If you could have one Axis A/C... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message


BLUESBOB -> If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 7:03:49 PM)

Thought I'd start another fantasy thread.

I was thinking, what if Germany was able to smuggle plans for the Junkers Ju390 to Japan, and that Japan produced them in numbers. That's the heavy bomber that flew from France to within 12 miles of the U.S. east coast during secret trials. Man, wouldn't that change the complexity of the game! Japanese 4E's able to hit Pearl from Truk!




Nomad -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 7:12:47 PM)

How about F4U Corsairs? i would think they like them. [:D]




Apollo11 -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 7:40:04 PM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: BLUESBOB

Thought I'd start another fantasy thread.

I was thinking, what if Germany was able to smuggle plans for the Junkers Ju390 to Japan, and that Japan produced them in numbers. That's the heavy bomber that flew from France to within 12 miles of the U.S. east coast during secret trials. Man, wouldn't that change the complexity of the game! Japanese 4E's able to hit Pearl from Truk!


That wouldn't help Japan at all... it was just experiment that didn't have much military use (same as other civilian airframe reconstructions)...


What would help Japan is (but luckily for humanity the Germany-Japan copperation was almost nonexistent):

#1
Radar technology.

Germany had "Freya" and "Wurzburg" mobile radars made to detect airborne targets and "Seetakt" ship radars in 1930's. Late war airborne radar technogy would also be very useful to Japan.


#2
Tank technology.

Japanese tanks were miserable.


#3
Infantry weapons.

Japanese infantry weapons were, to say the least, cumbersome and although Germany relied on old 1898 carabine for most of it's soldiers it was better rifle than Japanese one (and there is MG-34 and MG-42 of course)!


#4
Aircraft technology.

I will not go Me-262 route: Me-109, FW-190, Ju-88 would be sufficient...



Leo "Apollo11"




MkXIV -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 7:49:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11


#4
Aircraft technology.

I will not go Me-262 route: Me-109, FW-190, Ju-88 would be sufficient...



Leo "Apollo11"



Not sure they would want an FW-190, after all it was "A PIG" [;)]




Apollo11 -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 7:55:00 PM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: MkXIV

Not sure they would want an FW-190, after all it was "A PIG" [;)]


"A pig" !?!?!?

FW-190 was great fighter and when it was introduced in 1942 it made true consternation in RAF because in first engagement Spitfires were slaughtered by brand new FW-190's (this prompted "crash" Spitfire advanced developement)!

What most people think when "FW-190" is mentioned is heavily armoured and armed versions made to attackbombers... but that was not original FW-190 and that was not FW-190 with in-line engine (like FW-190D) in late war (early FW-190's wer radial engine)....


Leo "Apollo11"




mdiehl -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 8:05:24 PM)

quote:

Germany had "Freya" and "Wurzburg" mobile radars made to detect airborne targets and "Seetakt" ship radars in 1930's. Late war airborne radar technogy would also be very useful to Japan.


Japanese radar was adequate for detection by the end of the war. The problem both for them and the Germans was that they never had anything approaching fire control radar like the US FD set.

quote:

Japanese tanks were miserable.


Have to agree there. But what's the alternative? Japan didn't have the industry to make "Germany's Best" in useful numbers. Were I a Japanese planner with the ability to start tinkering in 1941 I'd ask the Germans for some Stug IIIs and I'd *try* to copy those.

quote:

Japanese infantry weapons were, to say the least, cumbersome and although Germany relied on old 1898 carabine for most of it's soldiers it was better rifle than Japanese one (and there is MG-34 and MG-42 of course)!


The German equipment was hands down better. Somehow the Japanese even managed to screw up their basic infantry support MG even though it was copied (IIRC) from a successful European pre-war design.

quote:

Me-109, FW-190, Ju-88 would be sufficient...


Agreed, but with Japanese logistical and industrial constraints you couldn't pick more than one. The G4M will do for a substitute for the Ju-88. Neither were any good if they were unescorted and facing enemy fighters. The FW 190 is hands down the best of those three. But could Japan make a decent knock off of its radial engine? After all, on paper the late war Japanese fighters were decent but quality control was so sloppy that they rarely operated anywhere near spec.




greg_slith -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 8:48:03 PM)

I think they'd get better mileage out of panzerfausts and panzershecks. By '44 the best anti-tank tool was the Mk I Son-of Nippon self exploding bomb. German anti-aircraft missle tech would be pretty important too.




Terminus -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 8:49:51 PM)

Like what? The Wasserfall? Good luck getting that to work...




Apollo11 -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 9:01:08 PM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Like what? The Wasserfall? Good luck getting that to work...


The "Wasserfall" later become Russian SA-1 (and then SA-2 etc.)... it was birth of a new era... 100% revolutionary!!!

Also let us not forget that "Wasserfall" was made in 1945 - if it was operational it would made impossible large bomber raids (i.e. bomber boxes) - but by 1945 it was all over for Hitler's Germany for long long time!

But, if we play with "what if" (that never happened and never could happen) in 1943 operational "Wasserfall" + reliable Me-262 would made Germany safe from strategic bombing...


Leo "Apollo11"





el cid again -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 9:08:27 PM)

quote:

I was thinking, what if Germany was able to smuggle plans for the Junkers Ju390 to Japan, and that Japan produced them in numbers. That's the heavy bomber that flew from France to within 12 miles of the U.S. east coast during secret trials. Man, wouldn't that change the complexity of the game! Japanese 4E's able to hit Pearl from Truk!


First, Germany FLET the JU-390 to Japan - too late to produce anything - but as a way for a notorious officer to escape.

Second, Japan lacked the ability to produce such a monster in numbers. They have an even larger project - I call it "the Japanese B-36" - but it was intended as an atom bomb carrier in tiny numbers. Also it would have taken until about 1948 to produce the required engines - and 1946 for the prototype (with half power engines).

Third, the Ju-390 is not the plane that flew to 12 km from NYC. It never had an opportunity - and flew only as a transport plane. The plane you are thinking of is the Me-264. Green first reports this in Warplanes of the Third Reich. I think it is in Warplanes of the Luftwaffe. And ALL German heavies are discussed at great length and detail in Luftwaffe Over Amerika - a new book. Much Ju-290 and 390 material is in the small Schiffer series German Heavy Bombers.




el cid again -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 9:26:09 PM)

quote:

What would help Japan is (but luckily for humanity the Germany-Japan copperation was almost nonexistent):

#1
Radar technology.


Quite false actually. The best long range proper tracking radar in the world was German. It could acquire and track in altitude as well as range a hypersonic missile - and was originally intended to insure that V-2s were on course (by radio correction after launch) - although in the event the sites for launching so accurately were overrun and only mobile units got to shoot.

The longest range aircraft detection technology of any WWII era power was used by the IJA - and it is the basis for a Chinese project to detect stealth aircraft today (one terminus station was at Shanghai - so the Chinese got to see its antennas). This is not exactly a radar however - it is properly an electromagnetic fence.

Japanese radars often were multi-static - they might have as many as four recievers - which is not only very efficient in terms of getting value from a radiated watt - it yields certain operational advantages.

Note that the Japanese invented the cavity magnetron independently. There is a good deal in Western radar history about how big a deal this is - the French invented it - smuggled it to Britain in 1940 - and Britain shared it with the USA - to help "win the war." Well - it may indeed have been "secret" - but physics is physics - and the Japanese - not knowing about it - made it anyway. Just because you don't know about it does not mean it is correct to assume ignorance on their part.

In general - I work with the principle author who writes about Japanese atomic science and, lately, with the head of a US intel team assigned (after the century turned) to investigate the same subject - I would say Japanese physics was far better than German - and amazingly ahead on theoretical grounds. [That is, Japanese theoretical physicists could work out correct values on the blackboard which American and Europeans could not, and did so, during the war, often on a time competative basis, in the atomic science world. A Japanese physicist was the first to propose a hydrogen bomb - for example - and more than a few things we had to measure the Japanese simply calculated.] I began professional life as a radar technician, and I collect wartime radar technology data:

this assertion is at best grossly misleading. Japan produced radar sets in the thousands - 6000 for just one type - and virtually for every kind of platform (land, ship, submarine, airplane) with virtually every function. It was better at using radar passively than we were - see the book Shinano for an example. Shinano detected her adversary FIRST - using RADAR - but not active radar! She was lost due to a series of critical mistakes made by her captain - the first of which was to misinterpret the meaning of the signal (he thought it was a surface ship, he thought it was attempting a different maneuver than it really was, and his misjudgement caused him to take the wrong course). But the OPPORTUNITY to wholly evade detection belonged to Shinano - because it had first contact - and passively - so the attacker had no clue.

Japan did suffer from big problems with respect to radar:

1) It was not a priority for far too long resulting in many things being too late for operational use;

2) Japan had great difficulty producing powerful transmitter devices, including tubes and magnetrons;

3) It was not properly coordinated - the workers at the same factory working on an Army radar had to keep it secret from workers who did Navy radar for example! Instead of sharing, the Army and Navy went separate paths - until too late. [Eventually the Army GAVE radars to the Navy - and one used on Japanese submarines is actually an ARMY radar!]

4) Japan did not use the planned position indicator - what you think of as a circular display - an important aid to interpreting signals.




Apollo11 -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 9:26:42 PM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

I was thinking, what if Germany was able to smuggle plans for the Junkers Ju390 to Japan, and that Japan produced them in numbers. That's the heavy bomber that flew from France to within 12 miles of the U.S. east coast during secret trials. Man, wouldn't that change the complexity of the game! Japanese 4E's able to hit Pearl from Truk!


First, Germany FLET the JU-390 to Japan - too late to produce anything - but as a way for a notorious officer to escape.

Second, Japan lacked the ability to produce such a monster in numbers. They have an even larger project - I call it "the Japanese B-36" - but it was intended as an atom bomb carrier in tiny numbers. Also it would have taken until about 1948 to produce the required engines - and 1946 for the prototype (with half power engines).

Third, the Ju-390 is not the plane that flew to 12 km from NYC. It never had an opportunity - and flew only as a transport plane. The plane you are thinking of is the Me-264. Green first reports this in Warplanes of the Third Reich. I think it is in Warplanes of the Luftwaffe. And ALL German heavies are discussed at great length and detail in Luftwaffe Over Amerika - a new book. Much Ju-290 and 390 material is in the small Schiffer series German Heavy Bombers.



Yes... great book... I bought it last year (2nd hand but in 99.99% mint condition - it is out of print for years and years)...


Leo "Apollo11"




Ursa MAior -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 9:31:40 PM)

Well interesting but lets not forget, that as some one pointed out, WWII Japan lost primarily beacuse of what it was. As a historicality fan (on the first place) I would not like to see fantasy weapons in Witp (I or II). At that time Nippon was a half industrialized medieval country.




mdiehl -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 9:55:13 PM)

quote:

Quite false actually


I'll bite, El Cid. What's your source? Secret? Who's yer famous expert on Japanese WW2 atomic science co-author? I'm reminded of the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. "Top men are working on this even as we speak." "Who?" "Top. Men." You've cited a bunch of History Channel bullshit about Japanese atomic science in the past. Is that still your source? The "Greg Goebel" website or some other noted and peer-reviewed (sarcasm intended) author?

Odd that US atomic scientists could not work out the, umm, necessary equations, yet managed to deploy the bomb that the Japanese could not. Odd that the Japanese had allegedly better tracking radar and deployed "6000" sets but still could not hit a bull in the ass with a bass fiddle, even when shooting at relatively slow targets like medium and heavy bombers.

I hope your tale isn't going to feature "find your own sources" and end with "And *All The Evidence Was Destroyed.*"

I think you'd have to admit that "That Outstanding Japanese Radar Technology" isn't a central feature of any analysis of Japanese surface combat capability, aircraft vectoring, and AAA guidance in any study of WW2 (including the SBS, which rates Japanese flak poorly).

And no, a "radar fence" is not a targeting device. It's not even a particularly good detection device, since such does not track. It's analogous to a trip-flare. Tells you that something has penetrated the perimeter but not where that something is going or when it will arrive.

That's why, by the way, your "rebuttal" is a straw man argument. The Japanese did not have *anything* radar wise that was well tied into a fire control director, nor did the Germans. FD was the best thing going at the time.




mdiehl -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/24/2006 11:46:50 PM)

quote:

It was better at using radar passively than we were - see the book Shinano for an example. Shinano detected her adversary FIRST - using RADAR - but not active radar!


By the way, that's just silly. US subs detected Japanese radar passively too. But, and here's the key, US subs (and just about everything else) had active radar that was far superior to (a) anyone's optical detection system, and (b) any Axis radar. The reason why Shinano detected Archerfish was because Archerfish was actively searching. Nothing about that says the Japanese were "better" at reception. It just says that they relied on it, rather than active methods, to determine when they were being detected. Given the quality of their active sets, their reliance on passive detection makes sense.

That's pretty much the way it works now. When you go active, you necessarily tell the whole world that has reception capability "Here I am." For a guy who claims to have been a mil radar tech, it's odd that I should have to point this out to you.




joey -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 12:04:11 AM)

If we are talking fantasy, I think we should stop worrying so much about planes and radar and, instead, think about guided anti-aircraft missiles. If either the Japanese or the Germans could have developed, manufactured, and deployed a viable anti-aircraft missile capable of downing a heavy bomber in large numbers that wouid have change the outcome of the war. I think this was one of the areas where both countries miss the boat.




Terminus -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 12:09:01 AM)

That was up earlier in this thread, talking about the German Wasserfall. The problem was that it was a SACLOS weapon, and exceptionally vulnerable to jamming...




mdiehl -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 12:20:38 AM)

Besides which you really need to talk about Radar (or these days, IR or Laser) if you want a *guided* SAM. By 1945 the best work done on SAMs was the US Army's WAC Corporal program and other efforts at radar guidance (like the JB series).




Halsey -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 12:29:36 AM)

Could we have a pioleted version of the V-2 for Brady to use as kamikazes?[:D]




Mifune -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 1:05:09 AM)

Let me hijack this thread to its original topic. As for a German plane my choice would be the FW-190. Though a good 4e could be fun if in the right strategic situation. The Me-264 first flight was in December 1942. As far as Japanese aircraft go, most of the interesting designs were too late in the timeline to be a impact plane. But an early inclusion of the Ki-96 would be interesting and provide an interesting impact at a critical time. The Ki-96 prototypes led to the developement of the Ki-102. My two cents with the radar discussion would be if the Japanese had deployed what they had it would have improved their situation. Among the early Radar pioneers was Dr Yagi (i.e. Yagi antennae) but the military did not see the real value for investment till far too late. Like many other issues the Japanese dragged their heels far too long.




Mike Scholl -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 7:50:33 AM)

If you want to give Japan something usefull that they could produce throughout the entire war, I'd vote for the RUSSIAN 76.2 Field Gun. High mobility, rapid rate-of-fire, usefull if not spectacular effect on target, excellent range, good AT capability, a decent AAA gun with a high-angle mounting, relatively simple to mass produce, the list goes on. Of course, the Japs would have trouble manufacturing enough shells to keep them in action..., but they had that anyway and in multiple calibres.




el cid again -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 5:35:08 PM)

quote:

As for a German plane my choice would be the FW-190. Though a good 4e could be fun if in the right strategic situation. The Me-264 first flight was in December 1942. As far as Japanese aircraft go, most of the interesting designs were too late in the timeline to be a impact plane. But an early inclusion of the Ki-96 would be interesting and provide an interesting impact at a critical time. The Ki-96 prototypes led to the developement of the Ki-102. My two cents with the radar discussion would be if the Japanese had deployed what they had it would have improved their situation. Among the early Radar pioneers was Dr Yagi (i.e. Yagi antennae) but the military did not see the real value for investment till far too late. Like many other issues the Japanese dragged their heels far too long.


Japan actually imported the Me-109 and tested it. It also bought rights to the He-100. It knew about - and rejected without testing - the FW-190.
It designed a plane better than all of them - not widely sung in the world of air buffs: the Ki-44. There are indeed better Japanese fighters later in the war - but the Ki-44 is flying in an operational evaluation unit (in combat) when the war (from the US point of view) begins - in 1941 - and is available in numbers in 1942. It is actually a rather spectacular plane and simply needs to be built in greater numbers than the slightly earlier (and revolutionary in its own right) Ki-43 - which became the Japanese standard. Actually - they still built the Ki-27 in 1945 - a terrible mistake! It should have been relegated to second line service in 1942 in favor of Ki-43s and 44s. The 44 should have also been upgraded to the III level - and it is in RHS if you want it.

I agree that Japan cannot build 4 engine bombers in great numbers. But that does not mean they don't matter - in the vast reaches of the Pacific they do matter. In RHS you have that option too: you may build the G8N1 for the navy. I call it "the Japanese B-17" - although the army Ki-91 was also in that same league.




cantona -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 7:04:00 PM)

focke wulf 190




BLUESBOB -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 7:07:45 PM)

Well, a lot of ground has been covered. Obviously most of us feel that Japan was sorely lacking in many aspects of military production. I asked for A/C and got everything from artillery to tanks.

I know there is no way to change this in a game, but , IMO, something else that Japan needed if they were going to win the war was a complete change in their military command framework. Someone described Japan's industrial capabilities as "medieval". Well, their command structure was absolutely "feudal"...and I believe that hurt them quite a bit throughout the war. Everything from sub-warfare to air-combat was effected by this obsolete military doctrine. They turned to the West for their military hardware...but shunned the West's command structure. Bushido worked well with swords...but not with the 20th century's new style of warfare.




Mifune -> RE: If you could have one Axis A/C... (5/25/2006 7:10:28 PM)

"you may build the G8N1 for the navy." Yes I agree, with its availability and virtues but unfortunately Rita does appear quite late. My opinion was to provide a strategic aircraft aircraft at a more opportune time. Where one can change the strategic thinking within the confines of WitP. Too many times we are forces to accept what is without the benefit of the ability to change what could have been without totally delving into fantasyland. Then again we do have hindsight to assist in providing other possibilities.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.09375