Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Midway Air Group in RHS

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> Midway Air Group in RHS Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/27/2007 12:56:01 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		The last of the big carriers is the USS Midway

This class was just too late for the war. Only USS Midway might appear as her own class in RHSCVO (and its counterpart RAO) if the war lasts slightly longer than normal. IF it appears, this ship has five squadrons of 19 aircraft in game terms (= 18 plus 1 spare, normal practice in USN):

A carrier fighter squadron, a carrier fighter-bomber squadron, a dive bomber squadron, a torpedo bomber squadron and a night fighter squadron. This requires 95 of the 96 capacity of its hanger. IRL the ship could have carried more aircraft - but probably would not have done - as it was universally believed the number was too great for efficient flight operations.
This ship was really built for the jet age to handle a smaller number of heavier and larger aircraft - and no one believed it would contribute to the outcome of WWII. FDR opposed it.

In RHSBBO family scenarios (including RPO and PPO) the Midway air group appears ashore on the same date the ship would have appeared in CVO. All the squadrons appear at San Francisco.

In RHSEOS the Midways are built specifically to contribute to victory in a war that might not go as well as IRL - so they are laid down sensibly as repeat Essex class. Two such ships might complete - Midway and Wake. These ships have slightly modified Essex air groups: a squadron of 18 fighters, a squadron of 18 fighter-bombers, a squadron of 12 torpedo bombers, and a flight (of the fighter squadron) of night fighters.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 7/27/2007 12:57:35 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/28/2007 8:06:25 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		Sid,

In Fast Carriers by Reynolds he refers IIRC to a an airgroup of 64 F4Us and 63 SB2C as the proposed airgroup. Capacity is 137 aircraft. (consistently with Conways). He refers to Midway "working up" to commissioning shortly after the war ends.

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 2
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/28/2007 11:44:02 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		This is possibly of some merit - although how to get 63 planes is a bit of a mystery?

But this isn't exactly what we need in technical terms. By this time the USN had gone over to oversized air groups - larger than the design capacity of the ship's hangers. For technical reasons (you do not have any risk with a deck park)
we don't do that. We need to know the hanger capacity. On top of that, there is a limit code can handle. We are not quite sure where it is - but we set it at 96 because this clearly works. Since it was believed that running 120-135 planes was not going to work operationally - but code won't understand that and won't leave some planes behind for efficiency reasons - we are working around that problem at the same time. Remember you get about 1/6 more planes than we rate and the ship still functions. At 96, 1/6 is 16 planes. [It is actually 15% - or about 14 planes for a total of 96 + 14 = 110 that the game will actually operate; in additon the ship may transport even more]

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 3
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/28/2007 2:27:41 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		from: http://uk.geocities.com/sb2c@btinternet.com/vt74.htm

"VT74 was commissioned at NAAS Otis Field, MS, on 1 May 1945. Forming part of Battle Carrier Air Group 74(CVBG74), scheduled for service aboard Midway(CVB41),the squadron had an authorised complement of 24 SB2C-4s, as compared with the 15 aircraft in an Essex-class VT unit. In August the complement was increased to 36.

Air Group training was carried out in the Cape Cod/Martha's Vineyard areas, while short deployments to NAAF Ayer provided practice in air support work. The squadron's specialist torpedo training took place in June and July at NAAF Hyannis. At the end of October VT74 transferred to Norfolk and immediately began carrier qualifications aboard the newly commissioned Midway. Then followed the carrier's shakedown cruise which took place off Cuba and Puerto Rico from early November until mid-December. On returning to Norfolk the squadron converted to the SB2C-5.

While the rest of CVBG74 was aboard Midway in March 1946, engaged in Operation Frostbite, VT74 spent several weeks at NAAS Charlestown for additional torpedo training. The squadron rejoined the rest of the air group in time for the next Caribbean cruise which lasted from mid-April until late May and included joint exercises with Princeton and F.D.Roosevelt. For the rest of the year VT4 was based ashore at Oceana. On 15 November 1946 the squadron was redesignated VA2B.

Early in May 1947 VA2B embarked in Midway for another Caribbean cruise which lasted until late June. On return to Oceana the squadron converted to the new Douglas AD-1. "

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 4
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/28/2007 2:55:38 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		And:  http://uk.geocities.com/sb2c@btinternet.com/vt17.html

"During WWII VT17 made two combat cruises flying the Grumman Avenger. The first was aboard Bunker Hill in 1943/4, the second on Hornet in 1945.
While stationed at NAAS Fallon in January 1946 Air Group 17 received word that it had been selected as the third Battle Carrier Air Group, for service aboard the new Midway-class carriers. This change also brought a transfer to the east coast. As soon as VT17 arrived at NAS Brunswick at the beginning of February it began the transition from the TBM-3E to its new aircraft complement, 24 SB2C-4Es. Conversion and training continued for the rest of the year, with the air group moving to NAS Norfolk in August. SB2C-5s replaced the -4Es in November 1946, and in that same month the squadron was redesignated VA6B (CVG17 became CVBG5). In December carquals were conducted on Franklin D. Roosevelt.
In January 1947 the squadron went aboard the new Valley Forge for her shakedown cruise to the Caribbean, and returned to Norfolk in March. September 1947 brought the first AD-1 Skyraiders and by the end of the year all the SB2C-5s had been replaced."

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 5
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/28/2007 2:57:39 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		and, more to the point, from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/cvw2.htm:

Carrier Air Wing TWO's motto, "For Liberty, We Fight" is appropriate for a military organization that has served the cause of liberty since the end of World War II. Established 1 May 1945 as CVBG-74, the new "Battle Air Group" originally comprised 96 F4U-4/FG-1D Corsairs and 46 SBW-4E Helldivers. Redesignated CVBG-1 on 15 November 1946...

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 6
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/28/2007 11:05:14 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		According to my math - 96 plus 46 = 142 - not exactly the normal advertised group for Midway - and surely requiring use of a deck park. But the ratio and types are interesing - and we can use that information.

The standard I adopted when reviewing carrier capacity for CHS - and which remains in place in RHS -
is information about the SHIP - not the air group. This is because design data for ships differs significantly from
the practice data for air groups. I don't have Midway committed to memory, but for example a Yorktown was designed to carry four squadrons of 18 planes and an Essex a "half squadron" more - or 72 and 81 machines respectively. Almost certainly we are going to find the Midways used some similar concept - some number of 18 plane squadrons and, likely, some number of 27 plane squadrons. Five times 18 = 90; five time 27 = 135. Very likely the hanger was designed for a value between those two figures: best guess three times 18 plus two times 27 = 108 - which curiously is very similar to the value of 96 Andrew and I (independently) picked - and closer still to the defacto 110 code will permit players to use on 96 rated ships.

When entering data in the data set, one must consider a number of factors - and the number of planes that operated from a deck is just one of them. While we can strictly honor that when the number of planes is LESS than ship rating, we have the opposite problem here. Here we must understand that wartime practice was to run units over strength - a squadron of 18 typically had 19 machines and not rarely more than that. We also must understand that wartime practice was to run the ship with a deck park - something I do not believe is "fair" in game terms (since players neither risk losing the deck planes nor have to avoid heavy weather to insure they don't do that - not that our weather is very well modeled - if it were we would be terrified to get near it with a deck park - if code would sweep the planes from the deck; since it won't - no deck park is far more realistic than allowing one).

So here the modder's art is required - compromise. Modding is above all the art of compromises - and good compromises must always INCLUDE ALL factors that matter. [A bad compromise ignores some of the factors that matter]
Air group composition is a factor - and I will modify Midway to operate mainly the F4U and whatever that other designation turns out to be in our terms - or the nearest to it. This is IMHO much worse than the present group - which has rather fantastic TBFs - and also which probably has night fighters. But the data above appears to say the group had very few types. I believe evolution was in the direction of specialist carriers - see night fighter carriers and night ops carriers for another variation of this. A carrier task group in 1946 (if the war lasted that long) might have had some carriers with all TBF bomber units and others with all dive bomber units - for example. This would make a number of things more efficient - and then we had so many carriers that redundency would not be a big deal.

What I do not propose to do at this point is revise the capacity rating of the Midway - which does not apply to EOS in any case (as Midway is cast as a repeat Essex in EOS). What we need is something like the USNI books on Essex and Independence re Midway - to help us understand the design hanger capacity. Even if we had that - we are still constrained by code - and it isn't yet clear we can go higher in code - technical terms. Since Midway is an afterthought - too late to matter - I don't regard this as a high priority matter. Nevertheless, getting it as good as we can is worth some thought and effort.

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 7
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/28/2007 11:16:54 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Note that in any form of WITP a squadron doesn't transfer between ships automatically - so we cannot use VT-17 on an Essex (never mind two different Essex) and then put it on Midway - without getting duplicated units.

On the other hand, it appears that they were running squadrons of up to 36 planes - and that the types above are the
SB2C-3 in our game terms. What is unclear is why this aircraft is in a torpedo squadron?

An elegant solution might be to run four squadrons of 24 planes - apparently 24 was used by VT-74 at one point -
and apparently the late war de facto air squadrons were no longer multiples of 9 (18, 27, etc). 4 x 24 = 96.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 7/28/2007 11:22:50 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 8
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/29/2007 4:21:13 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		Sid,

if we assume some dixlexia and add 69 and 46 = 115...

Not sure of the basis of the decision to replace the TBF with the SB2C, but the TB2D Skypirate that was merant to serve in the CVBG was cancelled because the specilaist torpedo aircraft was seen as outmoded. The Grumman TB2F - a twin engined torpedo bomber concept for the CVBG - had been cancelled as impractical (and they didn't proceed with a modified F7F labelled 'XTSF-1'). You can reasonably infer the SB2C was simply the most suitable type available to fill in as a general attack aircraft until the AD and AM arrived.

I also note that other sources suggested the CVBG's fighter squadrons would have a detachment of 6 x F6F-5N for 'all weather' CAP.

Can you divide eg CVBG74 into 4 squadrons:

VF-74 (F4U)
VBF-74 (F4U)
VB-74 (SB2C-4E or -5)
VT-74 (SB2C-4E) ?

and if a fifth worked you could have a 6 plane detachment of night fighters.

< Message edited by Ian R -- 7/29/2007 5:11:21 AM >

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 9
RE: Midway Air Group in RHS - 7/29/2007 7:00:39 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Perhaps my speculation above is closer than I understood: Some Essex air groups were all TBD - others all SB2C -
so it might just be that specialization of bomber idea cought on sooner than I understood.

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 10
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> Midway Air Group in RHS Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.563