IJN CV airwings "re-shaping"

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

IJN CV airwings "re-shaping"

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> IJN CV airwings "re-shaping"

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

IJN CV airwings "re-shaping" - 6/16/2003 10:28:11 PM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

In UV, IJN CVs change the configuration of their airwings sometime around 1st July 42, so that the number of Zeros and Vals is higher, and number of Kates is lower than before.

AFAIK, it is done on all carriers, even on the ones that were sunk in Midway battle, and for which there is no historical information re July-42 composition of airwings, simply because they were sunk by that time.

Why is it so? I assume that historically only the Shokaku and Zuikaku airwings changed their composition, because those carriers were the only surviving CVs in IJN. But why? Aren't Kates better ship killers than Vals?

Looking in my reference materials I have found that as "another lesson from the battle of Midway the number of both fighters and dive bombers (on Shokaku) was increased to 27 operational and 5 reserve planes. To compensate for this the number of torpedo bombers was reduced to 18 operational and 2 reserve etc."

This is written by Japanese author, but he does not say what exactly were those "lessons from Midway"? I can see the need for more Zeros after Midway, but why more Vals, and why lessen the number of Kates?? Weren't the Kates best ship killers, that, after all, did most damage to Yorktown at Midway?

There is another semi-philosophical issue here. Since UV "avoids" Midway in most scenarios, then perhaps there should be no change to IJN CV airwings, that were the direct result of Midway (and are applied even to the CVs historically sunk at Midway).

Comments? Personally, I'd rather have more Kates than Vals, although I think 50-50% is the best solution.

O.

Post #: 1

Re: IJN CV airwings "re-shaping" - 6/16/2003 10:40:41 PM

Apollo11

Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline

Hi all,

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oleg Mastruko
[B]In UV, IJN CVs change the configuration of their airwings sometime around 1st July 42, so that the number of Zeros and Vals is higher, and number of Kates is lower than before.

AFAIK, it is done on all carriers, even on the ones that were sunk in Midway battle, and for which there is no historical information re July-42 composition of airwings, simply because they were sunk by that time.

Why is it so? I assume that historically only the Shokaku and Zuikaku airwings changed their composition, because those carriers were the only surviving CVs in IJN. But why? Aren't Kates better ship killers than Vals?

Looking in my reference materials I have found that as "another lesson from the battle of Midway the number of both fighters and dive bombers (on Shokaku) was increased to 27 operational and 5 reserve planes. To compensate for this the number of torpedo bombers was reduced to 18 operational and 2 reserve etc."

This is written by Japanese author, but he does not say what exactly were those "lessons from Midway"? I can see the need for more Zeros after Midway, but why more Vals, and why lessen the number of Kates?? Weren't the Kates best ship killers, that, after all, did most damage to Yorktown at Midway?

There is another semi-philosophical issue here. Since UV "avoids" Midway in most scenarios, then perhaps there should be no change to IJN CV airwings, that were the direct result of Midway (and are applied even to the CVs historically sunk at Midway).

Comments? Personally, I'd rather have more Kates than Vals, although I think 50-50% is the best solution.

O. [/B][/QUOTE]

As far as I know both sides considered dive bombers bigger threat
than torpedo bombers.

This is due to relatively very high precision possible with good
dive bombing crews (and fact that at Midway the dive bombers
sealed the fate of Japanese CVs)...

Leo "Apollo11"

P.S. US carriers had 2 wings of dive bombers and 1 of torpedo bombers so
perhaps, japanese were "mimicking" that fact (lesson from Midway?)...

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 2

- 6/16/2003 10:47:48 PM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

IIRC, it had more to do with the high attrition rate for Kate drivers, hence fewer were available to even get the darn thing off the deck without fouling.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 3

Re: Re: IJN CV airwings "re-shaping" - 6/16/2003 10:51:14 PM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Apollo11
[B]Hi all,
As far as I know both sides considered dive bombers bigger threat
than torpedo bombers.

P.S. US carriers had 2 wings of dive bombers and 1 of torpedo bombers so
perhaps, japanese were "mimicking" that fact (lesson from Midway?)... [/B][/QUOTE]

If that's the lesson learned from Midway I think it is the wrong lesson :)

US pioneered dive bombing techniques (even the Germans learned from them) and had ****ty torpedo bomber to begin the war with (and unreliable torpedos too) so USN reliance on SBD is understandable.

But on the IJN side Kates were much better in antiship role than Vals (or at least I see it that way), and it's easier to make a torpedo run than dive bombing attack (important if you lost your best pilots and have lots of green crews).

O.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 4

Re: Re: Re: IJN CV airwings "re-shaping" - 6/16/2003 10:58:30 PM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oleg Mastruko
[B]If that's the lesson learned from Midway I think it is the wrong lesson :)

US pioneered dive bombing techniques (even the Germans learned from them) and had ****ty torpedo bomber to begin the war with (and unreliable torpedos too) so USN reliance on SBD is understandable.

But on the IJN side Kates were much better in antiship role than Vals (or at least I see it that way), and it's easier to make a torpedo run than dive bombing attack (important if you lost your best pilots and have lots of green crews).

O. [/B][/QUOTE]Yes, it's much easier to repair holes in the deck than holes in the hull :D.

I love my Kate drivers.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 5

- 6/16/2003 11:07:17 PM

kentaggie

Posts: 9
Joined: 5/5/2003
From: Katy, Tx
Status: offline

While the Kates are better ship killers in UV, that is only true until they get in a big furball. They are deadly for the first CV battle, but flak and fighters will take a huge chunk out of them to where their experience levels for whole squadrons drop 20% when they get replacements. Joe Louis with a glass jaw.

Little known fact I have read in 2 different books - Vals sank more allied ships than any other Japanese aircraft.

_____________________________

"What in the wide, wide world of sports is a going on here?"

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 6

Data Base - 6/16/2003 11:15:59 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, You would need a database for each scenario with group changes and ship upgrades. I think UV only uses one main data base. In WITP you will be able to modify the database much more then in UV. (The IJN begins with 1/3 1/3 1/3 fighters dive-bombers torpedo planes and changes to 2/5 2/5 1/5)
This change also allowed more ordnance to be carried on board the CV (fewer torpedoes meant more bombs) The Japanese intended on using larger bombs in future battles.
What we really need is adding the Japanese 800kg bomb. (The Judy divebomber could carry one) It was the USN 1k and 2k bombs that made the Japanese prefer dive-bombers.

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 7

- 6/17/2003 1:52:19 AM

CapAndGown

Posts: 3206
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

Just to repeat what Dadman stated, IIRC, it was in "Combined Fleet Decoded" that I read that the change over was due the the high attrition rate for torpedo bombers. Too many Kate pilots were lost for the training system to keep up.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 8

- 6/17/2003 2:40:01 AM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kentaggie
[B]Little known fact I have read in 2 different books - Vals sank more allied ships than any other Japanese aircraft. [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes I've read it too, the exact phrasing was that the Val is the most successful Axis anti-ship aircraft, overall (!!!). That means more shipping tonnage was sunk by Vals, than, say, by Condors or Stukas or Ju 88 or He111 or Kates or ...

I find this very very hard to believe without being presented with hard facts, what do the others think?

O.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 9

- 6/17/2003 2:41:25 AM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

This is correct. It was actually Coral Sea, more than Midway that made the Japanese skittish with their torp bombers due to heavy losses. Midway added to the fear.

Such was the extent of this skitishness that Nagumo held back all his torp bombers from his 1st wave strikes at Eastern Solomons so that they could be lauched in a 2nd wave after the enemy defenses had been softened up

This was grave error of course and cost the Japanese the chance to score better than they did

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 10