Bombardments Again! (Full Version)

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



Message


Didz -> Bombardments Again! (6/3/2002 7:04:16 AM)

I am now on my sixth attempt to get a decent #17 game out of UV and I am doing quite well so far but only at the expense of keeping the FOW switched off so I can avoid some of the more stupid actions of the AI.

I've noticed that the AI tends to sail its CV's back and forth between a point midway between Shortlands and Truk and either Lunga or Gilli so by keeping my CV's well out of the way when they charge I have managed to avoid the usual MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) situation where both sets of CV's knock either other senseless in the first few days of the campaign.

However, it is now mid June and the IJN have started their routine bombardment of Gilli again, only this time I can see exactly whats going on.

The problem is that because of the combination of movement distance and turn phasing there is nothing that I can do to interdict these attacks. (Short of sacrificing my carriers the Rabauls LBA)

The BB task group making them is capable of moving 600 miles in a day and begins its mission well beyond effect range of the LBA at Port Moresby and Gilli and the CV's Hornet and Enterpise deployed just south of the of Louisaide Archipelago.

During the night they charge into Gilli Gilli harbour under cover of darkness and bombard my base completely immune to attack because my aircraft can't fly at night.

However, next morning they are still in Gilli Gilli harbour but despite the fact that they are now well within strike range of about 200 allied bombers the turn sequence allows Naval Movement to happen before Day Air Ops so I have to watch them steam off into the rising sun and by the time my planes get a chance to react they are 300 miles out to sea again.

This situation needs to be changed so that Air Ops happens before Naval Movement or even better both before and after Naval Movement.




expvc5t2 -> more on bombardments (6/3/2002 7:53:11 AM)

The IJN has been able to bombard Port Moresby with impunity. Six times they have come, not once did I receive a warning and not once did any aircraft try to attack the bombardment group. Short of I should not have bought this game, is there something I'm doing wrong ?:(




Slaughtermeyer -> (6/3/2002 8:43:27 AM)

Historically the Japanese were able to perform overnight missions at Guadalcanal with ships based at Rabaul without having to worry about airstrikes from LBA at Guadalcanal, and since the distance from Rabaul to Gili-Gili and even to Port Moresby is shorter than the distance from Rabaul to Guadalcanal, I don't see this as a problem with the possible exception that long-range bombers based in Port Moresby might be able to reach the overnight bombardment groups.




Erik Rutins -> Fast Night Bombardments... (6/3/2002 8:57:42 AM)

The Tokyo Express is a historical tactic. When you "see" the icon there at the start of the day, it really is just an issue of the game not having moved it out yet. They're already well on their way out. By the time search planes have sent in their reports, they should be out of air ops range. Your staffs and pilots start air ops as early as they can, they don't wait until 11AM or some such.

The best way to catch them is with another Surface TF, as the US did historically at Guadalcanal. Even if you lose, you'll likely damage some enemy ships to the point that they will be unable to get out of your air ops range by morning. Then your planes can pound them into the sea, greatly increasing the losses of the bombarding fleet. Eventually, this leads to a change in tactics.

This tactic was historically frustrating for the US as well, but the answer is to use all the various options at your disposal, including surface combat TFs. Until you get P-38s combined with some long range bombers, you'll need to use this kind of combined forces tactic to really hit them hard enough to make it not worthwhile.

Regards,

- Erik




Howard Mitchell -> (6/3/2002 2:50:11 PM)

I'll second what Erik says. If you intercept with a surface force you will often inflict enough damage to slow down the retiring Japanese force and then either finish it of or damage it severely the following day. I'm still learning the game but have used this tactic successfully at Guadalcanal in several scenarios. It's a bit expensive on CAs and DDs though...




Didz -> Re: Fast Night Bombardments... (6/3/2002 4:45:11 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Erik Rutins
[B]The Tokyo Express is a historical tactic. When you "see" the icon there at the start of the day, it really is just an issue of the game not having moved it out yet. They're already well on their way out.[/B][/QUOTE]

I've seen this excuse posted before and accepted it at face value but having done a bit of research since it seems that there were significant differences between the 'Tokyo Express' and the tactics being described here.

According to this US Military history website

http://www.grunts.net/wars/20thcentury/wwii/guadalcanal/guadalcanal.html

[COLOR=orange]The procedure the Japanese used with ships (mostly destroyers) shuttling troops in at night became known to the Marines as "the Tokyo Expess." [/COLOR]

In short it was a covert operation to land fresh troops at night using small fast ships. Not a major BB Task Group that carried out a massive bombardment of a major US naval base.

The article goes on to describe how the over stretched marines held out against numerous 'Banzai' attacks of between 800 and 1,000 men during the day most of which were dead by morning.

[COLOR=orange] The "Tokyo Express" dropped off another 6,000 troops and on the 13th of September 3,500 of them hit the south perimeter of the airfield. This area was defended by the lst Marine Raider Battallion under the command of Lt.Col. Merritt (Red Mike) Edson. They were dug in on a ridge and bore the brunt of wave after wave of "banzai" attacks. [/COLOR]

More importantly the article makes the point that the 'Tokyo Express' was only able to operate at Guadacanal because the marines had not yet managed to contruct an operational airfield on the island. In fact it states that:

[COLOR=orange] The tide began to turn against the Japanese when the "Cactus Air Force" started to operate. Now the Japanese no longer had control of the air and soon the skies would be clear of them altogether. [/COLOR]

My own analysis confirms that a BB bombardment group which spent 1 hour durng the night bombarding Gilli Gilli would not be able to place more than 150 miles between itself and the enemy LBA before morning. It can only travel 400 miles during darkness even if it didn't stop to bombard the port. So, if the program allowed mid-phase interdiction it would only be 5 hexes from Gilli Gilli and easily close enough for LBA and CV search planes to spot it and direct an attack before it steamed out of range.

In effect it would take less than two hours for a search plane to reach the retreating ships and the first air attacks would be able to take place by mid-day.

This alone is a powerful reason why UV needs to be changed to allow a six hour game turn.




Didz -> (6/3/2002 4:50:31 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Howard Mitchell
[B]I'll second what Erik says. If you intercept with a surface force you will often inflict enough damage to slow down the retiring Japanese force and then either finish it of or damage it severely the following day. I'm still learning the game but have used this tactic successfully at Guadalcanal in several scenarios. It's a bit expensive on CAs and DDs though... [/B][/QUOTE]

Exactly, the program forces the US player to sacrifice valuable surface ships to counter a tactic that shouldn't be possible in the first place.




IKerensky -> (6/3/2002 5:21:12 PM)

I never had this kind of problem with GG but with Lunga yes.

Only solution is to make a group mixing DD and CL/CA ( 2 to 1 is a good ratio, 3 CA/CL 6 DD is potent 4/8 is deadly ) with a good leader this kind of group seems to efficiently protect or turn aways ennemy group even with BB in it.


Other things that work well:

1- Put Hudson and Beaufort to the base that is bombarded: they can naval strike to Rabaul and Shortland so range is no more a problem; and they can be absed in Lunga with minor building effect.

2- Use B17,B25,B26 to port attack Rabaul or Shortland Island and get thoses ships while they are resuplying.

3- Set one of your force as bombardement too. This is the kind of game 2 people can play.

4- Mine outside your base 3 hex dep or more. Especially easy for the slot or GG ( where you can mine a belt 3 hex away from your base and 4 to 5 hex depth by basing DM at GG ). Take care in mining the slot, your own force will go around your minefield and so they take more time to do their trip :( and can get annoyed by ennemy air force.


Basically point 2 and 3 enabled me to put the BB Hiei out of comision and numerous more important ships, but Hiei never ever got a chance to do anything. Popint 1 is very eeficient in protecting GG, the last CA run to their never reach it in his ingo leg, beaufort torpedoes grind them.

-------------------------------
LBA rules !
I am once again left with no CV for a years but I dont care, I can eat any Japanese CV that try to go souther than SI or RAbaul and I do it. JApanese sink : 2CV 3CVL, all by land based bomber. silly AI. Total naval supremacy and still losing :p




Erik Rutins -> Tokyo Express... (6/3/2002 9:01:11 PM)

Didz,

I'm sorry, but I disagree. This IS historical and it needs to be in UV. I used the term Tokyo Express because it has come to encompass all the high speed night runs down the slot. That is the same tactic being used against you. If you read a bit more, you'll find the Japanese also did this with Cruiser and, yes, BB led groups that were to bombard Lunga, wreak havoc on any ships there and then retire out of LBA range by morning.

By historical calculations, they could do it, they did it in fact. Only when their ships were damaged were they generally caught by the bombers from Henderson. If you keep only the fastest Japanese BBs, CAs and DDs in a TF, you can most definitely run in and out of range.

Any in depth study of the combat in this theater, particularly around Guadalcanal, will highlight the existence of this tactic and its effectiveness when not opposed at night by another surface force. Now, once you get P-38s and combined them with longer range bombers, you can catch them before they come in and after they leave. Until then, though, you'll have to rely on a combined strategy to defeat them.

Regards,

- Erik




Paul Vebber -> (6/3/2002 9:11:08 PM)

Also make sure you note the way surface action TF's react. They move to confront enemy TF"s IN BASE HEXES. So while you can;t bring them easily to decisive combat in open ocean, you CAN fight them when they actually try to go after your base.

See teh thread on "Question to designers" on feedback form Gary why this is so (basically to keep the game from bogging down time wise)




The Gnome -> (6/3/2002 9:54:38 PM)

Early in the game the IJN was using this tactic against PM and was driving me nuts. The Japanese had control of Gili which I didn't contest and were running BB's at will through there.

I sent Lexington and Yorktown on a little run 3 or 4 hexes to the SE of Gili (just outside of Rabaul LBA) and pounded to groups both led by BB's and containing several CA's and DD's. Both groups were almost complete losses.

The AI must have gotten REALLY annoyed because the next day a third group -led by Yamato- was being rushed at my air TF and was in an adjacent hex!!! That group got whomped on too.

So carrier air can be used most effectively if you can position it near the Bombardment group's jump off point.

Also, once some damage is inflicted and the speed of the bombardment group is slowed the LBA will come to life and clean up!




NorthStar -> (6/3/2002 11:40:32 PM)

I've also had some rather limited success in slowing the Japanese down useing PT boats to attack them. It doesn't stop them from bombarding, and it costs me quite a few PT boats, but it makes them pay for it at least a little bit. I've put two torpedos into the Kongo this way (over a few nights) and the CA Haruna as well. Plus, once the Kongo was wounded, I was able to put a 500 lb bomb on her from Lunga the next day. (She hit a mine as well, so I've pretty much hit her every possible way so far.)

Obviously, a surface force would be better, but I'm playing Green Hell, and at the begining I'm outnumbered at least two carriers (and a CVL) to one, and four battleships to one, so until my reinforcements arrive, its a realatively low cost way of paying them back.




thantis -> (6/4/2002 1:14:17 AM)

I haven't tried it yet (but plan to as part of my Operation Double Punch), but is it possible to reverse the process - i.e. station my bombardment group at Lunga & hit Shortland at night and make it back before the IJAF comes to play?




BB56 -> Fast Night Bombardment (6/4/2002 1:34:52 AM)

Didz:
If you read: Guadalcanal: The Definitive account of a the landmark battle, by Richard B. Frank, it will go into great detail about the IJN nightly bombardment runs and the sacrifices made by may USN sailors to stop them.
UV is modeling these correctly and yes, you will need to send whatever forces at your disposal to slow them down so you LBA can hit them in the daylight hours.
Happy hunting.




Didz -> Re: Tokyo Express... (6/4/2002 6:21:12 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Erik Rutins
[B]Didz,

I'm sorry, but I disagree. This IS historical and it needs to be in UV. I used the term Tokyo Express because it has come to encompass all the high speed night runs down the slot. That is the same tactic being used against you. If you read a bit more, you'll find the Japanese also did this with Cruiser and, yes, BB led groups that were to bombard Lunga, wreak havoc on any ships there and then retire out of LBA range by morning.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Then I'm afraid we must agree to disagree.

From what I have read this is certainly not a historically accurate representation of what the 'Tokyo Express' was or the conditions that enabled the IJN to use this tactic for a short period after the capture of Guadacanal. And yes I did read about the japanese attempt to bombard Lunga with a BB task group and the fact that it was intercepted and heavily damaged after only managing to cause minor damage to Henderson Field. The point was made also that this attempt was made before Henderson Field was fully operational for local air support. Once Henderson was fully operational the IJN had to abandon all attmepts because of heavy losses.

[Quote][B]
By historical calculations, they could do it, they did it in fact. Only when their ships were damaged were they generally caught by the bombers from Henderson. If you keep only the fastest Japanese BBs, CAs and DDs in a TF, you can most definitely run in and out of range.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Sorry! again I must disagree. Simple mathematic's will confirm that it is a physical impossibility.

Even assuming a full 12 hours of darkness and that the TF is capable of maintaining a constant speed of 30 knots for the entire period it could only cover 414 miles during the night.

Thats 207 miles in and 207 miles out again. Therefore, assuming that it didn't stop to bombard the target at all it would still be within 210 miles (7 Hexes) of the target at dawn the next morning and within 45 minute strike range of any aircraft launched from the target base.




Supervisor -> Re: Re: Tokyo Express... (6/4/2002 10:10:19 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Didz
[B]Sorry! again I must disagree. Simple mathematic's will confirm that it is a physical impossibility.

Even assuming a full 12 hours of darkness and that the TF is capable of maintaining a constant speed of 30 knots for the entire period it could only cover 414 miles during the night.

Thats 207 miles in and 207 miles out again. Therefore, assuming that it didn't stop to bombard the target at all it would still be within 210 miles (7 Hexes) of the target at dawn the next morning and within 45 minute strike range of any aircraft launched from the target base. [/B][/QUOTE]
Then you have to add in the 45 minutes (minimum) for the [I]search[/I] planes to get out there (in which time the ships add another 25 or so miles of distance. Then, assuming that you find them right away, and you launch, it would take at least an hour for the attack to form up, and proceed to the attack position (even if the flight were sitting ready on the ground). That adds another 35 or so miles to the distance. By this time, they are (using your example, 5½ hours of night steaming plus, say, 1 hour for the search and 1 hour for the attack) approximately 7½ hours out, or about 260 miles. Now this is just inside extended Dauntless range, but is [I]outside[/I] of Wildcat range. So, in ideal conditions, you would be sending out unescorted bombers to take on ships that are within LBA-based CAP range.

Also, what if the ships begin their run in a bit before sunset? If you do see them, the odds are that a strike wouldn't get there before dark. That would give them more time after the bombardment to retire before sunrise.




Didz -> Re: Re: Re: Tokyo Express... (6/4/2002 4:36:37 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rowlf
[B]
Then you have to add in the 45 minutes (minimum) for the [I]search[/I] planes to get out there (in which time the ships add another 25 or so miles of distance. Then, assuming that you find them right away, and you launch, it would take at least an hour for the attack to form up, and proceed to the attack position (even if the flight were sitting ready on the ground). That adds another 35 or so miles to the distance. By this time, they are (using your example, 5½ hours of night steaming plus, say, 1 hour for the search and 1 hour for the attack) approximately 7½ hours out, or about 260 miles. Now this is just inside extended Dauntless range, but is [I]outside[/I] of Wildcat range. So, in ideal conditions, you would be sending out unescorted bombers to take on ships that are within LBA-based CAP range.

Also, what if the ships begin their run in a bit before sunset? If you do see them, the odds are that a strike wouldn't get there before dark. That would give them more time after the bombardment to retire before sunrise. [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes! but on the negative side lets also accept that the night is not going to be 12 hours long, that the bombardment group will not be able to maintain a constant speed of 30 knots in the dark through the reefs, islands and shallows around Gilli Gilli and will need at least an hour on target to ake it worthwhile. Also bear in mind that after a couple of nights the defenders will be ready for them and have their air searches tuned to spot them either approaching or retiring and that as at Guadacanal the intelligence units had the IJN codes and were intercepting the IJN radio traffic and so would know exactly what was inbound.

However, I am not objecting to the fact that my search planes don't find them in time or to the fact that my bombers take too long to get to them or get creamed when they make their attack runs. My objection is quite simply that under the current phasing and movement arrangements aircraft are not even given the chance to respond and as a result the AI can make these attacks with impunity against any Allied base regardless of the level of air cover it has available.

In a real situation the bombardment group would have spent at least half the day under the Allied air Umbrella in broad daylight.




Sonny -> Re: Re: Re: Re: Tokyo Express... (6/4/2002 6:41:32 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Didz
[B]

Yes! but on the negative side lets also accept that the night is not going to be 12 hours long,... [/B][/QUOTE]



This action takes place near the equator at which point there are always 12 hours of daylight and 12 of night (give or take a minute or two).:)




Narlotep -> SIGINT (6/4/2002 7:01:23 PM)

Didz,

[I]and that as at Guadacanal the intelligence units had the IJN codes and were intercepting the IJN radio traffic and so would know exactly what was inbound. [/I]

That would have been very nice, but most tactical SIGINT was traffic analysis, i.e. studying the freqency and length of messages as well as the net structure to determine their meaning. This means actionable intelligence like the type you describe was very rare and keep in mind this analysis took time.

The IJN codes were broken several times during the war, but these were analyzed at a different location and disseminated through a fairly tight pipeline. Bottom line, this type of information also took time to process through the intel cycle and would not provide the tactical intel you describe.

The bottom line is the canal had to rely on search a/c and picket vessels to alert them to incoming raids. The Express did not run every night and keeping a/c on alert day after day, when other missions were also pressing just wasn't practical.

Narlotep




Didz -> Re: SIGINT (6/4/2002 8:37:16 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Narlotep
[B]Didz,

[I]and that as at Guadacanal the intelligence units had the IJN codes and were intercepting the IJN radio traffic and so would know exactly what was inbound. [/I]

That would have been very nice, but most tactical SIGINT was traffic analysis, i.e. studying the freqency and length of messages as well as the net structure to determine their meaning. This means actionable intelligence like the type you describe was very rare and keep in mind this analysis took time.

Narlotep [/B][/QUOTE]

The above comment was prompted by a document I stumbled across on a US Military website which went into great detail about how the Us monitored the build up of IJN forces assembling prior to commitment to the Guadacanal battle and as such were able to fully brief commanders at Guadacanal on what to expect and what to target. BB Hiei for instance was designated a priority target for all naval forces.

As always, SOD's LAW dictates that every attempt to re-discover this document has failed otherwise I would have posted a link.

However, I did discover a secondary source which states

[COLOR=orange] Halsey had an advantage that slowly became common to all U.S. operations in the Pacific: he had advance knowledge of unusual clarity regarding Japanese plans. When returning from a visit to Henderson Field, he was met by Captain Miles Browning, his brilliant, but arrogant and hot-tempered Chief-of-Staff, and informed about all details of Yamamoto's plan except for an incorrect estimate of five carriers with the IJN forces. At this point, it became clear to Halsey that everything was at stake in a crucial moment in which he was unable to sortie but a third of his forces in time. Enterprise and her screen, augmented by heavy cruiser Pensacola, departed Nouméa; but they would not arrive in time to stop the Japanese, for Halsey had waited too long. Admiral Turner's transports reached Guadalcanal in the early hours of 12 November, and commenced unloading rapidly. [/COLOR]

http://www.microworks.net/pacific/battles/naval_battle_guadalcanal_1.htm

Unfortunately this article doesn't quote its sources so I can't substantiate its claims. I also came across another personal website of a veteran from Guadacanal who was talking about something he called 'The Cactus Crystall Ball' which appeared to be some sort of radio listening post on Guadacanal that tracked IJN naval forces and decoded their messages but again no verification was listed.




Narlotep -> (6/4/2002 9:44:06 PM)

Didz,

Exactly my point. What your sources describe is accurate, but deliver operational and planning intelligence support. The problem with the tactical scenario you describe in your first post is timeliness. The ability of the SIGINT apparatus to disseminate such information in time to organize an intercept just wasn't there.

It could probably ID vessels operating in and around Rabaul. It could let you know general patterns of manuever. It could maybe let you know that something might be happening soon. What it could not do, AFAIK, is say, "2xBB, 3xCA, 6xDD heading South out of Rabaul at 1830 with Guadalcanal as target."

Narlotep




CJ Martin -> Re: Re: Tokyo Express... (6/4/2002 10:07:35 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Didz
[B]
From what I have read this is certainly not a historically accurate representation of what the 'Tokyo Express' was or the conditions that enabled the IJN to use this tactic for a short period after the capture of Guadacanal. And yes I did read about the japanese attempt to bombard Lunga with a BB task group and the fact that it was intercepted and heavily damaged after only managing to cause minor damage to Henderson Field. [/B][/QUOTE]

Funny, my reading is quite the opposite. "The Bombardment" was the term used by those that lived through the first IJN bombardment of Henderson Field by Battleships...the damage was awesome. Henderson was virtually destroyed and more importently most of the av gas went up in flames.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Didz
[B]
The point was made also that this attempt was made before Henderson Field was fully operational for local air support. Once Henderson was fully operational the IJN had to abandon all attmepts because of heavy losses. [/B][/QUOTE]

Define "fully operational".

P-400's, Wildcats, Dauntlesses, Avengers and even B-17's and PBY's were all flying from the field *before* the first BB bombardment.

Get the Frank book, it is an excellent account of this period.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Didz
[B]
Sorry! again I must disagree. Simple mathematic's will confirm that it is a physical impossibility.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Try telling that to the folks that lived through those shellings. They are documented, historical facts. I'm not sure how you can say they are a "physical impossibilty". Did the IJN ships always get clear? No. Did they take losses? Yes. But many times they did get clear and took no losses. What finally stopped them was the *combination* of surface actions that damaged (and thus slowed down thier withdrawal) and aircraft (which attacked the already damaged ships).

Based on my experiences in the game so far, this is very well modeled.

-CJ




Didz -> (6/5/2002 4:41:30 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CJ Martin
[B]

"The Bombardment" was the term used by those that lived through the first IJN bombardment of Henderson Field by Battleships...the damage was awesome. Henderson was virtually destroyed and more importently most of the av gas went up in flames.

-CJ [/B][/QUOTE]

I think we are straying a bit off the point here. The issue is NOT whether the IJN bombarded Henderson Field or whether the bombardment was effective but whether the bombardment of Henderson Field is a valid example of an IJN Battlegroup using the cover of darkness to avoid interception by allied LBA's.

My point is that it is physically impossible for a ship with a maximum speed of 30 knots to cover a distance of 400 miles, bombard an allied base and travel 400 miles back again before dawn. The maximum distance it could possibly cover is about half that meaning that for at least half its approach and withdrawal it would be liable to interception by Land Based Aircraft.

If anything the naval battles around Guadacanal in August through November 1942 do more to support than undermine this augument.

From what little I have read it is clear that both the Japanese and the Allies were only too well aware that success or failure at Guadacanal hinged on the operational effectiveness of Henderson Field. The whole focus of the IJN's bombarment missions during this period was to disrupt the development of this airstrip and disable the facilities already in place. Whilst the Americans realised equally well that the island was terribly vulnerable until such time as it could provide its own air cover effectively.

From what I have been able to piece together this issue was not resoved until November 1942.

9th August 42 Battle of Savo Island Fought.

10 August first marine landings.

18 August "Tokyo Express" begins with first landing of Japanese soldiers.

On August 20th twelve SBD dive bombers of VMSB-232 and nineteen F4F fighters of VMF-223 flew off of the escort carrier Long Island and arrived at Henderson Field. They were warmly greeted by the ground Marines, who had felt abandoned ever since the American naval forces had left the area leaving them without any tangible air support.

With few supplies and very little help from the outside world, the Marines really were "on their own". Everything depended on the aviators and aircraft stationed at Henderson Field to protect the Marines on the ground. Therefore the first planes to arrive simply could not be spared for Naval Search or attack duties and were concentrated on CAP and ground support roles.

Even though VMF-223 was reinforced by Major Robert E. Galer's VMF-224 on August 30th, the F4F Wildcats were nearly always outnumbered by Japanese fighters, even with the addition of the USAAF's 67th Fighter Squadron's P-39 Airacobras.

The men on Cactus soon settled into what was to become a familiar routine. Japanese aerial attacks on Henderson Field were an almost daily occurrence. Bombing raids by Japanese "Betty" bombers, escorted by Zero fighters, would be sent down the Slot from their base at Rabaul. All the Catus Airforce could do was keep the bombers from disabling their base there was no doubt that the IJN enjoyed total air superiority over the slot at this time.

On Sept 11th another fighter squadron: (U.S. Navy) VF-5 with 24 Wildcats arrived from the carrier Saratoga. The Saratoga had been torpedoed by a Japanese submarine, and it sent most of its air group to Guadalcanal while it was out for repairs, however; out of the 24 F4Fs that arrived on September 11th, only 5 remained five weeks later.

Through the entire month of September the Tokyo Express runs, made by destroyers, went unopposed by anything but sporadic air attacks from Henderson Field.

Another group of reinforcements arrived on October 9th, when Major 'Duke' Davis' VMF-121 came to Cactus with 24 much-needed Wildcats. However, by early October VMF-223 and VMF-224 were largely a spent force and were withdrawn.

11th-12th October The Battle of Cape Esperance fought

13-14 October bombardment of Henderson Field, by battleships Kongo and Haruna, had a devastating effect on the local air units, which lost most of their fuel and half of their planes, with more damaged.

15 October: yet another 8” bombardment, this one by cruisers Myoko and Maya, hit Henderson, but it neither turned the tide of operations. Henderson remained more or less operable, although the amount of planes it housed had considerably decreased

24-27 October Battle of Santa Cruz. Japanese launched their offensive on Henderson Field. In a battle lasting three days and nights, the Sendai Division hurled itself into the southern side of the U.S. perimeter, while IJN forces moved into support range to Guadalcanal's north, expecting the battle to be successful and hoping for a crack at the elusive U.S. Navy forces.

Thus even as late as 26 Oct the total compliment of operational aircraft was only numbered 29 (12xF4F, 11xSBD's, 3xP400 & 3xP39's) due mainly to supply difficulties and damage inflicted by IJN naval bombardment. However, the strip was never fully disabled and the planes were used to support ground operations during the day.

13-14 November Despite the tactical victory Japan scored in the Battle of Santa Cruz, it had not by any means secured a major advantage over the enemy. At Santa Cruz the U.S. Navy lost the service of both of its carriers, with Enterprise damaged and Hornet sunk, the planes from both carriers found refuge on Guadalcanal. Had the Japanese followed their success off Santa Cruz with a bombardment of Henderson Field, there might very well might have remained close to no opposition to further Japanese reinforcement runs.

In an final attempt to achieve victory the IJN decided to repeat the October bombardment in two steps: after a two day offensive by units of the 11th Air Fleet, the battleships Hiei and Kirishima would smash Henderson with concentrated gunfire a day before the arrival of Tanaka's convoy. Then, the day of Tanaka's arrival, Admiral Mikawa would pulverize the remnants of Henderson Field's air units with 203mm fire, leaving no opposition to Japanese reinforcement attempts.

However, the attack failed and the next dawn saw airplanes being readied frantically at Henderson Field to pursue the fleeing enemy, and Marine dive bomber squadrons were astonished to find a victim such as Hiei so close. She had suffered underwater damage to her steering gear, which flooded, preventing a swift escape. Aircraft attacked frequently and effectively in preventing the battleship's men from concentrating their efforts.

At 1015, TBFs from Enterprise, launched by Rear-Admiral Kinkaid to supplement the Marines at Henderson, attacked the damaged battlewagon, and throughout the next four hours the intensity of air attacks increased. Abe had hoped to move Kirishima back under cover of darkness to tow Hiei, but abandoned his efforts to save the ship, ordering her abandoned and scuttled. Admiral Yamamoto cancelled the scuttling order, instead wanting to retain her as a decoy to distract enemy planes from the rest of his fleet.

But Hiei did not accept this honor bestowed upon her, as she foundered during the next night. Abe retired northward, meeting Admiral Kondo's battleships north of the Solomons.

I have been unable to determine exactly when Henderson Field received its first long-range bombers but according to the journal of the Engineering unit responsible the Bomber1 and Bomber2 strips were not started until December 1942.

Therefore, it appears to me that the Allies never had a valid air umbella over the slot during the period between the withdrawal of the carriers in August until the arrival of the first long range bomber squadrons at Henderson Field possibly in December.

As a result the USN had no choice but to rely on the sacrifices of its surface ships to disrupt the IJN's attempts to land troops and destroy the airfield and the IJN were able to run the slot with their ships safe in the knowledge that there was no LBA umbrella to oppose them. Hence, IMO Guadacanal is NOT evidence of the ability of fast surface ships to avoid detection by LBA aircraft but is actually a demostration of why LBA air cover is so vital in preventing just such tactic's and the price that must be paid in surface vessels should it not be available.

It seems to me that had Henderson Field been fully operational in August 42 then, a) the marines would never have got ashore in the first place and b) the "Tokyo Express" would have been bombed to oblivion as it came up the slot.

Which is of course exactly the issue I have with the BB bombarment of Gilli Gilli which has a fully operational LBA umbrella and no supply problems and yet is being denied the opportunity to use them.

With thanks to: http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USMC/USMC-C-Guadalcanal.html




strollen -> (6/5/2002 5:58:40 AM)

[QUOTE]My point is that it is physically impossible for a ship with a maximum speed of 30 knots to cover a distance of 400 miles, bombard an allied base and travel 400 miles back again before dawn. The maximum distance it could possibly cover is about half that meaning that for at least half its approach and withdrawal it would be liable to interception by Land Based Aircraft. [/QUOTE]

You'd be right but they didn't need to sail 400 miles to be out of US LBA, 250 was just fine. My understanding is that both the Bombarding TF and Tanaka's Tokyo express standard procedure was to reach a point about 270-250 miles from Guadacanal in the late afternoon say 3 PM. They than sailed at full speed. (I've actually scuba dived in Ironbottom sound, the Slot is pretty much coral reef free certainly possible for a 32+ KT ship to average 30KT).

They arrived at midnight and bombard/unloaded for a relatively short time. Bombardments I know were only 30-45 minutes and the landings not much longer. IIRC (it has been a while since I read Morrison or Frank) almost all the naval battles were around midnight. Which means that by 12:30 to 1:00 the ships were on the way home. Shortly before 6:00 the US launched the search planes. They don't fly much faster the 150-180 MPH so if you are lucky they find the IJN force by 7 AM and it is 180-200 miles out. At which point an air strike is possible but since it is at extreme range probably not very effective.

Also I believe that most of the Tokyo express unloading where done at Tassafronga (sp) which is the hex next to Lunga, increasing the distance they could retreat by daylight.

In game terms, I think you have a point the way Fast TFs and Bombardments work gives the ship guy an extra couple of hexs or range they they didn't have in real life. I am not sure if Bombarding or unloading cost operation points. But if they don't Gary could change it to make these TFs use OPs points, which would decrease the effective "stand off" range of the ships.

In the game and in real life I think there are only two ways to stop the express. Either station carriers so they can attack the the Bombard/Fast transport TFs, or put medium bombers on the base.




Didz -> (6/5/2002 7:31:00 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by strollen
[B]

You'd be right but they didn't need to sail 400 miles to be out of US LBA, 250 was just fine. My understanding is that both the Bombarding TF and Tanaka's Tokyo express standard procedure was to reach a point about 270-250 miles from Guadacanal in the late afternoon say 3 PM. They than sailed at full speed. (I've actually scuba dived in Ironbottom sound, the Slot is pretty much coral reef free certainly possible for a 32+ KT ship to average 30KT).

They arrived at midnight and bombard/unloaded for a relatively short time. Bombardments I know were only 30-45 minutes and the landings not much longer. IIRC (it has been a while since I read Morrison or Frank) almost all the naval battles were around midnight. Which means that by 12:30 to 1:00 the ships were on the way home. Shortly before 6:00 the US launched the search planes. They don't fly much faster the 150-180 MPH so if you are lucky they find the IJN force by 7 AM and it is 180-200 miles out. At which point an air strike is possible but since it is at extreme range probably not very effective.
[/B][/QUOTE]

I would be perfectly happy if the bombardment TF's began their run within 6 hours sailing distance of the target and ended the mission 5 or 5.5 hours out from the target or vice versa.

It would still make it difficult to catch them with your LBA but at least it wouldn't be impossible.

I still suspect though the the tactic's used at Guadacanal only worked because the LBA at Henderson did not have any long range strike planes and was not capable to paying naval operations thier full attention.

One good thing to come out of this debate is that I now know far more than I did a few days ago about the Battle of Guadacanal:)




Sonny -> (6/5/2002 10:44:19 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Didz
[B]

..............

On August 20th twelve SBD dive bombers of VMSB-232 and nineteen F4F fighters of VMF-223 flew off of the escort carrier Long Island and arrived at Henderson Field. .......

[/B][/QUOTE]

This is really what you should be complaining about - the Long Island in the game has a capacity of only 16 planes and yet almost twice that many were on board August 20th.;) We want a L.I. with more capacity!!!




NorthStar -> Long Island Capacity (6/5/2002 11:26:13 PM)

Actually, Sonny, carriers can be loaded up above their capacity. If they are loaded above 110% (17 - 18, depending on rounding rules, for the L.I.) the planes can only fly transfer missions, which is what the description is.

I'm not sure what the absolute upper limit is though, as I don't have my manual handy at work.




Didz -> Re: Long Island Capacity (6/6/2002 2:04:25 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NorthStar
[B]Actually, Sonny, carriers can be loaded up above their capacity. If they are loaded above 110% (17 - 18, depending on rounding rules, for the L.I.) the planes can only fly transfer missions, which is what the description is.

I'm not sure what the absolute upper limit is though, as I don't have my manual handy at work. [/B][/QUOTE]

I've noticed that already. In fact its quite a neat trick.

Unload your Navy Squadrons from thier carrier and let them sit at a land base for a few days. Magically the aircraft compliment is increased to anything up to 36 planes per squadron.

Now transfer them back to the carriers. Quoila! Over stuffed carriers great for when you need those extra few planes.




Sonny -> Re: Long Island Capacity (6/6/2002 2:37:13 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NorthStar
[B]Actually, Sonny, carriers can be loaded up above their capacity. If they are loaded above 110% (17 - 18, depending on rounding rules, for the L.I.) the planes can only fly transfer missions, which is what the description is.

I'm not sure what the absolute upper limit is though, as I don't have my manual handy at work. [/B][/QUOTE]

Not the L.I. - I've put 17 planes on it before and they disappeared.:)




Didz -> Re: Re: Long Island Capacity (6/6/2002 2:41:47 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sonny
[B]

Not the L.I. - I've put 17 planes on it before and they disappeared.:) [/B][/QUOTE]

Well I can't comment cos I've never actually found any reason to use it.

It just sits in Noumea gathering barnacles. I tend to fly my planes from base to base instead.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.921875