Aces High Bulletin Board

Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Saxman on October 13, 2008, 01:02:37 PM

Title: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 13, 2008, 01:02:37 PM
Ok, this one would take some doing, since we don't have a map, (I have drawn a concept "theater" map encompassing all of New Britain and New Ireland, parts of New Guinea, the northern end of Bougainville and the surrounding smaller islands. The map is drawn roughly to 1:1 scale based on a 512x512 terrain).

Fortress Rabaul

November, 1943...

After more than a year of bloody fighting the Americans have succeeded in driving up the Solomon Islands and have landed on Bouganville. Although Japanese resistance on the island continues, the American leadership has set their sights on the next phase in their battle plan: The elimination of Rabaul.

By August 1943 it was decided that attempting to seize the island would be too costly, so instead the Allied command in the Pacific decided that the ports and airfields on Rabaul are to be pounded into rubble, and the heavy defenses of the island be bypassed in favor of easier and faster objectives elsewhere.

Substantial damage to Japanese supply efforts had already been inflicted upon the Japanese at the Battle of the Bismarck Sea, and the new generation of American fleet carriers are in the Pacific. Meanwhile, the Japanese carrier fleet has suffered heavy damage from the Battles of the Coral Sea and Midway, and they have no flattops still operating in the South Pacific. Most of their carrier fleet has been sunk, and the big Zuikaku and Shokaku have been withdrawn for repairs following damage received during the campaigns of 1942 and 1943. Striking from bases throughout New Guinea and the the Solomons, the pilots of the US Army Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps are poised to deliver a knock-out blow, and render one of the last major Japanese strongholds in the South Pacific a useless ruin.

United States:

F6F Hellcat (from carriers only)
F4U-1A Corsair (from Bougainville bases only)
FM-2 Wildcat (from carriers only)
P-38J Lightning
P-40E Warhawk
P-39Q Airacobra
SBD Dauntless
TBM Avenger
B-24J
B-25H (limited numbers)
PT Boat


Japanese to be drawn from:
A6M2 Zero
A6M5 Zero
Ki-61 "Tony"
Ki-84 "Frank" (limited numbers)
N1K2-J "George" (limited numbers)
Ki-67 "Peggy" (limited numbers)
D3A "Val"
B5N "Kate"

Objectives:

The obvious American objective is the reduction of the port and airfields of Rabaul. Additional targets (particularly for the B-25H and PT boats) are Japanese convoys (task groups of DDs and CAs only). They must also defend their carriers and land bases from Japanese counter-attack. The Japanese must defend Rabaul at all costs. They must also strike at the American carriers supporting the assault, and American bases in New Guinea and on Bouganville.

Possible Optional Mission for the Allies:

"Black Sheep One"

Among the Allied forces assaulting Rabaul are the pilots of VMF-214, the legendary Black Sheep, led by Greg "Gramps" Boyington on his race to break the USMC victory record. The Allied commander may choose one Corsair pilot to represent Boyington. Any victories he scores earns an additional points bonus. However if he is shot down by the Japanese the Axis receives a point bonus.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Dux on October 13, 2008, 03:17:46 PM
Just FYI, Sax... Raptor is currently working on exactly this map.

(http://home.sprynet.com/~cwbeals/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/newbritain.jpg)
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 13, 2008, 03:52:07 PM
What's the map scaling, btw?

I'd thought it would be REALLY cool if the port and airbase of Rabaul was built on the map to actually look LIKE the historical port at the time.

Oh, and a mix of dirt, coral, and pierced-steel plank runways. :D

Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Dux on October 13, 2008, 04:21:31 PM
It's pretty close to 1:1.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 13, 2008, 04:36:51 PM
Sweet, any screenshots?
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: lowZX14 on October 14, 2008, 09:25:13 AM
Ohhhhhhh yeah, a good 'ole USMC slug fest, I so hope we're allies when that one rolls around, oohrahhh :rock
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 14, 2008, 09:47:41 AM
I don't think any N1K's were in service in November 1943.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: lowZX14 on October 14, 2008, 10:05:42 AM
Among the Allied forces assaulting Rabaul are the pilots of VMF-214, the legendary Black Sheep, led by Greg "Gramps" Boyington on his race to break the USMC victory record. The Allied commander may choose one Corsair pilot to represent Boyington. Any victories he scores earns an additional points bonus. However if he is shot down by the Japanese the Axis receives a point bonus.

Except his name was Gregory "Pappy" Boyington
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 10:22:57 AM
Pappy was a media creation and the pilots under his command never actually used it. They called him "Gramps."
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 10:27:18 AM
I don't think any N1K's were in service in November 1943.

Earlier variants, not the 2J that we have might have been. Then again, there may not have been any Ki-84s, either.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: lowZX14 on October 14, 2008, 10:32:55 AM
Pappy was a media creation and the pilots under his command never actually used it. They called him "Gramps."
This is true, I am mistaken
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 14, 2008, 10:54:21 AM
Earlier variants, not the 2J that we have might have been. Then again, there may not have been any Ki-84s, either.

I don't know a lot about Japanese aircraft, but the Wiki article implies that even the N1K1-J didn't enter service until early 1944.

The sources listed at the end of the article:

Quote
    * Francillon, René J. Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War. London: Putnam & Company Ltd., 1970. second edition 1979. ISBN 0-370-30251-6.
    * Francillon, René J. Kawanishi Kyofu, Shiden and Shiden Kai Variants (Aircraft in Profile 213). Windsor, Berkshire, UK: Profile Publications Ltd., 1971.
    * Galbiati, Fabio. "Battaglia Aerea del 19 Marzo su Kure.(in Italian)" Storia Militare magazine, Albertelli edizioni, N.166, July 2007.
    * Green, William. Warplanes of the Second World War, Volume Three: Fighters. London: Macdonald & Co. (Publishers) Ltd., 1961 (seventh impression 1973). ISBN 0-356-01447-9.
    * Koseski, Krystian. Kawanishi N1K1/N1k2-J "Shiden/Kai" (in Polish). Warszawa, Poland: Wydawnictwo Susei, 1991. ISBN 83-900216-0-9.
    * Mondey, David. The Hamlyn Concise Guide to Axis Aircraft of World War II. London: Bounty Books, 2006. ISBN 0-753714-60-4.
    * Sakaida, Henry. Imperial Japanese Navy Aces, 1937-45. Botley, Oxford, UK: Osprey Publishing, 1998. ISBN 1-85532-727-9.
    * Sakaida, Henry, and Koji Takaki. Genda's Blade: Japan's Squadron of Aces: 343 Kokutai. Hersham, Surrey, UK: Classic Publications, 2003. ISBN 1-903223-25-3.


The article on the Ki-84 is not as thorough.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 14, 2008, 10:55:55 AM
N1K-2J production:

Quote
Shiden-Kai Production
Month    Number Produced
1943    1 (prototype)
January 1944    1
February 1944    1
March 1944    1
April 1944    2
May 1944    1
June 1944    1
July 1944    3
August 1944    2
September 1944    1
October 1944    6
November 1944    17
December 1944    31
January 1945    35
February 1945    47
March 1945    59
April 1945    83
May 1945    83 (20 by Himeji factory)
June 1945    25
July 1945    18
August 1945    10
Total    428
Sources: Pages 29 and 63-68 of Genda's Blade
and Aircraft in profile 213, page 64.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 14, 2008, 10:58:23 AM
I think it's safe to say the N1K2-J does not belong in your proposed FSO.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Fencer51 on October 14, 2008, 11:00:05 AM
There were no N1K1s or KI-84s at Rabaul.  We really need the A6M3, KI-43 and KI-44 for these mid to latemid war setups.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 11:31:10 AM
Anaxagoras,

True. Unfortunately Zeros and Tonies vs. Hellcats, Corsairs and P-38s would probably not be much fun for the Axis. Additionally, the Peggy wasn't encountered until a year later.

I agree, Fencer. It'd be useful to have Oscars and Nicks as well, but it wouldn't help the Axis plane set except for variety

In the interest of accuracy, the revised matchup would look something like this:

United States

F6F-5 Hellcat (from carriers only)
F4U-1A Corsair (from Bougainville bases only)
P-38J Lightning (all land bases)
P-39Q Airacobra (all land bases)
SBD Dauntless (carriers and Bougainville)
TBM Avenger (carriers and Bougainville)
B-24J (all land bases)
B-25H (limited numbers, all land bases)
PT Boat

Japan

A6M2 Zero
A6M5 Zero
Ki-61 "Tony"
D3A "Val" (2nd life in fighters)
B5N "Kate" (2nd life in fighters)

The Ki-84, N1K2 and Ki-67 have been removed since they were not yet in service. I've also removed the FM-2, as they were primarily operating from the "jeep" carriers, so would not be seeing heavy service in the Pacific until the following year (at this time most of them were in the Atlantic). The P-40E has also been removed, as by this time the P-40N was in use and the P-40E doesn't adequately substitue.

Side distribution would ideally be set to 60/40 in favor of the Axis to make up for the performance advantages of the American fighters and bombers. The Kates and Vals would have second lives in fighters as they are essentially cannon fodder for mid-war American iron. Minimum numbers can also be set for TBMs and SBDs, to ensure the Allies don't overwhelm the Axis with large numbers of Jabo Hellcats and Corsairs. Maximum could also be set for B-24s, depending on whether or not formations are allowed.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 14, 2008, 11:48:09 AM
If you're worried about the competitiveness of axis aircraft, why not leave the P-40E in?
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 12:00:13 PM
It could be put back in, true. I'm not sure if it would have all that big of an impact, though.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Fencer51 on October 14, 2008, 12:08:53 PM
I would suggest that you look at the use of the B-25C/D against Rabaul and consider the reduction of the number of B-24s.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 12:15:01 PM
Ok, based on these recommendations:

US Set

F6F-5 (CV only)
F4U-1A (Bougainville)
P-38J
P-40E
P-39Q
SBD (minimum number, Bougainville and CV)
TBM (minimum number, Bougainville and CV)
B-25H (limited numbers)
B-25C (minimum number)
B-24J (limited numbers)
PT Boat (optional)
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 14, 2008, 12:42:31 PM
It's not that the B-24 is so hard to down with e.g. the Ki-61, it's the formations with "fire-all" that are unbalancing.  It's a feature that's supposed to help bombers survive in the main arena when they are unescorted and lack the defensive help of other bombers.  Disabling formations would be an effective way to add balance to such a setup, which looks very promising btw.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 12:58:37 PM
So allow formations for the B-25s, but not for the B-24s?

Restricting the allowed bombload on the Liberators (say, no larger than 500lbers or something) could help further.

What would be really interesting would be to have at least one frame where the Allied objectives are all centered around the Port of Rabaul itself for one massive battle (maybe as the third frame in the series?). If the entire Japanese CAP is concentrated in one area the Allies would need to coordinate properly, otherwise they'll arrive piecemeal and be slaughtered. Granted, that may be a little too MA.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: daddog on October 14, 2008, 01:57:37 PM
Fencer is right about the B-24’s. With formations they would own the sky. Shoot, just forget all the Allied fighters and IMHO the Allies would win if they flew with 100% B-24’s.

Your first list of a plane set was more balanced than what you have now Sax. FSO at times has a trend that is moving toward ‘historical accuracy’ as opposed to balance game play.  Sure we all want things to be historically accurate, but not at the sacrifice of ‘fun’. Many don’t consider the ‘fun’ factor or put it on the back burner with historical accuracy the being the paramount concern.

Yes the A6M2 was in operation then, but it is a piece of paper. Just a few rounds of .50’s and it is over for that pilot. 2nd life for the Val’s and Kate’s helps, but you needs something that can stand a chance against the 38’s and F4U’s. Ki84 and N1K2 would help balance the plane set and make it much more enjoyable for the Axis players.

As far as limiting the payload, that is not a tool the CM’s have.  They wisely avoid having rules or regulations that they can’t control.

It is a good initial write up Sax and reasonably balanced. It is really tough to balance a mid to late war Pacific event. One is often forced to put in Axis AC that were not in service, drop and or limit the Allied AC. Tough choices.

<S>

My two cents. :)
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Odee on October 14, 2008, 02:18:48 PM
Pfffffff!
Ohhhhhhh yeah, a good 'ole USMC slug fest, I so hope we're allies when that one rolls around, oohrahhh :rock
Good old 5th USAAF, 49th FG kick butt time you mean.  Get out Dick Bong, and Tommy Lynch, boys!  The Japs they are a coming!
 :cool:
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 02:29:52 PM
daddog,

I did include the A6M5. The A6M2 COULD be dropped and replaced entirely with this model rather than having them operating side-by-side. It may be a little later than this period, but is a closer match to the A6M3 we're missing than the Ki-84 and N1K2 are to the Ki-43 and Ki-44.

There's also the 60/40 balance which should help as well. B-24s can easily be limited to no formations, limited to a maximum number of airframes. Minimum numbers for the SBDs, TBMs and B-25C with restrictions on the number of Liberators and 25Hs would require the bulk of the Allied strike to be made up of bombers more easily handled by the Axis. More would also be required because of their smaller loadouts, as well (the 75mm of the 25H really compensates for the B-25's limited bombload).
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: daddog on October 14, 2008, 02:57:01 PM
Quote
I did include the A6M5. The A6M2 COULD be dropped and replaced entirely with this model rather than having them operating side-by-side. It may be a little later than this period, but is a closer match to the A6M3 we're missing than the Ki-84 and N1K2 are to the Ki-43 and Ki-44.
Oh I know. I saw the A6M5. I just mentioned the A6M2 because it will be hurting in that setup against any bomber and will be of little use against any Allied fighter that is smart and stays fast.

Good write up Sax, but as I said with the Pacific Theater, mid to late war, a balanced play set is tough, let alone keep the historically minded happy.  :salute

Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Shifty on October 14, 2008, 03:05:09 PM
Another option would be to go with limited Allied aircraft.

Focus on a USAAF vs IJ scenario with P-38H, P-39D, and P-40E
vs
Ki-61, A6M5, and use A6M2 as a KI-43 sub.

Then a few months later turn around and run the same scenario using USN/USMC aircraft
F4U1 and F4F land based with F4Fs and limited F6Fs off CV's vs the same Japanese planeset.

Throwing both Army and Navy birds at the Japanese planeset at once may be a bit overwhelming. Limiting the scope of the battle might make it play a bit more even.

Just a thought.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: shreck on October 14, 2008, 03:12:42 PM
Manchurian Madness scenario  :devil  KI84s, n1ks vs LAs and Yaks  :rock  <-----Now that would be a HOOT.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 03:28:39 PM
Problem with limiting it to AAF on one, and USN/MC on the other is that the Rabaul assault was heavily coordinated. USMC escorting USAAF bombers, etc.

Updated, with possible restrictions indicated:

US

F6F-5 (30 Max, CV only)
F4U-1A (25 Max, Bougainville only)
P-38J (25 Max, all land bases)
P-39Q (20 minimum, all land bases)
P-40E (20 minimum, all land bases)
SBD-5 (20 Minimum, Bougainville and CV)
TBM-3 (20 Minimum, Bougainville and CV)
B-25C (20 Minimum, no formations, all land bases)
B-25H (10 Maximum, all land bases)
B-24J (10 Maximum, no formations, all land bases)
PT Boat (Optional, no second life, 10 Maximum)

Japan

A6M5 (no restrictions)
Ki-61 (no restrictions)
D3A (second life in fighters)
B5N (second life in fighters)

Balance: 60/40 in favor of Axis

Special Optional Mission: "Black Sheep One," as in the original write-up.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Shifty on October 14, 2008, 03:40:17 PM
You could still have the Army bombers in both sets. However it's your idea so roll with it. :aok
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: ELD66 on October 14, 2008, 04:55:23 PM
P38J was not introduced until august of 1943 and most were sent to north africa. It would be better if you swapped the J for the G. And the B24J was only in the ETO during 1943. If we include it why not also include KI67 with limited numbers and no formations?
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 06:52:22 PM
This campaign is also set at the tail-end of 1943 (November/December), by which times more Js would have been available. Additionally, by 1943 the Americans were largely giving up on the 38 in Europe due to the problems they were having in colder climates, so most were going to the Pacific (P-38s were being rushed into the PTO almost as fast as they could be built). Finally, the P-38H we're missing would be more appropriate to this setup than the G, and the 38J would be a closer substitute.

B-24Js can also be removed from the setup outright. It'd be nice if HTC would have given us earlier models of the 24 and 17 (we don't even HAVE a B-17 appropriate for the Pacific, as all Gs were in Europe) but I believe they've already gone on record saying "Not gonna happen." However while the B-24J can substitute for earlier models (technically I can call it a PB4Y in the writeup instead and be correct, as the PB4Y was a 24D modified with a nose turret for use by the Navy. In other words, a 24J) the Japanese bomber at this time would have been the G4M. The Ki-67 is as much a substitute for the G4M as the Ki-84 and N1K2-J are for the Ki-43 and 44. :p
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 14, 2008, 11:34:43 PM
After some consideration, I'd like to suggest this revision:

The gaps in the plane set are really too large to do all of what I want to do with this set up. Additionally the real focus is the reduction of Rabaul, and by this point in the war Japan was largely on the defensive and unable to mount an sort of appreciable counter-offensive against American airfields and bases. Therefore I'm removing the Japanese bombers. This setup I think would be more effectively run if treated like the Battle of Britain: Japan only defending while the US only attacks. This will also help alleviate the disparity between the American and Japanese aircraft by allowing the Axis to field their entire force as fighters. Combined with a 60/40 split that should help finish balancing things out.

American targets would include Japanese bases facilities on New Britain and New Ireland and the surrounding islands, as well as convoys (task groups with CAs and DDs only. No IJN CVs in this setup) in the area.

Plane Set

United States

F6F-5 (limited, CVs only)
F4U-1A (limited, Bougainville)
P-38J (limited, all land bases)
P-39Q (all land bases)
P-40E (all land bases)
SBD-5 (CV and Bougainville)
TBM-3 (CV and Bougainville)
B-25C (all land bases)
B-25H (limited, all land bases)
PB4Y-1 (Eld: ;) ) (limited, all land bases)
PT Boat (limited, optional, 2nd life in fighters -- at least one convoy should be placed within range of a PT spawn and indicated as such in objectives if the Allied commander wishes to use PTs)

Japan

A6M5
Ki-67

Side distribution: 60/40
Allied Special Mission: "Black Sheep One" - One Corsair pilot is designated as Boyington. Allies receive a bonus for any aircraft he shoots down. Axis receives a bonus if HE is shot down.
Possible Japan option: Include a limited number (say, 20-30) A6M2s. These pilots would have a 2nd life in this aircraft. This would be more an option to give a little more variety to the Axis plane set, and could further help balance the Axis in a similar manner as Vals and Kates with second lives would.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Stoney on October 15, 2008, 01:18:08 PM
I'd get rid of the B-25H and P-40E, add the A-20, and add the P-47D11.  There were 3 P-47 groups operating in New Guinea by this point.  The P-40's by this point were operating mostly as air support platforms on short range missions like the P-39's.  Most offensive missions were P-38 and P-47 escorted missions.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 15, 2008, 01:46:09 PM
I'd like to keep the B-25H, which WAS operating in the area, as something of a novelty. So far every setup with 25s since her addition to the game has used the glass-nosed C. This would be an interesting opportunity to apply the B-25H to its historical role of blowing gaping holes in enemy ships.

It's nothing against the A-20. She's a good ship, and the widespread use she sees in FSO is a testament to the ubiquitousness of the aircraft in about every theater of war. But she IS getting a lot of use, and at least so far we haven't run a setup that gives the pumpkin chucker a chance to show her stuff in historical action.

I see what you're saying about the P-47, however with the Lightning, Hellcat and Corsair in play I'd like to keep the P-40 as it gives the Japanese a more balanced opponent. I CAN put her in place of the P-39Q. This wouldn't be QUITE as overpowering.

BTW, that should be Ki-61 in the Japanese plane set above.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Stoney on October 15, 2008, 02:16:47 PM
We have used the B-25H in an FSO before...I believe it was an Italy setup that Nomde did last fall.  Regardless, the B-25H wasn't in theater in November 1943, the B-25G was, just to be picky  :P.  While the A-20 was operating in every theather, the Havoc epitomized the interdiction campaign conducted by 5th Air Force, and was an aircraft that General Kinney considered ideal for his operations.  To have a New Guinea setup that did not include the A-20 would be, IMO, poor taste indeed.

Perhaps an AirSols type planeset would capture what you're looking for better than what you've listed here?
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 15, 2008, 02:23:31 PM
More details on the AirSols set?
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Stoney on October 15, 2008, 02:33:48 PM
AirSols was the abbreviation for Air Solomons.  It was the combined command of all air units in the Solomons and superceded the Cactus Air Force.  It provided most of the land-based USMC/USN aircraft involved in Operation Cartwheel (i.e. VF-17, the Black Sheep, etc.) but also included British, Australian, and USAAF aircraft.  It was a separate command from 5th Air Force, even though their respective areas of operation were adjacent/overlapping.

I'd have to do some research to find all of the aircraft and units assigned, but certainly F4U's, P-40's (RAAF), P-400's, etc.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 15, 2008, 03:16:04 PM
What about this:

F4U-1A (Bougainville, limited)
P-38J (all land bases, limited)
P-47D-11 (all land bases, limited)
P-40E (minimum requirement, all land bases)
"P-400" (P-39D, minimum requirement, all land bases, 20mm option only)
A-20 Havoc (all land bases)
SBD-5 (minimum requirement, Bougainville)
TBM-3 (minimum requirement, Bougainville)

One type Drawn From:

"PB4Y-1" (B-24J, all land bases, limited, no formations)
B-25H (all land bases, limited)
PT Boat (optional, limited, 2nd life in aircraft)

P-40s, P-39s, SBDs and TBMs would have a minimum number that must be used. F4Us, P-38s and P-47s will be limited. A-20s are unlimited.

Additionally, the Allied CiC will then choose one of three optional types: B-24J, B-25H or PT Boat. These will be limited in number, and the CiC of each frame can only use one of these types. PTs would have a second life in any aircraft the CiC chooses.

I've removed the carriers from the allied side. This will remove one of the top-tier Allied fighters (F6Fs) and focus the campaign as a land-based operation.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Fencer51 on October 16, 2008, 05:28:43 AM
There were land based F6Fs as well.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 16, 2008, 07:49:34 AM
A rather small percentage of them.

Anyway, I don't want the Allies to have FOUR fighters that will dominate the Zeke and Tony.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 16, 2008, 08:01:56 AM
A rather small percentage of them.

Anyway, I don't want the Allies to have FOUR fighters that will dominate the Zeke and Tony.

Hey, we dominated the F6F with our Ki-61s during Fire in the Philippines. :D
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman on October 16, 2008, 09:19:41 AM
Ok, SHOULD dominiate. :p
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Fencer51 on October 16, 2008, 11:19:57 AM
A rather small percentage of them.

Anyway, I don't want the Allies to have FOUR fighters that will dominate the Zeke and Tony.

Actually there were 2 or 3 squadrons in AirSols.

And we did quite well against them with KI-61s.  That KI-61 is a ride not to be underestimated.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Stoney on October 16, 2008, 11:26:26 AM
If you do it with an AirSols setup, there would be no P-47D or P-38J.  P-39's and P-40's would be included with the USMC/USN aircraft as they were part of AirSols.  The P-47D and P-38J's would have been part of 5th Air Force.  So, my recommendation would be to either do it with an AirSols allied plane set, or a 5th Air Force plane set.

But again, the P-39 and P-40 were rarely used offensively at this point in the war in PTO...
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Stoney 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Bino 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
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Fencer51 on October 18, 2008, 12:58:46 PM
I think you should ditch the F4U.  :noid
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Baumer 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

 USN/USAAF

I'm not sure that it would be a balanced fight, but that's very hard to do with the current plane set.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: 1pLUs44 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: 1pLUs44 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
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman 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).
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: 1pLUs44 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: Saxman 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.
Title: Re: FSO Proposal
Post by: 1pLUs44 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