Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (Full Version)

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



Message

NAVMAN -> Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/7/2012 8:25:50 PM)

Hi All:
Currently playing scen 7(Quiet China w/ 12/8 start) as Allies. I am having no success at all
in maintaining fuel in Australia. Brisbane, Sidney, etc all have zero(0) fuel even though
I keep running in tankers and setting fuel stockpile to "on". No prob with supplies.
I am in 7/42.
Can anyone suggest a course of action? This has effectively immobilized my naval
units.

Thx.



EUBanana -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/7/2012 9:05:41 PM)

It's a bleedin' nightmare. The Australian industry is sucking up all your fuel is whats happening. AFAIK you can't turn it off unless there's been a patch made. So the bottom line is, if you want to have fuel in a base connected to the Australian infrastructure network you need to keep shipping masses of the stuff over or it all gets gobbled up and turned into supply.

The easy, though inconvenient solution is to not ship fuel to Australia in the first place. Use Noumea, or Tazmania, or New Zealand, or Fiji, or something like that.

if you desperately want fuel in Sydney disband some AOs there or something, then the Aussie industrialists won't steal it all.



Schanilec -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/7/2012 9:10:22 PM)

A true nightmare. I thought I had it licked. I'm now in the middle of May 1943. Guess what!



AcePylut -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/7/2012 9:32:14 PM)

If I'm not mistaken, you can turn off industry in Oz like the Japanese do.  But I could be wrong.  I swear I've turned it off before.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/7/2012 10:06:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

If I'm not mistaken, you can turn off industry in Oz like the Japanese do.  But I could be wrong.  I swear I've turned it off before.


You can turn it off. But it's likely that there isn't enough being shipped in either.



witpqs -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/7/2012 11:14:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

If I'm not mistaken, you can turn off industry in Oz like the Japanese do.  But I could be wrong.  I swear I've turned it off before.


You can turn it off. But it's likely that there isn't enough being shipped in either.


Right-O! I've read estimates of around 70,000 fuel per month required on the Australian mainland. By turning off industry you are stepping on the civilian population. Ship more instead!



Treetop64 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/7/2012 11:36:57 PM)

Plan your shipping to make sure OZ is supplied with oil, as well as fuel. Get your longest-legged tankers to LA and Abadan to ship fuel to Melbourne and Sydney. Also, if your're early in the campaign you can get some Dutch tankers to ship a lot of oil out of Palambang and the oil cities in southern and eastern Borneo. Get plenty of Oil to Melbourne and Sydney and the refineries there will refine it into fuel.

Also, in Dutch New Guinea the ports at Boelo and Babo will yield some oil and resources, but the ports are small and the services are minimal, so for those locations you'll want to use small tankers.

Port Kembla and Newcastle will need shipments of fuel also (not oil though, no refineries there).

The fuel and oil situation in OZ is something you have to plan for from the very first day of the campaign. Once you get behind there it's very difficult to catch up.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/7/2012 11:53:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

If I'm not mistaken, you can turn off industry in Oz like the Japanese do.  But I could be wrong.  I swear I've turned it off before.


You can turn it off. But it's likely that there isn't enough being shipped in either.


Right-O! I've read estimates of around 70,000 fuel per month required on the Australian mainland. By turning off industry you are stepping on the civilian population. Ship more instead!


You should monitor your supply situation in Oz and turn off HI/supply production as you see fit. At the beginning of the war fuel will also flow to many port hexes until they are at their base level. This is affected by the size of the port and how many ships are based there. Once things steady out and you determine how many HI installations you want to keep running, if any, estimate what naval ops will need fuel in the next year or so. Then get it moving.

There are many, many old threads in the main forum about supplying Oz with "stuff." There are many ways to go, personal preferences, pros and cons. My oft-stated preference is to route most of everything to Perth from Cape Town, with the East Coast feeding CT. My reasons are in those old threads. But it's up to the individual player, as well as whether it's an AI or PBEM game.



witpqs -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 1:19:34 AM)

My recommendation is for the Allies to saddle themselves with leaving everything in OZ "On" and the struggle to supply enough fuel.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 4:08:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

My recommendation is for the Allies to saddle themselves with leaving everything in OZ "On" and the struggle to supply enough fuel.


That's one way to go. Although when I had over two million supply at Sydney and no fuel for my ships I thought I'd like a way to turn off the HI machine. Now there is one.



NAVMAN -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 4:56:39 AM)

Hi All,
Thx for all your suggestions/comments. I d/n realize Oz fuel supply was going to be this
much of an issue. I have turned off all industry but aircraft production. I may try a
tanker "blitz" to the ports someone suggested. Had not thought about the need for shipping
in oil as well to feed the refineries.
Bullwinkle: you mentioned shipping in "CT" from the east coast. What is "CT"?
I'll write down some of the specific suggestions and give them a try.
Thx to all.



jmalter -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 7:36:50 AM)

CT = Cape Town (offmap). which also needs fuel to refuel ships carrying supplies to Oz. it receives fairly regular 'convoy' LCUs, but be careful you don't drain it dry of fuel - set TFs returning to CT to 'do not refuel', & refuel them only as needed for new TFs outbound to Perth.



cantona2 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 9:01:46 AM)

Massive tanker convoys from WC to Sydney keep enough fuel in Oz to keep the war machinge rumbling. Use the long legged 14,000 capacity ones and you should be fine.



USSAmerica -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 1:10:23 PM)

Australia's Heavy Industry requires about 67k fuel/month. If you want to turn off any industry to save fuel, HI is all you need to hit. This is a new capability with the new official patch. That's 5-6 large TK's/month before your ships use a single drop. You will be amazed at how fast a large number of ships operating in the area can drain fuel stores. Get your TK's busy hauling fuel from Abadan, US East Coast, and LA on Day 1 and keep them hauling fuel the entire war. The route you take to get to Oz is up to personal preference of course, and depends on enemy activity.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 1:14:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2

Massive tanker convoys from WC to Sydney keep enough fuel in Oz to keep the war machinge rumbling. Use the long legged 14,000 capacity ones and you should be fine.


This is one way to go. However, the newbie player should carefully consider that "massive convoys" drink massive amounts of the fuel they just hauled across the wide wastes of the Pacific to get themselves back to the West Coast. And that in every hex of the journey--both ways--they are open to attack.

The off-map mechanisms in the game are the single biggest design advantage given to the Allied player. Ships in the wormholes use no fuel and are immune from attack. Why not use them?



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 1:18:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NAVMAN

Hi All,
Thx for all your suggestions/comments. I d/n realize Oz fuel supply was going to be this
much of an issue. I have turned off all industry but aircraft production. I may try a
tanker "blitz" to the ports someone suggested. Had not thought about the need for shipping
in oil as well to feed the refineries.
Bullwinkle: you mentioned shipping in "CT" from the east coast. What is "CT"?
I'll write down some of the specific suggestions and give them a try.
Thx to all.


Aircraft production in OZ needs HI, so you'll have to monitor those levels. It's not a lot, but some. It's really about the only economy management the Allied player needs to do. (There is some minor decision-making about repairs in China and other tiny dog & cat issues, but nothing serious.)

There is no need to bring oil to Oz. For the Allied player there is never a need to move oil, anywhere, anytime. Some players like to do it for historical reasons, but there's no need and it ties up precious tankers in an interim step that's unnecessary. You are awash in fuel; it's just in the wrong places. Spend your hull-time moving it, not the dips and drabs of oil available to the Allies which is not already committed to the refineries nearby.

In 1942, remember that fuel can move in xAKs. Not as efficienlty as in a tanker, but in great quantities if needed.



cantona2 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 1:46:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2

Massive tanker convoys from WC to Sydney keep enough fuel in Oz to keep the war machinge rumbling. Use the long legged 14,000 capacity ones and you should be fine.


This is one way to go. However, the newbie player should carefully consider that "massive convoys" drink massive amounts of the fuel they just hauled across the wide wastes of the Pacific to get themselves back to the West Coast. And that in every hex of the journey--both ways--they are open to attack.

The off-map mechanisms in the game are the single biggest design advantage given to the Allied player. Ships in the wormholes use no fuel and are immune from attack. Why not use them?



Takes longer via the wormhole route. Obviously ones shipping lanes need to be secure and a string of airbases to keep asw/search planes in the air is a prerequisite. It is doable and so far I have had enough fuel in OZ. Slower, similar size convoys do take the other wormhole route via abadan/CT



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 2:02:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2

Takes longer via the wormhole route. Obviously ones shipping lanes need to be secure and a string of airbases to keep asw/search planes in the air is a prerequisite. It is doable and so far I have had enough fuel in OZ. Slower, similar size convoys do take the other wormhole route via abadan/CT



Once you pay the time penalty once and have a steady-state supply chain the route time is not a significant variable. And the usable throughput in the two cases is significantly differnet when to & fro fuel consumption by the haulers is factored in. The non-loss of tankers is just icing on the cake. No one has yet been able to convince me that a WC-to-Oz route is preferable to using off-map.

Mid-east to Oz is an interim proposition. It is shorter, but also uses fuel both ways and is open to attack. I have had the AI CV-raid into the IO in each game I've played and tankers are dead meat in that case. I've never lost one in the South Atlantic.



witpqs -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 2:13:09 PM)

Moose, are you sure they don't use fuel???



USSAmerica -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 2:34:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Moose, are you sure they don't use fuel???


The off map portion of the trip does not use any "on map" fuel. The ships are assumed to be refueling from stops in the Atlantic, etc. East Coast - Capetown never uses a drop of fuel. Of course, once they pop onto the map, they burn fuel.



denisonh -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 3:08:30 PM)

Where are all those U Boats when a JFB needs one........

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2

Takes longer via the wormhole route. Obviously ones shipping lanes need to be secure and a string of airbases to keep asw/search planes in the air is a prerequisite. It is doable and so far I have had enough fuel in OZ. Slower, similar size convoys do take the other wormhole route via abadan/CT



Once you pay the time penalty once and have a steady-state supply chain the route time is not a significant variable. And the usable throughput in the two cases is significantly differnet when to & fro fuel consumption by the haulers is factored in. The non-loss of tankers is just icing on the cake. No one has yet been able to convince me that a WC-to-Oz route is preferable to using off-map.

Mid-east to Oz is an interim proposition. It is shorter, but also uses fuel both ways and is open to attack. I have had the AI CV-raid into the IO in each game I've played and tankers are dead meat in that case. I've never lost one in the South Atlantic.




Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 5:20:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Moose, are you sure they don't use fuel???


You have to carefully study the tables in the manual. Some of the off-map bases have fuel costs to get to the "transit box" while others are 100% off-map and fuel-free. The fuel to the transit boxes is pretty trivial though. In a CT to Oz route the EC to CT is cheap, and CT to Perth and back is mostly free. The route from the wormhole exit to Perth is not 100% safe from attack, but it's a long way for IJN subs to transit from, say, Batavia, and CVs will have little dwell time. OTOH, in many cases having Japanese carriers off on the deep left corner of the map is good for the Allies. If I saw them there I'd just stop the "seagoing train" and let them burn up fuel and fatigue unitl they left.



Alfred -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 6:38:07 PM)

A properly structured convoy from America or the Middle East to Australia's east and west coast ports respectively will burn only its own fuel stores and not touch a single drop of fuel in an Australian port. It strikes me that players who experience difficulties in building up their fuel stocks in Australia allow their convoys to refuel from an australian port. that is totally unnecessary and considerably reduces the amount of net fuel which is delivered to Australia.

Alfred



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 6:52:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

A properly structured convoy from America or the Middle East to Australia's east and west coast ports respectively will burn only its own fuel stores and not touch a single drop of fuel in an Australian port. It strikes me that players who experience difficulties in building up their fuel stocks in Australia allow their convoys to refuel from an australian port. that is totally unnecessary and considerably reduces the amount of net fuel which is delivered to Australia.

Alfred


Within strict boundaries of ship selection and employment you are correct. There are some few early ships with the round-trip range to do what you suggest. But:

1) They are very valuable and every day they spend west of PH increases chance of loss.
2) They have other, valuable uses such as rapidly building stockpiles at PH and other early-war transfer points.
3) Use of my tactics allows many relatively uselss early-war ships, such as evacuated DEI xAKLs, to be used in the low-fuel shuttle service between the EC and CT.
4) Use of CT-Perth minimizes the need to tie up rare and valuable early-war escorts with any useful ASW capacity. Or to slow speed of advance to constantly re-fuel short-legged escorts such as SCs or AMs.



NAVMAN -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/8/2012 10:48:02 PM)

Hi All:
Thx for the continued discussion on this. I'm going to print this thread and study the various suggestions/comments. This is the furthest I've gotten in a campaign.
As of now, end of 7/42, PM, Java, etc. are gone. Rangoon, Mandalay, etc are
still holding. I have 4 cvs and I'm toying with the idea of going into Tarawa and
then the Solomons.

Thx.



crsutton -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/9/2012 1:03:29 AM)


Well the obvious question that I did not see asked here was how many ships are you operating in that theater? This is important. If you have all your old BBs in Noumea or OZ along with your carriers then you can expect severe fuel shortages in early to mid 42. There is nothing unusual or unreasonable about this. In my campaigns as the Allies I made that initial mistake. The old BBs especially sucked all the fuel out of the area. Send them back to Pearl until you build up the bases, fuel depots, and get enough tankers to support them.

Leave your old BBs stateside, use your carriers sparingly and you will do OK. I had a general shortage in OZ for the first six months of the war that gradually improved with time. After that, it has never been a problem.




jmalter -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/9/2012 1:22:37 AM)

hi navman,

you're a bit further in your game, i'm in late 5/42. 's good you're holding the Burma Road.

but be careful w/ your CVs, you're still in restricted air-group co-ordination time. 2 AirTFs of 2 CV each, you're not likely to get the best strike-power. 's ok for a raid, but not optimal for an offensive.

a quick raid against island bases close to Pearl might give you some results, but you're likely to have no early recon on the opposition strength, you don't want to have 1 or more of your CVs get tagged.

better, maybe, to conserve your CVs for use in a sustained offensive strike, vs. the Solomons. where, if you've been building/reinforcing Noumea/Luganville, you've got land-based NavS/NavB/CAP from underneath which Air/Surf/Amph/Trans TFs can operate.

which is to say, mebbe you don't want to be sending your CVs out into the ughknown belly/nettle areas, on a low-return operation. best to keep all your CVs fully fueled & operational for a Solomons assault.





jmalter -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/9/2012 1:28:16 AM)

crsutton has a good point - oldBBs have no useful purpose, & should stay at USA WC & do their upgrades, until '44. 



Mundy -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/9/2012 1:32:10 AM)

If I recall, while reading Neptune's Inferno, this was mentioned.  It came down to sending either the BBs or the carriers to Noumea, but not both.

I feel the pain, trying to keep Oz fueled myself.  It starting to threaten my supply convoys to PM.

Ed-



LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Maintaining Fuel Supplies In Australia (3/9/2012 10:21:43 AM)

IMO using the "whormhole" in order to be save from attacks smells a bit gamey. Ships using off-map movement should be subject to u-boat attacks [:'(].

I'm running supplies and fuel convoys from WC to Australia via a waypoint in the Tahiti area. The convoys have orders not to refuel at the destination in Australia, but to minimal refuel at the waypoint. In the beginning, I keep groups of AOs based at the waypoint while a port is being built. At a certain port size, shortlegged tankers from LA keep this fueling base filled and the AOs leave for other duty.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.388672