Training carrier pilots as Allies

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Training carrier pilots as Allies

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 >> The War Room >> Training carrier pilots as Allies

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/11/2019 4:10:00 PM

seich_23

Posts: 18
Joined: 10/30/2018
Status: offline

I'm playing my first PBEM as allies and I realized that there are no other air groups for USN than the ones already on the carriers. I'm missing something? I put some the already decent pilots to the reserve and start training replacements on the carrier groups. I'm missing something?

Post #: 1

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/11/2019 5:14:47 PM

AcePylut

Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

Use all those West Coast based Kingfisher squadrons to train your naval pilots. Iirc they are naval. They arrive pretty quickly in the war.

_____________________________

(in reply to seich_23)

Post #: 2

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/11/2019 5:28:36 PM

seich_23

Posts: 18
Joined: 10/30/2018
Status: offline

Even the figher pilots?

(in reply to AcePylut)

Post #: 3

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/11/2019 6:54:26 PM

AcePylut

Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

Yes those units can train 'fighter skills' by flying range 0 CAP.

_____________________________

(in reply to seich_23)

Post #: 4

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/12/2019 7:09:25 AM

seich_23

Posts: 18
Joined: 10/30/2018
Status: offline

Thanks for the answer.

(in reply to AcePylut)

Post #: 5

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/12/2019 7:31:33 PM

AcePylut

Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

Or range 0 sweep. Not sure which is best... but I always make sure they are range 0 (reduces fatigue).

_____________________________

(in reply to seich_23)

Post #: 6

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/12/2019 9:28:42 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Yes those units can train 'fighter skills' by flying range 0 CAP.

I think that the setting for these guys needs to be: 1. Training; 2. Escort; 3. 100% and 4. Range=0 for best efficiency. At least that's what I put for my floatplane IJNAF training units.

OP: This is just observational, but it's my experience that floatplanes set to train as naval fighters (like the settings provided above) will train more slowly than 'traditional' naval fighters under the same settings. But YMMV.

_____________________________

(in reply to AcePylut)

Post #: 7

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/13/2019 6:41:21 AM

Ian R

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

The other option is to take some of the many land based USN air groups that arrive later (VF, VC, etc) and retain them in the CONUS, in obsolete airframes, and use them as training groups.

Train the fighter jocks in escort, and the bomber chaps in naval attack. Once they get to 70 they can go to reserve. If you have spare time/capacity, the bomber chaps can also usefully train in nav search. If you put the fighters down low on strafe type training, it tends to improve their defensive skill. Torpedo bomber pilots should be trained in nav torpedo, but if you do that outside the operational squadron, you will have to go looking for them for your VTs using the 'request veteran' button.

No other skill really matters IMHO.

Also, fly your CAGs ashore when your CVs go in for repairs/upgrades. 100% training at zero hex range.

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 8

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/13/2019 7:49:19 AM

GetAssista

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline

It is very risky to use those carriers for the first half a year anyway. So train away

(in reply to Ian R)

Post #: 9

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/15/2019 5:58:08 PM

AcePylut

Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Yes those units can train 'fighter skills' by flying range 0 CAP.

I think that the setting for these guys needs to be: 1. Training; 2. Escort; 3. 100% and 4. Range=0 for best efficiency. At least that's what I put for my floatplane IJNAF training units.

OP: This is just observational, but it's my experience that floatplanes set to train as naval fighters (like the settings provided above) will train more slowly than 'traditional' naval fighters under the same settings. But YMMV.

No idea. Not like the allies have a lot of early war naval planes to train.

I've always set my training groups to 30% rest, just to keep airplane fatigue "down" and keep ops losses minimal. I don't like wearing out the airframes and giving them thar bastard japanners free VP.

_____________________________

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 10

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/15/2019 6:50:13 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

The other option is to take some of the many land based USN air groups that arrive later (VF, VC, etc) and retain them in the CONUS, in obsolete airframes, and use them as training groups.

Train the fighter jocks in escort, and the bomber chaps in naval attack. Once they get to 70 they can go to reserve. If you have spare time/capacity, the bomber chaps can also usefully train in nav search. If you put the fighters down low on strafe type training, it tends to improve their defensive skill. Torpedo bomber pilots should be trained in nav torpedo, but if you do that outside the operational squadron, you will have to go looking for them for your VTs using the 'request veteran' button.

No other skill really matters IMHO.

Also, fly your CAGs ashore when your CVs go in for repairs/upgrades. 100% training at zero hex range.

+1

This is what I do and rest at least 20% if not 30% as also recommended.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Ian R)

Post #: 11

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/15/2019 9:24:54 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

Train Sweep 0 range, 100%, 0 feet with brooms.

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 12

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/16/2019 11:20:45 AM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

Risky to use the USN CVs early but I always do - just need to make sure to avoid KB. My favorite ploy is to get all the CVs together and then engage with the mini KB if it exists. It is generally playing in the DEI so it takes a while to get over there, but I've never lost a CV engaging the mini KB. And it helps getting the experience up. One positive thing about the long commute is being able to fill out the air groups a bit.

editing to correct from 'plating to playing'

< Message edited by fcooke -- 11/16/2019 11:22:01 AM >

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 13

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/17/2019 3:08:35 AM

AcePylut

Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

Lots of Japanese players will use the Mini-KB to escort the Aleutians invasions. I've always pounced with my Allied CV's and never lost a battle there. Unfortunately, Chickenboy didn't want to play that game, so I wasn't able to sink some baby CV's. :(

_____________________________

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 14

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/22/2019 12:28:39 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Use all those West Coast based Kingfisher squadrons to train your naval pilots. Iirc they are naval. They arrive pretty quickly in the war.

Agreed - stop gap solution - very early in the war. Personally I think this has limited value by mid 1942.

I would argue that some of them need to be ASW assets in major ports and are more valuable in that role. They may not sink anything- but they 'spot' well - and spotting IJN subs is half the battle early in the war.

@ OP

1) Keep your Carriers safe and train your squadrons 'when practical'.

Micro manage when you have to act / react. Train (as advised by Hans others above) i.e. during upgrades. You get upgrades in 42 and 43.

Further when cruising around in 'safe zones' i.e. convoy escort San Francisco to Canton - set a percentage to train and/or train in 'off' skill. Example: SBD : Naval Attack : Search 20% Train 20% (Airfield Attack) Rest 10%

2) VRFs are your strongest pool builders.

Of the first 5 CVE that arrive in 1942 - Three as I recall - come with VRF Squardons (Replacements to act as Jeep Carriers)

Place the VRFs on the West Coast / Pearl and train primary skills 100% range 0 as above.

Allow replacements of pilots and airframes but do not upgrade airframes. Keep em in F4F3s for example.

The VRF pilots will train up quickly to 50EXP overall with 70's in primary skill. You can also then train them up in 2ndry skills as above.

Carefully scan through the VMF squadrons that arrive in San Diego.

Buy out the better ones i.e. those that do not withdraw till late 43 or even latter. Pay attention to the upgrade path of these Marines - many of them get F4U-1s - so do not upgrade or if playing PDU on - choose to upgrade them into FM1s / FM2's **

Place the bought out marine squadrons on your CVE to support operations. Even landings to protect beefing up bases such as Suva / Canton / Baker / Johnson / Christmas / Palmyra.

You need the flattop support early in the war. Latter in 43/44 you can switch back some the CVEs to "jeep carrier replenishment duties" when you have the assets.

**home rule / preference. F6F Hellcats were too heavy to operate (fly and land) off almost all jeep carriers in real life although the game permits this. I choose not to allow it to be historically true.

< Message edited by Macclan5 -- 11/22/2019 12:38:27 PM >

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to AcePylut)

Post #: 15

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/22/2019 4:31:39 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

I've never understood the whole too big/heavy to operate off CVEs thing. TBFs operated off them quite well, and are bigger planes, both weight-wise (loaded or light), physically in all dimensions, particularly in wingspan than the Hellcat. The only thing that I can speculate is that the F6F had a higher landing speed, which could make operating off smaller CVEs a bit dicey.

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 16

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/22/2019 4:36:40 PM

Alpha77

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

I've never understood the whole too big/heavy to operate off CVEs thing. TBFs operated off them quite well, and are bigger planes, both weight-wise (loaded or light), physically in all dimensions, particularly in wingspan than the Hellcat. The only thing that I can speculate is that the F6F had a higher landing speed, which could make operating off smaller CVEs a bit dicey.

Landing speed possibly,how about hangar height and speed of the ship ?

Btw. later CVEs had catapults or ? With them P47s can launch from CVEs

Edit, here a good link, which says, yes some CVEs had Hellcats, but also some results were ugly.. see pics there:

http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2012/12/hellcats-on-cves.html

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 11/22/2019 4:43:50 PM >

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 17

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/22/2019 6:28:56 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

I've never understood the whole too big/heavy to operate off CVEs thing. TBFs operated off them quite well, and are bigger planes, both weight-wise (loaded or light), physically in all dimensions, particularly in wingspan than the Hellcat. The only thing that I can speculate is that the F6F had a higher landing speed, which could make operating off smaller CVEs a bit dicey.

Landing speed possibly,how about hangar height and speed of the ship ?

Btw. later CVEs had catapults or ? With them P47s can launch from CVEs

Edit, here a good link, which says, yes some CVEs had Hellcats, but also some results were ugly.. see pics there:

http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2012/12/hellcats-on-cves.html

Great post - one with details I had read before - from another source.

I do know they launched F6F and P47 from the jeep carriers. This is noted at Marina's and Okinawa as I recall.

It was the landing / operating / weight (??) generically - size or mass perhaps more specifically ??

I am a Sangamon Class fanboy and I do permit the recommended upgrades to F6F on those decks. I immediately sail the first 3 (early 1942 - March?) from the Panama zone down to Australia and they consistently form the nucleus of 7th Fleet in all my game. They come early - they pack a reasonable punch - they pack reasonable defense - and can support a wide variety of ops in the Coral Sea if managed smartly.

I always understood the Sangamons were built from Oiler frames. I know that oilers were scarce in the early war - but the design behind the Sangamon's seems so intrinsically smart in my opinion. To this day I do not fully understand why the Casablanca design won out over the Sangamons - I think the USN should have shelved the Casablanca's for the Sangamons.

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Alpha77)

Post #: 18

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/22/2019 6:56:37 PM

Alpha77

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline

Guess in game the Allies will put F6s on most CVEs... as long they have enough (which should be the case, unless heavy losses). But IJN can not put Jakes on Glen subs

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 19

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/22/2019 9:23:24 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

Was not hanger height - TBF's taller than F6Fs....will read the link.

(in reply to Alpha77)

Post #: 20

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/22/2019 9:28:50 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

Pilot in that first photo almost certainly must have drowned as it looks like the plane is going over and the airframe isn't that banged up or on fire.....the 2nd one must have led to someone buying many beers when they got into port.

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 21

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/22/2019 9:57:20 PM

bomccarthy

Posts: 414
Joined: 9/6/2013
From: L.A.
Status: offline

All of the Sangamon CVEs operated F6Fs throughout the entire war. In addition, F6Fs operated from Bogue and Casablanca class CVEs in various operations, providing air support during the Gilberts invasions and the ANVIL invasion (where the F6F scored its only Luftwaffe kills). The Royal Navy also operated Hellcats (and Corsairs) from their Bogue class CVEs.

The Commencement Bay class CVEs operated USMC F4Us during the Okinawa and DEI operations in 1945.

In other words, size did not prevent the operation of F6Fs from CVEs. The most likely reason was an early fear of running out of F6Fs for the fleet carriers; once this fear faded, General Motors was producing so many FM-2s that it was expedient to continue operating them from the Bogue and Casablanca CVEs. They were criticized for being less capable at combating kamikazes during the Luzon invasion in late '44/early '45, but there were not enough F6F squadrons to equip the CVEs and the fleet carriers and there was little time to transition enough of the FM-2 squadrons to F6Fs to make a difference.

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 22

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/23/2019 4:19:40 AM

BBfanboy

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

No one has mentioned a key facet of aircraft design - the wing shape.
To minimize drag and make them faster, fighters have a smaller wing which means less lift. They have a higher take-off and landing speed.
Aircraft that carry heavy loads have wider wings for more lift. They can fly at lower speeds but have lower max speeds because of the drag.
This could mean that for the smallest CVE class, putting the F6F on them would be feasible but dicey - no room for mistakes or bad weather.

_____________________________

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 bomccarthy)

Post #: 23

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/25/2019 1:15:20 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Guess in game the Allies will put F6s on most CVEs... as long they have enough (which should be the case, unless heavy losses). But IJN can not put Jakes on Glen subs

These sort of conversations tend to degenerate.

However whether is it 'IJN planes' or "Brave Sir Robin" - One must differentiate:

1) The game.
The game is a historical simulation with many abstracts (generic supply) and allows many things and has counter balances for both players. Hence I concur house rules are not needed because the 'game' offers opportunities / challenges. Chess too has limitations ; may the best player win.

2) The 'gamey'
While there are obvious examples such as sending in a 'lone freighter' on a suicide mission to identify the location of a Carrier Task Force - but most 'gamey' issues are subjective and opinionated - hard to resolve. As such avoid the obvious.

3) The historic.
This is where I tend to play my games. Rooted as close as possible to the historic, dwelling on the "what if", accepting and imposing my own limitations. In this sense House Rules make sense if you can agree to them.

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Alpha77)

Post #: 24

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/26/2019 3:11:36 PM

ITAKLinus

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline

As Allied, I'm quite inexperienced, I confess openly.

However, I found that training directly on the CVs pays off quite a lot if you don't plan to engage IJN CVs soon.
Groups can train many pilots and some selected actions against enemy shipping reward a lot. For example, a classic cruise to catch some random cargo in Marshalls in the first very few months can help a lot in training pilots.
I don't say you have to attack the Marshalls, I say that some training cruise against soft targets is always the best way to train pilots.

Personally, I'm a great lover of this "learn-by-doing". But I'm also a maniac of good positioning, recon/NavS and SigInt, so I diminish dramatically the possibility of ambushes.

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 25

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/26/2019 3:23:10 PM

BBfanboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus

As Allied, I'm quite inexperienced, I confess openly.

However, I found that training directly on the CVs pays off quite a lot if you don't plan to engage IJN CVs soon.
Groups can train many pilots and some selected actions against enemy shipping reward a lot. For example, a classic cruise to catch some random cargo in Marshalls in the first very few months can help a lot in training pilots.
I don't say you have to attack the Marshalls, I say that some training cruise against soft targets is always the best way to train pilots.

Personally, I'm a great lover of this "learn-by-doing". But I'm also a maniac of good positioning, recon/NavS and SigInt, so I diminish dramatically the possibility of ambushes.

Sounds like you are on the right track Linus! Canoerebel follows the same search and SigInt philosophy so he has a good picture of what is going on and rarely gets surprised. As he put it - Knowledge (of the situation) is the most valuable asset in WITP-AE.

_____________________________

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 ITAKLinus)

Post #: 26

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/26/2019 3:41:04 PM

ITAKLinus

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus

As Allied, I'm quite inexperienced, I confess openly.

However, I found that training directly on the CVs pays off quite a lot if you don't plan to engage IJN CVs soon.
Groups can train many pilots and some selected actions against enemy shipping reward a lot. For example, a classic cruise to catch some random cargo in Marshalls in the first very few months can help a lot in training pilots.
I don't say you have to attack the Marshalls, I say that some training cruise against soft targets is always the best way to train pilots.

Personally, I'm a great lover of this "learn-by-doing". But I'm also a maniac of good positioning, recon/NavS and SigInt, so I diminish dramatically the possibility of ambushes.

Sounds like you are on the right track Linus! Canoerebel follows the same search and SigInt philosophy so he has a good picture of what is going on and rarely gets surprised. As he put it - Knowledge (of the situation) is the most valuable asset in WITP-AE.

Yeah. I have two PBEMs going on. And one paused.

In the one paused we're somehow mid-43 and I'm the Japanese.
In one of the 2 I'm doing I'm again Japanese and we're May-42.
The third has just started as Allied player and...

Well, I'm amazed by the huge quantity of stuff the Allies have right from the start and how flexible can be their initial steps. For example: SigInt provides a huge amount of info. If you couple them with decent Catalina NavS from, say, Philippines [my enemy decided to skip them since I always skip them and has copied "my" opening], well even crappy USN subs can be amazing.

And terrible pilots can still do something. For example: I got the first group of Banshee, placed them at PM with their mighty exp around 12ish and they obliterated a small amphibious TF in Buna.
Now they have way more exp.

These actions make your pilots stronger and stronger over time at relatively little risk, acting as a sort of force multiplier.

As Japanese I always struggle to have a decent pool of competent DB/TB pilots for example. After a long time I concluded that the best way is to use crappy pilots at the beginning in order to train them up. In the PBEM in May-42 a Japan, I changed most of the pilots around 10-DEC. I have already done several training cycles directly on CVs. I'm satisfied. I'm besieging Sidney and have almost already acheived 4:1 in score. Fact I have used CVs as a training platform hasn't prevented good results, then.
In the other PBEM, mid-43, I haven't done that and I'm now short of a large pool of very well trained pilots. I conquered India, though. So a good ROI for the massive bloodbaths I had in the Indian Ocean. But now I'm not really in good shape, so to say. And the enemy has the whole RN sunk, yes, but most of the USN alive and fighting. Quite a complex situation for me.

What I try to say is that marginal operations can improve a lot pilots' skills. Keeping them on carriers make them underutilised assets. Moreover, you can swap pilots and put the good ones right before unexpected situations (as Japanese I send back all the crappy guys and put on only TRACOM assh@les once I am 2-3 days of navigation from an enemy AirTF).

Also, consider that there are few creative ways of training pilots.

For example, as Allied: have you ever thought about taking away your TB pilots, putting on replacements. Send the TBs to some large base and embark additional DBs and Fs on your CVs. TBs in training.
The relatively good initial TBs' pilots go to some Catalina group and you wreck havoc of random Japanese light shipping in the DEI thanks to the great durability, the two torpedoes and the good range.

< Message edited by ITAKLinus -- 11/26/2019 3:43:21 PM >

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 27

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/26/2019 4:28:05 PM

Alpha77

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline

Training pilots at carriers is also cheaper, I think....If at a base you need (in case of training less) supply and space and air support. Training on "the job" - you need riskless operations or your DB/TB training ends in the waters.

One wonders how much these 4Es gain that bomb your already downbeat bases to the stoneage every turn (until you put a surprise CAP up and down some beasts), with 2 Zeros for 2 4Es being a good trade. With Georges 2 Georges for 5 4Es would be ok. Of course they will respond with some sweeps then you better run with Zeros or Oscars

I had 2 units of old bombers doing training in China vs. the scattered left overs from the Chinese army (amazingly they still exist even if supply should be out for months now). But the exp gain is low, the ground gain is "soso". I better set them to train a specific skill I have found this to be better than "on the job".

Also e.g. ASW training "OTJ" is not satisfactory imho. They only seem to gain one lousy exp and/or ASW point if they actually hit a sub (or claim to have done so)...

And btw. these lowly Banshee pilots often score I noted this already. One can get away with lower exp and (in this case) navb in certain missions vs. cargos. But try this with fighter pilots they are much more dependent on a good state BEFORE entering combat (IME) this is for PBM. However vs. the AI which might send lone Nettie strikes also worse pilots can score.

Ahh and I guess you have a secret how your cats with torps avoid CAP? When they "wreck havoc of random Japanese light shipping in the DEI"

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 11/26/2019 5:35:40 PM >

(in reply to ITAKLinus)

Post #: 28

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/27/2019 9:04:40 AM

ITAKLinus

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline

It's not such a complex task to kill Japanese light stuff in the DEI.

Suppose the enemy skips Philippines. He just doesn't conquer them.

You send Catalina in the theater leaving relatively few in the Pacific. That's a very big tradeoff but that has also been my choice.

PH => Midway => Guam => DEI. Both Catalina and B-17.

Now, you have very few locations able to support torps. Namely, Manila-Soerabaja-Singers.

If the enemy has skipped Philippines invasion and has done a huge Mersing gambit at 7-DEC, he will have for sure a lot of stuff to be moved around Philippines going to the DEI. That's where you can hurt him. Either he assigns LRCAP (not working well and short-legged) or he uses a random CVL with fighters as an escort for his convoys. But he has many many relatively little TFs moving around.
Your guys make few hits and sink a lot of stuff combined with aggressive SS and NavS.

I also employ extensively (well... "extensively" relative to the numbers present in the area at the start...) both Seagulls and P-40 in LowN. They are doing really well. I just obliterated a little TF with xAKs/xAKLs/PBs near Davao using those P-40s in LowN.
I think it's better to use those P-40s in this way, while I wait to buy them out of the area, rather than make them cannon fodder for Formosa's Zeros.

When the enemy approaches Java, also, it can be interesting to use Catalina in NavT. Of course, any competent Japanese player will bomb your AFs into oblivion and attack with strong aerial cover from CVLs and/or CVs, but... There is always something which goes wrong, some mistakes, some random reacting in the general mess of TFs going around, pesky allied PTs engaging over and over and... At that point you try to sneak in your stuff into an open AF (I generally use Madioen; AF=4, not on the sea and on good terrain) and unleash your guys over enemy's scattered TFs. Those which eventually go on enemy's AirTFs will be murdered, the others will do some damage.

It depends on your grand strategy. I personally like to have huge allied losses in the DEI buying few days to prepare Burma if I opt for a Burma defence. Few days can mean a couple of Australian DIVs more into the theater. Not much, not little.

Also from Singers: once the enemy has attacked Mersing, he generally retreats his TFs. It means that you can punish his attempts of attacking other positions pretty well given the naval attack mechanics of the game. For example: a classic move is to rush on Mersing, unload a huge amount of stuff, retreat and then attack N-E Borneo. You can kill several stuff during the move over N-E Borneo: your TBs haven't the range to threat them during the approach, your Catalina do.

Enemy's LRCAPs aren't a big problem. Enemy's CAPs are, but in case I soften them using B-17s I deployed from Philippines and PH. They damage all those pesky A6M2s/Oscar-Ics and then I am pretty sure Catalina can do their honest job.

It's just a matter of playing with ranges, positioning, NavS/SigInt, psychology and numbers. I do not say you kill the KB with a random group of Catalina, but I highlight that you can capitalize pretty well many opportunities and that's all I look for: side attacks on the enemy, capitalization over his mistakes, random hits/kills to slow his operations down.
For me, it's a matter of strategy. My grand strategy requires more time than what I do have with Mersing at day-1 and Philippines skipped, therefore I do what I can to gain every little bit of time to arrive at Jan-42 when my Burma defences will be ready and Indian Theater strongly reinforced.

In the meanwhile, I am perfectly open to lose the whole Pacific region to Japanese. Including PH if needed. I play DEI with the obvious idea of losing badly the ballte but accomplishing a strategic gain where it is important to me. That's why I throw into the meatgrinder extremely relevant assets such as Catalinas or B-17s.

I even sent a random Australian DIV to set up a tougher fight in Java. I know they'll die miserably. They'll buy some time, though.

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to Alpha77)

Post #: 29

RE: Training carrier pilots as Allies - 11/27/2019 11:40:49 AM

Alpha77

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline

Interesting ideas which one could use who starts a new Allied PBM...

On the IJN side their flying boats could be used to simmilar manner but are quite expensive to lose (4E). But for sure they hit quite good with torpedoes even if trained only in the 40s (IME) as long facing no big thread from Allied air and/or AA.

(in reply to ITAKLinus)

Post #: 30