OOB Comments

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Lemurs!
Posts: 788
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:27 pm

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by Lemurs! »

I actually did increase B17 & B24 ranges slightly in my scenario.
The B17E should be able to fly 2000 miles with a 4,000lb bomb load.

Anyway, i was working on Japanese ships today.
The Notoro which i believe is listed as an AK was actually a purpose built CS i believe of the Nisshin class. It did not have an airgroup permanantly attached. Also, the Chitose class CS top speed was 33kts. not 29. When it converted to a CVL its top speed did drop to 29kts.

The Sagara Maru should be a Sanyo class AV, It had its own airgroup attached, 6F1s, 2E8s. It should be part of the Singora invasion force.

The Asahi(san) Maru should be an AR; it was exactly the same as the Akashi.

Ah, the 5th Base Force and the saipan base force appear to be the same unit.
The 7th base force should probably be at Ominato.
Bonin, as far as i can tell, only had 1 platoon of gurads, 1 dock company, and 1 water distillation company on 8th dec.

The 3rd Base force and the Palau base force appear to be the same thing. The 4th base force and the Truk base force appear to be the same thing.

Mike
Image
User avatar
Lemurs!
Posts: 788
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:27 pm

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by Lemurs! »

Is there a game reason why the Japanese heavy artillery is all represented as 150mm guns?
Their were several regiments and battalions using 240mm & 280mm guns. Mobile guns.

Mike
Image
User avatar
Pascal_slith
Posts: 1657
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:39 am
Location: In Arizona now!

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by Pascal_slith »

ORIGINAL: Herrbear
ORIGINAL: Pascal

According to the section on the B-17E and F versions in volume 4 of "Aircraft in Profile", the B-17E and F versions had a range of 3'300 miles with the full 2'492 gallons of fuel and 4'420 miles with the additional "Tokyo Tanks" (fuel containers in the bomb bay, total fuel 3'612 gallons). This distances and the cruise speed was at 5000 ft.

The maximum speed at altitude was 318 mph (as in the WitP database), but the cruising speed was 160 mph. Thus the endurance should be 1'235 without Tokyo Tanks and 1'655 with Tokyo Tanks, far more than the 815 of the database. Given the caculations for Normal and Extended Range (1/4 and 1/3 of Ferry Range), I would change the endurance of the B-17E to 1600.


I think you are overstating the endurance basing it on the "Tokyo Tanks" as this would tend to increase the Normal and Extended ranges. The max bombload with the extra tanks would be much smaller in reality and you would be reflecting a Normal bombload over a longer distance than possible.

Using your End=1600 and the listed Cruise Spd of 160 a Max (Ferry) Rng=4267 or 71.11 Hexes, Norm=17.75; Ext=20.70. That would produce a Normal Bomb range of over 1000 miles, which is closer to their extended range IMO.

I agree that the Cruising Spd is a little low. Based on the sources below I would guess that 210 would be a better figure. Also I would use a maximum range 3250 (Split between 2 sources that said 3200 and 3300). The resulting figures:
Max=318; Cruise=210; Alt=36600; Climb=700; Mvr & Dur as is; Arm-1; End=929; Max Rng (Mi)=3200; Max Rng (Hx)=54.17; Ext Rng (Hx)=18.1; Norm Rng=13.5; Max Ld=8000; GV=26

The Extended Range will let you bomb Rabul from Cooktown.


Here are a few excellent sites on American and Allied aircraft.

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b17.html
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research ... omber2.htm
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/american.htm

Agree with your figures, though I found that the cruising speed you use is the one at 25'000 ft, whereas the ones I found were at 5000 ft. But, yes, the range of 3250 is probably best.
So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(

Image
User avatar
SpitfireIX
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Fort Wayne IN USA

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by SpitfireIX »

Scenario #15, V1.21


Ship Data

I just noticed that the New Mexico class is incorrectly equipped with 14"/45s--the correct guns are 14"/50s (Same as California and Tennessee)

Also, several ships do not have the correct captains at the start of the scenario--the ones I happened to notice are Enterprise (CAPT GW Murray, who is in the database), Arizona (CAPT Franklin Van Valkenburg), and West Virginia (CAPT Mervyn Bennion). I will check for others when I get a chance.

Finally, I noticed that Hughes is commanded by LCDR D. Ramsey, who happens to have the same stats and description as CAPT D. Ramsey, captain of Saratoga. I've seen this a couple other places as well--there appear to be at least two WC Shorts in the US Army. [&:]
"I know Japanese. He is very bad. And tricky. But we Americans too smart. We catch him and give him hell."

--Benny Sablan, crewman, USS Enterprise 12/7/41
kbullard
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon May 27, 2002 4:51 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Japanese 1st Parachute Regiment

Post by kbullard »

In scenario 1, the 1st Parachute Regiment uses the airborne infantry symbol and is air droppable.

In scenario 2, the 1st Parachute Regiment at Miri has the standard infantry symbol and cannot be air dropped. Is this an OOB error, or by design? I could imagine a unit "losing" its parachute capability as a result of combat or some other factor, but it's unclear if another factor is at work here.

Kurt
User avatar
Herrbear
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:17 pm
Location: Glendora, CA

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by Herrbear »

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

I actually did increase B17 & B24 ranges slightly in my scenario.
The B17E should be able to fly 2000 miles with a 4,000lb bomb load.

Anyway, i was working on Japanese ships today.
The Notoro which i believe is listed as an AK was actually a purpose built CS i believe of the Nisshin class. It did not have an airgroup permanantly attached. Also, the Chitose class CS top speed was 33kts. not 29. When it converted to a CVL its top speed did drop to 29kts.

The Sagara Maru should be a Sanyo class AV, It had its own airgroup attached, 6F1s, 2E8s. It should be part of the Singora invasion force.

The Asahi(san) Maru should be an AR; it was exactly the same as the Akashi.

Ah, the 5th Base Force and the saipan base force appear to be the same unit.
The 7th base force should probably be at Ominato.
Bonin, as far as i can tell, only had 1 platoon of gurads, 1 dock company, and 1 water distillation company on 8th dec.

The 3rd Base force and the Palau base force appear to be the same thing. The 4th base force and the Truk base force appear to be the same thing.

Mike


And that may be another map problem. The range from Cooktown to Rabaul is 18 hexes. They were able to bomb that far in the WWII and can in UV but not with your's or WITP's figures. Same for the B-29's. They cannot reach Tokyo from Saipan. In the game it is 21 hexes away. WITP has extended range as 20.31 and you have it as 19.62.
User avatar
Lemurs!
Posts: 788
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:27 pm

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by Lemurs! »

I am still fiddling with the air ranges.... I have the B17 at 950 minutes/180speed and the B24 at 990 minutes/190speed

mike
Image
User avatar
Pascal_slith
Posts: 1657
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:39 am
Location: In Arizona now!

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by Pascal_slith »

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

I am still fiddling with the air ranges.... I have the B17 at 950 minutes/180speed and the B24 at 990 minutes/190speed

mike

B-17E and B-17G range around 3200-3400, compromise at 3250 (see earlier posts). Cruise speed around 180mph (a compromise of different altitude figures), therefore endurance at 1080 minutes.
So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(

Image
User avatar
Pascal_slith
Posts: 1657
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:39 am
Location: In Arizona now!

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by Pascal_slith »

Many a/c (both Allied and Japanese) have endurance figures that are a little short, such as B-17, PBY, even the G4M. A closer check here would be worthwhile. I've started a spreadsheet with the calculations. Will try to post in next few days.
So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(

Image
User avatar
brisd
Posts: 613
Joined: Sat May 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: San Diego, CA

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by brisd »

I noticed in Scenario 15, ver 1.21 that the Sasebo Base Force Engineer unit starts (and stays, it's static) in Nagasaki. There is no Nagasaki base force, seems like an error to me and I've not seen it noted in this thread.
"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant
User avatar
pry
Posts: 938
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:19 am
Location: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas

RE: B-17 Endurance

Post by pry »

Data Collected
User avatar
Iron Duke
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2002 10:00 am
Location: UK

RE: OOB Comments

Post by Iron Duke »

scen 15 v1.21

Looking in the game and editor I've noticed a couple of discrepances

1. There are no tank battalions in the USMC divisions .

2. In the Indian Infantry divisions/brigades their are no British or Gurkha inf squads , general rule of thumb for indian brigades is 1x British battalion and 2x Indian or/and Gurkha battalions .

In fact I've yet to find a formation that includes any Gurkha squads?
Some independant brigades had just Indian/Gurkha battalions i.e. 268th Bde , Lushai Bde , 50th Para Bde.

3. 50th Armoured (Tank) Brigade not in OOB
4. Lushai Brigade not in OOB
"Bombers outpacing fighters - you've got to bloody well laugh!" Australian Buffalo pilot - Singapore
User avatar
Montbrun
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA

RE: OOB Comments

Post by Montbrun »

Iron Duke,

1. I pointed this out on the first page of this thread.
2. British battalions serving with the Indian forces were on an the same "Indian Estblishment" as the Indian battalions.
3. There are many OoB and TOE discrepencies to be addressed....

Brad
WitE Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE Research Team
WitE2.0 Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE2.0 Research Team
WitW Alpha/Beta Tester
WitW Research Team
Piercing Fortress Europa Research Team
Desert War 1940-1942 Alpha/Beta Tester
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: OOB Comments

Post by Brady »

TY Pascal, I had planed on going through and doing the math, but frankely it was at a glance a daunting task, that is why in part I listed all the data neaded to do the calculations for the Japanaese planes in my posts, I am happy to hear you will do a spread sheat on it.[:)]
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
Tankerace
Posts: 5408
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 12:23 pm
Location: Stillwater, OK, United States

RE: OOB Comments

Post by Tankerace »

I didn't even notice this, until I was collecting data for my Plan Orange mod.

In the WiTP OOB, the New Mexico class BB is using the 14"/45 cal Mk 8 gun, when in fact it should (like the Tennessee) be using the 14"/50 cal Mk 7 gun. In building all three ships were slated to use the 45 cal, but before completion they were fitted with the improved 50 cal gun.

Source: Jane's Fighting Ships of World War I
Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: OOB Comments

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

I didn't even notice this, until I was collecting data for my Plan Orange mod.

In the WiTP OOB, the New Mexico class BB is using the 14"/45 cal Mk 8 gun, when in fact it should (like the Tennessee) be using the 14"/50 cal Mk 7 gun. In building all three ships were slated to use the 45 cal, but before completion they were fitted with the improved 50 cal gun.

Source: Jane's Fighting Ships of World War I

45...50, guess the original armament was off. Never thought twice about it. Good catch guys.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Pascal_slith
Posts: 1657
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:39 am
Location: In Arizona now!

RE: OOB Comments

Post by Pascal_slith »

ORIGINAL: Brady

TY Pascal, I had planed on going through and doing the math, but frankely it was at a glance a daunting task, that is why in part I listed all the data neaded to do the calculations for the Japanaese planes in my posts, I am happy to hear you will do a spread sheat on it.[:)]

Brady, I have all your posts. What were your sources? I'm including the sources in the spreadsheet.
So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(

Image
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: OOB Comments

Post by Brady »

I will List them Tomarow, late hear now....
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
strawbuk
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 9:25 pm
Location: London via Glos

RE: OOB Comments

Post by strawbuk »

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter

Iron Duke,
2. British battalions serving with the Indian forces were on an the same "Indian Estblishment" as the Indian battalions.

Brad

See excellent stuff by McNaughton on Burma/Brits/CW, first &cond pages of thsi thread.

And... tm.asp?m=646566&mpage=9&key=&#661155661155

In danger of becoming the Forgotten Army again.
Image
Twinkle twinkle PBY
Seeking Kido Bu-tai
Flying o' the sea so high
An ill-omen in the sky
Twinkle twinkle PBY
Pointing out who's next to fry
User avatar
Montbrun
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA

RE: OOB Comments

Post by Montbrun »

^^^...not if I can help it - scrounging up my Indian Army sources this week...
WitE Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE Research Team
WitE2.0 Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE2.0 Research Team
WitW Alpha/Beta Tester
WitW Research Team
Piercing Fortress Europa Research Team
Desert War 1940-1942 Alpha/Beta Tester
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”