Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Capture Hue...
admiral.jpg
admiral.jpg (568.82 KiB) Viewed 1559 times
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17580
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by RangerJoe »

A very nice sweep!

But aren't the US Marines a little early for Hue? Like almost 24+ years early?
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

RangerJoe wrote: Sat Jul 29, 2023 1:30 pm A very nice sweep!

But aren't the US Marines a little early for Hue? Like almost 24+ years early?
2nd sweep:

Morning Air attack on Singapore , at 50,84

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 28 NM, estimated altitude 41,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 11
A6M5 Zero x 25
A6M5c Zero x 2
A6M8 Zero x 26
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 4
Ki-43-IIIa Oscar x 24
Ki-43-IV Oscar x 22

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 1 destroyed
A6M8 Zero: 1 destroyed
Ki-43-IV Oscar: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 1 destroyed
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Lost too many Corsairs to op losses....
a.jpg
a.jpg (99.07 KiB) Viewed 1454 times
GetAssista
Posts: 2835
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by GetAssista »

Lowpe wrote: Sun Jul 30, 2023 11:46 am Lost too many Corsairs to op losses....
That's good'ol “Ensign Eliminator” for you :)
User avatar
CaptBeefheart
Posts: 2592
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:42 am
Location: Seoul, Korea

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by CaptBeefheart »

Although you've been doing well with the F4U-1, you'll find the F4U-1A is a superior aircraft. Service rating improves noticeably (maybe 3 to 2 or 1), they can fly off decks and they do better air-to-air.

Cheers,
CB
Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17580
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by RangerJoe »

CaptBeefheart wrote: Mon Jul 31, 2023 5:37 am Although you've been doing well with the F4U-1, you'll find the F4U-1A is a superior aircraft. Service rating improves noticeably (maybe 3 to 2 or 1), they can fly off decks and they do better air-to-air.

Cheers,
CB
If I recall correctly, it goes to 2 and when the final version is a 1. Also, the F4U-1A becomes a hooker and the that status continues.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Sept 25, 1943

IJN shipping on the move in the SRA...I don't spend too much time keeping these guys penned in ....
a.jpg
a.jpg (758.08 KiB) Viewed 1170 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Moving forward here...
a.jpg
a.jpg (708.34 KiB) Viewed 1169 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Sept 26, 1943

IJN breakout attempt #9 :D
a.jpg
a.jpg (702.76 KiB) Viewed 983 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Japan has to pull back from Chungking...I think. We are pushing forward, looking to cut supply lines and threaten flanks etc. Not really attacking, but forcing Japan to attack. So many Chinese troops are back in supply...Japan made a horrible mistake in giving up Rangoon without a fight....

First two British tank units are unloaded at Pakhoi....three more divisions on the way plus other assorted odds and ends. Pakhoi now a size 4 runway, soon to be 5.

Japan is rotating low level Jill attacks with bombs on my supply line. With a range of 10 (I recall?) they can get pretty far and sank two YMS this turn. They are a bother, but we will set up some traps to snare them and protect our shipping lines today.
a.jpg
a.jpg (708.07 KiB) Viewed 979 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Sept 27, 1943

Here they come!....Drat...I send some PT boats to the wrong funnel...still, the enemy heavies expend some AAA.

Night Air attack on TF, near Bara at 74,106

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 10 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 2 minutes

Japanese aircraft
E13A1 Jake x 1

Allied aircraft
B-25D1 Mitchell x 6

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-25D1 Mitchell: 4 damaged

Japanese Ships
BB Yamato
BB Hyuga

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-25D1 Mitchell bombing and strafing from low level
Naval Attack: 6 x 500 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Naka-1 with E13A1 Jake (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 6000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 6000.
Raid is overhead

a.jpg
a.jpg (445.95 KiB) Viewed 909 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Japan seems intent on bulling their way thru:

A bit of bad luck on my sub and pt boat screen...although the subs do manage to sink an xakl and a tanker, but miss on some other juicy merchant ships. No shots on the IJN heavies.
admiral.jpg
admiral.jpg (485.35 KiB) Viewed 908 times
Morning Air attack on TF, near Obi at 77,106

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 74 NM, estimated altitude 39,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 22 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 1
A6M5 Zero x 25
A6M5b Zero x 19
A6M5c Zero x 5
A6M8 Zero x 6
F1M2 Pete x 12
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 14
Ki-43-IV Oscar x 43

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 6
F6F-3 Hellcat x 11

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5b Zero: 1 destroyed
A6M8 Zero: 1 destroyed
F1M2 Pete: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F6F-3 Hellcat: 3 destroyed

Japanese Ships
BB Hyuga
xAK Asakaze Maru

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 36000 feet
Naval Attack: 8 x 500 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Sasebo Ku S-1 with A6M3a Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 1 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 16000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 19 minutes
1 planes vectored on to bombers
253 Ku S-2 with A6M5b Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 19 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 3000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 3000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 2 minutes
261 Ku S-1 with A6M5 Zero (7 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
7 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 16000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 16000.
Raid is overhead
7 planes vectored on to bombers
281 Ku S-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 18 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 16000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 10 minutes
18 planes vectored on to bombers
958 Ku T-3 with F1M2 Pete (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 5000 , scrambling fighters to 30970.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 41 minutes
2 planes vectored on to bombers
Yamato-1 with F1M2 Pete (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 1 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 3000 , scrambling fighters to 30970.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
3 planes vectored on to bombers
24th Sentai with Ki-43-IV Oscar (25 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
25 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 16000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 16000.
Raid is overhead
25 planes vectored on to bombers
54th Sentai with Ki-43-IV Oscar (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 18 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 16000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 8 minutes
18 planes vectored on to bombers
63rd Sentai with Ki-43-IIb Oscar (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 14 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 16000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
14 planes vectored on to bombers
282 Ku S-1 Det B with A6M8 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 6 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 16000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 8 minutes
284 Ku S-1 Det A with A6M5c Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 5 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 16000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 11 minutes
5 planes vectored on to bombers

Bombers too high for some aircraft to intercept.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Striking at a task force that didn't keep up with the mainbody....they are nice ships but we blunder into bleeding lrcap.
b.jpg
b.jpg (202.85 KiB) Viewed 906 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

A two point tanker....why is is there?
b1.jpg
b1.jpg (487.4 KiB) Viewed 905 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Reinforcements and supplies for China....down 10+ Jills which have been a nuisance. Catch some decent units escaping from Saigon and force them back and away. :D
b2.jpg
b2.jpg (500.53 KiB) Viewed 904 times

Ground combat at 62,71 (near Dalat)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 32667 troops, 519 guns, 272 vehicles, Assault Value = 942

Defending force 7472 troops, 43 guns, 18 vehicles, Assault Value = 63

Allied adjusted assault: 616

Japanese adjusted defense: 64

Allied assault odds: 9 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2552 casualties reported
Squads: 38 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 65 destroyed, 29 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 27 (7 destroyed, 20 disabled)
Vehicles lost 5 (3 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Units retreated 5

Allied ground losses:
254 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 28 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
4th Marine Division
32nd Infantry Division
27th Infantry Division
1st Australian Division
145th Field Artillery Battalion
2nd Medium Regiment
XI US Corps
33rd Medium Regiment

Defending units:
16th Guards Rgt /8
28th Air Flotilla
25th Air Defense AA Regiment
13th Air Fleet
11th Air Flotilla
12th Base Force
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

What is Japan going to do here....another move for a cap trap? Pull back with some, or all? Or race the warships thru at flank speed? Power thru with everything taking direct routes or indirect routes?

Ideally, I want the PT Boats to engage first, and Battleships engage last...perhaps during the daytime even.
a.jpg
a.jpg (536.82 KiB) Viewed 896 times
6 more MTB at Namlea right below the IJN task force concentrations not pictured.
Last edited by Lowpe on Sat Aug 05, 2023 12:54 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

22 Avengers for two Adens....not really worth it...we shall see.
a.jpg
a.jpg (104.03 KiB) Viewed 895 times
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17580
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by RangerJoe »

I don't know if you know this. If you want to kill the merchants and ships all the way up to CAs, put your Avengers and any other TBs to attack at 1000 feet on Naval Attack with torpedoes but do NOT have any torpedoes available. The Avengers will then use four 500lb bombs in normal (torpedo) range. Other TBs such as Swordfish and Albacore will use 2 bombs, so if desired maybe have them a little farther back with torpedoes available. The heavy cruisers can be sunk from internal penetrating hits and even BBs with 40+ bomb hits from the resulting fires but with topside damage, a lot of the light AA guns and even the medium guns will be trashed. The added benefit would be to reduce the number of escorts for the larger TFs due to the escorts being lost, damaged and put into escort TFs, as well as escorting heavily damaged ships in escort TFs.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
JanSako
Posts: 503
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2022 12:06 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by JanSako »

They need to have at least some Low Nav training for this.
The issue with Avengers was the CAP, not the torps.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”