RHS AA!

[John 3rd]

Michael and I have been slowly playing the Russian Active version of CVO and I wanted to know which model the AA is using?

I have found that it is terrible over bases. In laying seige to Singapore, Manila, and Clark--I have no aerial opposition and still lose anywhere from 5-10 planes/raid. I am generally flying at 10,000 Ft...

Is this fairly normal? If so, I cringe...

[el cid again]

The historical Japanese raid - the MOST successful raid of the war - over Clark AFB - was at 25,000 feet. They looked down at the ineffective AA bursts at 22,000 feet. There is a REASON they did it that way!

In RHS the French 75s at Clark only reach 22,000 feet - deliberately - they had fuse limits forcing burst at that point.
RHS is the first mod to make you care about being within the reach of the AAA. IF you ignore the reach of the AAA - you are going to pay the price. Particularly if the planes are not armored - as early Japanese planes are not.

You have options: accept the losses, or go over the defense. I tend to choose my loss rate: I like to come in 1000 feet over the medium AAA the enemy has - if it reaches 12,000 feet I come in at 13,000 feet - that sort of thing. If I don't want that kind of bomb effectiveness, then I come in just above the light AAA. If it reaches 5000 feet I come in at 6000 - etc.

[Sardaukar]

Even in CHS variants and especially in NikMod, AAA is lethal. In those mods I usually never bomb bases from under 15 000 ft. At 10k you are very vulnerable.

[el cid again]

I am working up a table for all AA/DP/VHDP guns.

I found that the Allied Very Heavy guns (low slot guns came up first) were more efficient than the Japanese ones.
A British CA 8 inch gun has about the same lethal volume of airspace as the Yamato's 18.1 inch guns have.
A French BB 6 inch gun has about the same lethal volume of airspace as the Nagato 16 inch guns have. The worst of the lot were IJN 8 inch guns. Dutch 5.9 inch guns have about 15 % more than these IJN 8 inch. IJN 14 inch guns have about 50% more than these Dutch 5.9 inch - in terms of effective volume. Effective volume of airspace should be a major indicator of effective AAA.

[m10bob]

Do a search within the scenerio mods threads and you will see Sid initiated immense research on those AA guns,(naval guns as well) to come up with realistic rather then somewhat abstract and generic height/damage values..
If your planes have a good ceiling, try up there and gradually work your way down, (for an effective bomb yield without too high of damage to planes.)
It is almost a sure bet the larger the target, the greater the AA potential.

[el cid again]

Incomplete posting - but some good indicators here:

3. Heavy AA Guns and DP Guns
10 5 in/50 3 Year Type 127 5 27 59.5 51 85 11 32 4054.629333 3 No Yes IJN 5 in/50 3 Year Type
43 85 mm/53 KS-12 85 3.346 9.54 21 21 175 10 30 3141.5 5 Yes No USSR 85 mm/53 KS-12
45 4.7 in/40 & 50 DP Gun 120 4.7 20.41 45 36 120 11 32 4054.629333 5 No Yes IJN 4.7 in/40 & 50 DP Gun
47 5.25 in/50 Mark I 133 5.25 36.3 80 54 109 16 46.5 12465.472 14 Yes No RN 5.25 in/50 Mark I
48 5 in/40 Type 88 127 5 23 50.7 51 110 10 30.97 3243.075167 4 No Yes IJN 5 in/40 Type 88
50 3.9 in/55 Type 98 100 3.937 13 28.7 29 180 13 42.65 7547.820258 14 No Yes IJN 3.9 in/55 Type 98
51 3.9 in/50 Type 88 100 3.937 13 28.7 29 90 12 36.75 5541.606 5 No Yes IJN 3.9 in/50 Type 88
52 3 in/60 Type 98 76.2 3 5.99 13.2 13 188 10 29.85 3125.7925 6 No Yes IJN 3 in/60 Type 98
53 3 in/40 Type 88 76.2 3 5.99 13.2 13 120 8 23.6 1581.640533 2 No Yes IJN 3 in/40 Type 88
54 5 in/25 AA Short Gun 127 5 24.43 53.85 54 175 9 27.4 2324.0817 4 Yes No USN 5 in/25 AA Short Gun
55 5 in/38 Mark 12 DP Gun 127 5 24.95 55 37 170 12 37.2 5609.4624 10 Yes No USN 5 in/38 Mark 12 DP Gun
56 3 in/50 Mark 10 AA Gun 76.2 3 5.9 13 9 180 10 29.8 3120.556667 6 Yes No USN 3 in/50 Mark 10 AA Gun
58 4.5 in Mk I to IV DP Gun 112.03 4.5 24.95 55 37 120 14 41 8415.031333 10 Yes No USN 4.5 in Mk I to IV DP Gun
59 4 in Mark V DP Gun 101.6 4 14.06 31 21 175 10 31 3246.216667 6 Yes No USN 4 in Mark V DP Gun

4. Very Heavy AA Guns and DP Guns
1 18.1 in/45 84 Year Type 460 18.11 1460 3219 2147 19 46 12 26589.656 5 No Yes IJN 18.1 in/45 84 Year Type
2 16.1 in/45 3 Year Type 410 16.14 1020 2249 1500 28 42 11 20319.222 6 No Yes IJN, IJA 16.1 in/45 3 Year Type
3 14 in/45 41 Year Type 355.6 14 673.5 1485 990 20 39 10 15927.405 3 No Yes IJN 14 in/45 41 Year Type
4 8 in/50 3 Year Type 203.2 8 125.85 277.45 185 30 32 8 8578.389333 3 No Yes IJN, IJA 8 in/50 3 Year Type
28 8 in/50 3 Mark VIII 203.2 8 116.1 256 172 55 31 26 26164.50633 14 Yes No RN 8 in/50 3 Mark VIII
41 6 in/55 M1930 152.4 6 54.17 119.4 80 85 26.4 30 21894.9984 19 Yes No FFN 6 in/55 M1930
44 5.9 in/50 Quick Firing 159.1 5.9 46.7 103 69 40 21.3 21.3 10119.39666 4 Yes No RNN 5.9 in/50 Quick Firing

Device Name Caliber: Shell Weight Effect Accuracy Range Ceiling Volume AAA Allied Axis
milimeters inches kg lbs Rating

Note 1: Except for Very Heavy DP guns, RHS AA gun range is ceiling divided by 3000, rounded to the nearest whole number.
The last digit before the No or Yes is the RHS AAA index - the volume of airspace times accuracy. The highest rating so far is 19 for a French 6 inch Very Heavy DP gun. The lowest is 2 for a Japanese obsolete 3 inch. The second highest rating is a 3 way tie between the British 5.25 inch, the Japanese new 100 mm, and the British 8 inch cruiser Very Heavy DP gun - all at 14. Good guns have a rating of 10 - and include the US 5 inch 38 and the RN 4.5 inch Marks I to IV.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Incomplete posting - but some good indicators here:

3. Heavy AA Guns and DP Guns
10 5 in/50 3 Year Type 127 5 27 59.5 51 85 11 32 4055 3 No Yes IJN 5 in/50 3 Year Type
43 85 mm/53 KS-12 85 3.346 9.54 21 21 175 10 30 3142 5 Yes No USSR 85 mm/53 KS-12
45 4.7 in/40 & 50 DP Gun 120 4.7 20.41 45 36 120 11 32 4055 5 No Yes IJN 4.7 in/40 & 50 DP Gun
47 5.25 in/50 Mark I 133 5.25 36.3 80 54 109 16 46.5 12465 14 Yes No RN 5.25 in/50 Mark I
48 5 in/40 Type 88 127 5 23 50.7 51 110 10 30.97 3243 4 No Yes IJN 5 in/40 Type 88
50 & 294 3.9 in/55 Type 98 100 3.937 13 28.7 29 180 14 42.65 8754 16 No Yes IJN 3.9 in/55 Type 98 On land only in EEO (although on land IRL)
51 3.9 in/50 Type 88 100 3.937 13 28.7 29 90 12 36.75 5542 5 No Yes IJN 3.9 in/50 Type 88
52 & 292 3 in/60 Type 98 76.2 3 5.99 13.2 13 188 10 29.85 3126 6 No Yes IJN 3 in/60 Type 98 On land only in EOS family
53 & 292 3 in/40 Type 88 76.2 3 5.99 13.2 13 120 8 23.6 1582 2 No Yes IJN 3 in/40 Type 88 On land only in CVO & BBO families
54 5 in/25 AA Short Gun 127 5 24.43 53.85 54 175 9 27.4 2324 4 Yes No USN 5 in/25 AA Short Gun
55 5 in/38 Mark 12 DP Gun 127 5 24.95 55 37 170 12 37.2 5609 10 Yes No USN 5 in/38 Mark 12 DP Gun
56 3 in/50 Mark 10 AA Gun 76.2 3 5.9 13 9 180 10 29.8 3121 6 Yes No USN 3 in/50 Mark 10 AA Gun
58 4.5 in Mk I to IV DP Gun 112.03 4.5 24.95 55 37 120 14 41 8415 10 Yes No RN 4.5 in Mk I to IV DP Gun
59 4 in Mark V DP Gun 101.6 4 14.06 31 21 175 10 31 3246 6 Yes No RN 4 in Mark V DP Gun
60 4 in Mark XVI DP Gun 101.6 4 15.88 35 23 120 13 39 6902 8 Yes No RN 4 in Mark XVI DP Gun
61 5 in/54 Mark 16 DP Gun 127 5 31.75 70 47 150 17 51 15434 23 Yes No USN 5 in/54 Mark 16 DP Gun
62 3.9 in/45 M1930 AA Gun 100 3.937 14.9 32.96 22 100 11 32.28 4090 4 Yes Yes FFN, VFN 3.9 in/45 M1930 AA Gun
63 3.5 in/50 M1926 AA Gun 90 3.543 18 39.7 26 100 12 34.8 5248 5 Yes Yes FFN, VFN 3.5 in/50 M1926 AA Gun
64 3 in/50 M1922 AA Gun 75 2.95 12 26.5 26 150 11 32.8 4156 6 Yes Yes FFN, VFN 3 in/50 M1922 AA Gun
65 & 276 4.7 in/45 Type 10 120 4.724 20.41 45 45 110 11 32.8 4156 5 No Yes IJN 4.7 in/45 Type 10





4. Very Heavy AA Guns and DP Guns
1 18.1 in/45 84 Year Type 460 18.11 1460 3219 2147 19 46 12 26590 5 No Yes IJN 18.1 in/45 84 Year Type
2 16.1 in/45 3 Year Type 410 16.14 1020 2249 1500 28 42 11 20319 6 No Yes IJN, IJA 16.1 in/45 3 Year Type
3 14 in/45 41 Year Type 355.6 14 673.5 1485 990 20 39 10 15927 3 No Yes IJN 14 in/45 41 Year Type
4 8 in/50 3 Year Type 203.2 8 125.85 277.45 185 30 32 8 8578 3 No Yes IJN, IJA 8 in/50 3 Year Type
28 8 in/50 3 Mark VIII 203.2 8 116.1 256 172 55 31 26 26165 14 Yes No RN 8 in/50 3 Mark VIII
41 6 in/55 M1930 152.4 6 54.17 119.4 80 85 26.4 30 21895 19 Yes No FFN 6 in/55 M1930
44 5.9 in/50 Quick Firing 149.1 5.9 46.7 103 69 40 21.3 21.3 10119 4 Yes No RNN 5.9 in/50 Quick Firing

Device Name Caliber: Shell Weight Effect Accuracy Range Ceiling Volume AAA Allied Axis Service Device Name Notes
milimeters inches kg lbs Rating

Note 1: Except for Very Heavy DP guns, RHS AA gun range is ceiling divided by 3000, rounded to the nearest whole number.
Note 2: WITP Range is in thousands of yards.
Note 3: WITP ceiling is in thousands of feet. RHS uses effective ceiling rather than absolute ceiling.
Note 4: RHS uses effect = shell weight for HE and AA fragmentation type shells, but 2/3 of shell weight for all guns which have AP or SAP shells.
This is mainly for use in surface battles. For AA combat, larger effect values are probably meaningless: they will kill the target regardless.
The question that matters is: can the target be hit? The RHS AAA value scales the answer to this question objectively.
Note 5: RAN, RIN, RNZN, Commonwealth navies and RTN often use RN weapons.
Note 6: RTN often uses IJN weapons.
Note 7: Late war Soviet vessels often use USN weapons.


The last digit before the No or Yes is the RHS AAA index - the volume of airspace times accuracy. The highest rating so far is 19 for a French 6 inch Very Heavy DP gun. The lowest is 2 for a Japanese obsolete 3 inch. The second highest rating is a 3 way tie between the British 5.25 inch, the Japanese new 100 mm, and the British 8 inch cruiser Very Heavy DP gun - all at 14. Good guns have a rating of 10 - and include the US 5 inch 38 and the RN 4.5 inch Marks I to IV. Note the old Japanese 5 inch 50 destroyer gun is badly rated - at 3 - as it should be.

On revision, I found a typo in my spreadsheet misrated the superb Japanese 100 mm - it should be a 16. But the record now goes to the late war (and disliked) USN 5 inch 54 - at 23! I served with two derivitives of this weapon - a later 5 inch 54 firing the same shell to the same range and altitude but at a whopping 42 rounds per minute: it was down more than it was up and in the end got de-rated. The 23 shows it was indeed an attempt at super high performance, and this never works out as well as reasonable performance. Similarly, the second place French 6 inch, with 19, was also considered a technical failure even before WWII began. Using oversimplified systems in games, it is hard to show this sort of thing.

Note also that other factors should be in the AA effectiveness value - notably training and elevation speeds - but they are not in this system.

[goodboyladdie]

I am involved in a similar discussion with Sid about the Naval AAA. My experience of the land based AAA so far is that it is modelled quite well, but my experience is limited and it is my flak that is doing the shooting... My opponent has mentioned that his losses are severe. The figures Sid posted are helpful and it is good to see he has employed his normal thorough research and data crunching. However something IS off. The figures do not add up. Aircraft durability has come down to help sort A2A, but flak effects have gone up my a large factor. Is this a clue to the problem? In Naval AAA the problem of massive imbalance appears in ships not yet toting large numbers of the later high performance weapons, so there should not be values of 4000-6000 as opposed to 250-800.

I have been rephrasing the same question for days and have still not got an answer to that question. Why should I invest a lot of time in a mod (it is beautiful and shiny and tempting...) where I (and others) can see a glaring problem on turn 1 when I know that when the super weapons become more widely installed it is only going to get worse? I really want to get into RHS before AE arrives so that I can enjoy what Sid and many others have worked so hard to bring us, BUT Sid does not listen to people whose opinion he does not rate and can be quite rude and appear arrogant (I say appear as his actions re the amount of time he invests and his democratic management of development indicate that he is not).

[el cid again]

Perception is subjective - so in the end it is what you want it to be I suppose.

But know that it was my INTENTION to INCREASE AAA attrition - as well as general attrition. Note that in AE they decided attrition was not high enough either - and addressed it in code.

Several things made stock and CHS as I inherited the data not be effective when the planes were in range:

a) A number of guns had ceilings of 0 - so the guns never fired

b) Many units had no aircraft detection devices - so the guns in most situations never fired (unless another unit in the hex detected the attack, maybe - if that is used by code).

c) "Sound Detectors" (we don't use em as such in RHS) were rated at 10% likely to detect. RHS uses Audio-Visual Detection Networks rated at 25% - and often gives a land unit 2 or 3 of these. The result is a much higher probability an air attack will be detected and engaged. [IRL Japan sounded air raid warnings two hours in advance of raids, uniformly, according to foreign civilian and US POW witnesses - no exceptions. Failure to detect a raid was never an issue - although the atom bombings were not considered raids because so few planes were detected - and no alarm was sounded for them.]

d) ROF (that is accuracy) data was often way too low. I am STILL finding values way too low - and I will correct them. Probably a "too many cooks" thing, it may be sometimes people deliberately downrated a gun as well.

e) There used to be radar issues - Matrix has since fixed some of these in patches - that may have meant a unit with the "wrong" slot for radar really didn't get radar warning. Again, if so, little or no chance a raid would be engaged, or perhaps just the early waves of a raid if large enough. [Presumably after a while, units notice the bombs falling]

The loss rates to AAA were (and remain) so low in stock that players generally come in at altitudes that SHOULD result in horrible losses - but do not. RHS set out to make you care - and if it did that - it acheved my design intent. More specifically - I wanted you to raid up high for the same reason most real world raids did that - to keep losses down. This is counted as a victory by the defense - as bombing accuracy declines in that case. It was done deliberately - and now we are engaged in "calibration" testing - to insure we did so enough (being conservative, I may decide to apply a K or constant - and multiply the accuracy by 1.5, 2, 3, etc - if the losses are still too low). The idea they are too high has not yet presented itself as likely in any of 267 long game tests.

[m10bob]

"The loss rates to AAA were (and remain) so low in stock that players generally come in at altitudes that SHOULD result in horrible losses - but do not"


Not completely off-topic..If one were to ask any ww2 buff what height dive bombers released at, I am positive most would say just "mast high", but according to TITANS OF THE SEAS,(Belotes), 800 feet was considered "dangerously low". This is as high as an 80 story building......

[Buck Beach]

"d) ROF (that is accuracy) data was often way too low. I am STILL finding values way too low - and I will correct them."
 
 The penalties and deterrent should be realistic. Seems like a correction to the data and the scenarios are needed. I am willing to trust your expertise. It's looking like I may never get another game going.

[el cid again]

Only one instance was significantly in error: a dropped 0 caused a Soviet gun - the K-12 - to be an order of magnitude low. Since Soviet guns are not often used, it is not a game breaker. But I have found about 8 other errors - in accuracy or altitude mostly - and a couple in shell weight which machts nichts for AA IMHO - but matter in surface combat. In EVERY case the corrections are upward - AA will be marginally MORE effective - although not enough for anyone to notice. The data was NOT exaggerated - in spite of the perception.

I will issue the correction in the form of a microupdate - just device files.

I will be issuing turns for test games in a few days. You want a game - tell me the scenario Buck. We also need to reassemble the Allied Tag Team - the Japanese one remains in place - and I will send Mifune a turn shortly.

[ny59giants]

Here are some recent "milk runs" over Singapore by John III.
Note most are at 5000 feet. It's his choice to fly this low and pay the price.

01/04/42
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 45
Ki-21-II Sally x 31
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-II Sally: 3 destroyed, 9 damaged
Allied ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Airbase hits 5
Runway hits 32
Aircraft Attacking:
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
9 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
01/04/42
Day Air attack on CW SSVF Brigade, at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 9
Ki-48-I Lily x 11
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48-I Lily: 2 destroyed, 4 damaged
Allied ground losses:
19 casualties reported
Aircraft Attacking:
5 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
4 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
01/04/42
Day Air attack on IA 12th Brigade, at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 9
Ki-48-I Lily x 12
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48-I Lily: 5 damaged
Allied ground losses:
51 casualties reported
Guns lost 4
Aircraft Attacking:
5 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
7 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
01/03/42
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 45
Ki-21-II Sally x 59
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-II Sally: 7 destroyed, 10 damaged
Allied ground losses:
26 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 87
Aircraft Attacking:
10 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
11 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
11 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
3 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
12 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/31/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 46
Ki-21-II Sally x 35
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-II Sally: 7 destroyed, 8 damaged
Allied ground losses:
4 casualties reported
Airbase hits 3
Runway hits 44
Aircraft Attacking:
6 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
7 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
3 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/30/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 47
Ki-21-II Sally x 37
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-II Sally: 4 destroyed, 10 damaged
Airbase hits 6
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 45
Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
8 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
10 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
4 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
4 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
3 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/29/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 47
Ki-21-II Sally x 40
Allied aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-II Sally: 1 destroyed, 7 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Do 24K-2: 1 destroyed
Airbase hits 7
Runway hits 67
Aircraft Attacking:
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
6 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
7 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
3 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
13 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/28/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 44
Ki-21-II Sally x 74
Allied aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-II Sally: 5 destroyed, 18 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Allied ground losses:
5 casualties reported
Airbase hits 11
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 68
Aircraft Attacking:
19 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
19 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
13 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
3 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
9 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
6 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/27/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 18
Ki-48-I Lily x 26
Allied aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48-I Lily: 4 destroyed, 7 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Do 24K-2: 1 destroyed
Vildebeest/Vincent: 1 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
366 casualties reported
Guns lost 4
Vehicles lost 5
Airbase hits 5
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 26
Aircraft Attacking:
11 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
3 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/27/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 46
Ki-21-II Sally x 56
Allied aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-II Sally: 2 destroyed, 8 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Vildebeest/Vincent: 1 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
10 casualties reported
Airbase hits 3
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 67
Aircraft Attacking:
11 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
15 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
12 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
6 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
6 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
4 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/26/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 18
Ki-48-I Lily x 56
Allied aircraft
Buffalo/F2A x 34
Wirraway CA-1 x 6
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zeke: 1 destroyed
Ki-48-I Lily: 7 destroyed, 12 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Buffalo/F2A: 7 destroyed
Wirraway CA-1: 5 destroyed
Swordfish I: 3 destroyed
Catalina/PBY/PBV: 1 destroyed
Vildebeest/Vincent: 3 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
259 casualties reported
Guns lost 7
Vehicles lost 6
Airbase hits 7
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 22
Aircraft Attacking:
13 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
9 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
7 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
10 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
3 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-48-I Lily bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/26/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 48
Ki-21-II Sally x 64
Allied aircraft
Buffalo/F2A x 27
Wirraway CA-1 x 1
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zeke: 2 destroyed
Ki-21-II Sally: 2 destroyed, 6 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Buffalo/F2A: 23 destroyed
Wirraway CA-1: 1 destroyed
Vildebeest/Vincent: 1 destroyed
Swordfish I: 1 destroyed
Catalina/PBY/PBV: 1 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
3 casualties reported
Airbase hits 10
Airbase supply hits 5
Runway hits 65
Aircraft Attacking:
12 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
8 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
22 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
3 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
17 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================
12/21/41
Day Air attack on Singapore [UK] , at 22,51
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zeke x 45
Ki-21-II Sally x 37
Allied aircraft
Buffalo/F2A x 42
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zeke: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged
Ki-21-II Sally: 8 destroyed, 14 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Buffalo/F2A: 24 destroyed
Catalina/PBY/PBV: 1 destroyed
Swordfish I: 1 destroyed
Airbase hits 4
Runway hits 7
Aircraft Attacking:
15 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
5 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
2 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
7 x Ki-21-II Sally bombing at 5000 feet
=============================================

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Only one instance was significantly in error: a dropped 0 caused a Soviet gun - the K-12 - to be an order of magnitude low. Since Soviet guns are not often used, it is not a game breaker. But I have found about 8 other errors - in accuracy or altitude mostly - and a couple in shell weight which machts nichts for AA IMHO - but matter in surface combat. In EVERY case the corrections are upward - AA will be marginally MORE effective - although not enough for anyone to notice. The data was NOT exaggerated - in spite of the perception.

I will issue the correction in the form of a microupdate - just device files.

I will be issuing turns for test games in a few days. You want a game - tell me the scenario Buck. We also need to reassemble the Allied Tag Team - the Japanese one remains in place - and I will send Mifune a turn shortly.

Thanks Sid. I am tossing around between CAIO and AIO. Either or both are fine with me. I plan to change Calcutta back to being the major port over Diamond Bar (already made the switch with the current scenarios adjusting some of the numbers and the PWHex) and test to see how well the computer handles it. I expect no problem but who knows.

[el cid again]

I have re-rated the French 6 inch AA gun and the IJA late war 5.9 inch AA gun as AA guns. This helps explain why the French gun was a failure and the Japanese one good but not superb. Both were designed for AA - so they get AA range vice surface range - and that reduces their effective range vs aircraft. The true super heavy guns have long surface ranges - neither of these weapons need that - and very limited ceilings - the latter limiting the effectiveness. But the combination of long range and high ceiling made the French gun seem far better than it was. Now - as a 3 - one can see why they added a tirtiary battery to the Richelieu class.

3. Heavy AA Guns and DP Guns
10 5 in/50 3 Year Type 127 5 27 59.5 51 85 11 32 4055 3 No Yes IJN 5 in/50 3 Year Type
41 6 in/55 M1930 152.4 6 54.17 119.4 80 85 10 30 3142 3 Yes No FFN 6 in/55 M1930
43 85 mm/53 KS-12 85 3.346 9.54 21 21 175 10 30 3142 5 Yes No USSR 85 mm/53 KS-12
45 4.7 in/40 & 50 DP Gun 120 4.7 20.41 45 36 120 11 32 4055 5 No Yes IJN 4.7 in/40 & 50 DP Gun
47 5.25 in/50 Mark I 133 5.25 36.3 80 54 109 16 46.5 12465 14 Yes No RN 5.25 in/50 Mark I
48 5 in/40 Type 88 127 5 23 50.7 51 110 10 30.97 3243 4 No Yes IJN 5 in/40 Type 88
50 & 294 3.9 in/55 Type 98 100 3.937 13 28.7 29 180 14 42.65 8754 16 No Yes IJN 3.9 in/55 Type 98 On land only in EEO (although on land IRL)
51 3.9 in/50 Type 88 100 3.937 13 28.7 29 90 12 36.75 5542 5 No Yes IJN 3.9 in/50 Type 88
52 & 292 3 in/60 Type 98 76.2 3 5.99 13.2 13 188 10 29.85 3126 6 No Yes IJN 3 in/60 Type 98 On land only in EOS family
53 & 292 3 in/40 Type 88 76.2 3 5.99 13.2 13 120 8 23.6 1582 2 No Yes IJN 3 in/40 Type 88 On land only in CVO & BBO families
54 5 in/25 AA Short Gun 127 5 24.43 53.85 54 175 9 27.4 2324 4 Yes No USN 5 in/25 AA Short Gun
55 5 in/38 Mark 12 DP Gun 127 5 24.95 55 37 170 12 37.2 5609 10 Yes No USN 5 in/38 Mark 12 DP Gun
56 3 in/50 Mark 10 AA Gun 76.2 3 5.9 13 9 180 10 29.8 3121 6 Yes No USN 3 in/50 Mark 10 AA Gun
58 4.5 in Mk I to IV DP Gun 112.03 4.5 24.95 55 37 120 14 41 8415 10 Yes No RN 4.5 in Mk I to IV DP Gun
59 4 in Mark V DP Gun 101.6 4 14.06 31 21 175 10 31 3246 6 Yes No RN 4 in Mark V DP Gun
60 4 in Mark XVI DP Gun 101.6 4 15.88 35 23 120 13 39 6902 8 Yes No RN 4 in Mark XVI DP Gun
61 5 in/54 Mark 16 DP Gun 127 5 31.75 70 47 150 17 51 15434 23 Yes No USN 5 in/54 Mark 16 DP Gun
62 3.9 in/45 M1930 AA Gun 100 3.937 14.9 32.96 22 100 11 32.28 4090 4 Yes Yes FFN, VFN 3.9 in/45 M1930 AA Gun
63 3.5 in/50 M1926 AA Gun 90 3.543 18 39.7 26 100 12 34.8 5248 5 Yes Yes FFN, VFN 3.5 in/50 M1926 AA Gun
64 3 in/50 M1922 AA Gun 75 2.95 12 26.5 26 150 11 32.8 4156 6 Yes Yes FFN, VFN 3 in/50 M1922 AA Gun
65 & 276 4.7 in/45 Type 10 120 4.724 20.41 45 45 110 11 32.8 4156 5 No Yes IJN 4.7 in/45 Type 10
552 150 mm Type 5 AA Gun 149.1 5.9 45 99 99 80 17 50 15132 12 No Yes IJA 150 mm Type 5 AA Gun




4. Very Heavy AA Guns and DP Guns
1 18.1 in/45 84 Year Type 460 18.11 1460 3219 2147 19 46 12 26590 5 No Yes IJN 18.1 in/45 84 Year Type
2 16.1 in/45 3 Year Type 410 16.14 1020 2249 1500 28 42 11 20319 6 No Yes IJN, IJA 16.1 in/45 3 Year Type
3 14 in/45 41 Year Type 355.6 14 673.5 1485 990 20 39 10 15927 3 No Yes IJN 14 in/45 41 Year Type
4 8 in/50 3 Year Type 203.2 8 125.85 277.45 185 30 32 8 8578 3 No Yes IJN, IJA 8 in/50 3 Year Type
28 8 in/50 3 Mark VIII 203.2 8 116.1 256 172 55 31 26 26165 14 Yes No RN 8 in/50 3 Mark VIII
44 5.9 in/50 Quick Firing 149.1 5.9 46.7 103 69 40 21.3 21.3 10119 4 Yes No RNN 5.9 in/50 Quick Firing

Device Name Caliber: Shell Weight Effect Accuracy Range Ceiling Volume AAA Allied Axis Service Device Name Notes
milimeters inches kg lbs Rating

Note 1: Except for Very Heavy DP guns, RHS AA gun range is ceiling divided by 3000, rounded to the nearest whole number.
Note 2: WITP Range is in thousands of yards.
Note 3: WITP ceiling is in thousands of feet. RHS uses effective ceiling rather than absolute ceiling.
Note 4: RHS uses effect = shell weight for HE and AA fragmentation type shells, but 2/3 of shell weight for all guns which have AP or SAP shells.
This is mainly for use in surface battles. For AA combat, larger effect values are probably meaningless: they will kill the target regardless.
The question that matters is: can the target be hit? The RHS AAA value scales the answer to this question objectively.
Note 5: RAN, RIN, RNZN, Commonwealth navies and RTN often use RN weapons.
Note 6: RTN often uses IJN weapons.
Note 7: Late war Soviet vessels often use USN weapons.
Note 8: 6 in/55 M1930 and 15 cm Type 5 AA Gun are true AA weapons vice Very Heavy AA weapons, and are rated as such.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Here are some recent "milk runs" over Singapore by John III.
Note most are at 5000 feet. It's his choice to fly this low and pay the price.

...

I agree. For coming in at 5000 feet it sure looks like these are the kinds of losses one should expect. YMMV.

[goodboyladdie]

Mike and I are going for EOS. Despite any issues I have the game is brilliant and I cannot resist. [:)] Is the design now stable enough for us to be able to get all the way through without having to face restarts?

[1EyedJacks]

Hey John and Michael - what's up with your AARs? I was hoping to let you guyz break trail for Carl and myself <grin>.

Getting feedback on what you two are running into would be valuable to me. It looks like flak is gunna be a tuff nut 2 crack. I C El Sid has a list of AAA gunz but how i figure out what type of gunz R @ each base I'm attacking - that'll B a little rough <laughter>.

[goodboyladdie]

Is there a special medical name for fear of flak?

[1EyedJacks]

Look up NY59Giants AAR on page 2 where Michael posts air losses and then talk 2 me again about fear of flak...

Flak-O-phobia?