N1k1 & J2M were they CV ops capable?

[Ursa MAior]

I am playing a stock 44 scen. I have a shortage of Zeros, but many Georges and Jacks. The database says they are Carrier capable. I dont want to be gamey not even against the AI, so my question is were they IRL used on carriers (CVE e.g)?

[Akos Gergely]

Nope they were not, they were navy fighters intended for land bases. But for the fun of us just throw them in if You can !

[Ursa MAior]

No way! I will overwhelm you with the Divine Wind, and not some cowardly cheat!

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

I am playing a stock 44 scen. I have a shortage of Zeros, but many Georges and Jacks. The database says they are Carrier capable. I dont want to be gamey not even against the AI, so my question is were they IRL used on carriers (CVE e.g)?

Yes, but their landing gear had a tendency to collapse. High operational losses so YMMV.

[DuckofTindalos]

No Georges and Jacks on carriers. Na-ah...

[Ursa MAior]

herwin
What is a YMMV?

Terminus
That's why I am asking. I dont know too much about late war. There is not anything in hungarian, and have not read anything in english yet.

[DuckofTindalos]

The Japanese used Zeros on their carriers all the way through. The projected replacement for the Zero in that role was the A7M2 Reppu ("Sam"), of which a grand total of 10 were built by VJ-Day.

[Akos Gergely]

Just feel free to ask my friend I won't disinform You I promise. Also You have the Judys and Jills which have a better range then my attack a/c but they are somewhat less durable.

Surely the A7M would have been nice in 1943...but not in late 1945. BTW it is a very good looking plane !

[Ursa MAior]

I know. How could I thought that there is anything you dont knoe about the war in the pacific. How foolish of me.[:D]

[tsimmonds]

herwin
What is a YMMV?

"Your Mileage May Vary". It's a disclaimer phrase that appears in automobile advertising right after they tell you their lemon will get 30 MPG in the city and 45 on the highway. It is a modern "caveat emptor."

[Ursa MAior]

sO if I undrstand correctly these babes WERE used on CVs?

[DuckofTindalos]

No, Nein, Nyet, Non, Nej, Iye, etc... They were not...

[Ursa MAior]

Hai, Terominesu szan! Wakari mas!

[Hoplosternum]

I am not sure they will even fly. In most scenarios these are not Carrier capable, but they are naval fighters. So you can transport them by CV but only rebase mission from there.

As they are Naval fighter types not Army fighter types if you are using PDUs you should be able to convert any Zero squadrons to these types. You have plenty of land based Zero squadrons to choose from. Upgrade some of these and then you will have Zeros in your pool to refill your Carrier squadrons. But don't upgrade your CV squadrons as the game may let you but they won't work….

If for some reason they do work from CVs it would not be very historic to use them as such. However as your opponent (??) is saying, he's not worried. He has more planes, better planes and better pilots by this stage. You won't be giving yourself much of an advantage.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

herwin
What is a YMMV?

Terminus
That's why I am asking. I dont know too much about late war. There is not anything in hungarian, and have not read anything in english yet.

"Your mileage may vary"--said about automobile miles per gallon. Carrier aircraft had to be more tolerant of getting bounced around than land-based aircraft. Also, the operational environment varied from carrier class to carrier class--the Independence class CVLs were particularly hard on aircraft. Carrier capable did not necessarily mean that you wanted to operate them from carriers--your operational losses might still be excessive. Those Japanese fighters had weak shock absorbers and tended to prange easily.

[Nemo121]

The key issue here is between capabilities and actual usage. Were they used on carriers during the war? No. Could they have been? Yes ( albeit with some minor changes which fall well within the range of variants which each in-game aircraft model represents).
 
If you want to only do what was done during the war then don't operate them off carriers. If you are comfortable conforming to CAPABILITIES and not being bound by the historical decisions made at the time then it is reasonable to base them on your carriers. If you do this they will suffer higher ops losses in order to represent that they are extempore conversions to carrier duty and not purpose-designed for it like the Zero. This seems like a reasonable modelling to their capability to me. YMMV.

[trojan58]

Their were plans for a carrier version of the 'George' but it was dropped because all the big carriers capable of using it had been sunk, so perhaps there should be an option for a carrier capable 'george' if the big carriers are still around in 1944.

[mc3744]

I'm an Allied Fanboy, but I wouldn't mind my opponents to experiment with realistic possibilities.
It sounds like it could have happened. Hence,as an Allied player, I'd be ok with it.
If I wanted to replay history I would just watch Discovery channel [;)]

Just my two cents.

[Ursa MAior]

Their were plans for a carrier version of the 'George' but it was dropped because all the big carriers capable of using it had been sunk, so perhaps there should be an option for a carrier capable 'george' if the big carriers are still around in 1944.

I'm an Allied Fanboy, but I wouldn't mind my opponents to experiment with realistic possibilities.
It sounds like it could have happened. Hence,as an Allied player, I'd be ok with it.
If I wanted to replay history I would just watch Discovery channel

THX for the answers. Yes I want historial options, neither fantasy, nor history channel.

Since I still have Sho, Zui and Taiho, if they lose enough Zeros (no question) I will use georges on them.

[Kereguelen]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

The key issue here is between capabilities and actual usage. Were they used on carriers during the war? No. Could they have been? Yes ( albeit with some minor changes which fall well within the range of variants which each in-game aircraft model represents).

If you want to only do what was done during the war then don't operate them off carriers. If you are comfortable conforming to CAPABILITIES and not being bound by the historical decisions made at the time then it is reasonable to base them on your carriers. If you do this they will suffer higher ops losses in order to represent that they are extempore conversions to carrier duty and not purpose-designed for it like the Zero. This seems like a reasonable modelling to their capability to me. YMMV.

Thus you would not mind your (Allied) opponent to use Corsairs on his carriers in early 1943?