Dutch AVP Arend: Scenario 1 Exploits

[WEXF]

I understand that the SAP and GP bombs performed differently. I am wondering why the planes carried one type on search missions and the other on attack missions? An interesting discussion but not the main purpose of this AAR.
WEXF

[GrosserKreuzer]

I noticed an interesting aspect of selection the missions GVT-17 were ordered to fly. If flying Naval Search they were armed with 250kg SAP Bombs. If flying Naval Attack they carried 205kg GP Bombs.

I would not think too much about them showing GP bombs for naval attack. Looking at the D3A1 Val, it also shows GP bombs for naval attack and SAP bombs for naval search, but I am certain that I mostly see them using SAP bombs, only on rare occasion I have seen them dropping GP bombs.

[WEXF]

As the war headed into the final week of December 1941, AVP Arend continued performing its assigned mission of providing seaplane support to the Ambon base and the PBYs flying from there. Things would change on 27Dec when a large Japanese air strike would hit the port facilities. 20 A6M2 Zeros and 41 D3A1 Vals arrived in the morning, clearly from a large carrier grouping. The Vals were in 6 groups and dropped their 250kg GP bombs from altitudes of between 1000 and 3000 feet. Arend was hit by a single bomb and was left on fire with heavy damage. xAP Zealandia was also caught in the attack following her movement from Darwin to Ambon in preparation for moving some of the troops from the base to Australia. After the attack the fire was extinguished but the resulting damage was quite heavy. System: 41, Flotation: 62 (51 major), Engine: 8. Her speed was shown as 4, with a cruise speed of 2(0) meaning she would likely be only able to move 1 or maybe 2 hexes per day. My reaction was that it was amazing that this 1020 ton ship was still afloat. My guess is that had she been at sea she would not have survived.

ArendAttackjpg.jpg (219.31 KiB) Viewed 2076 times

[WEXF]

The above attack changed the plan that had been made regarding the defense of Ambon at least in regard to what troops would remain to defend the base. xAK Zealander was now in no condition to evacuate any of the ground troops at the base. I don't recall the exact degree of damage she had but it was significant but not sufficient to expect that she would sink if an attempt to move her to safety was tried. Zealandia was an important ship. At 4980 tons she was small enough to dock at a level 1 port. She could carry 2100 Troop and 900 Cargo 157 hexes at a very decent speed. WITH A VP of 12, she was equal to two destroyers. On the downside she had almost no armament and her captain and crew were really not experienced. Captain Tomlin had very poor numbers and the crew was just as bad. This screen shows Zealandia anchored in Cape Town and the date is 19Apr42. She was successfully evacuated from Ambon with a little assistance from Arend. It was quickly clear that staying in Ambon was not going to be a good idea. The evacuation of the 2 ships sent Zealandia in the general direction of Soerabaja but with the hope that no additional damage would be sustained and that she could continue on to CT without having to use the SY in Soerabaja. The trip was long and slow but on 25Feb42 I received the message that Zealandia had completed repairs at Cape Town and was ready for service.

ZeaAp422.jpg (117.58 KiB) Viewed 2048 times

[WEXF]

So how did AVP Arend help in the saving of Zealandia? Considering the heavy damage to Arend, she was considered expendable. What was clear was that she was not going to remain in Ambon. She was ordered to head for Saumlaki, a tiny port with no naval support, about 320 miles south (8 hexes). It was hoped that she might provide a target for any Japanese planes in the area and divert them from attacking Zealandia. Would Arend make it to Saumlaki or would Allied command get those dreaded messages that say "temporary flotation devices failing". Remarkably, Arend made the trip to Saumlaki in less than a week and with no additional damage. She was still showing S47, F62(51), E8. She immediately stood down to try and make some minor repairs while plans for her future were thought through.
On 1Feb42, Arend had improved to S41, F60(51), E8. It had taken a month to repair 6 points of system damage and 2 points of non-major flotation damage. At that rate it would take almost a year to repair the rest of the system damage. The decision was made to try and get Arend safely to Darwin, where the larger port would speed repairs. There was no shipyard at Darwin but at least the system and non-major flotation damage could be dealt with.
Arend sailed for Darwin on 1Feb. On 2Feb, damage was 42, 59(51), 8. On 3Feb damage was 43, 61(51),8. On 5Feb, now only 2 hexes from Darwin, damage was 44, 61(51),8. On 6Feb, Arend safely reached Darwin and remarkably damage was shown as 45, (51), 8. All of the non-major flotation damage had been repaired while at sea during the final day!
Arend was immediately stood down pierside and showed in red 29 days of repair available. The red indicating that not all of the damage (major-flotation) could be repaired.

[BBfanboy]

More likely Arend was assisted by Darwin's repair points as soon as she arrived. A good pump will do that! If you can get systems damage below 20, she should be OK sailing to a safer port. Darwin is another one of those pocket traps that Japan will be hitting around late January, early February. Miss Betty has a long reach!

[WEXF]

More likely Arend was assisted by Darwin's repair points as soon as she arrived.

That is an interesting possibility. I was thinking it was based on the last sentence of the first paragraph of Section 6.5.1 of the Manual that reads:
6.5.1 OPERATIONAL DAMAGE AND REPAIRS AT SEA
Whenever a ship is at sea (not docked), it has a chance of suffering system damage due to
wear and tear on the ship. This damage can occur as the TF enters each new hex or remains
on patrol in a hex, and will immediately affect the TF’s speed for the rest of the turn. Ships
moving at maximum speed will suffer greater Operational Damage than ships moving at Cruise
Speed. In addition, ships always attempt to repair fire, flooding, and system damage, even
when at sea.
Considering that 10 points of non-major flotation damage was repaired in one day it seem like that made sense. My read of 6.5.1 is that there is no clear definition of how much of a repair can happen at sea. Under Section 14.2 there are clear equations for how repairs are made in ports.

[RangerJoe]

The temporary flooding is where there are no holes in the hull open to the sea. The hatches can be closed and the water pumped out. That can happen fairly fast and faster when there is help. If the ship disbanded into the port, that is probably what happened.

[WEXF]

The temporary flooding is where there are no holes in the hull open to the sea. The hatches can be closed and the water pumped out. That can happen fairly fast and faster when there is help. If the ship disbanded into the port, that is probably what happened.

I can understand and agree with what you are saying as to how the large amount of non-major flotation damage was repaired. I take it you are in agreement that it happened under game rule 6.5.1 and not by the ability of the Darwin port under 14.2?

[RangerJoe]

The temporary flooding is where there are no holes in the hull open to the sea. The hatches can be closed and the water pumped out. That can happen fairly fast and faster when there is help. If the ship disbanded into the port, that is probably what happened.

I can understand and agree with what you are saying as to how the large amount of non-major flotation damage was repaired. I take it you are in agreement that it happened under game rule 6.5.1 and not by the ability of the Darwin port under 14.2?

No, it was mostly because of Darwin. I mean, just how much of the temporary float damage was taken care of at sea and while moving? The crew is busy then but some can work on the damage control. While some can be done at sea, it was probably the port having one or more large portable pumps to use that would do most if not all of the dewatering.

[BBfanboy]

I based my reply on two things:
- I have never seen a small ship reduce flooding that much at sea
- when the ship was at Saumlaki - a level 1 port - it did not repair any flotation damage.

Ergo, the larger port was likely what made the difference. If the ship entered Darwin in the first Naval Movement phase, there would have been 1000 ops points in the second phase to hook up a decent pump or apply a patch to a small hole before pumping.

[WEXF]

Thanks for all the comments. I am looking to separate what can happen in real life from what the rules of our game do.
I have seen only two game rules that deal with repairs of the type I am discussing: 6.5.1 and 14.2. A port having the pumps you are talking about would be, IMO, part of the abstraction of the "Port Repair Assist" Section 14.2.3.4. The table on page 239 of the Manual has a level 3 port (like Darwin) generating 27 Repair Points. (Some threads in the forum suggest that there may be a few typos in the table but none of the comments indicate anything significantly relevant to this discussion.)

Repair Table2.jpg (172.25 KiB) Viewed 1909 times

It takes 100 Repair Points to repair 1 Damage Point.
Additional Repair Points can be generated by Repair Ships (there were no relevant RS in Darwin), Naval Support (some variation on the actual number of NS during the time in Darwin but it was never higher than 50) and the ship crew.
Naval Support Assist: 14.2.3.5: There is a formula that takes the NS/2 (if stood down) which would be 50/2=25. From that you have to subtract the damage/5, or in our case 10 (only the non-major damage)/5=2. therefore the NS assistance for Darwin is 25-2 or 23.
Adding the NS and Port Assist together we get 27+ 23= 50.
The crew Assist 14.2.3.6 has a formula of Crew Experience/8. The crew experience on Arend was less that 30 so about 3.7 Repair Points would come from the crew.
That makes the total: 27+ 23+3.7= 53.7.
Rounding the numbers suggests that at most the Port of Darwin would take around 2 days to repair one point of the 10 non-major flotation damage under Rule 14.2.
I can't see how the port could have repaired all 10 in a single day.
If there is another rule in the game please tell me the section of the manual it is in.

[WEXF]

The decision was made to have Arend remain in Darwin for as long as additional repairs could be made or until enemy activity made it too risky to stay.
Damage status over time was, set at high priority:
6Feb: Arrival in Darwin: 45-51-8
7Feb: 45-51-8
8Feb: 44-51-8
9Feb: 44-51-8
10Feb: 43-51-8
11Feb: 43-51-8
12Feb: 42-51-8
13Feb: 42-51-8
14Feb: 41-51-8
15Feb: 41-51-8
16Feb: 40-51-8
17Feb: 39-51-8
18Feb: 38-51-8
19Feb: 37-51-8
20Feb: 37-51-8
21Feb: 36-51-8
22Feb: 35-51-8
23Feb: 34-51-8
24Feb: 34-51-8
25Feb: 33-51-8
Although not perfectly consistent the above numbers show a steady pattern with one point of system damage being repaired about every other day. One month later, on 24Mar42, I got the message that no additional repairs were possible using currently assigned resources at Darwin and that Arend was available for service in damaged condition. All of the system and engine damage had been repaired. It was clear that as more and more system damage was repaired the speed of repairs increased. In the last month of repairs 33 system and 8 engine damage were repaired!
Where would be the best place to send Arend to get the major repairs done. The two most likely choices were Perth and Brisbane. The decision was to head for Perth as there was less chance of running into enemy forces on the west side of Australia than on the east side. Although using just the mouse-over both port are the same distance from Darwin that technique is really a "as the crow flies" number. The actual sea distance is shorter to get to Perth. The plan was to monitor the progress of Arend, hoping that no further damage would happen. If it did, it would be possible to head into one of the ports on the north coast of Australia for some more repairs.

[RangerJoe]

Two things.

1) You can see how far along the repairs are to the next repair point if you check through the options.
2) Search on the matrix site for "Alfred" + "repairs" to read how the repair system works.

[WEXF]

AVP Arend set sail from Darwin on 24Mar42, heading to Perth. It was a trip of 48 hexes. Speed was showing as Max 6(1), Cruise 3(0). It would be a long slow trip! The route was interesting as it was all through shallow water to Broome and then almost all through shallow water to Exmouth. Once turning south to Perth the water was deeper and therefore more of a danger. I had no idea if deeper water was more likely to cause added flotation damage but it was certainly more likely to be hiding enemy submarines.
I tried to help Arend by detaching British KV Cyclamen that had been on ASW patrol near Broome as an escort.
Luckily, the trip was completely uneventful and Arend and Cyclamen reached Perth on 21Apr. Arend suffered no additional damage and was never attacked by the enemy.
Now safely in a port with a shipyard capable of repairing all of her flotation damage some important decisions had to be made.
Some things to notice on the screen below are:
1. Notice that the ability to carry a floatplane is in red, meaning that it had been damaged by the bomb that hit Arend. Whether repairs to the equipment needed for carrying the plane would happen at Perth was an open question.
2. When reaching Perth, Arend's TF was disbanded and Arend was immediately placed in the simplest repair status.
3. The crew experience was improved somewhat. It had been 25/20 now it was 33/26. The Captain's Leadership and Inspiration had not changed and were still 27/48.

Arend4.212.jpg (177.91 KiB) Viewed 1886 times

[RangerJoe]

AVP Arend set sail from Darwin on 24Mar42, heading to Perth. It was a trip of 48 hexes. Speed was showing as Max 6(1), Cruise 3(0). It would be a long slow trip! The route was interesting as it was all through shallow water to Broome and then almost all through shallow water to Exmouth. Once turning south to Perth the water was deeper and therefore more of a danger. I had no idea if deeper water was more likely to cause added flotation damage but it was certainly more likely to be hiding enemy submarines.
I tried to help Arend by detaching British KV Cyclamen that had been on ASW patrol near Broome as an escort.
Luckily, the trip was completely uneventful and Arend and Cyclamen reached Perth on 21Apr. Arend suffered no additional damage and was never attacked by the enemy.
Now safely in a port with a shipyard capable of repairing all of her flotation damage some important decisions had to be made.
Some things to notice on the screen below are:
1. Notice that the ability to carry a floatplane is in red, meaning that it had been damaged by the bomb that hit Arend. Whether repairs to the equipment needed for carrying the plane would happen at Perth was an open question.
2. When reaching Perth, Arend's TF was disbanded and Arend was immediately placed in the simplest repair status.
3. The crew experience was improved somewhat. It had been 25/20 now it was 33/36. The Captain's Leadership and Inspiration had not changed and were still 27/48.Arend4.212.jpg

Note that the inability to operate aircraft while moving is because of the total amount of damage the ship has.

[BBfanboy]

And because no aircraft is aboard, and because there is no supply aboard and therefore no avgas.

[WEXF]

And because no aircraft is aboard, and because there is no supply aboard and therefore no avgas.

I have to disagree with this as the original screenshot of Arend at the start of this AAR has the exact same "lack of aircraft" and "no supply" but the number is not red.

[WEXF]

I found the fact that the Captain's numbers did not change at all from the start of the action somewhat surprising. After all, his command had been through a lot. The ship had been attacked and badly damaged. Despite the problems of flotation damage that was threatening to sink the ship at any moment, he was able to make it to safety and then to a larger port for more repairs and finally captain his ship on a very long and dangerous voyage to the safety of a much larger port where his ship could be put back in fighting condition.
Yet, he was still:
Leadership: 27
Inspiration: 48
Naval: 25
Land: 13
Air: 8
Admin: 30
Aggression: 28
Looking at the possibility of replacing him now that he was in Perth, many choices of higher rated commanders were available for the cost of only a single PP. I decided not to replace him. I realize that none of the categories exactly fit what he did, but it would have been nice if he got some recognition.
The next decisions would be related to how Arend was positioned within the shipyard at Perth for the repairs. This was not simple as there were other ships that needed to be served.
At normal priority Arend would take 52 days to repair. The best situations for Arend would be to be in the SY at a critical or high priority. That would require only 30 or 31 days to repair the 51 major flotation damage. Although this sound great, it was not to be. Other orders were forthcoming from Allied command.

SyHighP2.jpg (156.47 KiB) Viewed 1841 times

[BBfanboy]

I agree that it would be nice if the game had coding that allowed for personal growth of leaders from their experiences during the game - but it doesn't. The only thing that sometimes changes is their rank. The ship's crew can gain or lose experience, but not the leaders.
Pilots can gain various skills and experience, but that is not the same as leader traits.