Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate

[tigercub]

ORIGINAL: tigercub

The US made around 300,000 planes during the war and 70% of did very little....to fighting the Axis,they were sent to the far parts of the world and made the US a great deal of money lendlease (The russians never payed the US back fully ) and some 23,000 were lost in the US and in transit(not combat)....and some 25,000 combat losses all causes.(just of the top of my head)

Tiger!

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: pad152

ORIGINAL: jimh009

Finally, in regards to "total production," do remember that a significant percentage of aircraft produced never find their way to the front lines. Planes crash in transit, are just plain defective and, most significantly, are used for training. The vast ramp-up in pilot training in 1942 would have sucked up a LOT of planes.

I don't know where you got that info! The problem is getting them to front line units. The problem with aircraft is keeping them flying, it was easier to get a new plane than spare parts. Just read about the flying tigers in China, they would go through planes pretty quick because of all the planes stripped for spare parts to keep some flying.

Actually he's quite correct. About 10% of all aircraft actually "in service" (from training to transfer to theatre to front line) were lost EVERY MONTH during the war by ALL participants. Non-Combat losses virtually always exceeded combat losses by a significant margin. For the Japanese non-combat losses were several percentage points higher than for the US.

None of which changes the fact that Allied A/C production massively exceeded Japan's..., and if anyone in the game should be having shortages of replacement A/C it isn't the Allies.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: witpqs
That's why I would like to hear a developer comment. [:)]

Thomas (TimTom) would be that "developer". I believe like most of the data in the game - we went with the best sources we could find - if you have better - share 'em out and they will be considered!

Figuring out what the total US production is - is not the hard part - breaking that down by what went to the Pacific is a bit tougher - Thomas has charts of data on this though - i've seen them.

I did not question anything he commented on. In fact, the vast majority of my post seems to support what he wrote. My question concerns an area he did not touch - the various USN PBY search plane ops losses. I'm not even questioning the PBY production/availability provided. I'm just curious if the ops losses I (and from their posts, I think others) are experiencing are on the money or off the mark. [:)]

Scenario 1 as as 42-09-26:

Plane Model #-- Tot-A2A-Flk-Grd-Ops

PBY-4- Catalina 026 005 000 007 014

PBY-5- Catalina 124 007 000 031 086

PBY-5A Catalina 040 000 000 000 040

[DrewMatrix]

The trouble is that Grumman produced 1200 or so F4F-4s. At the current production rate of 45/month, assuming the began in 03/42 (which is late by three months as far as the resources I have seen), the would not complete the historical production run until mid June, 1944, which is at least 12 months too long

As a question for The Managment:

Are the units that show up equipped with F4F-4s (and everything else) "free" or are the A/C to fill those units taken from the pools?

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
None of which changes the fact that Allied A/C production massively exceeded Japan's..., and if anyone in the game should be having shortages of replacement A/C it isn't the Allies.

Part of the problem in PBEM at least is the Godlike control over the economy that the Japs enjoy. (Granted, its also the reason I don't play the Japs, but for those who master it, it does let the Japanese leverage a huge advantage). It wasn't abnormal in the slightest for Japanese fighter production to be five or six times the front line fighter production of the US and the UK in mid 1942 in WITP. It wasn't abnormal in the slightest for the Allied fighter pools to be on virtually 0 across the board until 1943, with the exception of Wildcats sometimes.

Allied production levels are about the same as they were in WITP. From my readings of Japanese production plans, I think the Japs are not hugely curtailed over what they had before. 200 Zeroes a month still very feasible I imagine, no?

I always thought this was completely whacked. I think it's a bit less of an issue in AE as the air combat is less bloody and you dont get through 40 P40s in a day anymore.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
None of which changes the fact that Allied A/C production massively exceeded Japan's..., and if anyone in the game should be having shortages of replacement A/C it isn't the Allies.

Part of the problem in PBEM at least is the Godlike control over the economy that the Japs enjoy. (Granted, its also the reason I don't play the Japs, but for those who master it, it does let the Japanese leverage a huge advantage). It wasn't abnormal in the slightest for Japanese fighter production to be five or six times the front line fighter production of the US and the UK in mid 1942 in WITP. It wasn't abnormal in the slightest for the Allied fighter pools to be on virtually 0 across the board until 1943, with the exception of Wildcats sometimes.

Allied production levels are about the same as they were in WITP. From my readings of Japanese production plans, I think the Japs are not hugely curtailed over what they had before. 200 Zeroes a month still very feasible I imagine, no?

I always thought this was completely whacked. I think it's a bit less of an issue in AE as the air combat is less bloody and you dont get through 40 P40s in a day anymore.

By Jove..., I think he's got it! [;)]

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Beezle

The trouble is that Grumman produced 1200 or so F4F-4s. At the current production rate of 45/month, assuming the began in 03/42 (which is late by three months as far as the resources I have seen), the would not complete the historical production run until mid June, 1944, which is at least 12 months too long

As a question for The Managment:

Are the units that show up equipped with F4F-4s (and everything else) "free" or are the A/C to fill those units taken from the pools?

If the group is to arrive with some planes, then the planes are not taken from the pool.
Only groups with no planes defined in the editor take planes from the pool to fill out the group.
Reformed or withdrawn groups generally arrive with no planes so they come from the pool. Unless the group is 'a return as' group, then it depends on if any plane numbers were defined in editor.

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
- breaking that down by what went to the Pacific is a bit tougher -

And here is where the problem begins. The idea of using draconian replacement pool limits for the allies based on historical numbers is plain and simply a BAD idea. As an example let's look at Japan.

Assume Japan has 100 planes operating in the south Pacific. Now assume a huge air battle is fought and Japan loses 90 of those planes. What will Japan do? Leave only 10 planes operating down there because that's all Japan had sent historically and no new airframes arrived for another 2 months? No, Japan is going to find airframes from somewhere else to send down as replacements.

Just because losses were light for the allies historically, does not mean the allies would not have found more airframe to send if they were in fact needed. Limiting the allies to just what was needed historically is piss-poor game design (I'm sorry but it has to be said). You have to give them their historical capabilities or they aren't actually representative of the actual allies from WWII.

Now if you could find a way of strictly limiting Japan to just what they actually got during the war then I'd have no problem. But Japan has total freedom and a very generous excess of production to boot. The allies need a similar freedom or you just give them an Achilles heel that no amount of good game play can overcome.

So I say give the allies their historical production numbers and get rid of the ridiculously low production pool limits. They don't work when put up against an unlimited Japan.

Jim

[Brady]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
- breaking that down by what went to the Pacific is a bit tougher -

And here is where the problem begins. The idea of using draconian replacement pool limits for the allies based on historical numbers is plain and simply a BAD idea. As an example let's look at Japan.

Assume Japan has 100 planes operating in the south Pacific. Now assume a huge air battle is fought and Japan loses 90 of those planes. What will Japan do? Leave only 10 planes operating down there because that's all Japan had sent historically and no new airframes arrived for another 2 months? No, Japan is going to find airframes from somewhere else to send down as replacements.

Just because losses were light for the allies historically, does not mean the allies would not have found more airframe to send if they were in fact needed. Limiting the allies to just what was needed historically is piss-poor game design (I'm sorry but it has to be said). You have to give them their historical capabilities or they aren't actually representative of the actual allies from WWII.

Now if you could find a way of strictly limiting Japan to just what they actually got during the war then I'd have no problem. But Japan has total freedom and a very generous excess of production to boot. The allies need a similar freedom or you just give them an Achilles heel that no amount of good game play can overcome.

So I say give the allies their historical production numbers and get rid of the ridiculously low production pool limits. They don't work when put up against an unlimited Japan.

Jim

From my Latest test game (IronMan), numbers like this tend to make me think the Allies dont nead any help agasnt the Ai-



..............

From an Historical Perspective the want of more Aircraft and better ones was definatly high, but their was nothing to be had, this largely do to the Europe first policy:

From Americas Hundread Thousand by Dean:

From the Chronology on the P-40,

"Dec. 41 A total of 74 P-40E's have now been received in the Philipines. (18 P-40b's at clark with the 20th)"

"Dec. 7th Pearl harbor-87P-40B's and 12 P40C's"

"Dec. 26th only 18 P40's remain in service in teh Philipines, the rest were lost from bombing, fighting, and accedents."

"Dec. 31st P40 production of all types come to 2,246 aircraft, for 1941."

"Jan 1942-Fifity P40E's are alocated to the AVG in China, and water shipment will start in Feb. most will be in China by June."

Many P40's are lost in Java or on the way, 120 to 124 are sent their, 32 went down with the Langely, 11 destroyed in an air raid on darwin, 14 others lost in transit, 3 destroyed at Timor, Many were on the Sea Witch and could not be asembled in time and so were tosed over the side, 36 did howeaver make it."

Feb. 25/42 The AVG has only 20 flyable P40's left.

Mar, 42 AVG is sent 30 P40E's from Africa and India.

Mar 18, 42: By this date a total of 337 P40's Reach Austrailia (along with 190 Aircobras). Of these about 125 are lost in Java fighting, other by accedent. 75 are turned over to the RAAF, 74 are being reparied, and 100 awiat assembly. There are 92 P40's in comishion, and about 85 Aircobras.

Aprial 42, The AVG now has 36 flyable P40's, 39 are being repaired and 22 that could be repaired have to be destroyed when a move is made.

May 42, 101 P40's are in service in Hawaii, out of 134 in the area.

July 42, Darwin has about 80 P40's.

July 42, AVG(China Task Force) has 51 operational P-40's (24 are p40E's).

Aug. 42, Port Morsby New Gunie,30 P-40's and two RAAF squarons with around 30 Kittyhawks.

Oct. 42 Centrail Pacific, 319 Fighters all P-40's except one Squadron of P-39's and one of P-70's.

Dec. 42, by this a total of all types of P40's delevered amount to 4453.

Jan 1 1943-In the war aganst Japan the USAAF has a total of 618 P40's out of a total of 1118 fighters.

Aug 31st, 1943: Gen Paul Wirtsmith of the 5th Air Force has 598 fighters of which 118 are P40's But many P40's are in depot, and all are werry, having 300 to 500 combat hours each-equilvent to about 2,000 normal operating hours, Gen. Kenny writes from the Pacific to Hap Arnold- "I dont beleave anyone else, with the posable excpetion of Chennault, is flying stuff as old and worn out as these youngsters out here are."

................

From the P-39 section:

Aug. 42- The fighter situation in the SWP is critical with few reinforcements in sight.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana
Part of the problem in PBEM at least is the Godlike control over the economy that the Japs enjoy. (Granted, its also the reason I don't play the Japs, but for those who master it, it does let the Japanese leverage a huge advantage). It wasn't abnormal in the slightest for Japanese fighter production to be five or six times the front line fighter production of the US and the UK in mid 1942 in WITP. It wasn't abnormal in the slightest for the Allied fighter pools to be on virtually 0 across the board until 1943, with the exception of Wildcats sometimes.

Exactly! If the Allies had "production" as well, they'd have hoards of P-38's, F4U's, B24's, and B-25's before the end of 1942. But they don't have this option. So they should at least have rather substantial replacements for the menagerie they do recieve. Or we could give BOTH sides only what they actually got historically.

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: Brady
From my Latest test game (IronMan), numbers like this tend to make me think the Allies dont nead any help agasnt the Ai-

Well the fact the allies have lost their entire production run and then some of P-40s is probably why you don't see more of them destroyed. The high Japanese loss numbers have more to do with unescorted AI strikes than any kind of allied superiority, so using the AI for any kind of analysis is going to skew results.

What would be more informative, would be the number of replacement airframes in both sides pools at this stage. My guess is the allies are sitting at zero fighter airframes in their pools and Japan has a decent supply.

Jim

[TAIL GUNNER]

I did not question anything he commented on. In fact, the vast majority of my post seems to support what he wrote. My question concerns an area he did not touch - the various USN PBY search plane ops losses. I'm not even questioning the PBY production/availability provided. I'm just curious if the ops losses I (and from their posts, I think others) are experiencing are on the money or off the mark.

Scenario 1 as as 42-09-26:

Plane Model #-- Tot-A2A-Flk-Grd-Ops

PBY-4- Catalina 026 005 000 007 014

PBY-5- Catalina 124 007 000 031 086

PBY-5A Catalina 040 000 000 000 040

I wonder if severe weather could be the culprit?
I've only dabbled in AE so far, but I remember in UV if you flew during nasty weather, you'd pay the consequences with much higher Op. losses. I know offensive raids get cancelled during bad weather, but I believe naval search will send out planes regardless.

ChadG

[Brady]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: Brady
From my Latest test game (IronMan), numbers like this tend to make me think the Allies dont nead any help agasnt the Ai-

Well the fact the allies have lost their entire production run and then some of P-40s is probably why you don't see more of them destroyed. The high Japanese loss numbers have more to do with unescorted AI strikes than any kind of allied superiority, so using the AI for any kind of analysis is going to skew results.

What would be more informative, would be the number of replacement airframes in both sides pools at this stage. My guess is the allies are sitting at zero fighter airframes in their pools and Japan has a decent supply.

Jim

[bradfordkay]

Brady, so you've lost 85 P40Es and have 85 in the pool having used -6 so far. This means that if you had used replacements, your pool would be sitting empty.

[oldman45]

In June 43, I still cannot get 2 full A-20 squadrons and had to finally switch 1 of the to B-25C, even though I am out of those too I had a few in the pool. The number of fighters I have is fine, and with the additional production for the F4F-4 thats good too.

Bomber airframes are the problem. No A20 a handful of B25, both models.

Also, pilots for the Dutch. I never lost Java and held everything from Palambang south in Sumatra. I have no dutch planes left to speak off and no pilots in the pools. I am not sure there is a fix for something like this or if there should be considering against human I doubt I would be able to hold all that I did.

[Brady]

I may be to practiced at this, but I consistantly have more fighter's on hand and fighter untis than I can deploy to the front line bases in AE as the allies, and I consistantly trash the Japanese Ai Air forces in early 42.

If your running short on planes you may be useing them more extravagently than I am, their were shortages for the Allies Historicaly during the beging of the war, and TimTom is very hard to find fault with when it comes to his states on production numbers from a historical bases.

140 aint nothen, if theis were a normal Ai game the AVG ushauly has around 300 kills by this time, but the IronMan game Andys has fashioned is tougher:



Just switched these guys to the P-39:



Both screan taken on Feb. 17th 42.

[medicff]

It definitely makes a HUGE difference on how you play out your airframes. If you throw them into the fray without attempting to train some pilots and getting some early advantage numerically or at least even to help train pilots even more, then you wont have much success keeping your airgroups full.

I agree the allies don't have much in the pool and the japs probably have a lot in the early stages. If you carefully manage your groups (some fighting some training) and rotate them you should have enough. Eventually you will get the jap pilot experience down and start taking down their advantage in airframe production because now they will have the losses with less experienced pilots and less able equipment.

This may not be historical or even but it plays out well in the game.

Remember most allied airgoup reinforcements (scheduled for entry not withdrawn or disbanded) come with airframes NOT in the replacement pools (thats extra airframes). However IIRC ALL jap airgroups are filled from the replacement pools. (If dev knows differently please correct me)

Pat

[Mynok]

Airframes without pilots are useless. That's the Japanese problem.

[DrewMatrix]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: Beezle

The trouble is that Grumman produced 1200 or so F4F-4s. At the current production rate of 45/month, assuming the began in 03/42 (which is late by three months as far as the resources I have seen), the would not complete the historical production run until mid June, 1944, which is at least 12 months too long

As a question for The Managment:

Are the units that show up equipped with F4F-4s (and everything else) "free" or are the A/C to fill those units taken from the pools?

If the group is to arrive with some planes, then the planes are not taken from the pool.
Only groups with no planes defined in the editor take planes from the pool to fill out the group.
Reformed or withdrawn groups generally arrive with no planes so they come from the pool. Unless the group is 'a return as' group, then it depends on if any plane numbers were defined in editor.

So when you say "The US produced 1200 F4F-4s" you have to count whatever A/C show up in new units in addition to the 45 A/C/month that are added to the pool.

Does anyone have a count on how many F4F-4s show up in new units, in addition to the 45/month and does that come out at the historic rate.

(This is all aside from the "IJ has control of their economy, the Allies don't" argument which does have value. If the allies had a disaster they would have turned up production and in a bit there would have been a lot more F4F-4s or whatever)

[pat.casey]

As somebody else mentioned, limiting the allies to what was historically delivered seriously limits the freedom of action of an allied player.

Historically, the allied carriers were rarely used in the first six months of the way. Hence replacements were not required.

If you model that in game with an extremely low replacement rate, it means that, *in the game* allied carriers will, of necessity, sit out the first six months of the war.

Forcing the allies to use historical delivery patterns for their airframes forces them into a historical operational tempo as well, which severely limits their freedom of action and limits them vis-a-vis Japan which has complete freedom of action.

Additionally, as somebody else noted, the allied industrial base was massive and quite capable of adjusting to differing frontline demands. If the allies were losing 200 Dauntless a month in combat, you can bet they'd have produced 200 dauntless a month to offset that burn rate. There'd have been ramp-up time, and the issue of getting the materiel forward mind you, but the allied industrial base could have, and did, adjust to actual burn rates.