RE: unrealistic air combat...

RE: unrealistic air combat... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific

Message

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 10:12:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mdiehl Your position is a bit like demanding proof of the absence of god. But if you want to "debunk" one ( or more ) of the games rules, then it's up to you to disprove it. quote: You guys are the ones asserting that the Japanese had a real capability to launch CV based airstrikes at night. And we proved it. quote: So far you have been unable to come up with an example of a successful one. Why should it have to be successful? quote: You guys are the ones who have asserted that night time navigation by CV based piliots without loran is simple and reliable enough to make it an effective strategy in a consim, yet you have not provided a single example of the IJN successfully implementing a night attack on any target at any time. And no-one has proved the Allies did it in this Theatre either. The rules allow that too. quote: The Royal Navy could try it in 1942, because CV based swordfish and other torpedo a.c. were often equipped with radar. While that's not so great for navigation, it means that in the dark of night or low-cloud cover you could pick out a target with a small chance of success. Not as good as visual aiming in daylight but definitely better than visual aiming by iteself at night. So they could have. But to use someone else's point, did they?If not same situation as the Japs. quote: In 1942, the only USN a.c. capable of executing any kind of night attack with reasonable chances of success were land-based PBYs. So No. quote: It's germane. The point is that if operational losses at night are correctly modeled, and if operational successes are correctly modeled, players would emulate the historical IJNs aversion to launching night attacks. Now you get the idea!! quote: You seem very confused about what happened at Pearl Harbor. I know what happened at PH. I just got confused with your technical phrase. My answer shows that. Stop gloating! quote: It appears to be your contention that every time someone playing UV might wish to launch a night strike it should be allowed on the presumption that every target MUST have a 100 KW radio station blaring out American Bandstand conveniently usable by the enemy for navigation. Either admit that is what you are claiming or admit that the Pearl Harbor example is (as most of us know) irrelevent to this discussion. I've told you what I think and it's not what you are presuming above. The PH example was relevant in the context given, if not in the strange world in which you seem to exist. quote: The evidence is that the IJN never launched a successful CV-based night raid throughout the entire war. If you believe otherwise, where is your evidence? As I said before. You are proposing a "change" to the rules. It's up to you to prove YOUR case. By the way, most Japs have an aversion to anything to do with the Second World War and therefore accounts of what they did or did not do are rare. A lack of evidence is not therefore evidence of anything you may wish to presume.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 10:16:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: borner So there itis? Sorry my friend, I still dis-agree. Yes, the US attempted night ops, and had some success with these in a strike at Truk. However, most of these planes flew from US Enterprise, with radar equiped Avengers, after Enterprise had been withdrawn for months of practice. Can anyone show me an example where a night strike hit one target at sea, let alone against a whole TF. Aside of a slight offshoot by Ike99 & Tocaff, we were discusing strikes against Bases.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 10:23:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter quote: ie...washing machine charlie. Presumption. No evidence. quote: He also admitted they didn't really put much effort into considering the manner in which an open ended, uncontrolled implmentation could be expolited by a mercenary individual with no common sense and a lack of concern for historical accuracy. Read between the lines. He is saying in so many words, " we know we goofed on this but it's too late to fix it". What planet do you live on Hansbolter? This would be laughed out of court, if it ever ever got there. Total conjecture. Even slanderous!

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 10:31:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tocaff UV is a game and as such historical can be bent in the what if of gaming. I think you mean history. However, your theory is correct. quote: Night CV ops should be allowed in UV, while at the same time ops loses should be high while accuracy of the attacks should be low. Now you have the idea! If however the latter two points are not as they should be then a restriction such as a minimum bombing altitude could be used ( or whatever else some smart person can think of ). No night OPS is however, not smart, just dumb.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 10:39:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter What's this??? An admission that they "goofed" and since it's too late to fix it in UV they are looking to CF to fix it???? So much for the lines I was reading between not even being there! Again you misinterprete the information posted to suit your own ends. Take off the blinkers!!

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 10:43:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ILCK quote: ORIGINAL: SuluSea Ten pages and still no one has posted a shred of evidence that the IJN carried out a successful night carrier operation. Not that there was any doubt in the first place. For people in a historical game you'd think this would be possible. As stated before - information from Japanese sources is rare, as they do not like to deal with WW2. Therefore a lack of evidence proves nothing.

AbeSimpson -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 10:45:57 PM)
Thread`s dead baby [:D]

ILCK -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 10:51:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB As stated before - information from Japanese sources is rare, as they do not like to deal with WW2. Therefore a lack of evidence proves nothing. OK....so if the Japs who did the bombing don't have sources maybe, oh, I don't know, let's see.....the people that they bombed might have some records. They might have a raftload of records. Odd how neither the bombers nor the bombees mention this. [:)] Please, if it had happened it'd be mentioned by someone somewhere in the vomitous mass of info we have on WWII.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 11:06:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pasternakski quote: Ike, fer chrissake, can't you just let it go? I mean, the horse has been shot, thumped, beaten, ground, breaded, fried, fricasseed, whipped, honked, tailored, whacked, beaten some more, pureed, shredded, pounded, mortar-and-pestled, nuked, decontaminated, disembowelled, shellacked, torpedoed, and beaten some more. Agreed, but IKE99 is not the only one still here plugging their point of view ( & it's more than me too). Like you, every one wants the last word so they can claim victory. By the way is this your second "comeback" or third? quote: I don't see a single person here disputing your contention that night carrier air operations were possible, and sometimes attempted, in the Pacific theater in WWII. Disagreed. Several have said they were not possible & all their subsequent comments still support that view, and indeed carry it into general night time ops. quote: What they are saying, impliedly if not directly, is that such operations were not anyone's preferred mode of launching airstrikes from their carriers, and the primary reason was that severe operations losses were feared in exchange for lack of effective results. UV allows night carrier air operations almost off-handedly, and however they are represented by that game, Matrix has given you an exact pronouncement of what the prospects for change are: none. Thats not how I read the comments made. However, I agree that Night Air OPS from Carriers are neither sides "cup of tea". As to the in game effects I do not know, except that I hope they are reasonably allowed for. Some feel thats not the case, but as it applies to both sides I couldn't care less as long as it's not as effective as day- time raids.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 11:09:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AbeSimpson Thread`s dead baby [:D] You haven't been around here long, so you know nothing about how these people think/act.[:-]

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/25/2008 11:28:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ILCK quote: ORIGINAL: DEB As stated before - information from Japanese sources is rare, as they do not like to deal with WW2. Therefore a lack of evidence proves nothing. OK....so if the Japs who did the bombing don't have sources maybe, oh, I don't know, let's see.....the people that they bombed might have some records. They might have a raftload of records. Odd how neither the bombers nor the bombees mention this. [:)] Please, if it had happened it'd be mentioned by someone somewhere in the vomitous mass of info we have on WWII. That's as maybe, but finding it is something else. Not all things the Japs did are / were reported by the Allies. Most wartime reporting covers particular battles & large scale actions. General night OPs are not of this Ilk. There were thousands of night ops in Europe, but not that many are generally known about. The Blitz years in England centre around London & Coventry but alot of towns got bombed. Info is not as readily available as you seem to think and searching 100's or 1,000's of web sight entries to get a correct hit is just not reasonable.

pasternakski -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/26/2008 12:23:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB quote: ORIGINAL: AbeSimpson Thread`s dead baby [:D] You haven't been around here long, so you know nothing about how these people think/act.[:-] Yeah. They tend to go on and on and on like the Energizer bunny long after the toy is broken and no longer works no matter how much juice you pour into it. Besides, Abe, don't be such a moron. Obviously, those of us among the Anointed have been graced with knowledge far beyond your poor ability to comprehend. Now, take this pasternakski guy, for example. If he was a dipstick, you would never know if you had any oil in your crankcase. If he was a lightning rod, your temple would have been reduced to smoldering rubble long ago. If he was a messiah, he would have been late for his own resurrection. If he was ... Oh, sorry. I guess I was going on and on and on, wasn't I? NEVER MIND.

Kingfisher -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/26/2008 1:23:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB quote: ORIGINAL: ILCK quote: ORIGINAL: DEB As stated before - information from Japanese sources is rare, as they do not like to deal with WW2. Therefore a lack of evidence proves nothing. OK....so if the Japs who did the bombing don't have sources maybe, oh, I don't know, let's see.....the people that they bombed might have some records. They might have a raftload of records. Odd how neither the bombers nor the bombees mention this. [:)] Please, if it had happened it'd be mentioned by someone somewhere in the vomitous mass of info we have on WWII. That's as maybe, but finding it is something else. Not all things the Japs did are / were reported by the Allies. Most wartime reporting covers particular battles & large scale actions. General night OPs are not of this Ilk. There were thousands of night ops in Europe, but not that many are generally known about. The Blitz years in England centre around London & Coventry but alot of towns got bombed. Info is not as readily available as you seem to think and searching 100's or 1,000's of web sight entries to get a correct hit is just not reasonable. Rest assured that had the Japanese achieved the level of success in carrier night ops as described in this thread it wouldn't have been buried in page six of the daily intelligence briefings. Two things would have immediately resulted from this: a) repeat performances, perhaps even a definitive change in carrier tactics on the part of the Japanese, and b) the inevitable reaction on the part of the allies (i.e. Direct copy of tactics, more investment in night fighter training & squadrons). It should be noted that neither case happened.

pasternakski -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/26/2008 1:51:12 AM)
Wait ... wait ... something's coming to me ... it's a ... it's a ... vision, I think ... [image]local://upfiles/6977/EBC70B54E4644697BE5C73E4BB76ECA6.jpg[/image]

ILCK -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/26/2008 1:59:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kingfisher Rest assured that had the Japanese achieved the level of success in carrier night ops as described in this thread it wouldn't have been buried in page six of the daily intelligence briefings. Two things would have immediately resulted from this: a) repeat performances, perhaps even a definitive change in carrier tactics on the part of the Japanese, and b) the inevitable reaction on the part of the allies (i.e. Direct copy of tactics, more investment in night fighter training & squadrons). It should be noted that neither case happened. Yep the IJN ran a successful night op and they never did it again and the USN never made any mention anywhere of it and no historian has found any evidence of such a raid from interviewing veterans on both sides or from the documents. That's likely to have happened.

AbeSimpson -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/26/2008 9:03:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pasternakski quote: ORIGINAL: DEB quote: ORIGINAL: AbeSimpson Thread`s dead baby [:D] You haven't been around here long, so you know nothing about how these people think/act.[:-] Yeah. They tend to go on and on and on like the Energizer bunny long after the toy is broken and no longer works no matter how much juice you pour into it. Besides, Abe, don't be such a moron. Obviously, those of us among the Anointed have been graced with knowledge far beyond your poor ability to comprehend. Now, take this pasternakski guy, for example. If he was a dipstick, you would never know if you had any oil in your crankcase. If he was a lightning rod, your temple would have been reduced to smoldering rubble long ago. If he was a messiah, he would have been late for his own resurrection. If he was ... Oh, sorry. I guess I was going on and on and on, wasn't I? NEVER MIND. I guess now is time to beg for mercy and call him MASTER? [&o][:D]

Ike99 -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/26/2008 3:14:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ILCK OK....so if the Japs who did the bombing don't have sources maybe, oh, I don't know, let's see.....the people that they bombed might have some records. They might have a raftload of records. Odd how neither the bombers nor the bombees mention this. Please, if it had happened it'd be mentioned by someone somewhere in the vomitous mass of info we have on WWII. In this theatre such records would be extremely hard to find if they exist at all and I doubt they exist. Going out to count the bomb holes the next morning on a airfield and documenting them after a Japanese night bombing raid would be extremely low on the list of priorities. I don´t think anyone would be too concerned with that while trying to just stay alive or, minimum, keeping the ability to copulate.

tocaff -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/26/2008 4:21:30 PM)
I'd like to submit the following as the last word on this subject......... ENOUGH

Kingfisher -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/26/2008 5:17:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: ORIGINAL: ILCK OK....so if the Japs who did the bombing don't have sources maybe, oh, I don't know, let's see.....the people that they bombed might have some records. They might have a raftload of records. Odd how neither the bombers nor the bombees mention this. Please, if it had happened it'd be mentioned by someone somewhere in the vomitous mass of info we have on WWII. In this theatre such records would be extremely hard to find if they exist at all and I doubt they exist. Going out to count the bomb holes the next morning on a airfield and documenting them after a Japanese night bombing raid would be extremely low on the list of priorities. I don´t think anyone would be too concerned with that while trying to just stay alive or, minimum, keeping the ability to copulate. You are thinking too far down the chain of command. Both sides devoted considerable resources to evaluating the opposition's tactics and equipment, but these intelligence types were a couple of rungs further up the ladder than the average airbase support grunt.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 1:17:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kingfisher Rest assured that had the Japanese achieved the level of success in carrier night ops as described in this thread it wouldn't have been buried in page six of the daily intelligence briefings. You don't really read this thread do you? No-one has "claimed" a level of success in Night carrier OPS! We have just said that they could fly Night OPS if they wished too. Some people here think that no-one took off or landed ( at night ) on a carrier before 1944.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 1:19:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ILCK Yep the IJN ran a successful night op and they never did it again and the USN never made any mention anywhere of it and no historian has found any evidence of such a raid from interviewing veterans on both sides or from the documents. That's likely to have happened. Some-one else who can't read!! SEE PREVIOUS POST.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 1:22:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kingfisher You are thinking too far down the chain of command. Both sides devoted considerable resources to evaluating the opposition's tactics and equipment, but these intelligence types were a couple of rungs further up the ladder than the average airbase support grunt. Even more reason why it's unlikely. All info has to come from the bottom up unless it is personally gathered.

DEB -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 1:49:32 AM)
To answer some points made at various timesby varius people :- 1. Night-time navigation during early WW2 was done by: a) Celestial Navigation b) Dead Reckoning c) Radio Navigation A) Navigation by the Planets & the Stars, as used by ALL Navies at night, in conjuction with B. B) As described by IKE99 previously. Plot a course ( degrees ) and use your charts & speed. C) In two forms, one of which ( ADF ) was used by the Japs. This system was in use by the US WAVES during the war and did not use anything ( A & B ) that the Japs did not have or know. 2. From :- http://www.pacificwrecks.com/people/veterans/kudo.html The Tainan Kokutai was renamed the 251st Kokutai in early 1943. In May of that year they received two J1N1 Gekko (Irving) nightfighters armed with upward and downward firing 20mm cannons. Flying from Lakunai Airfield near Rabaul, Kudo was the first to test the aircraft in combat, flying with Lt. (jg) Akira Sugawara as observer. He would become the first night fighter ace on either side of the Pacific War. Satoru Ono also flew from Rabaul. June 26, 1943 Shot down two B-17s, firing from below using 164 rounds of 20mm ammunition. July 7, 1943 Took off for an evening patrol from Ballale flying with Akira Sugawara as observer. Thie Gekko used its two downward pointing 20mm cannons (on other occasion he had used the guns that pointed upwards). This would have required Kudo to approach the Hudson unseen from above and behind and then firing when in position 30 degrees above the Hudson's fore-aft axis (allowing for deflection). Claims in C5M Babs 1. B-17 by aerial burst bomb (August 29, 1942) P. B-17 by aerial burst bomb (August 29, 1942) Claims in J1N1 Gekko P. B-24 (June 30, 1943) possibly 42-40254 307th BG, MACR 30 Confirmed Night Fighter Victories 1 . B-17E "Honi Kuu Okole" 41-9244 (May 21, 1943) 2 . B-17E 41-9011 (May 21, 1943) 3 . B-17E "Georgia Peach" 41-24454 (June 13, 1943) 4 . B-17E "Naughty But Nice" 41-2430 (June 26, 1943) 5. B-17F "Taxpayers Pride" 41-24448 (June 26, 1943) 6. B-17F "Pluto" 41-24543 (June 30, 1943) 7. RNZAF A-28 Hudson NZ2033 (July 7, 1943) observer Sugiwara So the Japs did night fighter combat before the USA & in our time frame. 3. In Europe, the British choose to do night raids to minimise the losses on their aircraft from enemy fire, dispite the increases in OPS losses, and the lessening of the effectiveness of their bomb hits. The USA, on the other hand choose to maximise the damage caused by making daylight raids only, despite the high losses to enemy AA & aircraft. In the Pacific, the USA initially choose night raids, but when they learned that the Japs had a night fighter capacity, they switched to day raids.

Kingfisher -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 2:16:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB You don't really read this thread do you? No-one has "claimed" a level of success in Night carrier OPS! If launching 50+ planes from a carrier, forming up, navigating to the target (in formation), executing an attack, reforming for the flight home, navigating back to the carrier and then landing at night does not fit into your definition of a successful mission then what pray tell is? quote: Some people here think that no-one took off or landed ( at night ) on a carrier before 1944. Some people here have a problem providing any factual evidence

Nomad -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 2:32:21 AM)
I have another view: [image]local://upfiles/4176/BCF6C640B14E405C856AF39D918C24D1.gif[/image]

pasternakski -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 2:38:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB varius people One of the most popular Roman emperors of his time, but rather unknown today.

Kingfisher -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 2:40:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB quote: ORIGINAL: Kingfisher You are thinking too far down the chain of command. Both sides devoted considerable resources to evaluating the opposition's tactics and equipment, but these intelligence types were a couple of rungs further up the ladder than the average airbase support grunt. Even more reason why it's unlikely. All info has to come from the bottom up unless it is personally gathered. So it's your opinion that a major strike on an airbase would not be reported?

pasternakski -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 2:46:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB All info has to come from the bottom up unless it is personally gathered. In other words, @$$holes are the best source of knowledge.

pasternakski -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 2:48:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB Navigation by the Planets & the Stars Wasn't this the name of Cat Stevens's last album ... before he became Yusuf Osama bin Islam Obama?

pasternakski -> RE: unrealistic air combat... (7/28/2008 2:51:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DEB use your charts & speed. Now, now, charts are okay, but we gotta be careful advocating drug use around here.

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

4.5