Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Citabria on May 11, 2013, 11:38:40 AM
-
SBD's flying fighter cap over their own carrier? gamey? probably. realistic? rarely.
when you have only a small number of zeros as the only escorts for a bunch of rice paper bombers and you have to try to cover those bombers from not only a full flight of f4fs but from the SBD's that are flying fighter mode...
sorry but I lose all suspension of disbelief not to mention the balance issues of game the game gameplay like this.
we go through all this trouble for historical accuracy by flying ronson lighter aircraft with very small ammo loads vs very durable aircraft with enough ammo to kill about a dozen IJN planes with one clip all in the name of realism and I prefer it that way.
but if im going to take the time and hassle in the name of said realism I'd hope other squads would stay in the spirit of the event.
but fester your just ranting...
check the logs and see how many air to air fighter kills the SBD's got and tell me they have no effect on air to air combat balance. SBD5's had 38 kills many of them on d3a and b5n's.
in short. if your forced to fly SBD's or whatever the reason flying fighter cap with them above your CV to gain a 2 to 1 or more numerical advantage vs any oposing fighters is bad form.
-
The Allies went from having 70 F4F's to only 48. Those 22 pilots had to be put in something and the only choices where SBD's or TBM's. And how realistic would it have been to have TBM’s flying fighter cap? :)
The defenders do not have to just contend with the fighter sweep but also stop the attackers from getting their bombs on the target. By exchanging some of the 4-gun platforms to 2-gun platforms, the Axis where facing fewer guns and it was harder (took longer) for the Allies to bring a plane down. I was lucky enough to fly an F4F but could not deal with all the B5N's before they reached the carrier. I'm sure the ones I got where frustrated with the lack of protection form their own escorts and feeling like sitting ducks, but kudos to them for getting the CV.
-
The 55th 38th get CiC duty for Frame 3 Allies. Although I have yet to see the upcoming objectives, I would have to assume that we will be given even fewer F4F's. ( in all honesty I could be totally wrong). My question to Fester, and no disrespect intended, is: How do we fill these gaps?? Im all for historic accuracy but...... the reality is that we use the planes available. I see no other way around it. If we were to use the plane in a solely attack role, what is left for defense. Dont get me wrong I can see your point. Both sides are having to make tough decisions as to how to best utilize and which roles for all the aircraft involved.
<S>
Carver 38thFS
-
SBD's flying fighter cap over their own carrier? gamey? probably. realistic? rarely.
...
in short. if your forced to fly SBD's or whatever the reason flying fighter cap with them above your CV to gain a 2 to 1 or more numerical advantage vs any oposing fighters is bad form.
First off, I fully agree that the balance in early war PTO is way off.
However, SBDs WERE used in the CAP role at Coral Sea.. and were pretty good at it.
Having said that, I really don't see a way to balance the event without making it something like 25/75 in favor of the Japanese. Each SBD is worth 2 D3As.. and the Kate is hardly a match for a TBM.. Now, if the Devastator is ever introduced, that might take that down a notch.... and if the USN version of the F2A ( Brewster Buffalo ) is introduced.. that might make it a little better.
Yes, the Japanese planeset is accurate.. and trying to survive against blue planes flown by VERY experienced pilots ( keep in mind that the typical AH pilot probably has lifetimes more experience flying ( virtually ) than their real life counterpart ) is practically futile. The only hope you have to attack your target is to be able to sneak in undetected.
If you're found.. you die.
-
I am absolutely LIVID. I am extremely disappointed in the CM teams decision to remove those F4Fs. In frame 1 Axis did not coordinate their attack at all. That is how allies did so well. It had NOTHING to do with the plane set.
Allies Had 0 chance of defending while they were already at a disadvantage 2 allied CV's v 3 Axis CV's. If we could of only attacked 2 CV's we might of had a chance, but since that is now against the rules Allies are completely screwed.
I have never left an FSO angry, until last night. I have been to well over 40 frames.
-
First off, I fully agree that the balance in early war PTO is way off.
However, SBDs WERE used in the CAP role at Coral Sea.. and were pretty good at it.
Having said that, I really don't see a way to balance the event without making it something like 25/75 in favor of the Japanese. Each SBD is worth 2 D3As.. and the Kate is hardly a match for a TBM.. Now, if the Devastator is ever introduced, that might take that down a notch.... and if the USN version of the F2A ( Brewster Buffalo ) is introduced.. that might make it a little better.
Yes, the Japanese planeset is accurate.. and trying to survive against blue planes flown by VERY experienced pilots ( keep in mind that the typical AH pilot probably has lifetimes more experience flying ( virtually ) than their real life counterpart ) is practically futile. The only hope you have to attack your target is to be able to sneak in undetected.
If you're found.. you die.
Actually eight SBD-3s were used as an add hoc anti torpedo plane CAP during the Battle of Coral Sea. Swede Vejtasa managed to kill three Zekes in his SBD. No Japanese Torpedo Planes were shot down and four of the eight SBDs were lost. Because of the losses the use of SBDs as CAP wasn't attempted again. A hasty last minute addition to the defensive CAP of 8 SBD-3s is a quite different animal than assigning twenty something SBD-5s to your CAP in a 1942 PTO FSO setup. Plus the addition of the F2A Buffalo would make no difference to the setup as Buffalos didn't participate in the Coral Sea battle. The only battle they could be used in would be a Midway setup.
-
Actually eight SBD-3s were used as an add hoc anti torpedo plane CAP during the Battle of Coral Sea. Swede Vejtasa managed to kill three Zekes in his SBD. No Japanese Torpedo Planes were shot down and four of the eight SBDs were lost. Because of the losses the use of SBDs as CAP wasn't attempted again. A hasty last minute addition to the defensive CAP of 8 SBD-3s is a quite different animal than assigning twenty something SBD-5s to your CAP in a 1942 PTO FSO setup. Plus the addition of the F2A Buffalo would make no difference to the setup as Buffalos didn't participate in the Coral Sea battle. The only battle they could be used in would be a Midway setup.
Well when you only have 48, you have to escort 3 strikes, and defend 2 cv's. It adds up to around 10 planes per. So against 14 zekes per assignment Allies were screwed.
-
Oh yeah APDrone...
Swede Vejtasa was on hand last night. I think he changed his name to Mace though. ;)
-
I got bounced by Zekes early in an SBD and ended up shooting down 5 with credit of 4. Would of been nice to make ace in an SBD - never done it before.
SBD isn't that great of a fighter, especially when it has a 500lb bomb under it and boatload of fuel - one zeke entered a rolling scissors with me for 10 minutes and eventually lost, he made a few mistakes.
If he would of kept his alt and just BnZ me he would of been fine, but I jumped in my rear guns and popped him one making him scared I had a tail gunner, and thats when he broke out of a turn fight with me to climb and thats when I caught him.
Zekes flown right, simply smash all allied aircrafts, however the limited guns and fact people dont put their convergeance to 250 or such or waste ammo spraying and praying, really is the problem not the plane sets.
I only flew Allied one or two other times for FSO in the coral sea, half a dozen times I was axis - so I know the differences between each side.
-
Well when you only have 48, you have to escort 3 strikes, and defend 2 cv's. It adds up to around 10 planes per. So against 14 zekes per assignment Allies were screwed.
Your SBD are competent fighters and were used that way in both frames. North of C34 there was a 30v11 furball, only around 8 of the 30 were F4F. Our 11 zekes got waxed because your SBD is near equal in performance to the A6M2, but has more and bigger guns, MUCH more durable, and has super speed brakes. Sure we knocked some of them down but going 1 for one leaves 19 Allied planes remaining.
-
Your SBD are competent fighters and were used that way in both frames. North of C34 there was a 30v11 furball, only around 8 of the 30 were F4F. Our 11 zekes got waxed because your SBD is near equal in performance to the A6M2, but has more and bigger guns, MUCH more durable, and has super speed brakes. Sure we knocked some of them down but going 1 for 1 leaves 19 Allied planes remaining.
-
Problem with c34 when I showed up over that CV, all the axis zeros were on the deck - there were only 10 above 30k who wouldnt come down, 10 that bounced at 20k and 10 were on the deck.
Not sure who planned that defense, but sorry to say Very few of the SBDs dropped their ords when they were engaged. I was bounced and didnt drop my ords - a good portion of the zekes were chasing SBD's to the deck.
-
34 Did not go bad for the defenders the cv was still up at the end of the frame. I saw many sbds pickle their bombs long before they made it to target. It was not great but it was successful.
-
Oh yeah APDrone...
Swede Vejtasa was on hand last night. I think he changed his name to Mace though. ;)
Cool!! I did not know that! :salute
The F2A reference was to early war PTO, in general.. not so much specifically for Coral Sea.
As far as other CAP deployment for SBDs... are you sure that was the only time? I remember reading something.. I'm pretty sure it was one of the 'First Team' books, that described how, when a Japanese strike was imminent, the SBDs would launch and provide CAP.. and the TBFs would launch and get away from the fleet. It's been a few years, though..
-
Problem with c34 when I showed up over that CV, all the axis zeros were on the deck - there were only 10 above 30k who wouldnt come down, 10 that bounced at 20k and 10 were on the deck.
Not sure who planned that defense, but sorry to say Very few of the SBDs dropped their ords when they were engaged. I was bounced and didnt drop my ords - a good portion of the zekes were chasing SBD's to the deck.
we planned it that way! <S>
-
The Red Cross was able to tally the numbers for the recent air brawl. They were able to gather intel from both sides personnel, squadron and hospital records.
United States Navy Squadrons
68th Lightning Lancers (7-10) 3 SBDs and 7 TBMs with 2 on sick call
1841 Sqnd Fleet Arm (4-6) 4 F4Fs with 4 on sick call
325th (7-10) 2 F4Fs and and 5 SBDs with 5 on sick call
412th FS (7-10) 6 F4Fs and 4 SBDs with 2 on sick call
55th FG (4-6) 4 SBDs with 4 on sick call
94th FS (7-10) 6 F4Fs with 6 on sick call
Arabian Knights (11-15) 8 F4Fs and 4 SBDs with 5 on sick call
G3-MF (11-15) 8 F4Fs and 9 SBDs with NONE on sick call
JG2 (7-10) 6 F4Fs and 2 SBDs with 4 on sick call
Nightmares (7-10) 5 SBDs with 7 on sick call
USMC/71 SQN (7-10) 2 SBDs with 10 on sick call
VF-17 (16-21) 10 SBDs and 10 TBMs with 3 on sick call
VMF 216 (4-6) 3 SBDs and 3 TBMs with 2 on sick call
VMF 222 (7-10) 3 F4Fs and 6 SBDs with 3 on sick call
Gunfighters (11-15) 17 SBDs with NONE on sick call
364th (11-15) 9 TBMs and 1 SBD with 7 on sick call
Total
F4F - 43
SBD - 75
TBM - 29
Min - 128 Pilots
Max - 179 Pilots
Total Pilots
150
Total Kills
132
Sick Call
64 including 2 Reserve Aircraft for each squadron
Imperial Japanese Navy Squadrons
Freebirds (7-10) 11 A6M2s with 1 on sick call
162nd (16-21) 15 A6M2s with 8 on sick call
327th (4-6) 4 D3A1s with 4 on sick call
332nd (4-6) 3 D3A1s with 5 on sick call
334th (4-6) 5 D3A1s with 3 on sick call
353rd (7-10) 8 D3A1s with 4 on sick call
367th (4-6) 5 A6M2s with 3 on sick call
416th (7-10) 7 B5N2s with 5 on sick call
49th (11-15) 18 A6M2s with NONE on sick call
9 GIAP (7-10) 7 D3A1s with 5 on sick call
Claim Jumpers (16-21) 11 B5N2s and 3 A6M2s with 9 on sick call
Das Muppets (4-6) 7 A6M2s with 1 on sick call
Duxford Wing (4-6) 4 D3A1s with 4 on sick call
III/JG 11 (16-21) 10 A6M2s with 13 on sick call
JG 54 (7-10) 10 A6M2s with 2 on sick call
Kommondo Notwotny (7-10) 11 A6M2s with 1 on sick call
LCA (11-21) 18 B5N2s with 5 on sick call
Air Raiders (4-6) 5 D3A1s with 3 on sick call
Unforgiven (7-10) 10 A6M2s with 2 on sick call
Total
A6M2 - 100
D3A1 - 36
B5N2 - 29
Min - 152 Pilots
Max - 211 Pilots
Total Pilots
173
Total Kills
105
Sick Call
73 including 2 Reserve Aircraft for each squadron
Just by looking at the stats, you can see that the IJN has numeical supierority between the A6M2 vs the F4F of 2 to 1. By adding the SBDs, the USN has a slight advantage over the combined Zero arsenal.
In reality, each side suffered from a massive epidemic that kept vital airpower from being untilized. The outcome of the battle truly hinged on the absent pilots from each side. Keeping your rosters totally filled from your own squadrons and any pilots sitting in an O'club to pitch in can make the difference tactically and strategically.
This is just from the logs. Imagine taking this data and adding to the battleplans for both sides. The outcome would've been different if each squadron was full to the max.
SBD's flying fighter cap over their own carrier? gamey? probably. realistic? rarely.
when you have only a small number of zeros as the only escorts for a bunch of rice paper bombers and you have to try to cover those bombers from not only a full flight of f4fs but from the SBD's that are flying fighter mode...
sorry but I lose all suspension of disbelief not to mention the balance issues of game the game gameplay like this.
we go through all this trouble for historical accuracy by flying ronson lighter aircraft with very small ammo loads vs very durable aircraft with enough ammo to kill about a dozen IJN planes with one clip all in the name of realism and I prefer it that way.
but if im going to take the time and hassle in the name of said realism I'd hope other squads would stay in the spirit of the event.
but fester your just ranting...
check the logs and see how many air to air fighter kills the SBD's got and tell me they have no effect on air to air combat balance. SBD5's had 38 kills many of them on d3a and b5n's.
in short. if your forced to fly SBD's or whatever the reason flying fighter cap with them above your CV to gain a 2 to 1 or more numerical advantage vs any oposing fighters is bad form.
100 Zekes. What do you mean little fighter cover?
-
Cool!! I did not know that! :salute
The F2A reference was to early war PTO, in general.. not so much specifically for Coral Sea.
As far as other CAP deployment for SBDs... are you sure that was the only time? I remember reading something.. I'm pretty sure it was one of the 'First Team' books, that described how, when a Japanese strike was imminent, the SBDs would launch and provide CAP.. and the TBFs would launch and get away from the fleet. It's been a few years, though..
From what I've read it was actually a planned doctrine before the war. They kind of threw it together at Coral Sea despite Vejtasa's success they considered it too costly. I couldn't find any other uses of it but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Vejtasa went on to be a fighter pilot. I'm not certain of the actual total but I have read the SBD's air to air kill tally for the whole war was in the 90s.
I was one of those B5Ns that got by the F4Fs protecting the Lexington last night. Our group got scattered by 1841 Sqn F4Fs. The ones of us they didn't get managed to creep away, luckily we could see the Lex burning in the distance. Another squaddie found me and we joined up we watched the activity around the Lexington for maybe a minute two at most. I saw tracers arcing high and some dots swirling above the CV. I told my squadmate I was going to try and sneak in he followed me. In practice we've had better luck launching our torps right around 150 MPH so we slowed our approach a bit. As neared the TF we lined up on the CA's bow using it as our lead to get torps on the CV. We spotted SBDs between us and the CV and they already had their fangs out coming our way. Over vox we heard we had a few more squadmates making another run on the TF. The first pass by Mace was coming into my front left quarter. I got a PW from him. We were just close enough to the TF to where if he was slow to reverse I might still get my torp off with a chance of getting a hit. So I continued to plow towards the TF. I was agonizingly close but just quite to far out to launch my torp when his bullets hit home on his second pass. Long story short...
(http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/649974-1/B5N+torpedo+bomber+getting+hit+by+anti-aircraft+fire_+Battle+of+Coral+Sea_+8+May+1942)
My squadmate also went down to one of the SBDs right on the heels of my death. However the other group of our B5Ns managed to get close enough to get their torps away before being shot down. One of these sunk the CV which had been damaged by the earlier Val strike.
-
uumm......100 zeeks? that's 30 over the maximum..........
-
uumm......100 zeeks? that's 30 over the maximum..........
Wouldn't that be one huge penalty? I thought there seemed to be way to many zekes defending CV 34....
-
Actually eight SBD-3s were used as an add hoc anti torpedo plane CAP during the Battle of Coral Sea. Swede Vejtasa managed to kill three Zekes in his SBD. No Japanese Torpedo Planes were shot down and four of the eight SBDs were lost. Because of the losses the use of SBDs as CAP wasn't attempted again. A hasty last minute addition to the defensive CAP of 8 SBD-3s is a quite different animal than assigning twenty something SBD-5s to your CAP in a 1942 PTO FSO setup. Plus the addition of the F2A Buffalo would make no difference to the setup as Buffalos didn't participate in the Coral Sea battle. The only battle they could be used in would be a Midway setup.
The use of SBD as an anti-torpedo patrol wasn't an ad-hoc single instance. At times there were more SBDs up for CAP than F4Fs. It was doctrine for that time. The SBD was used in the role for the Lae-Salamaua raid as well.
Lundstrom details in particular the usage in the Battle of the Coral Sea.
Just one page of his here for a single illustration:
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=tfLTKzIM99IC&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=sbd+torpedo+patrol&source=bl&ots=hGVE9dQFd8&sig=Hlm3XwcwPU0w9x3YeQfCP9w_x6I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8wqPUYDOCsaviQfwqoC4CQ&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=sbd%20torpedo%20patrol&f=false (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=tfLTKzIM99IC&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=sbd+torpedo+patrol&source=bl&ots=hGVE9dQFd8&sig=Hlm3XwcwPU0w9x3YeQfCP9w_x6I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8wqPUYDOCsaviQfwqoC4CQ&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=sbd%20torpedo%20patrol&f=false)
The whole book is a "must read".
There was another author (sorry forget his name, not as illustrious as Lundstrom) who made a claim that the SBD killed at better than 1:1 ratio during the war. An extraordinary claim for a plane like this.
I can't readily lay my hands on the numbers of planes fielded by each side. Anybody got it?
-
Axis: 55%
A6M2 "Zero" - 70 MAXIMUM
B5N2 "Kate" - 30 minimum
D3A1 "Val" - 30 minimum
- All 3 of the carrier-based aircraft types must be used in each frame.
C-32= Light CV Shoho: A6M2, D3A1(250KG GP BOMB ONLY)(with level and dive bomb sights), B5N (TORPEDO ONLY)
C-33= CV Shokaku: A6M2, D3A1(250 KG BOMB GP ONLY), B5N (TORPEDO ONLY)
C-34= CV Zuikaku: A6M2, D3A1 (250KG GP BOMB ONLY), B5N (TORPEDO ONLY)
Allies: 45%
F4F-4 "Wildcat" - 70 MAXIMUM
TBM-3 "Avenger" - 30 minimum
SBD-5 "Dauntless" - 30 minimum
Was that changed?
-
Double post shhheeeshh
-
Was that changed?
the f4f max. was lowered, but the zeek max remained at 70.
-
There is no real balance issue based on design of the setup.
The factors that determined the outcome were this:
1) Allied and Axis CICs created the specific orders for each squad
2) Most squads had low turnout if not no substantial turnout in a few cases
3) Axis had 30 more Zekes than allowed from individual Axis squads
4) Fluidity of combat based on first 3 reasons forced the outcome
Low turnout from one side can decrease the effectiveness of any great CIC set of orders.
-
As stated above they were used sometimes in that role. :salute
-
The use of SBD as an anti-torpedo patrol wasn't an ad-hoc single instance. At times there were more SBDs up for CAP than F4Fs. It was doctrine for that time. The SBD was used in the role for the Lae-Salamaua raid as well.
Lundstrom details in particular the usage in the Battle of the Coral Sea.
Just one page of his here for a single illustration:
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=tfLTKzIM99IC&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=sbd+torpedo+patrol&source=bl&ots=hGVE9dQFd8&sig=Hlm3XwcwPU0w9x3YeQfCP9w_x6I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8wqPUYDOCsaviQfwqoC4CQ&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=sbd%20torpedo%20patrol&f=false (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=tfLTKzIM99IC&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=sbd+torpedo+patrol&source=bl&ots=hGVE9dQFd8&sig=Hlm3XwcwPU0w9x3YeQfCP9w_x6I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8wqPUYDOCsaviQfwqoC4CQ&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=sbd%20torpedo%20patrol&f=false)
The whole book is a "must read".
There was another author (sorry forget his name, not as illustrious as Lundstrom) who made a claim that the SBD killed at better than 1:1 ratio during the war. An extraordinary claim for a plane like this.
I can't readily lay my hands on the numbers of planes fielded by each side. Anybody got it?
I was just reading a bunch of stuff from Lundstrom at http://www.j-aircraft.org last night. Like I said in my post use of the SBD was a planed doctrine from pre-war days. Ad Hoc was a bad choice of words on my part.:lol Despite being doctrine every bit of reading material I've been able to get my hands on describes Vejtasa's CAP flight as an addition or augmentation. Of the four big 1942 CV battles Coral Sea/ Midway/ Eastern Solomons/ Santa Cruz this is the only instance I can find of SBDs being assigned CAP during a Carrier Battle. One reason may be because when they knew they were dealing with the threat of a Japanese CV task force SBDs were too valuable as scouts and attackers. I'm sure there were other instances where they were used as a backup CAP during operations near enemy land bases and I've even read where USMC pilots had used them for CAP. Funny you mention Lundstroms book because I decided I wanted to purchase it a couple of days ago along with Shattered Sword. I have to confess I'm still operating with Gordon W. Prange's At Dawn We Slept and Miracle at Midway era books. Friday night as I was trying to get my B5N snuggled up nice and cozy to the Lexington and saw the SBDs.. My first thought was $#@*&$@!!!! My second thought was Well it is Coral Sea. Dantoo if you have other suggestions of sources on the subject I'd appreciate you steering me in the proper direction. Like I said my library is a bit dated. :salute
-
this is from Wikipedia so take it for what its worth;
battle of coral sea excerpt:
At 09:15, the Japanese carriers launched a combined strike of 18 fighters, 33 dive bombers, and 18 torpedo planes, commanded by Lieutenant Commander Kakuichi Takahashi. The American carriers each launched a separate strike. Yorktown's group consisted of six fighters, 24 dive bombers, and nine torpedo planes and was on its way by 09:15. Lexington's group of nine fighters, 15 dive bombers, and 12 torpedo planes was off at 09:25. Both the American and Japanese carrier warship forces turned to head directly for each other's location at high speed in order to shorten the distance their aircraft would have to fly on their return legs.[72]
Yorktown's dive bombers, led by William O. Burch, reached the Japanese carriers at 10:32, and paused to allow the slower torpedo squadron to arrive so that they could conduct a simultaneous attack. At this time, Shōkaku and Zuikaku were about 10,000 yd (9,100 m) apart, with Zuikaku hidden under a rain squall of low-hanging clouds. The two carriers were protected by 16 CAP Zero fighters. The Yorktown dive bombers commenced their attacks at 10:57 on Shōkaku and hit the radically maneuvering carrier with two 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs, tearing open the forecastle and causing heavy damage to the carrier's flight and hangar decks. The Yorktown torpedo planes missed with all of their ordnance. Two U.S. dive bombers and two CAP Zeros were shot down during the attack.[73]
Shōkaku, at high speed and turning hard, has suffered bomb strikes and is afire.
Lexington's aircraft arrived and attacked at 11:30. Two dive bombers attacked Shōkaku, hitting the carrier with one 1,000 lb (450 kg) bomb, causing further damage. Two other dive bombers dove on Zuikaku, missing with their bombs. The rest of Lexington's dive bombers were unable to find the Japanese carriers in the heavy clouds. Lexington's TBDs missed Shōkaku with all 11 of their torpedoes. The 13 CAP Zeros on patrol at this time shot down three Wildcats.[74]
With her flight deck heavily damaged and 223 of her crew killed or wounded, Shōkaku was unable to conduct further aircraft operations. Her captain, Takatsugu Jōjima, requested permission from Takagi and Hara to withdraw from the battle, to which Takagi agreed. At 12:10, Shōkaku, accompanied by two destroyers, retired to the northeast.[75]
Attack on the U.S. carriers
At 10:55, Lexington's CXAM-1 radar detected the inbound Japanese aircraft at a range of 68 nmi (78 mi; 126 km) and vectored nine Wildcats to intercept. Expecting the Japanese torpedo bombers to be at a much lower altitude than they actually were, six of the Wildcats were stationed too low, and thus missed the Japanese aircraft as they passed by overhead.[76] Because of the heavy losses in aircraft suffered the night before, the Japanese could not execute a full torpedo attack on both carriers. Lieutenant Commander Shigekazu Shimazaki, commanding the Japanese torpedo planes, sent 14 to attack Lexington and four to attack Yorktown. A Wildcat shot down one and 8 patrolling Yorktown SBDs destroyed three more as the Japanese torpedo planes descended to take attack position. Four SBDs were shot down by Zeros escorting the torpedo planes.[77]
Lexington (center right), afire and under heavy attack, in a photograph taken from a Japanese aircraft
The Japanese attack began at 11:13 as the carriers, stationed 3,000 yd (2,700 m) apart, and their escorts opened fire with anti-aircraft guns. The four torpedo planes which attacked Yorktown all missed. The remaining torpedo planes successfully employed a pincer attack on Lexington, which had a much larger turning radius than Yorktown, and, at 11:20, hit her with two Type 91 torpedoes. The first torpedo buckled the port aviation gasoline stowage tanks. Undetected, gasoline vapors spread into surrounding compartments. The second torpedo ruptured the port water main, reducing water pressure to the three forward firerooms and forcing the associated boilers to be shut down. The ship, however, could still make 24 kn (28 mph; 44 km/h) with her remaining boilers. Four of the Japanese torpedo planes were shot down by anti-aircraft fire.[78]
The 33 Japanese dive bombers circled to attack from upwind, and thus did not begin their dives from 14,000 ft (4,300 m) until three to four minutes after the torpedo planes began their attacks. The 19 Shōkaku dive bombers, under Takahashi, lined up on Lexington while the remaining 14, directed by Tamotsu Ema, targeted Yorktown. Escorting Zeros shielded Takahashi's aircraft from four Lexington CAP Wildcats which attempted to intervene, but two Wildcats circling above Yorktown were able to disrupt Ema's formation. Takahashi's bombers damaged Lexington with two bomb hits and several near misses, causing fires which were contained by 12:33. At 11:27, Yorktown was hit in the center of her flight deck by a single 250 kg (550 lb), semi-armor-piercing bomb which penetrated four decks before exploding, causing severe structural damage to an aviation storage room and killing or seriously wounding 66 men. Up to 12 near misses damaged Yorktown's hull below the waterline. Two of the dive bombers were shot down by a CAP Wildcat during the attack.[79]
Tamotsu Ema, leader of the Zuikaku dive bombers which damaged Yorktown
As the Japanese aircraft completed their attacks and began to withdraw, believing that they inflicted fatal damage to both carriers, they ran a gauntlet of CAP Wildcats and SBDs. In the ensuing aerial duels, three SBDs and three Wildcats for the U.S., and three torpedo bombers, one dive bomber, and one Zero for the Japanese were downed. By 12:00, the U.S. and Japanese strike groups were on their way back to their respective carriers. During their return, aircraft from the two adversaries passed each other in the air, resulting in more air-to-air altercations. Kanno's and Takahashi's aircraft were shot down, killing both of them.[80]
-
...
Funny you mention Lundstroms book because I decided I wanted to purchase it a couple of days ago along with Shattered Sword. I have to confess I'm still operating with Gordon W. Prange's At Dawn We Slept and Miracle at Midway era books.
..
There are 2, btw.. The First Team and The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign.
You will LOVE them.
-
Dantoo if you have other suggestions of sources on the subject I'd appreciate you steering me in the proper direction.
Lundstroms "The First Team" is a good read. "Shattered Sword" is compulsory!
That link I gave to a page from the "The First Team" shows that at 11.00 am on the 7th May there were 14 SBDs up on anti-torpedo patrol, 10 from the Yorktown and 4 from the Lexington. There are plenty of other examples just in that book. Another quick one. 1st February, Page 79, "Yorktown at 0903 launched VS-5s fourteen SBDs as anti-torpedo-plane patrol". That's fourteen up on CAP from the Yorktown alone, months befor the Coral Sea battle. It wasn't a one-off or two-off or whatever. SBDs were used as bombers and scouts. They were also used as fleet air defence in the normal course of operations.
There is perhaps another issue in that I think there were only 36 wildcats between the two carriers. In FSO we have more planes than were available in the battle itself. I'm sure the CMs took all this and much more into account when they initially allowed 70 F4Fs. Haven't got time to firm up the numbers from reality but they're moot anyway. FSO is not a historical recreation. Can't be or there wouldn't be any fun. :)
-
Im cool with this :D
-
There are 2, btw.. The First Team and The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign.
You will LOVE them.
Thanks Drone I appreciate the reccomendations. :aok
Shadup Bailey. :D
I've read and read over and over through the years about the CV battles of 1942 they are some of my favorite aviation history subjects.
The only example I have been able to find on SBDs as CAP during Coral Sea are like this below. Like I said Friday when I was attempting my torp run
against the Lexington upon seeing the SBDs my first thought was Oh $*** followed by. Well this is Coral Sea
(http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc42/Johnvan52/CS_zps433d4e4e.png?t=1368364167)
This one taken from Air War Pacific Chronolgy.
Hey Jaeger... Wiki also says the saucer people regulary visit youranus as well. :P
-
Lundstroms "The First Team" is a good read. "Shattered Sword" is compulsory!
That link I gave to a page from the "The First Team" shows that at 11.00 am on the 7th May there were 14 SBDs up on anti-torpedo patrol, 10 from the Yorktown and 4 from the Lexington. There are plenty of other examples just in that book. Another quick one. 1st February, Page 79, "Yorktown at 0903 launched VS-5s fourteen SBDs as anti-torpedo-plane patrol". That's fourteen up on CAP from the Yorktown alone, months befor the Coral Sea battle. It wasn't a one-off or two-off or whatever. SBDs were used as bombers and scouts. They were also used as fleet air defence in the normal course of operations.
There is perhaps another issue in that I think there were only 36 wildcats between the two carriers. In FSO we have more planes than were available in the battle itself. I'm sure the CMs took all this and much more into account when they initially allowed 70 F4Fs. Haven't got time to firm up the numbers from reality but they're moot anyway. FSO is not a historical recreation. Can't be or there wouldn't be any fun. :)
Thanks Dantoo! :salute
-
Shadup Bailey. :D
(http://i888.photobucket.com/albums/ac82/mbailey166066/AlienProbing_zpsc81c0cae.gif) (http://s888.photobucket.com/user/mbailey166066/media/AlienProbing_zpsc81c0cae.gif.html)
:D
-
Hey Jaeger... Wiki also says the saucer people regulary visit youranus as well. :P
Like i said, take it for what its worth. the point i was making was the last paragraph about the SBD's
-
Like i said, take it for what its worth. the point i was making was the last paragraph about the SBD's
Huffy this morning are we?? ;)
-
I have refrained from posting in this thread because I don't think my comments would be conducive to good game play.
I assigned the Zeke squadrons there rides based on an average turn out those squads had in frame one. They in turn had great turn outs in frame two.
It was not intentional.
It felt like to me that frame two was a bit better balanced.
The allies will always have the advantage in the PTO. Any setup or situation where the Japanese had an advantage in real life will be watered down either for game play reasons, plane set reasons, or historical reasons. True in some ways for the eastern front as well.
The Japanese and Russians always have a tough go, fighting against plane set issues, lower turn outs and lack of familiarity.
I very rarely take my squad to fight on the winning side of history. Its tough, but something my guys have taken on as a source of pride.
The score doesn't mean squat to me....the fight it where the juice is at. All the better IMO when that fight is uphill.
-
Huffy this morning are we?? ;)
LOL not at all!! although I can see how it could come across that way. :D
I have refrained from posting in this thread because I don't think my comments would be conducive to good game play.
I assigned the Zeke squadrons there rides based on an average turn out those squads had in frame one. They in turn had great turn outs in frame two.
It was not intentional.
It felt like to me that frame two was a bit better balanced.
The allies will always have the advantage in the PTO. Any setup or situation where the Japanese had an advantage in real life will be watered down either for game play reasons, plane set reasons, or historical reasons. True in some ways for the eastern front as well.
The Japanese and Russians always have a tough go, fighting against plane set issues, lower turn outs and lack of familiarity.
I very rarely take my squad to fight on the winning side of history. Its tough, but something my guys have taken on as a source of pride.
The score doesn't mean squat to me....the fight it where the juice is at. All the better IMO when that fight is uphill.
i think you did what you could. the outcome is what it is. half the fun is that fact that the outcome might not be the same as it was in reality. this game is not a re-creatation of the events but follow as closely as possible. sometimes the outcomes are the same, sometimes not.
the CM team cannot exactly predict how many people are going to show up or not show up. JG54 has had trouble making 5 players and ended up with 10 this week. I cant speak for the other squads, but i know there were some deviations in numbers for some of the other squads too. stuff happens and its not predictable.
<S> to the job the CM team does no matter what the outcome. lets just have fun and stop sweating the little things!!
-
The allies will always have the advantage in the PTO.
Not a good sentence to use when rationalizing to the general public of FSO.
Just sayin'. :D
-
Interesting that this thread went from a "small number of zeros" to finding out they were over by 30, or did I miss something? :headscratch:
-
Not a good sentence to use when rationalizing to the general public of FSO.
Just sayin'. :D
You really shouldn't quote it out of context of the paragraph its in, in order to try and stir the pot.
Just sayin :aok
-
Using what Captain1ma posted from Wikipedia (for what it is worth):
IJN
A6M 34 (40%)
D3A 33 (39%)
B5N 18 (21%)
Total 85
USN
F4F 24 (26%)
SBD 47 (51%)
TBM 21 (23%)
Total 92
Their split was 48/52 (IJN/USN) and ours is 55/45.
Using the same composition (percentages) with the number of pilots USAFCAPcTSgt posted -- 173 IJN and 150 USN -- the number would look like this:
IJN
A6M 69
D3A 67
B5N 37
Total 173
USN
F4F 39
SBD 77
TBM 34
Total 150
I'm not proposing that the above should be used but I'm just noticing how they decided what they should put on the carriers. It looks like IJN was totally reliant on the A6M for fighter cover and USN could split the duty between the F4F and SBD. I'm assuming that 40% of a carrier's fighting force for both sides was determined to be fighter and that the USN could achieve that goal by having 26% F4F with some number of SBD's.
Got to run.
-
You really shouldn't quote it out of context of the paragraph its in, in order to try and stir the pot.
Just sayin :aok
Do you know what the word 'context' means? Illustrate how you were taken 'out of', then. :)
-
Do you know what the word 'context' means? Illustrate how you were taken 'out of', then. :)
I meant nothing insulting by my post. It just seemed to me that you were taking that one sentence out of the context of the paragraph to make it seem like an axis vs allied issue. I was just saying that sometimes trying to recreate the historical success of the Japanese and Russian setups is difficult to do at times for the special events. That being due to plane set restrictions and overall gameplay ability, and the lack of popularity of the plane set.
Perhaps instead I may have taken your post wrong :cheers:
-
and the lack of popularity of the plane set.
i cut up your post a bit.......
i've never really understood the lack(or perceived lack) of popularity of pto planes. especially the early war rides. they can(and often do) provide the best fights. :aok
-
I meant nothing insulting by my post. It just seemed to me that you were taking that one sentence out of the context of the paragraph to make it seem like an axis vs allied issue. I was just saying that sometimes trying to recreate the historical success of the Japanese and Russian setups is difficult to do at times for the special events. That being due to plane set restrictions and overall gameplay ability, and the lack of popularity of the plane set.
Perhaps instead I may have taken your post wrong :cheers:
:cheers: back. I wasn't insulted, in the least. But, (and I hope you appreciate this .... in context) whenever I see a sentence like that ... involving why a setup was adjusted (no matter the sides being discussed) ... it happens to come off as a slight inferiority complex (it's our planes!). I've seen it claimed when it comes to German vs US (or Allied) - and visa versa. I've seen it claimed involving German vs. Russian. I've long seen it as a claim about the Japanese plane set versus about anything.
Truth be told, the A6M vs F4F setups are not disadvantageous to the Axis. It's the pilots and tactics. In the past, VF-17 has flown Japanese aircraft in this kind of setup with no such issue and none of us felt the need to make the public claim you did in that sentence ("The allies will always have the advantage in the PTO.").
If it makes you feel better, in the last FSO, where my squadron had the privilege to fly I-16s, I heard most of my squad complain (internally) about that plane, as well. Although I didn't get many kills, I had a blast. I avoided what felt like non-stop passes by 109s with a smile and chuckle the entire time. Seighin felt the same.
It's not always the plane set. I would venture it seldom is.
Also, with rotation of who gets to fly what each frame ... an over-reaction in model availability/restriction isn't always necessary (though I suppose in some cases it's warranted). Small adjustments can oft do the trick. In this case, the F4F numbers were cut dramatically (and not due to frame loss) and the A6M availability was not only maintained but increased, whether through intent or not (in spite of losses in the previous frame). But ... I guess if that's the only way to get players to come back for a second frame I can live with it. :)
-
i've never really understood the lack(or perceived lack) of popularity of pto planes. especially the early war rides.
Because the vast majority of players play in the Late War arena so they can fly the fast planes with lots of armor and guns. If they are "forced" to fly early era planes, some choose to go pout in the corner and not participate that month.
It makes it hard for a CiC to plan the plane assignments when he can't count on squads to come with their regular numbers. And if he doesn't understand how to properly assign maximum numbers, and squads actually turn up with normal or max commitments, then all of a sudden the side is way over the maximum for a given airframe.
It's tough for a designer to design an event that balances history and gameplay, and it's hard for a CiC to come up with a plan that balances fairness to his players and is flexible enough to remain within the parameters of the design. I have respect for both and am glad that I get to fly at all.
-
It's tough for a designer to design an event that balances history and gameplay, and it's hard for a CiC to come up with a plan that balances fairness to his players and is flexible enough to remain within the parameters of the design. I have respect for both and am glad that I get to fly at all.
I can appreciate that. I really can. But it's not like events in AH is something new. There may be rotation amongst the CMs and CiCs (and there should be) but there's tons of experience amongst the player base, with former CMs and CiCs who may have run this precise setup able to share both their successes and failures. Having said that, I'm seeing new implementation, maps and so forth (with game updates making new designs of old setups possible) that bring back the old excitement in me.
All in all, there's no crisis. I just don't like discussions devolving into cries. We're (virtual) fighter (and bomber) pilots, dammit. :D
-
...
i've never really understood the lack(or perceived lack) of popularity of pto planes. especially the early war rides. they can(and often do) provide the best fights. :aok
Well, here's my beef with the early war PTO planes, and I'm strictly referring to IJN vs USN..
If you fly blue planes the ONLY IJN aircraft you fear is the A6M. I'll take an SBD or TBM against the D3As and Kates any day..
If you fly the D3A or B5N you fear ALL blue planes. ( or you should.. if you approach FSO with the intent of surviving )
So, here you have a disparity between the psychological impact of the different sides.
As allied, there's a 1 in 3 chance ( given equal distribution of aircraft assignments ) that the enemy plane I encounter is a threat to me.
As Axis, if I'm in the D3A or B5N, the chance of the enemy plane I encounter being a threat is 100%
Perhaps the worst part of all this is there is really no way to fix that. That's just the way they were. Personally, I enjoy flying the D3A and B5N.. I just don't care being killed in them so easily.
-
If SBD's were used for cap role historically, it's all good in my book. It really had no bearing on this frame, though, as both of our boats slept with the fishes. We obviously didn't do that well with them. :)
30 extra zeros!? I feel much better about our failure to get our guys to target now. :lol
-
i'm probably gonna get heat for this.......
but......i don't generally see reference to escorts when i read of the bomber attacks in the coral sea. i only have noted references to the scout planes, and the bombers.........
-
Personally, I enjoy flying the D3A and B5N.. I just don't care being killed in them so easily.
Stalking CVs with a B5N is lot like doing something you're not supposed to do. It's great fun, until you get caught. :D
D3A's I feel like I've got a fighting chance. Maybe its just because I got something in the front of the plane that goes bang.
-
Stalking CVs with a B5N is lot like doing something you're not supposed to do. It's great fun, until you get caught. :D
D3A's I feel like I've got a fighting chance. Maybe its just because I got something in the front of the plane that goes bang.
that, and flown right, those thing seem to manage to always be where my bullets aren't.......
-
that, and flown right, those thing seem to manage to always be where my bullets aren't.......
Any advice on this topic... I can't seem to not get shot at!
-
Any advice on this topic... I can't seem to not get shot at!
You can't "not get shot at". :D
You can, however, try harder to "not get hit". ;)
-
You can, however, try harder to "not get hit". ;)
LIES! :joystick:
-
Any advice on this topic... I can't seem to not get shot at!
i wish i did. when i fly the dam thing, i feel more like a lead magnet than when i'm flying a p38 low and slow. yet, when i'm trying to shoot em, the dam things almost seem to "warp jump"(trekki reference) outta my sights.
-
the problem is not thee sbds, it is the tbms. . . allies should be flying the vale instead (and that would be an upgrade to what the yanks had)
-
the problem is not thee sbds, it is the tbms. . . allies should be flying the vale instead (and that would be an upgrade to what the yanks had)
I think you mean the Douglas TBD "Devastator", no?
(http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/aircraft/torpedo-bomber/douglas-tbd-devastator-torpedo-bomber/douglas-tbd-devastator-torpedo-bomber-02.png)
-
the problem is not thee sbds, it is the tbms. . . allies should be flying the vale instead (and that would be an upgrade to what the yanks had)
Maybe you meant to say the Kate. And sure .... reskin it to represent the TBD Devastator, if you must .... but really, the TBM
is faring no better in this scenario than the TBD did in real life:
"The US Navy`s standard torpedo bomber in 1942 was the Douglas TBD Devastator first flown in 1935 and embarked on carriers of the Pacific Fleet in 1937. On May 7, 1942 in the Battle of the Coral Sea Devastators sank the Japanese carrier Shoho but failed to sink the Shokaku the next day.[15]
At the Battle of Midway on June 4, 1942, 41 Devastators launched from three US carriers failed to score a single torpedo hit. Only six aircraft returned to their carriers. The rest fell prey to the defending Mitsubishi A6M Zeros or anti-aircraft fire. The attacks had been poorly coordinated but the Devastator was immediately withdrawn from front-line service.[16]
The successor to the Devastator, the Grumman TBF Avenger arrived too late at Pearl Harbor to be loaded onto carriers for the Battle of Midway. However six were flown from Midway Island airbase. They fared no better than the Devastator with five being lost without a hit.[17]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_bomber
I'm seeing excuses, not valid reasons. :)
-
i'd have loved to have the proper planes for this.....but with the votes to get new aircraft, even if it was offered, the lw main players would never vote in another ew aircraft.
i'd have been happy if i could've had some way to make adjustments to its the tbm's performance even.......
-
i'd have loved to have the proper planes for this.....but with the votes to get new aircraft, even if it was offered, the lw main players would never vote in another ew aircraft.
i'd have been happy if i could've had some way to make adjustments to its the tbm's performance even.......
Although Hitech does offer a vote, look at the last few planes we got - Brewster, P40s, I-16 (off top of my head). While many will complain the new planes are "useless" in the late war arena, they are there for the historical purpose of scenarios.
I completely vote on early war/midwar to finish out before anymore late war rides. Sorry the BnZ crew has enough rides to play with, rest of us want our toys.
That being said - We need planes like the Devastator, Barracuda, Beaufighter and Ki-21 or Ki-48 bombers.
As it is I complained once about the Japanese having the Ki-67 and was frowned upon when the Ki-48 was the standard bomber of the Southwest Pacific during this period. Then again the ones who complained probably quit the game due to lack of any knowledge period.
-
Although Hitech does offer a vote, look at the last few planes we got - Brewster, P40s, I-16 (off top of my head). While many will complain the new planes are "useless" in the late war arena, they are there for the historical purpose of scenarios.
I completely vote on early war/midwar to finish out before anymore late war rides. Sorry the BnZ crew has enough rides to play with, rest of us want our toys.
That being said - We need planes like the Devastator, Barracuda, Beaufighter and Ki-21 or Ki-48 bombers.
As it is I complained once about the Japanese having the Ki-67 and was frowned upon when the Ki-48 was the standard bomber of the Southwest Pacific during this period. Then again the ones who complained probably quit the game due to lack of any knowledge period.
i'll bet i'm not the only cm salivating reading that bolded statement above.......
i don't bother complaining, as i just don't have the time, or desire to get upset about it. i take the toys i'm given, and do the best as i can, although i do make mistakes sometimes..........
-
i'll bet i'm not the only cm salivating reading that bolded statement above.......
i don't bother complaining, as i just don't have the time, or desire to get upset about it. i take the toys i'm given, and do the best as i can, although i do make mistakes sometimes..........
There is no set standard for Scenarios, FSOs, Snapshots - what do you do when Numbers drop big time? You have to adjust - not all the adjustments come out ok - people whine and cry because they have nothing better to do. Leave the CM's out of it - if you have a way to make FSO better - then feel free,
otherwise some people just run there gator to much.
I always Joked FSO is like Turkey Soup I make, every time its different because I have no recipe for it - I just make it and hope it turns out alright- while it usually does except for last time when I added Cayanne pepper on accident. Ouch.
-
i'll bet i'm not the only cm salivating reading that bolded statement above.......
i don't bother complaining, as i just don't have the time, or desire to get upset about it. i take the toys i'm given, and do the best as i can, although i do make mistakes sometimes..........
Plus 1
Add the early Yak, Mig, and La, as well as Russian bombers to that list too!
-
i'll bet i'm not the only cm salivating reading that bolded statement above.......
Nor ex. :D
-
If you want to check about fairness, just look how many TBM's were truely at Coral Sea!!!!!!!!!
-
If you want to check about fairness, just look how many TBM's were truely at Coral Sea!!!!!!!!!
Are you truly wanting to make a case for 'TBM unfairness?' :rofl
-
The TBM takes a bucket load of any IJN aircrafts ammo load to kill it, where the devastator was by all accounts I've read much easier to toast. That makes a difference when you are miles from your carrier/resupply. Those cannon rounds are worth gold.
-
The TBM takes a bucket load of any IJN aircrafts ammo load to kill it, where the devastator was by all accounts I've read much easier to toast. That makes a difference when you are miles from your carrier/resupply. Those cannon rounds are worth gold.
You know there's nothing else available to practically sub for a USN torpedo bomber, right? ;)
I'm thinking both of you may ought to read the logs of this event before hyperventilating
over the TBMs subbing for TBDs and the extreme unfairness of it all.
Check with Fester for A6M lessons:
Frame 1
Fester
23:59:41 Departed from Field #34 in a A6M2
00:21:55 Awarded kill as SIRB crashes.
00:22:19 Helps kappa shoot down FiLtH.
00:30:34 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by mbailey.
00:31:09 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by Triton28.
00:31:53 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by cobra89.
00:35:21 Helps kappa shoot down Trap78.
00:40:42 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by cactus.
00:48:24 Shot down a SBD-5 flown by Wulf149.
:D
-
Yep I get it Arlo, no other ac to stand in for the Devastator. My point was only to highlight the two ac's are quite different in capability and durability. In this game, as in real life combat many hammer away and hit little while some are superior marksmen. I fall into the latter category unfortunately. By the way my breathing was fully under control--no hyperventilating issues-- but thanks for the concern! I had a great time, it was a banner mission for me as I got two kills, quite a fete for me and survived which I don't do often either. Looking forward to the next mission. I seem to often be misunderstood when I open my yap, so let me say thanks to all you who put these scenarios together you do a great job and make this a great game to play! Salute, sdpops57 out.
-
You know there's nothing else available to practically sub for a USN torpedo bomber, right? ;)
I'm thinking both of you may ought to read the logs of this event before hyperventilating
over the TBMs subbing for TBDs and the extreme unfairness of it all.
Check with Fester for A6M lessons:
Frame 1
Fester
00:30:34 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by mbailey.
:D
And im still cool with it :D (sorry Shifty, couldnt resist)
-
And im still cool with it :D (sorry Shifty, couldnt resist)
I'm cool with you're being cool. :cool:
-
You know there's nothing else available to practically sub for a USN torpedo bomber, right? ;)
No. The Allies should use the B5N as well. In fact, the Kate is still an upgrade over the Devastator.
-
As Arlo showed, I have a hard time believing the TBM 's are too much machine for this setup. Those kills Fester and Kappa got on us weren't with us flying straight and level.
Yes, we turned to fight them. Seemed like a good idea at the time. :D
-
well I really don't see how this cannot be 'fixed' rather quickly (i.e. next time we run pacific) -
This post started with a complaint about the sbd, the sbd was the problem and we should be crying about them, but the problem is the impossibility of covering for the TBM-3 (it is faster then anything we have - period) which 'should' be easy kills (as it was during the war). . .
-
No. The Allies should use the B5N as well. In fact, the Kate is still an upgrade over the Devastator.
Then there's no making you happy.
To make it fair .... lets your and my squad trade for the last frame. I doubt it would compromise
each sides orders. :t
-
Then there's no making you happy.
What do you mean "no making me happy." ?
There are many hard to fix issues with early PTO setups. Finding a more reasonable substitute for the TBD Devastator is a fairly easy one to implement in the future. I seriously doubt that HTC will add a TBD anytime soon.
I'm not trying to cause a fuss, just trying to offer a possible solution the imbalance that clearly exists, unlike most people in the 6 pages of this thread, who seem to only want to troll and argue.
-
There isn't the imbalance you perceive in early PTO. It's just a long standing excuse. I'd be willing to trade places with you, personally this frame.
-
There isn't the imbalance you perceive in early PTO. It's just a long standing excuse.
You're too funny sometimes Arlo. Subbing in a mid 44 aircraft into a setup 2 years before its introduction is the very definition of imbalance in this case.
-
You know there's nothing else available to practically sub for a USN torpedo bomber, right? ;)
I'm thinking both of you may ought to read the logs of this event before hyperventilating
over the TBMs subbing for TBDs and the extreme unfairness of it all.
Check with Fester for A6M lessons:
Frame 1
Fester
23:59:41 Departed from Field #34 in a A6M2
00:21:55 Awarded kill as SIRB crashes.
00:22:19 Helps kappa shoot down FiLtH.
00:30:34 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by mbailey.
00:31:09 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by Triton28.
00:31:53 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by cobra89.
00:35:21 Helps kappa shoot down Trap78.
00:40:42 Shot down a TBM-3 flown by cactus.
00:48:24 Shot down a SBD-5 flown by Wulf149.
:D
Some of the argument isn't so much that the TBM is overmodelled against the A6M2 ( which is normally would be, but Kermit is a killing machine )
However, how would that have panned out if Kermit had been flying the D3A? I would be willing to wager one of UnclKurt's major body parts the result would not have been the same.
Now, take that a step further.. Kermit stays in the D3A and the TBMS are swapped out with TBD Devastators.. That's MY point in all this. Now the D3A driver has hope to be able to kill something.. if not simply being able to keep up with it.
Should be interesting to see how tonight pans out.. :rofl
Again, nothing we can really do about it.. just addressing the question as to why some aren't love-sick over the early PTO matchups.
-
Simple, just replace the TBM's with SBD's.
-
You're too funny sometimes Arlo. Subbing in a mid 44 aircraft into a setup 2 years before its introduction is the very definition of imbalance in this case.
Fester had no difficulty. You're argument is exaggerated. Perspective is everything.
I said I was willing to trade boots with you to see if it's mine that's at fault. This
is a 'man up or stop your whining moment' by definition. :)
-
Some of the argument isn't so much that the TBM is overmodelled against the A6M2 ( which is normally would be, but Kermit is a killing machine )
However, how would that have panned out if Kermit had been flying the D3A? I would be willing to wager one of UnclKurt's major body parts the result would not have been the same.
Now, take that a step further.. Kermit stays in the D3A and the TBMS are swapped out with TBD Devastators.. That's MY point in all this. Now the D3A driver has hope to be able to kill something.. if not simply being able to keep up with it.
Should be interesting to see how tonight pans out.. :rofl
Again, nothing we can really do about it.. just addressing the question as to why some aren't love-sick over the early PTO matchups.
If you're attempting to shore up a 'it's the pilot not the plane' argument .... by all means, sir. :aok
VF-17 isn't love sick over non-PTO events but I don't recall anyone in my squad resorting to all this
public whining about flying the I-16. (I actually enjoyed it - you can enjoy anything in events if you
try.) :D
-
Simple, just replace the TBM's with SBD's.
SBDs don't carry torpedos. Besides even our SBD model is later than the Coral Sea era by at least a year.
The B5N will still do its job, as will the D3A and A6m2.
AH's IJN carrier strike aircraft and USN carrier strike aircraft are of slightly different generations. We have the ability to do a resonable Late 1942 CV duel, Anything later and we don't have the right Japanese strike aircraft anything earlier and we don't have the correct US strike aircraft. Actually with the aircraft we have Battle of the Eastern Solomons and Santa Cruz are the two CV Battles we can do the most historic justice to.
-
Fester had no difficulty. You're argument is exaggerated. Perspective is everything.
I said I was willing to trade boots with you to see if it's mine that's at fault. This
is a 'man up or stop your whining moment' by definition. :)
One person doing well doesn't change the fact its the wrong plane for this setup.
-
SBDs don't carry torpedos. Besides even our SBD model is pre Coral Sea by at least a year.
The B5N will still do its job, as will the D3A and A6m2.
AH's IJN carrier strike aircraft and USN carrier strike aircraft are of slightly different generations. We have the ability to do a resonable Late 1942 CV duel, Anything later and we don't have the right Japanese strike aircraft anything earlier and we don't have the correct US strike aircraft. Actually with the aircraft we have Battle of the Eastern Solomons and Santa Cruz are the two CV Battles we can do the most historic justice to.
Actually it was a tongue in cheek response.
Also I believe you meant our SBD is post Coral Sea.
Until every plane is modeled in AH, we make due with what we have.
Besides it's not like the allied's upped thirty more fighters than we were supposed to.
-
Also I believe you meant our SBD is post Coral Sea.
That is correct I worded it wrong.
If you're attempting to shore up a 'it's the pilot not the plane' argument .... by all means, sir. :aok
VF-17 isn't love sick over non-PTO events but I don't recall anyone in my squad resorting to all this
public whining about flying the I-16. (I actually enjoyed it - you can enjoy anything in events if you
try.) :D
Good to hear you say that.. Some of the Luftwaffe guys might want to take a break from flying Japanese for a couple of PTO setups.. Maybe you VF-17 guys would enjoy hanging out with the Japanese for a PTO setup or two. :aok
-
Good to hear you say that.. .. Maybe you VF-17 guys would enjoy hanging out with the Japanese for a PTO setup or two. :aok
:bhead
-
That is correct I worded it wrong.
Good to hear you say that.. Some of the Luftwaffe guys might want to take a break from flying Japanese for a couple of PTO setups.. Maybe you VF-17 guys would enjoy hanging out with the Japanese for a PTO setup or two. :aok
Not a problem as long as the next time we're flying North Africa you axis guys take the P-40's and we get the 109's.
-
Not a problem as long as the next time we're flying North Africa you axis guys take the P-40's and we get the 109's.
Last two times there was a Med setup with 109s and P-40s you guys were Axis. :aok
-
p40 vs 109 is actually a fun fight.
-
Last two times there was a Med setup with 109s and P-40s you guys were Axis. :aok
LOL ok, but I think you miss the point.
Many of the axis squads are just that. They fly axis almost exclusively. If you're going to do that then don't whine when the set-up doesn't favor the axis. They did lose the war after all, and only held a small advantage in certain theaters for a brief time.
-
One person doing well doesn't change the fact its the wrong plane for this setup.
What is the point of this complaint?
-
That is correct I worded it wrong.
Good to hear you say that.. Some of the Luftwaffe guys might want to take a break from flying Japanese for a couple of PTO setups.. Maybe you VF-17 guys would enjoy hanging out with the Japanese for a PTO setup or two. :aok
As for me, sure. I may even fly against my beloved Corsair. ;)
-
LOL ok, but I think you miss the point.
Many of the axis squads are just that. They fly axis almost exclusively. If you're going to do that then don't whine when the set-up doesn't favor the axis. They did lose the war after all, and only held a small advantage in certain theaters for a brief time.
Shifty's not a whiner, IIRC.
-
LOL ok, but I think you miss the point.
Many of the axis squads are just that. They fly axis almost exclusively. If you're going to do that then don't whine when the set-up doesn't favor the axis. They did lose the war after all, and only held a small advantage in certain theaters for a brief time.
No I didn't miss any point and I haven't whined. Personally I like being Japanese in the early PTO, but I don't blame those that dislike it. The point you're missing is you guys mainly fly Axis and request Axis until it is a PTO setup. Then you expect to be Allied and get your Blue planes. There are a lot of Luftwaffe guys that don't like flying Japanese, but suck it up and do it anyway so you Navy guys get your fix. If they want to grumble a little bit and have some complaints, so what? I'm just saying cut em some slack they're doing something you guys don't want to do. Keep referring to them as whiners and telling them they need to buck up and fly like Fester, they may just decide they'd rather fly blue planes next PTO. Just a little respect and courtesy goes a long way. :salute
-
Just a little respect and courtesy goes a long way. :salute
On account of it being such a rare commodity these days.
<S> Shifty
-
.... they're doing something you guys don't want to do. Keep referring to them as whiners and telling them they need to buck up and fly like Fester, they may just decide they'd rather fly blue planes next PTO. Just a little respect and courtesy goes a long way. :salute
Don't generalize! :D You know me, Shifty. And I recall not only being in VF-17
but leading it at a time where we flew any and everything without complaint
for a rare chance to fly our beloved Corsair in a mid or late PTO setup. Hell, I
even designed a PTO AvA setup subbing jets and rocket planes for the Axis
side just to draw players for the opposing side at a time when JG squads just
plain refused to fly even NiKs against -1s. In AvA we even split the squad and
flew against each other in PTO setups because of such.
FSO is a wonderful character builder .... for anyone willing to let it be. :aok :cheers:
-
FSO is a wonderful character builder .... for anyone willing to let it be. :aok :cheers:
Point well made, and I don't whine,, I critique. :D
-
Point well made, and I don't whine,, I critique. :D
I know that. :)
Anyhow .... frame three tonight and let the chips fall where they were dropped from the bag.
:salute
-
Banzai Yankee Air Pirate. :salute
-
Let me clarify one thing here. I only request the side that I feel will give us the best chance at survivability and the best performance. We have a history doing will in 109s, and I will take a plane that we do well in over a plane that we generally do poorly in any day. Several times we have not gotten the side we requested (*cough Shifty ;)) but we did not complain about it. I have never given anything but courtesy to the FSO community, and will gladly fly whatever we get. I just attempt to get my squad into the aircraft that I feel we can preform the best in, whether it be a 109 or a corsair. That is the simple reasoning behind what we do.
-
Shifty let me first say that I wasn't calling you a whiner, and I apologize if you took it that way. I didn't take any of what you said as a whine. There have been however several whines in this thread from people that fly only axis.
We (VF-17) fly whatever we are assigned. Yes, we prefer the blue planes, we are a blue plane squad after all. We have a dedicated corsair training night for pete's sake. Would we fly against blue planes? Yes, we might not be happy about it, but we would do our job to the best of our abilities. We don't always get the ride we want, but we also don't complain when we don't. We do what we are assigned to do.
Most of us are not real happy when we get TBM's, but until now no one has said anything about it. Personally I would much prefer a SBD to a TBM. We still fly our missions to the best of our abilities no matter what ride, or what side we are on. For those that don't like the TBM's being in the early pac scenarios request the devastator next time HTC asks. I doubt we will get it, but you never know. Imo a torpedo mission is a suicide mission no matter what side you are on,or what ride you are in.
Many of us in VF-17 are also 109 geeks. Does that make us bad people? Probably, but it is what it is.
-
This thread has gone from SBDs killing B5Ns at Coral Sea all the way to 109s vs P-40s in the MTO. ;) Every squad VF-17 included has every right to request what they want to fly. I know full well VF-17's dedication to the Corsair. I was in VF-17 a few years back in fact I made a lot of the avatars and sig blocks you guys are still wearing now. Those of you that love the 109 too are just living wrong. :P There is nothing wrong with the way VF-17 does business or requests its sides or airplanes. My point was early IJN is a very hard sale. For a few history geeks like me it is appealing. For many it just it is not. The point of my post was just to say.. You can't expect everyone to be happy in any setup. Especially these early PTO ones, so cut em a little slack if they complain. These guys are also your teammates when you're flying 109s. That was and is my point. True we all get our turn in the barrel, however some barrels just smell better than others. :cheers:
-
As long as the beer isnt stale and BC hasnt pissed in it, the barrell is usually pretty fun. Bombers arent hard to fly, and usually give plenty of time for drinking. :cheers:
T- 1hr and 10 minutes.
-
tbm's can sorta kinda be fun. in a weird way. you just gotta think outside the box, and make your own fun. presuming you survive long enough that is, lololol.
my squad co tends to call our missions "death ride" when we're in 'em. it's funny as hell, 'cause every time he calls it that, we seem to mostly survive. we even got to give a few deck workers a tbm buzz cut. :devil
-
From what I've read it was actually a planned doctrine before the war. They kind of threw it together at Coral Sea despite Vejtasa's success they considered it too costly. I couldn't find any other uses of it but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Vejtasa went on to be a fighter pilot. I'm not certain of the actual total but I have read the SBD's air to air kill tally for the whole war was in the 90s.
I was one of those B5Ns that got by the F4Fs protecting the Lexington last night. Our group got scattered by 1841 Sqn F4Fs. The ones of us they didn't get managed to creep away, luckily we could see the Lex burning in the distance. Another squaddie found me and we joined up we watched the activity around the Lexington for maybe a minute two at most. I saw tracers arcing high and some dots swirling above the CV. I told my squadmate I was going to try and sneak in he followed me. In practice we've had better luck launching our torps right around 150 MPH so we slowed our approach a bit. As neared the TF we lined up on the CA's bow using it as our lead to get torps on the CV. We spotted SBDs between us and the CV and they already had their fangs out coming our way. Over vox we heard we had a few more squadmates making another run on the TF. The first pass by Mace was coming into my front left quarter. I got a PW from him. We were just close enough to the TF to where if he was slow to reverse I might still get my torp off with a chance of getting a hit. So I continued to plow towards the TF. I was agonizingly close but just quite to far out to launch my torp when his bullets hit home on his second pass. Long story short...
(http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/649974-1/B5N+torpedo+bomber+getting+hit+by+anti-aircraft+fire_+Battle+of+Coral+Sea_+8+May+1942)
I was witness to this attack, Carver and I watched the entire attack develop and honestly, we thought it was planned, it was a superb attack no matter what, and we immediately launched our rafts . . we knew we where sunk just because of the angles you guys dropped from, no matter if she turned or not she was taking it hard. We took that attack seriously when making Allied orders for frame 3, making plans to counter it if used again. I haven't found out yet how Lexington bought it but I am wondering if torp's got her. That attack was awesome shifty, yours an your wingman's sacrifice bought brought your squaddie's the time needed to wreck our boat. <S>
My squadmate also went down to one of the SBDs right on the heels of my death. However the other group of our B5Ns managed to get close enough to get their torps away before being shot down. One of these sunk the CV which had been damaged by the earlier Val strike.
I don't know how I did it but I posted in your comment somehow. I said: I was witness to this attack, Carver and I watched the entire attack develop and honestly, we thought it was planned, it was a superb attack no matter what, and we immediately launched our rafts . . we knew we where sunk just because of the angles you guys dropped from, no matter if she turned or not she was taking it hard. We took that attack seriously when making Allied orders for frame 3, making plans to counter it if used again. I haven't found out yet how Lexington bought it but I am wondering if torp's got her. That attack was awesome shifty, yours an your wingman's sacrifices brought your squaddie's the time needed to wreck our boat. <S>
-
I don't know how I did it but I posted in your comment somehow. I said: I was witness to this attack, Carver and I watched the entire attack develop and honestly, we thought it was planned, it was a superb attack no matter what, and we immediately launched our rafts . . we knew we where sunk just because of the angles you guys dropped from, no matter if she turned or not she was taking it hard. We took that attack seriously when making Allied orders for frame 3, making plans to counter it if used again. I haven't found out yet how Lexington bought it but I am wondering if torp's got her. That attack was awesome shifty, yours an your wingman's sacrifices brought your squaddie's the time needed to wreck our boat. <S>
Thanks Poppy, Hightone was the guy that organized and led that mission. The attack you guys made on the Zuikaku last night pretty much was the same type tactic with the same results. "Scratch One Flattop". :aok