Jorge's(A) crusade to the fabled kingdom of PresterJohn(J) DBB-C --- Allied AAR

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Nov 29th: 1st LST arrived

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

That's actually a good question
I would think they will behave as normal squadrons: do CAP,LRCAP etc.
And only if I change the TF to "replacement" mission, then it will refill other squadrons. Or in other words that I would have the final decision once the need for replacements arise.

I hope someone can confirm
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20555
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Nov 29th: 1st LST arrived

Post by BBfanboy »

You can use replacement squadrons as if they were regular squadrons. They will need review for training levels and leadership before you do so.
However, if you get within a certain range (max transfer range??) of a CV needing that type of aircraft, some will transfer without any intervention by you.

It does not matter what kind of TF the CVE is in. Even if the replacement squadron is landed at a base it will still try to preform its mission to replenish depleted CV squadrons. The CVE can take replacements at a port when it returns there.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Nov 29th: 1st LST arrived

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Are you sure it is any TF? I had read somewhere it needs to be in replenishment TF if embarked. No restriction if based on land.

But in any case I have all fighter squadrons at max capacity and max reserves. I plan to use the CVEs close to the fleet carrier as additional CAP / LRCAP. If battle losses are recovered from the replenishment squadrons then it is also good. I have one replenishment squadron flying Wilcats F3 while all fleet carriers and most other squadrons flying F4. This way I can guarantee always some CAP cover above the CVES

But a good point I failed to check: pilot quality and leadership might be lacking. I will check and replace if needed as soon as they reach port


User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20555
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Nov 29th: 1st LST arrived

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Are you sure it is any TF? I had read somewhere it needs to be in replenishment TF if embarked. No restriction if based on land.

But in any case I have all fighter squadrons at max capacity and max reserves. I plan to use the CVEs close to the fleet carrier as additional CAP / LRCAP. If battle losses are recovered from the replenishment squadrons then it is also good. I have one replenishment squadron flying Wilcats F3 while all fleet carriers and most other squadrons flying F4. This way I can guarantee always some CAP cover above the CVES

But a good point I failed to check: pilot quality and leadership might be lacking. I will check and replace if needed as soon as they reach port
Pretty sure when I was operating my CVEs with VR squadrons embarked as a CVE TF (operating against land targets) that when I got too close to my CVs some of the planes transferred automatically. I will have to set up another close encounter to confirm.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

Dec 2nd: back!

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Prester John had issues with his computer, thus it took us a week to get back into the turn

really not a lot new, I have one last convoy unloading at Vanikoro, this has the 12 MAG embarked.

Still a few weeks before the action starts

Image
Attachments
screenshot..16_01_30.jpg
screenshot..16_01_30.jpg (331.98 KiB) Viewed 222 times
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

Dec 4th: Naval battle of Broome

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

A few turns ago, I had the Dutch TF (Java, DeRuyter, Dutch DDs + "adopted" Marblehead), in Northern Australia, the original idea was to use it as naval bombardment during Broome/ Derby land invasion

But he abandon Northern Australia, thus I decided to keep them on station at Broome, then last turn a small xAKL TF was spotted by the Japan.
Notice the Dutch SCTF was never spotted, so I hoped for some small destroyer TF to arrive and be surprised by my Dutch fleet.

So long story short, it happen!! however results were not as good as I hoped... basically a small and ancient TF (1 CL, 3 DDs: 1920s Abukuma, one each Fubuki, Wakatake, Momo WTF!!) mopped the floor against 3 CLs and 4 DDs
[:@][:@]useless Dutch!!! [:@][:@]

Another night time slaughter: CL Marblehead sunk... more to follow...

Image[:@]

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Dec 04, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Broome at 62,127, Range 7,000 Yards

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
SOC-1 Seagull: 2 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CL Abukuma, Shell hits 2
DD Amagiri
DD Yugao
DD Yanagi, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
CL Sumatra
CL De Ruyter, Shell hits 3
CL Marblehead, Shell hits 16, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
DD Piet Hein
DD Kortenaer
DD Van Nes
DD Van Ghent

Reduced sighting due to 14% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions and 14% moonlight: 7,000 yards
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 7,000 yards
Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 7,000 yards
CL Abukuma launches Long Lance Torpedoes at CL Marblehead at 7,000 yards
DD Yanagi launches Torpedoes at CL Marblehead at 7,000 yards
DD Yugao launches Torpedoes at CL Sumatra at 7,000 yards
DD Amagiri launches Long Lance Torpedoes at CL Marblehead at 7,000 yards
DD Yanagi fires at DD Kortenaer at 7,000 yards
Range closes to 4,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL Marblehead at 4,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages DD Yanagi at 4,000 yards
CL Sumatra engages CL Abukuma at 4,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Kortenaer at 4,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Kortenaer at 4,000 yards
Range closes to 2,000 yards
CL Marblehead engages CL Abukuma at 2,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages CL Abukuma at 2,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Yugao at 2,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Kortenaer at 2,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Kortenaer at 2,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Piet Hein at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 4,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL Marblehead at 4,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL De Ruyter at 4,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL Sumatra at 4,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Van Ghent at 4,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Van Nes at 4,000 yards
Range increases to 6,000 yards
CL Marblehead sunk by CL Abukuma at 6,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Piet Hein at 6,000 yards
CL Sumatra engages CL Abukuma at 6,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Van Ghent at 6,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Yugao at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages CL Abukuma at 7,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Kortenaer at 7,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Yugao at 7,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Yugao at 7,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Piet Hein at 7,000 yards
Range increases to 11,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages CL Abukuma at 11,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Van Nes at 11,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Van Ghent at 11,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Yugao at 11,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Piet Hein at 11,000 yards
Task forces break off...
Attachments
screenshot..16_02_01.jpg
screenshot..16_02_01.jpg (618.01 KiB) Viewed 222 times
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Dec 4th: Naval battle of Broome

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Then daytime brought another battle:

This time, DD Yanagi, the oldest and most useless destroyer in Japan's inventory got traded for DD Van Nes
DD Piet Hein might also sink.. we will see

Only good news of the turn: because of battle damage, the Japanese decided not to strike the small cargo convoy

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Broome at 62,126, Range 15,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Abukuma, Shell hits 1
DD Amagiri, Shell hits 4, on fire
DD Yugao, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Yanagi, Shell hits 13, and is sunk

Allied Ships
CL Sumatra
CL De Ruyter, Shell hits 2
DD Piet Hein, Shell hits 3, heavy fires
DD Kortenaer, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Van Nes, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Van Ghent

Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions: 28,000 yards
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 21,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 21,000 yards
Range closes to 15,000 yards...
Willinge, J.J.L. crosses the 'T'
Massive explosion on DD Yanagi
CL Sumatra engages DD Yanagi at 15,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Piet Hein at 15,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL De Ruyter at 10,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Yanagi at 10,000 yards
DD Van Ghent engages DD Yanagi at 10,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Yanagi at 10,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Yanagi at 10,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Yanagi at 10,000 yards
Range closes to 9,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages CL Abukuma at 9,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Van Ghent at 9,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Piet Hein at 9,000 yards
Range closes to 6,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL De Ruyter at 6,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Van Ghent at 6,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Van Ghent at 6,000 yards
DD Van Nes sunk by DD Amagiri at 6,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Amagiri at 6,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Amagiri at 6,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages DD Amagiri at 6,000 yards
DD Yanagi engages DD Kortenaer at 6,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Van Ghent at 6,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Van Ghent at 6,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Piet Hein at 6,000 yards
Magazine explodes on DD Yanagi
DD Yanagi sunk by CL Sumatra at 6,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Van Ghent at 6,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Piet Hein at 6,000 yards
Range closes to 4,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL Sumatra at 4,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Yugao at 4,000 yards
DD Van Ghent engages DD Yugao at 4,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Amagiri at 4,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Amagiri at 4,000 yards
Range increases to 6,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL De Ruyter at 6,000 yards
CL Sumatra engages CL Abukuma at 6,000 yards
DD Van Ghent engages DD Amagiri at 6,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Kortenaer at 6,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Amagiri at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 8,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL Sumatra at 8,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL Sumatra at 8,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Van Ghent at 8,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Yugao at 8,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Piet Hein at 8,000 yards
Range increases to 10,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages CL Abukuma at 10,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Kortenaer at 10,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Kortenaer at 10,000 yards
DD Yugao engages DD Kortenaer at 10,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Amagiri at 10,000 yards
Willinge, J.J.L. orders Allied TF to disengage
Murayama, Seiroku orders Japanese TF to disengage
Range increases to 14,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL Sumatra at 14,000 yards
CL Sumatra engages DD Yugao at 14,000 yards
DD Amagiri engages DD Van Ghent at 14,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Yugao at 14,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Yugao at 14,000 yards
Range increases to 20,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages CL Abukuma at 20,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages CL Sumatra at 20,000 yards
DD Van Ghent engages DD Yugao at 20,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Amagiri at 20,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Amagiri at 20,000 yards
Task forces break off...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Broome at 62,127, Range 20,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Abukuma
DD Amagiri, on fire
DD Yugao, on fire

Allied Ships
xAKL Kindur
xAKL Mortlake Bank
xAKL Mulubinda
xAKL Pelton Bank
xAKL Wollongbar

Japanese Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Allied TF begins to get underway
Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions: 28,000 yards
Range increases to 21,000 yards...
Both Task Forces evade combat

User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Dec 4th: Naval battle of Broome

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

I think the key factor of this underwhelming performance was the fact that CL Marblehead was hit on the first torpedo barrage. Soon after it sank

This was Doorman's flagship... and he went down with the ship. Afterward some useless loser took command

A lesson learnt: Check that all captains of a combat TF are at least decent enough to lead it. Check that all cruiser and above captains are good as they will be likely candidates if the flagship goes down
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Dec 4th: Naval battle of Broome

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

For tomorrow:

- Undamaged CL Sumatra and DD Van Guent will patrol Broome. All other ships will run away, at full speed, to the south. I am very disappointed on their performance, so I really don't care how many come back; in any case they will remain at Perth until war end's
- Small xAKL TF will continue unloading supply (1,835 left)
- US Army Banshees and Australian Kittyhawks will provide air support; Banshees are at naval strike with 20% search, Kittyhawks are at 100% CAP 0 range. Hopefully they will meet unescorted Netties
I chose Kittyhawks and Banshees because stocks in these 2 models are abundant and I have no air support at Broome. It will take me a while to move air support there, so most likely any damaged planes will be abandoned once this operation ends.

Image
Attachments
screenshot..16_02_02.jpg
screenshot..16_02_02.jpg (191.61 KiB) Viewed 222 times
User avatar
Mike McCreery
Posts: 4361
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

RE: Dec 4th: Naval battle of Broome

Post by Mike McCreery »

If it is still late 1942 the allies had some pretty poor crew ratings, especially for night actions.

In my game, rather than letting ships sit in harbor I put them in TF's and set them to patrol. This helped get my ratings up especially in the daytime but night time helped as well. There is a limit to how much this helps but it will get them from terrible to fair.
Image
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Dec 4th: Naval battle of Broome

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

I had the Dutch on a TF for a long time... that said I had them on "remain station" not "patrol"

What would be the minimal experience you suggest before I seek naval engagements?

By the way Dutch TF crew experience before the battle:
Day/ Night
Marblehead 71/ 59
DeRuyter 68/ 59
Sumatra 58/ 55
Piet Hein 64/ 61
Kortenaear 69/ 55
Van Nes 70/ 58
Van Ghent 64/ 55

What worries me is that these numbers are above my fleet's average... at around 50 for night fighting (anywher from low 40s to mid 50s)



User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

Dec 5th: CAP trap on Broome

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Not a lot of news:

- Dutch cripples run away, there were 2 unsuccessful submarines attacks, so he knows their whereabouts

- Small xAKL fleet unloading on Broome attracted escorted Netties; I lost one xAKL for around eight Netties and one Oscar shot down

- Vaikoro fleet (2 AKs, 4 DMs) spotted by naval search, DL=2, they will run away, but the entire operation might be compromised now. We will see if he sends recon tomorrow


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Exmouth at 50,128

Japanese Ships
SS I-159

Allied Ships
DD Piet Hein

SS I-159 launches 2 torpedoes at DD Piet Hein
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Broome at 62,127

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G3M3 Nell x 13
G4M1 Betty x 9
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 12

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 16

Japanese aircraft losses
G3M3 Nell: 3 destroyed
G4M1 Betty: 3 destroyed
Ki-43-IIb Oscar: 1 destroyed

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
xAKL Kindur
xAKL Wollongbar
xAKL Mortlake Bank
xAKL Mulubinda, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk

Aircraft Attacking:
10 x G3M3 Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
5 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp

CAP engaged:
No.77 Sqn RAAF with Kittyhawk IA (5 airborne, 11 on standby, 0 scrambling)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Exmouth at 50,128

Japanese Ships
SS I-159

Allied Ships
DD Piet Hein

SS I-159 launches 2 torpedoes at DD Piet Hein
I-159 diving deep ....
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Piet Hein fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

Dec 7th: Festung Chungking

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Chugnking was attacked this turn, and results were surprisingly good.
As my opponent so elocuently wrote: tm.asp?m=4020601
forts remained at level 6 [:)]

These are the LCUs after the assault
Image

And important to mention that several LCUs "respawned" between this and the previous assault.

These fresh troops were key to success:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Chungking (76,45)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 189107 troops, 1930 guns, 582 vehicles, Assault Value = 4755

Defending force 197445 troops, 422 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3116

Japanese adjusted assault: 1107

Allied adjusted defense: 2299

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 6)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
21537 casualties reported
Squads: 315 destroyed, 1948 disabled
Non Combat: 19 destroyed, 178 disabled
Engineers: 26 destroyed, 166 disabled
Guns lost 238 (29 destroyed, 209 disabled)
Vehicles lost 28 (2 destroyed, 26 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
13489 casualties reported
Squads: 184 destroyed, 321 disabled
Non Combat: 524 destroyed, 562 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 71 (31 destroyed, 40 disabled)
Units destroyed 7

Assaulting units:
40th Division
70th Division
17th Division
36th Division
32nd Division
63rd Division
110th Division
34th Division
37th Division
6th Division
69th Division
26th Division
104th Division
3rd Division
41st Division
59th Division
138th Infantry Regiment
1st Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
1st Hvy.Artillery Regiment
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
China Expeditionary Army
12th Army
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
Botanko Hvy Gun Regiment
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
2nd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
21st AA Regiment
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
6th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
10th Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
11th Army
3rd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
4th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
1st Mortar Battalion
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
23rd Army
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
21st Mortar Battalion
1st Army
20th Ind. Mtn Gun Battalion

Defending units:
34th Chinese Corps
30th Chinese Corps
55th Chinese Corps
31st Chinese Corps
43rd Chinese Corps
33rd Chinese Corps
2nd Prov Chinese Corps
56th Chinese Corps
21st Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Corps
45th Chinese Corps
17th Chinese Corps
3rd Prov Chinese Corps
92nd Chinese Corps
77th Chinese Corps
2nd Chinese Corps
41st Chinese Corps
86th Chinese Corps
88th Chinese Corps
95th Chinese Corps
68th Chinese Corps
71st Chinese Corps
85th Chinese Corps
8th New Chinese Corps
69th Chinese Corps
24th Chinese Corps
75th Chinese Corps
91st Chinese Corps
1st Chinese Cavalry Corps
63rd Chinese Corps
32nd Chinese Corps
14th Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Cavalry Corps
48th Chinese Corps
62nd Chinese Corps
61st Chinese Corps
21st Group Army
3rd Chinese Base Force
47th Chinese Corps
12th Group Army
49th AA Regiment
13th Group Army
4th Heavy Mortar Regiment
3rd Group Army
1st Artillery Regiment
1st Chinese Base Force
10th Group Army
12th Construction Regiment
15th Chinese Corps
7th Artillery Regiment
83rd Chinese Corps
90th Chinese Corps
14th Group Army
10th Construction Regiment
China Command
1st War Area
35th Chinese Corps
12th Chinese Corps
Red Chinese Army
26th Group Army
36th Group Army
67th Chinese Corps
15th Group Army
8th Group Army
6th Chinese Base Force
23rd Group Army
18th Artillery Regiment
Jingcha War Area
24th Group Army
16th Construction Regiment
16th Group Army
CAF HQ
4th War Area
3rd Heavy Mortar Regiment
32nd Group Army
4th Chinese Base Force
10th Chinese Base Force
Central Reserve
3rd Construction Regiment
39th Group Army
5th War Area
17th Group Army
37th Group Army
39th Chinese Corps
13th Construction Regiment
4th Group Army
89th Chinese Corps
7th Group Army
31st Group Army
8th Construction Regiment
57th AT Gun Regiment
41st AA Regiment
7th Construction Regiment
34th Group Army
11th Construction Regiment
56th AT Gun Regiment
Lusu War Area
33rd Group Army
3rd War Area
2nd Group Army
7th War Area
38th Group Army
22nd Group Army
7th New Chinese Corps
15th Chinese Base Force
Attachments
screenshot..16_02_07.jpg
screenshot..16_02_07.jpg (278.04 KiB) Viewed 215 times
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

Dec 9th: The costly supply of North Oz

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Today Japan had a field day sinking xAKLs on the northern Oz route.
3 xAKLs sunk (2 carrying supply for Darwin, another one empty, leaving Broome). This is a costly sacrifice, as I need the supply to keep flowing to Northern Australia bases, and I simply cannot afford to engage the IJN with anything other than third rate leftovers (like the recently defeated Dutch).

Overall I was lucky because he also sent a powerful SCTF that failed to find anything other than some army planes on naval strike.

Bombing was inefective, but at least, he now knows that there will be dive bombers waiting everytime he wants to get too close
Supply on Darwin is at 7,712 + another 3,700 to be unloaded when the enemy withdraws
Broome is at 3,493
Image

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Dec 09, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine attack near Bathurst Island at 77,123

Japanese Ships
SS I-17

Allied Ships
xAKL Atlantic, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage

xAKL Atlantic is sighted by SS I-17
SS I-17 launches 2 torpedoes at xAKL Atlantic

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine attack near Bathurst Island at 77,123

Japanese Ships
SS I-17

Allied Ships
xAKL Kailua, Shell hits 7, heavy fires, heavy damage

xAKL Kailua is sighted by SS I-17
SS I-17 attacking xAKL Kailua on the surface
SS I-17 low on gun ammo, Matsuba O. breaks off surface engagement and submerges


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Exmouth at 50,128

Japanese Ships
SS I-159

Allied Ships
xAKL Nevadan, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

xAKL Nevadan is sighted by SS I-159
SS I-159 launches 2 torpedoes


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Bathurst Island at 77,123

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes

Allied aircraft
Wirraway x 4

Allied aircraft losses
Wirraway: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
DD Hokaze

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Wirraway bombing from 100 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 100 lb GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Bathurst Island at 77,123

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 12 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Allied aircraft
A-24 Banshee x 11

Allied aircraft losses
A-24 Banshee: 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
CA Atago

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x A-24 Banshee releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x A-24 Banshee releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
Attachments
screenshot..16_02_08.jpg
screenshot..16_02_08.jpg (309.47 KiB) Viewed 215 times
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Dec 9th: The costly supply of North Oz

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

In other news, he caught me pants down on Ledo [:-]
I will rebase some fighter ASAP

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Ledo , at 65,38

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 31 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 20
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 7

Allied aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 9 damaged
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
C-47 Skytrain: 24 damaged
C-47 Skytrain: 3 destroyed on ground

Airbase hits 2
Runway hits 5

Aircraft Attacking:
19 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 6000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

Dec 14th: missed opportunity

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

2 CVEs came within range of my Darwin Banshees
Somehow there was no CAP... maybe he left them on training?
My pilots managed to screw it up.. [:@]it is not that CVEs are agile

would this be just bad luck? I can't see anything wrong with their skill level.
Commander is at leadership 62, inspiration 66, air 64, admin 47, aggression 62

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Saumlaki at 78,117

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 31 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Allied aircraft
A-24 Banshee x 12
P-40K Warhawk x 13

Allied aircraft losses
A-24 Banshee: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
CVE Hosho
CVE Chuyo

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x A-24 Banshee releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x A-24 Banshee releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

Carrier support unable to supply air cover..
Image
Attachments
screenshot..16_02_14.jpg
screenshot..16_02_14.jpg (256.87 KiB) Viewed 215 times
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 4970
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Dec 14th: missed opportunity

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

Heavy rain, only 12 planes - and pilot skill? Maybe the guys with 30 and 60+ NavB were sent out in that lousy weather?
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Dec 14th: missed opportunity

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Yes, heavy rain... and I noticed that 30s guy...he will go back to the stormtrooper marksmanship academy

You can assess the quality of dive bombing pilots by checking the release altitude; those that release high are not great.. so my guess is that only 4 were good:
Aircraft Attacking:
4 x A-24 Banshee releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x A-24 Banshee releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

And it is Darwin... just barely above starvation.. so I can't really re-base too many planes there
User avatar
IdahoNYer
Posts: 2744
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 2:07 am
Location: NYer living in Boise, ID

RE: Dec 14th: missed opportunity

Post by IdahoNYer »

I'd actually kill for those pilot stats! With the exception of the guy who just can't bomb!

Looks like you have a pretty good pilot training program!! I'm lucky to have one good skill set in Army pilots, let alone two. But why waste good low nav skill pilots in divebombers? Like I said, you must have one heck of a robust pilot training to do that!

Kudos[&o]
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20555
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Dec 14th: missed opportunity

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

I'd actually kill for those pilot stats! With the exception of the guy who just can't bomb!

Looks like you have a pretty good pilot training program!! I'm lucky to have one good skill set in Army pilots, let alone two. But why waste good low nav skill pilots in divebombers? Like I said, you must have one heck of a robust pilot training to do that!

Kudos[&o]
Don't write the guy off so quick! He appears to be a new transfer in from the pool and has a 70 in Low Nav. He just hasn't been in a squadron doing NavB long enough to get the stats.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”