Chitose, Chiyoda, Nisshin and Mizuho

[el cid again]

These four ships are remarkable in naval history, without foreign peers,
and not well understood or modeled in AE. They were built as seaplane
carriers in the mid to late 1930s, to provide aviation platforms which were
not aircraft carriers as defined by treaty law. They were designed to permit
rapid conversion to replenishment oilers or aircraft carriers. In addition,
they were in fact all designated for conversion to mid-ocean delivery vessels
for midget submarines. Three of them were converted to this configuration in
1941, and start the Pacific War that way. Not that you can tell by looking
at stock or mods of AE (or its ancestors).

Midget submarines were a super secret. They were not even called submarines,
but instead had various code names, including several kinds of "fittings" and
also "aircraft bombing targets." The concept was evolved and tested of attacking
the United States Fleet mid-ocean. Had all four carriers been converted, they
would have carried 48 midgets, each with two torpedoes, for a total of 96 torpedoes.
Although the concept was considered feasible and enough were built to justify three
of the four proposed conversions in 1941, in the end the decision was made to use
just five of these midget subs delivered by submarine carriers - 1 each. This and
similar attacks were the proper, offensive use of these vessels - the most sophisticated
midgets in the World War II era. Later defensive use was not what they were designed for,
and they were not effective. Long dismissed as technical failures, it turns out that
they actually did score a hit at Pearl Harbor - an act caught on film discovered many
decades after the attack. Any strictly historical scenario of AE should begin with
Chitose, Chiyoda and Mizuho as hybrid-seaplane and midget sub carriers - 12 seaplanes
and 12 midgets.

I misunderstood "rapid conversion" (this means rapid compared to building a new ship) and
only provided the hybrid versions as an alternate configuration of the classes. From now
on, all strictly historical RHS scenarios which start in December, 1941, will feature the
three ships in this form. The midgets are modeled as a peculiar statistical variation of
Type 87 18 inch torpedo. The torpedo has a range which models both its carrier and itself,
and the model includes a very small chance the second torpedo might be fired in some
circumstances. IF it hits, it is the same as a normal Type 87 torpedo would be. These
special "torpedo mounts" launch attacks from the stern, two at a time, with a total of
six shots.

A different dimension of these ships is that they can be converted to other ship types. The most
famous was conversion of the Chitose and Chiyoda to CVL form. There were plans to convert the other
two as well. The conversion of Chitose and Chiyoda exists in stock, implemented with special code
related to the slots involved. RHS has elected NOT to use this code or those slots, and instead
to treat conversions normally. Strictly historical scenarios 121-124 have them start in CVS form -
three of them hybrid midget carriers - with just one of two 12 plane squadrons of seaplanes.

Scenario 125 - which I designed - Japan only modifies things in the run-up to the war. These ships
start in carrier form on the original hulls. Most are CVL's - but Mizuho is rated as a CVE because
of its slower speed. The two squadrons of aircraft are presented in carrier aircraft form.

Scenario 129 - which Mifune designed and which was inspired by the AltWars site - Japan standardizes
ship engine production in 1931 - and begins standardized ship construction without regard for the treaties
from about 1935. All four ships are presented as Chitose class CVLs.

In common with almost all aircraft carriers on both sides, RHS also presents an AKV "configuration" of
these carriers. This is because aircraft carriers are superb transports for troops, cargo and non-carrier
aircraft. Code permits them to carry one squadron of any size, even of very large aircraft. They are
defined with significant troop and dry cargo capacity as well. There is a bit of conversion involved.
The aircrew are removed from the ship, and some of the hanger space is converted for messing and birthing
troops. The hanger and deck also can be used for cargo and/or aircraft (which cannot fly). AKV transported
air units land their aircraft READY FOR OPERAIIONS - not damaged as is normal for aircraft transported by
ship. The AKV "configuration" may also convert back to its parent carrier type. Significant numbers of USN
and RN CVEs enter RHS games in AKV form - because they had no air groups. Japanese seaplane tenders have AKV
configurations after they convert, or at game start in Scenarios 125 and 129.

A still different conversion is presented in strictly historical scenarios 121-124. This is an LSD configuration.
Similar to an AKV, it is a superb transport. Similar to a midget sub carrier, it also carries a few seaplanes.
But it has the bonus in an amphibious landing an LSD provides. This is because the rail system used for the midget
sub carrier configuration is IDENTICAL to those on Navy operated Army amphibious assault ships. If they were not
used in the amphib role, they could have been. These configurations are similar to AKVs in that they can be reversed,
and it only takes a matter of days to do that. Since none of these ships are present in seaplane carrier form
in Japan Enhanced (JES) Scenarios, neither Scenario 125 nor 129 have the LSD variation as an option.

A final conversion option exists (only) in strictly historical scenarios 121-125. This is for Nisshin. Because
she was fitted to lay mines rapidly and in numbers, a CM version is available. As with the LSD and AKV options,
they may cross convert rapidly back to their CVS form.

[Ian R]

ORIGINAL: el cid again


A still different conversion is presented in strictly historical scenarios 121-124.

This is an LSD configuration.

"Its a beautiful ship, Morarity!"

Jokes aside... If you are going to put a lot of torpedoes on them, you should probably class them as cruisers (at 10-11k tons, CAs) otherwise they will avoid surface engagements. Have you tested how much damage the exe will impose on a ship converting from a cruiser type to an LSD, or back again?

PS - Jane's names these ships as "Titose, Tiyoda, Miduho, and Nissin". There seems to have been a considerable historical difference of opinion as to how to render Japanese into Inglés. Mr McMurtrie says that the spellings he uses are the revised official spellings supplied to him by the Navy Department, Tokyo, in 1936. The spellings we are using are the pre-revision version. Have you got those? I really think they ought be used if historical accuracy is at a premium.

[el cid again]

I control the damage imposed by appropriate fields in the editor. Normally I do not have
any damage for a conversion. If damage appears in an RHS conversion, it likely was inherited
from stock. Otherwise the record was copied from a stock record and modified, and I failed to
zero out the damage field.

[el cid again]

There were several different transliteration systems. I think it is best to stick with
the standard one because it is more widely recognized by players. However, in cases
where there is a real disagreement among scholars, I go with the official version,
whatever that may be. Often times that is quite awkward for English readers.

Your point about using torpedoes as weapons is valid. The LSD version is NOT for launching
midgets, it is for launching troops via landing craft. I need to check what the version is
with the midgets? I think that is a CVS with half the number of planes. The idea was
tactically impractical - it may be best to leave them as CVS that just happen to be able to
fight if you get really close to them. But I didn't think it through. I need to do some
testing. I only armed them correctly. Thanks for the suggestion.

ORIGINAL: Ian R

ORIGINAL: el cid again


A still different conversion is presented in strictly historical scenarios 121-124.

This is an LSD configuration.

"Its a beautiful ship, Morarity!"

Jokes aside... If you are going to put a lot of torpedoes on them, you should probably class them as cruisers (at 10-11k tons, CAs) otherwise they will avoid surface engagements. Have you tested how much damage the exe will impose on a ship converting from a cruiser type to an LSD, or back again?

PS - Jane's names these ships as "Titose, Tiyoda, Miduho, and Nissin". There seems to have been a considerable historical difference of opinion as to how to render Japanese into Inglés. Mr McMurtrie says that the spellings he uses are the revised official spellings supplied to him by the Navy Department, Tokyo, in 1936. The spellings we are using are the pre-revision version. Have you got those? I really think they ought be used if historical accuracy is at a premium.

[Ian R]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I control the damage imposed by appropriate fields in the editor. Normally I do not have
any damage for a conversion. If damage appears in an RHS conversion, it likely was inherited
from stock. Otherwise the record was copied from a stock record and modified, and I failed to
zero out the damage field.

I understood from a very old post from Don Bowen that the exe will impose heavy damage for extreme conversions. A transport to a CA might be one, although maybe changing displacement plays a role.

[mind_messing]

Long dismissed as technical failures, it turns out that they actually did score a hit at Pearl Harbor - an act caught on film discovered many decades after the attack.

Citation, please?

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Long dismissed as technical failures, it turns out that they actually did score a hit at Pearl Harbor - an act caught on film discovered many decades after the attack.

Citation, please?

Yeah. One did fire a torp into a BB at Pearl. In all two, possibly three, midgets made into the harbor. The one that hit a BB. Another that fired, but hit a dock. That one was 'run' over by a DD that dropped DC on her. Due to the shallowness of Pearl the DD lost control when the DC detonated, and ran aground. A third midget may have penetrated, but that's speculation as one was never found.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Long dismissed as technical failures, it turns out that they actually did score a hit at Pearl Harbor - an act caught on film discovered many decades after the attack.

Citation, please?

Yeah. One did fire a torp into a BB at Pearl. In all two, possibly three, midgets made into the harbor. The one that hit a BB. Another that fired, but hit a dock. That one was 'run' over by a DD that dropped DC on her. Due to the shallowness of Pearl the DD lost control when the DC detonated, and ran aground. A third midget may have penetrated, but that's speculation as one was never found.

That's interesting. Again, has anyone a citation for that?

[Scott_USN]

It comes from Nova "This discovery is covered in the Nova episode Killer Subs in Pearl Harbor" it is still controversial as to if one did or did not fire on BB Row. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/killersubs/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_K% ... bor_attack

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

It comes from Nova "This discovery is covered in the Nova episode Killer Subs in Pearl Harbor" it is still controversial as to if one did or did not fire on BB Row. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/killersubs/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_K% ... bor_attack

Thanks, I suspected that it would be controversial given that I'd never heard claims of success of the midgets at Pearl.

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

It comes from Nova "This discovery is covered in the Nova episode Killer Subs in Pearl Harbor" it is still controversial as to if one did or did not fire on BB Row. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/killersubs/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_K% ... bor_attack

Its very convincing when the torp tracks and aircraft in the photo are examined. One extra torp track. Plus a 'rooster tail' that would be seen after a midget let loose one of those, proportionately speaking, large torps.

Let's face it, its not something the U.S. would rather admit. A midget did what?[X(]

Just sayin'.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

It comes from Nova "This discovery is covered in the Nova episode Killer Subs in Pearl Harbor" it is still controversial as to if one did or did not fire on BB Row. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/killersubs/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_K% ... bor_attack

Its very convincing when the torp tracks and aircraft in the photo are examined. One extra torp track. Plus a 'rooster tail' that would be seen after a midget let loose one of those, proportionately speaking, large torps.

Let's face it, its not something the U.S. would rather admit. A midget did what?[X(]

Just sayin'.

Even so, I'm not fully convinced - given that Pearl was a fairly well recorded attack, having a single unclear image isn't a massive degree of evidence.

I also don't buy into your suggestion of a cover-up, not after so long has passed.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

It comes from Nova "This discovery is covered in the Nova episode Killer Subs in Pearl Harbor" it is still controversial as to if one did or did not fire on BB Row. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/killersubs/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_K% ... bor_attack

Its very convincing when the torp tracks and aircraft in the photo are examined. One extra torp track. Plus a 'rooster tail' that would be seen after a midget let loose one of those, proportionately speaking, large torps.

Let's face it, its not something the U.S. would rather admit. A midget did what?[X(]

Just sayin'.

Even so, I'm not fully convinced - given that Pearl was a fairly well recorded attack, having a single unclear image isn't a massive degree of evidence.

I also don't buy into your suggestion of a cover-up, not after so long has passed.

+1

[Scott_USN]

You all jinxed me!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Dec 07, 41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Midget Sub attack inside harbor of Pearl Harbor!!!

Japanese Ships
SSX Ha-18

Allied Ships
BB Tennessee, Torpedo hits 1


Trying out the Reluctant Admiral.

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

You all jinxed me!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Dec 07, 41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Midget Sub attack inside harbor of Pearl Harbor!!!

Japanese Ships
SSX Ha-18

Allied Ships
BB Tennessee, Torpedo hits 1


Trying out the Reluctant Admiral.

Bingo.[:D]

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

It comes from Nova "This discovery is covered in the Nova episode Killer Subs in Pearl Harbor" it is still controversial as to if one did or did not fire on BB Row. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/killersubs/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_K% ... bor_attack

Its very convincing when the torp tracks and aircraft in the photo are examined. One extra torp track. Plus a 'rooster tail' that would be seen after a midget let loose one of those, proportionately speaking, large torps.

Let's face it, its not something the U.S. would rather admit. A midget did what?[X(]

Just sayin'.

Even so, I'm not fully convinced - given that Pearl was a fairly well recorded attack, having a single unclear image isn't a massive degree of evidence.

I also don't buy into your suggestion of a cover-up, not after so long has passed.

I don't know if you're viewing the same image(s) that I have seen, but its (they are) pretty clear. And I'm not suggesting any sort of a 'cover-up'. There are some who took the time recently to reexamine the evidence, and it shows a torp running that didn't come from a plane.

Believe it or not, its up to you.

P.S. And the Ward didn't sink one either.[:D]