IJN aircraft loss

[felixckw]

I have a feeling that IJN always suffers a greater aircraft loss. IJN pilots are more experienced and Zeros are better than wildcat in the early stage of the game, but still lose more aircrafts than USN in air-to-air combat. It also seems the morale of IJN pilot goes down more quickly, is it true?

[Tordenskiold]

I do not have to many years behind me in this but I do not have the feeling you describe. One of my Japanese squadrons have shot down 108 enemy aircrafts, but I make sure to not wear them out and attack only when morale is high and fatigue is low. The Wildcats might be hard to shoot down and definitely an opponent to be careful with.

[Denniss]

The US side should loose way more planes than the japanese in the early days/months maybe except for some Japanese Army planes Ki-27, -43 etc. Problem with the japanese is the long range they are usually operating from thus getting high OP losses especially if damaged in air combat. You also have to pay attention to fatigue - high fatigue = higher OP losses and less good in combat.

[pasternakski]

Are you playing against the AI? If so, like in any Gary Grigsby-based design, you will get your shorts cheated off all the way.

In PBEM, as I recall (it's been awhile since I played this game, I must confess), air combat is just weird. Usually, though, if you are careful, you can make things work fairly close to what was historical.

[DEB]

So far as the game goes I don't know. Historically, the Jap pilot morale was high for 42 & a lot of 43. Also they had less losses than the allies.

Re the game, if you lose too many capital ships ( esp. CV's ) and the ground war is running worse than it did historically, then morale should be going down. Also Zero's have a great range, but don't use it to excess.
( Dog fights use up lots of fuel & if the Allies are over their own bases, they have plenty of extra fuel that the japs will not have.)
Although Zero's are better on a 1:1 basis, a superior force is always useful and was usually deployed for attacks.

[Desertmole]

Actually, the Japanese losses were higher in all types but fighters.  During air combat from 7 Aug 42 to 1 Jan 43 The Japanese lost 102 aircraft to US Navy fighter squadrons.  This included 25 Zeroes, to a loss of 31 Wildcats during the same period.  On 7 August the USN lost 9 F4Fs to 2 Zeroes lost.  From then on to the end of the campaign, the totals were 23 Zeroes to 22 F4Fs.  So, the Wildcat squadrons were actually able to hold their own against the Zeroes after the initial combat.  Source: The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign by John Lundstrom.
 
Lundstrom spent years comparing Japanese and American combat records, interviewing pilots and reviewing their diaries.  The book (and his first one, The First Team) are excellent analyses of air combat for the first year of the war.

[Moondawggie]

I agree with desertmole, but his figures are off---the Guadalcanal Campaign consumed far more than 23/22 zeros and wildcats total. But overall air-to-air combat fighter losses were about equal between the 2 sides at the 'canal.

John Lundstrom's 2 books are classics. It shows you how adjusting tactics (for a wildcat pilot, avoiding a turning dogfight, and concentrating on a diving attack and extension; "zoom and boom") neutralized the IJN's advantage in turning radius and climb.

As Chuck Yeager said, "It's the man---not the machine!"

Besides, by the time Guadalcanal took place, the USN had been fully blooded in the early carrier raids, Coral Sea, and Midway----at that point, combat experience was more or less equal between the two sides. A far cry from the status quo on 12/7/41.

I'd also recommend reading "Shattered Sword" for a great study on IJN carrier ops (and deficiencies!)

For UV, the lesson is simple: get your pilots experienced, keep them rested (fatigue level less than 20) whenever possible, and well supplied, concentrate planes so there are some big numbers of fighters present, and the job gets done in a historically realistic manner.

Moondawggie

[DEB]

Actually, the Japanese losses were higher in all types but fighters. 

I thought the query ( & therefore my reply ) was re fighters.

[Desertmole]

Actually those figures are for the USN fighter squadrons (the subject of Lundstrom's books).  I am still trying to find USMC figures.  Probably in USMC Aviation in WWII (by Sherrod), but I don't have my copy here.  It would only be reliable for US losses anyway, though you could probably interpolate the figures for the Japanese if you have the accurate figures on total Zero losses for the period.
 
One interesting thing in Lundstrom's Guadalcanal book.  He mentions that LTC (Coach) Bauer's instructions to dogfight, but to not get into a turning contest with Zeroes seemed to reduce USMC losses.  He was a big fan of turning into a Zero attack and going head-to-head.  Apparently the F4Fs firepower gave it an advantage.  The other thing that apparently gave USN and USMC pilots a big advantage was deflection shooting.  Apparently it wasn't taught much by the IJN or IJAF.

[mdiehl]

In face to face encounters American CV based pilots defeated Japanese CV pilots in face to face encounters in*every*action in 1942. Empirical evidence from actual losses throughout 1942 suggest that the F4F wildcat was at least as good as any version of the Zero and USN/USMC pilots were as well trained or better trained than Japanese naval pilots. American pilots had less airtime in training and pre-war but the loss ratios suggest that in combat American naval and marine corps pilots had an edge at all times throughout 1942.

[pasternakski]

With all due respect, gentlemen, this thread has just made the same silly mistake that has been made a thousand times in a hundred threads over the past four-plus years: you are talking, all of you quite sensibly and reasonably, about reality.

UV and its b@stard child WitP don't follow anything any of you assert. You've got a bunch of strange, incomprehensible numbers that work in strange, incomprehensible routines to produce strange, incomprehensible results.

It's bad enough in PBEM or head-to-head. It's goofier than Tom Cruise when the AI "plays."

Further, those who have tried to "fix things" through database mods have only thrown more mud into the water.

Where are the designers with a rationale for the factory-assigned numbers? How do they actually work? What is the real effect of the various pilot-relevant figures?

We'll never know. We might as well forget it.

As Matrix/2by3 gear up for more UV "engine" products, I can only cringe.

[DuckofTindalos]

You old cynic, you...[:'(] I keep trying to tell you that it's only your copies of the game that act like that, because (as you know) Grigsby hates you personally. The only other copies that display this behaviour are owned by Ron, for much the same reasons...

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

You old cynic, you...[:'(] I keep trying to tell you that it's only your copies of the game that act like that, because (as you know) Grigsby hates you personally.

[CMDRMCTOAST]

L.O.L........