On the L2D2 Tabby

[timtom]

My apologies for the lateness of reply. I've been out of town this past week and am fairly useless away from the home library.

First a disclaimer. Working on the Japanese air forces is tricky. Not so much because of the alien (to a Westerner) organisational modes, terminology or the IJNAF fetish for reorganisation, but because of the relative paucity of English-language literature on the subject. There's nothing remotely like the single-volume works on fx the USAAF OOB by M.Mauer or the RAF OOB by C.G.Jefford. Some of the most useful literature in English are that of I.Hata & Y.Izawa, H.Sakaida, O.Tagaya, M.Kawamoto and the late R.Bueschel, which together form an important body of work but falls rather short of a complete OOB. Much more is available in Japanese, but has been largely beyond our reach in spite of the translation efforts by fellow forumite Yoshino of issues of FAOW and Brady's generosity with his old issues of KokuFan.

For our purposes its also worth noting that within aviation literature there's a glamour hierarchy of sorts. Fighter units gets the most attention followed by bombers followed by patrol types followed by everyone else. Transport units are at the bottom of the barrel. Japanese tranport units aren't even in the barrel.

Most of my understanding of the structure of IJNAF transport units stems from "The Japanese Air Forces in World War II: The Organization of the Japanese Army & Naval Air Forces, 1945", published by Arms & Armour 1979. This is a print of an Allied intelligence manual on the subject, so strictly speaking its a source not on the subject matter but on what the Allies thought they knew on the subject matter as of '45. But we have to work with the literature available and the game doesn't allow for ifs and buts.

According to this reference (p.119-123), IJNAF transport and communications aircraft were broadly distriputed as follows:

Naval Commands (Combined Fleet, Area Fleets, etc): 100 a/c
Air Commands (Air Fleets, Flotillas): 100 a/c
Operational Air Groups (other than transport units): 250 a/c
Training Units: "Some"
Naval Districts, Guard Districts, Base Forces: 100 a/c
Air Depots: 50 a/c
Transport Air Groups (1000-series Kokutais): 100 a/c

This leavening of transports throughout isn't unique, but stands out because of the relatively small number of a/c with tactical transport units proper. Only the 1000-series Kokutais were solely involved with WitP-style tactical missions, however one might presume that at least some of the other a/c would be involved in moving men and material some of the time. We've gone back and forth on whether to explicitly include some of the command transports more than a few times. As the Air Team OOB-wallah, my main concern is that doing would be opening the lid on a industrial-sized can o' worms not least considering the number of Allied transports found in echelon or similar - fx the entire US Air Transport Command in the Pacific is omitted and the argument for doing so is probably weaker than that for the IJN transports.

Its worth noting that the T/O strength of all IJNAF in-game transport units amount to 272 a/c excluding reserves.

Obviously the L2D was in production well before '44 (serial production from 1940 in fact). In repeat, the stated AE methodology is for the availability date of an a/c to equal the date it was first in use with an in-game unit, which presently is 1/44. This is by no means set in stone - we're only as good as our data [:)]

[Grotius]

Timtom, thanks for that thoughtful and thorough response. You're right, it's tough to find reliable English-language sources on how the Japanese deployed their transport aircraft. Over the past few days I've probably spent 20 hours looking -- I've got the week off and have too much time on my hands! I've checked every book I own, from Morison to Bergerud's "Fire in the Sky" and lots of stuff in between. There's general stuff about how the Japanese didn't make good use of their transports, but no specific documentation of what planes were used where and by whom. I've looked through the Library of Congress online card catalogs, to no avail. I've also spent fruitless hours surfing the internet. I have found one unreliable, undocumented internet source suggesting that paratroopers jumped out of Tabbies before 1944, but it lists just about other IJA/IJN transport plane as participating too. *shrugs*

As it happens I've already ordered the source you're using, plus a couple other sources, including one on Japanese paratrooper ops. If I can find a Japanese-language source, I have friends who could help me translate parts of it, but I haven't found anything yet. Mostly I seem to be traveling down the path you've already followed. In a few days I'll receive a big clutch of books from Amazon (US and Japan), and maybe those will help.

Anyway, I'm glad to hear that things aren't yet "set in stone." If I find anything helpful, I'll let you know.

[Herrbear]

In fact, YH's numbers indicate that Japan only gets enough squadrons to fly a total of 72 Tabbies total for the entire war, when Showa Company alone produced 416 over the course of the war. (I'm still not clear on to what extent other factories also produced L2D2s and their variants.) And it seems ahistorical to me to require the player to "research" an aircraft when 22 were already built by Showa in 1941 (and one each in 1939 and 1940), in accordance with a license to make a Japanese version of the DC-3.

According to Francillon, 71 other Tabbies were produced by Nakajima from 1940 through 1942.

[Dili]

Here only shows 71 made by Nakajima up until 42 http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/l2d.htm

[Grotius]

Ah, thanks for that info, Herrbear.

I looked through a couple of sources on Japanese paratroop ops today. As I expected, neither indicated that the Japanese used the Tabby in paradrops before 1944. Osprey's "Japanese Paratroop Forces of WW2" may not be the most comprehensive source, but it's an interesting read. It lists the Tabby as one of several aircraft that were used at some point in the war (p. 20), but while it describes the Tabby in use in paradrops in 1944 (pp. 44-45, 49), it doesn't mention the Tabby being used before then. The book includes a couple of pics of Tabbies, including an interesting one of trainees in drop gear, sitting in the plane's wicker seats (p. 45). I've never seen a plane with wicker seats. (Although I once experienced a rickety flight on Aeroflot that made me feel like I was sitting in a wicker seat.)

Anyway, the Osprey book doesn't speak to other missions for supply craft, like supply transport or troop transport other than paradrops. I sure wish I could find a book on "Japanese Transport Aircraft in WW2"! That would be a big seller, huh?

One other tidbit: the boardgame "World in Flames", by the Australian Design Group, does include the Tabby as early as 1942. Matrix's forthcoming computer WIF, which I'm helping to beta-test, follows ADG's design decisions on such things. So at least one other Matrix-published game will include the Tabby in the early war. (And yes, I asked in the MWIF forum whether the NDA permitted me to say that. The designers just asked that I stress that inclusion of the Tabby was ADG's design decision, not MWIF's.) So I can get my Tabby jollies there! Maybe I can track down someone from ADG and ask them why they decided to put the Tabby in that early. Anyone know who I would ask?

[timtom]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

In fact, YH's numbers indicate that Japan only gets enough squadrons to fly a total of 72 Tabbies total for the entire war, when Showa Company alone produced 416 over the course of the war. (I'm still not clear on to what extent other factories also produced L2D2s and their variants.)

Thanks God for PDU, eh? [:D]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

And it seems ahistorical to me to require the player to "research" an aircraft when 22 were already built by Showa in 1941 (and one each in 1939 and 1940), in accordance with a license to make a Japanese version of the DC-3.

Between you and me, research factories aren't really research factories. They're a tool to help the AI handle production. The rest is just an afterthought.

[pad152]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Wouldnt be the first time a typo went into the database, but here it is as of last weeks build (I havent downloaded this weeks yet):

What's a Toka? Wasn't Tokia the Japanese name for the Q1W1 Lorna?

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear



In fact, YH's numbers indicate that Japan only gets enough squadrons to fly a total of 72 Tabbies total for the entire war, when Showa Company alone produced 416 over the course of the war.

Well you are assuming that every plane produced goes into a transport unit. Fact is, they dont. Some are in "other" squadrons as utility planes. Some officers of command and even a few field grade commanders may have 1 or 2 for their personal use, ect. Any number of reasons a given unit or plane may not actually appear in the game. There are countless units that existed in real life that arent directly in the game. MP units, medical units, transportation units. Military prisons. The list is endless.

You cant look at production figures and say "look, they built "X" number of this plane, why do I only get "Y" number in the game? Not to mention the fact that this is a game and not a time capsule looking back into the 1940s.

These "unaccounted for" aircraft are modeled in other ways. Transport planes that are "missing" from the game could possibly be in infantry divisions supplying their own units, or evaccuating wounded to rear areas. Light recon planes that arent directly in the game give units the ability to "see" everything in their hex, ect.

[Chad Harrison]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Not to mention the fact that this is a game and not a time capsule looking back into the 1940s.

The more I read comments from outside of the AE dev team over the past year and a half, the more I wonder how many people forget this?

This is not a burn on anyone, just an observation. Theres nothing wrong with a little debate about this or that, but the dev team has to draw the line somewhere with what can be expected of their game, and I think we all need to do the same for our sometimes impossible expectations of AE.

[Grotius]

Well you are assuming that every plane produced goes into a transport unit.

No, I acknowledge that many Tabbies didn't make it into a transport unit. There are indications that the Tabby was indeed used to ferry top brass around and to support HQ ops. I just ask whether we're certain that *none* were ever used in an air-supply or troop-transport role before 1944. That's why I suggested a compromise -- maybe one or two Tabby chutai, or at least the ability to make enough Tabbies that one can upgrade some other Navy transport craft to the Tabby before 1944. But Timtom's explanation is plausible to me, and I'll certainly understand if the devs go with things the way they are -- unless I can find more definitive evidence that the Tabby was used for air supply or troop transport before 1944.

Theres nothing wrong with a little debate about this or that, but the dev team has to draw the line somewhere with what can be expected of their game

Sure, I agree with that, too. But when it comes to the Order of Battle, now is the time for us to make our pitch, because (unless I'm mistaken) OOB changes require restarts. I'm not going to rant and stomp if the designers exclude the Tabby til 1944 -- I think there's a plausible case for their position, and I'll happily play the game either way. As long as debate remains civilized, and as long as I'm willing to do the legwork to look for authoritative sources on use of the Tabby, I see no harm done, and possible benefits.

[Yamato hugger]

Well all I can say is if the numbers of Tabbys is your yardstick of what AE should be...

Feel free to mod.

[Grotius]

Heh, AE is already far more than I could have hoped for, Tabby or not.

[timtom]

ORIGINAL: pad152

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Wouldnt be the first time a typo went into the database, but here it is as of last weeks build (I havent downloaded this weeks yet):

What's a Toka? Wasn't Tokia the Japanese name for the Q1W1 Lorna?

IJNAF version of the Ki-115 build-to-purpose special attack aircraft.

[m10bob]

http://www.century-of-flight.net/Aviati ... mikaze.htm

[GaryChildress]

If the L2D2 is going to be in WITP what about the C-3PO? [:D]

[Gary trying his best not to be "dramatic"]

[khyberbill]

If the L2D2 is going to be in WITP what about the C-3PO?

[Gary trying his best not to be "dramatic"]

The L2D2 is already in WITP. No if, ands or buts about it.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

What if Winnie had allowed the RAF to upgrade earlier? Shouldnt we decide when to upgrade, not Churchill? What if we decided that the P38 was a better plane than the P39? Shouldnt we decide to produce it in greater quantities earlier in the war? The trouble with "What Ifs" is that there are so many of them.

What I've always noticed in this forum is that virtually all the "What ifs" people bring up are to aid the Japanese. Glad to see someone pointing out that the Allies had a lot more "what ifs" available as well. I still remember with delight the screams of dismay when it was discovered that PDU worked for the Allies as well! [:D]

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

What if Winnie had allowed the RAF to upgrade earlier? Shouldnt we decide when to upgrade, not Churchill? What if we decided that the P38 was a better plane than the P39? Shouldnt we decide to produce it in greater quantities earlier in the war? The trouble with "What Ifs" is that there are so many of them.

What I've always noticed in this forum is that virtually all the "What ifs" people bring up are to aid the Japanese. Glad to see someone pointing out that the Allies had a lot more "what ifs" available as well. I still remember with delight the screams of dismay when it was discovered that PDU worked for the Allies as well! [:D]

ALLIED WHAT IFS!!!!!!????....Omigosh...I had never considered this!....Let's see now.....One B 19 means 4 less P-40's or P 39's (per B 19)........resources to Douglas will halve the output of C 47's......B 29 will come out a year later, (maybe 2 years if more than 40 B 19's are produced)......Lessee now.....B 19 has great range but speed suffers badly so.........won't need such a fast escort, just longer range......GOT IT!!!!!! Wing tanks on the P 36!!!!(Radial engine, won't be affected by the Allison engine shortage).........2 less 37MM guns per B 19.....gotta get with the Army on this one....Glass needs to be "borrowed" from the plant at Willow Run......Less B 24's...sorry....................

Wait!!....Heavy plane......bigger runways....earlier.............need groundcrew and more engineers...earlier!.....[;)]

[anarchyintheuk]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

I still remember with delight the screams of dismay when it was discovered that PDU worked for the Allies as well! [:D]

I remember that. Pretty funny actually.

[Grotius]

Heh, well the Tabby was used by the Japanese, so it's not a question of "what-if" -- just a question of when. There are plausible arguments on both sides, and I can live with the designers' decision to limit Tabbies to the 1000-series transport squadrons formed up in 1944, even though the aircraft was used in some fashion by the Japanese before then. And yes, we should avoid JFBism -- as someone said earlier, one can make similar arguments about inclusion of the entire Allied C-47 fleet. At the same time, we should also recognize that we don't have a wealth of English-language sources on some aspects of the Japanese military, whereas such sources are often easier to come by for the Allies. I've bought every English-language book I can find relating to how the Japanese used their air transports, and I still have more questions than answers.

And yeah, I am going to change the title of this thread, since the Tabby is indeed in AE.