Author Topic: FSO Proposal  (Read 5745 times)

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #45 on: October 16, 2008, 11:56:56 AM »
One solution to that would be:

Bougainville (AirSols)

F4U-1A (Limited)
F6F-5 (Limited)
SBD-5
TBM-3
A-20
PT Boat* (Limited, 2nd Life in Aircraft)

New Guinea (5th AF)

P-38J (Limited)
P-47D-11 (Limited)
A-20
B-24J* (Limited)
B-25H* (Limited)
PT Boat* (Limited, 2nd Life in Aircraft)

* = Can only emply one option

P-39s and P-40s eliminated since they wouldn't have factored into the campaign to flatten Rabaul.

Alternately, the Japanese can be given targets to hit with Vals and Kates on Bougainville and New Guinea, with P-39s and P-40s re-added for defense (and only Warhawks and Airacobras can be so employed). However I still think this setup favors an Allied-only offense.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2008, 12:01:45 PM by Saxman »
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #46 on: October 16, 2008, 12:27:49 PM »
AirSols didn't have any A-20's that I know of.  B-25's were the medium bomber assigned I believe.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #47 on: October 16, 2008, 12:37:51 PM »
Easy enough to restrict the A-20s to the 5th AF bases in New Guinea, and have the Marines and Naval forces out of Bougainville rely on their Dauntlesses and TBMs.

Actually, keeping both AirSols (with no B-25C added) and the 5th Air Force in the setup together will create an interesting strategic and tactical situation for the Allied CiC, as each group would have vastly differing strike capabilities and methods.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Bino

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5937
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #48 on: October 18, 2008, 10:05:18 AM »
Saxman, thanks for coming up with this.

As Anaxagoras points out, JG11 did quite well flying the Ki-61 in a recent FSO.  You might want to include a minimum required number for the A6M5, or maybe a 50/50 split for the two planes. Personally, I'd choose a Tony over a Zero, any day.

And you may want to include the option (or requirement?) for torpedo-armed G4Ms, as the IJN still firmly believed in that whole long-range, land-based "attack bomber" thing in late '43.

Su-u-u-re would be cool if we had more planes in the mid-war set!  Yes, it sure would! <nudge, nudge, wink, wink>

Anyway, I'm looking forward to this, Saxman.  Thanks!  :salute
« Last Edit: October 18, 2008, 10:07:37 AM by Bino »


"The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'." - Randy Pausch

PC Specs

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #49 on: October 18, 2008, 10:30:51 AM »

And you may want to include the option (or requirement?) for torpedo-armed G4Ms, as the IJN still firmly believed in that whole long-range, land-based "attack bomber" thing in late '43.


Unfortunately we don't HAVE G4Ms, and the Ki-67 is in no way a substitute. Anyway, I also removed the Allied CVs. This will strictly be an 8th AF and AirSols campaign.

Revised based on latest suggestions. Each US position (Bougainville and New Guinea) will have one limited and one not fighter. On Bougainville it is the F6F as there were a limited number of land-based Hellcat squadrons in the area. In New Guinea it is the P-38J, which would have only just been arriving in the theater.

UNITED STATES

Bougainville (AirSols)

F6F-5 (maximum 20)
F4U-1A
SBD-5 (minimum 25 required)
TBM-3 (minimum 20 required)
PT Boat* (maximum 10, 2nd Life in Aircraft)

New Guinea (5th AF)

P-38J (maximum 20)
P-47D-11
A-20 (minimum 25 required)
B-24J* (maximum 10)
B-25H* (maximum 10)
PT Boat* (maximum 10, 2nd Life in Aircraft)

* = Can only employ one option. Selection is for all aircraft/vehicles in frame, not by base

JAPAN

A6M2 (maximum 15%)
A6M5 (minimum 40%)
Ki-61 (maximum 45%)

Split is 55/45 in favor of Japan.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Fencer51

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4679
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #50 on: October 18, 2008, 12:58:46 PM »
I think you should ditch the F4U.  :noid
Fencer
The names of the irrelevant have been changed to protect their irrelevance.
The names of the innocent and the guilty have not been changed.
As for the innocent, everyone needs to know they are innocent –
As for the guilty… they can suck it.

Offline Baumer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
      • 332nd Flying Mongrels
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #51 on: October 18, 2008, 02:44:40 PM »
Saxman,

Just playing devil's advocate but I ran the numbers for a 500 player set with the following out come.

500 participants 45/55 would be US 225  vs IJN/IJA 275

As I understand the aircraft requirement it COULD break down like this.

 IJN/IJA
  • A6M2- 15% or 41 aircraft
  • A6M5- 40% or 110 aircraft
  • Ki-61- 45% or 124 aircraft

 USN/USAAF
  • SBD- (Min 25) so 25 aircraft
  • TBM- (Min 20) so 20 aircraft
  • A-20- (Min 25) so 25 aircraft
  • B-24- (Max 10) so 10 aircraft
  • F4U-1A- (unlimited) remainder of pilots- 145 aircraft

I'm not sure that it would be a balanced fight, but that's very hard to do with the current plane set.
HTC Please show the blue planes some love!
F4F-4, FM2, SBD-5, TBM-3

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #52 on: October 18, 2008, 03:21:40 PM »
You're forgetting the P-38s and P-47s, which are the only fighters available out of New Guinea (F4Us launch out of Bougainville only). An additional provision to require all aircraft types to be flown (with one drawn from the set three optional craft) would prevent stacking all the fighters in F4Us or Jugs.

With only 20 P-38s, the Allies will need to field at LEAST an equivalent number of P-47s. The same applies to the F6F and F4U. I'd expect to see a breakdown more along the lines of:

AirSols and 5th Air Force:

25 SBDs
20 TBMs
25 A-20s
10 B-24s
20 P-38Js
20 F6Fs

This would leave 105 pilots to split between P-47 and F4U-1A. Assuming an equal split, that's about 52 of one, 53 of the other.

However the Allies must also still ensure a sufficient strike force to knock out their targets. The 5th AF has the advantage with the A-20s and two additional bombers (B-24 or B-25H) to choose from. However AirSols is relying on SBDs and TBMs. While the TBMs carry an appreciable bomb load, the SBDs are much more limited (1500lbs combined centerline and wing pylons, I believe). Twenty-five Dauntlesses aren't going to be able to inflict the same damage as an equal number of TBMs or A-20s.

If you assume the best-case scenario it takes two SBDs to drop one hangar (1500lbs x 2). Just a small airfield would require twelve SBDs ALL hitting their targets spot-on to take down just the hangars. leveling an entire field on the first go may require 15 of them, which is greater than half the total number of SBDs required. This means the Allied CiC must either use more than the minimum number of strike craft from AirSols or have some of his F6Fs or F4Us flying heavy just to ensure he's sending enough ordinance, to say nothing of enough planes to get through the CAP.

Planning for the Allied side is going to be a lot less straightforward than it would seem.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #53 on: October 23, 2008, 10:35:22 PM »
Proposed modification:

All aircraft types must be used, with ONE drawn from the optional set (B-25C, B-25H, B-24 or PT boat)

UNITED STATES

Bougainville (AirSols)

F6F-5 (maximum 20)
F4U-1A
SBD-5 (minimum 25 required)
TBM-3 (minimum 20 required)
B-25C* (maximum 15, no formations)
PT Boat* (maximum 10, 2nd Life in Aircraft)

New Guinea (5th AF)

P-38J (maximum 20)
P-47D-11
A-20 (minimum 25 required)
B-24J* (maximum 10, no formations)
B-25H* (maximum 10)
PT Boat* (maximum 10, 2nd Life in Aircraft)

* = Can only employ one option. Selection applies to entire Allied force, not by base

Optional Special Mission: Black Sheep One (as previously proposed)

JAPAN

A6M2 (maximum 15%)
A6M5 (minimum 40%)
Ki-61 (maximum 45%)

Split is 55/45 in favor of Japan.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline 1pLUs44

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #54 on: October 25, 2008, 12:43:47 PM »
One solution to that would be:

Bougainville (AirSols)

F4U-1A (Limited)
F6F-5 (Limited)
SBD-5
TBM-3
A-20
PT Boat* (Limited, 2nd Life in Aircraft)

New Guinea (5th AF)

P-38J (Limited)
P-47D-11 (Limited)
A-20
B-24J* (Limited)
B-25H* (Limited)
PT Boat* (Limited, 2nd Life in Aircraft)

* = Can only emply one option

P-39s and P-40s eliminated since they wouldn't have factored into the campaign to flatten Rabaul.

Alternately, the Japanese can be given targets to hit with Vals and Kates on Bougainville and New Guinea, with P-39s and P-40s re-added for defense (and only Warhawks and Airacobras can be so employed). However I still think this setup favors an Allied-only offense.


I would have to disagree with you on that one.  The 40th and the 39th Fighter squadrons had probably flown there as they were part of the 5th AF. At the time, the 40th were still flying P-39s IIRC, or were now transitioning to P-47D25s... The 39th Fighter Squadron would also either have a P-38 or be just getting the P-47s. So there would be atleast P-39D's here, and at most, the P-47D25s.  :salute

P-47D11s probably wouldn't be limited, as the 40th FS got their P-47D25s around then in 1943.
No one knows what the future may bring.

Offline 1pLUs44

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #55 on: October 25, 2008, 12:47:38 PM »
The squadron settled at Mt. Gambier, SA by 16 March and were then ordered to a new air strip 16 miles from Townsville, QLD called Antil Plains. After six weeks of training new people and securing P-400s and P-39s, the 40th was ordered to Port Moresby, Papua on 2 June 1942 as the 40th Fighter Squadron. Lt. Harvey J. Scandrett had scored the first victory for the 40th while on TDY with another unit on 17 May. Lt. B. J. Oliver scored the 2nd victory on an intercept over Salamaua on 16 June but Lts. William L. Hutcheson, Stanley F. Rice, and P. J. Magre were MIA. Lts. Robert S. Johnson and Stephen M. Smith were wounded. Capt Hubert I. Egenes, a Java veteran, took over the command.

On 11 July 1942 on an intercept over Port Moresby Lts. Robert W. Shick, Chester E. Trout, Garth B. Cottam, Clarence M. Wilmarth, and Philip K. Shriver scored victories. Lt. O. A. Kirtland was MIA and Lt. Ed J. Gignac was injured in a forced landing. Late in July the squadron rotated back to Antil Plains to re-coup and re-arm. On 21 Nov the 40th moved to Port Moresby and based at Berry Field (12 mile). Capt. Malcolm A. Moore was the commander. The 40th received the Presidential Unit Citation for its role in aerial support for the Papuan Campaign.

On 7 Dec 1942 in an air battle over Buna, Capt. Moore and Lts. Wilmarth and Charles A. Klein each downed a Zeke. On 6 Feb 1943 while covering C-47s supplying troops at Wau, a flight of eight 40th P-39s ran into a large group of Japanese aircraft and shot down twelve with no losses to themselves. Victors were Lt. Gene De Boer (1), Lt. Bill McDonough (2), Lt. Lewis Raines (1), Lt. Bill Shick (2), Lt. Lee Taylor (1), Capt. Tom Winburn (2), and Lt. Ed Schneider (3). This feat earned the 40th a second Presidential Unit Citation.

On 12 April 1943 on an intercept over Port Moresby Lts. Klein, Lou Nagy, Hauser Wilson, and Gene Heinz scored one victory each, while Capt. Bill Davitt got two. For the next three months the missions were routine patrol, air support for bombers, and escort for transports. Then came the move to Tsili-Tsili, a higly-secret, landlocked strip 200 miles north of Port Moresby. The first escort of C-47s began on 14 August. On the 15th, Lts. Dick Schamlz and Bob Yaeger tacked onto a 41st flight which got to the Tsili-Tsili area just as the first Japanese raid came in. Lt. Schmalz got one victory and Lt. Yaeger got two. The 40th moved to Tsili-Tsili on 25 Aug 1943 for some of the most rugged and severe flying and living conditions. Fuel, food and munitions supply could only come in by C-47. Mud and heat prevailed in the extremes, and cloud build-up over the surrounding mountains made every flight hazardous. The 40th covered the Lae landings of Allied troops and also participated in the airborne assault of the Nadzab area. The 40th moved to Nadzab in October 1943 and were able to cover Allied landings at Finschhafen. Major Thomas H. Winburn (now Lt Col, ret) was commander during this period.

On 27 Oct planes led by Capt. John Clapper intercepted Japanese bombers over Finschhafen. He and Lts. Carl E. Nelson, Nathan Smith, Schneider, Phil Wolf, and Robert G. Allison each downed a bomber. However, the Japanese also raided Nadzab at random and on 7 Nov 1943 Lts. John E. Doordan, Ben J. Ewers, Nelson, Walter S. Thayer, and William H. Strand each scored. Again on 9 Nov Capt. Clapper got 2 victories, Lts. Jack A. Grimm and John M. Davis got one each. In late November over Saidor Lts. Francis J. Vetort, Grimm, and Nelson got single victories, and Lt. Alvaro J. Hunter got two.
P-47 ERA

In late December 1943 with Capt. Joseph E. Lamphere as commander the 40th began transition into P-47 Thunderbolts, a big change from P-39s. In January 1944 the 40th flight line was bombed and strafed several times, but no big damage was done. Then in Feb 1944 the 40th moved up the Markham river to the Ramu river valley base called Gusap. It had cool air and cold water and put the squadron within the range of the Japanese bases around Wewak. Major Bill McDonough got two P-47 victories over Wewak on 15 Feb and another over Gusap on 4 March as Japanese Tony's followed our flights back from Wewak. On 11 Mar 1944 Capt. Robert Yaeger, Jr. got 3 scores over Wewak. Later he was the 40th Commander from 21 April to 5 May 1944.




This might be able to confirm it, I'm not too sure about the location of the ports and what not in real life.  :salute
No one knows what the future may bring.

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #56 on: October 25, 2008, 02:51:41 PM »
So according to that article the P-39 would be more appropriate than the Jugs for the time period (November/December 1943).
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline 1pLUs44

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #57 on: October 26, 2008, 08:31:00 PM »
I'm not saying that, I'm saying that the 39 was definitely used up until atleast then. I'm pretty sure the 39th FS got their Razorbacks in 1944, I'm not sure about that one though as I'm pretty sure they had their P-38s for almost all of 1943. P-38G might need it's own spot there as well.
No one knows what the future may bring.

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #58 on: October 26, 2008, 11:04:25 PM »
I don't want to load the Allied plane set down TOO much as there's already quite a few rides as it is. I went with the P-38J as from what I can dig up it was the 38H that was primarily used in the attacks on the Rabaul. We don't have the H, but the P-38J is a much closer match than our G.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline 1pLUs44

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
Re: FSO Proposal
« Reply #59 on: October 30, 2008, 11:09:00 PM »
Ah, okay. I'm 100% Positive that the P-47D11 was there at Rabaul, but a lot of fighter squadrons still had the P-39s (Mostly P-39Ks to whatever latest model had come out at the time). The 35th was one of the fighter groups of the war that was almost never recognized for anything they did, and they pretty much had the 'not-so-good-' planes up until well into the middle of the war and starting in the later years of the war.  :salute
No one knows what the future may bring.