flotillas in all, numbering over 100 submarines...

Over the last months, reconnaissance submarines have plied gaps between Japanese-held islands, veritable fissures in their dreams of world conquest, trying to find routes into the Philippine Sea that elude detection; others have tested the grey areas at the limits of enemy search-radii to the west and south; all this in an effort to reach deployment areas without raising enemy alarm.

It is hoped these vessels will soon gather in strange interludes for a day or two, poised to spread in all directions from their silent deployments, to blossom into a veritable shield encrusting the Marianas as the invasion armada enters into the waters east of Rota: 108 6-hex triangular patrol zones, in some approaches 6 patrol zones deep.

The brave submariners, first into enemy waters, fully know that Admiral Bravo is set sail with an extraordinary force, no doubt occasionally unwieldy by its colossal proportions, inexperienced, uncertain, course set for a target so distant that anything contemplated in Europe is dwarfed in comparison... this wild-eyed operation, so long planned, is now exhilarating and heroic.

We don't know what we'll find at journey's end—but soon, at least—the first casualty will be speculation.

Good luck, Rio!

—R.R. Haggard, Commander, USN



Commander Haggard-

Good hunting!

Your pal,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to CaptHaggard)
Post #: 1441
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/19/2017 11:52:46 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
June 5, 1943



Opening Comment


Operation Sea Shark Invasion Fleet is traveling at 12 knots and is 2,840 miles away from its destination one hex due east of Rota (Marianas Islands).


Synopsis of Combat Events for Today


1.) El Lobo bombs Chengtu, near Kienko (hex 79, 39), Chungking, and near Rabaul (hex 106, 125).

2.) El Lobo deliberately attacks near Kienko (hex 79, 39) and near Kienkko (hex 79, 41).


Japanese Bomb Chengtu


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)

Allied Losses

1 hit (Airbase)
10 hits (Runway)


Japanese Bomb Near Kienko (hex 79, 39)


No Japanese losses.

Allied Losses

16 casualties
4 squads disabled


Japanese Bomb Chungking


Japanese Losses

2 damaged (Ki-49-IIa Helen)

Allied Losses

202 casualties
1 squad destroyed
43 squads disabled


Japanese Bomb Near Rabaul (hex 106, 125)


Japanese Losses

1 destroyed (G4M1 Betty)

No Allied losses.


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko (hex 79, 39


Ground combat at 79,39 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1024 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 53

Defending force 1730 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2

Japanese adjusted assault: 25

Allied adjusted defense: 31

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-)

Assaulting units:
101st NCPC Route Brigade

Defending units:
Red Chinese Army
15th Chinese Base Force


Japanese Attack Near Kienko (hex 79, 41)


Ground combat at 79,41 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1024 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 53

Defending force 1000 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 55

Allied adjusted defense: 22

Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+)

Assaulting units:
5th NCPC Infantry Brigade

Defending units:
52nd Chinese Corps


Best Regards,

-Terry







_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1442
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/20/2017 12:13:16 PM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
June 6, 1943



Opening Comments


The Operation Sea Shark Invasion Fleet slowed down today to let a few straggling Amphibious Task Forces catch up. The Invasion Fleet only traveled 40 miles today and is 2,800 miles from its destination one hex due east of Rota near the Marianas Islands.


Synopsis of Combat Events for Today


1.) El Lobo's submarine sets an Allied xAK on fire near Rossel Island (hex 107,134).

2.) El Lobo bombs Chengtu, near Kienko (hex 79,39), and Chungking.

3.) El Lobo deliberately attacks near Kienko (hex 79,41).


Japanese Submarine 1; Allied xAK 0; Near Rossel Island (hex 107,134)


No Japanese losses.

Allied Losses

S I-175 puts a torpedo into xAK Peter Silvestor; setting it on fire.


Japanese Bomb Chengtu


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)

Allied Losses

8 hits (Runway)


Japanese Bomb Near Kienko (hex 79,39)


No Japanese losses.

Allied Losses

58 casualties
9 squads disabled


Japanese Bomb Chungking


No Japanese losses.

Allied Losses

242 casualties
33 squads disabled
2 hits (Airbase)
29 hits (Runway)


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko (hex 79,41)


Ground combat at 79,41 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1024 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 53

Defending force 985 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 27

Allied adjusted defense: 19

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-)

Allied ground losses:
16 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
5th NCPC Infantry Brigade

Defending units:
52nd Chinese Corps


Best Regards,

-Terry




_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1443
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/20/2017 12:55:13 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		I am really looking forward to Sea Shark! Good luck!

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1444
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/21/2017 11:09:09 PM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
June 7, 1943



Opening Comments


With the exception of the 16th Canadian Brigade Task Force, all Invasion Task Forces have joined the Operation Sea Shark Invasion Fleet. The 16th Canadian Brigade Task Force will join the Invasion Fleet tomorrow, June 8, 1943. The Invasion Fleet is 2,600 miles from their destination one hex due East of Rota near the Marianas Islands.


Synopsis of Combat Events for Today


1.) Captain Haggard's ASW ships hammered one Japanese Submarine off the coast of Johnston Island (hex 160,111) and dented two Japanese Submarines; one off the coast of Chugindak (hex 168,54) and one off the coast of Munda (hex 109,134).
2.) El Lobo bombs Chengtu, Near Kienko (hex 79,39), and Chungking.
3.) El Lobo deliberately attacks near Kienko (hex 79,39).


Captain Haggard's ASW Attacks


Japanese Losses

1.) AM Herald hits SS I-128 14 times causing heavy damage near Johnston Island (hex 160,111).
2.) SC-519 hits SS I-2 once near Chugindak (hex 168,54).
3.) DD With de With hits SS I-175 once near Munda (hex 109,134).

No Allied losses.


Japanese Bomb Chengtu


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)

Allied Losses

1 hit (Airbase)
17 hits (Runway)


Japanese Bomb Near Kienko (hex 79,39)


No Japanese losses.

Allied Losses

30 casualties
1 squad destroyed
5 squads disabled


Japanese Bomb Chungking


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)
3 damaged (Ki-49-IIa Helen)

Allied Losses

414 casualties
2 squads destroyed
67 squads disabled


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko (hex 79,39)


Ground combat at 79,39 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1024 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 53

Defending force 1630 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2

Japanese adjusted assault: 27

Allied adjusted defense: 31

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-)

Assaulting units:
101st NCPC Route Brigade

Defending units:
Red Chinese Army
15th Chinese Base Force


Best Regards,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1445
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/21/2017 11:23:52 PM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I am really looking forward to Sea Shark! Good luck!



Lowpe-

I am pleased that you are following The War College and that you are looking forward to the Allies invading the four southern Marianas Islands mid June, 1943.

I am curious as to what El Lobo has on the Marianas Islands and I am curious as to whether he will send his Carriers to fight at the Marianas Islands.

If he sends his Carriers to fight, rather than sinking Japanese Carriers, I hope to kill as many Japanese pilots as possible.

Best Regards,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1446
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/22/2017 12:23:03 AM   
Wolfhunter107

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 4/21/2017
Status: offline 		Looking forward to Sea Shark here too. Pretty nice to see the Canadians and New Zealanders get to see some action.

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1447
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/22/2017 1:59:58 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
June 8, 1943



Opening Comments


The Operation Sea Shark Invasion Fleet is 2,360 miles from its destination one hex due east of Rota near the Marianas Islands. The Invasion Fleet is moving as one group and slowly at 12 knots.


Synopsis of Combat Events for Today


1.) El Lobo bombs Chengtu and Chungking.
2.) El Lobo deliberately attacks near Kienko (hex 79,41) and near Kunming (hex 71,48).
3.) The Allies deliberately attack near Taung Gyi (hex 60,48) and Ramree Island.


Japanese Bomb Chengtu


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)

Allied Losses

2 hits (Airbase)
23 hits (Runway)


Japanese Bomb Chungking


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)
3 damaged (Ki-49-IIa Helen)


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko


Ground combat at 79,41 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1024 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 53

Defending force 970 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 25

Allied adjusted defense: 22

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(-)

Allied ground losses:
7 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
5th NCPC Infantry Brigade

Defending units:
52nd Chinese Corps


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kunming


Ground combat at 71,48 (near Kunming)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 30840 troops, 283 guns, 349 vehicles, Assault Value = 1042

Defending force 1162 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 27

Japanese adjusted assault: 867

Allied adjusted defense: 1

Japanese assault odds: 867 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), op mode(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
50 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
1673 casualties reported
Squads: 38 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 49 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Units destroyed 2

Assaulting units:
61st Infantry Brigade
58th Infantry Regiment
60th Division
12th Tank Regiment
9th Tank Regiment
102nd Infantry Regiment
71st Infantry Brigade
11th RGC Temp. Division
6th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
4th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
6th RF Gun Battalion

Defending units:
30th Chinese Corps
84th Chinese Corps


Allies Deliberately Attack Near Taung Gyi


Ground combat at 60,48 (near Taung Gyi)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 31814 troops, 563 guns, 721 vehicles, Assault Value = 1154

Defending force 600 troops, 50 guns, 40 vehicles, Assault Value = 2

Allied adjusted assault: 653

Japanese adjusted defense: 10

Allied assault odds: 65 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), fatigue(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
Guns lost 23 (16 destroyed, 7 disabled)
Vehicles lost 23 (10 destroyed, 13 disabled)
Units retreated 2

Allied ground losses:
35 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 11 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
268th Motorised Brigade
40th Infantry Division
3rd Motor Brigade
25th Infantry/A Division
1st Motor Brigade
BFF Brigade
25th Infantry/B Division
76th Coast AA Regiment
14th Army
15th RAAF Base Force
13th Australian Hvy AA Regiment

Defending units:
1st Medium Field Artillery Regiment
8th Medium Field Artillery Regiment


The Allies Attack Ramree Island


Ground combat at Ramree Island (54,48)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 13923 troops, 368 guns, 322 vehicles, Assault Value = 446

Defending force 8139 troops, 102 guns, 119 vehicles, Assault Value = 99

Allied adjusted assault: 176

Japanese adjusted defense: 201

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1015 casualties reported
Squads: 67 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 11 (8 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
183 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 18 disabled

Assaulting units:
I Aus Corps Engineer Battalion
2nd British Division
173 Wing
18th USN Naval Construction Battalion
23rd Indian Engineer Battalion
54th Coastal Artillery Regiment
Rabaul Det. Base Force
24th Indian Engineer Battalion
2nd Indian Coastal Artillery Regiment
175 Wing
1st NW Frontier Base Force
101st RAF Base Force
12th Indian Engineer Battalion
1st Burma Auxiliary AA Regiment
107th RAF Base Force
112th RN Base Force
823rd Engineer Aviation Battalion

Defending units:
55th Infantry Regiment
143rd Infantry Regiment
2nd Army
3rd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
5th Field Artillery Regiment
17th JAAF Base Force


Best Regards,

-Terry





_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Wolfhunter107)
Post #: 1448
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/22/2017 2:06:33 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wolfhunter107

Looking forward to Sea Shark here too. Pretty nice to see the Canadians and New Zealanders get to see some action.


Wolfhunter-

I am pleased that you are following The War College.

Considering the present date of the War and considering that I haven't a clue what El Lobo has on the Marianas Islands, I scraped and scrounged and bought out as many available ground force units as possible.

The Canadians are responsible for capturing Rota. The New Zealanders are responsible for capturing Tinian.

In two to three days, I will set forth the entire Order of Battle for Operation Sea Shark. At that time, you will no doubt be pleased to see how many Canadian and New Zealand Infantry Brigades and supporting troops are involved with Operation Sea Shark.

Best Regards,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Wolfhunter107)
Post #: 1449
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/22/2017 12:49:47 PM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
Operation Sea Shark
Invasion of the Four Southern Marianas Islands
Order of Battle
As of June 8, 1943



Opening Comments


Since the inception of the war, the Allies have planned to invade Saipan, Tinian, Rota, and Guam (the four southern Marianas Islands) during the month of June, 1943. Operation Sea Shark is an integral part of the Allied Grand Strategy to implement a Naval Blockade of Japan Proper and to transport ground forces, aircraft, and supply to China in support of Operation Land Shark (the land war to conquer Burma, China, Manchukua, and Korea).


Consolidated Data


Excluding the Submarines, Minesweepers, and PT boats under the Command of Captain Haggard, the Invasion Fleet is comprised of the following:

• 3,120 Miles from Pearl to Objectives
• 427 Wildcat Fighters
• 271 Hellcat Fighters
• 134 Dauntless Dive Bombers
• 46 Task Forces
• 971 Ships
• 20 Carriers
• 23 Battleships
• 25 CAs
• 26 CLs
• 7 CLAAs
• 95 Destroyers
• 22 AOs
• 262,310 Fuel Replenishment
• 1,943 Saipan Assault Value
• 788 Tinian Assault Value
• 703 Rota Assault Value
• 3,131 Guam Assault Value
• 337,339 Saipan Supply
• 331,106 Tinian Supply
• 330,480 Rota Supply
• 622,657 Guam Supply
• 1,621,582 Total Supply
• 14,000,000 Rolls of Toilet Paper


Task Forces


I have no doubt, that many of The War College members could have done a much better job creating the Invasion Fleet Task Forces. It has been a time consuming and daunting task configuring the following Task Forces:


Carrier Task Forces (4)

72 ships

TF 473 Carrier Group One (18 ships): CV Enterprise, CV Yorktown, CVE Altamaha, CVE Barnes, CVE Chenango, CA Wichita, CA Astoria, CL Cleveland, CL St. Louis, CLAA Atlanta, CLAA Oakland, DD Fletcher, DD Abbot, DD Aulick, DD Bache, DD Beale, DD Chevalier, and DE Austin.

TF 528 Carrier Group Two (18 ships): CV Lexington, CV Saratoga, CVE Nassau, CVE Copalee, CVE Long Island, CA Indianapolis, CA New Orleans, CL Denver, CL Helena, CLAA Juneau, CLAA Reno, DD Conway, DD Cony, DD DeHaven, DD Eaton, DD Jenkins, DD La Vallette, and DE Edward C. Daly.

TF 533 Carrier Group Three (18 ships): CV Hornet, CV Wasp, CVE Sangamon, CVE Suwanee, CVL Hermes, CA Portland, CA Minneapolis, CL Columbia, CL Honolulu, CLAA San Diego, CLAA Prince Rupert, DD Nichols, DD O’Bannon, DD Phillip, DD Radford, DD Renshaw, DD Saufley, and DE Juamma.

TF 534 Carrier Group Four (18 ships): CV Essex, CV Victorious, CVE Prince William, CVE Anzio, CVE Santee, CA Quincy, CA San Francisco, CL Santa Fe, CL Nashville, CL Phoenix, CLAA San Juan, DD Converse, DD Ammen, DD Stanly, DD Strong, DD Taylor, DD Waller, and DE Sutlej.


Bombardment Task Forces (4)

60 ships

TF 521 Saipan Bombardment Group (15 ships): BB Maryland, BB Colorado, BB West Virginia, BB Arizona, BB Pennsylvania, CA Chester, CA Chicago, CA Houston, CA Louisville, CL Achilles, CL Concord, CL Detroit, CL Raleigh, DD Porter, and DD Phelps.

TF 532 Tinian Bombardment Group (15 Ships): BB Idaho, BB Mississippi, BB New Mexico, BB California, BB Tennessee, CA Australia, CA Canberra, CA Doretshire, CA Cornwall, CL Danae, CL Marblehead, CL Richmond, CL Trenton, DD Clark, and DD Ellet.

TF 535 Rota Bombardment Group (15 ships): BB Pronce of Wales, BB Revenge, BB Royal Sovereign, BB Ramillies, BB Resolution,CA Exeter, CA Shropshire, CA Sussex, CA Frobisher, CL Adelaide, CL Cape Town, CL Caredoc, CL Ceres, DD Benham, and DD Lang.

TF 536 Guam Bombardment Group (15 ships): BB North Carolina, BB Washington, BB Massachusetts, BB Indiana, BB South Dakota, CA Vincennes, CA Northampton, CA Pensacola, CA Salt Lake City, CL Montpleir, CL Leander, CL Hobart, CL Perth, DD Balch, and DD Selfridge.


Surface Combat Task Forces (3)

35 ships

TF 537 Surface Combat Group One (13 Ships): BC Repulse, CL Durban, CA Hawkins, DD Anthony, DD Bennett, DD Hutchins, DD Pringle, DD Fanning, DD Mahan, DD Cummings, DD Drayton, DD Case, and DD Conyngham.

TF 662 Surface Combat Group Two (11 Ships): BB California, DD Helm, DD Mugford, DD Ralph Talbot, DD Henley, DD Patterson, DD Jarvis, DD Craven, DD Gridley, DD McCall, and DD Maury.

TF 670 Surface Combat Group Three (11 Ships): BB Tennessee, DD Walke, DD Lamson, DD Cushing, DD Smith, DD Preston, DD Reid, DD Flusser, DD Tucker, DD Cassin, and DD Downes.


Fuel Replenishment Task Force (1)

21 ships

TF 540 Fuel Replenishment Group (21 Ships): DD Stack, DD Sterrett, AO Bazos, AO Cuyama, AO Kanawka, AO Neches, AO Spbine, AO Karaskia, AO Cimarron, AO Platte, AO Guadalupe, AO Kankakee, AO Tappahanock, AO Monoghele, AO Tallulah, AO Cache, AO Suamioo, AO Milliooma, AO Saranac, AO Sahvylkill, AO Bishopdale and 232,850 fuel.

One Destroyer, 3 AOs, and 29,460 fuel are undocked at Wake Island.


Saipan Amphibious Task Forces (7)

175 ships

TF 40 Saipan Amphib One (25 Ships): 6 US Army HQ, 7 Infantry Division, 181 USAAF BF, 48 USN SeaBees, 804 EAB, 4 FA Bn., 55 Coastal Artillery Bn., 203 Coastal AA Rgt., and 30,811 supply.

TF 209 Saipan Amphib Two (25 Ships): XI US Corps HQ, 43 Infantry Division, 353 Construction Rgt., 144 USA BF, 182 USAAF BF, 98 FA Bn., 250 Coastal Artillery Bn., 210 Coastal AA Rgt., and 30,582 supply.

TF 618 Saipan Amphib Three (25 Ships): US AirCenPac HQ, 129 Infantry Rgt., 145 Infantry Rgt., 1393 Construction Rgt., 150 USA BF, 224 USN BF, 822/824 EAB, 225 FA Bn., and 41,132 supply.

TF 619 Saipan Amphib Four (25 Ships): 53 (Sep) Infantry Rgt., 102 (Sep) Infantry Rgt., 766 Tank Bn., D Det. Port Service, 151 USA BF, 39 USN SeaBees, 154 FA Bn., 259 Coastal Artillery Bn., and 60,950 supply.

TF 621 Saipan Amphib Five (25 Ships): 138 (Sep) Infantry Rgt., 158 (Sep) Infantry Rgt., 767 Tank Bn., 4 USN Naval Construction Rgt., 152 USA BF, 40 USN SeaBees, 165 FA Bn., 30 Caostal AA Rgt., and 54,278 supply.

TF 622 Saipan Amphib Six (25 Ships): 201 (Sep) Infantry Rgt., 503 Parachute Bn., 131 Combat Engineer Rgt., 109 Anti-Tank Bn., 5 USN Naval Construction Rgt., 108 USN BF, 41 USN SeaBees, 209 FA Bn., 77 Coastal AA Rgt., and 59,158 supply.

TF 677 Saipan Amphib Supply Group (25 Ships): 60,428 Supply.


Tinian Amphibious Task Forces (8)

173 ships

TF 625 Tinian Amphib One (23 Ships): 8 NZ Bde., 11 USN SeaBees, 3 RNZAF BF, and 26,429 supply.

TF 628 Tinian Amphib Two (23 Ships): 11 NZ Bde., 16 USN SeaBees, N Force Detachemnt, 501 Coastal AA Rgt., and 41,523 supply.

TF 629 Tinian Amphib Three (22 Sips): 14 NZ Bde., 42 USN SeaBees, 7 USN Naval Construction, Rgt., A Det. Port Service, and 31,789 supply.

TF 630 Tinian Amphib Four (23 Ships): 13 USAAF HQ, Fiji Bde., 6 USN Naval Construction Rgt., 35 Aviation BF, and 42,819 supply.

TF 631 Tinian Amphib Five (22 Ships) 1 Fiji Commando Bn., 226 USN BF, 2 RNZAF BF, and 51,436 supply.

TF 632 Tinian Amphib Six (22 Ships): 110 Combat Engineer, 15 NZ AA Bde., 142 USA BF, 842 EAB, 33 Medium Rgt., and 31,800 supply.

TF 633 Tinian Amphib Seven (22): 3 NZ Division HQ, 227 USN BF, 857 EAB, 3 NZ Armor, 507 Coastal AA Rgt., and 45,030 supply.

TF 653 Tinian Amphib Supply Group (16 Ships): 68,280 supply.


Rota Amphibious Task Forces (8)

171 ships

TF 634 Rota Amphib One (25 Ships): XiV US Corps HQ, 14 Canadian Bde., and 39,885 supply.

TF 635 Rota Amphib Two (25 Ships): 18 Canadian Bde., 871 EAB, and 42,282 supply.

TF 636 Rota Amphib Three (25 Ships): 24 (Sep) Infantry Rgt., 36 USN SeaBees, 57 Coastal AA Rgt., and 41,804 supply.

TF 637 Rota Amphib Four (25 Ships): 112 Cavalry Rgt., 8 USN Naval Construction Rgt., 37 USN SeaBees, 863 EAB, and 40,317 supply.

TF 638 Rota Amphib Five (25 Ships): Rocky Mountain Ranger Bn., 179 USAAF Bn., B Detachment Port Service, 40 Aviation Bn., and 46,204 supply.

TF 639 Rota Amphib Six (24 Ships): 109 USN BF, 9 USN Naval Construction Rgt., and 45,457 supply.

TF 226 Rota Amphib Seven: (5 Ships): 16 Canadian Bde., and 2,931 supply.

TF 226 Rota Amphib Supply Group (17 Ships): 71,600 supply.

28 Canadian AA Rgt., 511 Coastal AA Rgt., and 611 Coastal AA Rgt. are loading at Pearl Harbor and will not be able to catch up with the Invasion Fleet prior to the Invasion Fleet Amphibious Task Forces hitting the beaches. Depending on the situation, these ground forces may land a few days late or simply go to Wake Island to await the capture of Rota.


Guam Amphibious Task Forces (11)

263 ships

TF 641 Guam Amphib One (25 Ships): 1 US Amphibious Corps, 1 Marine Division, 1 USMC Tank Bn., 1 Marine Defense Bn., 1 USMC FA Bn., 1 USMC EAB, 1 USMC Air Wing, 45 USN SeaBees, and 42,764 supply.

TF 642 Guam Amphib Two (25 Ships): USMC AirFMFPac, 2 Marine Division, 2 USMC Tank Bn., 2 Marine Defense Bn., 2 USMC FA Bn., 2 USMC EAB, 2 USMC Air Wing, and 52,729 supply.

TF 643 Guam Amphib Three (25 Ships): I US Corps HQ, 3 Marine Division, 3 USMC Tank Bn., 3 Marine Defense Bn., 146 USA BF, 46 USN SeaBees, and 56,017 supply.

TF 644 Guam Amphib Four (25 Ships): 7 US Fleet HQ, 4 Marine Division, 4 USMC Tank Bn., 4 Marine Defense Bn., 147 USA BF, and 39,099 supply.

TF 645 Guam Amphib Five (25 Ships): 22 Marine Rgt., 18 Combat Engineer Rgt., 1 USMC Corps Tank Bn., 5 Marine Defense Bn., 148 USA BF, 177 Construction Rgt., and 57,724 supply.

TF 646 Guam Amphib Six (25 Ships): 1 USMC Parachute Bn., 1 Marine Raider Bn., 2 Eng. Amphibious Bde., 640 Tank Destroyer Bn., 7 Marine Defense Bn., 149 USA BF, E Detachment Port Service, and 63,134 supply.

TF 647 Guam Amphib Seven (25 Ships): 2 USMC Parachute Bn., 2 Marine Raider Bn., 1 USN Naval Construction Rgt., 177 USAAF BF, 8 Marine Defense Bn., 223 USN BF, 39 Aviation BF, and 35,555 supply.

TF 648 Guam Amphib Eight (25 Ships): 3 USMC Parachute Bn., 3 Marine Raider Bn., 2 USN Naval Construction Rgt., 178 USAAF BF, 222 USN BF, 9 Marine Defense Bn., and 57,275 supply.

TF 649 Guam Amphib Nine (25 Ships): 4 Marine Raider Bn., C Detachment Port Service, 43 USN SeaBees, 10 Marine Defense Bn., 38 Aviation BF, and 97,819 supply.

TF 650 Guam Amphib Ten (13 Ships): Pacific Ocean Areas HQ, 11 Marine Defense Bn., 12 Marine Defense Bn., 14 Marine Defense Bn., 15 Marine Defense Bn., 16 Marine Defense Bn., and 13,981 Supply.

TF 652 Guam Amphib Supply Group (25 Ships): 622,657 supply.


Best Regards,

-Terry














< Message edited by Rio Bravo -- 4/22/2017 12:56:51 PM >

_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1450
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/22/2017 3:33:14 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline 		You better not include construction units and air support baseforces into initial landing TFs. Those kind of supports are not needed in the assault and will only clog the beaches, get their machinery disabled and increase the loss count if things go wrong.
Also make sure to put some combat ships into amphib TFs as shell magnets and suppression especially in Saipan case because of naval fortress CD unit. For suppression puproses combat ships work much better in amphib compared to separate bombardment TFs. Bombardment on the other hand can go in and out.

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1451
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/22/2017 4:20:31 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		What does sigint tell you about expected enemy forces?

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 1452
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/22/2017 4:25:48 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		I also suggest that you eventually put the CVEs into about 2-3 separate TFs, each with < 150 aircraft and a few DDs and DEs; they can sit right in the coastal hex under assault and operate at full capacity. You want to keep your fast carriers with 30 knt cruiser and DD escorts one hex out to sea where they will still put a lot of cap over the adjacent island, and also will possibly divert the attention of the IJN away from your transports, or at least attract the airstrikes so your Hellcat jocks can go to work. This separation will make best use of the aircraft under the 1943 co-ordination limit.

I see you have the California and the Tennessee in twice (in bombardment groups and SAGs) - If they are going to act as SAG protection, do not let them shoot off all their ammo in a bombardment. The 5 fast USN BBS, and the Prince of Wales would either go with the fast carriers, or are formed into a surface SAG with the most aggressive and capable leader available (use Ching Lee or Arleigh Burke if they're out there in command of a TF) and also retain their full ammo load in case Mr Yamato and his buddy Mr Musashi drop by. It won't be pretty if your air cover doesn't deter them, and you might lose a couple of your new BBs, but at least they'll be damaged and go away. The Repulse is better off doing AAA duty with the fast carriers, where it might take a torpedo instead of a CV.

On a related note, looking at your Replenishment Group - your fuel state looks good, but where are the AEs and AKEs to reload your BBs and cruisers? (Hopefully loaded and dispersed amongst the supply taskforces to be separated later.) I'd be going for Rota, or whichever island looks to have the weakest garrison, first, to establish a resupply lagoon with some of those big AEs that can transfer 16" rifle ammo. I'd also have a flotilla of ARs/ADs ready to go to Guam to operate with the 7th fleet HQ ASAP.

And the usual advice about putting some BB float planes on recon (night and day), and some cruiser floatplanes on night activities.



_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 1453
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/22/2017 10:03:13 PM   
CaptHaggard

 

Posts: 191
Joined: 3/8/2016
From: Sonoma, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

I also suggest that you eventually put the CVEs into about 2-3 separate TFs, each with < 150 aircraft and a few DDs and DEs; they can sit right in the coastal hex under assault and operate at full capacity. You want to keep your fast carriers with 30 knt cruiser and DD escorts one hex out to sea where they will still put a lot of cap over the adjacent island, and also will possibly divert the attention of the IJN away from your transports, or at least attract the airstrikes so your Hellcat jocks can go to work. This separation will make best use of the aircraft under the 1943 co-ordination limit.

I see you have the California and the Tennessee in twice (in bombardment groups and SAGs) - If they are going to act as SAG protection, do not let them shoot off all their ammo in a bombardment. The 5 fast USN BBS, and the Prince of Wales would either go with the fast carriers, or are formed into a surface SAG with the most aggressive and capable leader available (use Ching Lee or Arleigh Burke if they're out there in command of a TF) and also retain their full ammo load in case Mr Yamato and his buddy Mr Musashi drop by. It won't be pretty if your air cover doesn't deter them, and you might lose a couple of your new BBs, but at least they'll be damaged and go away. The Repulse is better off doing AAA duty with the fast carriers, where it might take a torpedo instead of a CV.

On a related note, looking at your Replenishment Group - your fuel state looks good, but where are the AEs and AKEs to reload your BBs and cruisers? (Hopefully loaded and dispersed amongst the supply taskforces to be separated later.) I'd be going for Rota, or whichever island looks to have the weakest garrison, first, to establish a resupply lagoon with some of those big AEs that can transfer 16" rifle ammo. I'd also have a flotilla of ARs/ADs ready to go to Guam to operate with the 7th fleet HQ ASAP.

And the usual advice about putting some BB float planes on recon (night and day), and some cruiser floatplanes on night activities.




Ian R—

The AE and AKEs are heading from PH to Midway tomorrow. They will be ready to go to Wake to rearm the BBs and CAs, or—depending on their perceived vulnerability as the battle progresses—remain in Midway for the task.

The "usual advice" from you and all the other gentlemen of War College is not only welcome but essential. Kindly keep it coming!

Thank you!

—Hag


< Message edited by CaptHaggard -- 4/22/2017 10:09:45 PM >

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 1454
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/23/2017 4:07:31 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
quote:

The AE and AKEs are heading from PH to Midway tomorrow. They will be ready to go to Wake to rearm the BBs and CAs, or—depending on their perceived vulnerability as the battle progresses—remain in Midway for the task.


Wake is too far away in an emergency. A small, two ship AE & AKE task group with an ASW escort might escape detection in the clutter, and give you the ability to rearm about 2-3 BBs overnight at the first anchorage you occupy. Those numbers are an anecdotal observation. I've never done the maths, but there was a post years ago that said its coded so that the smaller ships will load from the smallest AKE with capacity to rearm them, leaving your Lassen class AE to attend to the big fellows. It also means you can rotate rearmed bombardment groups across to the other islands where the situation on the ground may still be in issue. Just remember to reload the AEs from the port on any day they aren't otherwise engaged.

Hopefully this will all be moot because your Guam attack force is bigger than any historical (Pacific) landing force bar Okinawa. If the number crunching says the Guam port size plus the naval HQ & the nav support in all the various BFs adds up to the right amount, you may be able to rearm most ships there anyway, although probably still needing a large AE for the 14" -> 16" rifles.

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to CaptHaggard)
Post #: 1455
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/23/2017 6:32:10 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
June 9, 1943



Opening Comments


1.) The Sea Shark Invasion Fleet is at hex 169,98, 2,480 miles away from its destination one hex due east of Rota near the Marianas Islands.

2.) The Allies have laid siege to Magwe and Meiktila. El Lobo is slowly withdrawing his ground forces to Southern Burma.


Synopsis of Combat Events for Today


1.) El Lobo bombed Chengtu, Chungking, and Magwe.

2.) El Lobo deliberately attacked near Kienko (hex 79,41).

3.) The Allies bombarded Meiktila.


Japanese Bomb Chengtu


Japanese Losses

2 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)

Allied Losses

1 hit (Airbase)
1 hit (Airbase Supply)
17 hits (Runway)


Japanese Bomb Chungking


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)
3 damaged (Ki-49-IIa Helen)

Allied Losses

300 casualties
2 squads destroyed
50 squads disabled
2 hits (Airbase)
17 hits (Runway)


Japanese Bomb Magwe


Japanese Losses

8 destroyed and 11 damaged (Ki45 Kai Nick)

Allied Losses

82 casualties
1 squad destroyed
15 squads disabled
4 guns lost
1 gun destroyed
3 guns disabled


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko (hex 79,41)


Ground combat at 79,41 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1018 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 52

Defending force 940 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 26

Allied adjusted defense: 13

Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-)

Allied ground losses:
27 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
5th NCPC Infantry Brigade

Defending units:
52nd Chinese Corps


Allies Bombard Meiktila


Ground combat at Meiktila (58,47)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 3420 troops, 306 guns, 228 vehicles, Assault Value = 1038

Defending force 78889 troops, 928 guns, 331 vehicles, Assault Value = 1890

Japanese ground losses:
321 casualties reported
Squads: 7 destroyed, 14 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 9 (2 destroyed, 7 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
Guns lost 36 (21 destroyed, 15 disabled)
Vehicles lost 10 (3 destroyed, 7 disabled)

Assaulting units:
762nd Tank Battalion
Americal Infantry Division
193rd Tank Battalion
763rd Tank Battalion
637th Tank Destroyer Battalion
24th Infantry Division
627th Tank Destroyer Battalion
II Aus Corps Engineer Battalion
205th Field Artillery Battalion
181st Field Artillery Regiment
226th Field Artillery Battalion
168th Field Artillery Regiment
183rd Field Artillery Regiment
30th Field Artillery Regiment
188th Field Artillery Regiment
206th Coast AA Regiment
214th Coast AA Regiment
134th Field Artillery Battalion
249th Field Artillery Battalion
97th Field Artillery Battalion
198th Field Artillery Battalion
147th Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
23rd Ind.Mixed Brigade
52nd Division
48th Division
4th Guards Division
2nd Guards Division
2nd Division
5th Guards Division
31st Road Const Co
39th JAAF AF Bn
25th Air Defense AA Regiment
18th JNAF AF Unit
2nd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
29th Ind. Engineer Regiment
207th JAAF AF Bn
70th JAAF AF Bn
9th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
17th Army
85th JAAF AF Bn
14th JNAF AF Unit
1st Hvy.Artillery Regiment
46th JNAF AF Unit
22nd Ind.Mtn Gun Battalion
23rd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
34th Field AA Battalion
53rd JNAF AF Unit
10th JNAF AF Unit
91st JAAF AF Bn
115th JAAF AF Bn


Best Regards,

-Terry




_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 1456
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/23/2017 7:30:58 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

You better not include construction units and air support baseforces into initial landing TFs. Those kind of supports are not needed in the assault and will only clog the beaches, get their machinery disabled and increase the loss count if things go wrong.
Also make sure to put some combat ships into amphib TFs as shell magnets and suppression especially in Saipan case because of naval fortress CD unit. For suppression puproses combat ships work much better in amphib compared to separate bombardment TFs. Bombardment on the other hand can go in and out.


GetAssita-

Your interest in The War College and your sage advice is appreciated.

One or Two Waves of Amphibious Landings?

It has been previously discussed within The War College as to whether ground and naval losses would be greater with one wave or two waves.

One wave should result in ground forces unloading quicker, thereby giving the Japanese coastal guns and aircraft less opportunity to hammer Allied troops and ships than two waves.

However, as you indicate, two waves should result in less losses to Headquarter units, Base Force units, and Construction units.

Considering that I haven't a clue what El Lobo has on the four southern Marianas Islands, that I don't know whether overall losses would be greater with one wave or two waves, and that I want to get the Invasion Fleet away from the Marianas Islands as soon as possible, I opted for one wave.

Do you feel strongly, considering the circumstances, that Allied over-all losses would be less with two waves (i.e., holding back the HQ units, Base Forces, and Construction units for the second wave)?

Capital Ships Imbedded with Amphibious Task Forces

I have imbedded one destroyer with each Amphibious Task Force.

I have enough destroyers to imbed two destroyers within approximately 20 of the Amphibious Task Forces which would leave 20 less destroyers for Combat Surface Task Forces. However, considering that I only plan to make one Bombardment run, the second day will free up four Bombardment Task Forces that I plan to convert to Surface Combat Task Forces.

Would you go with two DDs in as many Amphibious Task Forces as possible without lessening the strength of the one day Bombardment Task Forces?

Best Regards,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 1457
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/23/2017 8:07:01 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

What does sigint tell you about expected enemy forces?



Lowpe-

I haven't a clue regarding the Japanese strength at the Marianas Islands. The only intelligence I have is that yesterdays Signet Report indicated that the Japanese 24th Infantry Regiment had loaded and was bound for Guam.

The Allies have increased activity at Aitape, Manus, Kavieng, Rabaul, and the Shortlands with minimal ships and troops in an effort to divert El Lobo's attention away from the Marianas Islands. For over a month, the Signet Report has been indicating that El Lobo is transferring troops to Moluccas.

I haven't snooped around the Marianas Islands for fear of alerting El Lobo to an early impending Allied Invasion of the Marianas Islands.

Due to the early date of the war, I am gambling that El Lobo will not be expecting an Allied Invasion of the Marianas Islands, that the Allies will surprise him, and that he has not yet stuffed the Marianas Islands with troops and aircraft.

I have dedicated such a large force to capturing the Marianas for the following two reasons:

1.) To capture the Marianas Islands as soon as possible to build the ports, airbases, and forts.

2.) To have substantial ground forces in place at the Marianas to prep for the next major invasion which will be Formosa.

Best Regards,

-Terry







_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1458
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/23/2017 9:18:23 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

I also suggest that you eventually put the CVEs into about 2-3 separate TFs, each with < 150 aircraft and a few DDs and DEs; they can sit right in the coastal hex under assault and operate at full capacity. You want to keep your fast carriers with 30 knt cruiser and DD escorts one hex out to sea where they will still put a lot of cap over the adjacent island, and also will possibly divert the attention of the IJN away from your transports, or at least attract the airstrikes so your Hellcat jocks can go to work. This separation will make best use of the aircraft under the 1943 co-ordination limit.

I see you have the California and the Tennessee in twice (in bombardment groups and SAGs) - If they are going to act as SAG protection, do not let them shoot off all their ammo in a bombardment. The 5 fast USN BBS, and the Prince of Wales would either go with the fast carriers, or are formed into a surface SAG with the most aggressive and capable leader available (use Ching Lee or Arleigh Burke if they're out there in command of a TF) and also retain their full ammo load in case Mr Yamato and his buddy Mr Musashi drop by. It won't be pretty if your air cover doesn't deter them, and you might lose a couple of your new BBs, but at least they'll be damaged and go away. The Repulse is better off doing AAA duty with the fast carriers, where it might take a torpedo instead of a CV.

On a related note, looking at your Replenishment Group - your fuel state looks good, but where are the AEs and AKEs to reload your BBs and cruisers? (Hopefully loaded and dispersed amongst the supply taskforces to be separated later.) I'd be going for Rota, or whichever island looks to have the weakest garrison, first, to establish a resupply lagoon with some of those big AEs that can transfer 16" rifle ammo. I'd also have a flotilla of ARs/ADs ready to go to Guam to operate with the 7th fleet HQ ASAP.

And the usual advice about putting some BB float planes on recon (night and day), and some cruiser floatplanes on night activities.




Ian R-

Thank you for your interest in The War College, bringing to my attention that I listed BB California and BB Tennessee in both a Bombardment Task Force and Surface Combat Task Forces, and for your sound advice.

Tomorrow, I will transfer BB California and BB Tennessee from the Surface Combat Task Forces 662 nd 670 to the Bombardment Task Force 532.

At the outset, for purposes of Operation Sea Shark only, I am not concerned about grouping fast combat ships together in a Task Force.

Briefly, the General Plan is as follows:

1.) The entire Invasion Fleet will slowly move together from Pearl Harbor to one hex due east of Rota.

2.) The Bombardment Task Forces will bombard only one night and return to one hex east of Rota. Upon their return, the Bombardment Task Forces will change their mission to Surface Combat.

3.) The Amphibious Task Forces will assault the beaches. After each unloads the troops and supply, the Amphibious Task Forces will return to one hex east of Rota.

4.) All the Carriers are presently intended to remain one hex east of Rota to protect the Bombardment Task Forces and Amphibious Task Forces. Carrier Aircraft Assignments are to be as follows:

-276 Hellcats will provide CAP over the hex due east of Rota.
-200 Wildcats will provide LRCAP over the target hexes of Saipan, Tinian, Rota, and Guam (i.e., 50 Wildcats per each of the four objectives).
-227 Wildcats will not be designated a target, but rather provide LRCAP covering 3 hexes.
-Each of the above fighter groups will vary their altitude at 20,000, 15,000, and 10,000 feet.
-134 Dauntless Dive Bombers will bomb the airfields at Saipan, Tinian, Rota, and Guam the day after the Bombardment Task Forces have bombarded those same Islands. After the Dauntless' one day bombing of airfields, their mission will change to Naval Attack.

5.) Upon all Bombardment Task Forces and Amphibious Task Forces returning to one hex east of Rota, together, the entire Invasion Fleet will slowly return to Pearl Harbor.

I have designed this plan as I believed that it was the best plan to accomplish the following goals:

1.) Provide the best protection possible for all ships.

2.) Hammer the four islands and airfields.

3.) Kill Japanese pilots.

4.) Capture the four southern Marianas Islands.

Coordination 1943 Limits?

However, if I am understanding you correctly, you are telling me that my orders for the aircraft will not happen as planned due to limits on "Coordination" in 1943 because I have too many carriers and too many aircraft in the same hex?

Further, that by splitting the carriers into smaller groups and in two hexes that the coordination of aircraft missions would be more successful?

Please clarify and advise.

Best Regards,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1459
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/23/2017 10:13:38 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		Terry, a few general ideas that seem to work well in practice:

1. I'm assuming you have some MSW or DMS integrated in your TFs. Including the bombardment ones. If you send an MSW task force into sweep Saipan, it will be sunk by the fortress guns. Dispersed in other TFs they will still sweep some mines, and the enemy has bigger fish to catch.

2. I'd put the assault troop transports into bigger TFs - right up to the 100 ship limit to saturate the defenses - even your attack transports will fire their 5" or 3" guns and it all helps. I would put the old Omahas in them at two per if possible to suck up the shore fire. Otherwise the CD guns will possibly shoot at each TF. If you have a bombardment BB that is down under 50% ammo, and you can't rearm it on site, you my as well include it, as the smaller CD guns will bounce a lot of rounds off its belt plate. If you have some amphib loaded AKAs with supply only, put some in the 100 ship TF to offload it direct to the troops.

3. Unless you have loaded the assault troops sparsely across a lot of ships, they will take at least 2-3 days to get all the combat elements ashore anyway. One days ground bombardment will give you the enemy OOB and tell you whether to use a shock attack to overrun the base or wait.

4. To get some recon results I'd set all the bombardment BB floatplanes to that mission, half at night*, along with any groups from cruisers embedded with the landing force. The other cruisers' and fast BBs' groups can do the naval searching and a bit of ASW. [*So they spot the shore bombardment as well.]

5. Last but not least - I gather you are planning to assault all 4 islands simultaneously, rather than starting, say, with Guam to establish a base under local air cover (200 Corsairs should do it) and working your way up with all the CVE and slow BB groups supporting each assault in turn, then replenishing. I think that's dangerous, because you are splitting your naval assets, but maybe it'll work given the surprise element. Because it will take a while to unload, and all 4 bases might not be taken in the first few days, I do think you need to be prepared to fight a fleet engagement - that means do not commit your fast carrier strike groups to base attacks, other than maybe one to port attack the CD guns. Also, keep at least a fast BB TF and a cruiser TF with full ammo loads to serially assault any IJN SAGs that sneak in at night.

And break out the PT boats.

Edit: The above was typed before I saw your last post and some of it is redundant.

The aircraft coordination rule is buried on page 167 of the manual. In 1943, the chance of (allied) co-ordination loss is doubled if the number of aircraft in the CVTF is greater than 150 +rnd(150). Obviously two CV TFs have just under a 1/3rd risk of coordination loss, but you can tailor your CVE TFs more precisely.

The other rule I was thinking of is at the foot of page 167, but it only applies if the carrier is "in a base hex" as opposed to in a TF in a base hex. I had a notion that CVEs didn't suffer the 50% launch penalty, but on reflection this is irrelevant.

Also, have a look at 6.3.5 on page 129 - once your bombardment TFs have any ship with <33% ammo load, they will disobey orders and head back to Pearl Harbor - another reason to set up your first island conquest as their TF home base and replenishment point, so they will be located there the next morning instead of half way to Wake Is.


< Message edited by Ian R -- 4/23/2017 10:48:48 AM >

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1460
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/23/2017 2:40:38 PM   
CaptHaggard

 

Posts: 191
Joined: 3/8/2016
From: Sonoma, CA
Status: offline 		Ian R—

As to point #1—In running a couple of Marianas invasions in a mini-game, my experience in ordering everything at once into the invasion hexes (as Admiral Bravo intends) resulted in the MS TFs and the Bombardment TFs predictably encountering first fire—but with MS losses in mines only, not from CD fire, even against that bad boy at Saipan. The CDs seemed always to concentrate on the Bombardment TFs, while the MS went about their business (at least if the Bombardment TF had a BB firing)...

Losses were pretty steep for the MS TFs because the islands have a ton of mines (in the juiced-up mini-version).

Here the MS TFs have between 12-20 ships for each invasion, all containing a combination of DMS, AM & YMS... IOW, everything I could lay my hands on

Thank you for your excellent points!

—Hag

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 1461
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/24/2017 5:22:08 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		Gents,

Good luck with Sea Shark.

Since there's some excellent advice laid out by Ian R, my apologies if I'm venturing into Dept. of Redundancy Dept. territory, but as an AFB I'd like to see you fellas do well. One further point on the CVs--if they are paired with slower vessels they'll be more vulnerable to attack, since the slowest vessel in the TF sets the speed, and also they won't be able to react as far if needed. It's best to keep CVs and CVEs separated primarily due to the speed difference (this also applies to surface forces, such as mixing old BBs and CAs). The coordination penalty also only applies to strike packages as far as I know. It shouldn't affect CAP or LRCAP.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to CaptHaggard)
Post #: 1462
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/24/2017 9:02:22 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline 		June 10, 1943


Opening Comments



1.) The Sea Shark Invasion Fleet is two hexes southwest of Laysan Island at hex 163,97; 2,280 miles from its destination one hex due east of Rota near the Marianas Islands.

2.) I am beginning to get a tad concerned that Chungking may indeed fall into Japanese hands sometime during the next few months as El Lobo's bombers are inflicting heavier casualties than in the past.


Synopsis of Combat Events for Today


1.) Captain Haggard's AM hits El Lobo's submarine I-38 five times near Midway (hex 153,101).

2.) El Lobo bombs Chungking.

3.) El Lobo deliberately attacks near Kienko (hex 79,41) and near Chungking (hex 79,39).

4.) The Allies deliberately attack Ramree Island.

5.) The Allies bombard Meiktila.


Captain Haggard 1, El Lobo 0, near Midway (hex 153,101)


Japanese Losses

AM Champion hits SS I-38 five times, setting it ablaze.

No Allied losses.


Japanese Bomb Chungking


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)
3 damaged (Ki-49-IIa Helen)

Allied Losses

306 casualties
1 squad destroyed
44 squads disabled
6 hits (Airbase)
1 hit (Airbase Supply)
8 hits (Runway)


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko (hex 79,41)


Ground combat at 79,41 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1018 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 52

Defending force 910 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 26

Allied adjusted defense: 13

Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-)

Allied ground losses:
12 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
5th NCPC Infantry Brigade

Defending units:
52nd Chinese Corps


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko (hex 79,39)


Ground combat at 79,39 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1024 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 53

Defending force 1595 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2

Japanese adjusted assault: 27

Allied adjusted defense: 31

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-)

Allied ground losses:
24 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
101st NCPC Route Brigade

Defending units:
Red Chinese Army
15th Chinese Base Force


Allies Deliberately Attack Ramree Island


Ground combat at Ramree Island (54,48)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 13856 troops, 367 guns, 321 vehicles, Assault Value = 439

Defending force 7818 troops, 100 guns, 119 vehicles, Assault Value = 75

Allied adjusted assault: 153

Japanese adjusted defense: 273

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
461 casualties reported
Squads: 23 destroyed, 9 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
177 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 19 disabled

Assaulting units:
I Aus Corps Engineer Battalion
2nd British Division
54th Coastal Artillery Regiment
101st RAF Base Force
12th Indian Engineer Battalion
107th RAF Base Force
2nd Indian Coastal Artillery Regiment
Rabaul Det. Base Force
1st Burma Auxiliary AA Regiment
1st NW Frontier Base Force
173 Wing
112th RN Base Force
18th USN Naval Construction Battalion
175 Wing
24th Indian Engineer Battalion
23rd Indian Engineer Battalion
823rd Engineer Aviation Battalion

Defending units:
55th Infantry Regiment
143rd Infantry Regiment
5th Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Army
3rd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
17th JAAF Base Force


Allies Bombard Meiktila


Ground combat at Meiktila (58,47)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 3356 troops, 295 guns, 228 vehicles, Assault Value = 2290

Defending force 78905 troops, 928 guns, 331 vehicles, Assault Value = 1890

Japanese ground losses:
91 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
Guns lost 52 (33 destroyed, 19 disabled)
Vehicles lost 24 (1 destroyed, 23 disabled)

Assaulting units:
762nd Tank Battalion
6th Australian Division
7th Australian Division
763rd Tank Battalion
193rd Tank Battalion
102nd Combat Engineer Regiment
II Aus Corps Engineer Battalion
627th Tank Destroyer Battalion
24th Infantry Division
Americal Infantry Division
637th Tank Destroyer Battalion
9th Australian Division
30th Field Artillery Regiment
251st Coast AA Regiment
188th Field Artillery Regiment
138th USA Base Force
97th Field Artillery Battalion
216th Coast AA Regiment
134th Field Artillery Battalion
214th Coast AA Regiment
168th Field Artillery Regiment
206th Coast AA Regiment
205th Field Artillery Battalion
249th Field Artillery Battalion
181st Field Artillery Regiment
226th Field Artillery Battalion
183rd Field Artillery Regiment
198th Field Artillery Battalion
110th USA Base Force
147th Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
4th Guards Division
52nd Division
2nd Guards Division
2nd Division
48th Division
23rd Ind.Mixed Brigade
5th Guards Division
39th JAAF AF Bn
46th JNAF AF Unit
34th Field AA Battalion
53rd JNAF AF Unit
85th JAAF AF Bn
22nd Ind.Mtn Gun Battalion
23rd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
31st Road Const Co
10th JNAF AF Unit
207th JAAF AF Bn
1st Hvy.Artillery Regiment
14th JNAF AF Unit
29th Ind. Engineer Regiment
17th Army
91st JAAF AF Bn
18th JNAF AF Unit
9th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
70th JAAF AF Bn
25th Air Defense AA Regiment
2nd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
115th JAAF AF Bn


Best Regards,

-Terry




_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 1463
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/24/2017 9:38:37 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Gents,

Good luck with Sea Shark.

Since there's some excellent advice laid out by Ian R, my apologies if I'm venturing into Dept. of Redundancy Dept. territory, but as an AFB I'd like to see you fellas do well. One further point on the CVs--if they are paired with slower vessels they'll be more vulnerable to attack, since the slowest vessel in the TF sets the speed, and also they won't be able to react as far if needed. It's best to keep CVs and CVEs separated primarily due to the speed difference (this also applies to surface forces, such as mixing old BBs and CAs). The coordination penalty also only applies to strike packages as far as I know. It shouldn't affect CAP or LRCAP.

Cheers,
CC



Commander Cody-

Welcome aboard The War College!

Thank you for wishing Captain Haggard and I success in capturing the four southern Marianas Islands.

I have previously been advised numerous times not to mix slow carriers nor slow combat surface ships with fast carriers and fast combat surface ships. However, for the purposes of Operation Sea Shark only, I don't understand the relevancy considering the following:

1.) Except for the Bombardment and Amphibious Assault Task Forces, the Allies intend to keep the entire Invasion Fleet together in the same hex to and from Pearl Harbor and at the hex due east of Rota. After the Bombardment Task Forces bombard each of their objectives only one time (i.e., Saipan, Tinian, Rota, and Guam) and after the Amphibious Task Forces unload troops and supply, the Bombardment Task Forces and Amphibious Assault Task Forces will return to join the Invasion Fleet.

2.) The Allies do not intend to neither chase nor run from Japanese warships. The Invasion Fleet carriers intend to provide CAP and LRCAP in an effort to protect the Amphibious Assaults and kill Japanese pilots. The Invasion Fleet Combat Surface Task Forces intend to remain in the same hex as the carriers and returning Amphibious Assault Task Forces to fight any Japanese war ships that care to enter the hex.

3.) The Allies simply do not care about speed. When the Invasion Fleet moves, it will move at 12 knots, the speed of the slowest transports within the Invasion Fleet. Neither the carriers nor the combat surface ships will break-away from the Invasion Fleet as their mission is to protect hundreds of transports.

Accordingly, for the purposes of Operation Sea Shark only, am I missing something?

Best Regards,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 1464
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/24/2017 9:55:52 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
Revision of Order of Battle

for

Operation Sea Shark Task Forces

June 10, 1943



Upon taking into consideration the recent sage advice of GetAssista and Ian R, the Allies have decided to make the following changes regarding some of Operation Sea Shark's Invasion Fleet Task Forces:

1.) Carrier Task Forces will be revised to assure that no single Carrier Task Force contain more than 150 aircraft nor more than 15 ships.

2.) One BB and one CA will be removed from each of the four Bombardment Task Forces.

3.) Three new Surface Combat Task Forces will be formed, using the removed BBs and CAs, and using the all the surface combat ships presently in the three Surface Combat Task Forces.

4.) One day prior to the Amphibious Assaults, the Amphibious Assault Task forces will be revised to include up to 100 Amphibious Assault transports, thereby reducing the number of transports the Japanese Coastal Guns can fire upon.

Within a day or two, I will post the complete revised Operation Sea Shark Order of Battle.

Best Regards,

-Terry

_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1465
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/24/2017 3:30:18 PM   
pontiouspilot


Posts: 1127
Joined: 7/27/2012
Status: offline 		The element of surprise is all good and fine...has this freight train been spotted? You will want to keep close eye on the various detection levels as this train tries to sneak up on it's prey.

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1466
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/24/2017 10:48:16 PM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

The element of surprise is all good and fine...has this freight train been spotted? You will want to keep close eye on the various detection levels as this train tries to sneak up on it's prey.



pontiouspilot-

You Canadians do make me laugh.

In response to your question: Like the man that fell out of his 16th floor apartment responded to those below that asked how things were going as he passed by on the way down, "So far, so good."

Only two of the present 46 Task Forces of the Invasion Fleet indicate detection, both at a detection level of 1.

Captain Haggard reports that his submarines 200 miles north of Wake Island are being detected at higher levels.

Our ships moving into Wake Island have also been snooped fairly well for about three weeks.

Accordingly, I suspect that as the Invasion Fleet passes 40 miles above Wake Island the freight train will be heard.

Best Regards,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to pontiouspilot)
Post #: 1467
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/25/2017 3:22:25 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rio Bravo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Gents,

Good luck with Sea Shark.

Since there's some excellent advice laid out by Ian R, my apologies if I'm venturing into Dept. of Redundancy Dept. territory, but as an AFB I'd like to see you fellas do well. One further point on the CVs--if they are paired with slower vessels they'll be more vulnerable to attack, since the slowest vessel in the TF sets the speed, and also they won't be able to react as far if needed. It's best to keep CVs and CVEs separated primarily due to the speed difference (this also applies to surface forces, such as mixing old BBs and CAs). The coordination penalty also only applies to strike packages as far as I know. It shouldn't affect CAP or LRCAP.

Cheers,
CC



Commander Cody-

Welcome aboard The War College!

Thank you for wishing Captain Haggard and I success in capturing the four southern Marianas Islands.

I have previously been advised numerous times not to mix slow carriers nor slow combat surface ships with fast carriers and fast combat surface ships. However, for the purposes of Operation Sea Shark only, I don't understand the relevancy considering the following:

1.) Except for the Bombardment and Amphibious Assault Task Forces, the Allies intend to keep the entire Invasion Fleet together in the same hex to and from Pearl Harbor and at the hex due east of Rota. After the Bombardment Task Forces bombard each of their objectives only one time (i.e., Saipan, Tinian, Rota, and Guam) and after the Amphibious Task Forces unload troops and supply, the Bombardment Task Forces and Amphibious Assault Task Forces will return to join the Invasion Fleet.

2.) The Allies do not intend to neither chase nor run from Japanese warships. The Invasion Fleet carriers intend to provide CAP and LRCAP in an effort to protect the Amphibious Assaults and kill Japanese pilots. The Invasion Fleet Combat Surface Task Forces intend to remain in the same hex as the carriers and returning Amphibious Assault Task Forces to fight any Japanese war ships that care to enter the hex.

3.) The Allies simply do not care about speed. When the Invasion Fleet moves, it will move at 12 knots, the speed of the slowest transports within the Invasion Fleet. Neither the carriers nor the combat surface ships will break-away from the Invasion Fleet as their mission is to protect hundreds of transports.

Accordingly, for the purposes of Operation Sea Shark only, am I missing something?

Best Regards,

-Terry


Rio Bravo: By speed, as far as I know (and I'm no developer), ships are easier to hit the lower their speed (which matches the lowest speed in the TF). By that I mean the faster the ship, the harder it is to hit it with bombs, torpedoes or naval shells.

I could be wrong, but somewhere along the way this got stuck in my head and I keep it in mind when organizing TFs.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Rio Bravo)
Post #: 1468
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/25/2017 12:01:17 PM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
June 11, 1943



Opening Comments


The Operation Sea Shark Invasion Fleet is proceeding together slowly at 12 knots and is 2,040 miles away from its destination one hex due east of Rota near the Marianas Islands. The Disruption Level of the troops is close to 6 and the Fatigue Level is 0.


Synopsis of Combat Events for Today


1.) El Lobo Bombs Chengtu and Chungking. El Lobo's bombers are taking a heavy toll on the heavily battered and bruised Chinese at Chungking. The Chinese Assault Value at Chengtu is 2,700 and the Fort Level is 1. The Assault Value at Chungking is 5,100 and the Fort Level is 5. The Chinese are severely low on supply and running out of rubber bands to shoot at El Lobo's evil marauding pillagers and plunderers.

2.) El Lobo deliberately attacks near Kienko at hexes 79,41 and 79,39. El Lobo attacks the Chinese at these two hexes nearly everyday and has been for a couple months. The brave and honorable Chinese have beaten off each attack by hurling rocks and swinging sticks.

3.) The 2nd British Division attacked Ramree Island for the fifth (maybe the sixth) time today and once again was denied the prize. Damn Ramree and the El Lobo wave it surfed in on!


Japanese Bomb Chengtu


Japanese Losses

1 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)

Allied Losses

4 casualties
1 squad disabled
2 hits (Airbase)
3 hits (Airbase Supply)
42 hits (Runway)


Japanese Pound Chungking


Japanese Losses

2 damaged (Ki-21-IIa Sally)
4 damaged (Ki-49-IIa Helen)

Allied Losses

498 casualties
2 squads destroyed
79 squads disabled
2 hits (Airbase)
1 hit (Airbase Supply)
17 hits (Runway)


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko (hex 79,41)


Ground combat at 79,39 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1024 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 53

Defending force 1585 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2

Japanese adjusted assault: 47

Allied adjusted defense: 31

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Allied ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
101st NCPC Route Brigade

Defending units:
Red Chinese Army
15th Chinese Base Force


Japanese Deliberately Attack Near Kienko (hex 79,41)


Ground combat at 79,41 (near Kienko)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1024 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 53

Defending force 890 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 55

Allied adjusted defense: 10

Japanese assault odds: 5 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+)

Assaulting units:
5th NCPC Infantry Brigade

Defending units:
52nd Chinese Corps


Ramree Island Be Damned!


Ground combat at Ramree Island (54,48)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 13796 troops, 367 guns, 321 vehicles, Assault Value = 433

Defending force 7497 troops, 99 guns, 119 vehicles, Assault Value = 57

Allied adjusted assault: 303

Japanese adjusted defense: 251

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 0)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 0

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), fatigue(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
535 casualties reported
Squads: 32 destroyed, 9 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 4 (2 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
216 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 7 destroyed, 16 disabled
Guns lost 5 (1 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Assaulting units:
I Aus Corps Engineer Battalion
2nd British Division
101st RAF Base Force
2nd Indian Coastal Artillery Regiment
54th Coastal Artillery Regiment
175 Wing
12th Indian Engineer Battalion
107th RAF Base Force
112th RN Base Force
1st Burma Auxiliary AA Regiment
1st NW Frontier Base Force
173 Wing
Rabaul Det. Base Force
18th USN Naval Construction Battalion
24th Indian Engineer Battalion
23rd Indian Engineer Battalion
823rd Engineer Aviation Battalion

Defending units:
55th Infantry Regiment
143rd Infantry Regiment
5th Field Artillery Regiment
3rd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Army
17th JAAF Base Force


Best Regards,

-Terry






_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 1469
RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) - 4/25/2017 12:04:46 PM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rio Bravo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Gents,

Good luck with Sea Shark.

Since there's some excellent advice laid out by Ian R, my apologies if I'm venturing into Dept. of Redundancy Dept. territory, but as an AFB I'd like to see you fellas do well. One further point on the CVs--if they are paired with slower vessels they'll be more vulnerable to attack, since the slowest vessel in the TF sets the speed, and also they won't be able to react as far if needed. It's best to keep CVs and CVEs separated primarily due to the speed difference (this also applies to surface forces, such as mixing old BBs and CAs). The coordination penalty also only applies to strike packages as far as I know. It shouldn't affect CAP or LRCAP.

Cheers,
CC



Commander Cody-

Welcome aboard The War College!

Thank you for wishing Captain Haggard and I success in capturing the four southern Marianas Islands.

I have previously been advised numerous times not to mix slow carriers nor slow combat surface ships with fast carriers and fast combat surface ships. However, for the purposes of Operation Sea Shark only, I don't understand the relevancy considering the following:

1.) Except for the Bombardment and Amphibious Assault Task Forces, the Allies intend to keep the entire Invasion Fleet together in the same hex to and from Pearl Harbor and at the hex due east of Rota. After the Bombardment Task Forces bombard each of their objectives only one time (i.e., Saipan, Tinian, Rota, and Guam) and after the Amphibious Task Forces unload troops and supply, the Bombardment Task Forces and Amphibious Assault Task Forces will return to join the Invasion Fleet.

2.) The Allies do not intend to neither chase nor run from Japanese warships. The Invasion Fleet carriers intend to provide CAP and LRCAP in an effort to protect the Amphibious Assaults and kill Japanese pilots. The Invasion Fleet Combat Surface Task Forces intend to remain in the same hex as the carriers and returning Amphibious Assault Task Forces to fight any Japanese war ships that care to enter the hex.

3.) The Allies simply do not care about speed. When the Invasion Fleet moves, it will move at 12 knots, the speed of the slowest transports within the Invasion Fleet. Neither the carriers nor the combat surface ships will break-away from the Invasion Fleet as their mission is to protect hundreds of transports.

Accordingly, for the purposes of Operation Sea Shark only, am I missing something?

Best Regards,

-Terry


Rio Bravo: By speed, as far as I know (and I'm no developer), ships are easier to hit the lower their speed (which matches the lowest speed in the TF). By that I mean the faster the ship, the harder it is to hit it with bombs, torpedoes or naval shells.

I could be wrong, but somewhere along the way this got stuck in my head and I keep it in mind when organizing TFs.

Cheers,
CC



Commander Cody-

That makes sense.

Unfortunately, the Allies can't risk leaving hundreds of transports unguarded.

Besides, after laying-low for eighteen months, the troops are itching to fight.

Best Regards,

-Terry


_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 1470
Page:   <<   < prev  47 48 [49] 50 51   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: THE WAR COLLEGE-Rio Bravo (A) v. El Lobo (J) Page: <<   < prev  47 48 [49] 50 51   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

0.672