RE: Japanese airframe production

RE: Japanese airframe production (Full Version)

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

Message

Kitakami -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/5/2009 9:27:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: USS America You guys are busier than a bunch of accountants on April 14th. [:D] ROFL!!! Yes... we are :) quote: ORIGINAL: vonSchnitter Even though I offer these files as I get them readied - which means I have very little prior time to look really close - my impression of the IJ AC production system so far can be summarized in one expression: booby-trapped. Of course, this is more of a gut-feeling going by numbers, than much of playing and testing. After much thought, I agree. Consider this, for example: since for most planes there is only one factory, at least at start, when strategic bombing starts against the Home Islands... what airframes do we want to have the largest number of individual factories producing them? There are critical plane types (fighters?) for which I'd hate to depend on only one factory. If the factory gets bombed to pieces... no more planes [:-] And the northernmost factories begin to look more important as the war goes on... not as easy to get within bombing range of them... Regarding the Helen and the Tojo yes, those are important decisions. The Tojo's initial lack of armor and the availability of armored Helen bombers is what I have been thinking about lately. Not decided yet, but armor used to mean pilot survival... we need to know if it still does.

vonSchnitter -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/5/2009 9:35:26 PM)
Haha Mike ! Where does your concern about barkers and biters leaves ye, mate ? [:'(] If you have any concern for your privates left - considering the age of contributors on this forum (just my conception, no reflection on your abilities) - or the use of concern beyond wargaming of some body parts with a measure of success - one way or the other- may get ye .. or whatever I would appreciate your help !!! Care to help out with the engines production table ? Just for proofreading - it is a bastard. Woof [:D]

Q-Ball -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/5/2009 9:57:09 PM)
Question: Do reinforcement units still come with "free" pilots, like in WITP? Or does AE pull them out of the pilot pool? This is important, because if it's like WITP, you definitely want a full complement of A/C available in order to get your free pilots. 16.2.2 implies it's still like WITP, though that's not 100% for certain, and it's not clear what experience levels you can expect.

vonSchnitter -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/5/2009 10:21:20 PM)
@ USS Amerika ! if things depend on it, you better start counting beans quick, real quick. Unless you are a partial to venting off your disappointmet to keep the shepart in check .... However, going by past experience, the AC etc production system is not the most pressing part of the Japanese resource management. Building ships (IJN or transports of any description) is the real drain. But the player may have the most (apparent) influence by way of the air-production thing. Mabe I will have a close look at this subsystem later ...

Mike Solli -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/5/2009 11:23:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Q-Ball Question: Do reinforcement units still come with "free" pilots, like in WITP? Or does AE pull them out of the pilot pool? This is important, because if it's like WITP, you definitely want a full complement of A/C available in order to get your free pilots. 16.2.2 implies it's still like WITP, though that's not 100% for certain, and it's not clear what experience levels you can expect. No more free pilots. That's why the pilot pool starts out so large. Everything comes from there.

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/6/2009 1:24:10 AM)
I feel pretty sure that the Mabel is the way to go on Torpedo bombers instead of Kates. The performance is about the same (better cruise in fact) and it uses the HA-33 engine (Same as the Nell, Mavis, and Val) instead of the HA-35 (Kate, Zero, Lily, Tojo, Irving, and many of the critical types). If I can pull some of the critical demand off of the HA-35 factory without giving up performance, then that seems to be the sensible thing to do.

stuman -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/6/2009 4:28:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kitakami quote: ORIGINAL: vonSchnitter Thanks for the Kamikaze info. I had a rather close look at the production of AC as is at the beginning up the end of 43. So far all available AC during this time either have an R&D plant going or produktion will switch from an older model to the new one. Few exceptions to this rule exist. a) Kate - there is one factory with no produktion (Hiroshima). In case of expansion, switch the factory from B5N1 to B5N2, since here is no automatic upgrade. b) E15K1 Norm - a floatplane. Better range than Jake, better performance in general - however the Jake gets radar eventually. No units spawn with the Norm. c) Nate factories will not autoupgrade. d) No production of Tojos whatsoever, without changing things. And no airgroups coming equipped with them. However Nate/Oscar groups can convert to Tojo. e) Helen 1a (future MAD) will autoconvert to newer model (not MAD capable) f) Out of production models (like Claude) can be reintroduced - they got dumped in WitP at the same turn. I am not sure if this is true for all models. Thanks to both Historiker and vonSchnitter :) Since there are not many factories we can just freely switch production in without stopping production of other models, thinking long and hard about this before turn one has become very, very important. A few thoughts (which are not necessarily the best way of doing things, but they may start a good discussion): - A6M2 Zero production now upgrades to A6M2 Sen Baku, in 2/44... this will have to be changed manually to something better than Zeros before then. The questions are when, and to what? - A6M3 Zero is not carrirer-capable. Yet, it may play an important part... how many should we produce per month? It does convert to A6M3a in 12/42, which is carrier-capable. - B5N2 Kate... 32 per month I guess. - There is no factory building C5M2 Babs... should we convert one? This plane does not convert automatically to anything. - D3A1 Val production does convert automatically to D3A2, which in turn converts to D5Y1 in 11/45. Should this be manually converted to D4Y1 production in 4/43? - I am considering keeping E13A1/1b production until the end of the war, instead of going with E15K1. - F1M2 Pete is not a bad plane for point-defense in the beggining stages of the war. Later it may need to be phased out, but unescorted Brittish and Dutch bombers might get a nasty surprise once in a while. - Should we continue G3M2 Nell production, or should we switch production to G4M1 Betty and, if so, when? It upgrades automatically to the G3M3 Nell in 5/42, which dies have radar, whereas the Betty gets radar only in 6/44, with the G4M2a model. - The H6K5 Mavis has radar in 6/42. The H8K2 Emily gets radar in 3/43. The Emily is the better plane, so the question is... how important is radar? - The J2M2 Jack is armored, and it appears in 9/43, earlier than the armored A6Mx models. The N1K1-J George appears in 9/43, and it is also armored. My thinking at this point is to choose only one for serious deployment. - The P1Y1 Frances is armored, and appears in 11/43, one year before the G4M3a gets armor. How many units should field this plane? Did not get into IJA planes, but please let me know what you all think about any/all of the above :) Thx to all three of you

Shark7 -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/6/2009 4:46:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Solli quote: ORIGINAL: Q-Ball Question: Do reinforcement units still come with "free" pilots, like in WITP? Or does AE pull them out of the pilot pool? This is important, because if it's like WITP, you definitely want a full complement of A/C available in order to get your free pilots. 16.2.2 implies it's still like WITP, though that's not 100% for certain, and it's not clear what experience levels you can expect. No more free pilots. That's why the pilot pool starts out so large. Everything comes from there. Then honestly there is no reason to keep producing hordes of outdated aircraft into the late war years. If you only have 9, bring it in with 9, convert it to something good and build up from there.

Mynok -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/7/2009 4:43:43 PM)
Andrew Brown just confirmed that no new factories appear. [X(][X(][X(][X(] That means that factory expansion will have to be calculated for in supply usage projections. Frankly, I foresee a lot of groups getting stuck in Organizing (I assume they still do?) before arriving.

Local Yokel -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/7/2009 5:30:13 PM)
Just posted something on airframe production in the economy thread; my bad for not putting it in here [:o]. It's a bit of an old chestnut that has been addressed before, but the Model 32 Zero (A6M3) was carrier capable. An example can be seen departing the pointy end of Zuikaku in film footage said to have been shot at Santa Cruz. Hope this gets picked up and corrected in the scenario one data.

Mike Solli -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 2:01:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Andrew Brown just confirmed that no new factories appear. [X(][X(][X(][X(] That means that factory expansion will have to be calculated for in supply usage projections. Frankly, I foresee a lot of groups getting stuck in Organizing (I assume they still do?) before arriving. Oh boy. That's going to complicate things. [:(]

ChezDaJez -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 11:26:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vonSchnitter well of course - booby trap may be a little strong. But which of the choices do you prefer: A German Dachshund having a go at your ancles Or a German Shepard aiming for your butts. And of course, you never know if both go for more "vital" parts of your male anatonomy eventually - without testing there is no way of knowing. [:D] Don't forget to look at the service ratings. Doesn't do much good to swap a Dachshund for a German Shepard if the German Shepard is too sick to bite. Chez

ChezDaJez -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 12:07:21 PM)
quote: It's a bit of an old chestnut that has been addressed before, but the Model 32 Zero (A6M3) was carrier capable. An example can be seen departing the pointy end of Zuikaku in film footage said to have been shot at Santa Cruz. Hope this gets picked up and corrected in the scenario one data. It shouldn't get changed. No A6M3 Model 32s were ever assigned to carrier units. All carrier units that operated the A6M3 used the model 22 (A6M3a). Doesn't mean that Model 32s couldn't take off and land from carriers, just that they weren't assigned to any CV airgroup. Be interested to see the unit markings on that A6M3 on the Zuikaku. Chez

vonSchnitter -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 12:39:36 PM)
Hi Gents ! Here we go again - some more data mining. Looks like the dachshund/shephard thing has caught on [:D] However I think I found reason to believe both may have a very distinct inclination to go after your vitals - reproduction related or not ... [:D] Btw. Local Yokel: Mind if I use your file in a general compilation ? Before we advance to the engine issue have a look at this: [image]local://upfiles/12623/57808929FA3648BE9EBE59784CDDDF65.jpg[/image]

vonSchnitter -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 1:20:20 PM)
Just in case you wonder: There is no road/rail/ferry connection between Honshu and Kyushu (grapically) and even though there is one between Honshu and Shikoku, the base of Matsujama is connected pretty poorly, while the base at Kochi is not connected at all. guess what ? Matsujama is producing engines ... and the poor connection shows, even though it may get you pretty much unawares (Aichi Ha-60, x 80 used for Judys) If nothing else, this example suggests - to my lights - that all pruduction figures - any kind - provided by AE or "staff" should be taken by a grain of salt as far as factories on Kyushu and Shikoku go. And of course there is Hokkaido. From what the graphics say: I may have stumbled upon an issue relevant for more than ac/engine production ...

vonSchnitter -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 2:30:35 PM)
oops, almost forgot here is the engine production file. Not very relevant, since the in-game numbers apply, but anyway Engines Looks like, it is time to get some input by the powers that be, before any conclusions or even hypothesis can be outlined. Going on a tangent ..

n01487477 -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 4:31:22 PM)
Just updated some information on engine production (engines.xls) ... data might still not be 100% but am working on it ... --Damian--

Local Yokel -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 6:02:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vonSchnitter Hi Gents ! Here we go again - some more data mining. Looks like the dachshund/shephard thing has caught on [:D] However I think I found reason to believe both may have a very distinct inclination to go after your vitals - reproduction related or not ... [:D] Btw. Local Yokel: Mind if I use your file in a general compilation ? Before we advance to the engine issue have a look at this: [image]local://upfiles/12623/57808929FA3648BE9EBE59784CDDDF65.jpg[/image] By all means - happy for you to do so! On the subject of the map, it's also worth looking at the rail network for Japan. The absence of a road or rail connection across the Tsugaru Strait between Honshu and Hokkaido is correct, although a railway tunnel connecting these islands was built post-war. The absence of any railway link across the Kanmon Strait between Honshu and Kyushu is more controversial. Whilst it's true that the first bore of the Kanmon Tunnel wasn't completed until June 1942, there had already been a train ferry service across the Strait since about 1911. So even if you discount the tunnel there's a basis for saying that some sort of railway link between Honshu and Kyushu should be shown. That's not to say that the Japanese were able to rely exclusively on rail transport to move freight between these islands, as I suspect that there remained a substantial need for coastwise shipping. Nevertheless the Kanmon Tunnel was an important Japanese transport link, and post-war interrogations of Japanese officers indicates they were acutely sensitive about it being a choke point in the rail network that was vulnerable to air attack.

Mynok -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 6:18:05 PM)
Yikes. That is going to change my choices for resource/fuel dump port significantly. I don't have the manual handy but will stuff still cross water between two level 3 or better ports or has that been eliminated?

Local Yokel -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 6:24:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez quote: It's a bit of an old chestnut that has been addressed before, but the Model 32 Zero (A6M3) was carrier capable. An example can be seen departing the pointy end of Zuikaku in film footage said to have been shot at Santa Cruz. Hope this gets picked up and corrected in the scenario one data. It shouldn't get changed. No A6M3 Model 32s were ever assigned to carrier units. All carrier units that operated the A6M3 used the model 22 (A6M3a). Doesn't mean that Model 32s couldn't take off and land from carriers, just that they weren't assigned to any CV airgroup. Be interested to see the unit markings on that A6M3 on the Zuikaku. Chez Chez, I respectfully disagree. I have seen two photographs said to show A6M3's engaged in flying off Shokaku class carriers, and I have no reason to think that they were taken otherwise than during the course of combat as distinct from ferry operations. There is an interesting thread on the subject on the j-aircraft board here which points to this marque being used as replacement equipment for Shokaku's kansen-tai. If you can point to sources which put it beyond doubt that Model 32's were never assigned to carrier units, I should be very interested to see it. We know from the mix of Type 97's embarked in Ryujo that the Japanese weren't averse to operating different marques in the same unit, so I can't see why it should be any different with the fighters. In any case, regardless of whether the Model 32 was actually assigned to a carrier's fighter unit, surely the fact that they were equipped to do so is what should determine whether they were carrier capable. Certainly I would take a Model 22 over a Model 32 as the equipment of choice for my carriers, given its superior range. But if you don't have that choice due to losses, as may well have been the case at the time it was introduced, I see no reason to deny the option of sending the Model 32 to sea aboard your carriers.

Mike Solli -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 6:26:23 PM)
I guess I learned years ago that dumping resources/oil in Sasebo usually didn't see it move anywhere. I got in the habit of dropping it in Honshu ports. It would take an extra day or two, but I was confident that the HI was getting what it needed.

Mynok -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 6:37:08 PM)
Never had any trouble with Sasebo. In fact, my stuff dumped at Sasebo tends to congregate on Hokkaido, which is annoying because it makes it look like Japan is low on resource when in actuality it is all piled up in Sapporo. Wish there were bigger ports on the back side of Japan. Now it looks like our resource TFs are going to have to brave the sub gauntlet in front of Japan where it is much more difficult to get ASW assets on subs quickly.

Mike Solli -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 6:42:10 PM)
The waypoint system with ASW TFs may help with that problem, Mynok. I'm in the process of attempting to figure out the airframe factory delimma trying to create some of all of the needed airframes to get as many of the air units into the game as possible. Not sure how that will work though. Then I'll try to figure out the engine production program to fit the airframe program.

Mike Solli -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 6:43:07 PM)
Phase I is to create a wire diagram for upgrades of all aircraft.

Mynok -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 6:46:18 PM)
Actually I'm hoping Patrol will help, but I've not yet studied how it works yet for ASW assets. The problem is that most of the ASW assets are short-ranged, thus have to return to base often. This means they have to full speed rush out to jump on sub detections, which uses more fuel...a now precious commodity. Waypoints may very well help with the cargo tf's avoiding subs though.

Historiker -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 7:09:48 PM)
Will you publish your work in a joint wiki? Many of us hate forum search and even while "Must read threads" was usefull, I always fund it uncomfortable to have all the useless coments in between - as well as sometime there were different answers to a single question...

Mike Solli -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 7:13:04 PM)
I assume that question was to me, Historiker. If it is, of course I will. I'm just trying to figure out an easy way to make the diagram right now.

Historiker -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 7:15:32 PM)
Would you mind to say which part of the wiki you'll write? Terminus said it quite right, there were already dead wiki projects. I don't want to work on a wiki that will end with the 4 articles I've written, so I'd like to already have an author for all needed part. Thank you! [:)]

erstad -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 7:34:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Yikes. That is going to change my choices for resource/fuel dump port significantly. I don't have the manual handy but will stuff still cross water between two level 3 or better ports or has that been eliminated? I haven't tested this but 9.3.3.3 of the manual addresses this. The answer is "yes, but in limited quantities" For resources, the "ooze" is 500x port size (smallest of the two involved) As written, it may only apply if the directly adjacent port needs the item but I'm hoping it's more general than that. However, it's not going to be a lot in any case.

Captain Cruft -> RE: Japanese airframe production (8/8/2009 7:51:36 PM)
Anecdotal data point. It's mid January against the AI and I have a shortage of Nates. Playing with PDU off most of these groups can't upgrade for ages either, the path being to Oscar II or Nick. Something is preventing me from expanding the factory though. Blind prejudice probably ... [;)] --- P.S. There are some half-decent ports on the "back" of Japan. Fukuoka is size 10 (and has size 10 refinery) Shimonoseki is 7(6) so can go to size 9 (and has size 160 refinery) Maizuru is 5(6) so can go to size 9 Niigata is 5(4) so can go to size 7 (and has size 50 refinery)

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.21875