The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

[Canoerebel]

To follow up on crsutton's point, I do have to guard against inefficient losses of western ground troops. That was one of the big concerns about invading Hokkaido.

John's going to have a hard time getting at any major American units in the foreseeable future. Those that are at or close to the front are garrisoning strongly held islands (like Adak and Umnak). The three big Aussie divisions of 1st Corps are likewise well entrenched.

He can and probably will go after Indian and British units in Assam. That's my best guess. Alllied air power and the defensive positions are such that (I think) I'd welcome a chance to fight John there in a defensive campaign.

John's going to create a major bulge in my lines somewhere (Oz, India or China), but I think I'm ready to fight a productive defensive war in those place while on the offensive in the Pacific.

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

If he didn't see which way your carriers went when they retired, he might think he needs KB to cover any IO operation - but if he got a DL from naval search or a sub that your carriers were going back to PH he will keep KB together in CentPac.

John saw which way they were going. Even if he hadn't, he'd not have much doubt.

[Canoerebel]

In three weeks, I think Death Star transitions from avoiding KB to seeking a decisive battle. With that in mind, I'm planning carrier TF configurations something like this:

1. Enterprise, Yorktown, CVL Brandywine
2. Saratoga, Lexington, CVL Independence
3. Hornet, Essex, Wasp
4. Kettle Creek (Essex Class), Olustee (Essex Class), CVL Princeton

I also have CV Victorious (55 aircraft capacity). Can she join any of those four TFs without invoking coordination penalties due to too much air?

For that matter, does anybody see any problems with TF arrangements like this? I could spread them out a bit more, but escorts then become problematic, as I have to devote so many to carrier TFs that I'd be short on combat TFs.

[Canoerebel]

In three weeks, Death Star will be ready to set sail from Pearl Harbor with more than 1,100 aircraft (including CVE compliments). I think that's sufficient to take on Steroid KB on neutral ground or ground that favors the Allies. I think there is such ground available given John's preference to react aggressively and defend forward.

Until now, Death Star was at a disadvantage. I was willing to move only if I achieved surprise and local carrier superiority. For a variety of reasons, the Allies achieved those conditions in the Aleutians and CenPac.

Death Star is no longer at a disadvantage. That doesn't mean that it's impervious, can't lose in battle, or won't blunder into a tough wolf pack. What id does mean is that I don't have to wait to achieve surprise or until I think a Half KB is upgrading. Death Star will be ready to move forward and seek battle. It will allow the Allies to move in the near term or Roi-Namur/Kwajalein and/or Amchitka.

That's why Circus and Roller Coaster were so important. Instead of having to steam into enemy controlled waters to take on a strong set of interlocking airfields guarding bases that John has had more than a year to fortify, the Allies have already done those things successfully. Now the Allies have a strong set of interlocking arifields guarding bases adjacent to John's bases. I might not win the pending battles, but the chances are much better than before. And friendly waters with good bases and CAP are right there if needed.

The question is how does John perceive this? We know he's always aggressive. We've all seen him react strongly to both Allied operations in the Pacific. Does he feel that time is against Steroid KB, so that he'd rather seek Decisive Battle now, before the Allies grow even stronger? Or does he instead conserve KB, loitering on the periphery and seeking a chance to strike?

I think he'll choose the latter course of action.

But the time in which the Allies would also loiter, so that both sides would dance about afraid to commit, has ended. Now it's a matter of preparation, massing force, and moving forward.

[BillBrown]

Keep in mind that there is no actual coordination penalty, but if a TF fails the check the chance of uncoordination is doubled.
In other words, failing the check does not mean you will have uncoordinated strikes, but the possibility is doubled. I have found that
having a TF leader with high air rating, and very good air unit commanders mitigates the possibility quite well.
I tend to use larger TFs than you are showing, 4 x CVs and 1 or 2 CVLs in each when I have them.

[Canoerebel]

Thanks, Bill. Those are good thoughts on the subject.

[Lecivius]

I personally use 3 CV's and 1 CVL per group. I may just be lucky, but '43 forward I have never had much of an issue. Just my .02 [;)]

[Canoerebel]

Thanks. That would free up some escorts.

[Canoerebel]

What do I think John should do now? Another way of putting this is: What tactics would worry me the most?

I believe John will use his "Sumatra Recovered" dividend to pour troops into Burma and southern China. He'll move overland into Assam in an effort to sever the Allied troops at and near Akyab, Sabang and Ramree Island from India proper. He'll also move into China from Burma. At the same time, he'll resume offensive operations in main China - here I'm thyinking he'll take hard looks at two vectors: Toyun and Sian.

In the Pacific, he'll work to garrison and defend islands while looking for opportunities to strike advantageously with his carriers and combat ships. I don't think he should push his reinforcements right to the Allied doorstep to contest those places, but I think he will because of his competitive nature. He's not desperate enough to risk KB against uncertain or bad odds, so I think he'll loiter and probe and await opportunities.

Since India, Assam and China have been quiet sectors for more than a year, Allied troops are dug in (though I've found that some shifting around is necessary). In India and Assam, I'm moving a few units to strengthen the garrisons at Cox's Bazaar and Chittagong against any amphibious op designed to really isolate Assam. I don't think such a move is likely, but it's possible. Here the Allied airforce is pretty strong now. What I want to do (here and in China) is to allow John to move on entrenched troops, which should be somewhat costly for him. Then, whenever and wherever his stacks enter Allied bases, Allied 4EB (protected by fighters) will strike.

In the Pacific, the plan is to try to use blunt force to strike hard at enemy held bases close to Allied bases. This means Roi-Namur, Kwajalein, and Amchitka are on the short list. Once those fall, Eniwetok, Kusaie, and the western Aleutians are viable. And there are neuatral waters (unprotected by intelocking airfields) that I'm willining to hit: Wake in particular, but eventually Marcus. Tabituea is a possibility, but at this moment I prefer to let John worry about bases like Taby and Lunga and Noumea, expending energy to either reinforce them or withdraw their garrisons.

That's alot of things on agenda, which is why I say the Allies have sufficient ground troops to handle things for the balance of the year.

[jwolf]

I suppose it's possible the Japanese could make some progress in a major ground campaign in India or China -- but it would take a very long time to do so, committing a large number of ground and air forces to make it work. Meanwhile, those forces would not be available in the Pacific, and that IMHO is where the war will be decided.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Keep in mind that there is no actual coordination penalty, but if a TF fails the check the chance of uncoordination is doubled.
In other words, failing the check does not mean you will have uncoordinated strikes, but the possibility is doubled. I have found that
having a TF leader with high air rating, and very good air unit commanders mitigates the possibility quite well.
I tend to use larger TFs than you are showing, 4 x CVs and 1 or 2 CVLs in each when I have them.

Agree with Bill, I never split my six original carriers but keep them together. The reason is that I think the risk of lack of coordination is small. I much more fear one TF reacting towards the enemy and getting crushed. When I have more carriers I go for three to four big and two small in each TF-depending on the number of fast BBs I have as I like to have at least one in each TF.

[Canoerebel]

That's interesting. I've kept my carriers in two-CV TFs throughout the war. We haven't had any carrier battles, though we came close a couple of times.

[Mike McCreery]

What they said. I like to go with 3-4 fleet CV's in a group.

If the chance of disruption is 5% and it doubles to 10% it really is not that big a factor. Unfortunately, notbody including the Dev's is going to disclose the exact chance of disruption.

[JeffroK]

In 1943, 3 CV * 1 CVL.

Have your new bases got mines, ACM & CD guns, any other lessons from Sabang to avoid the "Isolate & cut out" approach?

[poodlebrain]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

In 1943, 3 CV * 1 CVL.

Have your new bases got mines, ACM & CD guns, any other lessons from Sabang to avoid the "Isolate & cut out" approach?

Don't forget the PT Boats. They are useful even if they do nothing more than cause the Japanese to use some OPs when trying to conduct bombardment missions.

[Canoerebel]

Tarawa, Jaluit and Dutch Harbor have CD guns. None of the bases have mines yet, though minelayers are lurking.

But the fate of Sabang had nothing to do with mines, ACM and CD guns. It had 900+ mines and three ACM. Those didn't stop bombardments, which were the undoing of Sabang. CD guns wouldn't aided there, either. Nor would they have helped stop an invasion of Sabang or Langsa, because John didn't invade. He had ports of his own and marched overland.

CD guns and mines wouldn't play a big role in the coming campaigns either. I'm not overly impressed with the effect of guns against BBs, and John knows how to use BBs. What's going to stop John here is that these are islands, he doesn't have the option of landing at another base and marching overland, and the Allied have stout infantry garrisons and plenty of supply at these bases. I don't see John trying, but if he did, the Allies can respond in strength (both in air and sea, unlike the Sumatran campaign, which was early). Also, the Allies have interlocking airfields.

No, this is not a later version of Sumatra.

[BillBrown]

The one thing that CD units at Sabang would have done is to fire on the minesweepers John sent in. It would have made it slower and costlier.

[Canoerebel]

Roller Coaster conquests, with TFs returning to Pearl.

[crsutton]

You have enough bases that you will hold air superiority once the fields are built up. Maleolap and the rest of the bases are doomed or will be neutralized. Islands are the toughest for the Japanese to defend because their first line fighters are not suited to the fields. Level 3 service makes them too vulnerable.

[Canoerebel]

7/16/43

Roller Coaster: Maloelap fell today on a 2:1 shock attack (the defenders there had some kind of mojo or moxie or something). The operation is winding down now - all eight primary targets have been secured, the Allied position is strong, and all ships have broken contact and are well en route to Pearl Harbor or already there.

Enemy subs are still lurking, and plenty of Allied ships are still at sea, so there may be additional losses. In particular, I have my eye on two damaged APA (one heavily, one moderately), hoping that they can limp home safely. Four Allied capital ships were damaged by single torp hits: CA Indianapolis is in the yards at Pearl and needs about 27 days to repair; BB South Dakota is too, and needs 90+ days. Washington will arrive in a few days and shouldn't need a great deal of time; BB Resolution suffered moderate damage and will probably require something on the order of SD's work.

This op was not without cost: I lost CA Portland, an APA, two AO, and two DE. Those were the most costly losses and will be missed the most. There were also a modest number of xAP, xAK, and other small craft. I did not lose any men or aircraft to speak of.

In return, the Allies took eight enemy bases, including three or four with shore guns (Jaluit, Wotje, Mili, and I think Ailinglaplap or Maloelap had them). The garrisons were not particularly strong - Tarawa with two naval guard units was the stiffest. Altogether, John might have lost 20k men. He only lost a couple of small craft and I think five or six subs suffered heavy damage.

John's greatest cost was in aircraft - he lost 500+, mainly Zeroes, Judys, Jills, Kates and Netties. The Allies lost less than 50 - maybe considerably less (and most of those to ops).

To my way of thinking, the Allies successfully and at an most acceptable investment made the important opening leap across open water to encroach upon John's defensive perimeter. I now have a strongly held position close to additional important enemy bases. This opens up good possibilities for future attacks that don't require moving deep into enemy territory. The Allies also have multiple vectors of attack avaialbe - south towards the Solomons and adjacent territory, west towards Ponape and Truk, or northwest to Wake and Marcus. The closer targets - Kawj, Roi, Eniwetok and Kusaie - will be hit, probably relatively soon.

Ross made the point that the Marshalls and Gilberts are not intrinisically vital ground. But they can be. First, any terrrain anywhere can become critical if one or both sides deem it so. In this case, if John is willing to fight hard over his remaining Marshalls holdings, the terrain is de facto critical. I think he will, but he may also pull back, in which case the Allies move forward in small steps until eventually John does fight. That's a viable path to victory, I think.

Importantly, Roller Coaster served me well because it worked so well in tandem with Circus. I was able to move rapidly from one theater to the next (Circus landings began in late May, Roller Coaster in late June) before John could bring his battewagons to bear (they were still committed in Sumatra). And I was fortunate that I knew the exact location of Half KB North throughout the campaign and had a strong (and I think accurate) idea that the other Half KB was in port upgrading. Roller Coaster would not have gone forward into the unknown. Instead, I would have waited another eight weeks, when Death Star would have been ready to take on the unknown.

Now, instead of leading a big amphibious op into a nest of enemy held islands, Death Star will lead a big amphibious op into a concentration of friendly islands to pick off vulnerable (though dangerous) enemy bases. The difference in risk level is enormous.

So, yes, Roller Coaster has been remarkably successful.

Circus: Unless John bombards Adak tonight, forts will go to level four. The Allies are about ready to insert the Fletcher TF there and then to re-load the airfield to resume working on Amchitka Island (whcih has been reinforced). At the moment, I'm leaning towards returning to the Marshalls prior to moving on Amchitka, but I'm not positive.

Dutch Harbor garrison down to 38k. I'm pulling out one USN base force and I'll pull out a few more AA units, and then Dutch can stand on its own without overstacking worries. The port is currently at 4.54. It will be built to six (with an AE and Naval Support, that should be sufficient for replenishing even BB main guns). Then I'll build the 0(0) airfield to level one.