RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson

Page: << < prev 30 31 [32] 33 34 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:05:49 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I appear to have wiped out an entire TF near Baker Island but they had probably already unloaded their troops there.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 8/12/2012 12:07:32 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 931

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:15:05 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Another inconsequential Allied raid on Hanoi

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 932

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:17:45 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Another Allied raid on Buna that didn't do much.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 933

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:20:54 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

And then an Allied raid using the B-17's that didn't do much. At least I damaged some of them.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 934

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:23:57 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

And THEN the P-40's came up to play.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 935

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:26:22 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

And then there was some action in the skies over Cebu

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 936

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:37:44 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

And then nothing special happens for a while. Then there's some ASW action near Singkawang.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 937

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:41:06 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

And then all of a sudden, the Clark Field defenders collapse.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 938

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:43:35 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Some of the Clark Field victors are obviously going to have to be moved to Manila to help out there.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 939

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:51:55 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

And then all of a sudden the Palembang defenders caved in.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 940

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:54:18 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

And then the Allies did a ground bombardment at Cebu

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 941

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 12:56:47 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

And then finally, the Allies did a ground bombardment at Kuantan. I've set my Jap Kuantan defenders to do their own bombardment
next turn.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 942

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 5:10:46 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's the strategic situation map for 20Jan42:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 943

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 10:23:12 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 19, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These coastal ships were the eqivalent of Rommel's "Plywood Panzers", except it didn't work out as well.

Night Time Surface Combat, near Pamekasan at 57,105, Range 12,000 Yards
Japanese Ships
BB Haruna
CA Chokai
CA Myoko
CA Aoba
CL Abukuma
DD Amatsukaze
DD Ayanami
DD Karii

Allied Ships
AMc Tjerimai, Shell hits 1, on fire
AMc Slamat, Shell hits 1
AMc Aroe, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
AMc Bantam

Night Time Surface Combat, near Pamekasan at 58,106, Range 8,000 Yards
Japanese Ships
BB Haruna
CA Chokai
CA Myoko
CA Aoba
CL Abukuma
DD Amatsukaze
DD Ayanami
DD Karii

Allied Ships
AMc MMS A, Shell hits 6, and is sunk
AMc MMS B, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
AMc MMS C, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
AMc MMS D, Shell hits 1, and is sunk

Night Time Surface Combat, near Probolinggo at 56,105, Range 11,000 Yards
Japanese Ships
DD Hagikaze
DD Hatsuyuki
DD Kamikaze

Allied Ships
AMc Tjerimai, Shell hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
AMc Slamat, Shell hits 8, and is sunk
AMc Bantam, Shell hits 2, and is sunk

As Larry posted I got most of the troops off to Baker Is., the supplies were sunk though.
I wonder if he has the KB around??? This could be over soon if he does...

Day Time Surface Combat, near Baker Island at 149,136, Range 14,000 Yards
Japanese Ships
BB Hiei
CL Agano
DD Yugumo
DD Yukikaze
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Hatsuharu
DD Amagiri
DD Akebono

Allied Ships
APD Waters, Shell hits 3, and is sunk
AP Harris, Shell hits 6, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAP Lurline, Shell hits 36, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAP Santa Maria, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
AK Bellatrix, Shell hits 6, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AK Betelgeuse, Shell hits 7, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
AK Arcturus, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk

Day Time Surface Combat, near Baker Island at 149,136, Range 12,000 Yards
Japanese Ships
E Hachijo

Allied Ships
xAP Lurline, Shell hits 2, and is sunk

I am losing these bases but it's still surprising how high the disruption got so fast.

Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 39150 troops, 582 guns, 195 vehicles, Assault Value = 1073
Defending force 14089 troops, 310 guns, 215 vehicles, Assault Value = 224

Japanese adjusted assault: 547
Allied adjusted defense: 241
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Clark Field !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
674 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 103 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 19 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 27 disabled
Guns lost 10 (2 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
6015 casualties reported
Squads: 354 destroyed, 30 disabled
Non Combat: 586 destroyed, 27 disabled
Engineers: 107 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 224 (216 destroyed, 8 disabled)
Vehicles lost 160 (156 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Units retreated 8
Units destroyed 1

Manila won't last long now that the Clark LCU's are freed up.

Ground combat at Manila (79,77)
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 891 troops, 59 guns, 69 vehicles, Assault Value = 752
Defending force 40485 troops, 480 guns, 190 vehicles, Assault Value = 1197

Japanese ground losses:
Guns lost 7 (2 destroyed, 5 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
28 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Enuff said!

Japanese forces CAPTURE Palembang !!!

HONESTLY, I'm NOT trying not make this easy for Larry!!!

Ground combat at Kuantan (51,79)
Allied Bombardment attack
Attacking force 3162 troops, 23 guns, 1 vehicles, Assault Value = 106
Defending force 6588 troops, 64 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 181

Allied ground losses:
5 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 944

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/12/2012 11:46:41 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

There's still some fires burning at Palley and there's a lot of damage to the oil and refineries there but for the most part I'm thinking it's
going relatively fine there at Palley. I've got some engineers headed that way and some more troops are on their way and I'm planning
on moving some planes there eventually so things are looking up. Also, an AA unit or two will be stationed there so Jim won't be so
inclined to bomb the oil facilities into the dark ages. If I was on the ball the AA units would already be there but NNNNNOOoooooooo I didn't think that far ahead.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 945

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/15/2012 4:58:33 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I just had a thought..........I've been overrunning a lot of the smaller islands between the Celebes and Darwin and I've noticed that the majority of them lack any fuel to speak of and I'm wondering what's to keep me from unloading fuel at them while they are still unoccupied and Allied controlled so that after I capture them they might have the fuel I need them to have? Anybody have a thought about that idea?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 946

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/15/2012 5:02:32 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

You can't unload at the other side's bases.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 947

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/15/2012 6:30:53 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
You can't unload at the other side's bases.

D'oh. Another great idea shot down. Thanks for the heads up.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 948

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/15/2012 2:03:29 PM

fulcrum28

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/28/2010
Status: offline

omg...Great, impressive AAR

May I ask a few questions?

First one is related to the "transparent" combat report. did you paste it on the pic or it comes with some mod(reluctant admiral?)?
Second, how do you set the naval search/Recon missions? do you try to recond LAnd hexes? is it possible?
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3163422

Do you set specific arcs for naval search of your CL/CA floatplanes or use the default settings?
Do you use carrier base bombers(val) to help in naval searches?
Did you set the turn cycle to 1 so 1 day means one turn? If so, it would be a long and beautiful game :) (365 x 3+8x30 turns approximately!?)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 949

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/15/2012 2:44:10 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
omg...Great, impressive AAR

Thanks. It was Jim's idea and I just sorta fell in line.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
May I ask a few questions?

yes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
First one is related to the "transparent" combat report. did you paste it on the pic or it comes with some mod(reluctant admiral?)?

Yeah, I have to paste it on the pic. It's not all that hard actually. And I think it looks pretty good. Except for shots of China.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
Second, how do you set the naval search/Recon missions? do you try to recon Land hexes? is it possible?

I don't know what Jim does but for me it depends on the situation. The default is to recon 360 degrees and for specific situations
( Allied subs ) I do the arcs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
Do you set specific arcs for naval search of your CL/CA floatplanes or use the default settings?

Jim would have to answer for what he does ( hint, hint ) but for me I think it again depends on the situation. I've tried to transfer the
float planes to bases so that the CA/CL only has one float plane aboard and use it as needed for the specific situation at the time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
Do you use carrier base bombers(val) to help in naval searches?

I have them help in the searches and switch to fighting missions when they find something. Jim probably does the same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
Did you set the turn cycle to 1 so 1 day means one turn? If so, it would be a long and beautiful game :) (365 x 3+8x30 turns approximately!?)

Yep, 1 day at a time. I figure it'll be over a year of swapping turns with each other, at least.

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 950

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/15/2012 6:01:01 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

Very minor request, Larry. I don't think there's any OPSEC problems with including the top toolbar in your screencaps. It has the current date and helps us orient in time and saves you from having to type the date so often. If there is a OPSEC problem, and if you're as good at photoshopping as I think you are, you can change the date to whatever you like.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 951

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/15/2012 6:10:47 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert
Very minor request, Larry. I don't think there's any OPSEC problems with including the top toolbar in your screencaps. It has the current date and helps us orient in time and saves you from having to type the date so often.

Hey that's a good idea. I'll do it. No problemo with OPSEC.

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert
If there is a OPSEC problem, and if you're as good at photoshopping as I think you are, you can change the date to whatever you like.

I don't use photoshop at all........I'm purely a MSPaint dude.

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 952

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/15/2012 6:47:33 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 953

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/16/2012 9:58:40 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

Sorry, Gremlins got to my router and it took a few days to replace it - BUT I'm Back!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
omg...Great, impressive AAR

Thanks. It was Jim's idea and I just sorta fell in line.

Larry is the talent here, I'm doing my first AAR. Thanks for reading .

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
May I ask a few questions?

yes.

Absolutely!

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
First one is related to the "transparent" combat report. did you paste it on the pic or it comes with some mod(reluctant admiral?)?

Yeah, I have to paste it on the pic. It's not all that hard actually. And I think it looks pretty good. Except for shots of China.

We're playing Reluctant Admiral 4.2, again the talent is Larry's.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
Second, how do you set the naval search/Recon missions? do you try to recon Land hexes? is it possible?

I don't know what Jim does but for me it depends on the situation. The default is to recon 360 degrees and for specific situations
( Allied subs ) I do the arcs.

I usually leave Plane searches on default, unless I'm looking for something specifically in a certain place, or if they are shore units then I will use a 180 degree arc. I use my subs - say in ports for my other searches...

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
Do you set specific arcs for naval search of your CL/CA floatplanes or use the default settings?

Jim would have to answer for what he does ( hint, hint ) but for me I think it again depends on the situation. I've tried to transfer the
float planes to bases so that the CA/CL only has one float plane aboard and use it as needed for the specific situation at the time.

Again its specifics, If i'm looking for something in a certain place I will narrow it down to close range (1/2 hexes) = 30 degree arc searches, medium range (3-4 hexes) = 60 degree arcs, etc. If I'm just generally trying to recon an area then its max range and 90 degrees.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
Do you use carrier base bombers(val) to help in naval searches?

I have them help in the searches and switch to fighting missions when they find something. Jim probably does the same.

As long as you have sorties remaining on your Cv's, I use DB's to at 70 search/30 Rest, I use the TB's to ASW 70/30 also. 30 CAP / 40 LRCAP / 30 REST for the fighters. 15K altitude for the F/& DB 5K for the TB's. I leave the rest of the fleet floats to ASW or search. If the Commander is highly rated then I leave the decision to him, otherwise I'm usually not selecting an arc, Im worried more about the range for fatigue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28
Did you set the turn cycle to 1 so 1 day means one turn? If so, it would be a long and beautiful game :) (365 x 3+8x30 turns approximately!?)

Yep, 1 day at a time. I figure it'll be over a year of swapping turns with each other, at least.

LOL yes It has kept me from making some serious blunders, opposed to 2 or 3 day turns. There is a TON of stats to keep track of and action/reaction moves, I average about an hour per turn, and still havent figured it all out yet. If you choose to play as the Japanese, use caution - its EASY to wreck the economy and use up all of your supply/resources quickly! There are several really good players on the AAR's that can give you golden advice.

Again thanks for reading and feel free to post!

< Message edited by moore4807 -- 8/16/2012 10:07:43 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 954

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/16/2012 10:04:09 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert
Very minor request, Larry. I don't think there's any OPSEC problems with including the top toolbar in your screencaps. It has the current date and helps us orient in time and saves you from having to type the date so often.

Hey that's a good idea. I'll do it. No problemo with OPSEC.

I'm adding the Date header to my reports! LOL Larry's posts ARE the definition of a picture saying a thousand words...

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert
If there is a OPSEC problem, and if you're as good at photoshopping as I think you are, you can change the date to whatever you like.

I don't use photoshop at all........I'm purely a MSPaint dude.

Larry has given me several tips on here about MSPaint and offers to use his bag of tricks, obviously I'm not the talent he is... BUT in my defense he is a former software programmer! LOL

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 955

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/16/2012 10:06:47 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert
THIS IS AWESOME... BRAVO!!!
Moo is suitably impressed!

_____________________________

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 956

RE: 20Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/16/2012 10:26:16 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 20, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One shot from BB Harauna and its curtains for you my pretty!

Night Time Surface Combat, near Probolinggo at 56,105, Range 6,000 Yards
Japanese Ships
BB Haruna
CA Chokai
CA Myoko
CA Aoba
CL Abukuma
DD Amatsukaze
DD Ayanami
DD Karii

Allied Ships
AMc Tjerimai, Shell hits 1, and is sunk

This is insulting! Walk right in my front door uninvited!

Night Naval bombardment of Darwin at 76,124 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!
26 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Japanese Ships
CA Furutaka

Allied ground losses:
66 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

CA Furutaka firing at Emery Point Fortress
Emery Point Fortress firing at CA Furutaka

I'll take whatever moral victories I can...

Sub attack near Sydney at 92,168
Japanese Ships
SS I-1, hits 1

Allied Ships
PG Moresby

Sub attack near Ebadon at 130,113
Japanese Ships
PB Takuna Maru #7, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
PB Takuna Maru #6

Allied Ships
SS Seadragon

Larry FINALLY brings down a B-17, Now If I can only keep flying to get them the experience they need to hit the side of the barn!

Afternoon Air attack on 24th Special Base Force, at 99,129 (Buna)
Weather in hex: Overcast
Raid spotted at 8 NM, estimated altitude 27,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 2 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 10

Allied aircraft
B-17D Fortress x 4

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-17D Fortress: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged

To sum up this turn, nothing for Orphan Anne to crow about! A LOT of ASW work by the Japanese around Orinmato(?) and Makassar.
Couple of torps sank an AK at Midway, Gotta work harder clearing them out of there!

_____________________________

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 957

RE: 21Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/16/2012 10:29:06 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I found one of Jim's little surprizes.......fortunately it's near a port so my ship can limp to a dockside without much duress. I've dispatched
some DMS ships to the spot so I think maybe it'll be cleaned up pretty quickly. I can't imagine how many times I've been past that spot
without finding any mines, which leads me to believe it's a small minefield. I don't have enough DMS ships to include one in every convoy
so I guess I'll continue to find them the way I found this one. Jim has some subs that can lay mines I believe and I wouldn't put it past
him to use them to lay little surprizes all around the places I've already been just to see how many ships he can sink/damage.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 958

RE: 21Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/16/2012 10:36:37 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

My airconditioner went on the fritz a couple of days ago and the temperature inside the house got up to 96 degrees F before the a/c
technition got here to fix it at 17:10 pm. He had the problemo diagnosed and fixed in less than 20 minutes but according to the contract I
had to pay for a full hour of labor. The parts were still under warranty so it was fixed for $140 and I had cool air coming out of the vents
in no time. It took the rest of the day to cool down the house but at least it was back to 75 degrees at night so I could work in comfort on
my moves. There's a lot to be said for the minor heros that help us in our lives.

Um.....not a whole lot happened in the 21Jan42 combat report. I posted something about the minefield I found above but other than
that there were a lot of unconsequential air strikes and ground bombardments in various places. Here's the combat report ( attached ) so you can peruse it if you are so inclined

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 959

RE: 21Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 8/16/2012 10:42:05 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I got a lucky hit on an AK near Midway. There was no mention of casualties so I've surmized that it had already unloaded it's cargo
there. I'm only posting something about the incident because a ship got damaged. There were lots of sub attacks where nothing
at all happened afterward so I thought I'd post something about the consequential ones.