G4M Bettys on Wake

G4M Bettys on Wake (Full Version)

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

Message

Torplexed -> G4M Bettys on Wake (1/10/2010 9:18:44 PM)
Was curious. Historically did the Japanese ever enlarge the captured airfield on Wake to a size to operate 2 engined naval bombers like the Nell or Betty? I've noticed in the game it's already at an SPS of three but can't be enlarged much more.

stuman -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/10/2010 9:47:25 PM)
That's an interesting question. I have used it as a patrol/recon plane base only so far.

Torplexed -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/10/2010 11:04:53 PM)
Yeah, I've noticed in the 1942, '43 and '44 scenarios of vanilla WITP there's never much posted there in the way of aircraft other than a few Emily or Mavis patrol planes. I was curious to know if the Japanese ever lengthened the airstrip to accommodate a squadron of bombers. I know they fortified the place well enough with bunkers and pillboxes using some leftover American prisoners as pressed labor.

stuman -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 12:59:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Torplexed Yeah, I've noticed in the 1942, '43 and '44 scenarios of vanilla WITP there's never much posted there in the way of aircraft other than a few Emily or Mavis patrol planes. I was curious to know if the Japanese ever lengthened the airstrip to accommodate a squadron of bombers. I know they fortified the place well enough with bunkers and pillboxes using some leftover American prisoners as pressed labor. For what it is worth the current runway on Wake is 3000 meters long. So I bet in theory 2 engine land based planes could have been flown off of there. But man it is a small island, and I have to believe that it would have been really hard to have built that base up, and then keep it running for an active bomber base.

wwengr -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 1:15:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stuman quote: ORIGINAL: Torplexed Yeah, I've noticed in the 1942, '43 and '44 scenarios of vanilla WITP there's never much posted there in the way of aircraft other than a few Emily or Mavis patrol planes. I was curious to know if the Japanese ever lengthened the airstrip to accommodate a squadron of bombers. I know they fortified the place well enough with bunkers and pillboxes using some leftover American prisoners as pressed labor. For what it is worth the current runway on Wake is 3000 meters long. So I bet in theory 2 engine land based planes could have been flown off of there. But man it is a small island, and I have to believe that it would have been really hard to have built that base up, and then keep it running for an active bomber base. By comparison, Wake is huge! Just for fun, where in the WITP world is this 9,000 foot runway? [image]local://upfiles/23680/ECAE7B57288840968D382FA5B555F8FD.jpg[/image]

wwengr -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 1:18:12 AM)
Wake Island [image]local://upfiles/23680/00B85E3F112A48228434654276205A64.jpg[/image]

stuman -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 1:20:31 AM)
French Frigate Shoals ? I seem to remember a picture of it and thinking it was nothing more than a rectangle in the middle of the Pacific [:)]

Torplexed -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 1:34:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stuman For what it is worth the current runway on Wake is 3000 meters long. So I bet in theory 2 engine land based planes could have been flown off of there. But man it is a small island, and I have to believe that it would have been really hard to have built that base up, and then keep it running for an active bomber base. Indeed, the current runway built in the post war era probably with the mechanized help of bulldozers, backhoes and graders is 3,000 meters long. But I wonder could a Japanese Naval Construction battalion made up mostly of conscripted Korean and Taiwanese labor which had little in the way of earth-moving equipment and special construction tools do the same in a reasonable period of time? [;)]

wwengr -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 1:50:59 AM)
Not French Frigate Shoals[:)] Hint: I was there when I was in the Army. It was, until just a few years ago, an Army base, but now it is closed. The United States got rid of everything that was there, so closed the base. The things were in bunkers. They Army built a facility and burned it all in teh facility.

Local Yokel -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 1:56:19 AM)
Johnston Island.

Blackhorse -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 2:22:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Torplexed Was curious. Historically did the Japanese ever enlarge the captured airfield on Wake to a size to operate 2 engined naval bombers like the Nell or Betty? I've noticed in the game it's already at an SPS of three but can't be enlarged much more. Pre-war, B-17s refueled at Wake when ferrying from Pearl Harbor to the Philippines, so I'm guessing that the Japanese could have flown their Netties from there without much improvement.

Brady -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 2:38:17 AM)
A Betty with a war load had about the same T/O run that a P-38 did, so its not so much the length of the runway thats the isue, at least in dertiming the feasabality of them operating from a place like Wake. from what I recall their is a formula aplied to all islands in game that determines the size of the base, of course this has from what I understand been tweaked on ocashion to adjust for circumstance.

wwengr -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 3:44:23 AM)
Johnston Island it is!

stuman -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 7:49:08 AM)
quote: Hint: I was there when I was in the Army. It was, until just a few years ago, an Army base, but now it is closed. The United States got rid of everything that was there, so closed the base. The things were in bunkers. They Army built a facility and burned it all in teh facility. How long were you there ? Seems like it would have gotten a little " small feeling " after a while [:)]

wwengr -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 11:35:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stuman quote: Hint: I was there when I was in the Army. It was, until just a few years ago, an Army base, but now it is closed. The United States got rid of everything that was there, so closed the base. The things were in bunkers. They Army built a facility and burned it all in teh facility. How long were you there ? Seems like it would have gotten a little " small feeling " after a while [:)] I was there three weeks for a temporary duty assignment. Normal assignments to JI were 1 year long with fairly frequent trips to Oahu. JI was a Chemical Weapons storage facility.

John Lansford -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 11:40:39 AM)
I can see why the game limits the # of men on small islands like Johnston to 6000 now. Even that many would have them standing on each other's toes, and that doesn't even include their supplies and sleeping quarters. In my game I've got a defense battalion, base force and a couple of AA units there, plus a seaplane tender, PBY and B-26 squadrons running recon patrols over Baker Island, and 20k+ supply and fuel. I have no idea where it is all stored...

noguaranteeofsanity -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 12:13:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: John Lansford I can see why the game limits the # of men on small islands like Johnston to 6000 now.� Even that many would have them standing on each other's toes, and that doesn't even include their supplies and sleeping quarters.� In my game I've got a defense battalion, base force and a couple of AA units there, plus a seaplane tender, PBY and B-26 squadrons running recon patrols over Baker Island, and 20k+ supply and fuel.� I have no idea where it is all stored... Actually in 1942 it was much smaller than it is now and the island has been expanded over time since ww2. Here is the relative size in 1942, compared to present (apologies but the forum dont like svg files). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Growth_of_Johnston_Island.svg While it probably also helps explain the rather square shape and/or straight coastline.

John Lansford -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/11/2010 2:02:07 PM)
Good grief; 1942 Johnston Island would have had one of the densest populations in the world if it had had 6000 people on it. I also looked at Baker Island with Google maps; it's basically a big sand bar and if the Japanese had put as many men on it as the AI has in my CG (a garrison plus construction unit), they wouldn't be able to lie down...

Blackhorse -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/12/2010 2:27:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: John Lansford Good grief; 1942 Johnston Island would have had one of the densest populations in the world if it had had 6000 people on it.� I also looked at Baker Island with Google maps; it's basically a big sand bar and if the Japanese had put as many men on it as the AI has in my CG (a garrison plus construction unit), they wouldn't be able to lie down... IRL, the US garrisoned Johnston with a detachment of a Marine Defense Battalion because the atoll was too small to host an entire (900+) man battalion. So the 6,000-man limit is generous for some islands (I think French Frigate Shoals was even smaller). Still, its a huge improvement over stock, where you could cram unlimited numbers of troops onto any island, Johnston included.

stuman -> RE: G4M Bettys on Wake (1/12/2010 5:53:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blackhorse quote: ORIGINAL: John Lansford Good grief; 1942 Johnston Island would have had one of the densest populations in the world if it had had 6000 people on it.� I also looked at Baker Island with Google maps; it's basically a big sand bar and if the Japanese had put as many men on it as the AI has in my CG (a garrison plus construction unit), they wouldn't be able to lie down... IRL, the US garrisoned Johnston with a detachment of a Marine Defense Battalion because the atoll was too small to host an entire (900+) man battalion. So the 6,000-man limit is generous for some islands (I think French Frigate Shoals was even smaller). Still, its a huge improvement over stock, where you could cram unlimited numbers of troops onto any island, Johnston included. That is true. Makes me realizie how completely unrealistic my huge bases on some of those islands were in WiTP.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.046875