RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (Full Version)

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



Message

Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/29/2010 5:45:27 PM)

I had several of these on my last hard drive that unfortunatly died on me, Famous Aircraft of the World, so I am familiar with scaning these types of charts.

As mentioned it is prety easy to glean spead and hights, and weapons data from them.

The 25 and 50 and 3 refer to bomb weight classes, or rather No. 25 or No. 50 or No. 3 bombs.

You can clearly see the drop tanks also and the fuel carried on board.

The speads/Ranges when converted compare closely to the ones listed above, what , perhaps obviously, begs translating is the circumstances, the english sources I listed above show the ordnace loads and ranges, it would be interesting to see if FAOW shows the same data.

The Recon potential of the Judy is extrodanary realy were looking at 18 to 20 some odd hexes in game terms.




castor troy -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/29/2010 6:12:07 PM)

what is happening in the game, if drop tanks are selected, does this still mean bombers attack with their full load? [&:] Thought that would be reduced load anyway because how would you take off with drop tanks AND full bomb load? Now that I think about it, I was attacked by Judies at 8 hexes with 500kg bombs, wouldnīt that be extended range for the Judy in the game? And that would mean drop tanks AND full bomb load.



Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/29/2010 6:31:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

what is happening in the game, if drop tanks are selected, does this still mean bombers attack with their full load? [&:] Thought that would be reduced load anyway because how would you take off with drop tanks AND full bomb load? Now that I think about it, I was attacked by Judies at 8 hexes with 500kg bombs, wouldnīt that be extended range for the Judy in the game? And that would mean drop tanks AND full bomb load.


It depends on the type, I should think, For the Judy and the SBD, the drop tanks were carried on the wings, the Primary ordnace was carried on the centerline, the SBD externaly the Judy Internaly, so the Type could still cary drop tanks and their Bombs.

Referances above show from the TAIC report the Judy could carry both as could the SBD, but I thought they pulled the Drop tanks in game from the Judy?

A plane like the Early P-40 could not carry a drop tank and a bomb as both had to use the centerline rack, you could carry one or the other not both, as an example.

With regard to the 500kg/1000 pound bombs Both the SBD and the Judy could filed, as you can see from the SBD's chart above the larger bomb was carried to almost the same range as the 500 pounder the diferances were in the clmib rates used and the power settings mostly.

So since the game seams to of slighted the Judy some with regard to range, 8 hexes would seam reasionable given the ranges should be 10 to 12 hexes, without a drop tank.







Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/29/2010 6:45:05 PM)

With drop tanks:

Judy-

With 435 US gal ( 275 internal, 160 external ) and 550 lb bomb at 1500 ft

2580 st miles at 155 mph

2280 st miles at 191 mph Aprox. 18 hexs
 
......................
 
SBD-

Condation # 4 (420 nm) Aprox 10 to 11 hexes
 
 

 
 



witpqs -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/29/2010 6:47:36 PM)

Castor,

From looking at the game (meaning in-game), there are a few planes that carry no ordnance when they carry drop tanks. There are many that just have longer range 'normal' and 'extended' loadouts (drop tanks + ordnance). I think in the editor the 'regular' loadouts have nothing to do with the 'drop-tanks' loadouts, so you can define by however it was for that plane.



crsutton -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 12:37:39 AM)

Now, can anyone tell me if a Judy could launch from a carrier with a 500kg bomb and 450 gallons of fuel? Might have been difficult but I don't know. That is, is there any proof that both were used in combination at any range? Perhaps from land only?



Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 12:41:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Now, can anyone tell me if a Judy could launch from a carrier with a 500kg bomb and 450 gallons of fuel? Might have been difficult but I don't know. That is, is there any proof that both were used in combination at any range? Perhaps from land only?


Ya thats sorta what I was woundering, that and weather or not any SBD's launched with two drop tanks and a 500 pound bomb, at sea.



CapAndGown -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 12:52:43 AM)

This is from Wikipedia:

quote:

Although the D4Y could operate successfully from the large and fast fleet carriers that formed the core of the Combined Fleet at the start of the war, it had problems operating from the smaller and slower carriers such as the Hiyō class which formed a large proportion of Japan's carrier fleet after the losses received in the Battle of Midway. Catapult equipment was therefore fitted, giving rise to the D4Y-1 Kai (or improved) model.


The source for this claim is footnoted as:

Huggins, Mark. "Falling Comet: Yokosuka's Suisei Dive-Bomber". Air Enthusiast, No. 97, January/February 2002, pg. 68



crsutton -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 3:37:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Now, can anyone tell me if a Judy could launch from a carrier with a 500kg bomb and 450 gallons of fuel? Might have been difficult but I don't know. That is, is there any proof that both were used in combination at any range? Perhaps from land only?


Ya thats sorta what I was woundering, that and weather or not any SBD's launched with two drop tanks and a 500 pound bomb, at sea.




Well, from looking at the photo of the preserved Judy, it looks like she was built for speed with thin eliptical wings. That would mean a low wing loading which generally means a longer takeoff run. It is hard to imagine it getting off of a carrier with 1,000 pounds of bombs and another 1000 pounds of external fuel. She is indeed a beautiful, elegant aircraft-a perfect example of how excellent Japanese designers were. Way too far ahead of Japanese industral capability.

The Dauntless on the other had seems to have higher wing loading and a powerful radial engine. I would expect more lift out of her frame and a greater abiltity to get into the air from a carrier deck with a substantial load.

But, I am the first to admit that I am not an expert here. It is just my impression.



Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 7:01:30 AM)

The Judys wing loading is interestingly very close to that of the SBD, per the chart on the previous page and Francillion.

The D4Y1 is at 31.7 pounds per sq ft (power loading)/ 6.7 pounds per hp

The D4Y2 is at 33.3 / 6

The D4Y3 is at 32.6 / 5.3

The D4Y4 is at 39.4 / 6.4

The Judys climb rate is also much higher than the SBD, managing to climb to 10,000ft in 4 and half to 5 min 15 sec, depending on the model. (The D4Y4 was slower though)

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

Honestly I realy dont think the whole drop tank from the CV in the case of the SBD or the Judy is what would be constituted as "Normal", I am still looking for any evidance that Judys conducted strikes with drop tanks from CV's, I have also not found any evidance that SBD's did strikes with drop tanks and 500 pound bombs, I have sean countless picks of SBD's wating to take off or taking off for strikes with no drop tanks, thats not to say it never hapened but...

Take off runs are listed for the SBD above and Condation #  presents a longish run to be shure but not an imposably long run given the flight deck length with enough wind over the bow, again though it would seam this is not a Normal configuration.

  



castor troy -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 7:32:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Now, can anyone tell me if a Judy could launch from a carrier with a 500kg bomb and 450 gallons of fuel? Might have been difficult but I don't know. That is, is there any proof that both were used in combination at any range? Perhaps from land only?


Ya thats sorta what I was woundering, that and weather or not any SBD's launched with two drop tanks and a 500 pound bomb, at sea.




Thatīs exactly what I was thinking about, I was talking about carrier starts. Full bomb load (on the center line) and full drop tanks? From a carrier? Sounds quite some weight for a carrier start.



mike scholl 1 -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 11:10:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

Thatīs exactly what I was thinking about, I was talking about carrier starts. Full bomb load (on the center line) and full drop tanks? From a carrier? Sounds quite some weight for a carrier start.




Which is exactly the reason the ESSEX class CV's were equipped with catapaults.



Lomri -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 3:56:16 PM)


Am I reading this correctly to see that the drop tank aspect, while interesting, isn't the point of the OP?

It looks like some of the research is showing that the Judy's base range (no drop tank) is longer than depicted in the game. Am I missing something?



witpqs -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 4:39:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

Thatīs exactly what I was thinking about, I was talking about carrier starts. Full bomb load (on the center line) and full drop tanks? From a carrier? Sounds quite some weight for a carrier start.




Which is exactly the reason the ESSEX class CV's were equipped with catapaults.



A pic I got here on this forum, a catapault hanger launch from CV-12...



[image]local://upfiles/14248/036154D52B4D4277AE6BAC2320D6FE61.jpg[/image]



Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 4:42:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lomri


Am I reading this correctly to see that the drop tank aspect, while interesting, isn't the point of the OP?

It looks like some of the research is showing that the Judy's base range (no drop tank) is longer than depicted in the game. Am I missing something?


Yes the Judys base range (no drop tanks) should be longer than depected in game.

The SBD's range is also imo longer in game than it should be, as its dependent on drop tanks, the use of which is a point of contention in game imo.



Shark7 -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 5:20:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

what is happening in the game, if drop tanks are selected, does this still mean bombers attack with their full load? [&:] Thought that would be reduced load anyway because how would you take off with drop tanks AND full bomb load? Now that I think about it, I was attacked by Judies at 8 hexes with 500kg bombs, wouldnīt that be extended range for the Judy in the game? And that would mean drop tanks AND full bomb load.


It depends on the type, I should think, For the Judy and the SBD, the drop tanks were carried on the wings, the Primary ordnace was carried on the centerline, the SBD externaly the Judy Internaly, so the Type could still cary drop tanks and their Bombs.

Referances above show from the TAIC report the Judy could carry both as could the SBD, but I thought they pulled the Drop tanks in game from the Judy?

A plane like the Early P-40 could not carry a drop tank and a bomb as both had to use the centerline rack, you could carry one or the other not both, as an example.

With regard to the 500kg/1000 pound bombs Both the SBD and the Judy could filed, as you can see from the SBD's chart above the larger bomb was carried to almost the same range as the 500 pounder the diferances were in the clmib rates used and the power settings mostly.

So since the game seams to of slighted the Judy some with regard to range, 8 hexes would seam reasionable given the ranges should be 10 to 12 hexes, without a drop tank.







But one has to be mindful of maximum take-off weight. The full fuel and bomb load can only be carried if it does not exceed the maximum take-off weight. I'm not sure either of the aircraft mentioned can do that, but a reduced bomb load with full fuel load is likely possible.



viberpol -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 5:53:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady
With drop tanks:

Judy-

With 435 US gal ( 275 internal, 160 external ) and 550 lb bomb at 1500 ft

2580 st miles at 155 mph

2280 st miles at 191 mph Aprox. 18 hexs
 


That makes me wonder... why the heck the devs limited the range of Judy? [&:]

I searched the forum for phrases "Judy AND range" and it found only this thread.
So it seems it is not a result of some complains/whinings/lobbing of AFBs.

It seems clear from what Brady brought here that it can use both drop tanks and centerline heavy bomb. Maybe such a setup is impossible from smaller CVs, but that's why they have TBs squadrons not DBs. What's more, long range attacks from CV TFs are limited by the game code, and such a setup is definitely possible if Judies were to take off from normal airfields... so what's the problem?
Why they took the nice toy out of hands of JFBs? (me [:D])

Is it a "correction" that's actually a mistake?





vonSchnitter -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 6:44:39 PM)

Come on chaps,

are you really talking about a hex or two - even a couple - of IJN carrier strike planes ? Pfft.
You aught to have learned about Radar and the CiC plus some other stuff before the USN got it. Like the defs did.
Just wondering how the USN learned about the multiple carrier strike force thingy - because of Midway ?




Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 8:58:47 PM)



Lets look at the SBD-5 again:

[img]http://www.oniva.com/upload/2131/SBD-5_Game.jpg[/img]

In order to acheave the range shown above in game for this machine case # 4 (from the SBD-5 table on page one of this thread) has to be realised in game, that is Drop tanks full fuel load and a 500 pound bomb, the Power loading wing loading and take off run are all maxed out, in fact the take off run is imposable unless optimal condations are met on the flight deck in terms of length, basicaly no other planes on deck but the SBD's and max wind is coming over the bow.

Yet the game alows this for the SBD.

Normal condations for the SBD would be case 2 or 3 for Strikes.

Again condation # 2 would be Normal Range (1000 pound bomb) range of 5 hexes.

Condation # 3 would be Normal extended range (500 pound bomb) 6 (posably7) Hexes



Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 9:20:46 PM)

The Judy:

[img]http://www.oniva.com/upload/2131/D4Y1_not_C_game.jpg[/img]

The basic range and cruse info is from what I have posted above short and to high respectively.

With Just internal fuel only, and half the rated bomb load of the Type:

1580 st miles with internal fuel only ( 275 US gal + 550 lbs bomb ) at 157 mph at 1500 ft (1385 nm)

1320 st miles ( same as above but at 205 mph cruise speed )

This should translate into a 10 to 12 hex range depending on which cruse spead is selected. Mind you in game terms this would be the extended range (without drop tanks) The 500 kg load would be shorter 6 to 7 hexes.

Again this is not anywhear near the overload and maxed out alowance the SBD presently enjoys.

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

D4Y Internal fuel capacity:

Internal Fuel: 1040 L ( 2 x 260 L inboard, 2 x 130 L outboard, plus 260 L under cockpit )

Aprox. 275 US gallons





anarchyintheuk -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 10:01:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

In order to acheave the range shown above in game for this machine case # 4 (from the SBD-5 table on page one of this thread) has to be realised in game, that is Drop tanks full fuel load and a 500 pound bomb, the Power loading wing loading and take off run are all maxed out, in fact the take off run is imposable unless optimal condations are met on the flight deck in terms of length, basicaly no other planes on deck but the SBD's and max wind is coming over the bow.



You can either attempt to obtain all of those preconditions or you can use a catapult. The USN chose the catapult . . . I think even the 6 pack had flush deck versions although the early plane weights being what they were the catapults probably weren't used much. The Essex (except for the lead ship) were all completed w/ catapults.



anarchyintheuk -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 10:04:57 PM)

Duplicate fu.



Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 10:11:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

You can either attempt to achieve all of those preconditions or you can use a catapult. The USN chose the catapult . . . I think even the 6 pack had flush deck versions although the early plane weights being what they were the catapults probably weren't used much. The Essex (except for the lead ship) were all completed w/ catapults.



My primary point hear is that Load Out Condation # 4, while not imposable is or should be considered Extraordinary.

That if we are disalowing the Judy her drop tanks in game, and alowing the SBD's that their is an isue their, particularly since the Judy is very under-ranged even in a normal configuration with internal fuel only.

Also that as Condation # 4 is again, extraordinary, and I cant find a referance for it having been used on any historic strikes, their may of been a very practile reasion for it.





witpqs -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 10:27:04 PM)

Brady,

If I understood correctly the sources they have used differ from the ones you are using? If I did get that right, you'll have to convince them that your source(s) is(are) better on this plane.



Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (11/30/2010 11:12:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Brady,

If I understood correctly the sources they have used differ from the ones you are using? If I did get that right, you'll have to convince them that your source(s) is(are) better on this plane.


TimTom is imo largely infalable, and I am not shure what his thinking hear is, given the present development cycle I doubt weather or not any of this will change, but it is easly sorted in the editor.

The TAIC test data clearly show the fuel/spead and load out data that are generating the range figures above for the Judy, they difer from other sources in detail.

The isue with the SBD is imo a gameplay one much the same as the removal of the drop tanks from the Judy was likely in the first place. (The alowance of the drop tanks in game).






witpqs -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (12/1/2010 1:09:06 AM)

Well I hope they are not game-play decisions. I would rather see the historical capabilities and work with those.



Brady -> RE: So much for any Japanese range advantage (12/1/2010 4:54:05 PM)

Aparently the  Chino Planes of Fame Museum in Chino, CA Has a D4Y they are restoring, to a condation it can taxi in, and will be put on Display in the future....



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.828125