empty CVE Hosho

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
tsimmonds
Posts: 5490
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: astride Mason and Dixon's Line

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by tsimmonds »

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez
Right, and she's a CVL

IRL but not in WitP so we're both right! [:'(]

Chez
I suppose that depends on whether you play stock or a mod. In my TFs (in CHS) she's a CVL.[:'(][;)]
I like to put some of the usless 9 plane A6M Zero groups onboard never know when you can use the extra air cover in an invasion convoy

Good God, man, the words "useless" and "A6M" do not belong in the same sentence![;)]

Well, unless of course the sentence is something like, "The 9 A6Ms destroyed the enemy CAP comprised of 18 useless Wirraways."[8D]
Fear the kitten!
User avatar
tsimmonds
Posts: 5490
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: astride Mason and Dixon's Line

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by tsimmonds »

Speaking of Wirraways, this paragraph from The Barrier and the Javelin cracks me up every time I read it:
The war in the Pacific had begun with the RAAF deploying a meagre 177 Aircraft in Australia, New Guinea, and the Indies. Of these, nine were Seagull flying boats (better known as Walruses) used for patrolling and air-sea rescue; twelve were Catalinas; fifty-three were Hudson light reconnaissance bombers and the remainder were Wirraways, used for training, liaison and observation duties. Given the imbalance between types of aircraft and flying boats, most of which were of extremely dubious fighting value, and given the presence of some 101 observation aircraft out of a total of 177 planes, one can only conclude that the Australians must have believed they needed an extraordinary number of reconnaissance and observation aircraft to report the massacre of the others and the unimpeded advance of the enemy.

[:D]

Admittedly, my sense of humor is not normal.
Fear the kitten!
User avatar
dethbass
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:40 am

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by dethbass »

One last question. How do I transfer any aircraft to the Taiyo then? If I go to the Aircraft squadron menu and I choose "Transfer to ship" for the squadron, the Taiyo is never shown as a possible target ship. I tried with carrier-capable squadrons, but it does not work. Actually the only squadrons that has any valid destination are the 2 squadrons off Hosho (carrier-trained). How do I transfer land-based carrier capable aircraft to Taiyo???

(Can you tell I'm new to this [:)])
Thx again,
/Bass
User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by ChezDaJez »

Assign Taiyo to an Air TF then transfer the aircraft. She can not be disbanded inport.

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
bradfordkay
Posts: 8603
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 8:39 am
Location: Olympia, WA

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by bradfordkay »

I think that he means that if Taiyo is disbanded in port, you cannot transfer aircraft onto her.
fair winds,
Brad
User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by ChezDaJez »

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

I think that he means that if Taiyo is disbanded in port, you cannot transfer aircraft onto her.


Yupper, guess I wasn't quite clear on that.

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
User avatar
dethbass
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:40 am

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by dethbass »

Well I've put the Taiyo in an ACTF by herself at tokyo and I tried to transfer planes from the AF there, but still I do not see the Taiyo as a valid target for the AC. I Noticed that the AC on all my CV are indepedent, while the Land-Based carrier-capable AC are attached to the Home defense force, does that matter?
bradfordkay
Posts: 8603
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 8:39 am
Location: Olympia, WA

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by bradfordkay »

Chez, you've got to answer this one... I've never looked at the Japanese side, but I do believe that the Home Defense Force is a restricted command, so it's squadrons cannot be placed aboard any ship. Is this the case?
fair winds,
Brad
User avatar
dtravel
Posts: 4533
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 6:34 pm

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by dtravel »

Home Defense Force is a restricted command.
This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.

Image
User avatar
dethbass
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:40 am

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by dethbass »

aha! That was it. I changed its command to 4th fleet and boom I could transfer to Taiyo! Cool thanks for the tips

/Bass
User avatar
Skyros
Posts: 1554
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Columbia SC

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by Skyros »

What determines if aircraft flown off the CVE arrive intact and ready or needing servicing. I recently moved two wildcat squadrons using the CVE Long Island and when I flew them off one arrived with all aircraft ready and the other time they all needed servicing? This of course was not at the same time. It was different events seperated by a couple of weeks. Stock game modified to 1.806.
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by Terminus »

Was it the same base?
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Skyros
Posts: 1554
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Columbia SC

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by Skyros »

Pearl Harbor and Hilo. If I remember correctly the squadron at hilo arrived ok.
bradfordkay
Posts: 8603
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 8:39 am
Location: Olympia, WA

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by bradfordkay »

If the carrier is docked at a base, any aircraft being transferred to that base are being removed via crane. If the carrier is at sea, then they fly off. At least that has been my experience.
fair winds,
Brad
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

If the carrier is docked at a base, any aircraft being transferred to that base are being removed via crane. If the carrier is at sea, then they fly off. At least that has been my experience.

This is correct.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Local Yokel
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Somerset, U.K.

RE: empty CVE Hosho

Post by Local Yokel »

ORIGINAL: Skyros

What determines if aircraft flown off the CVE arrive intact and ready or needing servicing. I recently moved two wildcat squadrons using the CVE Long Island and when I flew them off one arrived with all aircraft ready and the other time they all needed servicing? This of course was not at the same time. It was different events seperated by a couple of weeks. Stock game modified to 1.806.

Sorry, didn't see this post before starting a new thread describing the same behaviour with Japanese CVE Hosho and her airgroup. Seems aircraft in a transferred airgroup can all suffer damage, regardless of whether the TF is docked.

Or is it just a CVE thing?
Image
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”