Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

Rainer -> Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/5/2009 10:33:40 PM)

Current WITP (1.806) allows only one round of bombarding for Battle Ships. After that ammunition is depleted (except reserve for surface battles) and the ships have to return to port for replenishment. ANY port (even as small as size 1).
This has an impact on strategy because multi-day bombardment is not possible, at least not for participating BBs. Therefor wise players will probably want to occupy ports in the vicinity of their main targets.
Example: Say you play Allies and you are after Saipan. You probably will first attack one of the other islands, say Tinian, Guam or even Pagan, just to make sure you have a port where your BBs can replenish and continue to bombard Saipan NEXT day. Otherwise your BBs will have to go all the way home to Eniwetok or Kwajalein - a multi days trip.
Seems all a bit odd to me.

Question: is that still so with AE?

PS: There are work arounds, like sending BBs in small packs, say 2 per TF plus escorts, and have those packages arrive with one day delay between them. However, that reduces firepower, and was certainly neither necessary nor considered during the war.

PPS: Note to AE team: please disregard if causing ANY delay [;)]



khyberbill -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/5/2009 10:57:51 PM)

This, of course, can become another can of worms. Back in the 60's, a drinking buddy of mine was a gunners mate on the New Jersey. One of the things I recall him telling me is that the design life of the liner (I dont recall the technical term) inside their 16 inch guns was 300 salvos. Again, before the experts tear me to pieces, this is what I was told by a 2nd class gunners mate. I have not googled this information nor looked it up on wiki. He also told me they fired more salvos than that on his last WestPac tour to Vietnam in 68/69. However, what saved the liner was they didnt do a lot of consecutive firing. Once or twice a day was the norm. In other words, not a bombardment. Therefore, if you want a lot of consecutive firing on the one hand, then there is a need to put the ship in the yards at some point to replace the barrel liner.




Rainer -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 2:41:38 AM)

I see your point, and I agree that prolonged use of the big guns definitely should have an effect on wear and tear. And a nasty one at that. Barrels are a delicate thing.
However, what limited knowledge of the events of the pacific war I have, most sources report that atolls were bombarded for more than one day in a row. There were also discussions, notably in preparation of the assault on Iwo Jima, that the battle wagons should stay for bombardment for at least a week or so, if I recall correctly. I think the final agreement was to have the big guns bombard Iwo Jima for 3 (?) days.
I feel it should be the commander's (that's me) decision, how the barrels should be (mis-) used.

I still feel that the current situation was not intended by the WitP developers. It looks like an oversight to me. Perhaps related to the also not working AE ships, which don't replenish the big guns of the BBs (and cruisers? Not sure). Not before 1945, not 1945. Never.

Basically I can live with that. I'm asking because it forces a change (deviation?) in strategy, as mentioned in my last post. And AE provides a chance to adjust things like that. Or future versions, who knows. Who cares as long as WitP is SO much fun. Even against AI [;)]


EDIT: Oops, forgot: PS: Note to AE team: please disregard if causing ANY delay [;)]



Gunner98 -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 6:30:29 AM)

The barrel life issue is real one, I'm not sure how many EFC (Equivalent Full Charge) the big naval guns had but it wouldn't be that high. The method of extending barrel life described also makes sense since a major component of barrel wear is heat. As the barrel warms up the metallurgy changes and each round brings a bit of the barrel down range with it, the hotter the tube the worse it gets. Not as catastrophic as a premature of either the propellant or shell due to heat but a worrisome side effect none the less.

I suspect (but don't know for sure) that changing the barrel liners was a relatively routine maintenance task but it would require quite a bit of infrastructure to do it.

I don't believe barrel wear is modelled in WiTP but I am not sure it should be either. I believe that the problem described can be (has been?) solved with proper functioning of the AEs, that way you can park a replenishment group one or two hexes away at any atoll and do what the USN did with their forward logistics forces.



bradfordkay -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 7:08:45 AM)

I'll bet that they had to be more careful about it during the Vietnam war than during WW2 because (one would guess) replacement barrel liners were probably much more abundant in the 1940's. 



2ndACR -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 7:14:19 AM)

Well, IIRC USS Newport News, last of the big gun cruisers fired about 70,000 rounds while deployed to Vietnam.

That is alot of 8 inch ammo. Fastest firing ship ever built.



Terminus -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 7:26:22 AM)

BB main battery ammunition can no longer be replenished at small ports. I forget how big they have to be, but certainly bigger than size 3.



spence -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 11:55:10 AM)

The entire bombardment routine as it exists in WitP is modeled on the October IJN BB bombardment of Henderson Field: what turned out to be a singular event in the war.

Knocking airfields (area targets) out for the US/Allies became a job for carpet bombing by 4E bombers. The US then used its bombardment BBs to engage point targets such as individual strongpoints and guns. With embedded NGFSOs directing the fire they got on target quickly and suppressed or knocked out the guns after one or two salvos or even shots. [In his own writings General Kuribayashi (sic) on Iwo Jima wrote that half of his antiboat guns were destroyed or knocked out by direct, counterbattery naval gunfire within 24 hours of his authorizing them to open fire (either through loss of crewman, isolation from their ammunition supply or being buried)]. That type of NGFS by BBs is only available through a manipulation of TF type currently:

[elaborated below for those unfamiliar with the trick:
1)form Amphib/Transport TF and load troops
2) when loaded change TF to escort TF, add BBs
3) change TF back to Amphib/Transport]

The list of accomplishments by Japanese CD guns in WWII is pathetically short (major CD installations were not challenged by either side). The modeling in WitP would have us believe that minesweeper duty in the Allied Navies was the equivalent of duty in the Kamikaze Corps when in fact the USN lists something like 2 minesweepers and 5 coastal minesweepers sunk in all theaters by all causes in WWII (subsequent to the loss of the ones initially in the PI).

Is a more realistic portrayal of naval bombardment in the works (or at least an easier procedure for integrating BBs into the amphib support roles they proved effective in)?




Yamato hugger -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 12:22:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer

PPS: Note to AE team: please disregard if causing ANY delay [;)]



Hearing rustling behind you in the bushes do you? m10bob hasnt replied yet, so maybe he is waiting for you to feel relaxed and just when you feel you are safe

[sm=00000054.gif]



Akos Gergely -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 12:29:52 PM)

The info on the approx 300 ESR is correct but! An EFC means a n armor-piercing shell fired with full charge (so in the case of USS New Jersey that's 6 bags of 90lb charges).. For bombardment they used HE or HC shells which were less in weight so this made a bombardment round to about 0.43 ESR and also if they fired with reduced charges at 1900 fps instead of the normal 2600-2700 fps the ESR rating was way below 0.1, meaning that 10 bombardment rounds could be fired for one "antiship" shot.

Just as as ide info, later on in the carrer of the Iowas a lo of techniques and additives were developed, first a cooler burning powder, then a so called Swedish-wax applied to the liner up to the late '80s when a special foam was used on the charges. by then the ESR value was so low that the linerlife was no longer the bottleneck, instead mechanical fatigue became the major limiting factor.

As for liner/gun changes it usually required a port and a heavy lift capacity crane. FOr the modern USN BBs it was relatively simple task as the guns could be unmounted through the gunports. For older BBs the had to remove part of the turret top armor and retrive the guns backwards (I think for Nevada and Pennsylvania even the turret back plates had to be removed becose the guns were on a single sleve).



Rainer -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 1:33:57 PM)

I hereby officially state that

I am relaxed.
I feel safe.

Now that I am standing fast let the information come[:'(]




dhuffjr2 -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 4:42:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos

The info on the approx 300 ESR is correct but! An EFC means a n armor-piercing shell fired with full charge (so in the case of USS New Jersey that's 6 bags of 90lb charges).. For bombardment they used HE or HC shells which were less in weight so this made a bombardment round to about 0.43 ESR and also if they fired with reduced charges at 1900 fps instead of the normal 2600-2700 fps the ESR rating was way below 0.1, meaning that 10 bombardment rounds could be fired for one "antiship" shot.

This along with the comment on target selection and rate of fire are the most important things to bear in mind in regards to bombardment.

Those big guns were in pretty close so the amount of powder needed was lower which would reduce wear. They did not hammer away continuously until out of ammo either.

How big can atolls get in port size? Because that is were the replenishment was taking place. How long to build them to sufficient size? As I recall from my reading they were replenished from an ammunition ship not a dock.

I recall reading that one old battleship was turned into a ammunition store ship and used in the Pacific.



m10bob -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 6:35:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer

PPS: Note to AE team: please disregard if causing ANY delay [;)]



Hearing rustling behind you in the bushes do you? m10bob hasnt replied yet, so maybe he is waiting for you to feel relaxed and just when you feel you are safe

[sm=00000054.gif]


Never safe...and if they are foolish enough to run....they die tired.[;)]



m10bob -> RE: Main Batteries of BBs / Bombard Mission (1/6/2009 6:39:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer

I hereby officially state that

I am relaxed.
I feel safe.

Now that I am standing fast let the information come[:'(]





The hall monitors are standing by.

[image]local://upfiles/7909/D136B628645E47AE9E17812489297969.jpg[/image]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.03125