Japanese Air to Air Combat Dropoff

[veji1]

this is bad.... So the only difference between the two dates was date : same planes, exp, weapons, durability, etc ?

If this is the case this is the most disturbing thing I have read about WITP...

[Nicholas Bell]

ORIGINAL: veji1
this is bad.... So the only difference between the two dates was date : same planes, exp, weapons, durability, etc ?

Right, exactly the same, except the date.

Be happy to email the scenario if anyone wants to try it themselves.

[Andy Mac]

I am in the middle of doing one of my own but if your results are right then this is terrible
 
No radar or ships anywhere nearby remember range of CPS 1 is 400 miles so any ship that has the upgrade will contaminate your test ?

[Nicholas Bell]

No radar or ships anywhere nearby remember range of CPS 1 is 400 miles so any ship that has the upgrade will contaminate your test ?

All the ships are delayed out of the scenario. The ground radars are the same in both the 1942 and 1944 runs. If they are in range, then they are affecting both tests, best of my knowledge.

[Andy Mac]

OK I ran a very simple test of my own
 
Now this is a LOT less statistically significant than Nicholas's test as I dont have the patience !!!
 
10 Tests
 
Location Japanese Base Koumac lvl 9 AF with Av Support
44 George Sqn Sweeping Nomou also lvl 9 AF Under Allied Control 44 P38G Sqn on 90% CAP over the base
 
Leaders identical, no ships base forces or anything close to contaminate results
XP 75 Moral 75
 
5 in 42
 
Casualties
George   P38G
3            9
6            7
4            7
4            7
4            7
 
21          37
 
Same Test in 44
 
0            7
4            6
5            9
3            4
4            7
 
16          33
 
Now I would need to expand the test and run it more times plus probably have P38's sweep Koumac same number of times as vice versa to check statistical significance but early indications are I dont see the issue.
 
But again not enough test runs to be trully significant

[bstarr]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

OK I ran a very simple test of my own

Now this is a LOT less statistically significant than Nicholas's test as I dont have the patience !!!

10 Tests

Location Japanese Base Koumac lvl 9 AF with Av Support
44 George Sqn Sweeping Nomou also lvl 9 AF Under Allied Control 44 P38G Sqn on 90% CAP over the base

Leaders identical, no ships base forces or anything close to contaminate results
XP 75 Moral 75

5 in 42

Casualties
George   P38G
3            9
6            7
4            7
4            7
4            7

21          37

Same Test in 44

0            7
4            6
5            9
3            4
4            7

16          33

Now I would need to expand the test and run it more times plus probably have P38's sweep Koumac same number of times as vice versa to check statistical significance but early indications are I dont see the issue.

But again not enough test runs to be trully significant

Thank you for running these tests for us. Can I make one suggestion? Back when I ran the tests I altered the planes as well so that both sides had identical planes. You may want to try this, since it would give a better idea of how much is modified and to what.

You know, I wish like hell I had written down the results of my experiments. That's what I get for being so unorganized.
bs

[Nicholas Bell]

I would be very happy if anyone would be willing to take a look at my test scenario and find some fault in the set up. I don't want this to be true! I was thinking I would disprove El Cid's assertion about the dropff (nothing personal Sid!! ) So drop me an email so I can send the file if you want to take a look. It takes about a 90 seconds to run and record one test.

Can I make one suggestion? Back when I ran the tests I altered the planes as well so that both sides had identical planes. You may want to try this, since it would give a better idea of how much is modified and to what.

That's a good suggestion Bstarr. I was thinking about doing that to experiment with how speed & manuever rating effect combat but didn't transfer the thought to this test. I will try and equalize everything. Any other ideas - please let me know. I'm busy this weekend but will run some more tests next week.

[bstarr]

ORIGINAL: Nicholas Bell

I would be very happy if anyone would be willing to take a look at my test scenario and find some fault in the set up. I don't want this to be true! I was thinking I would disprove El Cid's assertion about the dropff (nothing personal Sid!! ) So drop me an email so I can send the file if you want to take a look. It takes about a 90 seconds to run and record one test.

Can I make one suggestion? Back when I ran the tests I altered the planes as well so that both sides had identical planes. You may want to try this, since it would give a better idea of how much is modified and to what.

That's a good suggestion Bstarr. I was thinking about doing that to experiment with how speed & manuever rating effect combat but didn't transfer the thought to this test. I will try and equalize everything. Any other ideas - please let me know. I'm busy this weekend but will run some more tests next week.

I love to prove cid wrong as much as the next guy, but he's got you this time. That was exactly what I set out to do with my experiments (prove cid wrong, that it). However, the one thing that I did find out was that there definitely was a dropoff in Japanese Air-to-Air effectiveness after the fall of 43.

[Andy Mac]

Bstarr I just redid the test for 44 and the results are very interesting.
 
OK Situation 4 Bases in use Nomou - Koumac/ Nandi - Suva
 
All bases given Lvl 9 AF and an aviation Regt no radars in range and both have 100k supplies (NO Air HQ in range either)
 
On each pair of bases each side has 2 x 100 plan groups of F4U1 all sqns have the same leader with 75 air xp/ 75 aggrsssion/ xp is 75 for all sqns
 
Each pair of bases is Caped by 1 sqn at 90% at 10000 feet and the other sweeps its opponents base at 10000 feet.
 
The date is December 44
 
So exact mirror images
 
Total losses
 
Jap           US
65            79
83            83
63            95
44            70
71            67
81            70
 
Now I would need to run it more times to make it statistically significant but in the abscence of any radar it appears that there is no anti Japanese code given that everything was equal in this test.
 
If I get the patience I will run the same test with allied radar present
 

[Andy Mac]

OK I re ran the test 5 more times this time with both allied bases having a pair of CPS - 1 Radars
 
Everything else was the same
 
Total losses

Jap           US 
83            53 
96            62 
132          59
92            64
108          69   

[Andy Mac]

One big observation was the increase in US planes on CAP up from 50 - 60 on 90% CAP before radar to 70 - 90 with radar present.
 
 

[Andy Mac]

This is the text file for the big 132 Jap loss which was the worst I observed in the with radar tests

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 12/07/44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JAP SWEEP ON NOMOU

Day Air attack on Noumea , at 68,113

Japanese aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 99

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 85

Japanese aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 45 destroyed, 3 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 29 destroyed, 4 damaged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALLIED SWEEP ON KOUMAC

Day Air attack on Koumac , at 67,111

Japanese aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 67

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 99

Japanese aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 34 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 4 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALLIED SWEEP ON NANDI

Day Air attack on Nandi , at 85,114

Japanese aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 50

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 99

Japanese aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 26 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 4 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAP SWEEP ON SUVA

Day Air attack on Suva , at 86,114

Japanese aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 90

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 72

Japanese aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 27 destroyed, 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 22 destroyed, 2 damaged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[veji1]

this gets more and more complicated...

[Andy Mac]

Not really I may not have convinced others but I have convinced myself that there is NO Japanese hard coded drop off what is happenening is that Allied Radar gets a LOT better that greatly improves CAP
 
If you look at the non radar tests the Sweeps won every time easily after I put radar in the Sweeps are losing a lot more planes to the CAP albeit still winning

[Andy Mac]

OK I just reversed the radars giving the Japanese CSP -1 radar and ran the test I only ran it twice
 
Total losses

Jap           US  
58            92
68            130
 
Test result for the big one
 
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 12/07/44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Noumea , at 68,113
 
Japanese aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 99
 
Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 67
 
Japanese aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 8 destroyed, 1 damaged
 
Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 27 destroyed
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Koumac , at 67,111
 
Japanese aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 67
 
Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 99
 
Japanese aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 21 destroyed, 2 damaged
 
Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 41 destroyed, 4 damaged
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Nandi , at 85,114
 
Japanese aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 84
 
Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 99
 
Japanese aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 29 destroyed, 7 damaged
 
Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 31 destroyed
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Suva , at 86,114
 
Japanese aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 99
 
Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 50
 
Japanese aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 10 destroyed
 
Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 30 destroyed
  

[pauk]

hm... did i get it right - radar is actually helping not only in scrambling CAP figthers, it also helps in A2A combat?

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: pauk

hm... did i get it right - radar is actually helping not only in scrambling CAP figthers, it also helps in A2A combat?

Yes, Radar does help in a2a from the perspecctive of being one of the factors that determines who has the bounce. So if my group has radar, my DL against your group will be higher and my chances of getting the bounce will be higher. Not sure we can argue against the logic of that (like think about BoB).

[Andy Mac]

Dont forget these examples are slightly exaggerated because only one side has radar.
 
Normally both sides will have when defending at least not as good but probably enough to mitigate partyl the losses.
 
I suspect the increased perfomance people see in Allied types in A2A IS tied to the improved radar the allies get in early 43
 
 
Andy

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: pauk

hm... did i get it right - radar is actually helping not only in scrambling CAP figthers, it also helps in A2A combat?

It allows the defender to get into the most advantageous position. Most American fighters had a significant speed advantage on the Japanese. If they are vectored above and out of the sun, even experienced Japanese fighter pilots are going to have a tough time fighting them. If vastly inferior fighters without a speed advantage were vectored into the same position, the fight probably would not be so lopsided.

Bill

[Nicholas Bell]

What needs to be done is eliminate all radars from the test scenarios.  If the results between the same tests in 42 and 44 are then identical, we can safely assume that the radar is the root cause of the imbalance.  This would be good!  However, the test runs I did mostly did not have the influence of Allied radar, so....we'll see.

Andy, if you are so inclined you may want eliminate the radars on your scenario.  I'll be out of the net until Monday.